HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 03/14/07 Work SessionM I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall
March 14, 2007
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Jennifer
Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka.
ABSENT: Betty Taylor.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order.
A. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The council met in executive session to consult with legal counsel about legal rights and duties regarding
current litigation or litigation likely to be filed, in accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 192.660(2)(h).
Mayor Piercy called the council into regular session.
B. ACTION: Brown Measure 37 Claim (M37-06)
Mayor Piercy said that Councilor Betty Taylor requested that the council not take action on the resolution in
her absence.
Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to consider the item.
Ms. Bettman thought Ms. Taylor’s vote would make a difference on the outcome of the issue and wanted to
honor her request.
Mayor Piercy wanted to honor Ms. Taylor’s request unless the item was time-sensitive.
The motion passed 4:3; Ms. Bettman, Ms. Ortiz, and Mr. Zelenka voting no.
Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to adopt Resolution 4905 granting a Measure 37
claim and modifying a provision of Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code, 1971, for property lo-
th
cated on 12 Avenue between Charnelton and Lincoln streets, Eugene, Oregon (Assessor’s
Map 17-03-31-42, Tax Lot 2100—DMB Green, LLC).
Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to amend page 2 of the resolution with the fol-
lowing:
MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 14, 2007 Page 1
Work Session
“Authorized modification:
The current Land Use Code is waived, and the land use code in effect on July 31, 2001, one
day prior to the effective date of the Land Use Code Update is re-imposed for the subject
property.”
Ms. Bettman offered the amendment because she believed the resolution demonstrated one of the problems
with Ballot Measure 37. She thought it imperative to avoid allowing applicants to cherry-pick the code for
the provisions they preferred. She did not know if the application of the old code in this case would benefit
the property owner, but thought for fairness and consistency, those who objected to the code imposed on
their property since they purchased it should not be able to take advantage of the provisions they preferred in
the current code.
Mr. Clark found it troubling that some referred to Ballot Measure 37 as “the problem or the danger or the
consequences,” a negative tone which he believed presupposed the council’s actions about what was right.
He thought one of the councilors’ duties as elected officials was to safeguard people’s rights, and that was
what Ballot Measure 37 was intended to do. He did not find all the claims troubling when people were
acting to protect their rights. He asked the effect of the amendment. Mr. Klein said the legal effect of the
amendment would be to take the property back to the code in effect before the update. Heather O’Donnell of
the Planning Division indicated that many of the commercial standards in the current code were in the past
code as well. The only standard that appeared to make much of a difference was the height standard; prior
to the update there was no height restriction in commercial zones. Now the height limitation was 120 feet,
which did not appear to be an issue in this case.
Ms. Solomon felt the amendment being offered was illogical. If Ms. Bettman felt the code was so valuable,
Ms. Solomon questioned why she would want to forego all of it on the basis of one Ballot Measure 37
application. She said the council should be careful in such instances, and asked what the council’s reaction
would have been if height was an issue for this project. She found the amendment counter-productive.
Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman about what year the property was purchased, City Attorney
Glenn Klein indicated it was purchased in 1994. Noting that the language she offered was drafted by Mr.
Klein, Ms. Bettman asked why the amendment referred to the day before the code was adopted as opposed
to 1994.
Ms. Bettman said the theory she was proceeding under was that such claimants wanted to be subject only to
the code in place when they bought their property and no other code. She thought that to be consistent, the
council should direct that the property in question revert to the code provisions in place at the time of
purchase. That may or may not provide more latitude to the property owner while at the same time denying
those property owners the benefit of the updated code as well as giving the City a consistent standard.
Mr. Clark moved to extend time for the meeting until the council completed the item. The
motion died for lack of a second.
Mr. Zelenka expressed concern about the principle involved in the amendment and what would happen if
extended to other properties with older claims. He asked if that would mean the council would go back to no
code in some instances, because in that case, he could “not go there.”
MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 14, 2007 Page 2
Work Session
Mr. Pryor said he would be more willing to support someone seeking a partial waiver of the code as opposed
to a full waiver. He did not think the amendment helped in regard to what he would want to see come out of
the action being contemplated.
Responding to Ms. Bettman’s question regarding the date he included in the amendment, Mr. Klein
suggested the following revision: “Authorized modification: The current Land Use Code is waived and the
Land Use Code in effect on November 16, 1994, is re-imposed for the subject property.” Ms. Bettman and
her second, Ms. Ortiz, accepted the revision.
Ms. Bettman pointed out her amendment did not waive the entire code, but merely put in place the
provisions that existed when the property was purchased.
The amendment to the motion failed, 5:2; Ms. Bettman and Ms. Ortiz voting yes.
The motion passed 6:1; Ms. Bettman voting no.
The meeting adjourned at 1:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 14, 2007 Page 3
Work Session