Laserfiche WebLink
knew something that was perhaps not considered by the ICS task team. He believed the alternative motion protected <br />the neighbors, but the WUN area was predominantly composed of student-related housing. <br /> <br />Councilor Brown averred that the ICS task team did represent a broad spectrum of people with a good deal of <br />knowledge. He also did not believe the Planning Commission discussed the item for very long. He thought they <br />should not disregard the work of the task team because it would send a terrible message to people in the City about <br />how much their participation was valued. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon understood that the staff motion applied to the SUNA area only. She ascertained that it would <br />still be possible, with the staff motion, to construct buildings in the WUN area up to a height of 90 feet on lots larger <br />than 10,000 square feet. She thought this was reasonable; they had worked with the SUNA neighbors to address <br />their issues regarding density and height. She wanted to acknowledge that the University was continuing to grow and <br />there was an increasing need for housing for the students. She averred that they should want the students to live as <br />close to campus as possible. The closer students were in proximity to the campus, the less likely they were to bring a <br />car. Additionally, she thought the chance of a developer finding a lot that was greater than 10,000 square feet was <br />slim. She also thought it unlikely that a developer would choose to build to that height because of the cost. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark stated that the motion provided by staff would protect the SUNA area, in compatibility with the ICS <br />recommendation. He was amenable to that as a compromise position because he understood the importance of the <br />quality of life in that neighborhood. He was concerned that the motion on the table would have unintended <br />consequence. He said people built buildings to suit the marketplace and he predicted that there would be many more <br />six-bedroom buildings with a “whole lot of cars” and what would be built would be “boxes after boxes.” He averred <br />that what they would get if they allowed the opportunity for greater height would be the opportunity to achieve a <br />similar density and with height where height made sense. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor commented that the possibility that a 90-foot high building could be built did not mean it would <br />happen. He thought that the compromise that accommodated the SUNA area interests was reasonable and the <br />question was whether that was also reasonable for the WUN. He was concerned that they might be treating one <br />neighborhood differently because they were more involved. He was challenged to make a decision on this, but was <br />likely inclined to support the staff’s recommendation for a motion. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy wanted to emphasize that the ICS task team had worked on this for two years and reached consensus <br />on many things. She believed that the make-up of the ICS group had been broad. She had understood that the WUN <br />area had not been involved in the conversation that had brought about the compromise. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka remarked that the University area was the only one in the town where R-4, Residential, zoning <br />butted up against R-1. He felt that the WUN had quality-of-life issues and it did not make sense to him to treat them <br />differently from people who lived one block away. He listed several examples of development that furthered the <br />goals of density at a lower height. <br /> <br />Roll call vote; the vote on the amendment was a tie, 4:4; councilors Ortiz, Taylor, Zelenka, and <br />Brown voting in favor and councilors Pryor, Clark, Solomon, and Poling voting in opposition. <br />Mayor Piercy voted for the amendment and the amendment passed. <br /> <br />Councilor Brown, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to delete Section 4 from Council Bill 5015 <br />and renumber the sections accordingly so that the ordinance would take effect according to Section <br />30 of the Eugene Charter. Roll call vote; the amendment passed, 7:1; Councilor Solomon voting in <br />opposition. <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 14, 2009 Page 9 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />