1994 Tree Ordinance - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

Bascom least a decade, said Kathy Fieland, deputy city recorder. In June 1986, Veto kills Mayor Brian Obie threatened to veto an ordinance dealing with land use ap- plication fees, but didn't need to make good on his threat after the council dropped the ordinance. Under provisions in the city char- Scenic values would have to be tree law considered, and developers would ter, a mayor can veto acouncil -ap have to leave tree buffers along prop- proved ordinance within 10 days of its erty lines. Clear-cutting inside the city • Property: In a letter to the passage by placing the unsigned bill on limits would be banned in many cases. the city manager's desk along with a The law substantially strengthens City Council, the mayor cites list of reasons for the veto. an Urban Forest Management Plan lack of a public hearing as Fieland said charter language giv- passed by the council in November ing mayors veto power is fairly com- that "encourages" rather than requires one reason for her decision. mon, even in cities such as Eugene developers to preserve trees. Vollmer that operate under a council-city man- By JEFF WRIGHT 7/7 Al 3 form of government. In Eugene said the council agreed then to let the plan be tested a year before making a ger orm o governmen. n ugene changes. The Register Guard and similarly organized cities, the mayor doesn't vote on city matters ex- The new law was enacted after a In the first mayoral veto in Eugene in at cept in case of council ties. group of south Eugene residents in least a decade, Ruth Bascom has cut down a Tim Vollmer, executive officer of Keller's ward raised concerns about a sweeping tree protection law approved by a the Home Builders Association of Lane loophole" that allows some develop - near- unanimous City Council last week. County, said Tuesday he's pleased that ers to log sites before applying for a The veto means that the ordinance, which , the council apparently will get another planned unit development, thus cir- imposes substantial new regulations on develop- chance to consider the new ordinance. cumventing some tree preservation re- Bu P quirements. ers who want to cut trees from large lots, is void Vollmer said he shared his group's unless the eight- member council overrides the concerns with Bascom after last Keller said Tuesday that Bascom's veto. week's vote, but her veto "was not at concerns — including the absence of a The council will take up the matter Monday. our encouragement or suggestion. It public hearing — were discussed at Y last week's meeting. A council majori- Two-thirds of the council, or six members, must did not occur to me that she even had ty decided against a public hearing, vote to override a mayoral veto. the power of veto." Keller said, out of concern that some The mayor's action, which comes on the He said Bascom told him that she developers might rush to cut down heels of recent verbal exchanges among council was considering sending a letter to the trees before the new ordinance could members that already threaten the council's council indicating she might withhold go into effect. - hopes for calm debate, evoked dismay from her signature on the bill — an action Ironically, that danger has resur- some who learned of the veto Tuesday. that would not kill the measure — but faced because of Bascom's veto, Keller "I'm stunned," said Councilwoman Barbara did not mention the possibility of veto. said. Keller, who had shepherded the tree protection "I think she has some real con- Robinette said Tuesday that he ordinance to passage. "We reached what was cerns,- and we happen to agree with voted against the ordinance last week pretty much a consensus, and for the mayor to many of those concerns," Vollmer pY Y because it seemed too sweeping to ap- s imply say,'I'm going to override it; I don't care said. what you agreed on,' seems to me to be undemo- In her comments at last Wednes- cratic." day's council session, Bascom said she The chance that the mayor's veto will be has become more sensitive to the com- upheld may be slim. The council voted 7 -1 last plex nature of tree felling require - Wednesday to approve the new tree protection ments as an owner, with her husband, ordinance and even the lone dissenter — Kaye of a tree farm. Robinette — said Tuesday he's not inclined to Bascom, long regarded as a tree . support a veto. advocate in city politics, is a longtime But Bascom apparently has succeeded in member and chairwoman of the re- forcing the council to take another look at an cently decommissioned city Tree Com- ordinance that would require developers to get mission. city approval of a detailed logging plan if they The law vetoed by Bascom would want to cut 10 or more trees from large lots. require developers who file for a log - Bascom, who returns from vacation today, ging plan to offset the negative effects couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday. In a of logging on neighbors' homes, on letter to the council, however, she cited three wetlands and on wildlife habitat. reasons for her veto. The law also requires that neigh - The council, she said, decided against allow- bors be informed of any logging plans ing public comment before passing the new law; and be given the chance to appeal any it failed to consider the regulatory costs to the approved plans to a city hearings offi- city; and it decided to impose regulation at the cial. threshold of 10 trees per lot. Bascom said the 10 -tree minimum would place the city's regulatory net over "a new and large group: single families wishing to construct their own home in the south hills." She suggest- ed the minimum be increased to 25 trees. The mayor's veto appears to be the first in at Turn to VETO, Page 4A