Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> --~_.- -----..~~ <br /> M I NUT E S <br /> EUGENE CITY COUNCIL <br /> December 4,1975 <br /> e Special session of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon, called for the pur- <br /> pose of considering filing a writ of review with regard to extension of water service <br /> to Shade Oaks Subdivision east of Goshen. The meeting was called to order by Council <br /> President Neil Murray at 7:00 p.m. on December 4, 1975 in the McNutt Room with other <br /> Council members present: Gus Keller, Wickes Beal, Tom Williams, D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, <br /> and Edna Shirey. Councilman Ray Bradley was absent. <br /> I - Extension of Water Service, Shade Oaks Subdivision <br /> Mrs. Beal moved second by Mr. Hamel that staff prepare and file a <br /> write of review (Boundary Commission decision of November 6, 1975 <br /> authorizing Willamette Water Company to extend water service to <br /> Shade Oaks Subdivision). <br /> Councilwoman Beal said the intent was to preserve the 1990 Plan, that although the <br /> issue is complicated, the principle is clear. Councilman Keller asked the city <br /> attorney's ideas on the issue. <br /> Stan Long, assistant city attorney, said that the record with regard to the decision <br /> I <br /> is not very strong, there is the hazard of some precedent that would be difficult~ to <br /> live with, and that the errors appear to be procedural so that the record could be <br /> corrected through reconsideration of the issue by the Boundary Commission. He added <br /> that there was no way to assure that the decision of the Boundary Commission, upon <br /> reconsideration, would be the same. <br /> e Councilman Keller then asked Keith Parks, general manager of Eugene Water & Electric <br /> Board, if there was any doubt about the earlier Council statement setting forth the <br /> city's policy with regard to extension of water services beyond the urban boundary. <br /> Mr. Parks answered that the question was one of interpretation of the 1990 Plan, <br /> and there was no way of predicting what the Water Board's action would be. <br /> Councilman Haws asked if Boundary Commission reconsideration would be on the exist- <br /> ing record, or do novo. Also, what precedent would be set that would affect the <br /> city in the long run. Mr. Long answered that most attorneys for legislative bodies <br /> would encourage de novo hearings. With regard to precedent, he said that one issue <br /> would be whether Fasano requirements apply to Boundary Commission decisions on small <br /> parcels of land where conflicts arise. <br /> Councilman Williams wondered how the extension of water service to the Shade Oaks <br /> Subdivision conflicts with the 1990 Plan when the Plan itself provides for service <br /> to established development with public health hazard. Councilman Murray said his <br /> recollection was that water was not the issue in the item referred to. Gary Chenkin, <br /> assistant planning director, explained that lack of water was not considered a health <br /> hazard, that it was the bacterial count involved. He said further that the recent <br /> policy statement by the Council related also to substances in the water as a public <br /> health hazard, not the lack of water. <br /> Councilman Williams then referred to a section of the Lane County code based on state <br /> law wherein public health hazard was defined as "contaminated or inadequate water <br /> supply." He drew a comparison between a person on a raft on the ocean where there <br /> e is adequate water who would die if he drank the water, and a person on a desert who <br /> would die of dehydration for lack of water. <br /> Councilwoman Beal asked if there were other properties that could be served, noting <br /> the Boundary Commission decision limited service to existing houses. She asked for <br /> ~30 12/4/75 - 1 <br />