Laserfiche WebLink
The staff recommendation was retained. <br />HB 3031 <br />Ms. Wilson said the bill related to residential land development and would declare an emergency, <br />allowing local governments to extend approval of residential development permits for two years. <br />Mr. Poling asked what the current timeframe was. Mr. Nystrom replied that it varied; all of the different <br />land uses had different timeframes. He stated that the Home Builders Association had sent letters to all of <br />the jurisdictions in the hope that they would adopt this clause locally. He said, for Eugene, there would be <br />no direct impact, but it would need a policy discussion and this was why staff had adopted a neutral <br />position. <br />Mr. Poling surmised that under the current economic conditions the bill would provide assistance by <br />providing some extra time to developers who were impacted by current economic conditions and were not <br />able to begin construction in a timely manner. He thought the committee should adopt a Priority 3 <br />Support position. <br />Ms. Piercy asked what the down side to the bill would be. Mr. Nystrom replied that the bill would affect <br />the projects that were already approved. He said no code changes could affect them, given that the permit <br />was already issued. He thought the applicant should provide notice so that there would be public <br />knowledge of the status of projects. <br />Ms. Ortiz asked if the bill had been through a hearing. She thought they could consider this locally for <br />this economic time. She preferred doing this instead of changing it from a neutral stance to a Priority 3 <br />Support. <br />Mr. Poling moved to change the position to Priority 3 Support. The motion died for lack <br />of a second. <br />SB 761 <br />Ms. Wilson said SB 761 related to the annexation to contiguous territory and would require local <br />government annexation elections to include electors on property that was not proposed for annexation but <br />was abutting the public right of way proposed for annexation. Staff had recommended adopting a Priority <br />2 Oppose position on it. <br />Ms. Ortiz stated that she had pulled the bill to make comments on it. She averred that neighbors should <br />not be able to decide whether or not a property should be annexed. <br />The staff recommendation stood. <br />SB 781 <br />Ms. Wilson explained that the bill would require a city with a population greater than 100,000 to include <br />certain types of land within its UGB. Staff had recommended taking a Priority 1 Oppose position. <br />Mr. Nystrom related that staff had discussed the bill with the City Attorney and the phrasing of the bill <br />had led staff to take a different tack. He explained that the provision indicated that a city with a <br />population greater than 100,000 would be required to include within its UGB a tract of land that was <br />MINUTESCouncil Committee on Intergovernmental Relations April 1, 2009 Page 12 <br />