Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 04/14/08 City Council Meeting M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall April 14, 2008 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman, Mike Clark, Andrea Ortiz, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Alan Zelenka. Councilor George Poling was excused. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Kudos to City Manager Angel Jones - Pro Tem Mayor Piercy thanked Pro Tem City Manager Angel Jones for her service during the months between former City Manager Dennis Taylor’s departure and the hiring of a new City Manager. Ms. Jones received a warm round of applause. Welcome to City Manager Jon Ruiz - Mayor Piercy welcomed City Manager Jon Ruiz to his first City Council meeting. She said Mr. Ruiz had taken his oath earlier in the day and presented him with a framed copy of it. Mr. Ruiz read the oath aloud for the audience. Mr. Ruiz received a warm round of applause. Mr. Ruiz read a statement that touted the committed and passionate people who care about their community in Eugene. He averred that his early encounters with City staff had revealed them to be professionals dedicated to serving the community. He believed the City must maintain a high degree of integrity and credibility and stressed his commitment to be trustworthy, accountable, and transparent. Presentation of Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Delta Pond Award - Ben Mondie, representing the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI), explained that DOGAMI presented an annual reclamation awards primarily to the mining industry and to agencies dealing with mining statewide. He stated that DOGAMI was recognizing the work of the City of Eugene on the Delta Ponds project. He commended the Delta Ponds project and presented the City with the Oregon Plan Award. He noted that the Oregon Plan had originally been put together as a watershed health program. The audience applauded the award. Mayor Piercy received the award and thanked the Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Land Manage- ment, the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, the Oregon Department of State Parks, the City’s Park MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 1 Regular Meeting and Open Space Division staff, and the Public Works Engineering Division for their coordination and sharing in this endeavor, which she considered to be a “treasure for generations to come.” MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 2 Regular Meeting 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Susan Walsh , 1960 Emerald Street, offered her congratulations to Mr. Ruiz and commended Ms. Jones for th doing a good job. She wished to speak in regard to the City-owned property located at 1320 West 13 Avenue. She was representing a group of non-profit organizations, which included agencies such as the Committee Partners for Youth, the HIV Alliance, and Lane ShelterCare, among others. She conveyed the groups’ desire to discuss with the City the potential of allowing a consortium of non-profits to reside there. She believed this would help the organizations share resources by reducing expenses. She thought it would enable some of the most vulnerable people access a range of social services under one roof and on the bus line. She acknowledged that a position paper had been drawn up about the site and requested the opportu- nity to review it and participate in the process. Mark Rabinowitz , PO Box 51222, Eugene, had a copy of a petition to request that the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) bond be put to a vote. He felt that EWEB should invest in solar panel factories instead given the climate change and that the world had allegedly reached peak oil production. He listed some of the neighborhood associations and asserted that they were not part of the West Eugene Collabora- tive, a group formed to look at transportation alternatives to the formerly proposed West Eugene Parkway (WEP). He opined that neighborhood groups were not welcome to participate and therefore the group was not truly collaborative. He said some west Eugene traffic issues would be solved by adding a traffic light at th the intersection of 5 Avenue and Seneca Street. Deb Frisch , Eugene, reiterated her contempt for local government and in particular the Eugene Police Department and the Chief of Police. th Dan Weiner , 751 East 16 Avenue #112, averred that the affordable housing situation in the City of Eugene had become substantially worse. He related that on February 15, Aztec Campus Housing had bought 528 units, the majority of which were quads that rented from $320 to $365. He said the units were planned to be remodeled and the rents were slated to increase to $400 to $449 per month. He believed that the majority of the quad residents would prefer lower rent over “luxury quads.” He hoped that the City would poll current residents about this. He thought one option would be to use eminent domain powers to buy the units. He provided his testimony in writing. William Ivanoff , 1810 Harris Street, Apt. 336, averred that since 1972 Eugene had been auto-oriented. He attributed this to the abandonment of the street railway in the early 1900s and car-friendly policies. He questioned why bicyclists and pedestrians were not safe in the City. He had read an article about police taking action in response to a bicycle ride. He believed that organized bicycle rides were always harassed by the police. In another article he had read that Eugene had sent two officers to check out a program that sought to obtain grants for pedestrian safety. He alleged that an organizer of the event said the officers from Eugene had seemed more interested in ticketing pedestrians than drivers. He felt anything the Mayor said regarding pedestrian or bicycle safety was akin to “putting lipstick on a pig.” He declared that no matter what was said, if enforcement of the rules for driving was not important, Eugene could not call itself a progressive place. He opined that the automobile ruled in Eugene. Gordon Anslow , 4493 Paddock Drive, spoke in support of approval of the Multiple Unit Property Tax th Exemption (MUPTE) for the property located at 450 East 14 Avenue, the eighth item on the City Council agenda. He said he had lived in Eugene since 1976 and was currently co-chair of the Infill Compatibility MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 3 Regular Meeting Standards Task Team. He noted that he had previously served on the TransPlan Advisory Committee and had more recently worked on the Walnut Station mixed use area planning effort, among others. He held former Governor Tom McCall as a personal hero for his pivotal role for establishing Oregon’s “justly famous and widely respected” statewide land use laws. He believed that the urban infill projects were an appropriate step in an effort to preserve farm and forest lands. He averred that in the current “post-peak oil era” projects that provided decent housing close to school, work, and shopping were needed to limit local dependence on oil-intensive transportation. He said good urban planning had a role in limiting environ- mental impact. He commended Mr. Hansen, calling him “exactly the sort of customer we like to see.” He felt Mr. Hansen valued good design and was sympathetic to efforts to build economically viable projects that could still be considered compatible with the neighborhood. He stressed his company’s emphasis on building projects that were in line with the older houses that remained in the neighborhood. He pointed out that though it would have made economic sense to raze the existing structure to build more units and establish more parking, they had decided to retain and upgrade the original house and build new units behind it. He stated that the West University Neighbors (WUN) had conveyed their unanimous support for the project. He related that they had proposed considerable additional landscaping and a number of new trees. He said it would provide 15 parking spaces though the requirement was for six and security would be built into the building. He asserted that the tax relief provided by the MUPTE allowed the project to be more responsive to neighborhood concerns and to provide a higher level of architectural quality. He urged the council to support the MUPTE application. He provided his testimony in writing. Zachary Vishanoff , somewhere on Patterson Street, provided a handout. He believed that the street maintenance backlog had arisen from projects that qualified for a MUPTE. He declared that the density the projects provided had worn out the streets. He opined that a lot of deforestation had been brought about by MUPTE projects as well. He also opposed allowing the rents to increase for the apartments that Mr. Weiner had spoken about. Mr. Vishanoff commended Mayor Piercy, calling her a “great candidate for Mayor.” He was pleased that she had been willing to start a conversation about the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) property. He thought whatever happened at the EWEB property would benefit from the public conversation. Mr. Vishanoff asked the council to Google an article called U of O Seeks Fast Track for Builder of Arena. He predicted the State Board of Education would “rubber stamp” the application and this would allow them to go with their “good old boy forums” that were involved with problematic projects, lawsuits, accidents, and “boondoggles” around the world. Dean Hansen , 2917 Powderhorn Street, wanted to speak in favor of the application for a MUPTE that he th had submitted for 450 East 14 Avenue. He noted that he had lived in Eugene for more than 35 years and had worked at a bank and his wife taught at Lane Community College. He underscored how much he cared for his community, adding that he had served for ten years on the Fair Board, was currently on the United Way Board, had served on the Kidsports Board for over 20 years, and currently sat on the Lane Community College Foundation Board of Directors. He shared that he had been “pleased and excited” when the WUN had unanimously approved the recommendation for his application for a MUPTE. He related that the WUN had liked the fact that the project had many sustainability features and included ample parking. He underscored that this project would not go forward as presented without the MUPTE. He explained that without the exemption, the project as set forth would lose approximately $9,000 per year and with the MUPTE and the sustainability features he stood to gain 2 percent per year on his investment. He said it was a family development and he and his family had a long-term goal to build a good project in the campus area. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 4 Regular Meeting Gerry Gaydos , 440 East Broadway, Suite 300, spoke in regard to Agenda Item 5, regarding the recom- mended design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and Friendly Street. He commended the process that had brought the design recommendation forward. He underscored that the overall issue was what was best for the City, which would be decided by the council. He asked the council to consider the issues regarding bicycling and safety as well as the need to maintain the rural character, which meant that some people still had larger vehicles such as tractors and recreational vehicles. He pointed out that if access were taken away from someone it constituted a taking. He agreed there should be a compromise between City standards, design, and safety. He thought this might be best served by having the narrow roads that had been approved. He felt that if the City went further and required diverters and traffic calming elements it would cause area residents concern. There were many difficult intersections in the area. He underscored the need to accommodate emergency vehicles. Lyndell Wilken , 3065 Whitbeck Boulevard, stated that she had served as the bicycle/pedestrian representa- tive for the Crest Drive Community Team (CDCT). She said everyone in the process regardless of their position felt passionately about the design for which they advocated. She felt no one could be faulted. She expressed disappointment in the design as presented because she did not believe it provided safe passage for bicycles. She related that many in the bicycling community wanted the full five-foot wide lane. She disagreed with the design and could not vouch for its safety. th Marilyn Milne , 2156 Harris Street, spoke regarding the proposed building project on the corner of 19 Avenue and Alder Street. She thanked Councilor Zelenka on behalf of the neighborhood for “caring about the livability” of the neighborhood. She related that the neighborhood residents had met with the developer of the apartment building. She felt he was concerned and said he was now looking at ways to lessen the impact of the building on the neighborhood. She noted that the neighborhood had representatives on the Infill Compatibility Siting Task Force (ICS) and several members were serving on ICS subcommittees. Ms. Milne stated that many South University Neighborhood Association (SUNA) residents attended the Planning Commission’s recent Minor Code Amendment Process (MiCAP) meeting. She related that they had been disappointed in the planners’ recommendation for “an extremely limited” transition zone between th land zoned R-3 and R-1 on the south side of 19 Avenue. She said one resident had offered suggestions for how to improve the proposal. She averred that current code in the ICS directives did not define density so that it recognized all forms. She cited, as an example, conversion of a residence into a home for five to eight non-related people. She said another MiCAP proposal concerned parking. She felt it would help to have ICS explore parking requirements for R-3 and R-4 developments. She added that they wanted the area thth between 18 and 20 Avenues and Agate and Hilyard Streets to be an ICS test case. She asked the council to “remind City staff to follow through on these directives.” th Victor Stathakis , 935 West 8 Avenue, chair of the Wayne Morse Youth Program, stated that the free th speech terrace was operating again for its 16 year with the advent of the first Saturday Market of the year. He invited the councilors to see Mr. Morse’s legacy in action, which he wanted to pass on to young in particular. He called it a tough venue. He said they were proud of the Saturday Market and the Farmers Market; they had “three great corners.” He related that the fourth corner, however, featured a “disparate bunch of groups.” He invited the City to tap into its expertise on how to better coordinate this area. He noted that they were working well with the County Commissioners but they needed help from the Eugene Police Department (EPD). He remarked that it was not numbers so much as the quality of policing. He averred that they needed “Officer Friendly” who knew the people there and could discern between those who were bad and those who were good. He asked to sit down with representatives of the EPD to talk about the possibility of making the area someone’s beat. He wanted to improve the fourth corner. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 5 Regular Meeting Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, said he was a long-time bicycle advocate and had also been involved in neighborhood associations. He expressed pride in the CDCT, noting that the plan had been a long time in coming and that the Crest Drive area residents had worked hard with the City and with neighbors. It concerned him that the bicycle community was coming in “at this late hour” and advocating for something that was not in the plan. Sherie Hawley , 3484 Storey Boulevard, supported the CDCT design. She asked the council to approve the design and the four-foot sidewalks. She noted that the Crest Drive neighbors had been working on the challenge of redesigning winding, steep streets in that area. She stated that the results of the community- based process were a redesign that worked for everyone. She stressed that all involved had made compro- mises; compromise had been “key.” She pointed out that everyone on Storey Boulevard and middle Crest Drive were losing all of their on-street parking. She said the neighbors were not incited to become involved because the street was unsafe, but because the City had wanted to redo the street which was full of potholes. She could not recall any bicyclist or pedestrian injuries in all of the years she had resided there. She said they had a committee called the Crest Drive Advisory Committee and they were still fine-tuning designs. Len Bailey , 2932 Friendly Street, supported the CDCT design recommendation. He pointed out that any changes to the proposed streets for the Crest neighborhood could have serious repercussions and unintended consequences. He said at present the streets were 18 feet wide with no sidewalks, no bicycle lanes, no on- street parking, and no bioswales and there had been no accidents. He pointed out that an addition of a bicycle lane would eliminate bioswales, which he considered a key element to sustainability. He understood th that easy bicycle access existed to Lorane Highway from 29 Avenue and from Madison and Chamber Streets. He thought it would be absurd to create bicycle lanes on Storey Boulevard, Friendly Street, and Crest Drive if Lorane Highway was the main destination for bicyclists. He noted that Lorane Highway had no bicycle lanes, and little or no shoulder, and “nobody seemed to mind.” He averred that the sidewalks had been carefully thought out to address the needs of the neighborhood. Kathy Saranpa , 3015 Friendly Street, said she had served as a member of the CDCT and was also a member of the Crest Drive Citizens Association (CDCA). She averred that the design process had not been perfect, but she did not believe any democracy anywhere could be characterized as perfect. She felt the council had the opportunity to prove that democracy worked. She wished to underscore that the CDCT was not anti-bicycle, anti-child, anti-safety, or anti-sustainability. Nonetheless, they disputed the usefulness of a five-foot wide strip of pavement that would benefit a handful of “elite, recreational bicyclists.” She alleged that the bicycle representative had not opposed the design without bicycle lanes during the process. She said there were alternate bikeways plotted in City documents and one of the team members was researching them. She felt it would be a more productive use of a concerned bicyclist’s energy to work with that team member on identifying them and getting them built rather than “agitating” against the CDCT at this point in time. She stressed that the neighborhood association supported the proposed design. Barbara Donovan , 885 Crest Drive, said letters against the Crest area street design contained misinforma- tion. She suspected that signers of the petition were not given the whole story. She related that it was only during the last meeting that a negative vote had been cast by the bicycle representative. She read a portion of the Eugene City Street Classification document which indicated that bicycle lanes on local streets were almost never used. She reiterated that the whole design process had begun because area residents had not wanted the roads to be classified as collectors. She related that area neighbors still opposed the change in classification. She felt that the “windy, steep streets at the top of a watershed” were the perfect place for Eugene to “join in on a movement toward the shared livable green streets” that had been studied. She MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 6 Regular Meeting averred that permeable construction materials in green streets allowed water to be filtered before it went into the watershed. She said the 18-foot streets and 4-foot sidewalks would keep most walkways off the road, thus eliminating curbs and gutters and allowing the use of bioswales. She felt that adding a bicycle lane would curtail the ability to build the road in this way. She added that small electric cars and buses would offer another sustainable transportation solution. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and called on the council for questions and remarks. She thanked everyone on the CDCT for their efforts. She also supported the use of the former Naval/Marine Reserve site. Additionally, Mayor Piercy clarified that the West Eugene Collaborative did have neighborhood representa- tion. She said there would be an outreach effort to involve more people from the neighborhoods. Mayor Piercy hoped that Mr. Ivanoff would work with the City to help implement the new bike and pedestrian plan. Councilor Clark thanked everyone who spoke, and in particular the people from the CDCT. He noted that th he had requested staff to look into the building at the corner of Chambers Street and 13 Avenue. He wanted to know how to accomplish what John Brown had suggested at an earlier council meeting i.e. to make the building a home for a consortium of non-profit agencies. Councilor Taylor thanked everyone. She thanked Mr. Stathakis for coming and for his work with youth. She hoped his request for an “Officer Friendly” could be granted. She also wanted to thank the CDCT. Councilor Bettman appreciated that the University neighborhood was getting involved in the infill and design standards discussion. She asked if it would be necessary to request a work session on the former Navy/Marine Reserve building. Ms. Jones explained that staff was in the process of preparing a memorandum on the options. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 7 Regular Meeting 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - February 11, 2008, City Council Meeting - February 12, 2008, Joint Elected Officials Meeting - February 19, 2008, Work Session - February 20, 2008, Work Session - February 25, 2008, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Adoption of Resolution 4935 Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Water Utility System Revenue Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Amount of Not to Exceed Fifteen Million Five Hundred Ninety-Five Thousand Dollars ($15,595,000) for the Purpose of Financing Certain Capital improvements to the Water Utility System and Providing for Certain Details and Related Matters D. Adoption of Resolution 4936 Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Electric Utility System Revenue Refunding Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Amount of Not to Exceed Forty-Six Million Dollars ($46,000,000) For the Purposes of Refinancing Improvements to the Elec- tric Utility System and Providing for Related Matters E. Adoption of Resolution 4937 Authorizing Interim and Long Term Financing for Local Im- provement Projects and Terminating the Authority under Resolution No. 4807 F. Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions of February 5, 2008, and February 13, 2008 G. Approval of Eugene 08 Neighborhood Grants 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. She pulled Items C, D, E, and F. Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections to the minutes, without objection, approved. Roll call vote; the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items C, D, E, and F, passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Bettman stated that $36 million had been approved in 1999, and $21.4 million had been spent to date, and in 2002, $11 million had been approved and $10 million had been spent to date. She asked if reissuing the bond, as per Consent Calendar Item C, would re-extend the deadline. Sue Cutsogeorge, Financial Analysis Manager for the Central Services Department, responded that the deadline was from the time of issuance of the bonds. Councilor Bettman ascertained from Ms. Cutsogeorge that there was no 30-year timeframe on the bonds. She said the thing that was missing for her was a project list of what the money would be spent on. She could not support the bond. Cathy Bloom, Finance Manager for EWEB, explained that the money would be used for capital improve- ments to the aging infrastructure, the Hayden Bridge filtration plant expansion and enhancements, and the replacement of water mains. Councilor Bettman reiterated her desire for a list of projects. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 8 Regular Meeting Councilor Zelenka ascertained from Ms. Bloom that the electric system bonds were existing bonds that were already embedded in the rates. He asked if the purpose of this action was to help lower costs and stabilize rates. Ms. Bloom confirmed this was the purpose. Councilor Zelenka asked if the projects the water bonds were intended to pay for were in EWEB’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Ms. Bloom affirmed that they were. She said every year as part of the budgeting process they developed what the capital costs were currently, and would be for the next year, and for the next four years. She stressed that this was part of the public process when they adopted the budget. Councilor Zelenka pointed out that EWEB Commissioners were elected and if someone did not like how things were going the ultimate accountability was being “un-elected.” Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:2; councilors Bettman and Taylor voting in opposition. Regarding Item D, Councilor Bettman ascertained from Ms. Bloom that the refinance of the bond would save $1.7 million and this would result in future savings to the ratepayers. In response to a follow-up question from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Bloom explained that the savings would occur from the present forward. Councilor Bettman asked if the bond money would be used to accomplish anything else. Ms. Bloom replied that it would not; they were refinancing an existing debt to realize a savings. Councilor Bettman said it seemed to her that there would not be much savings given the administrative costs. She wondered what other reason there would be for refinancing the bonds. Ms. Bloom explained that the savings were far and above the costs of issuing the bonds. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Bettman said she had flagged Item E because there was a request to increase the amount of debt that could be incurred on assessments from $4 million to $5 million. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, City Attorney Glenn Klein explained that if enough property owners refuse a Local Improvement District (LID) the City Council could override it. Councilor Bettman would not favor forcing people to take on a large liability. She wanted to know that the Crest Drive neighbors were in agreement before she could do so. Mr. Klein referred to Section 37 of the Charter and determined that if the owners of a majority of the parcels that would be assessed object then the improvement could not go forward unless two-thirds of the council decided to override that objection. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to table Item E, adoption of Resolution 4937 authorizing interim and long-term financing for Local Improvement Pro- jects and terminating the authority under Resolution No. 4807. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:2; councilors Clark and Pryor voting in opposition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 9 Regular Meeting Regarding Item F, Councilor Bettman wanted the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) minutes to include a small description of the bills discussed. She also wanted the minutes to be explicit regarding times when the Mayor would step in and vote in place of a CCIGR member that was not present. She noted that the minutes had indicated that the Intergovernmental Relations Manager referred to the legislative document when there was not time to consult with the CCIGR on a bill. She recalled that a decision had been made to remain neutral on a bill in that case. She wanted clarification of that as she considered the Legislative Policy Document to be “vague.” She added that there had not been a quick enough turnaround for the minutes to come before the City Council. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 10 Regular Meeting 4. ACTION: An Ordinance Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan; Amending the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan Land Use Diagram and Text; Amending the Eugene Zoning Map, and Adopting a Severability Clause (Oregon West Management, LLC, MA 07-2, RA 07-1, and Z 07-3) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved that the City adopt Council Bill 4965, an ordinance amending the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan Land Use Diagram, River Road – Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan Land Use Diagram, and Eugene Zoning Map. Councilor Clark indicated that he had some ex parte contacts with “both sides” of this discussion by having attended the Santa Clara Community Organization (SCCO) meetings at which it had been presented and discussed. Councilor Ortiz said she would support the item. She averred that this part of the community sometimes felt that they were not listened to. She commented that the council could not say what kind of development could be put into that area, it could only determine what kind of zone changes there could be. She thought the council should give the person who bought the property support based on the fact that he bought the property with division in mind. She noted that he had a lot of support in the community. Councilor Bettman indicated she would oppose the bill. She declared that the application was inconsistent with the MetroPlan, the Refinement Plan, the Urban Facilities Plan, the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, the commercial land study, and TransPlan. She felt she could support it if the C-2 could be converted to C-1 and include a caveat in the resolution adopting it that would require 136 units of housing to be built over the area. She averred that the “symbolism” and language of nodal development and mixed use were being employed but it was not accomplishing those goals. She called it a “cash industry” and a “lottery” because if a person could afford a lawyer they could work to get laws waived and zoning changed. She felt the action was inconsistent with policies. Councilor Taylor had been convinced by the arguments in opposition. She felt that the fact that someone bought the property thinking they would profit from it obligated the council to approve it. Councilor Bettman said the council was acting on the zoning change and the land use designation change, along with the Planning Commission addition requiring some traffic enhancements. She asserted that none of the verbiage in the resolution would require the applicant to deliver anything more than what was required in the zones. She felt that the lack of minimum density in the C-2 area could mean there would be no housing there as there were no guarantees. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Heather O’Donnell, Associate Planner for the Planning and Development Department, affirmed that the owner could potentially sell the property after successfully applying for the changes. She said the applicant was also proposing text amendments on the Refinement Plan that had some limitations on the types of uses that could be allowed as well as the size of the buildings, pedestrian connections and other items. She explained that those would be triggered through the TUD and the Site Review Overlay if someone else initiated a development on the property. Councilor Clark reminded the City Council that many letters of support had been received from area residents. He thought Councilor Bettman’s comments could lead to a different conclusion. He underscored that the president of the SCCO had written a letter of support, noting that he also served on the Infill MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 11 Regular Meeting Compatibility Standards Task Force and was knowledgeable about this. He appreciated his letter of recommendation. Councilor Bettman said when she had served on the Land Use Measures Task Force one of the issues they had looked at was “strip commercial.” She averred that it created “huge problems, expensive problems, and dangerous problems.” She declared that it was the “definition of unsustainable development” to build strip commercial development. She believed that it was occurring piecemeal and the overall cumulative effect was not being considered. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:2; councilors Bettman and Taylor voting in opposition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 12 Regular Meeting 5. ACTION: Crest Drive Community Team Recommended Design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and Friendly Street Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to approve the design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and Friendly Street as recommended by the Crest Drive Commu- nity Team. Councilor Clark commented that it had been an interesting process listening to all of the testimony and reading email input. He thanked the neighborhood members who participated on the CDCT. He noted that he lived on a street that was in a similar condition to Crest Drive. He had been inspired by the CDCT efforts to create a neighborhood sensitive situation and had initiated a neighborhood effort to do the same for his street. Councilor Pryor remarked that at times the council had to decide between two “right answers.” He supported the current recommendation, but he reiterated that this was the beginning of a discussion on how bicycles could be accommodated with regard to access to Lorane Highway and how bicycles, which he considered to be an important part of the community, could be accommodated in a larger sense. Mark Schoening, City Engineer for the Public Works Department, provided a brief overview of the context sensitive solution process. He noted that the CDCT had consisted of abutting property owners, at-large members from the neighborhood, and two City staff. He stated that abutting property owners were given primacy in the decision-making process given that they would have to help pay for the improvements. He conveyed staff’s support for the community recommendation. Councilor Bettman expressed appreciation for everyone who had participated. She averred that it had been an “unprecedented exercise in community involvement.” Councilor Bettman offered a friendly amendment that would move to direct the City Man- ager to create a working group that would include staff from transportation, parks and open space, the Crest Drive Community Team, the Eugene Bicycle Coalition and other stake- holders including appropriate neighborhoods to identify options for bikeways in the south- west and southeast hills. Councilor Pryor accepted the friendly amendment. Councilor Bettman thought that as this was moved into the broader community context what worked in this model should be taken and utilized to create another work group to identify those options. Councilor Taylor remarked that this was turning out well. She acknowledged that not everyone was happy, but felt it was coming to a good conclusion. She supported the motion and the friendly amendment. Councilor Solomon asked who would pay for the bike ways to which the amendment referred. Mr. Schoening replied that it would depend on where they were located. Councilor Solomon supported the inclusion of bicycle lanes on Storey Boulevard, Crest Drive, and Friendly Street. She recalled her work on the committee that sought to identify transportation funding solutions. She explained that the committee had presented a recommendation to the City Council and the council had “picked and chose” what it wanted. She averred that she could not approve anything carte blanche. She stressed that as a policy maker she had to address this item from a different perspective than the neighbors MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 13 Regular Meeting had to. She believed that bicycle lanes were an important part of alternate modes of transportation and sustainability. She felt an amendment without a funding strategy was “rhetoric.” Councilor Zelenka appreciated the hard work of the Crest neighbors and City staff on this issue. He said one of his main concerns as a councilor was livability. He supported the design. He also supported providing bicycle lanes throughout the City. He observed that there were competing interests in this item and it would not be possible to make everyone happy. He supported the amendment. He hoped that it would be possible to make the design friendlier for bicyclists, perhaps with rolled curbs or bicycle paths. Councilor Clark indicated he would support the amended motion. He asked if in this process of accepting a change in street widths a precedent was being set. Mr. Klein responded that if this was being used to create an argument, he did not think it was a winnable argument given that this process arose from a situation with unusual properties different from much of the City. Mayor Piercy said the CDCT wanted to remain involved in the next phase. She felt that many bicyclists had not engaged in this conversation early on because they believed any road created in Eugene would have bicycle lanes. She averred that any time the City took on an issue related to roads an effort should be made to engage the bicycling community. She stressed that the City had a commitment to be increasingly bicycle friendly. Councilor Taylor did not believe the action would establish a precedent. She agreed that the Crest Drive situation was unusual and had needed a context sensitive solution. She added that she had some concern about how people would be assessed. She thought the City should reconsider how residents would be assessed in a Local Improvement District (LID). She was concerned that some people might lose their homes. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:1; Councilor Solomon voting in opposition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 14 Regular Meeting 6. ACTION: Minimum Sidewalk Width Design Standard for the Crest Drive Area Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Resolution 4927 con- cerning sidewalk widths in the Crest Drive area, and amending the City’s design standards and guidelines for Eugene streets, sidewalks, bikeways and access ways, the Eugene Arte- rial & Collector Street Plan, and the Eugene Local Street Plan. Mr. Schoening explained that this item was in line with a recommendation to pursue an amendment to the design standards for minimum sidewalk width, reducing it from five feet to four feet. He stated that the staff recommendation was to keep the minimum width at five feet as it was considered a comfortable width for two pedestrians to walk side by side. Councilor Bettman indicated she would support the motion. She said it would not mandate four foot sidewalks in the area; it would leave discretion to reduce width in places that would need it. She asserted th that sidewalks were not an adequate width in a project on 29 Avenue and asked how that had been allowed. Mr. Schoening replied that he was not familiar with that project. Councilor Zelenka asked why the Crest Drive Neighbors had wanted four foot sidewalk widths if the existing codes allowed for a five foot sidewalk to be narrower where it was necessary. Mr. Schoening responded that there was not a width to the sidewalk in the recommended design at present. He believed that the community wanted a design standard that was less than five feet because an exception to the current code could only be granted based on one of the five exception criteria: topography, historic resources, wetlands, trees, and inadequate right-of-way. Councilor Zelenka surmised that the sidewalk would double as a bicycle path. Mr. Schoening affirmed that it could. Councilor Zelenka thought a four foot wide sidewalk would make it difficult for a bicycle to pass a pedestrian. Mr. Schoening agreed, adding that it would be difficult on a five foot wide sidewalk as well. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:2; councilors Zelenka and Solomon voting in opposi- tion. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to direct the City Manager to (1) request the Planning Commission to approve classifying Friendly Street, Crest Drive and Storey Boulevard as local streets, and (2) if the Planning Commission approves that classi- fication, to bring to the council an ordinance adopting that classification. Councilor Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to substitute the word ‘investigate’ for the word ‘approve.’ The maker and the second accepted the friendly amendment. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, as amended, 7:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to take from the table Consent Calendar Item E. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Roll call vote; the motion to approve Consent Calendar Item E, adoption of Resolution 4937 authorizing interim and long term financing for Local improvement Projects and ter- minating the authority under Resolution No. 4807, passed unanimously, 7:0. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 15 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor asked how and when the council could talk about assessments and in particular for the CDCT project. Mayor Piercy responded that she should request a work session. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 16 Regular Meeting 7. ACTION: Resolution 4938 Approving a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential Property th Located at 693 East 16 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Corey Development, LLC) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Resolution 4938 approv- ing a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for residential property located at 693 East th 16 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Corey Development, LLC). th Councilor Clark observed that the councilors had heard much of the discussion on the development on 19 Avenue and Alder Street and that Councilor Zelenka had suggested that perhaps a MUPTE could apply there so that the developer would not have to build a seven-story building to have a profitable project. He said in consideration of the projects before the council and particularly the second one, which had taken into consideration being context sensitive to the neighborhood, use of the MUPTE was the only way for the projects to pencil out as they were presented. He averred that opposition to granting the MUPTE in either case was a de facto indication that the council would prefer very tall buildings, which would be “the only thing that would then be profitable.” He was concerned about sending this message. Councilor Bettman opined that a tax exemption was not about how “personable or involved in the community” a developer may be. She averred that it was irrelevant to the decision to “forego needed tax revenue.” She said the project was for housing in the University district that would serve the University. She felt the housing would be profitable and would be built anyway. She asserted that the City had a “proliferation” of tax breaks and that the “playing field” should be level so everyone paid a fair share. She believed tax exemptions were only warranted in special circumstances such as in the downtown core. Councilor Ortiz noted that the council had recently heard a report from Lane County Commissioner Faye Stewart on the county budget. She observed that tax exemptions did remove potential tax funding from the county and city coffers. She had voted for the Enterprise Zone and the Urban Renewal District activity downtown because she believed they would provide a public benefit. She was challenged to find a public benefit in the MUPTE applications that were on the docket. She noted her request for a work session on the MUPTE. She felt the council needed to revisit the tax exemption boundaries and consider changing them so other areas that feature decay, such as the Highway 99 North area, could be included. Councilor Taylor opposed the MUPTE application. She averred that the tax money was needed and she did not perceive a demonstrable public benefit in the projects the MUPTE applicants had set forth. Councilor Zelenka clarified that he had suggested to the neighborhood group opposed to the tall building th project at 19 Avenue and Agate Street that a MUPTE would be the wrong tool to use for the purpose of adjusting the design. He did not believe any of the projects that had been built without the MUPTE in the University area in the past three years had been over four stories tall. He said he would oppose the applications because he felt it was difficult to part with General Fund dollars in an era of budget deficits. He noted that the MUPTE was intended to create housing in the area. He related that the council had asked staff to look at projects created in the area. He stated that in the past three years 17 units had been built; of them only three had been granted a MUPTE. He surmised that it could not be said that housing was not being developed there. He could not see the public benefit to granting a MUPTE in that area. He supported reducing the tax exemption boundary and considering expanding it to other areas, such as the one Councilor Ortiz had cited. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 17 Regular Meeting Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Zelenka, moved to substitute a motion to adopt the resolution, included in the agenda packet in Attachment F on page 398, denying a Mul- th tiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for residential property located at 693 East 16 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Corey Development, LLC). Councilor Pryor observed that they had been talking about a philosophical view of the MUPTE rather than the merits of the project. He had not heard that the project did not qualify for a MUPTE. He believed using a MUPTE had merit where a building would not be built without it. He noted that the second project, which he believed would be a very appropriate use of the exemption, would not be built as presented without the MUPTE. Councilor Solomon indicated she would support both MUPTE applications. She felt they were both excellent projects in needed areas and would provide the University area with a better housing stock than currently existed. She underscored that the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) for the first project had indicated the land would still be taxed for ten years and then after 10 years an estimated $9,069 would be paid on the improvements annually. She concluded that the lost revenue from the property would be made up 3.3 years after the exemption ended. She likened passing on this benefit to “cutting off our nose to spite our face.” Mayor Piercy said it bothered her that they were considering these MUPTE applications prior to holding the work session on the exemption. She felt that people were told that it was possible to get the exemption in the University area and they would go through the process to obtain one. She thought this was an unfair situation for people who were “playing by the rules.” Councilor Bettman objected to Mayor Piercy’s characterization. She emphasized that the council had discretion to make a decision to grant or deny the exemption. She disagreed that this was a philosophical issue, declaring it to be a policy issue. Councilor Zelenka called the projects good, adding that he hoped they would be built. He repeated that projects had been built in the University area without the MUPTE. Councilor Taylor reiterated that the MUPTE had never been guaranteed to be granted. Councilor Ortiz underscored that for her this was about finances. She stated that $30,000 would pay for a .5 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) police officer or support person. She needed to see more of a public benefit from such tax exemptions. Councilor Clark pointed out that either way the City would receive more tax money in the long-term. He said if the MUPTE was granted there would be a gain after ten years for the life-time of the building. He stated that this was not the discussion however. He averred that now that the council opposed granting the MUPTE the discussion would change to what sort of building would be built there. He said without the MUPTE the developer was free to do all of the things within the code that were possible, which included very little parking and the possibility of six-bedroom units in a very tall building. He underscored that this would also increase the money into the tax coffers, but it would also increase the long-term negative impact to the neighborhood from the kind of building the City was encouraging people to build. Councilor Bettman asked if rentals would not depreciate on the tax rolls. Richie Weinman, Urban Services Manager for the Community Development Division, responded that once properties were on the tax rolls they tended to go up by three percent or more annually. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 18 Regular Meeting Roll call vote; the motion to substitute the resolution passed, 4:3; councilors Clark, Pryor, and Solomon voting in opposition. Roll call vote; the substitute motion passed, 4:3; councilors Clark, Pryor, and Solomon vot- ing in opposition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 19 Regular Meeting 8. ACTION: Resolution 4939 Approving a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential Property th Located at 450 East 14 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Twenty LLC, Applicant) (The Fenway) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt the resolution in Attach- ment F on page 418 of the council packet denying a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption th for residential property located at 450 East 14 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Twenty LLC, applicant). Roll call vote; the motion passed 4:3; councilors Clark, Pryor, and Solomon voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 20 Regular Meeting