Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Councilor Brown agreed there were other options for achieving 100 points, but pointed out the developers did not choose them and the project’s points were below the minimum required. He questioned why standards were established if they were relaxed in certain situations. He cautioned against making exceptions for technicalities. He suggested delaying a vote and allowing the developers to resubmit their application once they were able to achieve 100 points. Councilor Zelenka agreed with Councilor Brown that the developers could resubmit their application when it met the requirements. He said there was no point in having standards if they were not enforced. The motion to amend passed, 4:3; Councilor Brown, Councilor Zelenka and Councilor Ortiz voting no. The amended motion passed, 4:3; Councilor Brown, Councilor Zelenka and Councilor Ortiz voting no. 4. ACTION: Adoption of an Ordinance Concerning Time Extensions for Approved Developments; and Providing an Effective Date (City File CA 09-5). Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to adopt Council Bill #5011 concerning time extensions for approved developments. Mr. Ruiz provided a brief overview of the item. Councilor Zelenka asked the rationale for extending the time for three years instead of two. Gabe Flock, Planning and Development Department, explained that the ordinance was originally drafted to allow a two-year time extension based on state legislation. The Planning Commission, after receiving testimony on the item, chose to extend the time extension for approved land use applications to three years. He said a similar ordinance in Portland granted a three and one-half-year extension and ordinances in other jurisdictions made permanent changes to their processing criteria that went beyond what staff considered the scope of the council’s direction. Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Brown, moved to amend the ordinance to provide a two-year extension. Councilor Ortiz stated she could not support the amendment as she felt the three-year period was appropriate. She asked how many applications would be affected by the ordinance and whether any had expired to-date. Mr. Flock replied that there were 130 land use approvals that would be granted the extension. There had been a handful of applications that expired over the last year for a variety of reasons and staff was working with those applicants to consider the options available to them. The motion to amend failed 5:2; Councilor Zelenka and Councilor Brown voting yes. The main motion passed, 6:1; Councilor Brown voting no. 5. ACTION: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Land Use diagram; Amending the Willakenzie Area Plan Pursuant to Section 9.7750(4) of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effective Date; MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 6