CC Minutes - 10/24/05 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Manager Taylor introduced Steve Nystrom, Principal Planner for the Planning and Development Department (PDD), and asked him to speak to the proposed minor land use code amendments. Mr. Nystrom explained that the public hearing sought to consider the first of two phases of code amendments slated to come before the council. He said the first phase was made up of minor amendments which he hoped the council would agree were fairly non-controversial in nature and had the intent of improving administration of the code. He stated that for the most part, the amendments sought to resolve conflicts, gaps, or ambiguous language in the code in the hopes of improving the PDD administration of the code and without raising substantial policy concerns. He indicated that the second phase would deal with more significant issues and, perhaps, policy questions that would be brought before the council in winter 2006. Mr. Nystrom stated that the packet before the City Council represented the recommendation from the Planning Commission. He reported that the Planning Commission helped to filter out which amendments were more minor in nature and subsequently conducted the more formal proceedings, input from the public and any recommended changes in the language before the council. Mr. Nystrom related that some concern had been expressed by the council on whether the amendments could result in any benefit in property value. He said staff worked with the City Attorney to review those and, in general, the minor nature of the amendments did not raise substantial concern with the exception of three of them. He stated that those three amendments had been flagged and suggested that they be considered and then removed only if they should remain a source of concern. He acknowledged receipt of a list of questions from Councilor Bettman. He indicated that staff had not had time to provide a written response to them but was willing to provide oral answers. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Terry Connolly , 1401 Willamette Street, representing the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, provided written comments identical to those submitted at the public hearing before the Planning Commission. He reported that the chamber found the amendments to be minor. He thought the amendments made minor practical improvements to the code in areas such as clarifying the 5,000-square foot limitation that applies to new commercial buildings and not existing businesses. He expressed appreciation for the review the Planning Commission had given to the amendments. He commended staff for creating a matrix for the amendments. He felt the matrix was very helpful in aiding the public to quickly identify what the amendments were and what sections of the code they applied to. He said the chamber looked forward to other opportunities to find ways to make the code enable good things to happen in the city of Eugene and for the direction and involvement of the City Council in that process. Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, recalled that Councilor Bettman made a motion in a work session on October 12 that would postpone land use decisions until a funding mechanism for potential Ballot Measure 37 claims had been created. He related that the motion passed and wondered why the council was considering land use code amendments in the face of that. He said it was his understanding that the City had been presented with its first Ballot Measure 37 claim. Kevin Matthews , Box 1588, Eugene, president of 1,000 Friends of Eugene, commented that he was unable to adequately express his frustration at the minor code amendment process. He complained that staff had not accurately or frankly represented the involvement of the Planning Commission in this process. He MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 24, 2005 Page 5 Regular Session