04/08/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

*- M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL April 8, 1974 0450 Regular meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by His Honor Mayor Lester E. Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on April 8, 1974 in the Council Chamber with the following councilmembers present: Mr. Williams, Mr. Hershner, Mrs. Beal, Mrs. Campbell, Mr. Keller (left early), Mr. Murray, and Mr. Wood. Coucilman McDonald was absent. I - Appeal, Planning Commission October 2, 1973 denial of rezoning from RA to R-2-3.9-PD on property between 1-105 and Kins Row, Centennial Boulevard (Earl GFeen) . Rezoning between I-5 and Kins Row, Centennial Boulevard (Earl Green) - Copies of Ci ty Attorney's memo recounting the history of th€~ request to rezone this property were previously distributed to Council membe'rs. The Council voted in February to rezone the property but at that time, because of negative recommenda- tion from the Planning Commission, findings supporting the rezoning and the ordinance effecting the change were not prepared. The issue was postponed to a subsequent meeting at which time different representation of the Council declined to accomplish the rezoning and there were no findings adopted supporting the negative vote. City Attorney advised that preparation of findings supporting both views would be appropriate for consideration at the next Council meeting, at which time the appropriate findings could be adopted in line with the majority decision at that time. Manager said there seemed to be no legal risk in de- veloping findings on a controversy supporting both sides of the issue; it would be a matter of judgment on which findings state the stronger case. City Attorney also pointed out that in order to strengthen the record it would be appropriate for those Council members who were absent from some of the meetings at which the issue was discussed to so state and to indicate they had studied the record of the meetings missed. If the record of meetings missed had not been studied, then the Council member should abstain from participating in the decision. City Attorney added that to correct the action previously taken, under th~ Fasano ruling, findings supporting the decision must be adopted and in the record. Manager suggested any anticipated absences from the April 8 Council meeting should be noted and then a decision made on whether to take the issue to that meeting or postpone it. There was no indication of any anticipated absence from that meeting. rill' Councilman McDonald wondered whether precedent was set in reversing the action of the Council at the February 25 meeting. He said it was a regular meeting with a quorum present and he understood the action taken at that time should stand. Manager explained that rezoning approved at the February 25 meeting was not accomplished because the ordinance and findings supporting the change (re- quired by the Fasano ruling) were not prepared. At the following meeting a dif- ferent Council majority was present and voted not to ,proceed with the change but findings supporting that position were not prepared, so disposal of the issue at that meeting would not have been legal. Councilwoman Campbell asked if there was precedent in having a rollcall prior to a meeting on rezoning and whether there would always be a prior rollcall in the future. Manager agreed a problem existed, particularly when the vote was fairly evenly divided on an issue. One council member absent would necessitate staff having to be prepared to respond in either direction. He said a prior rollcall would not be a matter of course in the futur,e. Comm 3/27/74 Affirm It was understood findings would be prepared supporti.ng both affirma ti ve and negative positions on the rezoning for distribution to the Council before con- ,sideration at the April 8 meeting. ~ r. ' .-... . Findings, Earl Green Rezoning (between.'Kiils Rowand I-10S, Centennial Boulevard) _ I Copies of findings supporting the rezoning of this p,roperty to C-2-]. 9-PD were ,distributed to Council members. Also distributed were excerpts from Planning I Commission minutes of October 2, 1973 supporting the Commission's recommended : denial of the rezoning. It was understood the issue would be on the April 8,1974 ! Council agenda. ~---;- .,-.... -'--' -'~_'__'_"~-._"":_-_._~.~_,___.,..______"....._... ..._._ .._.'_ ,.__........ ..__.,~..__.._-:-<.__..........._._..::::.._. .~--.. .-;. .;..._4.'.... ....-.... "0 '":"'.- .u -'"7.:'-"'"7, '. .,-c~:-.._._..:-;-------' Co rom 4/3/74 Affirm ~ .. At the request of Councilman Keller this item was taken out of order (Item II-J and K on Council agenda). He had indicated when inquiry was made in committee about attendance at this meeting for action on this appeal that he would be present. However, he was unable to stay for the entire meeting. Copies of letter received from Richard Cleveland, attorney representing Earl ?reen, w~re distributed to Council members. Mr. Cleveland requested postponement of the Hem unt1.l the entire Council was present (McDonald absent). Manager reviewed action on this request and the conflicting actions taken at different meetings of the Counci,l, depending upon which Council members were present. 2 ~i 4/8/74 - 1