Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/24/1972 Meeting (2) Council Chamber Eugene, Oregon January 24, 1972 Adjourned meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon adjourned from the regular meeting held January 10, 1972 - was called to order in the Council Chamber by His Honor Mayor Lester E. Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on January 24, 1972, with the following councilmen present: Mr. Mohr, Mrs. Beal, Messrs, McDonald, Gribskov, and Williams, and Mrs. Campbell. Councilmen ~e~gu~ ~nd Hershner were absent. I .~l~ .~ I - Public Hearings A. Assessments Cooncil Bills Nos. 9555 through 9560 levying assessments for various paving and sewer projects were heard and approved. (See action on page 12 of these minutes under Ordinances.) B. Appeal from Planned Unit Development, Sunshine Acres, Cooley/DeBUsk A letter from James DeBusk, 15009 S. E. Mill, Portland, Oregon, was read appealing to the Council for reversal of the Planning Commission's approval of the Sunshine Acres PUD. He wrote that the planned unit development left no access to the rear of his property which fronts on Harlow Road. The Planning Director showed slides of the PUD and explained it is the Planning staff's feeling that Mr. DeBusk and his neighbor can develop their properties through subdivision or PUD and provide their own interior roads. Wallace Clark, representing William Neel, designer of the PUD, 241 East Broadway, showed drawings of the project and explained that they tried to avoid a through street inasmuch as the only users would be residents of the project. It would require a major design change if access is required to the back of the two properties facing on Harlow Road because of the planned 6- to 15-foot buffer bordering the two lots. Mr. Mohr asked if there were grounds for the appeal based on the ordinance governing PUDS. The Planning Director answered that technically there were none, it might be considered a borderline case. .' Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to deny the appeal on the basis that there is no substantial reason for accepting it based on the conditions of planned unit developments as specified by ordinance. · Councilman McDonald asked if Mr. DeBusk was notified of the hearing, and was told a letter was written to him on January 18, 1972 to his Portland address. A vote was taken on the motion to deny the appeal, and motion carried unanimously. C. Abatements 1. 431 East 3rd (Cliff Shirley-Universal Developers) - The Building Department reported they were unable to secure rehabilitation or removal; the building is not suitable for occupancy and utilities were disconnected in 1971; complaints have been received from neighboring residents. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the structure at 431 East 3rd be declared a dangerous building and abatement autl1orized. Motion carried unanimously. (See actd.on on page 13 of these minutes under Resolution 2002.) 2. 631 West 11th (John Skillern-Edward Mansell) - The Building Department report was noted with regard to portion of s.tructure still standing and its dangerous condition. . Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to authorize abatement of the building at 631 West 11th Avenue Motion carried unanimously. (See action on page 13 of these minutes under Resolution 2003.) D. Nightwatchman Trailer, 460 North Danebo Road - A Building Department report indicates nightwatchman services are desirable for this building (Danebo Parts and E~pment) located in an industrial zone. Connection of a mobile home would not be detrimental , to surrounding properties. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Baal to grant a revocable permit allowing the mobile home for nightwatchman living quarters at 460 North Danebo Road. Motion carried unanimously. (See action on page 13 of these minutes under Resolution 2004.) E. Hearin Official Conditional Use Permits (Planning Commission Report January 10. 1972 - The Planning Commission recommended 'that the Council consider use of zoning hearings official concept as it relates to conditional use permits. The City Manager suggested any action at this time be preliminary in nature because there are no funds budgeted, and to allow staff work to develop the possibility. James Pearson. president of the Planning Commission. explained that the Planning Commis- sion is spending more and more time on zoning and administration in addition to many extra meetings with other agencies. leaving too little time for actual planning work. He said the Commission feels the administrative workings can be handled by another body or another person where there still' would be due process' ahd hearings comparable to the present situation with the Planning Commission. yet not involving the Planning Commission. Based on experience of other communi ties and presuming criteria is precise. use of a zoning hearings officer appears to be an appropriate way of handling conditi~nal use permits. He outlined the general tentative procedure the Commission would like to see 1/24/72-1 . 8 . followedt eliminating applicants' presentation in :-ull to the Planning Commission,but providing for appeal from the hearings officer's decisions to the Planning Commission, and going directly from the Planning Commission to the courts. The Commission is talking now only of conditional use permitst but would consider at some future time including in the officer's duties hearings on planned unit developments. At the present time the Commission is making this tentative proposition with the in- tent of going ahead with preliminary examination in order to get the process started at the first opportunity t and to get the feeling of the Conncil memers to see if they feel the idea should be pursued. Councilman Williams asked what procedure would be provided should there be an ap- peal when a conditional use permit has been allowed rather than denied, and how many conditional use permits are processed in a given time. He also asked whether bypassing the Council and having hearings before only the officer and the Planning Commission before going to the courts assumes the laws as written are not as they should be. . Mr. Pearson said appeals on the issuance of permits t granted or deniedt would be from the hearings officer to the Planning Commission on the same basis on which they now go from the Planning Commission to the Council. Hopefully, before im- plementationtif the proced~ is adoptedt evaluation and improvement of the hear- ings ordinance would provide more specific criteria concerning granting of permits. He said that removing hearings from the law-making body is perhaps a good thing; issues would be heard on the merits of the case rather than on any political 'con- sideration. The procedure assumes a set of criteria in the ordinance which are extremely good. He said that he does not know of any instance in which the Council had reversed a Planning Commission decision on conditional Use permits. The Planning Director said conditional use permit hearings average about 45 a year; 70-75% approvedt 10% appealed. Councilman Mohr suggested that the mechanism for establishing administrative hearings before either the Planning Commission or the Council, be embodied in the research of the proposed legal intern who, if employed, will expl.ore legal re- quirements on public hearings in general. When that instrument is prepared, policy on hearings can be made. Mrs. Beal remarked it would be well to include the question with the intern's research, if it didn't take too long; however, the Planning Commission is sug- gesting this hearing procedure because of the work load, and action is needed as quickly as possible to relieve them of some of the administrative work and allow their time to be spent on actual planning. Councilman McDonald agreed with Mrs. Beal's comment with regard to the time element and work load" and said he feels Planning Commission appointments and procedures should be examined with the idea that the community is growing beyond the need for a Planning Commission only. - I Mayor Anderson replied he would not attempt to delineate duties ()f PlanningCo~ mission members but does believe the City has been fol't:unate in having so many competent citizens willing to spend so much time and effort as memers of the Com- mission without compensation. He said he feels .it is encUJJi>eDt upon .the.Co\,U1~i1 to make possible inore time for the Commission' to 'spend on planning 'duties, rather ,,' than administrative; he favors the concept pfhearlngs officer as presented and, recommended the staff, be .directed to bring baCk an, ordinance to cover including arrangements fO,r funding. ' ~. : .. '1'.' Mohr moved seconded by ,Mrs. Beal that the, staff be csked to prepare an ,ordinance embodying the concept of an administrative officer ,for, hearings on conditional use permits which come before the, Pl~ning Commission, ,together with estimate of costs involved. 'Motion carried unanimoUSly. F. Code Amendments 1. Definition "Group Care Homes" - Plann.i.ng Commi$sion Report Deceser 14, 1971. The Planning Commission recOllllilended amending Section 9.254 of the Eugene City Code concerning definition of group care homes to read: "Shall mean any home or private institution maintained and ope.ated for ,the care, boarding, housing~ and training of fQur '(4) or nore physically, mentally, or socially handicapped persons or del.fl1quent or dependent persons b!/ lIn!/ person who is not the parent or guardian of and who is not related b!/ blood, marriage or legal adoption' to such, persOns." ' " The Planning Dire,*or explained the amendment as a housekeeping measure sug- : gested by the attd:rney' s offiice in order to ~liminate qse of a:)J1~ tional use permits for mang group care proposals; it permits g~up care homes which have persons over 18 gears of age in residti:ntial 'districts. " , ',I ' . The' proposed definition was read. and the Planning Director said the~ity Att6~ey ad- vised this type language would allow work release and vaIious other, programs without having to use a catchall clause allowing use under condi td.enal permits for group care homes. (See action on page 12 of these minutes under Council Bill'9573.Ordinances.) Comm 1/12/72 PUb Hmg 1/2~172'- 2 . "<, 9 2. R-4 District Uses. Commercial Zoning - Planning COmnUssion Report January 10, 1972. The Planning Conmrlssion recommended amendment to Section 9.382 of the City Code to allow certain uses under condi tional permi t - barber and beauty shops; delica- tessens; grocery stores; professional offices for accountants, attorneys, physi- cians, osteopaths, dentists, optometrists, opticians, chiropractors, and other state licensees practicing healing arts; and restaurants, except drive-in or walk-up. The amendment also sets criteria to be utilized in permitting the conditional uses. I I i I i I I i I I I ~-. ~~ I'\., Mr. Williams questioned the exclusion of walk-up restaurants, and was informed no eating is allowed inside tbe building for a walk-up restaurant; problems result- ing from food being eaten outside was the reason for exclusion from uses. Mr. Hershner questioned the requirement that commercial uses must be in con- junction with residential uses except on very small lots, asking if it is neces- sary to make the combination mandatory. The Planning Director said the R-4 zone is basically for housing, but it is felt certain commercial uses should be provi ded. Mr. Williams asked about leeway in granting the conditional permit should a lot be a fraction smaller or larger than the 6000 square feet designated. Planning Director ex plained appeals on size of lot would go to the Zoning Board of Ap,.. peals and their action would depend on what is presented and criteria of variance procedure. Further discussion followed with regard to mandatory combination of commercial uses with residential uses on small lots, with understanding a decision on adoption of the amendment would be in form of a public hearing at the January 24, 1972 Council meeting. Comm 1/19/72 Pub Hrng - Mr. Williams asked with regard to conditional use permits for non-conforming uses in R-4 zones whether physicians' offices permitted as an outright use would be permitted to continue. He s aid he feels it is important and should be answered before the ordinance is adopted. The Planning Director said there is no phase-out scheduled; no specific answer so the attorney's opinion would have to prevail. Mr. Pearson said he feels the uses referred to are not non-conforming uses. rather they are condi~ional uses, and would continue as such with no phasing out intended. But if any expansion is requested, the hearing procedure would have to be followed and a conditional use permit obtained. The purpose of the amendment is to inject vertical zoning into the ordinance. Mr. Otto Poticha. architect, said he feels it appropriate if R-4 zones are to take con- ditional medical uses, that the hospital area should be zoned the same way. and that medical oriented facilities were permitted as an outright use when the hospital project was started. He wondered why architects' offices were not included in the uses permitted under the amendment. (See action on page 12 under C.B.9574, Ordinances.) G. Street Name Change - North Shasta Loop (Planning CommissimReport December 13. 1971) The Planning Conmrlssion recommended denial of request to 'change the name of this street located east of East Amazon connecting the south end of Agate Street wi th East 43rd. A majori ty of the people wi th resi dences on that street and using that address object to any change. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. B~al to sustain the Planning Commission's recom- mendation (no change). Motion carried. unanimously. Corom 1/12/72 Pub Hrng I I I -I I I I I I i , I I I j I I j I I I I -r I I I I i I I I H. Vacations 1. utility Easement east of Hughes, between Pattison and Avalon, George Pyle (Planning Commission Report December 14, 1971) - The Planning Conmrlssion recom- mended approval of vacation of thie 6-foot easement. , (See action on page 12 of these minutes under C.B.9575, Ordinances) COlllDl 1./12/72 Pub Hrng 2. Bufton, north of West 11th between Wallis and Bertelsen, George wingard (Planning Conmrlssion Report December 14, 1971) - The Planning Commission recommended vacation of this dedicated but unimproved street. The Planning Director said a 100-foot easement is to be dedicated for the Amazon Channel whJ:i::h would take care of any remuneration which might be dU$ for the vacated property. (See action on page 12 of these minutes under C.B.9576, Ordinances) Corom 1/12/72 Pub Hrng 3. Portion Dillard Road at Snell, Gary Parks (Planning Commission Report DeCem- ber 28, 1971) - The Planning Commission recommended approval of vacation of this area: bordering on an annexation which the Boundary Commission h~ ordered and which will come into the Ci ty unless the.re is an, appeal. ,Mr. Williams said it appears that traffic' congestion would result since, the property lies at the junction of the two streets; he asked if the value of the property to be vacated has been esta1Jlished. Public Works Director explained the property is unimproved and vacation would actually improve the traffic situa- tion since it would allow a 90~degree intersection instead of the wide "y" type which now exists. He said there has been no appraisal of value. 1/214-/72 - 3 10 \ I I ! I I ~.: I I I I I I i I I I I I I I Planning Director said the vacation is required as a part of platting. Mr. Teague questioned the value to the City of the area proposed for vaca- tion as a small park or playground, saying it seemed to be a sizeable piece of property to be deeding into pri vate ownership. Staff explained no value would accrue to adjacent property, since lots were already created and improved. Manager said maintenance of property alone would be nv.re of a liability than use of the land; it is not la.rge enough fo.r a .rec.reationa1 a.rea and if owne.rship is retained it would have to be landscaped and maintained as a landscaped a.rea. Also, there is the possibi1i ty of assessments fo.r any futu.re imp.rovements which would have to be assumed by the City since lots a.re ~ow se{!la.rated f.rom the st.reet by this owne.rship. M.r. Teague nvved seconded by Mrs. Bea1 to have the prope.rty appraised before action is taken on the vacation .request. Upon question from the Manager, it was ag.reed an informal appraisal by Ci ty staff would be sufficient rather than requesting a formal appraisal. A vote was taken on the 1lIOtion, and nvtion carried. . ! Mr. Williams conunented that since the staff already said the property is worthless, it would seem a staff appraisal would be no different than the recommendation to vacate. Manager said the staff does not feel it is "worthless," only that it is of no value to the City. Further disclJSsion followed with regard to value of land proposed for dedication to private USli with general agreement additional information would be of benefit. The Manager .. said an app.raisa1 would gi ve the square foot value of the land, and Mayor re- marked it would also give soma comparison to benefit the City would be re- ceiving from the vacation in not having to maintain the p.roperty. (See ~ction page 12 these minutes under C. B. 9577, Ordinances) 4. Portion of Easement, Lot 11, Block 4, 1st Addition to Cow Palace (Jeppeson Acres Road west of Norkenzie), Barker {Planning Conunission Report December 28, 1971 - The Planning Director explained construction of a building encroached upon the easement. When the property was platted requirements for utilities were not complete and it was felt there would be future need fo.r the easement. Planning Conunission recommended vacation of that portion upon which the bu.6ld- ing was constructed. (See action page 12 these minutes under C.B.9S78, Ordinances) Conun 1/12/72 Pub Hrng Conun 1/12/72 Pub Hrng I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I S. Easement near Hawthorne between Fairfield and Baxter, excluding south 2S feet, Sorgenfri - Planning Commission Report Decembe.r 28, 1971 - Planning Director explained additional easement was conside.red necessary for storm sewer construction, but since a culvert was instalJed the extra width will not be needed. The additional property would provide land for a build- ing project. The south 2S feet is being retained for utilities, and a 20";'foot easement remains on the west. (See action page 12 these minutes under C.B. 9579~Ordinances) 6. Easement lots 13 and 18 Pine Rid e Estates north of Mahala Drive W. H. D111s Planning Commiss1on Report January 10. 1972 - Plann1ng COmm1SS10n recammended approval. (See action page 12 these minutes under C.B.9580, Ordinances. ) Conun 1/12/72 P!lb IIrng II - ItelllS Considered With One Motion. Previously discussed at Committee meetings on January 12 and January 19, 1972. Minutes of th~e meetings are printed below in italics. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Bealthat Items A through V below be fiPproved, affirmed. and filed as noted. A. Lane Countll Communi tll Action AgenCll, Ci tll Representation - The restructuring of this AgenCll as a' County-operated program calls for an Administering Board of 21 members: 1/3 public officials or their designee; 1/3 low-income representatives; and 1/3 from private sector, as detailed in a letter presented to the Council from the Program Director. Eugene has been designated to receive one seat on, the Board, and the' Council was asked to consider the appointment of one ofi ts members and convey the choice to Lane County commissioners as soon as possible. Mayor Anderson colllllSnted ~at Councilman Mohr had represented the City when the AgenCll was operating as Lane Human Resources, and Mrs,. CaJIlpbell suggested Hr.Mohr's continuing as the City's representative. I . I Mr. Williams l/IOved seconded by Mr.' Teague that the Mayor appoint a Council member to . represent the City on the Administering Board of Lane County Communi ty Action AgenCll. Hotion carried. COIllll 1/12/72 Apprc;)ve . ~. Lighting, Central Business District Loop Streets - .Council members had been provided wi th tabulation of 12 proposals for lighting the mall loop streets, showing number of poles and fixtures, estimated cost~ patter usage, and capital cost. Hanager read I staff's report for recommending J'lan I on the tabulation: Fewer poles and least' cost for desired lighting level of 3. B footcandles. He said the Eugene DowntoWn Associa- tion favored a 3. B footcandle lighting level, together with poles that will tie in with general building "design in the area and. which will be aesthetically Pfeasing. '. 11 1/~4/7~ - 4 '. ,?' On question from Mr. Hershner, the Manager explained cost of installation is borne by EWEB' andijriorti'zed over a period of time; cost of power and maintenance borne by City. Mrs,,:,""f.pampbell asked which of the tabulated plans matched those formerly presented by O!t~poticha, architect, who protested installation of the 60-foot poles called for i~:;;Plan I; she was told Plans IX through XII. Manager also confirmed that the Eugene , ~~ewal Agency would not pay any of the cost. He said if something other than the ,~'}jan i'econunended by staff is decided upon, it would be desirable to ask the consulting ~,~desi gners f~r ~e mall. and the Rene~al Agency to bring another ~roposal to the co~cil. ~ \A M,r:. Mohr sa~d ~ t was h~s understanding that Plan I was the arch~ tects' reconunendat~on. ';'i' f:,"'Mrs. Campbell understood there was an alternate plan submi tted. Councilman Williams ~l!' said he had discussed the lighting with Hugh Mitchell, mall design,architect, and found the lic;rht level desired would determine the installation - if 3.8 footcandle require- ments, then 60-foot poles with metal halide fixtures would be appropriate. I I i I I e\ Mr. Mohr restated the administration's request that if the reconunendation is changed, the ~ll architects would be asked to prepare a new plan based on caxefully prescribed specifications. Mr. Williams said he now feels there is no other practical course to plJIsue, considering the light level desired, trees in the area, economics, etc. He moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to reaffirm original Council decision to install the 60-foot poles with metal halide lights. Otto Poticha, architect, distributed copies of testim:my to Council members to support his views for lower poles and incandescent lighting. He conunented on the staff's reconunendations, saying there was no technical data presented supporting the design criteria recommended, and generally discussed factors involved in selecting the proper lighting design. He asked that performance criteria be established and referred back to the architects to have a lighting consultant prepare a design for the light fix- tures. Mr. Poticha also felt since the Renewal Agency has paid for other lights, trees, street improvements in the downtown area, it would be possible to ask HUD to include the cost of these light fixtures. Charles Potterf, 420 East 3rd Avenue, protested the method of financing the project. He feels the cost: should not be at taxpayers expense. , , I I ! i e: ! I I I i I I I I I I I i i I I I I Mrs. Campbell asked Davi d Huht, Renewal Agency di rector, to conunent on paying the cost, and Mr. Hunt explained that Federal regUlations prohibit this expense because' the mall lighting is not considered normal street lighting. Ray Wiley, engineer for Breeden Bros.., showed Council members pictures he had of the 60-foot pole lighting on the 14th Avenue project, and said when foliage is on trees this type of lighting results in a severe light/dark contrast. In answer to Mr.Mohr's remark that a questionnaire distributed by EWEB in the 14th Avenue area determined the ,J.ighting was accepted by the neighborhoOd, Mr. Wiley said he felt the questionnaire was no 1lIOre than a summary showing approval of the project rather than approval of light level. Mrs. Campbell asked Parks Director Smi th to conunent on trees in relation to the number of poles required by the plans; she was informed his department was not involved in the design. i I i . Rachel Starr, graduate student from the university of Oregon, said the questionnaire gave no options for answers; question submitted was "do you approve" rather than "what is your opinion." A vote was taken on the 1lIOtion to reaffirm previous Council action to approve Plan I. Motion carried, Mrs. Beal and Mrs. Campbell voting no. Comm 1/19/72 Approve I I I I I i I I I I I I I I . Mr. Gribskov commented that regardless of which agency paid for the lighting, considera- tion of economics should be a part of the decision. Mrs. Beal said she believes the consensus is that 1lIOre lighting is needed in the area, and it is now a question of a proper decision on a long-term basis, not just inunediate cost and necessity, to make the downtown area the most attractive and livable. Mr. Gribskov restated his position that regardless of where the cost falls, it is still an important factor in whatever decision is reached. Mr. Wiley said 2 foo,tcandles are considered the industry standard, and if that level is provided rather than 3.8 footcandles, the cost would be less. Mr. Williams remarked that if Plan I is used with one fixture on each pole, the cost drops about a third, and cost of maintenance would drop. If two fixtures are installed on each pole and it is decided later 2 footcandles are appropriate rather than 3.8, it is simpl!/ a matter of changing bulbs. Scott Wiley, 8~2 East 20th, compared the lighting plan proposed for the mall loop streets to the installation at 14th and Patterson. He said he feels thismuc:h light is not really necessary to obtain the objectives of protection and also present a pleasing image at night. He favors a more softly scaled light at a lower level. 'Otto poticha, 1820 Kona,Street, suggested referral of the issue to the Design Review Committee recently created by the Eugene Renewal Agency. He said, t9p, so far as he knows the lighting 1/24/72 - 5 1'2 1 f I I i l plan has not been reviet<led by the Planning Commission. He called attention to the original application of ERA for grant for the mall work which included pedestrian lights 8 to 10 feet high, and reiterated his previous arguments against installation of the lighting proposed in Plan 1. " c ' John Reynolds, 290 East 37th Avenue, said he feels design review is clearly justified, and that the level of lighting is twice the illumination level for residential usage (referring to upstairs living quarters in the downtown area) as designated by the Electrical Engineer- ing Society. Charles Potterf, 420 East 3rd Avenue, again protested the method of financing the project. He said he feels the people benefiting from the lights in the downtown al~a should pay for the installation, and that any light 9 whatever type, should not be installed at taxpayers' expense, and cited tax expenditures on lighting and police patrol in the downtown district. Wilmot Gilland, 1670 Fairmount Boulevard, agreed with Mr. Potterf's comments and urged review of the'plan by architects expert in the field of illumination, because once the installation is accomplished they would be difficult to remove. He said he feelS the high intensity light- ing would tend to separate the core area more from adjacent areas rather than connecting it. James Longwood, 2633 Spring Boulevard, newly appointed meni>er of the Planning Commission, said he was surprised to find the proposed mall lighting had not been reviewed by the Commission. He explined it was brought up at a recent Commission meeting because of opposition which had developed in the Co~cil's consideration, and the Commission denied by a 4-3 vote a motion that the issue be referred to the Design Review Committee. . I I I I Howard Bonnett, 775 East 22nd Avenue, Planning Commission member, said he feels in view of the recent EtiEB rate increase that some of the monies spent should be for the type lighting desired by those people paying for it, rather than the harsh high-level lighting. James Pearson, president of the Planning Commission, explained the action referred to by Mr. Longwood in considering the mall lighting - that opinion was split 3-3 on the Commission as to whether to invite the Council to refer the matter to the Commission, and on a motion to refer it instead to the ERA Design Review Committee he had voted "no" breaking the tie because he felt it had been considered at length by the Council and that it would not be appropriate for the Planning Commission without study to recommend a course of acti&. Bob Thomas, staff member of ERA, explained the item included in the grant appiication for the mall referred to by Mr. Poticha was for accent lighting only, not street lighting. ~j Councilman William:; s~:lid he had been advised by a member of the Renewal Agency that there is a February 15, 1972 deadline for a decision on the lighting because of the scheduling of street widening and related work in the mall area. I e Mrs. Campbell said she agrees with the public testimony oPP9sing the high-level ligtlting and that the cost factor is being given too much consideration in view of the investment in the mall already. She moved to have the entire issue referred to the ERA Design Review Committee, but the motion was ruled out of order because of a motion on the floor for approval. Mrs. Beal questioned remarks made with regard to financing the lights, and Manager explained that EWEB makes the capital expenditure invested in the street light system, and that arrount is completely recovered from the City over a IS-year period. Councilman Mohr in answer to Mr. Bonnett,'s conunents with regard to EWEB rates, explained the plan proposed is the third lowest in terms of power consumption. C. Condemnation Settlement, Ridenour, West Amazon Expressway - City Council authorized condemnation of property in the ownership of Mr. and Mrs. Donald Ridenour for right- Of-way for West Am.!zon Expressway. 2'he amount offered was $3,500.00. Attomey has now proposed settlement for $3,878.00, the aJnOtmtof appraisal made at Ridemour's direction. Staff recommended settlement at $3,878.00. Mr. WillialllS moved seconded b!1 Mr. Gribskov to approve the reCODllllSndation. Ifotion carried. COIllll 1/19/72 Approve . D. BUD Application; Exchange Open-Space Riverfront Properties, Raup/Brown - Open-space ftmds were used to purchase, the Raul' property on which there were several buildings. BUD requires clearance of all buildings from' properties purchased ~ith open-sp.tce ftmds, and this was done on the Raul' property except the house which is rented to Child Care, Inc., ,and being used for a IUJII cue center and two small buildings used to store , I. ' . park equipment. Final settlement ts Jaeld pending removal of tbosebuildings. . ' ;. . . . Staff proposes making oomm:itment to BUD to remov,? the two ifareho&.lSes and the house from the Raul' property if a two-year ext~ion is considez*d and settlement made' and, funds received. Also, staff proposes exchange,~.f land of equal value purchased with the BrtMn propert'y for the land on which the buildings are located so their' use can be continued. An application to this effect would be submitted to BUD for appro~al. Mr. williams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov to approve submission of the app11cat:Lon. Notion carried. . COIllll 1119/72 Approve 1.3 J,fl4/72 ~ , E. Recommendation, Charitable Solicitations Ordinance, County - Council members received copies of a memorandum from the Charitable Solicitations Commission requesting the Council approach County Gommissioners wi th regard to their adoption of an' ordinance parallel to the City's ordinance on screening of fund raising campaigns. The City's ordinance has been quite effective and beneficial but telephone solicitationS are being made from outside the City limits which subvert a portion of the effort in the City. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov to draft a request addressed to the County' Commissioners urging the County's adoption of a charitable solicitations ordinance. Motion carried. F. Peti tion for Paving, Si dewalk, Storm Sewer - Centennial from Centennial Loop West to 300 feet east of Centennial Loop East (64%) - Manager said improvement is on street running north from CeJ?tennial Boulevard where commercial construction is in progress, and it is desirable the street be brought to City standards when the conmercial uses take place. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov to accept the petition and public hear- ing held. Motion carried. G. Liquor License Renewals - JLC Sports Concession Stands #1 and #2 Retail Malt Beverage (RMBA) - South Willamette Street Approved by Police Department. H. Wreckers Licem;e - Foreign Parts West t 1584 West 1st Bruce Korsted - Change of Partners I. Council Self-study Session - Mayor Anderson asked if Council members would be interested in holding a self-study session as has been done in recent years at the beginning of a new year. It was agreed such a session would, be scheduled and Council members notified as to time and place. J. Council Officers - Council Vice President Mohr, conducting the meeting in the ab- sence of Mayor Anderson, announced election of Council officers for the year 1972; Councilman Mohr, president; Mrs. Beal, vice president. K. Sidewalk Petition, Barger Drive and Echo Hollow Road - Submitted by 332 petitioners for temporary sidewalk on one side of Barger Drive from Ohio Street to Echo Hollow Road ~d on one side of Echo Hollow Road from Barger Drive to Willhi St,reet, and con- sideration of resurfacing Barger Drive. The petition also asked that the improve- ments be made wi thout assessment to abutting properties. Manager pointed out a number of policy questions: ,1. City does nO,t pay cost of temporary walks because permanent walks are preferable. 2. Temporary walks delay permanent walk installation. 3. Money for purchase of addi tional right-of-way to aCcommodate walks on Bilrger must be budgeted. There are no estimates at this time. 4. The City normally precedes sidewalk installation with permanent street improvements. 5. Permanent improvement of Echo Hollow and Barger is needed, permanent walks on one or both sides could accompany the street project. 6. City would need funds for extra width and storm sewers if permanent streets are built. These funds are not budgeted. 7. Property owners would normally be assessed for cost of permanent sidewalks and standard street width. 8. Variance from normal City poliC!J to construct temporary walks would result in similar requests from other areas. Naps were presented showing where additional, right-of-way would !fe needed. Counc;il previously toured the area. Staff reCQllllDended denial of the petition and that they be requested to bring back cost estimates on permanent improvements with abreaJedown of cost to property owners and to City; the information could be used in preparation of the 1972-73 budget. Cost estimates for sidewalk on one side of Barger and Echo Hollow are: Concrete - $59,152; Asphalt and Rock - $31,806; Crushed Rock - $18,285. Estimates are notnow available on acquisi tion of right-of-way" ei ther permanent or temporary. Staff does not feel a temPorary insta1.1ation between 'the surfaced mat and eJdsting ditch is safe. Counc1,l meu,ers generally agreed temporary installation is not! desirable and that if ' ithe City paid for the improvements, a' net( approaCh would have to be taken with regard to the Ci ty 's assessment poll C!J. 1Ir. Nohr suggested a meeting with interested persons in tbe 12eighborhood to discUss the' improvements requested and answer questions. Nanager said a neighborhOOd COIIt- , mi ttee in the State Streets area development program was encouraged and 'i t m1ghtbe well to meet with that C'OIIlIDittee after figures and information onaltemative pro- posals are available. Nr. Willians asked the staff to include in its estimates for consideration costs t;'f a temporarY walk on an assessment basis which would not preclude, going back later and reassessing for permanent improvements. 14 -"';;'. " . ~. Comm 1/19/72 Approve COIllllJ 1/19/72 Approve Approve Approve Co"." 1/12/72 Affirm COlllllJ 1/19/72 Affirm . '''' 1/24/12- 7 M::..'. llel:simer asked ctaff's da.J;~inition or' a tenlpOrClEY sidn-lalk a,n'i was told ri:he con- cl'ete is considered a permanent'installation; asphalt or c.'rushed rock, temporary. :*- .' Mr. Gribskov moved seconded by Hr. Wil.'!..ir;r;;s to deny the petition and develop costs and assessments to property owners for permanent improvements, including costs for temporary side""alk on an assessment basis. Mr. Mohr said he wou~d be willi.ng ''::0 p8.zticipate in meeti:ngs with people interested ill having thu iillprove~,:f:'iJts aJ~d recommended a meeting be c:;;;r.k'.:mgan a.fter information is available. Mrs. Campbell said she ""as not convinced the City IJeeds to pi;y the cost of i1li,provements abutting large vacant cOIreas, those abutting the State street properties ""ou1d be okay. She said she had a blJ,L~et.in lOOntioning tl'le first phase of a $50 million program to create pUblic works prc,-iect:r:; in high unemployment areas, and asked if the imlJIovements under consideration wOLl.ld qualify under that pro(Tram, It t:fa5 staff's opinion a total economic deve10pmel.l'C: program was to be proposed under ti1is funding, an L-COG appointed commi ttee is working on it, but IT>re information in this regard would be brought to the regular Council meeting. A voU.. 'jf;)S ta'l:en .-:1:: ~:,he motion as stated" and :.-cA':ioJ'J carried. Comm 1/19/72 Affirm - Mel Lemmon t 5580 Barger Drive t expressed concern for pedestrian traffic in the area because of the narrow road width and h(;)avy veh:.culcu" 'i::raffic. He said costs. whether for permanem.: or te:npora..-y sidewalk, would he negl:tgible :i.n relation to danger to children traveling to the various schools and swimming' pool in the area. He urged cons:i.deration of installation of some type of walkway. either permanent or temporary. and said it is his understanding the required :r>i[i'lt-of"-way for a \-!alk can be obtained by the City quic1cly and at a minimum cost. Mayor ;mdel~cn explained the Cowlcil's ~ction in denying the pe~ition' was to deny the re- quest for the City's payment of costs for a temporary installation9 that the staff was di- rected to p..--epare costs Qstimnt:;s for pet'manent street and sidm>1nlk improvement. plus esti- mates for a temporary sidewalk9 bo,h on an assessment basis. Councilman r.johr elq:lained thaL CQuncil members agreed unanimOUSly flom'Zlthing mu.st be done; they also agI'eed to meet with a committee from the area to dis~;\JSs the Elituation and answer residents' questions with regard to the improvements. Discussion between Mrs. Ca~pb~ll and Hr. Lemmon touched on advice from the Public Works Department that Barger is projected as an arterial at some future time but not ready to be developed at this time. hence the suggestion for a temporary walkway for safety purposes. Mr. Lem1llOn said in answer to Mrs. Campbell's question that he feels people in the area would be willing to be assessed for a temporary walk. The Manager commented that there are no cost estimates at this time on securing right-of- way on Bargel? and Echo Hollow t but in view of the great a1llOunt which will be needed for improving Barger the project would be facilitated if owners of abutting properties were to contribute the necessary land. With Council approval of the committee action. cost estimates will be prepared on a tempoary walk as well as on the pel."manent improvements. e L. L-COG Represent81ti ve - SinO'.,) Couna11 adopted resolution agreeing to h3<COme ell meD/l)er of Lane Council of Gover.nmentz unoox its new structure, appointment of a voting meD/l)er for the city of Eugene is desirable. Comm Mr. Williams moved seconded by Hr. Hershner to reappoint Mayor Anderson as the City's 1/19/72 representative. Motion carried. Affirm M. Annual Audit, Year Ending June 30, 1971 - Copies of the Annual Financial Report were submitted to Council members for review. Richard L. Flomer, partner, Lybrand, Ross, Bros. & Montgomery, expressed appreciation for co-operation given by the City Manager's and Finance Director's staffs in preparation of the audit. Mr. Mohr asked if a letter was' included with the audit setting out certain findings and making recommendatiOns, for changes, such as was subm1tted with last year's audit" and was informed such a letter was included. It was agreed the report would be studied' by Council meD/l)ers and brought back to .. subsequent meeting for discussion and/or questions. Comm 1/12/72 File . N. Advisory COlIIm:ittee, Highway 126 Environmental IlIlpIlct Studv (Planning COlIDission Re- ' /)Ort December 27, 1971) ...; ,!he Planning Commission reooBlllended Mayor and Couna11 appoint a comm1ttee to advise on envi.ronment4ll impac::t iStUdy of proposed Highway 1.26 between Washi.ngton-Jefferson Bridge and West 11th at Oka Hill to include: Planner, engineer, archi~ect, or landscape architect,s0c101ogist, psychologist or physician, appraiser, and ecologist. , I ' , Mrs. Campbell' said she had the impression an econom1st was to be included. Mr.Wllli.. agreed jt would be des.1rabJ.e t:o .1nclude an eoonom:i.st:, and suggested also addit:Lonof a traffic engineer, a structural enpgeer, and a cpntractor. Manager said the Plal)ni.ng COIIlIld..ion felt an appraiser cpuld be included, :Lnlieu of an eamora1st, and that since this group is to supplement the Highway Depar~t's te..,., . '. 15 1/24/72 _ , the engineers and contractor suggested by Mr. Williall5 would probably be provided by the State. Mr. Williall5 commented that there would be no concern if provided, but that these disciplines should be included in any deliberations as to how or what will be recommended. Mrs. Campbell did not agree an appraiser is equi valent to an economist, and recommended inclusion of an economist. Also that the traffic and'structural engineers and contractor would not be needed in view of State Highway's team. Mr. WilliamS reiterated that re- gardless of how furnished, the engineers and contractor should be included. '16 '.., .," " \ Manager suggested contact be made wi th State Highway Department to determine which of their people will be involved before Council action is taken on appointment of the committee. Mayor said it would be preferable if "disciplines" were indicated rather than individual pursuits in makeup of the committee; it is possible one person could cover several disciplines. He suggested adoption of some indication as to kind of disciplines to be represented, then check with the Highway Department and bring the item back for a decision. Conun 1/12/72 File O. Bicycle Safety - Copies of a letter from. County Commissioner Jess Hill were dis- tributed to Council members together wi th a reply from Police Chief Allen with regard to concern of Lane County Advisory Commi ttee for Safety and Accident Prevention for lack of enforcement action against unsafe operation of bicycles in thE! metropolitan area. The letter asked possible implementation of an enforcement system whereby convicted offenders could be sent to a bicycle safety school. Chief Allen's response explained present safety programs maintained in grade schools and ci ted expense which would be involved in conductipg a safety school or having a special force 'of officers devoting its entire attention to bicycle violations. - Mr. Williams expressed his concern about use of bicycles on road used by cars and asked if there is any legal way of dealing with that situation. As it is now, bicycles have a legal right to use the same roads used by autombiles. Mrs. Beal commented on the hazard of bicycles On the Ferry Street Bridge and suggested signs to the effect they should be ridden on the sidewalk only. Manager said it could be considered, however pedestrians also use that right-of-way. Mr. Hershner asked if by ordinance bicycles could be required to use only sidewalks. Attorney said sin.ce it is a matter of local concern, Eugene could pass an ordinance mre restrictive than State law. Conun 1/12/72 File Mrs. Campbell called attention to a meeting of the Bicycle Study Committee on January 20, 1972 at 12:30 p.in. and said Council's suggestions on this subject could be passed to them at that time. P. Protest Sewer Assessment (between Frienclly and Lorane Highway), Emery (70-07) - The Public Works Director explained that Mr. W. T. Emery, 2885 Monroe Street, wrote a let- ter of protest prior to the hearing on this assess11Je11t in March 1971. The letter was not presented to the Council at that time since the Public Works staff felt the problem was resolved with their explanation of procedure for assessment of cost against the 30-foot strip in Mr. Emery's ownership for the sewer constructed on Frienclly Street. Mr. Emery requested Council consideration, although the assessment has been made and the only action possible is for the. cost to be borne by the City if it is decided the property should not be assessed; the amount ($275.25) is not large enough to warrant refiguring the entire assessment to spread the cost to other properties served by the sewer. Public Works Director said assessment procedure requires assessment of the property; the sewer is there and can be used, other adjacent sewers cannot be used because ofgravi ty problems, future sewer construction cannot overlap this area so there could be no other sewer assessment. He recommended that the asseS8ment stand. - Mr. Emery said he feels the assessment is unfair because he doesn't believe there will be construction on the property; if it is developed, it would have to be serviced by sewers from another direction. He displayed a plat of the area showing location of the property in relation to the sewer and gave a general explanation of his request for waiver of the assessment. He said he had been granted waiver of the stub ~arge. Mrs'. Emery remarked about assumption on the part of the City that the protest had been resolved; they thought a letter before the hearing was sufficient to gain the Council's consideration. She feels sewer charges should be borne by properties on Friendly Street served and does not think charges should be collected after the fact from the City either. General discussion followed between CoUncil members and staff wi th regard to possible developmSnt of ,the property should it be sold in ,the future and combined with ad- Jacent properties, whether other sewers, could service the area, possible assessments .in the future, assessment procedure, etc. . Councilman Mohr left the meeting. Mr. ElDBry suggested the Council grant a walver of the assessment until the property -.: ,is developed and will use'the sewer. 16 1/24/72- 9 ,'. r Manager said if assessment procedure were such that sewers were paid for b!l general public and value to propert!l realized onl!l when sewer connection made, a waiver would be appropriate. But it is felt sewer construction creates value to propert!l and justifies assessment; based on that, vacant areas can be subdivided and developed, and older areas onl!l partially developed can be provided with sewer and service made available to vacant lots regardless of whether it is used. Mayor Anderson said if exception is made in this instance it would set precedent for extenuating circumstances in future situations. Mr. Emer!l replied that he felt precedent was established when cost of the stub was waived. Public Works Director said waiver of stub cost was another issue; that procedure for location of the stub in this case had not been completed wi th Mr. Emery prior to its installation. He also said even though the propert!l is only 30x150'" if a building permit is requested it would have to be issued and a building could be lo- cated an!l place on the propert!l, thereb!l making use of the sewer. Mr. Williams moved seconded b!l Mr. Hershner to place the item on file. Public Works Director said a rehearing of the assessment would have to be held at which time it could be confirmed. No vote was taken. Comm 1/12/72 File '. C). Laurelwood Lease - Copies of a letter were distributed to Council members addressed to Mrs. Dorothy Johnson from the Parks and Recreation Director terminating Mrs. Johnson's lease of Laure1wood Club building as of April 10, 1972. !n response to question from Mrs. Campbell, Manager explained refreshment use could be continued while the golf course is in operation and no later than 10:00 p.m., or an entirel!l different use compatible wi th op€)ration of the golf course, but there seems to be no need for another nightclub sucll as is in operation in the building now. It could be used as a communit!l center, although no funds are available for staffing. Some volun- teer groups have looked at it with that purpose'in mind. Mrs'. Campbell said she had been asked about its use for the aged because of lack of office space downtown" and because this would be during the day she felt it would be a good use. Manager said a meeting is scheduled wi th the Committee for Aging to explore that possibilit!l~ Mrs. Beal asked about rent from the building ($250 per llDnth) and whether it could be reduced or the building used rent free. Manager replied if used b!l volunteer groups, would probably have to forego rent; if used as a concession in conjunction with the golf course, some income would be involved. Ma!lor remarked that the intent is to find some use for the building which is, colfl)at- ib1e with operation of the golf course, and the matter will be brought back for Council action. Mr. Hershner asked if there is a chance of releasing it to the same people with different hours of operation, and Manager .answered the!l have the right of first refusal if operation changed, but at this time no agreement has been reached on closing at 10:00 p.m. Parks Director said there are man!l activities and groups to be explored to find an operation suitable for the location. Comm 1/12/72 File . R. Notices"; Council members were informed of the following meetings: A. Public hearing on 1990 General Plan before joint meeting of Lane County, Spring- field, and Eugene Planning Commissions - Thursday, January 13, 1972, 7:30 p.m., Eugene Council Chamber. B. National League of Cities Congressi~al-Cit!l Conference - March 5-7, 1972 in Washington, D.C. Comm 1112/72 File S. Mayor's Park Study Committee - Mrs. Campbell recommended reactivation of this c0m- mittee to concern itself with the Southridge PUD project relative to its effect on the proposed Ridgeline Park. There was general discussion with refliJrd to the c0m- mittee's me11i:Jership. Manager explained i~ as a joint Parks-Planning ~tudtJ Committee , which, as part of the process of reviewing the feaSibilit!l of a ridgelinepark con- cept, was created to act as a steering COIIUl'littee to work with interested citizens and the staff to bring a proposal to the Planning Commission and Council. Idea of reactivating the committee will be reviewed with the Mayor and brought back for consideration. . In answer to Mr. Mohr's question as to whom the comm1ttee would report, IIrs.Campbell said she didn't feel it necessary the committee report to the Council, but 'as a result o~ the Planning Comm1ssion~s action to table the Southridge PUD project she, felt if the committee is, to be effet:*ive it would have to be react;Lvated J.lIlIlJ8diatel!l' in order to be heard by the Planning Conm1ssion when the Jtem is brought back for discussion. Manager ~aid better d1rect!-on would be ind1catedaE,ter the, January. 24" '1972 Planning Commission meeting; a moratorium for one year on developments of great' density in the area may be advisable in order to alloW ti~ for the Planning Com-' , mission staff and the Joint Study Committee to review and attempt to report on the feasibility of the ridgeline park proposal. , Co.. 1/19/72 P1.~. ~. Audit, "ear Bnding June 30, 197' -Copies were distributed to Council members of report to management from Lybrand, ROss Bros.. & lfPJltgomery, audi tors (dated De~ .1 '"I 1/24/72 .. 10 1---- I I I I I ORllINANCES - Council Bill No. 9555 - Levying assessme~ts for storm sewer within Sheldon Parkside PUD,(71-12)w~ subJ!l,i.tted and read the first time by council bill number and title only on Decenber 27. 1971, there being no co~cilman present requesting it be read in full, and held over to this meeting t.o allOw proper notice of assessment to, be given owners of affected propaties, and are brought back at this , time for consideration with no protests on file. ' " . Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bi.J.l be read the second time by council bill nunber only, with unanimous ,consent of the Council and that enactment be considered at this time. MOtion carrie4 unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nUDber only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal :that the council bill be approved an4 given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen' presentwting aye, the bill was declared passed and nwrbered 16364. , '. .' . ~ Council Bill No. 9556 - Levying aSsessments for paving Mdnroe Street from 38th Avenue to south 800 feet (71-17), submitted and, read thefii'st time by co\Dicil b~ll nunber and title only on December 27, ,1971, there being no. councilman pre8e~t requesting it be read in full, held over to this lIlBeting , to allow p~eI' notice of assesismentto be given owners of affec:ted properties, and brought back at this time 'for conE\ideratioowith no written prote~t on file., I " Mr,' Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be read the second time by council bill nwrber oilly, with unanimous consent ,of the Council .and that' enactlll8nt be considered at thi,S time. Motionc~ied uIianimously and,t~e b+ll was read the second time by council ~i11 nUDber only. Mr. Mohr '..dved seConded by Mrs: Beal that the council bH.lbe appl'O'Ved and g4.ven final paSsage. Rollcall Vote. All councilmen present voting aye ,the bill was declared passed and nwrbered ~. Council Bill No. 9557 - Levying ~se.sments for paving, sanitary and storm sewers within Fil Acres 1st Addition (.71-21). subillitted ane! read the first tiJlle by councll bill n.er and title.. only 1/24/72 ';'11 . 18' I I :. I I I I I I I ber 20, 1971) and memo from City Finance Director commenting on findings listed by auditors (dated January 18, 1972). The item will be brought to a future committee meeting for discussion. Comm 1/19/72 File U. Parks Department Award - Manager announced the Eugene Parks and Recreation Depart- ment received the highest award of the Parks Maintenance Magazine for the combina- tion parks maintenance building and restroom in ,Hendricks Park. COllllJl 1/19/72 File V. Kathleen Thomsen letter re: Street lights and police costs was distributed to Council members with the January 19, 1972 Committee agenda. 1/19/72 File A rollcall vote was taken on the motion to approve, affirm, or file as noted Items A through V above. Motion carried, all cOWlcilmen present voting aye, except Mrs. Campbell voting no. Mayor Anderson said he appreciates the people's concern on lighting and said the Council is going to be faced often with decisions which will call upon them to be environmental specialists taking into account timing and safety, and it will not always be possible to achieve a balance. Mrs. Campbell questioned procedure, asking how a Council member could have referred the matter of mall loop street lights to the Design Review Committee with a motion on the floor to approve, and the Mayor said she could moved to table or to amend. I i I I e i III - TOPICS (Traffic Operation Program to Improve Capacity and Safety) - Copies of the Plan- ning Commission recommendation for adoption of the TOPICS plan were distributed to Council members together with copies of the Plan itself, with the understanding the item would be brought up for discussion at the January 24, 1972 Council meeting. I I I I I I I I I I I I ~' , Mrs. Canlpbe11 inquired if funding for TOPICS was cut off and whether 11th Avenue project was cut out. Traffic Engineer explained that local on-going projects already approved are still bUdgeted and funded. After the approved on-going projects are completed, money for Eugene-Springfield projects will be combined and apportioned on a priority basis; that the 11th Avenue project will be completed under this program. Assistant Manager cOlr.mented that $166,000.00 was budgeted for local matching funds for TOPICS, anticipating Comm funds from unused projects in the rest of the State which. did not materialize. 1/19/72 Traffic Engineer explained that the purpose of this plan is to increase capacity and facilitate flow of traffic throughout the area. Eugene has joined with Lane County and Springfield for funding under the Federal Highway Safety Act, and two projects are now Wlderway with this fund- ing. He referred to specific portions of the plan and explained priority ratings on various projects. The L-COG Transportation Committee and a citizens advisory committee have also :recommended adoption. Because of cutbacks in Federal spending future funding will be shared jointly by Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene and projects authorized on a priority basis; those projects now underway will be completed under the present fWlding. Mrs: Beal said that since Council members have had the report only three days she doesn't feel they can be expected to make a decision on adoption of a plan of this magnitude without 't'i:me for thorough review and study. She was told that the plan has been under consideration by various agencies involved which accounts for the time elapsed since it was originally frewarded by Cornell, HOwland, Hayes & Merryfield. Further discussion revealed no specific deailine for a decision on the plan, and it was understood it would be carried over to a later meeting. -. ,18 1/24/72 '- 11 \ I I I I . I I ! I I I on December 27, 1971, there being no councilman present requesting it be read in full, held over to this meeting to allow proper notice of assessment to be given owners of affected properties, and brought back at this time for consideration with no written protest on file. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. leal that the council bill be read the second time by council bill nuni>er only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be cons idered at this time. M,?tion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nwrber only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and l1umbered ~. Council Bill No. 9558 - Levying assessments for sanitary sewer in area between Spring Boulevard and Vine Maple Drive extended, and from the end of Vine Maple Drive to 200 feet south (71-24), sub- mitted and read the first time by council bill number only on December 27, 1971, there being no councilman present requesting it be read in full, held over to this meeting to allow proper notice of assessment to be given owners of affected properties, 'and brought back at this time for consid~ration ~ith no,written protest on file. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be read the second time by council bill nwrber only ~ with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was zoead the second time by council bill nwrber only. I I I I I ~ I I I Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nwrbered ~. Council Bill No. 9559 - Levying assessments for paving alley between Grant Street and Chambers Street from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue (71-31), submitted and read the first time by council bill nuni>er and title only on December 27, 1971, there being no councilan present requesting it be read in full, held over to this meeting to allow proper notice of assessment to be given Owners of affected properties, and brought back at this time for consideration with no written protest on file. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be read the second time by council bill numer only t with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nwrber only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be, approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. 1.11 councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nUDbered 16368. ' - Council Bill No. 9560 - Levying aSsessments for sanitary sewer between Bailey Lane and Willa- kenzie Road from Coburg Road to Haclcamore Way (71-52), submitted and read the first time by council bill numer and title only on December 27, 1971, there being no councilan present requesting it be read in full, held over to this meeting to allow proper notice of assessment to be given owners of affected properties, and broMlht back at this time for consideration with no written protest on file. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be read the second time by council bill nUnber only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read' the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be approved and given final passase. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present ,voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16369. . . ------ . I I I I I I I I I I I . Council Bill No. 9573 - Amending Section 9.254 of the City Code re: Definition "Group Care Homes" was' ;submitted and read by council bill number and title only,' there being no councilman present re~ questing it be rea,d in full. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by HnI.Beal that the council bill be rea,d the second time by council bill nUDber oily, with unanimous consent of the Council, and tbat enactment be consi~red at this time. Motion carried unanimoUSly and the bill was read tbe second time' by council bill number only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be appJ'C>>ved and given final passqe. . Rollcall vote. All co1,Dlcilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16370. . . ,', '- , Council Bill No. 9574 - Amending Section 9.378 of the Ci:t:y Code re: R~4 District Uses, was sub- mitted ~d read by council ,bU.l nWli>er and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. ' Mr. MO;ht', moved seconded by , It's. Beal that:the counc$.l bill be read the second time by, coUncil bill nUDber only, with unanimous, cons'ent of the CO\,U1cll, and that 'enactment be considered at this time., Motion carriedun$l1imousl, and the bill was, read the second ti~ by coUncil bill nunber only. i I . Mr. Moot' moved seoonded by Mrs. Beal 1:hat the council' bill be approved' and gi~n final pass.... ' Rollcali vote.' All councilmen present voting aye t . the bill was declared passed and iUDIlbered16:37l. .', " ~ . ,'.: I' ': . , . ,Council Bill No. 9575 - Calling hearing ,February 28, 19''12; re; Vacation of utility eaSement e8$t: of Hughes Street between Pattison and Avalon; Pyle, ,was submittEic1 and read by council bill numer eu" ti Ue only, there being .-,0 Co~cil.Dijm prese,nt requesting that :it be read, in full. ' Mr. Mchr moved seconded by ~~. Beal that the council~tlJ.be ~ad the second it_ byccrimcil bill nUDber only , with unan~mous <consent of the Counci,l" and that enactment be considered at this till!8. Motion carried unanimously and the bU.l was read the second time by cOuncil bill, nUDber only. Hr. Hohr JDOved seconded by Jh'e. B.~.th.t the councilblll be approved'and given fin~ PM',.' Rollcall vOte. All' cOuncilmen p~s~~" vOting aye, ~h~ bill was' deCl~d pas.~4 and' n,U1lIbe1'Od '~ 3~2o, . "~;' ~' ~. I '19 Council Bill No. 9576 - Calling hearing February 28, 1972 re: Vacation of Button Street north of West 11th Avenue between Wallis Street and Bertelsen Road, Wingard, was submitted and read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. , tlr. Mohr roved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill nUJJber only,' with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nuroer only. - Mr. Mohr IOOved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nUDbered ~. Council Bill No. 9577 - Calling hearing February 28, 1972 re: Vacation of portion of Dillard Road at Snell Street, Parks, was submi ttedand read the first time by council bill, number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in fUll. Mr. Mohr IOOved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only wi th unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. MotIon carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nUDber only. Mr. Mohr movCi!d seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nUDbered ~. Council Bill No. 9578 - Calling hearing February 28, 1972 re: Vacation of easement on Lot 11. Block 4 ~ 1st Addition to Cow Palace (Jeppeson Acres Road west of Norkenzie Road), Barker. was sub- mitted and read the first time by council bill nUJJber and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. ' Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill nunber only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nW1ber only. Mr. Mohr IOOved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final pas8~ge. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nUDbered ~. Council Bill No. 9579 - Calling hearing February 28,1972 re: Vacation of easeBent near Hawthorne Street between Fairfield Street and Baxter Street, excluding the south 25 feet. Sorgenfri. was sub- mi tted and read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no counciilman present requesting that it be read in full. tit: Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill nunber only. with unanilOOus consent of the Council. and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nwdlered ~. Council Bill No. 9580 - Calling hearing February 28, 1972 re: Vacation of easements on Lots 13 and 18, Pine Ridge Estates north of Mahalo Drive, Dills, was submitted and read the finJt time by council bill nunber and title only. there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. ' Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number' only. wi th unanilOOus consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried l unanilOOusly and the bill was read the second time by council bill nunberOnly. ' Mr. ,Mohr IOOved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. ' All councilmen present voting aye. the bill was declared passed and nunbered ~. Council Bill No. 9581- Amending Section 9.050 of the City Code re: Plat Check Fees, was sub- mitted and read the first time by council bill nUDber and title only. there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. tit Mr. Mohr moved seconded by MnJ. Seal that the bill be read the aecond time by council bill nUDber only.' with unanimous consent of the Council. and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried lUlanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nunber only. 'Mr. Mohr IOOved secOnded by Mrs. Beal'that the bill be approved and given fiaM passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye. the 'bill was declared passed and lumbered ~. Manager said the purpolle o~ t:hta o.rd.1nance 1s to bring plan checJdng fees for pl.ts to oorrespond wi th schedule ~ov1ded by Df!M Sute law. Staf~ feels 1ncre~e 1n Cbazges 1s justif1ed. ' COJrR 1/19/72 , " COlUlcil,Bill No. 9582 - Paving Centennial' Boulevard from'centennilaLaop West to 300 feet eas~ of Centennial Loop East, was submitted end read t~e first time 'by council bill nUDbel' and title only. there being no colUlcilman present requesting that it be read, in full. .' ' ' , I .d Mr.Mohl' moved seconded by Mrs. Bealthat the bill be read the second time by council bill nUDbel' only ~J with unanimous consent of the CO\D1cil. and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion cal'l'ied ' unanimously and the bill was rea4 the second time by council bill nUJlber only. Hr. Mohr moved seconded by Hrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passqe. RollCall 1IO:te. All eouncUmen ,present vodtig aye. the bill' was declared ~assed and numbered ~. 20 ~ .' -- I . I . Council Bill No. 9583 ..Adopting p10ns ~d specifications for paving Centennial Boulevard from Centennial Loop tlest to 300 feet east cSf Centennial Loop East. was submitted and read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill nunber only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried ""7lMimo1.1S1y and the bill was read the second time by council bill nunber only. " Mr. Mohr moved seconded by r-!rs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All counciltoon pr3ser.t voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered ~. Council Bill No. 9584 - Construction of storm sewer on Centennial Boulevard from Centennial Loop West to 300 feet east of Centennial Loop East, was submitted and read the first time by council bill nUlTber and 1:i tIe only, there being no councilmen present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Mohr IOOved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill nunber only with manimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by comell bill nunber only. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nunbered ~. Council Bill No. 9595 - Adopting plans and specificatiom for construction of storm sewer on Centennial Boulevard from Centennial Loop West to 300 feet east of Centennial Loop East, was submitted and read the first time by council bill nunber and title only, there being no councilman present re- questing that it be read in full. .' .1' Mr.>. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, wi th tmanirnous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried ' 12 unanilOOusly and the bill was read the second time by comcil bill nunber only. Mr. l-'ohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16382 . Council Bill No. 9586 - Construction of sidewalk on Centennial Boulevard ~m Centennial Loop West to 300 feet east of Centennial Loop East, was submitted and read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with manimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by comcil bill number only ~ Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and nunbered ~. RESOLUTIONS, Resolution No. 2002 - Authorizing abatement 431 East 3rd Avenue (Shirley, Uni vel'6al Developel'6) was submitted. Mr. Mohr moved secondod by Mrs. Beal to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. All comcilmen present voting aye, motion carried. Resolution No. 2003 - Authorizing abatement 631 West 11th (Skillern-Mansell), was submitted. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, ,motion carried. Resolution No. 2004 - Authorizing revocable permit for nightwatchman mobile home at 460 Nol'th Danebo Road (Danebo Pat'ts & Equip~nt), was submitted. Mr. Mohr moved soconded by MrS. Beal to adopt the resol<Ution. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye ,mOtion carried. ' , Resolution No. 2005 - Authorizins applica'tion to DepU"tment of Housing and lhban ~veloPllllent for conversion of Raup property to uses othel' than open space, and exchange of pot'tion of Brown property therefor, was submitted. ' Mr. MDh:r moved seconded by Ml'6. Beal ,that the l'eSolutien be adopted.' ROllcall vote. All councilmen present vo'ting aye, motion carried. Resolution No~ 2006 - Authorizing pay_ntof.,bills and claim for period January 10,1972 to Jan~ 2~, 1972, Was s~mitted." ' . , " ~ . MI'. McDonald ques'tioned a $~ ,900.06 expend! ture for' survey eqUipment in the Public Works Department and the Dire:ctor explained that it w~ 'for electronic equipment used in all of the department'. propel'ty surveys and const!'Uation worle. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Bea1that the resolution be, adopted. Rollcall 'vote,' All councilmen present voting aye, motion C81Tied. \, ,""~.J .....' r . Bicycle Safety Report and Film - Manager said Ruth Bascom, chairman of the Bicycle Study Com- mi ttee, asked for time to show a film produced by the Committee; and that it was scheduled for the noon meeting January 26, ~972. He also announced a tour is scheduled by the Budget Committee at 11:00 a.m. on that day. Mrs. Campbell suggested the Budget Committee be invited to stay for the commi ttee meeting to hear the Bicycle Committee's report because of the expected request for about' $214,000.00 for bicycle routes in the City. I 11'["> Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned. < _;1: /7 A/L~C ............... ~ McKinley City Manager . I' I I I I I I _I j '. 1- )..11_ 1''):' ;1 \ ~ ,:;, (...,