Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/31/1974 Meeting ;. No tape . . It M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBER JANUARY 31, 1974 Special meeting called for consideration of an ordinance which would regulate removal or cut- ting of trees within the City. The meeting was called to order by His Honor Mayor Lester E. Anderson (left early) at 4:00 p.m. on January 31, 1974 in the Council Chamber with the fol- lowing council members present: Messrs. Williams (arrived later), Hershner, McDonald; Mmes. Beal and Campbell, and Messrs. Keller, Murray, and Wood. I - Committee, Selection of Sculptor for International Symposium Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that Mayor Anderson be authorized to appoint a committee to make recommendations for selection of an artist to create a sculpture during the 1974 International Sumposium for permanent location in Eugene. Motion carried unanimously. II - Third Level Commuter Air Service - Airport Commission Policy - Copies of policy state- ment recommended by the Airport Commission were previously distributed to Council members. The statement supports the desirability of third-level air transport service from Eugene to serve passengers traveling to Seattle and Portland and for better choice between Port- land or San Francisco for eastbound connections. Council authorization was requested to present the statement at PUC public hearing scheduled February 11. Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell to authorize the statement as r~quested. Motion carried unanimously. III - Tree Cutting Ordinance~(See'committee minutes January 31,,1974/Coun'cii February 11,1974). Mayor Anderson said he would not be able to remain because of a previousiy scheduled meeting. He stated his support of efforts to keep trees as part of the urban landscape and his feeling that the proposed ordinance was a good frame upon which to build some good legislation to accomplish that purpose. However, he thought there was a responsi- bility to have public input on any proposed legislation. The crisis resulting from cutting operations in the South Hills appeared to be over and any further cutting, he said, could only be construed as defiance of efforts to pass a suitable ordinance. He hoped the Council would provide sufficient time at this meeting to receive public testimony and consider carefully the possibility of referring that testimony along with report from committee meeting (January 30) to the subcommittee on tree cutting for re- consideration with the possibility of revising the ordinance to reflect that input. Mayor Anderson left the meeting. Council Vice President Hershner assumed the Chair. Manager reported on similar legislation in effect in Lake Oswego, the only city in Oregon attempting to legislate with regard to tree removal. He said the the ordinance proposed was based on one from San Mateo, California. With more time, he said, further informa- tion could be gathered with regard to administrative problems, funding, etc. He sug- gested further redrafting at staff level should testimony at this meeting indicate con- siderable amendment. Public hearing was opened. Speaking in favor of the ordinance were: Edna Shirey, 3217 Whitten Drive Ruth Miller, 195 West 35th Place Mattox Purvis, 880 West 38th Avenue Nancy Cole, 225 West 35th Place Charlotte Schillman, 780 Lorane Highway Helen Rockett, 245 West 35th Place Betty Higgins, 300 Frederick Court Hillary Hodges, 150 West 35th Place Robert King, 250 West 37th Avenue Most of those speaking in favor of the ordinance urged adoption at this meeting. They were primarily interested in preservation of trees in the 'South Hills area along with orderly development of the area which would take into account possibility of replantiDg where trees necessarily are removed. Support of recommendations in the South Hills study were expressed, but it was pointed out that time lag before adoption of those recommendations would not appear to offer the immediate protection needed. Many called attention to the logging operation prompting the proposed legislation, saying continued operations of that nature would detract from the livability of the South Hills area. They deplored the clear cutting of the property and doubted that the crisis was past. Mr. Hodges felt a written agreement was necessary to ensure no more cutting, unless it was prohibited by ordinance. Others expressed concern about erosion and flooding of properties at lower elevations should similar cutting continue. Marvin Boyer,' Pleasant Hill, identified himself as the logger of the area for Mr. Braatz. He was in favor of controlled cutting in the City, but called attention to the fact that the trees removed were at the peak of their merchantable value and would start deteriorat- ing if not removed. He suggested any tree removal should be followed by replanting - 37 1/31/74 - 1 two for one - but knew of no way to make logging beautiful. He said the present cutting operation had ceased as agreed, the only activity now going on was removal of down timber. Mr. Boyer mentioned previous logging in the Eugene area for developers who made a point of removing only trees necessary to provide a housing site. He also.called attention to a tree left aboue the 700-foot level in the course of cutting the Braatz property which should be considered dangerous and should be removed. He felt the ordinance if adopted should provide that liability not lie with the property owner in the event of damage from a tree deemed dangersou and which was not permitted to be removed. He expressed his feel- ing that absolute prohibition of tree cutting in the City would affect the economy in view of the logging industry in the area. He suggested employment of a qualified forester knowledgeable in growth of Douglas Fir merchantable timber if a permit system were to be delegated to the parks department authority. Mr. Boyer again cautioned that any tree cutting needs to be followed by replanting as the only means of preventing erosion and flooding and that should be a requirement of any permit system. . Other speaking in opposition to the ordinance were: Faye Stewart, Fox Hollow Road Ed Deardorff, 675 Loran Highway Randy Cuddeback, 1160 Lincoln Street Mike Poe, 1085 Patterson Street, Apt.4 Gale Roberts, Route 4, Box 44 Richard Hansen, 2744 Tomahawk Lane Carl Raynor, 2169 Stone Crest Drive Ann Haynes, 2293 Agate Street John Breeden, 4072 Normandy Way Ray Lindberg, 3110 Emerald Street Vern Gleaves, 2515 Highland Oaks Drive John Barber, 1280 Pearl Street Their objections were primarily directed toward proposed restriction on cutting of any type that would interfere with proper management of larger stands of timber. Mr. Stewart felt provisions of the ordinance should be more specific with regard to dimension of trees and that more notice of intent to. adopt this type of legislation should be given the general public. He thought adoption of the ordinance would have the effect of forcing owners of larger stands of timber to clear cut and burn. . Others felt restrictions to meet needs of the South Hills area should not be applied to the entire City, requiring permits for removal of single trees from individual properties. Mr. Cuddeback presented a petition signed by prop~rty owners protesting inclusion of re- strictions on cutting of individual trees on already developed properties. Council President Williams entered the meeting and assumed the Chair. Mr. Poe felt it unconstitutional to regulate landscaping operations. And Mr. Roberts stated consideration of this ordinance would determine how soon he would clear cut timber on property in his ownership near the City limits. Most of those opposing the legisla- tion believed the emergency situation was over and that there was no need for hasty action. Both foresters and housing developers spoke of the necessity for selective cutting under certain circumstances. Mr. Lindberg anticipated problems with location of houses in subdivision if tree preservation was to become the primary consideration rather than topography of the land. . Mr. Gleaves felt the City should acquire ownership of any park-type land on which trees were to be preserved rather than restricting the rights of every individual in the City to gain the required preservation. Neither did he feel any owner of private property should have development of his property dictated by neighbors or the parks department. He urged further study of the proposal, pointing out legal shortcomings. He said as it was now written there was no limit on the exercise of discretion by the parks director, and there seemed to be some disagreement on direction of the regulations - toward public or private concerns. Intent of specific control desired should be spelled out, he said. Also criteria on which permits would be issued should be written out. He added that appeal provision should be included, giving the Council the final authority, and only after finding that the general welfare of the citizens overrides that of the private prop- erty owner. Mr. Gleaves recited other specific rights of the individual which should be considered - time limit for consideration of cutting applications, appeals, listing of findings supporting any denials. He pointed out reference in the ordinance to Code section which did not exist and said more work was needed on the ordinance to delete that type of wording and to make it legally defensible. He also felt it important to have more specific cost figures for implementation of the permit program before it was adopted, and that a great deal more publicity regarding the proposal should be given to get reaction from the "man on the street" with regard to the anticipated results of the legiSlation. . Mr. Barber expressed concern about taking of property rights of the individual without due compensation to meet the problem of one area of the City. He said it would affect every piece of property in Eugene and hasty action should not be taken under those circumstances. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. 38 1/31/74 - 2 -,\ . Assistant Manager in response to question raised about ownership of the property from which Mr. Braatz was having trees removed said there was no information in that regard. With regard to question whether that cutting would have been prevented had the current ordinance been in effect, Assistant Manager said the ordinance merely would have re- quired that a permit be obtained. Whether it would have prevented what occurred was not known, only that a process would have been followed before issuance of a permit. Councilman Wood suggested that an opportunity be provided for interested persons in the City to examine the ordinance and present their evaluation before it was adopted. Councilman McDonald opposed the provision of the ordinance which would require a permit for cutting of any individual tree in the City. However, he felt something should be done to ensure cessation of cutting in the South Hills, still leaving the opportunity for proper development of properties, in that area. Councilman Hershner said his views were the same as he expressed previously in committee, and he felt Mr. Gleaves' stand valid with regard to indefensibility of the ordinance as now written. Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mr. Keller to refer the ordinance back to the tree preservation subcommittee for consideration of testimony presented at this meeting. e Councilwoman Beal supported referral, hoping an ordinance would be returned at an early date. She regretted the appearance of legislating for an emergency but felt adoption of an ordinance was important to preserve the aesthetic qualities of the city. She thought too the individual property rights should be considered saying she was not sure but that the restrictions should only apply to vacant or undeveloped properties. In answer to questioning by Councilman Murray, it was explained that an ordinance con- taining the emergency clause (which provides that it becomes effective immediately upon passage) must have six affirmative vot~s. Without the emergency clause it could be adopted by majority vote. However, no 'ordinance can be adopted at the same meeting at which it is introduced without unanimous consent of all Council members present. Councilman Murray said he was not convinced there was no crlS1S now in view of recurring cutting in the South Hills but that he would go along with referral. Councilwoman Campbell recounted her efforts in trying to stop the tree cutting in the South Hills at the urging of residents of that area. She said she favored adoption of regulations which would promote preservation of trees in the city, but she had reserva- tions about restrictions on cutting of single trees on individual properties. She noted postponement of adoption was obvious and hoped that postponement would not pro- vide the opportunity for wholesale tree removal in anticipation of pending regulations. .' Councilman Hershner mentioned the agreement made previously that no further cutting would occur on Mr. Braatz,' property. He said the property owner has now made a state- ment to that effect in public meeting, so it was clear no more cutting was intended. He hoped the subcommittee would consider the idea of limiting cutting to a certain number of trees in one ownership rather than having the restrictions apply to every individual tree in the city. And he suggested there might be some merit in licensing people cutting trees for pay to help control cutting of trees on the basis of erroneous advice. Councilwoman Beal suggested inclusion of trees on parking strips in the restrictions. Councilman Williams asked that specific suggestions be submitted in writing to the sub- committee for its consideration when working on redraft of the ordinance. Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried unanimously. Councilman Williams congratulated the Council for its action, saying it would result in more prudent legislation than would have been adopted through hasty action. \, Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned. .,~~ - A. K. Martin Assistant City Manager 3~ . 1/31/74 - 3,