Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Nystrom called attention to the motions before the council. He thought, in general, that staff had worked with the various motions and tried to respond to council concerns or questions that had been raised. He hoped it helped to clarify or alleviate concerns that had been expressed. He said staff was in support of the amendments by and large. He asked the council to consider adoption of the ordinance with the proposed motions before it. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4910, an ordinance concerning minor land use code amendments. Councilor Papé said he did not find language on corner lots and fence heights, a concern of his constituents. Mr. Nystrom responded that an amendment regarding this item had initially been considered but enough concerns were expressed about policy issues surrounding it that it had been deferred to the second round of code amendments. City Attorney Glenn Klein clarified at Councilor Kelly’s request that the Staff Recommended Motions (A) through (E) provided in Attachment A to the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) could be made individually and could be referenced by letter. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to amend the motion with Staff Recommended Motion (A) from page 235 of the Agenda Item Summary. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to amend the motion with Staff Recommended Motion (B) from page 235 of the Agenda Item Summary. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to replace Staff Recommended Motion (B) with a motion to amend Council Bill 4910, Section 13, to remove any proposed revisions to the current code entries for lot area minimum for duplex, triplex, and fourplex lots on Eugene Code (EC) Table 9.2760. Councilor Bettman averred that policy issues were involved in Section 13 and, as such, she would prefer to have those discussions when the council talked about major land use code amendments. Councilor Solomon asked Mr. Nystrom for his input on the amendment. Mr. Nystrom responded that the City had on its books for a long time an option for people subdividing land which allowed them to create R- 1 lots for alternative housing types such as duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes. He said the question for staff had to do with how to address a larger lot meant for a fourplex that was sold by a developer to someone who wanted to build a single-family home and whether an exception to the lot size limit for such a home could be allowed. He stated that should the amendment not be approved, a lot designated for a duplex and so on would be required to remain so designated. He noted that PDD only saw one or two of such requests per year. In response to a follow-up question from Councilor Solomon, Mr. Nystrom affirmed that the substitute motion would remove the original amendment’s flexibility. He reiterated that the current language was inflexible and the original amendment had sought to increase the flexibility. He thought, should the code remain the same, staff would have to be more “up front” with developers so that it was understood that a designation could not be changed at a later date. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 4 Regular Session