Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/11/08 Meeting M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall February 11, 2008 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Alan Zelenka. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Mike Clark. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. She asked for a moment of silence in honor of the tragic killings of two city councilors and the mayor of Kirkwood, Missouri. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Mark Rabinowitz , PO Box 51222, Eugene reiterated the concerns he expressed in the past regarding climate change. He asked what the City of Eugene and Lane County were willing to give up to reduce energy consumption. He noted that a federal comment period was underway regarding the Interstate 5 construction in Glenwood “even though in coming years oil availability” would be reduced. He recalled that Mayor Piercy had voted for the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) in November. He felt that if the City was truly concerned about climate change it would not support more transportation planning. He criticized the University of Oregon’s plans to build a new arena. He remarked that while the City was waiting for “intelligent urban design” it continued to “rubber stamp” big box stores in west Eugene. He said that it was legal according to Oregon law to bar such development. He alleged that athletes who went to the Olympics in China would be banned from saying anything about human rights or air pollution. He said if Eugene was going to be the human rights city, it should not subsidize a “communist Chinese dictatorship” and its “massive human rights abuses.” Mary Jo Davis , 30519 Overholser Road, Cottage Grove, said she had lived in the woods west of Cottage Grove for 35 years. She related that during this time she had been personally affected by logging. She wished to register her opposition to the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR), which would reopen Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land for logging. She submitted a petition signed by over 300 people to the City Council. She averred that the BLM had given three alternatives, all three of which would create more problems. She said the number one reason to oppose the WOPR would be the impact to drinking water that allowing cutting more closely to the river banks would create. She predicted that this would increase the silt in water, decrease retention of water, kill fish, and potentially increase herbicide levels in drinking water. She also predicted this would generate numerous lawsuits. She pointed out that the preferred plan would increase cutting by 700 percent, though there were “so little of these trees left.” She MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 1 Regular Meeting acknowledged that timber-dependent counties such as Lane County were struggling to provide services due to lagging budgets. She averred that logging old growth was not a long-term solution and would only “put [area residents] in the same place a few years from now.” She said there were better ways, such as thinning areas that had already been cut. She declared that a solution could be found without “cutting down trees that were giants when Lewis and Clark first came to Oregon.” Ron Davis , 30519 Overholser Road, Cottage Grove, submitted a picture of the earth, “our home.” He suggested that they should “ask not what your planet can do for you, ask what you can do for your planet.” He felt that endorsing the WOPR would send a message that it was okay to be out of balance with nature. He pointed out that the federal land was owned collectively by all of the citizens of this country and should be managed wisely. He related that he had heard an interview with author Gary Zukav in which Mr. Zukav likened living in the United States to having already won the lottery. He said if people did not take care of land and forests, they would create poverty and deserts. He understood that nearly 30,000 comments had come in, mostly in opposition to the WOPR. He said concerns had also been raised by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS), and a coalition of eight hunting and fishing groups. He noted that the EPA had specifically expressed concern about the effects of alternative 2 and 3 on drinking water and aquatic species. He averred that they should demand that federal agencies present a more balanced alternative as people could not afford to throw the planet away. th Samantha Chirillo , 157 East 27 Avenue, Apt. 3, co-director of Cascadia’s Ecosystem Advocates and organizer of the WOPR and Beyond Coalition, which represented more than 15 different forest conservation, climate change, and community groups, expressed hope that the council would pass a resolution opposing the WOPR in solidarity with those groups. She asserted that carbon storage capacity of western Oregon forests was the greatest per acre of any forest in the world. She also said water and soil conservation the forests provided was irreplaceable. She opined that Eugene would be a less attractive place to live if the WOPR was approved. She related that the WOPR would increase logging jobs slightly, because so much of the work was now mechanized, but a greater number of jobs would be lost in recreation and eco-tourism. She noted that she had recently participated in a conference for youth and asked the council to please support the youth in their endeavor to create a livable future. Josh Laughlin , 2905 Ferry Street, said he was conservation director of the Eugene-based Cascadia Project, representing approximately 700 members across the country. He stated that old growth forests had drawn him to the area from the east coast, where old growth forests were now gone. He reiterated the value of old trees in relation to carbon storage and drinking water. He related that for the past five to seven years the Eugene BLM had been focusing on restoration, forestry, thinning and managing plantations, and decommis- sioning harmful roads that were “bleeding sediment” into waterways. He said this would change with the WOPR, a “back room settlement/negotiation that proposed to ramp up old growth logging” on federal public lands in western Oregon. He felt they had the opportunity to redirect the BLM’s energy. He related that all of the BLM land up the McKenzie River would become a timber management area and the Coburg Hills area would “go away.” Glen Love , 393 Ful Vue Drive, noted that he had written a letter in opposition to the WOPR to the council a couple of months earlier on behalf of the McKenzie Flyfishers, a group of 120 members in the Eugene/Springfield area. He conveyed the group’s concern regarding the threats to water and fish resources posed by the plan. He said this had been brought to light by EPA opposition to the plan. He stated that the McKenzie Flyfishers joined the EPA in opposing the WOPR. He noted there was no recognition of global warming in the WOPR plan. He averred that 90 percent of the old growth forest in Oregon was gone and MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 2 Regular Meeting much of the remaining 10 percent would be threatened by the plan. He explained that old growth forest conditions take over 1,000 years to regenerate and ultimately ecological conditions could not be replicated. Jeff Devore , 85816 Parklane Circle, noted that he had served as president of the McKenzie Flyfishers in the previous year. He had helped its board to craft a letter in opposition to the WOPR. He had also served as the McKenzie Flyfishers representative on the McKenzie Watershed Council (MWC) and had participated in a letter from the MWC opposing the plan. He wished to speak as an individual in support of the “no action alternative.” He resented the amount of money spent working on a plan that basically changed all of the plans that were already in place. He averred that if money had been spent on improving the existing Northwest Forest Plan there could have been more logging and thinning on second growth forests and no one would be arguing about cutting down old growth. He had lost faith in the Forest Service and the BLM to protect the forest; their charter was to protect those forests and it was what they were paid to do. th Mike Russo , 1975 Potter Street, wished to speak about a proposed building for the corner of 19 Avenue and Alder Street. He stated that speakers opposing the building were supported by the South University Neighborhood Association Board, which recognized and supported the neighbors as they tried to have this project modified through discussions on zoning and allowable heights and densities on that street. He said the building was proposed to be seven stories tall and would maximize the number of units while minimizing the setbacks and parking. He added that the “out of town developer” planned to build four-bedroom units and expected to rent to students, but because the required parking was based on the number of units and not on occupancy, the code only required between 39 and 62 parking spaces and the developer’s plan included 40. He believed the project would saturate the neighborhood with parked cars and increase traffic issues. He found it “shocking” that the developer had not committed to retaining an onsite manager to provide support and supervision for the tenants. Mr. Russo declared the building to be “grotesquely” out of character for the neighborhood and a direct contradiction to Growth Management Policy #6, which sought to increase the density of new housing development while maintaining neighborhood character. He acknowl- edged that change would come over time, but area residents were worried that the debate regarding infill was only framed in terms of “up or out.” He felt there was a “wide zone of acceptability” for infill that would balance the need for increased density with an economic return to development and with the need for livability in that neighborhood. He asked for the council’s help to “protect the neighborhood.” ndth Nancy Meyer , 1135 East 22 Avenue, averred there was a huge problem with the R-4 zoning on 19 Avenue that would allow a long wall of very tall buildings that would house hundreds of people. She said the zoning would impact the South University Neighborhood Association, the West University Neighbors, the Fairmount Neighbors, and the University and Olympic Trials. She supported “reasonable density” but believed that inappropriate infill threatened core neighborhoods. She acknowledged that residents who chose to live in the University neighborhood understood they lived in an increasingly dense area filled with students. She felt that “injecting” a seven-story building would defy growth management policies that sought to maintain the character and livability of such neighborhoods as it would be “wildly out of character” with its environs. She noted that the University was capping building height in order to maintain architectural integrity of its campus. She listed similar buildings in town, which included Sacred Heart Hospital, a six-story building, and underscored the traffic issues they created. She asked the City Council to set a deadline for the code amendments and that they request the City Manager to direct staff to spend time with area neighbors to craft a development plan for the neighborhood. Ken Kato , 2060 Agate Street, noted that a packet of images and maps had been included in councilors’ packets. He said he was speaking as a neighbor and also as a topographer. He explained that the two scale drawings he had provided demonstrated that a seven-story building could be 80 to 100 feet tall; in his MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 3 Regular Meeting drawing he estimated the building to be 90 feet tall. He sought to delineate the stark difference in sizes between the larger proposed building and surrounding buildings. th Mike Westervelt , 853 East 20 Avenue, was extremely concerned regarding the proposed seven-story building project. He said Alder Street was a significant bicycle route. He believed the project would create “chaos and danger” for cyclists because the developer was choosing to build with the minimum setbacks, which would reduce visibility. He strongly encouraged the council to revisit the future of the South University Neighborhood. He read a letter from Bill Aspegren, a neighbor. Mr. Aspegren reiterated concerns regarding bicyclist safety, the height of the building, and that only 40 parking spaces were planned. He was not against steps to gain control of sprawl but believed that safety of bicycle routes must take priority over “uncontrolled development.” He urged the council to ask the developer to scale down the project. st Janet Heinonen , 1012 East 21 Avenue, expressed concern that there would be nothing left to connect Eugeneans with their historic roots. She averred that the City was “poised to lose” Civic Stadium and Mac Court. She felt the prospect of a seven-story building “looming over” the University neighborhood was depressing. She believed a “high-rise building for students” without any supervision threatened the residential integrity of the existing neighborhood. She questioned the wisdom of the zoning in the area, noting that zoning allowed up to a 12-story building across the street from R-1 homes. She said the R-3 areas nearby were all characterized by three-story buildings. She thought the original zoning was in the context of grandfathering-in group living residences, mostly fraternities and sororities. She urged the council to address the zoning designation. She recalled the movement to preserve Hayward Field in the 1980s. Marilyn Milne , 2156 Harris Street, remarked that the University neighborhood would have a front row seat for the Olympic Trials. She expressed appreciation for the grants the council provided for the neighborhood groups in recognition of the congestion the trials would bring. She reiterated opposition for the “de facto th dormitory” planned for 19 Avenue and Alder Street. She believed that area of the neighborhood was incorrectly zoned. She predicted Olympic Trials fans would come and go through construction of the building and this could present safety issues. She thought the building, if it was constructed as planned, would be a “big permanent mess” that people would later regret. She believed the City Council could take action by directing the City Manager to have staff work with the area residents on a permanent solution and planning a work session on four topics: a moratorium on the building until after the Infill Compatibility Standards Committee finished its work, a land use code amendment that did not conflict with the Metro Plan, the direction to the Planning Department and City Manager to bring the minor code amendment process forward immediately, and expansion of the definition of infill to also include the number of residents per household. Linda Carnine , 5455 Saratoga Street, opposed the WOPR and supported a resolution against it. She said people were consumers who relied on producers. She averred that old growth forests were some of the best producers in the world. She stated that clear-cutting damaged the McKenzie River and its tributaries. She believed the area was a “jewel” and the cutting of tens of thousands of acres of old growth would be wrong. She also wished to underscore the importance of habitat for other animals. Drix , Ward 3, said he was present because he loved the town. He felt the holes in the downtown area presented a wonderful opportunity because they contained nothing at present. He thought they could be filled with buildings, but said the town should think about what to put in them. He related that he had attended a meeting of the Eugene Tree Foundation and had enjoyed meeting the people there. He noted that MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 4 Regular Meeting Oregon had the largest organism on the planet, a large fungi growing under trees. He also had attended the homeless convention. He related that he had his bicycle adjusted there and had met several people who lived under the apartment buildings in his neighborhood. th Gienie Assink , 221 66 Street, Springfield, supported the WOPR plan. She related that democratic leader in the House, Mike Schaufler, had specifically stated on the House floor that timber production was critical for Oregon counties. She declared that trees were a renewable resource and that the Oregon Forest Practices Act required replanting after harvest. She averred that cleared areas benefited wildlife such as the black- tailed deer. She said what was needed was an environmental plan that provided economic and environmental balance by maintaining critical protections in the Northwest Forest Plan as well as making adjustments in order to achieve the timber yield “initially promised.” She challenged the council to come up with a better plan. She pointed out that voters in Lane County had opposed tax increases to cover the costs of services. She averred that if the council was not willing to support a plan that would bring financial stability to the county, what would it propose to do to meet the need? She disputed the notion that old growth still existed in Lane County. She encouraged everyone to research the plan further before opposing it. th Adam Detteer , 542 East 12 Avenue, Apt. 2, noted he was a University of Oregon student. He opposed the WOPR. He argued that even if a forest could be returned to its original state, there would be a value the forests would lose that could not be restored. He declared that this value lay in a forest’s history as a natural place free from the impact of “human manipulation.” He believed that natural places were valuable because they were “beyond the human built world.” He opined that “destroying natural places” would destroy a “window into the world.” He urged everyone not to allow the forests to be logged. David Tvedt , 801 Lynn Lane, asked the City Council to oppose the WOPR. He related that he had explored old growth areas in Lane County and there were not a lot left. He submitted photos of some of those areas, much of which he projected would be logged. He also submitted a photo of an area near McGowan Creek that would be logged. He noted that the Forest Service had indicated that timber sales were “total losers” at present because the value of wood had fallen. He had read through much of the WOPR and felt that it contained many faults. Kathleen Brandt , 1960 Alder Street, related that she and her family had bought an older home in the University neighborhood and were very happy there. She said her kitchen window looked over Alder Street th at 19 Avenue. She underscored that it was a bicycle thoroughfare. She was concerned about the safety of that neighborhood. She noted that in addition to the University population many people traversed the area to go to work at the hospital, another large employer. She did not oppose growth, but she felt the growth had to be undertaken safely. Everett Brandt , 1960 Alder Street, did not think more apartments were needed in the area; there were already enough. He noted that should the building be constructed, he would be looking into the apartments from his bedroom window. John Sihler , 4235 Brae Burn Drive, member of the McKenzie Flyfishers, noted that he was present to speak in regard to the Wiper Measure 37 claim. He said homeowners needed stability as much or more than business owners. He quoted from the dedication of the cemetery, which dated to 1929, which directly indicated that it was intended for public cemetery purposes. He related that the Edgewood West Park Association, consisting of over 80 homeowners, had written a letter in opposition to the claim. He averred that if the cemetery had made a claim that intended to construct residential homes while perpetuating the 75- foot buffer zone, it might have garnered more support from the neighborhood. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 5 Regular Meeting Paul Moore , 2586 Potter Street, spoke regarding Crest Drive road improvements. He requested that the council require that bicycle lanes be included in all of the uphill parts of the project. He said he had gone to a bicycle conference at which Michael Ronkin, former Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) bike/pedestrian coordinator, had made the point that more so than safety bicycle lanes were created to make a predictable and visible flow of bicycle traffic. He underscored that the Crest Drive/Storey Boule- vard/Friendly Street area contained significant grades and speed differences combined with poor visibility on curves. He reiterated that area residents who were dependent on bicycles for transportation had spoken to the Mayor and Councilor Bettman, representing over 100 signers on a petition, requesting bicycle lanes. He also submitted a petition signed by three-quarters of the people who had attended the Bicycle/Pedestrian Summit and approximately 40 people who attended the climate gatherings in the previous week at the University of Oregon. He commented that in his experience the council’s constituents overwhelmingly approve bicycle accommodations. He recommended the councilors go to the area and look into it themselves either on a bicycle or in a car. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and called on the council for questions and remarks. She thanked everyone opposing the construction of the seven-story building in the University neighborhood for coming and involving themselves in a civic discussion. She said the building presented tough issues for considera- tion. She noted that Councilor Taylor would put a motion in opposition to the WOPR on the table after the Consent Agenda item Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for testifying. She appreciated the input given regarding the seven-story building. Councilor Zelenka thanked the University neighborhood residents for coming. He said the neighborhood was sincerely concerned about protecting the character and compatibility in their neighborhood. He felt this highlighted the need for the work that the Infill Compatibility Committee was doing and the need for refinement plans and the City creating ways to finance those plans. He also wished to call attention to the first page of the booklet they had submitted. He supported modifying the R-4 zoning so that it created a more “graceful edge” to the neighborhood. He intended to ask the council for a work session on this topic. He also thanked those present who had spoken in regard to the WOPR. Councilor Solomon thanked Ms. Assink for being the lone advocate for the WOPR. She stated that more than 50 percent of Oregon was owned by the government, which did not pay taxes. She declared that the county would benefit from harvesting trees as it would generate funds that would help people. Councilor Taylor thanked everyone. She appreciated the input from the University neighbors in opposition to the seven-story building. She hoped the City Council would pass the resolution she intended to place on the table. She said it was important to protect what was left of the old growth forests as it was critical to water quality, land stability, carbon storage, and quality of life. Councilor Taylor noted that Mr. Love’s son, Dr. Stanley Love, was in space on a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) mission. Councilor Bettman thanked everyone for their testimony. She remarked that there had been a point in time when the residential zoning designations had the ranges of allowable density changed. She asserted that currently R-2 “looked more like high density” and commercial uses were permitted within R-3 and R-4. She wanted to know when this change had occurred. She thought the proposed building was an example of the MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 6 Regular Meeting failure to move forward opportunity-siting in a “meaningful way.” She believed that opportunity-siting would take neighborhoods and downzone areas that needed protection and then would allow the utilization of the “expertise of the people in the neighborhood” to determine what opportunities lay within the neighbor- hood to provide “very high density housing.” She averred that high density housing could be then placed in a neighborhood without “destroying the fabric of the entire neighborhood.” She supported holding a work session on the item. Councilor Bettman indicated she would support the resolution in opposition of the WOPR. She recalled a time in which she had worked as a tree planter. She felt it was a big mistake to engage in clear cutting. She opined that timber contracts often cost more to implement than they brought in for public revenue. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - September 18, 2007, Work Session - November 27, 2007, Workshop - December 18, 2007, Work Session - January 7, 2008, State of the City - January 16, 2008, Joint Elected Officials Meeting B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to approve the items on the Con- sent Calendar. Councilor Bettman noted she had submitted corrections to the minutes. Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections to the minutes, without objection, approved. Councilor Ortiz noted that her husband’s name was Gino and not Nino, as printed in the minutes of the State of the City address, dated January 7, 2008. Roll call vote; the Consent Calendar with the acknowledged minutes corrections was passed unanimously, 7:0. Mayor Piercy noted that Councilor Clark was ill. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Zelenka, moved to adopt Resolution No. 4928, a resolution opposing the Bureau of Land Management’s proposed Western Oregon Plan Re- vision by the City Council of the City of Eugene. Councilor Taylor acknowledged that the Eugene City Council had no jurisdiction over the plan. Councilor Ortiz indicated her support for the resolution. She said even though the resolution was a statement and had no ability to affect the outcome of the WOPR, it was important for the community to take a stand. She did not believe the plan revision would benefit the community Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:2; councilor Poling and Solomon voting in opposition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 7 Regular Meeting 3. ACTION: Charles Wiper, Inc. Measure 37 Claim (M37 06-4) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Resolution 4926 denying a Measure 37 claim of Charles Wiper, Inc. for property identified as Assessor’s Map 18- 03-18-00, Tax Lot 300. Councilor Solomon opposed the motion. She believed that the Wipers had a valid claim. She disagreed with staff’s analysis. She opined that this was “precisely the reason” that people voted for Ballot Measure 37 in the first place. She averred that the Wipers were asking to develop property that had never been intended for the internment of human remains. She said they should be able to develop that property “any way they want” within the parameters of the Eugene Code. Roll call vote; the motion passed 6:1; Councilor Solomon voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 9:18 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 11, 2008 Page 8 Regular Meeting