Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 05/05/98 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Eugene Planning Commission Council Chamber--City Ha11--777 Pearl Street May 5, 1998 7p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Far, President; Tim Laue, Bobbie Lee, Scott Meisner, Ken Tollenaar, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Betty Taylor. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Art Farley, President; Peter Barrel, Bob Conrad, Ann Marie Levis, Adell McMillan, John Van Landingham, Ellen Wojahn. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Nancy Nathanson. Mayor Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order at 7:05 p.m. Mr. Farley called the meeting of the Eugene Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. Mayor Torrey welcomed those who were present and explained that the purpose of the joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission was to hear reports from community groups invited to review the Draft Land Use Code Update. He said a goal of the reports was to have issues of concern to citizens identified before further public hearings on the draft update were held by the Planning Commission. He suggested that public review of the update would continue until action on it was taken sometime in 1999. I. PRESENTATIONS BY COMMUNITY GROUPS Eugene Chamber of Commerce Director of Government Affairs Kathy Madison expressed appreciation to the council and commission for the opportunity to present citizen views on the draft update. She described how the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, Friends of Eugene, Home Builders Association of Lane County, and Neighborhood Leaders Council had co- sponsored four public forums on the draft update, worked together to understand each other's viewpoints, and agreed to make independent reports. Mayor Torrey explained guidelines set for the presentations. He said that Eugene Code: Green organization would be given three minutes for a presentation at the conclusion of the previously scheduled reports. A. Neighborhood Leaders Council Neighborhood Leaders Council Co-Chair Jan Wostmann described the make-up, structure, and diversity of the Neighborhood Leaders Council and explained the process used by the council to review the draft Land Use Code Update. He said that a committee had been formed to review the draft Land Use Code Update, each neighborhood being invited to send one or more representative; that the group met weekly and were joined by a number of concerned citizens MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 1 Eugene Planning Commission who saw the council as the most likely vehicle for their concerns; and that attendance at the meetings fluctuated from 12 to 30 persons. He said many hours were spent debating the merits and flaws of the draft code and in the end was able to agree on 30 general statements about land use, the code update, and the role of neighborhoods in land use planning and review. He reviewed the statements contained in a collection of documents entitled "Neighborhood Leaders Council Presentation on the Draft Use Code Update to the Eugene Planning Commission and Eugene City Council -- May 5, 1998" distributed at the beginning of the meeting. Neighborhood Leaders Council member David Hinkley stated that members of neighborhood associations had been invited to submit recommendations for revision to the draft Lane Use Code Update. He referred to a list of 356 recommendations received contained in the collection of documents reviewed by Mr. Wostmann. He said that the recommendations were assembled as submitted and sorted by code section. He described a process used by the Neighborhood Leaders Council Code Update Study Committee to evaluate the recommendations. He reviewed the record of support recommendations received as recorded in the collection of documents. He explained that the "Support" number in the document indicated the number of participants supporting the recommended change. Neighborhood Leaders Council Co-Chair Jon Belcher described a process followed by the update study committee of the council in which individual statements of association members were provided an opportunity to share specific concerns which were discussed by the group as a whole. He noted that the written concerns already considered were included in the collection of documents distributed at the beginning of the meeting and that others would be considered at a later time and submitted to the City Council and Planning Commission. Mr. Belcher said the Eugene Chamber of Commerce, Friends of Eugene, Home Builders Association of Lane County, and Neighborhood Leaders Council had reached consensus on seven issues, as follows: · One hundred foot notification for zone changes and other land use applications is inadequate, the current notification standards should be retained, and both occupants and owners of property should be notified. · The authority of the City Manager in land use matters should not supercede that of the Hearings Official, Planning Commission, Historic Review Board, and City Council. · The City Manager's designee should be specified by either administrative order or ordinance. · The cod numbering system should be revised to provide for future amendments and change to clarify and make the code as user-friendly as possible. · The Land Use Code Update should comply with Growth Management Policies. · All Planning Department decisions should have at least one local avenue of appeal. · The City, as developer, should be required to abide by the Land Use Code. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 2 Eugene Planning Commission B. Eugene Chamber of Commerce Ms. Madison stated that the Eugene Chamber of Commerce was concerned that the Land Use Code Update achieve its own goals and reflect City Council goals and community standards. She said her organization believed the update should address legal mandates and fiscal constraints, balance land use regulations and public expectations for development control, and be easy to use and understand. She reviewed examples of proposed changes in the code with Growth Management Study Policies and the Industrial Lands Policy Report. She reviewed new landscaping standards in the draft Update for areas zoned I-1 Campus Industrial. She reviewed other new regulations, the proposed code numbering system, its cross referencing, and the location of tables and figures. She said that the Chamber of Commerce had concluded that the Land Use Code Update did not meet the project goals, was in conflict with underlying principles and planning goals, and that it contained a one-size-fits-all philosophy which did not improve development. She suggested that additional time should be taken to understand principles behind changes, make changes in the context of planning objectives, and understand the implications of changes. She distributed a handout illustrating the text slides used in her presentation. C. Home Builders Association of Lane County Home Builders Association of Lane County Director of Government Affairs Kathy Bruebaker expressed appreciation to City staff for its cooperation with the organizations presenting reports. She described the process followed by her association in developing its report and presented concerns, as follows: · The update increased regulations with negative effects on affordable housing. Since housing is "market driven," increased regulations were an obstacle to economic efficiency and created financing difficulties. · The update does not address certain goals of TransPlan and makes it impossible to meet others. · The update raises concerns about the Residential Lands and Housing study about high density proposals; open space, landscape and setback standards; and development of infrastructure. · The update does not work well with Growth Management Policies · The update should provide incentives to encourage affordable housing, such as: developer bonuses, fee waivers, design waivers, and acceptance of developer driven concepts. · The update should be flexible in design considerations, unit design and lot size coordination, eliminate a "once-size-fits-all approach, and reduce requirements. Ms. Bruebaker distributed a handout illustrating the text slides used in her presentation. D. Friends of Eugene MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 3 Eugene Planning Commission Friends of Eugene President Greg McClauchlan stated that his organization supported the goals of the Land Use code Update to reduce administrative costs of the City and reduce compliance costs of developers. He said his organization had reviewed the update using the following standards: · The update should promote a sense of community and encourage better development by empowering neighborhoods and residents to have an influence on how such development will affect them and the community. · The update should improve the development approval decision-making process through adequate notification and public information. · The update should ensure that development is compatible with existing neighborhoods and protects local quality of life and livability. · The update should implement Growth Management Study Policies. Mr. McClauchlan said the update should encourage design and development of livable neighborhoods by creating pleasant, safe, walkable streets; provide for Neighborhood Commercial Zones, and Mixed Use Nodes; and maintain a density plus livability formula. He said a report called, "Agenda for Sustainable Eugene" would soon be completed by the Friends of Eugene and would help in the code update. Friends of Eugene member Eben Foder reviewed proposals of his organization to improve public participation in development by requiring a Major Project Review process; expanding the notification area for development applications; requiring a Community Impact Statement; creating an optional performance review path for innovative development projects; focusing on mixed- uses, density downtown, and in major commercial nodes; creating pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly development; and prohibiting strip mall development E. Eugene Code: Green Mr. Cornelius Swart stated that Eugene Code: Green was a group of University of Oregon students, activists, and artists who had studied the Land Use Code Update and come to agreement that notification procedures, local involvement, the authority of the City Manager, and design review process needed to be improved. He said his organization supported alternative performance-based paths versus conformance to standard code requirements and a more simple code to cut costs. II. COUNCILORS AND COMMISSIONERS SHARE OBSERVATIONS Ms. Levis stated that she appreciated the work and suggestions of the groups making presentations. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that she also appreciated the presentation and was impressed with the high quality and variety of views held. Mr. Bartel stated that he had attended each of the forums sponsored by the presenting groups and believed they were a valuable service to the community. He asked what "incentives" the MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 4 Eugene Planning Commission groups supported to encourage the development of affordable housing. Mr. McClauchlan replied that Friends of Eugene did not support financial subsidies, but the use of a design review process. Mr. Bruebaker replied that the Home Builders Association supported creation of ways to make such housing attractive to developers. Mr. Laue said he believed there were common themes in each of the presentations: neighborhood involvement, use of design review, concerns about notification processes, and flexibility. He said he hoped the Land Use Code Update would coincide with Growth Management Study Policies adopted by the City Council. Ms. McMillan expressed appreciation to Mayor Torrey for initiating the process which led to the presentations received. She said she favored design review for development plans and that she did not believe it needed to be an expensive process. Mr. Fart said that he believed the presentations reflected the ability of diverse groups in Eugene acting cooperatively. He commended the participating groups for bringing the community together. Mr. Farley expressed appreciation to the groups making presentations. He said he supported giving the process for granting the update additional time and liked specific examples given in the presentations. In response to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Belcher stated that representatives of 13 of 18 chartered neighborhood associations had participated in the Neighborhood Leaders Council study of the Land Use Code Update. Mr. Wostmann suggested that increased neighborhood participation in all activities of the associations would be enhanced by increased budgetary support for publication of group newsletters. Mr. Conrad said he hoped the involvement of neighborhoods in land development could be enhanced, as suggested by several of the presenting groups. Mr. Tollenaar said he believed the presentations made would impact the final form of the Land Use Code Update to be adopted. He said he also believed the October 1997 draft code came closer to carrying out Growth Management Study Policies than the current code. Mr. Van Landingham requested that additional specific examples showing unintended consequences of the draft code be prepared by the presenting groups and the public. He also requested that the City Council consider how the process for approval of the updated code could be extended beyond the currently planned target of July 1999. Mr. Meisner said he believed the broad interests and goals of the presenting groups were similar, but that they had differing strategies. He said he supported design review practices and providing for a slower approval process. Mr. Lee said that he believed the presentations were another example of divergent views coming together for common goals. He rhetorically asked if public policy could be effective in making changes. He suggested that the City Council seek to empower neighborhood associations to operate at a higher level, especially by providing additional resources for group newsletters. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 5 Eugene Planning Commission Ms. Wojahn said she was pleased that the presentations had proven that she was in error in her belief that the process would slow approval of the Land Use Code Update. She said she now believed it would only strengthen it. Ms. Taylor said that she found the presentations extremely interesting. She said she hoped it could be the beginning of increased public involvement in policy decision making. III. NEXT STEPS Mr. Farley reviewed dates included in a document entitled "Land Use Code Update--Schedule as of April 27, 1998" distributed with the agenda of the meeting. He emphasized that written public comment would continue to be received on the update at least through June 30, 1998. Mr. Farley closed the meeting of the Planning Commission at 9:50 p.m. Mayor Torrey expressed appreciation to the representatives of the groups which had made presentations and closed the meeting of the City Council at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager Pro Tern (Recorded by Dan Lindstrom) R:~1998~Adm Services~CIS ~Councfl~cc980505. wpd MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 6 Eugene Planning Commission