Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/11/1972 Meeting Council Chamber Eugene, Oregon December 11, 1972 . Regular meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by '. Council President Fred Mohr in the absence of Mayor Anderson at 7: 30 p.m. on December 11,1972 in the Council Chamber with the following councilmen present: Mrs. Beal, Messrs. McDonald, Teague, Williams, Hershner, Mrs. Campbell, and Mr. Bradshaw. I -Invitation, Dinner Honoring Jess Hill - Invitation to dinner honoring Jess Hill, retiring Lane County Commissioner, was read. It is scheduled for Tuesday, December 12, 1972, 7:00 p.m. at the Eugene Hotel. II - Staff Recommendations, Revenue Sharing - Manager noted staff recommendations for use of monies distributed under revenue sharing were previously mailed to Council members. The first check has been received ($918,233) for the first six months of 1972, which would indicate about $1,836,000 will be received for the calendar year 1972. In accordance with budget laws, a supplemental budget is required if the money is to be used during the current fiscal year. Although the normal budgeting process must be followed the lay members of the Budget Committee are not required in the discussions unless the Council so desires. Manager hoped the budgeting process could begin immediately and decisions made with regard to whether funds cut from this year's budget would be replaced from revenue sharing funds. At the conclusion of other business before the Council, it was ~greed to call the Budget Committee into session (including lay members) on Friday, December 15, at 11:30 a.m. . III - Public Hearings A. Vacation of street 1800 feet north of Royal from 100 feet west of Candlelight Drive to Cand+elight Drive (Lyndon Homes) - Planriing Commission recommended approval on October 9, 1972. The property is being resurveyed. The street, originally dedicated when the subdivision was platted, will no lonter be needed. No money is involved. Council Bill No. 137 - Vacating street 1800 feet north of Royal Avenue from 100 feet west of Candlelight Drive to Candlelight Drive, 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. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was dec~ared passed. and numbered 16667. · . . d . B. Appeal - Northland PUD, Norkenzle and Mln a Approved by the Planning Commission on October 10, 1972. Northland PUD, Norkenzie and Minda - Appeal of Marvin P. Brabham, 1709 Minda Drive, from the Planning Commission decision granting preliminary approval to Northland Planned Unit Development, located at the southeast corner of Norkenzie . and Minda, was referred for joint consideration of the Council and Planning Com- . mission. Objections from residents in the area to the multi-family development 'were based primarily on its effect on surrounding properties. Assistant Planning Director pointed out and explained major elements of the proposed development on a site plan. He said the Commission in its considera- tion was concerned with density of the project and the crowded effect which .might occur in allowing 20 dwellings because of the odd shape of the parcel. The Commission was also concerned with location of the buildings, parking areas, , proximi ty of the swimming pool to the property line, remote location of play , areas from dwelling uni ts. In gi ving preliminary approval the Commission set 1\ : condi tions for the development which it felt would take care of its concerns if ; the condi tions were followed by the developer and observed on the final plan to I ,be presented in the future. Conditions upon which preliminary approval was I ._ granted for 20 dwelling units on about 2.5 acres were (1) landscape buffering I . ,between the south parking lot and single-family. houses to the east; (2) deletion . 'of swimming pool, or its relocation, with open space recreational area provided I - tin its place or in centrally located position with ample screening; (3) provi- sion for children's play area; (4) resolution of Public Works Department concerns ,including (a) additional right-of-way on Norkenzie Road to be dedicated as per ;pxoposed alignment, (b) disposal of portion of tax lot which lies across Norkenzie: J R9~d or an. i1!l!.:ement to f~y futur~ p,!:v~!l~ <:-nd sidew~~!5_ assessment~L_(C;)__~O!l~tI~UC:-,' 3 sf 12/11/72 - 1 tion of storm sewer along the drainage di tch, (d) construction of sidewalk on Norkenzie and Minda wi th standa:r;d dri veway approaches, and (e) provision of two fire hydrants as required by the Eugene Fire Department. The Commission in its ,consideration also felt study of the site planning would be desirable. I . !James Pearson, president of the Planning Commission, said the Commission in .\ approving the concept of the proposed development, was concerned abou t the density, but was reluctant to arbitrarily force a lesser density for this or ,any bther planned unit development because ,there is no criteria in the PUD ordinance for adjusting densities. He said the staff is now in the process of , I updating the ordinance and hopefully the revised version will include density criteria. Councilman Mohr commented that apparently there is not the flexibility in the planned development standards with regard to density except when the Council imposes it, such as in the south hills area. Planned developments seem always to be accomplished at the maximum number of units, and the neighborhood in this instance objects to increasing the densities in the entire area. He suggested there should be flexibility in density regulations as well as in siting or other ;requirements that could be put into effect. Manager said the City Attorney feels 'the Commission does not have the authority to limit density to a lesser figure than set out in the ordinance. The Commission does have the authority to deny !approval of a planned development on the basis of being too dense which would I ~~ave the option to developers to come back wi th a plan wi th less densi ty. ,iiayor Anderson arri ved at the meeting. Councilman Williams said then it would not seem to be appropriate for the Council i . to indicate a development is too dense and to say what they would consider' a reasonable density, but could deny a project because it is too dense and let the developer decide himself what would be an appropriate number of units to bring back for approval. Planning Director concurred. Mr. Bonnett wondered if this would be a policy change, saying in previous planned I .developments density decreases have been suggested and approval postponed until .the applicant and staff have be~n able to arrive at a suitable plan. Manager said there can be an informal understanding if a developer is willing to accept ]informa1 direction and change his plan to a lesser density, but apparently the ~ Commission does not have the right to say it will approve if number of uni ts is niduced to so many per acre. Planning Director, in response to Mr. Pearson's r~ference to reduction in density for a previous PUD approval, noted that that .feduction was offered by the applicant, the Northland developer has made no offer to reduce the density. ~' . . ' .- . - Beal, Assistant Planning Director pointed out In answer to questions from Mrs. location of houses on properties adjacent to the project site and dwelling unit ,locations and parking areas on the si te plan. He said discussion has been held with the developer with regard to access to interior areas adjacent to the site i ,but that access has not yet been worked out. Also, that the adjacent properties I . , ,." are in several ownerships and would probably have to be consolidated were they '. to be developed in multiple housing. ;\1 Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Bradshaw to sustain the appeal and overrule I the Planning Commission's preliminary approval of the Northland PUD on the : basis that the site is not appropriate for the density being pxojected by the , developer. i There was discussion with regard to consideration of this item at the Council i meeting of December 11 wi th consensus that it would appear on the consent calendar . I and that the Planning',Commission' s recommendation would be available for considera-: : tion at that time also. i Mr. Pearson referred to the density scale imposed by the 1990 Plan and said he feels the Commission's action in approving the proposed project was totally , consistent with the 1990 Plan both as to density and as to concentration of : development within the urban service boundary.. Planning Director said so far ,as the PUD ordinance is. concerned, if the Commission or Council feel the plan I for pxoposed development as submitted because of the number of units would create ,pxoblems, it would be appropriate to review and get a substitute plan with the . same density but with a different configuration which may resolve the situation. ~James Redden, architect, said his client acquired the land for development based . on 8 units per acre and that it would not be realistic to ask them to come back with a lesser density. He said proposals for use of the property under normal subdivision and alternate schemes still using the 8 units per acre have been prepared with the idea of explaining the alternatives to residents in the neigh- ; borhood and better acquaint them .with problems of the development. He said those plans would also be available to the Council. I ~ .. _. . - . -,~ ~SS - 2 12/11/7? Mr. Hoffman felt denial of this development on the basis of high density wouid I put the Commission in an awkward position in consideration of all planned unit developments. He suggested too that the PUD ordinance should probably be revised . to include some criteria for lesser densities to establish a basis or guidelines on which the Commission could approve something less than 8 units per acre. Manager said that staff concerns on this project were not so much the densi ty as such. It was the configuration of the property and arrangement of buildings : on the property which would result in something less than desirable living con- I ditions. Comm 11/29/72 Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, Mr. McDonald voting no. Pub Hrng .l!ayor Anderson assumed the Chair from Council President Mohr. , -... . .- -...~...- " '._.'~_".__ _.._,~_. _.. ~. .., ._. ..::"-,,,w..._._ .._: Council on November 27, 1972 referred this item to joint session of Planning Commission and Council (November 29,'1972 - see minutes above). Planning Commission on December 11, 1972 - after reconsideration of its recommendation for approval of preliminary plans and in light of concerns expressed at the hearing on October 10, 1972 and joint session with the Council, especially with regard to density and need for relocation of build- ings and open space - recommended that the Northland PUD be referred back to the Plan- ning Commission for hearing on a revised preliminary plan. Receipt of letter from Kr1.imdieck Brothers, developers, concerning the proposed develop- . ment was noted. Discussion resulted in understanding that the letter could be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration in hearing on a revised plan, should the Council refer the PUD back to the Commission. In that event, the letter would not be taken into consideration by the Council unless another appeal is filed. Councilman Williams questioned whether any testimony should be accepted in light of the Council's action to sustain the appeal at the committee meeting. Further discussion resulted in understanding that if the matter is not re-referred to the Commission, this particular preliminary plan approval would no longer exist. Another development design would have to be filed with the Planning Commission. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mrs . Campbell to re-refer the Northland PUD to the Planning Commisson for consideration of a revised preliminary plan. Motion carried unanimously. C. Rezoning, R-2 to RP PD, southwest corner Coburg Road and Cal Young Road (Citizen's Bank) Planning CommissIDon recommended denial on October 3, 1972. Rezoning Request, R-2 to RP PD, southwest corner Coburg and Ca1 Young, Citizen's I. Bank - Referred by Council to joint meeting with Planning Commission at request : of applicant for opportunity to discuss in work session. e Councilman Williams noted that he could not vote on the issue because of conflict of interest. He wanted however to state his opinion with regard to the requested RP zone. He questioned the concept of buffering heavily used streets with housing, saying a clean, professional type development would seem more satisfactory. Mr. Williams also wondered why zoning this corner Residential Professional would not conform to the residential character proposed in the 1990 Plan since the use of the term "residential" in defining the zone would seem to be indicative of its belonging in a generally residential area - if not, he continued, the term should , be changed. Another concern was the approval of a sizeable number of apartment uni ts in the general Willakenzie area. He compared the number of renter-occupied units completed and in various stages of development, with single-family units , , . f and expressed concern with wha~ is happening to the Wi11akenzie area ~n.terms 0 i apartments. Mr. Williams said;,he felt the requested RP PD zone was ent~re1y ! appropriate, that it would not:~reate the same traffic load as multiple-family , housing, and that it does confdrm to the 1990 Plan for solving the area's prob1ems-: Councilman Mohr added that it should be noted that the first definition for per- missi ve uses in RP zones is banks. ! :,P1.~iEg CommisE!ion ~rn1?~~ Bonn~tt ~ef! the meeting. - -~".-'--~_.- .... ~~- '- .....~ . :In answer to Mrs. Beal's question whether other banks had requested rezoning 'for the corner under discussion, Jim Saul, Planning staff, summarized previous - . applications for rezoning the property beginning in 1954 with a request for commercial zoning to allow a service station. Similar requests were denied juntil 1968 when the petitioner for zoning to allow a service station said I :.alternative use for a bank would be acceptable. Denial of that request was (appealed, the Court upholding the City's decision, saying basically that the I 1 Ci ty had the right to mi;ike its decision denying the zone change. However, the ...- - ---'.._~-'----~---''"'''''-:-..~~-'--~---........_-- _. ".-- ~'''-~'-'.:;::::r:-~--~.'...,....~...::-- -.--~--.-.-...~_.--:--- ~.~;-- '35'"' .- "To;;." 12/11/72 - 3 , City -aid rezone the property R-2, recognizing the problems for single-family , use. In 1971 a request for C-l and RP was filed on this property and one lot to the west, the intent being to locate a bank, professional offi ces, and some apartments on the combined properties. That was denied. Mrs. Bea1 was cOncerned that rezoning this would constitute spot zoning and wondered about the reaction : of previous peti tioners should the Council now act to approve rezoning of the . corner. Mr. Pearson noted that the property is still in the original ownership, previous purchases were subject to appxova1 of zone changes. He said the Commission too was concerned about buffering arterials with mu1tip1e-fanri1y housing, but with about 50 miles of arterial roads wi thin the Ci ty it would not be possible or I feasible because of demand for curb cuts, etc., to have commercial zoning along that length of roadways. He continued that there is available and unused C-2 property directly across the street from this property, to the north and east, on which this bank could be located, and the Commission is more concerned with consistent planning than with artificial appreciation of a certain property. With regard to the Residential Professional zone itself, Mr. Pearson said, it is : not felt to be a practical or viable classification. He said it would seem best ; that it be stricken fxom the ordinance entirely if it creates confusion. Mr. 'Pearson was concerned with reference to renter-occupied dwellings vs sing1e- . family detached dwellings. He said there are no more in the Wil1akenzie area ,than throughout other parts of the City. People are accepting apartment and I rental living asa way of life. The comrndssion, he continued, felt intrusion 'of commercial use on this site would be a "leak in the dike" and put pressure on adjacent properties for similar quasi-commercial development. Too, the comrndssion would be bereft of any opportunity to halt that type of zoning with e the next borderline, since it is extremely difficult to draw a zoning line and . make it stick. Mr. Hoffman added that one of the considerations on property to the north of the intersection was installation of landscaping to buffer residential proper- I ties from commercial uses, and it would not seem pxoper to forget that effort. I . . Craig Robinson, president of Citizen's Bank, said his firm had been working with RP defini tions, and they are disturbed that halfway through the planning stages they find that those definitions do not seem to apply. If the RP zone is con- sidered a commercial zone, then it should be so defined. Mr. Robinson said that at no time in the past has the RP zone been petitioned on this property so it would be inconsistent to say that this is another commercial application. P revi ous ~ requests were to allow location of small markets, service stations, hamburger stands. The previous petition for location of a bank at that site was for a . Citizen's Bank office although they were not named on the petition. He said 'this proposed development would seem the best solution for the corner and the plans were flexible enough to allow his people to work with staff to prepare a plan without traffic or people pxob1ems and which would fit well with residen- tial on one sLge. and commercial on the other. He said there is not commercial , land which can be acquired north of this pxoperty, and that if there had been an , alternate site they would not have spent the time researching this location. : Jim Manley, 726 Royal, Medford, said there is property available directly across e : Coburg Road to the east for a development of this type. Mr. Pearson added that there is additional RP zoned land also. Comm It was understood the item would corne to the Council for public hearing on 11/29/72 December 11, 1972. Pub Hrng Council on November 27, 1972 referred to joint session of Planning Commission and Council (November 29, 1972 - see minutes above). Planning Commission on December 11, 1972 reaffirmed its decision to deny the rezoning to RP PD on the basis that it would be in serious conflict with the 1990 General Plan, the ~llakenzie Plan, and with previous Commission policy and actions with regard to properties in this area. The Commission felt rezoning this property to RP PD would create an undesirable precedent for other properties south of Cal Young Road. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague to uphold the recommenation of the Plan- ning Commission and deny the rezoning request. Councilwoman Campbell expressed concern about the statement that the requested zone is not in line with the 1990 Plan. She asked if there was discussion or considerationbf:the. ~ Residential....Professional zone'Wh.eritJiisare.awas-designatednori':"'c6JIrinercial in the 1990 Plan. Also whether this r~quest is in conflict with the 1990 Plan since it is not for a strictly . commercial use. Manager replied that the Planning Commission';feels it is in conflict with the Plan. However, the Plan is not a zone plan - it is an indication of land uses and densities in general areas, so there is no specific answer as to where the line is drawn. Jim Saul, Planning department, said the Commission's discussion centered around the Plan's indication of residential uses south of Cal Young Road and dissatisfaction with the RP "35' 12/11/72 - 4 zone request because it does permit banks which they consider-a commercial use. Manager added that some Commission members feel the RP zone is not doing what it was intended to do, and that is to provide for transitional uses between commercial and residential. As the RP zone is now written in the ordinance, because of the uses it allows, it is . not considered by the Commission to be a suitable zone for this particular property. Councilman Williams said that although it may be questionable. whether the RP zone will be desirable for future use, the residential/professional designation as a transitional use between residential and commercial would seem appropriate, particularly in this case as a buffer between residential and heavily used thoroughfares. Manager reviewed for Coucilman Teague the uses permitted under the present R-2 zone. Mr. Teague favored use of the property for a bank rather than an~apartment complex, saying it would seem to be more practical and to the best interests of the community. In answer to questions from Councilwoman Beal, Mr. Saul,and Manager reviewed history of requests for rezoning the property under consideration. Reqommendation of the Planning Commission on re-examination of its initial recommendation was read. Councilman Bradshaw commented that the 1990 Plan was not intended to be so inflexible that it could not be changed, and it would seem the requested RP zone is an appropriate transitional use between residential and C-2. If there is a problem with the RP. zone, he continued, then action should be taken to delete it from the zoning ordinance. e Manager noted that the rezoning request is for RP PD. Final reading and approval of the ordinance would be held until Planning Commission approval of the development plans for the property if the rezoning is approved. Vote was taken on the motion to deny rezoning. Motion defeated. Mrs. Beal voting aye; Messrs. Mohr, McDonald, Teague, Mrs. Campbeli, and Mr. Bradshaw voting no; Messrs. Williams and Hershner abstaining. Council Bill No. 145 - Rezoning to RP PD area at the southwest Corner of Coburg Road and Cal Young Road 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. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be held pending approval of developinent-plans by the Planning Commission. Motion carried, Councilmen Mohr, McDonald, Teague, Campbell, and Bradshaw voting aye; Councilwoman Beal voting no; Councilmen Williams and Hershner abstaining. D. Rezoning, RA to RG, east side of Portland between 29th and 29th Place (O'Connor) . Planning Commission recommended reassessment of the request October 30, 1972. Rezoning Request, RA to RG, east side of Portland between 29th and 29th Place '0' C~nnor. - Planning Commissitm in October 1969 recommended rezoning five prop- erhes on the east side of Portland from RA to R3G on condition that a cul-de-sac' be constructed at a point between 29th and 29th Place to accolTl11r:>date turn-around :traffic and cut off through traffic. The Counci 1 accepted that recommendation on ,the condition that owners of abutting properties be assessed for construction of I I the cul-de-sac. The rezoning was never consummated because property owners re- :questing it did not accept the cost of constructing the cu1~de-sac. Since that "time the Ci ty has placed a barricade on Portland Street at Crest Dri vee1iminating some of the. through traffic. . In view of this, the -petitio~~;"is aSkl.h;' th~t 'H. ~ ,the p:opert~e~ b~ re~oned RG ~ithout the condition of cul-de-sac construction. Plann~ng Comrruss~on ~~ recons~deration (October 30, 1972) felt it inappropriate to make a recommendat~on unless referred by the Council since the zone change request was before the Council when last heard. The Commission requested Council reassessment - whether the ~arric~de at Crest Drive has solved the traffic prob- . lem or whether further cons~derat~on by the Planning Commission is desirable. Mr. ~earson said the through traffic problem has been alleviated somewhat by the barr~c:ade on p~rtland at. Crest. The Commission feels if the cul-de-sac arrange- ,rr:en~ ~s not go~ng. to be ~mposed then conceivably the rezoning might be left as . ~t ~s but t~e .or~nance revised to strike the cul-de-sac provision. Staff feels e,,; .~f the prov~s~on ~s to be lifted, then the entire situation should be re-examined. - :Counci~man Williams questioned whether only a portion of the properties along the . east s~de of the stree,t should be rezoned. Planning Director said the COmmission ,sug~ested that the area from Willamette north of 30th over to the Cascade Manor 1 ;be .~ncluded as mUltiple-family zone. The Council accepted that recommendation 'wh~ch was based on changing the traffic pattern to make Portland a residential ,~treet rather than ~ arterial. Since the Council has been working with people ~~~t!J~, are~~~ trafhc problems, the Commission felt it would be desirable to have -.............-".,--.. -- -~.-----' , 358 1?/11/7? _ t:; j their comments before tiildng posJ. ti ve action. He said the staff feels 'if the traffic cannot be controlled to make Portland a residential street, it would be better not to increase the density of the area. Manager added tha.t staff believes the barricade at Crest Drive has not relieved the traffic situation to the extent that there is no longer any problem with creating a greater density on Portland . Street. Assistant Manager said the proposition of a cul-de-sac itself is still ,a volatile subject in the neighborhood. It has been suggested that a cul-de-sac closer to 30th rather than between 29th and 29th Place may solve the problem. The major complaint in the area is weekend traffic traveling south on Wil1amette to 30th and back to 29th and Willamette on Portland. Cars are passing the 30th and Portland intersection at the rate of about 1000 an hour the entire night with attendant noise and pollution. Meetings have been held in the neighborhood but the residents, including those living at Cascade Manor, still do not want .,:the cul-de-sac. Mr. Hoffman asked if improvement of the 29th and Willamette intersection will alleviate the situation. Manager felt it would free movements through that intersection but would not lower the volume. Councilman Williams stated his understanding of staff recommendation as being that rezoning should not seriously be considered, increasing the density, until action,is taken to improve the livability of the area. Planning Director con- curred. Manager added the alternative of denying the rezoning, saying the I petitioner's request was that the condition calling for construction of the cul- ..de-sac be rerroved. Comm ~Mr. Mohr rroved seconded by Mr. Bradshaw to deny the request for deletion of 11/29/72 e ,:cu1-de-sac construction on Portland Street contingent to rezoning of the Pub Hrng ;properties under consideration. Motion carried unanimously. Considered at joint session of Planning Commission and Council ,November 29, 1972 (see minutes above). Manager said Mr. O'Connor requested postponement of this item if there I was to be further hearing. No action was taken and the status of the properties remains I as it now is. E. Ordinance Revisions 1. Disorderly Conduct 2. Indecent Touching 3. Public Indecency 4. Resisting Arrest Proposed Ordinance Revisions -- -Copies of-proPosed revisions to ordinances having to do with disorderly conduct, public indecency, indecent touching, and resisting arrest were previously distributed to Council members. Manager said they were prepared partially in attempting to respond to interest by some members of the Council in behavioral problems in public areas and to bring some sections of the Code into line with the State criminal code where there are ambiguities. Jim Korth, assistant city-, attorney, said in reviewing several complaints arising from problems in the mall and e 'at the fairgrounds, it was felt citywide application of the regulations would be de- ! sirable. These revisions will accomplish that purpose. Police Chief said his de- I partment- is well pleased with the revisions presented in that they provide further I ,clarification of intent of some of the existing ordinances. i Comm 12/6/72 lIt was understood the ordinances would be presented for public hearing at the I Pub Hrng ,December 11 Council meeting. Manager explained that the ordinance revisions were discussed with the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union to whom copies of the revisions were sent. The ACLU has not had the opportunity to review them nor to take a position and requested post- ponement of action until the December 18 Council meeting. The Chair ruled that hearing would be postponed to the December 18, 1972 Council meeting since there was only one person present for the scheduled public hearing and he preferred to await the ACLU response. IV - Items Considered With One Motion Previously discussed at Committee meetings on November 29 (Present: Mayor Anderson; Councilmen Mohr, Beal, McDonald, Williams, and Bradshaw) and December 6, 1972 (Present: ,,-e Mayor Anderson; Councilmen Mohr, Beal, Teague, Williams, Hershner, Campbell, and Bradshaw). Minutes of those meetings appear below printed in italics. A. Vacation of Easement east of Augusta between 20th and 28th (Weaver) - Planning Comm Comndssion recommended October 30, 1972. Public hearing to be called. 11/29/72 Approve B. Trai2er Permit, Wi22amette Graystone, 280 Highway 99 North - Requescedfor Comm temporary office quarters, M&D Interstate, Neil Monaghan. 11/29/72 Mr. Mohr J1loved seconded by Mr. williams to approve. Motion carried unanimously. Approve ~, ~C.9 12/11/72 - 6 C. Petition, Storm se;;e; 'between Sally Way and Marlow Lane fxom Gilham Road to NOrwood Street - 64% - Map of the area was shown and the project described. City cost would be $30,000, assessed cost $10,000. The di tch was moved from its natural location at the request of the developer when Marlow Park Subdivision e was originally platted. The project was previously before the Council but re- jected. Construction now will allow development of a portion of the properties, and those benefiting can be assessed. Public Works Department recommended con- struction, since it' would be less expensive now before the property is developed. Comm Mr. Bradshaw Tfr)ved seconded by Mr. Mohr to accept the petition. Motion carried 11/29/72 ,unanimously. Approve D. Report, Ad Hoc Commi ttee on Suggested Changes in Housing Authori ty Board - The 'Mayor's Conmdttee on Aging requested Council recommendation to Lane County that the number of members of the Lane County Housing Authority Board be changed to , seven (now five), that there be at least one woman on the Board, that the number of consecutive terms be limited, and c;o..~~ic'le~a~ion ff?r,appoin~ment to th: Board I include resource background as well as geographic representation. The Council 'referred the request to an ad hoc commi ttee representing the Council, County Com- ,missioners, Eugene Joint Housing Committee, Lane County Housing Authority Board, and Mayor's Committee on Aging. The Committee after review of the request now ,recommends that the Council ask Lane County Commissioners to consider increasing . the number of Lane County Housing Authority Board members fxom 5 to 7, thereby ~improving resource background while maintaining the needed geographical representa- ti on on the Board. The Committee reported that it felt it would not be appropriate e for the Council to make recommendations to the County wi th regard to indi vidual ,membership of the Board or the number of consecutive terms for a Board member. Comm Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Williams to accept the Committee report. Motion 11/29/72 ~,carried unanimously. Approve -- ~- .... ..- -.--,_. --.-. .".-- -~..._~ E. Urban Renewal Downtown Project - Councilmen Mohr and Williams distributed to Council members copies of a memo in which they asked consideration of questions to be for- warded to the Eugene Renewal Agency for reply. Mr. Mohr corrected the $19 million figure referred to in the first paragraph of the memo to $29 million. He said that figure has now risen to $31 million from an original estimate of $18 million for cost of the project. An explanation was requested of the apparent overrun in com-, p1etion costs. Other questions asked were what policies the Council might adopt I to prevent this apparent overrun, what is the Council's role with respect to policy formulation by the ERA, what will be the effect of the defeat of the auditorium bond issue on the overall downtown project cost, what is the line of 'appeal from ERA decisions, why do citizens now have only appeal to the courts rather than through the Council, and when was this authority granted to the ERA~ ! Mr. Mohr said the Council holds authority of appointment over members of the ERA ,yet it is unique in that it is autonomous in its decisions and policy formulation ,other than approval of any urban renewal plan. He asked if the auditorium project ~is essential to the total project by viture of its being used as a matching-fund . ,component, whether it would have to be replaced by another equivalent project. ,With regard to the decisions and policy formulation, Mr. Mohr wondered why this iboardwou1d be different from any other City board or commission. He asked how the authority of the ERA was delegated and what the original instrument of delega- tion of that authority was. l , ~ ,Mr. Williams wondered in view of the arrrJunt of overrun on the downtown project ;whether there was anything the Council would want to make the Department of 'Housing and Urban Development aware of in the event of similar occurrences in other' cities. , Councilman Teague expressed his interest in having answers to the questions pre- , , sented. Mayor Anderson suggested directing the questions to the Renewal Agency ! 'with the possibility they could be discussed a~ a joint meeting between the Agency; 'and the Council. i , Manager for clarification asked if it was the intent to have a written report prior to the discussion. Consensus was that it would be desirable. Mayor Anderson noted that the Council established the role of the Agency with respect :to policy formulation so that Council records should give answers to that question unless it is desired that the Agency reply. Manager said he and David Hunt, ;,AgenCy dirdctor, would work together in preparing a report. ." Comm Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Williams to forward the questions presented to 12/6/72 the E~9:~ne, R~a~, Ager:c.'l_f..?!._!!!..sko!},se. ,__Mot_L,?l}E!i_r~€!.~_!:!I!~,nimous1y. -"-.-~.~ - .---....\ Approve - ... .. . .- .-- -.~. -----, - - . - ~ ~._-~.... F. jReport, Room Tax Allocation - Copies of the report were previously distributed to lCounci1 members. The report was read. A summary of the current financial status, ;of the Room Tax Fund shows estimated amount available $l49,947.03. The Committee recommends the following allocations: l..-......__ ___._ ---.-,.- -- -- . ~ 3~o 12/11/72 - 7 " ,- Snappy Theater $ 100.00 Lane County Auditorium Association 997.31 Festival of the Arts Committee, U of 0 1,000.00 Volunteer Services Council 2,500.00 -. Eugene Parks and Recreation Department Westmoreland Community Center 2,326.00 Trude Kaufman Community Center 18,000.00 l On questioning from Mr. Teague, Manager said it is his understanding the Council i,action was to reserve for the auditorium those amounts of the Room Tax Fund not \ allocated to other uses during each fiscal year. There was no percentage amount set. Courici1man Hershner asked whether the allocation to Volunteer Services Council would', come under the provisions of the Charter amendment as to uses of these funds. Manager said before the funds are disbursed the amendment will be checked to be sure. Mrs. Campbell said she was sure that organization qualified. However, she was con~ cerned that the allocation was only $2,500 when the Volunteer Services had requested '$5,000. She noted the types of services provided by the organization and urged the Council to consider allocating the full amount requested. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Teague to approve the recommendations as presented I by the Committee. ; Campbell moved seconded by Mrs. Bea1 to amend the motion to allocate $5,000 to : Mrs. e :the Volunteer Services Council. Councilmen williams and Bradshaw were concerned about bypassing the commi ttee' s recom- : mendation and wondered 'whether the suggested increase should be reviewed first by the; , commi ttee. Mrs. Bea1 suggested holding approval of the report until the allocation has been reviewed by the commi ttee and the Vol unteer Servi ces Council. . I I Further discussion resulted in agreement to withdraw the amending motion so that allocation of the funds could be made as recommended. It was understood considera- tion would be given to any request for additional funds from the Volunteer Services COIT{Ill Council. 12/6/72 Vote was taken on the original motion as stated. Motion carried unanimously. Approve G. Agreement, Fire Protection at Airport - Copies of an agreement 'WTfFl-- Lane Rural Fire District No.1 were previously distributed to Council members. The agreement pro- vides for District on-call fire protection service for the airport which will par- , ,tia11y meet requirements of the FAA for response time necessary in order to be certified to serve commercial airlines. New standards established by the FAA appear , to make the present system inadequate. Under the agreement the City will provide free dispatching service to the District in return for their response to calls. It . will be necessary to add two maintenance employes at the airport who will also serve~ e as standby operators of the City's crash equipment. In answer to Mrs. Bea1, Manager explained that the additional personnel at the air- port are not a part of the agreement. provision for these positions is in the p1an- ,ning stage and will be presented to the Council as a part of the revenue sharing Q recommendations in the near future. It is planned that the personnel will be en- gaged in pxoductive work except for emergency requirements of operating the crash equipment. Mrs. Beal asked what effect the new Federal security regulations to guard against ~highjacking at airports will have on the local airport. Manager replied t;hat Bob Shelby, airport manager, and Captain Larion, police department, met with security people in Portland and are attempting to develop recommendations in that regard. Costs as of now will be borne locally. COIllIll Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the agreement. Motion carried 12/6/72 unanimously. Approve H. ,Leased Housing 'unit Size, Lane County Housing Authority - Copies of letter received' from Lane County Housing Authori ty were previously distributed to Council members. i The Authority has an authorized quota of 600 leased housing units but has never completely filled that authorization. Uni ts are now being lost because of the ~-- inability to secure sufficient 3-, 4-, and 5-bedroom units to fit the distribution "- developed by the City. The Authority proposes reducing by 50 the number of units distributed to the 3-, 4-, and 5-bedroom uni t's, and increasing by 50 the number of uni ts di_s_tr~b.3!t:ed, to 1- and 2-bedroo..m ,units ...It i~ J~l t;.~ the, q~ota can_be. f:i:1led if" that shift occurs. Maizager suggestedr'eierring the matter to the Joint Housing 'Committee for recommendation. ..-. ,-- ---.- - ~-.....--. - - ~. 3b\ 12/11/72 - 8 C~uncilman Williams, member of the Joint Housing Committee, said the ,Committee has d~scussed whether t~e Housing Authority might request permission to use allocated funds over fewer un~ ts, but the proposal to shift uni ts has not been discussed. I , I . 'i Mr. ~ohr moved ~econded by Mrs. Bea1 to refer the proposal to the Joint Housing I Comm , COlllllU ttee. Mot~on carried unanimously. 12/6/72 I. Segr~gation ~f A~sessmen:s, Eugene Renewal Agency - Against pxoperty at 11th and Oak. I Approve Deta~ls on f~le ~n the F~nance Department. Comm Mr. l-!ohr moved seconded by Mr. Williams to appxove the segregation. Motion carried 12/6/72 , '!,na!:lImously. __ , ~ -..'---"..r..,............___.__ ___._ ____,.__. Approve - ,=,,"-- ---,,--..,-- -..-.,~-.-..~ J. Budget Commi ttee Appointment - Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to re- Comm appoint Ron Boehi as a member of the Budget Committee for the term ending 12/6/72 December 31, 1975. Motion carried unanimously. Approve I Councilman Williams recommended appointment of Dr. Hugh John$ton as a member of the Budget Committee for the three-year term ending December 31,\1975, replacing Stanley Vance. ' K. Liquor License, Cracker Barrel Tavern, 211 Washington Street - Change of owner- ship for RMBC license requested by Thomas and June Boone (T.J.B. Inc.) . Formerly Clarence and Maxine Dunshee. .' Comm Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval. Motion ,carried 12/6/72 unanimously. Approve - ~ Manager nofed addi~ion of two liquor license applications to the consent calendar. I Spigot Tavern, 28~1 Willamette St- Greater Privilege - RMBA to RMBC Pizan's, 1225 Alder Street - RMBB to RMBA L. Bids, Amazon Bike Trail - Bicycle Committee recommended rejecting bids for concrete construction of bike trail from 15th and Jefferson to 16th and Friendly and rebid for asphalt construction (Public Works Bid Opening - November 7,1972). Comm Mrs. Bea1 moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the recommendation. Motion 12/6/72 carried.unanimously. Approve M. Council Minutes, November 6, 1972 - As circulated Mrs. Beal asked correction of minutes to show her voting"ay~" rather ,thaIl, "no" on referring the matter of rezoning the southwest corner of Coburg Road and Cal Young Road to a joint session of the Planning Commission and Council. Minutes were also corrected Approve . to show Councilman Teague voting "aye" instead of abstaining on the same issue. Councilwoman Campbell asked correction of Decembe~ 6 committee minutes to show county/ city merger effected by tlE legislature in Indianapolis rather than in Minneapolis. (See Item U below.) N. Urban Renewal Discussion - Councilmen Mohr and Williams asked that time be scheduled on commdttee agenda for presentation of a written statement of the kinds: of concerns they have 'on urban renewal.' Mahager wondered if it would be appro- 'priate to invite people from the Eugene Renewal Agency to be present, or notifica- tion of the meeting for informational purposes only. Mr. Mohr and Mr. Williams stated the purpose was to present their thinking for consideration by the C~uncil i Comm I and to gi ve other Council members an opportuni ty for response and to determine 11/29/72 whether they had questions they wished to include for the Renewal Agency to ad- Affirm dress itself to. ~....-.-- '-.._~.---~ ---.- ..-.---......- _..-._~ ---.- .-.--- . -(-.-.. -- . ---'---'.---'-~"'.'~ - ~--"'-'---~- . ",.'" , -- O. 'Bikes on Sidewalks - Mrs.) Bea1 presented a letter she had received from Mrs.Icme Pierron, 1360 Ferry Street, in which it was suggested that sidewalks on one side of the streets be designated for bikes, the other side for pedestrians, that is, Comm perhaps the south and east sides for bikes, the north and west sides for pedes- 12/6/72 ,trians. It was understood the letter would be referred to the Bicycle Committee Affirm for respoIlse to Mrs. Pierron with copy to. Mrs ~ B~al. -+'-" -- - --..., tJ:' Councilwoman Campbell asked for a written r~port on the use ,of sidewalks for bicycle riding, including a report on alteration of cur os to allow access to and from the street level. - Manage~ said the staff is not ready at this point to make a report. The Bicycle Committee has been reviewing such use in light of legalities regarding riding bicycles on sidewalks - the~e is incompatibility with State law, and staff is now working on an ordinance to control bicycle ~iding on both streets and sidewalks. Also, work is in progress on alternative designs for ramps, traffic safety problems, etc. He said the matter is not being ignored, it is a case of not having all information together for making a report. ,I 3"2- 12/11/72 - 9 p.,Labor Relations Advisory Commission - Mrs. Beal asked when the'resolution creat- ing a Labor Relations Advisory Commission, presented by the Lane County Labor Comm Council, would be discussed. Mayor Anderson said he had asked that it be sched- uled soon. Manager said a written memorandum would be mailed to Coun~i1 members 12/6/72 aI?d the matter scheduled probably for, the December 13 committee meeting. Affirm . Q. Resignation, Ralph Cobb, Budget Conimittee - Letter was "received from Mr. Cobb resigning fxom tIe Budget Committee. Manager noted that the terms of Ronald Boehi Comm and Stanley Vance will expire at the end of this year. He said Councilman Hersh- ;ner has nominated Mr. Boehi for reappointment. Councilman Williams said he would 11/29/72 present a nomination at a later date. File . - ,_. <,..,. --.-.,. <,I.~ _,..~ R. ; Appointments, Boards and Coritmissions - Mayor Anderson reminded Council members of Comm :appointments and reappointments to be made soon on various Boards and Commissions. 12/6/72 He asked that suggestions be submitted no later than Wednesday, December 13. File S. Appointments, Natural Resources Advisory Committee - Mayor Anderson asked for sug- gestions for appointments to fill two City vacancies on the Natural Resources Ad- Comm visory Committee. He said he would appreciate having any names to be submitted 12/6/72 as soon as possible because of the work in progress' in keeping the 1990 Plan to date. File T. ,Environmental Impact Study ColnriiiFtee, -:Illghway 126 -- Mrs; . Bea1 -woTulered when ap- I ;pointment of the local environmentalimpa,ct study committee on Highway 126 routing 'would be made. Mayor Anderson said it is still awaiting 'appointment of the State team. Manager said Robert Royer, State Highway Department planning director, . '- ,indicated the State disciplines would be known shortly. As soon as they are known the City will ,be notified, then appointment of the local team can proceed. , Mrs. Beal said it is the thinking of the Planning commission that the local team, -- .."-- being volunteer, should probably be appointed ahead of the State team in order ~to be organized and have materials with which to work. She said this w.ou1d en- I : able them to stay abreast of the State study which will probably be done by pro- I ' fessional people wi th staff help. Mayor Anderson replied that he would still prefer to wait until State disciplines " are named before appointing the local people, then the two groups can work to- gether. He said if the Council feels there is dire urgency, he would have no !objection to submdtting recommendations for a team. However, even though it is a I State project, the City holds control on approval until it is satisfied the en- ,vironmental study has been weighed and discussed. He said he has recei ved severa] :suggestions for appointees and has some names in mind, but before making a public, 'announcement he would rather see what the State is going to do. Mrs. Bea1 suggested asking the Planning commission for some indication of when they feel the committee should be appointed. Manager said he is not aware of any quarrel on the part of the Planning commission with the anticipated procedure. Mr. Royer is aware of the intended working relationships between the State and local groups and doesn't anticipate any problem in developing a method of pro- '. cedure between them which will allow them to work in a co-ordinated fashion. It would appear to be a waste of time were each team to start separately without co- ordination before the people who will actually do the work can get together to I assess the problems and objectives. It was understood he would check with the Planning Commission, however, on their opinion. 'Councilman Mohr said a problem to consider at this point which did not exist at the time of prior discussions about the impact study commdttee is the Charter amendment requiring a vote on any arterial construction. He would be reluctant to see a committee appointed to achieve a goal which is in doubt until it has been voted upon. Mayor Anderson said this might be pointed out to the Planning commission at the time their thinking is sought. Comm !Mrs. Beal agreed but thought if a committee were appointed it would be helpful 12/6/72 File in disseminating information about the project and in gaining approval from I, 1 the voters. U.j?,eporT;'7iLc-ccmgress of Cities - Mrs.caii,pb'el1"reported on 'the Congress of cities she attended in Indianapolis recently. She said the most exciting event was formation of a Women's Caucus. She read a resolution by the Caucus which was presented to and adopted by the convention delegates. She noted a "first" for the convention was the election of a black as first vice president - Thomas . Bradley, Los Angeles councilman. He will be president of the League in 1974. Of importance, she felt, was discussion relating to merger of county and city igovernments, one instance being that accomplished in Minneapolis*by act of the ~'~ 'legislature. She thought there may be consideration of this type merger occurring jin the Portland/Mu1tnomah County area. Other discussions she mentioned were on ComID 'environmental advisory commissions, costs of public programs, percentage of low- 1 12/6/72 !cost housing in relation to total housing construction. A copy of the National / ;Municipal Policy adopted by the League was also noted. ) File ~ * Corrected to read Indianapolis ,,~ ~~~' 12(11/72 - 10 ...... - ~~. , . - V. Neighborhood Meeting, Spencer Butte Jr High - Letter of invi tation was noted from Charles Dallas, president of the Spencer Butte Improvement Association, to a ,neighborhood meeting at which County plans to improve Fox Hollow Road will be dis- cussed. The meeting is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on January 10, 1973 at the Spencer I ., 'Butte Junior High School. The Association feels the improvement will have a signif- \ Comm icant effect upOn planning and development in the South Eugene area and for this 12/6/72 _!e,a~on YL€.Y w.e::~_ _e!lcouraging ,~~t~Tl.~~~e._ 9.!__c.?,!-ncil and ~laJJniI?9 CommissiO!}, membe1.'!?,._ File W. ;Transit System/Downtown Parking - Councilman Hershner previously inquired about the 'effect of free bus rides offered by the Transit System the day after Thanksgiving Comm on parking demands downtown. Manager reported that the busses were overcrowded 12/6/72 :at times, but the Overpark use was still 16% higher than the same day last year. File - X. j Return Codes, Studies - Retiring councilmen were requested to return copies of Codes, Comm studies, and reports to the Manager's office. '12/6/72 I File Y. Human Rights Day - Ruth Carson, chairman of the Committee on International Co- operation, called attention to Human Rights Day, December 10. She said that on that i : day in 1948 a declaration of human rights was adopted by the United Nations, the : basic purpose being to pxovide an agreed upon list of human rights and freedoms, 'including traditional rights and the modern and economic rights. She asked the i ,Council's participation and co-oPeration in bringing it to the public's attention. I , : Bob Edwards, chairman of the Human Rights Commission, said it is hoped next year, in co-operation with the International Committee, to prepare an informational program : for the schools, churches, and other institutions to recognize Human Rights Day. i I f Comm e (Mayor Anderson suggested it would be, a good program for the City to sponsor if a ijoint committee of the Human Rights COnmUssion and International Co-o~ration Com- ]2/6/72 'Rdttee would plan an observance siRdlar to the United Nations Day observance. File Z. 'Council Orientation Session - Mrs. Bea1 asked if there would be an opportunity for I discussion of items on the workshop agenda which were not considered. Mayor Anderson Comm I suggested meeting prior to the conmU ttee meeting on December 20, but because of some i12/6/72 conflicts of dates it was a~re~d a time would be set lat~r. File , - -. --.-.-....-.- ..~. AA. Revenue Sharing - Manager said recommendations on uses of funds from revenue shar- Corrun ing will be mailed to Council members soon. 12/6/72 File. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague to approve, affirm, and' file as noted Items A through AA, including approval of Dr. Johnston's appointment to the Budget Committee, added liquor license applications, and corrections to minutes of November 6, 1972. Rollcall vote. All councilmen ~esent voting aye, motion carried. III - Ordinances Council Bill No. 142 - Construction of storm sewer 550 feet north of Willhi Street from Echo Hollow Road to Belt Line Road was submitted and read the first time by council bill number e.- and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be read the second time by council bill number 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. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16668. Council Bill No. 143 - Adopting plans and specifications for construction of storm sewer 550 feet north of Willhi Street from Echo Hollow Road to Belt Line Road was submitted and read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present request- ing that it be read in full. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be read the second time by council bill number 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. Mrs. Beal moved seconded:'by Mr. Teague that the bill be approved and given final ,passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16669. . Council Bill No. 144 - Calling hearing January 22, 1973 re: Vacation of easement east of - Augusta Street between 20th and 28th (Weaver) 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. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that the bill be read the second time by council bill number 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. 3lai /' /' \\ 12(11/72 -,l-l Mrs. Beal moved seconded by-Mr. Teague' that the hill be approved and, given final passage. Rollcal vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16670. IV-Resolutions -. - Resolution No. 2131 - Transmitting to Planning Commission for hearing January 2, 1973 re: ~-",. Zoning N e~ y Annexed areas. ra.as. s.1ib.rnitted.' ' , -, Mrs. Heal moved seconded by Mr. 'league to adopt the resolution ~ Rollcall vote. All coUncilmen present voting aye:t motion'carried. Resolution No. 2132 ~ Authorizing payment of hills, claims, and progress payments for period Novemher 27 through December 11, 1972 was submitted. ' Councilman Hershner asked about the payment to C. J. Montag & Sons for $38,000. Manager ex- plainedthat City was not satisfied with quality ,of work Montag performed in paving anaddi- tional 700 feet of runway at the Airport several years'ago ahd withheld payment. 'The matter came to <ourt, Montag claiming $107,000 was owed him. After many months of legal negotiations, .~;. the suit was finally settled for $38 ,000 ~ FAA approved the settlement and will participate to some extent in that cost. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote~ Motion carried, I all councilmen present : vot ing aye. Upon' motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adj ourned to Mond~y, ". December 18 , 1972. I ~:eY I Ci ty Manager ~~. c,. 3~S"'