Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/22/1974 Meeting ~'.. .... ,I "\ fa.. ~, \~ r. ~ I' -" -,.:1\ ;.~ I ; r 1 ....ST UTE S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL April 22, 1974 Adjourned meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon - adjourned from the meeting on April 8, 1974 - was called to order by His Honor Mayor Lester E. Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on April 22, 1974, in the Council Chamber with the following council members present: Mr. Williams, Mr. Hershner, Mr. McDonald, Mrs. Beal, Mrs. Campbell, Mr. Keller, Mr. Murray and Mr. Wood. ~ - Public Hearings A. Laurelhill Neighborhood Growth Plan Proposed to the Eugene City Council by the Laurel Hill Citi~ens Association February - March, 1974. Mayor Anderson reported agreement re?'~hed between the Council sUD-:ommittee (Anderson, Williams, Beal) a:J.d L3.\:1'0J.. H::'ll Associatjol1 CTl substance of the Plan. A redraft will be brought baCk 1:0 Council with a. "do pass" recommendation. Manager states a committee had been appointed to work with the Laurel Hill people to address questions raised as to the wording of the proposed plan. After several meetings a resolution has been developed to adopt the plan as reworded. , Mayor Anderson said the committee, consisting of Council members Beal and Williams, representatives of Laurel Hill and himself, met several times. The committee had been charged with making certain changes which would reflect more clearly what the policy of the City would be. In making editorial changes, the committee tried to follow the terminology contained in the Community Goals. Also, the' general terms "neighborhood association" and "residents of the neighborhood" were used, since the Laurel Hill Citizens Association could some day be replace~ by another group. Thirdly, the introduction was omitted, since it was a letter of transmittal from the Blanning Commission and has no place in the permanent document. Fourthly, the word "acknowledgment" was substituted for "recognition" to connote receipt of the total plan, and the policies were assembled eeparat.e;Ly for formal adopt ion by the council. ..) The only substantive changes were in I.a., where provision for controlled income and rent housing was made" on the advice of the city attorney; in Lb., where approval of apartment complexes was made contingent upon feasibility of providing services; the same change was made in 1.3. On Page 3 (of the policy document) under 11.2., the IDrds, "except as necessary to serve the valley residents' were added to the prohibition against arterials" and in II. 3. " access to the valley was allowed as necessary for serving the valley, in order not to deny access where needed for desireable development. In V., p. 4, wording was changed to make more clear the responsibility of the' city ',:to keep the neighborhood informed of proposals involving the valley, and to make clear the funding limitations on city assistance. . .~~ ~ Lastly, the words "Growth" and "Refinement" were dropped from the title in the belief that a plan is necessary to a community irrespective of growth or the existence of a larger plan. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Manager expressed appreciation to the Laurel Hill citizens, the committee and Mrs. Rutter. It was pointed out that the responsibilities of the neighborhood organizations are spelled out quite clearly in the neighborhood organization charter. They are boards formulated to reflect the attitudes and interests of people in a particular area and to work ,with the council and give elected officials a closer view. From a staff standpoint, there has been concern that spokesmen from neighborhood organizations be selected by an established screening process and that they continue to maintain validity as spokesmen. At the present time the role of a neighborhood organization is advisory, but the city has indicated an obligation to submit to neighborhood spokesmen those kinds of actions which are coming before the Council and Planning Commission, so there will be an opportunity for the organization to react to those proposals. A responsibility exists to give groups a chance to assist in the decision-making process, but the final decisions of course lie with the Planning Commiss! on and Council. ;,.,.. 4/22/74 - 1 , _ .i'..;::....,.. 1\ a...~l: . dc,' _ _""'~ - - -- -.....---. .------~- - - '. - ---~... --- _.-.- -......--~--- f,., -A-question was raised reg~g possible pressure which. could he exerted by 1~\neighborhOOd groups. Mr. Williams r~sponded that precise conclusions need to be : ,eached defining the relationship of a neighborhood organization to its own members, , 0 others in the area who are not members, to the community as a whole and to the ~'city staff. The Community Goals Conference will deal with defining roles so as to resolve any future possible conflicts. He does not see anything in the Laurel Hill Plan that improperly infringes on the Councilor the City government. .. Resolution No. 2263 - Adopting Laurel Hill Neighborhood Growth Plan. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. B. Zone Change west of Coburg Road north of Country Club Road - from RA to C-2 to C-2 SR - (Zellner 1 - CA 74..:..5) 'Tax Lots 2200 and 2300 Planning Commission - recommended approval March ..12, ..1974. - Staff notes, Planning Commission minutes and Planning Commission findings in making recommendation were previously distributed to Council members and by reference thereto made a part of this record. A hearing had been called for April 8, but the proponents were unable to come so the Council continued the hearing to April 22. -rl I No Council member present declared the intent to abstain from voting on the issue. Public hearing was opened. Jim Longwood, 725 Country Club Road, expressed concern with an amendment in the Planning Commission motion which made granting of the zone change subject to 'the applicant's entering into a zipper contract regarding the access on Coburg Road. The contract would be similar in nature to the contract entered into by the City and Rhombus Corporation for the Parkway-Willamette Development. The zipper contract pro- vision would allow the city recourse should access become hazardous beyond the stages of Site Review approval. .'Vi. .~- ~; Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Jim Saul, Planning, pointed out that the decision in this instance was based on the fact that there was a similarity between this situation and the Parkway-Willamette Development. It would be a matter of Council judgment whether to accept the Planning Commission recommendation as regards the contract with Zellner. Manager said that the ordinance provides for site review procedures to cover the following concerns: Efficient, workable and safe interrelationships among buildings, parking, circulation, open space and landscaped areas as well as related activities and uses; structures designed, sized and shaped in scale and harmony with intended uses and resulting in a pleasant environment for working or shopping; safe and efficient ingress, egress and on-site traffic circulation for pedestrian and bicycle traffic, as well as for automobile traffic. There is no provision in the ordinance for revocation of right or ingress and egress. .1 Mr. Williams expressed discomfort with a revocable right of ingress and egress on the site. Council Bill No. 505 - Rezoning to C-2SR area west of Coburg Road north of Country Club Road (Zellner)(Z 74-5) was read by council bill number and title' only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the findings of fact in the matter of rezoning to C-2SR area west of Coburg Road north of Country Club Road (Zellner)(Z 74-5) as set forth in Planning Commission minutes dated March 12, 1974, and on file in the City Recorder's Office, be adopted by reference thereto; that the council bil~ 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 blll was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17031 '. C. Vacation of Easement located near the intersection of Laurelhurst & Primrose Planning connnission recommended approval February 11, 1974. The property has been ."" subdivided and the existing easement is recommended for vacation since it no longer applies to the way the area has been parceled out. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. 4/22/74 - 2 ~ \\3 Council Bill No. 506 ~ Vacating ease~ent located near the intersection of Laurelhurst and Primrose was read by council bill n~er and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. II . .-- .- ~ ..~-. "F i'~)-.i,~i~' moved .s eC9hdea:-by.'"' .:~ .:fl~r.~shDec-r.-~t1iat the.. b ~11 :.be read, ! the s e.cond..t ime - - - -by 1;_o~I"!c.i,l:.bill', n~erOnly ,--'wit&'unaniin~u:s'] 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. Williams moved se.conded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17032. .-. o. Street Vacation located on University Street between East 13th Avenue and East 18th Avenue, I East1:3th Avenue between University Street and Agate Street, and East 15th Avenue between Uni vers i ty Street and" Agate Street Planning Commission recommended approval February 11,1974. Staff has initiated going ahead based on the understanding that the University would assume ~osts bf street maintenance, street cleaning, and operation of street lights. Manager received a phone call rrom chairman of parking committee of the South University group whi indicated that. the people there were concerned about. the potential for.the University closing Uni versi ty Street in front of McArthur Court. This would force more day-time parking out into the neighborhood, and they feel it would be at an unacceptable level. Mr. Don South representing the group could not be present and asked that the hearing could be continu~d to allow the neighborhood group to present its viewpoints. If the Council wishes to honor that request, it would be appropriate to have public testimony and then continue the hearing or proceed with whatever action is desired. The public hearing was opened with no testimony presented. In previous meetings with the University on the parking problem, it was agreed that the University would have to reduce enough of the vehicles coming to the campus before staff asks people in the area not to park in their own neighborhood. The 'University is working on the situation. It was felt that possible it would be wise to postpone it for a short period of time. Mr. Williams supported taking any action which would pressure the Univeris~y in terms of addressing the parking problem. Council Bill No. 507 Street vacation located on University Street between East 13th and 18th Avenues, East 13th Avenue between University c.nd Agate Streets ~ and East 15th Avenue between University and Agate Streets, w_Lx;.. y'ead by council bill number and title only, t-fiere being no councilman present H:'<;,r y'equesting that it be read in full. - Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, wi.i'.fdr:c'.'q:p:anj::iri6u8;:-~~:nsent of the Council, and that enactment be consj.dered at this time.' Moti'on' de.featea'~ lacking unanimouS consent and the council bill ~Tas'held over ,foP~-~-i~c;>~f~,~eadiY.~J: .. -. -:;':""-' -~;-.- "--"" --,-'C'._. Informal Bid ~: . , Name Dr Bidder and Project Contract Cost Cost'to 'Abutting I'rop.' ~ Parking Lot So'~theast' Corner 6th Avenue and Hillemette Street (1030) Cost to City ~ . .' I Downtown Development District. 1. Benge 'Paving, Inc...... .,...........,.,....... .$4,983.32.....................,.... .0.. .:.. ~.. I......... ."......,.... .$4.983.32 2. Wild ish Construction Company..................$5.562.00 . 3. Shur-Wey Contractors. Inc.....................$5.675.60 4. Eugene Sand & Gravel. Inc.....................$7.226.60 , . ' COMPLETION DATE: May 10. 1974 . I ------;~:-~~~;-~-:-;::-::-:~~n~-~~-;-:~-~:~-:~:~~s:--~~::~-_:;-~~:-~~::~-~-~~-~-~~~~:~~~:-~~~~~~---------1 (1030) . The cost would be borne by the J?DB. Recommended award to Benge Paving, Inc., low bidder, for a cost of $4,983.32. :Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. . Mr. Willi~~~ moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to award contract to low bidder. if: r22:~all 'vote 'was' JaJ,<:en,,:withall Council members voting aye. j! - Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items if requested. Previously discussed incomrnittee on April 10 (Present: Mayor Anderson; Council members YTilliams, Hershner, Beal, Campbell, Keller, and Murray) and on April 17, 1974 (Present: Council members Hershner, Beal, Campbell, Keller, Wood and Murray). Minutes of those _~--2':.E:!eting~E.J2.~arE~}ow prin!e_~__in i-_t~~~~ .:__ __. ______ _ _____ _____ ~ 4/22/74 - 3 u+ !A. Request for Cost.of Studt}, Cap,i,tal Costs of Growth - Councilwoman fr,Cal ~fcrred \ to memo prev,ious"ly distLUJUted requestjn,! the Council to direct staff to bring \ a report on cost of a study on capital costs of growth. She said the request was \ not that staff make the study, but that it only report the cost of such a study. She noted the higher rate of growth for Eugene compared to that of other areas lof the State. She said the Council subcommittee appointed to make recommendations! i on change in method of alley and stree~ assessments (Beal, Hershner, Bradshaw) felt a report on capital costs of growth ~ould be of invaluable assistance-in planning as well as a saving of tax monies. . Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Murray to request staff to report to the Council what such a study would entail and what the cost would be. :Councilman Williams referred to the current updating of community goals and one lof the major questions in that process - growth, its costs, and direction the ,city should pursue. He had no objection to_~taff's considering the cost of I " ; such a study, but he was not sur~eoothf'ltJ:he cost could be di2termined until work ion eommuni ty goals was finished. He suggested pOstponement'-of the request. In answer to Councilman Murray., Mr. Williams said material ctea'Jillg _wiTh queStions , of cost of g:rowth would be distributed to the Community GOeils Commi t;tee wi thin ' ::-'~ the next week. First discussion was scheduled for May 1 or 8 with refinement of goals, if any, finished by June 5 for presentation t~othe Council. -~. --~~ ~ouncilm~n Murray t~OUgh~report of this nature would ~e helpful ~r~liminary , ~nformat~on, referrLng-to a present goals statement call~ng-tQr_a sLmLlar stud~. H~ said~_~~+d nave concern ab~ut proceed~ng with the study itselzat this ,t~e'~Dut could see no problem wLth requestLng the cost of a study. Councilman Hershner expre~tieq_[1o -6bjeCt1:ofit-'8 the-study but saidh;-;;;;-;;F;t~-t---- 1 should have further subcommittee analysis before asking s~aff to become involve~ in what seemed an illusive sort of subject. As a member of the subcommittee, he said, he felt the question of analyzing costs of growth was beyond the scope of the subcommi tEee.' s~h~rge ap4_th~ t he had !!!i:-sgi vings about how to go about compiling that type of information. ~-~~ ~- .-=-----_~-, , e ~CJ2!Lncilwoman Camp15el:-rwasihfavor of the motion. joverdue'and if costs were not computed now during !would have to be postponed for anoth~~_~~a~ ~~~ She felt the study was long budget-sesE?ions considera tion l Ma yo r :!,/ould ; there -~~~, ---- ~~ Anderson noted the complexity of the issue and the many factors which enter into any study.pE growth costs. He suggested postponement until was a !JlecH----delI1li-rron of communi ty goals and more specific objectives. iCouncilwoman Beal said she was asking only for an assessment ot capital expendi- ttures_needesLto meet current projected pQpulatiQIL.g}'owth,}n terms' 'Of 1974 dollars. :Shc!'/fel t a report of that nature wouLd 'save tax monies and would be sImilar to .- --- . the type of report used bYuJ'big~-15fisiness" on a regular basis. She suggested the 'reuqes t WOuld amorij[r~t6--;;sking a qualified consul tant the capi tal expendi tures necessary to preserve presi2pt-:level, seryiC;'?$, in terms of present-day dollars. ---. - __~_',--.c? -- ----: :Manager suggested that subcommittee discussion of various alternatives would' !help staff ill~J3rin~ing-'--back-ii!JePOEt;on cost ()f a study in view of the lack i of consensus on tEe desired staff analysis-:~He noted the mimber of capi ta.1 (impr~ment plans which had been prepared over the years based on certain ,in- iformation at a given time but not speaking to growth costs as such w,hich would appear to involve a great deal more operating service cost. He thought more !discussion by subcommittee as to kind of information needed by the Council and \public in considering what growth will do would help in bringing back a more I:::~i::::l r:::::~thet what !'as1;~i::~as:::~::: ~:"~h :~tal=~;~ : to preserve the present l/evelo of services in the face of antic,ipated growth. :She felt it would be valuable in assessing the cost, for instance, of annexa- 'tions or in decisions on development of one area before another. She said she , ......--,>---- . . . ,didn't know and was not suggesting whether to consid~~ capital .outlay on an \ --," . --- ! overall b~or area-by-area or which would~~~/mijre useful, but would like to haVe-s'taff consider that. I I :Mayor Anderson called attention to the time and wondered if discussion could be' 'postponed to next week's committee agenda in order to consider regular agenda ,items at this time. Mrs. Beal expressed concern about postponemen~ in view of 'b;dget meetings now in process. She suggested that cost of such a study would be a good use of revenue sharing funds if Council decided to go ahead with it. e: -~ 4/22/74 - 4 J , \'5 . .' -- . ~\ ,....,..-. COil' ampbe11 suggested postponement for a week would give the oppor- tU.l1.itpt or Planning Commission corrunent, noting several Corrunission members 'pn:sent, since the study would relate to the kinds of decisions faced by that i body. . ; Councilman Keller favored postponement to give an opportunity for incorporation jof d~ta from other studies now. in progress into the requested report. Mrs.Bea1 replied that waiting for completion of other studies would mean indefinite . postponement. She thougoc the study should be 'prepared now and updated as 'other information became available. ,- i- , Vote was taken on the motion to ask staff for analysis of cost of study on growth costs. Motion defeated, Council members Bea1, Campbell, and Murray voting aye; Council members,Wi11iams, Hershner, Keller, and Mayor Anderson vO,tine]"" no; .___------- Comm 4/1()~14 . Approve I :Mayor Anderson suggested that the matter be brought back for discussion, and . Councilman Hershner explained that his "no" vote was with the understanding ithe issue would be brought back as a regular item on a future agenda. Counci1- ,man Williams said he would support the motion once the resuLts of the corrununity goals update was known. In answer to Mrs. Bea1's suggestion that the budget ,would be prepared by that time, Mr. Williams cited other instances of funding ;studies during a budget year. . : :It was understood the item ipre~empted by other topics; would be on the April 24 commi ttee agenda unless. Manager noted the Community Schools report held .over for a couple of weeks on which the School District needed Council feed- 'back soon. Councilman Murray hoped discussion on the School report would take ;p1ace soon, noting need for d!~c~~sion or that in budget sessions a1so~ B. Ambu;lance Rate Increase Request - Copies of present and proposed ambulance rates werE' previously distributed to Council members. The proposea ra'tes were recommended' by a joint Eugene-Springfield commi ttee charged wi th reviewing request from Eugene/ ' Springfield Ambulance Services, Inc., for change in the rate structure. The Spiing-: field City Council adopted the recommendations as presented. Memo from Finance \ 'Department was read explaining the request for rate increase and subsequent audit of the Ambulance Services financial records, and calling attention to the request that adjustment of charges 'for all supplies be made upon written notification to the City finance office. Manager pointed out specific changes in the rates pro~ :posed by the joint committee, noted investigation had covered current rates in :othe,y areas, and prices for supplies had been compared to those purchased from sl.!-rg,ica1 supply companies. Letter from Ruth Edwards, Springfield councilwoman i and Jne0ber of the joint committee, was read supporting the rate increase and sug- 'gest.ing a review by the LCOG Comprehensive Heal th Planning Corruni ttef;'!, to achieve 1 .SOme__form,..of Lane County subsidy to relieve Eugene and SprinqFie1dvcitizf;.ns, of some 'Of tl:teburden of "lost reve1?ue" costs to the Ambulance' Services. Also noted', ' 'was a. letter from members of Triangle Lake Emergency Action Services supporting the I'a te increase. Councilman Williams questioned the request that future adjustment ,in charges for supplies be made upon "written notification to the foinance department." He wondered about the basis for those charges. Sherm F10gstad, .finance director, explained that the ~ording in the resolution which would adopt the changes provided that adjustments would be made to current prices upon "wri tten notification to and approval of the city finance officer." He explained that any charges to be adjusted would have to be comparable to then current prices on medical supplies at hospitals and clinics. i~ the area. ' He said the cost of supplies was higher to the ambulance services than to hospitals because of purchases in smaller quantities; larger purchases \ were not practicable because of fairly rapid deterioration. Councilwoman Campbell asked for an estimate of possible reduction in charges if a County subsidy was achieved. Bill Leonard, president of the Ambulance Services, explained that because of varying situations he didn't want to be "locked in" on a 'figure but would estimate possibly a 10 to 15% reduction if the County did have money available. :Councilman M!irray wondered whether the start-up fee should reflect the type of ambulance used in view of the difference in cost and operation between the in- tensive care unit and the regular unit. Mr. Leonard said probably in the future the r.;ttes could be structured from that approach but there was not enough operating exper.ience with the, intensive care unit to' warrant it now. He said that.patients picked up by the van were not really subsi'dizing those picked up by the intensive '. --.----,.-- --. .. -----. ..' . ". ,,--,. - --. --. . . .. .. ,.-.. ----- ---,"..-... , 4/22/74 - 5 Ufo . , - - --~~-- .. ... ..'- - ~-~~~._- 'care unit because the basic rate and mileage--werethe saine~- cost of supplies a.nd l 1care in the newer unit accounted for the higher cost. Another ;epresentative of .' . the Ambulance Services anticipated all ambulance units in the future would be ! equipped as the intensive care unit to meet any type of emergency including dis- 1 aster services. . 1 - ,Councilman Keller asked why in the replacement of equipment the charge was listed ias "current retail prices." Mr. Leonard explained that in event of damage by :patients to any equipment the cost of replacement would be charged to the person ,causing the damage. In answer to Councilman Murray, Mr. Leonard cited instances iof use of the intensive care unit rather than the van in answering calls - heart 'Iiattacks vs broken legs. Manager suggested change in wording of "current retail . prices" to more clearly define the intent of the replacement charges. I j Mrs. Beal moved seco.nded by Mr./Williams to approve the-rate increase as proposed. -........--.......-. y- i iCouncilman Murray expressed hesitation about approval of the nEi!J!L-ratestructure because of the lack of ' differentiation between the intensive care unit and van and hoped other -Council members would ~give that some thought. He said he would vote against approval for that one reason. Manager suggested that Mr. Leonard before the April 8 Council meeting could further explore the concern expressed by, ,Mr. Murray. Council agreed to placing the matter on the consent calendar wit'h ;segregation possible if further discussion was desired. · Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, all council- ____ men present voting aye, except Mr. Murray voting no. -Comm 4/:1.0/74 Approve . C ,Building Code Enforcement Program - Manager said the State of Oregon has established . :a state building code and pre-empted that field from the cities and the counties. iThe statutes provide that the cities may continue to enforce building codes at the :local level. If they decide not to do so, it then becomes the responsibility of !the county. If the county opts out, it 'then falls under the state's jurisdiction. (The opinion was voiced that the City would prefer to continue operating its own :Building Division to maintain a locally operated service and thereby be more iresponsive to the peeds of the community. The statute requires that, if the city . is to continue the operation, it is necessary to inform the state by council action. Mr. Wood moved seconded by Mr. Murray that the State be advised of the City of Eugene's intention to maintain its own Building Department. Motion carried, all council members present voting aye. , COTIUTl 4/~7/74 Approve '-',' ," . - . .> D. communify--SchoolprogramPwlth District 4':'J - Cbpies-ofPthe coinmunity School"P:fograrri--'-- report were previously distributed to council members. Recreation Superintendent Dave Pompel gave a presentation on the, report. He stated that the initial Community School Committee was made up over a year ago and chaired by Judge Edwin Allen~ A.second . committee was subsequently appointed, and they have worked on various aspects of the ~ program and have put together a report which is viewed as a plan in progress. out of ,that came a. recommendation that a Community School Advisory Council be established, with whom the school principal would work closely to carry forward the goals of the program. The princjpal would also supervise the work of the Community School Coordinator. The City of Eugene's access to the administrat~on of the program would be through the formulation of a Community School Coordinating Committee. This committee would have repre~entatives from the City, the school district and the local community schools. The schools included in the 74-75 proposed allocations are Laurel Hill, Whiteaker, Lincoln, Ida Patterson, with Coburg being funde4~y District 4-J only. It was pointed out that -th~-City Council needs to take action on whether to accept the 'report and continue the p;'ogram. If approved, it w-;'rila-then be-necessary to set up an administrative agreement between the school district and the city, appoint a community schOQl_~oordinati~~ cpmmittee and city representative to that committee, and determine the whole area of staffing-and what the city's input would be, including ,budget, schools to be included, designation of-progra@,and_provision for yearly review. ------ -;' , ,Mrs. Campbell questioned the role of the Mott Foundation. Mr. Pompel answered that :they have been instrumental in contributing money and resources and various other 'training expenses. .. Mr. Wood spoke positively about the program and particularly the ability of Committee ,'member Larry Horyna in these kinds of endeavors. I 'In answer to a question from Mr. Murray, Mr. Pompel answered that the Bethel School (District is not affected by this agreement, that there would be continual communication :between them and the School District 4-J Program, however. 4/22/74 - 6 l'1 J 'e . -- . ... ~~ ~'-~~ Discussion was also held as to the County's involvement, should a school be located :outside the city. The county at this point has expressed a. reluctance to become involved ;as they would not have available funds; also, their responsibility extends to the .entire county, not just the area around Eugene. Discussion also was held on the fact that it would be useful to define roles when a community school and neighborhood iorganization are operating side by side. I Mr. Keller asked about potential growth in the next two years. Mr. Pompel asserted .that the City's share for 74-75 is esti~ated at $45,000 and that, if the program is successf~l, he sees .it easily doubling or tripling in the next two tb three years. He :also stated the schools' cooperation with the city and use of the facilities has been :'excellent. He believes a key factor is not simply getting into the facili ties but I.establishing better usage wi th less red tape; there should be more' invoivement of the community and an opportunity for the community to voice its desires. Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by' Mr. Murray to direct the staff to prepare a joint resolution between the City and the school district. .It was pointed out that the City'smo~etary share is included in the proposed city i '. fUdget and that the city's contribution would be subject to budgetary approval. \ I ,) Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously, all council members present voting aye. Comm I 4/J.7/74 ! Approye . E~ Assessment Policies - Copies of a proposed resolution were previously distributed to Council. Assistant City Manager explained that the thrust of the proposed change was basically to provide relief to property owners from the rising cost of assessments. , The existing policies would not be affected as regards commercial streets or storm .\ sew~rs. The policy would be changed only on streets adjacent to existing single-family residential developments. \ The resolution provides that the City shall pay the costs of street construction in ,excess of that required for a standard street, which is: 1. Residential street, 28 : feet wide, abutting existing single family dwellings, duplexes or vacant properties lin R-l, R-A or AG districts; 2. Residential street, 36 feet wide, abutting lots in.a new or undeveloped residential subdivision, new residential development or multiple. family district; 3. Commercial or industrial street, 44 feet wide, abutting property in a commercial or industrial district. Some changes Were recommended in the proposed ordinance, and reference was made to a section of the proposed ordinance outlining conditions under which collection of ,assessments may be deferred: Council may defer collection representing cost in excess of that for a 28-foot street if all the following conditions exist: (a) underdeveloped . property, (b) existing use requires no more than a 28-foot street, (c) property is in !R-l, R-A, or AG district. I Staff wishes council to consider including in the. proposed new policy some streets which pave been constructed and are ready for assessment. For some years, there have Inot been major improvements to roads in the classifications referred to in the proposed \ordinance. However, this past summer several have been constructed, including Echo jH01low, Norkenzie, Bailey Hill, West Amazon Drive, Oakway Road, Oak Patch Rpad and lNorth Polk. The cost to include these roads would be $103,000. This loss should be able to be supplanted because of some joint projects with the County. IMrs. Bea1 stated that, in arriving at a decision for the City to assume part of the costs in residential areas, the philosophy was that there was a benefi.t to the general public when the street became a collector or arterial street. Therefore, this benefit Ito the general public should be absorbed by the City rather than by the resident. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to schedule the resolution for Coun~il consideration and that it apply to projects now being completed and ready for assessment. Motion carried, all council members present voting aye. Comrn 4/17/74 Approve Abatement - 2420 University Street Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Keller to schedule a hearing on the abatement. 'Motion carried, all council members present voting aye. . Comri:J U,/17174 Appr0ve ''----.. .-.-. ..'--~ ------~P-....~.. \\~ 4/22/74 - 7 G. Petition - Sanitary Sewers for Lots, 5-10, Point Thomas Addition _ 79% -~-.-'---- -~_._------ IH. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. M~rray to accept the Petition. Motion carried, all members present voting aye. Comm: 4/17/7111 Approve' e' Referral to Room Tax Allocation Committee - Request of Triple-H Ranch School _ Manager would ten~ to feel it is not eligible for room tax allocation funds. However, the Room Tax Committee would know more about how the money should be used. It should be referred back with the attorney's opinion. Mrs. Beal'moved seconded by Mr. Keller to refer it back to the Room Tax Committee with the attorney's opinion. yotion carried, all Council members present voting aye. .CQmm. 4/17/74 . Approve. I. Letter from Planning Commission re: Fountain in Willamette River Proposed by Valley River Inn - The letter from the Planning Commission was distributed with the agendas. It was referred only as an item of interest unless Council wished to endorse the opinion. of the City Planning Commission, which was to oppose the installation of a fountain in the river by the Valley River Inn. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell to support the op~n~on of the Commission._/o19-~io!l carried, all members present voting aye. Comm: Planning : 4/:17/74 : .. .n ____~____.__c. - ~ Approve! J. Assessment Panel Report - Hearings of 4/15/74 Mr. Wood moved seconded by Mr. Keller to place panel on the consent calendar for the April 22 all members present voting aye. Present: Councilwomen Campbell mid Beal; MaUrice and Bert Teitzel~ City Engineer. the minutes of the assessment Comm . Council meeting. Motion carri~~7/74 Approve . - - Mitchell~ Assistant Finance Officer; _. I I 'Assessment ordinances to be considered by Council on April 22~ 1974: 1. C.B. 501 - Levying as~essments for paving Ridgeway Drive from Goodpasture Island Road to 1000 eet North in Knutson Bros. Planned Unit Develo ment (72-44) No written protests on file. No objections presented at hearing. Recommendation: Levy assessments as proposed. 2. C.B. 502 - Levying assessments for sto~ sewer within Replat of Shasta Gardens (72-66) No written protests on file. No objections presented at hearing. Recommendation: Levy assessments as proposed. 3. C.B. 503 - Levying assessments for sto~ sewer between Sally Way and Marlow Lane rom Norwood Street to Gilham Road (73-50) No written protests on file. - Since three property owners were present for the hearing on this assessment ordinance~ the panel asked the city engineer to provide the background of the project befo~e any testimony was heard. He eXplained that the ditch was relocated to, the N. boundary of the Marlow Lane properties at the time of platting in 1966 to accommodate the development of the lots. A petition to install a sto~ sewer in this ditch was received in 1971 and the project was not constructed due to high bid costs. A new petition was received from a portion of the property owners in 1972 to have a stor.m sewer pipe installed in order to fill in the ditch. A poll of property owners was taken prior to award of the contract stating the estimated cost for each lot. A favorable response from owners of 64% of the affected property was received. Bids were awarded on this basis with one written protest from Mrs. Theodora SaZmon. The . city engineer explained that the entire subdivision should have shared in the cost of the stor.m seWer at the time of platting; however~ at that time there was no stor.m sewer system existing in the area and the subdivider was not required to install the stor.m sewer. Since only haZf of the Zots in the subdivision are sharing in the cost of the sto~ s~wer at this time~ the City is assuming the portion of costs that would nor.mally have been borne by the other half of the ... properties. The City's total participation in the project is 75%. ~ Mr. Delmont Dougherty of 2181 Marlow Lane objected to paying such a high pr~ce for fiZling in the ditch and stated he felt the property owners on Sally Way were benefited as much as Marlow Lane properties and should share in the assessment. He stated that with the pipe being located on Sally Way~ their properties are benefited,~ydrainage into the stor.m sewer and should be assessed a portion of the cost.'-~1;'!l Engineer explained that the 12ipe ZJas located on SaZZu WaZ/ because i l~ 4/22/74 - 8 ~ the contractor was'unable to construct it in the ditch area. He explained that the project was undertaken at the request of property owners_9n Marlow Lane and since the ditch was entirely on their property it was their responsibility and not that of properties on Sally Way. II Mrs. Theodora Salmon of 2179 Marlow Lane objected to paying $1200 for filling in the ditch. She stated she could have hired someone .to fill in her part of the ditch for much less. City Engineer explained state law prohibits blocking of natural drainageways~ therefore~ the pipe had to.be .installed before the ditch could be filled. Mrs. Salmon asked how the 64% favorable response was calculated and how were owners counted who did not answer the poll. City Engineer stated that there was' a response from all property.owners and that the 64% was arrived at by using the number of front feet of property represented by fizvorable responses to the poll. Mrs. Salmon al8'o objected to the fact tha-t Sally Way properties are not sharing in , the costs. . . I Mr. Wilfred Swindall of 2163 Marlow Lan~ stated he purchased his property in 1972 from the school district and no mention was made of the proposed sewer in the transaction. He stated that the original ditch has not been filled completely and that he still has a 12" ditch that carries surface w~t~r. Can he fil~.this in and .,~ use the propex'ty for planting~ etc.? CiLy Engineer stated that the 12" Bwale was Zeft so as not to cause any drainage probZems on the MarZow Lane properties. ' e .Mr. and Mrs. Dougherty and Mrs. Salmon again raised the question of the benefit : to Sally Way properties and stated they still felt Sally Way property should share in the cost. . Councilwoman Campbell requested clarification from city engineer as to the actual benefit of this project to Marlow Lane properties. City engineer ,stated that the ditch was located on the Marlow Lane properties and a majority ,of these property owners requested that the storm sewer be installed in order :to have the ditch filled. The pipe is located in the street area of Sally Way 'only because the contractor was unable to install the pipe in the ditch area. Considerable discussion followed regarding the benefits to Martow Lane and Sally I Way properties and the high costs of the project. Councilwoman Beal concurred that the costs seemed high; however~ this has been the case in all improvement contracts this past year and the city expects even higher costs for forthcoming : projects. i ! Recommendation: Levy assessments as proposed. C.B. 504 - Levying Assessments for paving~ pedestrian way~ sidewalks and sanitary I sewer and storm sewer within Oakwau Subdivision (73-37) No written protests on file. No objections presented at hearing. - '. Recommendation: Levy assessments as proposed. L Change of Ownership on Liquor License'':;' Sidetrack Tavern . Approve I iL. IAppointment~ Assessment Deferral Committee -May' or Ad' .' t f C. '1 . n erson announced the appo t men 0 . ounc~ men Murray, chairman Keller and M D ld in - 'tt ' , c ona as members of a b m~ ee to make recommendations with regard t 1 ' . su com- ,and accrued interest thereon. 0 po ~cy on deferral of assessments I I ,M. Armory Preservation - Copies of letter from Lane County Commissioner Ken Omlid dated April 9, 1974 wer~ distributed to Council members. The letter spOke to the Council's resolution requesting preservation of the Armory building and effect the building~s preservation would have upon the Civic Center Plan. It was agreed the matter would be on the April 17 committee agenda. Comm ' 4/10/74 ' Affirm Comm 4/10/74 Affirm , IN. Meeting bate for Ward Boundaries Realignment - Mr. Hershner asked aboutthe.official meeting date on the ward boundaries realignment. He has had contacts with persons running for public office who are stymied because of the pending ward changes. Comm ~anager explained ,that i: will be back on the April 24 Committee agenda. May 27 4/17(74" ~s a normal Counc~l meet~ng date, but it is a holiday. After discussion on the Afflrm various choices, it was decided that the May meetings would be held on the 6th and 20th of May and that the official meeting on the ward boundaries realignment could then be held on May 6. -- - O. Laurel Hill Nei ghl:Drhoocl Growth Plan " Mayor Anderson reported agreement reached fbe6veen the Council sUbcorruriittee"(Anderson, ~villiams" Beal) and Lau'rel Hill Associa-, Comni tion on substance of the Plan. A redraft will be brought back to Council with a 4/~0/74 ---~"...dg__.pass" r..ecommendation.._~,~,__~-- - -.-- ~'\File , 4/22/74 9 ~, '20 ~._--~._- IP. I Ward 'Boundaries ReaIi gnment . -:- Attention was cailed' to map of redrawn ward boundaries developed by the Council subcommittee (Anderson, Williams, Murray Wood) in re~ C ' '. omm sponse to quest/on.!:; raised by Council in discussion of boundary changes previouslY4/10/74 proposed. It wa~ understood the new alignment would be subject of future Council f'l d' , 1 e ~scus,s.~on. . I I Q. asture Island Land Use' Study - John Blayney of Livingston & Blayney, city regional planners, presented the firm's interim report on the commercial need refinement study (Goodpasture Island area/Central Business District). Mr.Blayney pointed out that this report had not a great deal of content. Rather it was a midway report.on the types of information being gathered in attempting to provide the bases for policy decisio~ with regard to further commercial development in the Goodpasture Island area. In looking at what would be involved in terms of costs and benefits various impacts would be considered - economic effect on the entire metropolitan area, cost of_munic~.pC1.l!!ervices'_I!.rivate economic~impact, ~environmental and social i.mpact, etc. Mr. Blayney said that the economists, taking trend projections and LCOG population projections together with given assumptions with regard to annual average increase, roughly estimated that the reta~l floor area would double in the next 15 years. The question then becomes ~ot what goes into the downtown mall versus Valley River so much as it is the !location of_~_dthir.c].._,r.egioJ1al .$.hopp~I?g .cent;ex..i{1ndtl:!~..~ffectof that on the' other. two. Mr. Blayney sa~d they had no f~rm recommendat~ons with regard to further knnexations in the Goodpasture Island area at this time. . ! ~ - ,. , Bob Glover, lead man on the study by the consulting .firm, cited use of LCOG ~nd planning staff econ~mic and.population projections together with other informa- tion already. available and said there was no reason to believe they we~e not realistic projections over the next 20 to 30 years. Existing and 'potential ~mployment levels, land use, zoning and potential for expansion of commercial zoning, masstransi t information, etc., were taken into consideration for de- ve~opment of alternatives in determining the future of the downtown area and ~mp~ct on other land uses. ~ouncilman Murray asked whether a comprehensive look was being taken at existing commercially-zoned property, either in shopping cen'ters or distributed throughout the community, not used for commercial purposes. He wondered if there would be :an evaluation of whether to change some of the existing commercial zones. iMr. Glover responded that much of it wouldn't be used, but suggested that in ithe future major commercial centers probably would be zoned on. a contractual rasis - if not developed for commercial use, the commercial zoning would not :OCCUl.'. I I . _. C.ouncilwoman Campbell asked whether the s.tudy anticipa.ted inclusion of cost of capi tal ~Renditures as it related to annexation. Mr. Blayney answered that it would, both Itt~' the developer and to the ci ty. I..,'" ) -\-:"~$: .. I~answer to Councilman Keller with regard to the statement on doubling the retail area, Mr. Blayney said that even heavily discounting present projections, the increase in real spendable income per family would double the total retail area in the metropolitan area which would be enough to start a third regional shopping center. With regard to air pollution, it .was pointed out that there could be some measure b~ area, but generally that impact would have to be on a community-wide basis. A large concentration of activities would obviously generate more traffic thereby generating more pollution. - -. lPlanning Commission member David Hoffman asked'whether the area covered by the !study included water areas, rights:"of-way, etc., and whether. there would be Irecommendations with regard to .utilization of waterways. 'Mr. Blayney said the area included everything west of the Delta Highway to the River, estimated about 800 acres. All of the undeveloped property in that area would be considered for some use if not commercial. Darrell Smith, architect, asked whether another interim report would be made with regard to annexation in the Goodpasture area. Mr. Blayney replied that a written memo wou2d be furnished within the next few weeks on annexation. Deadline of June 1974 for completion of the study di~ not permit interim discussion other than necessary to complete the study. In answer to Mrs. Campbell's concern about plans of the Willamette Greenway Associa- I tion in that area, Mr. Blayney said his firm would be in consultation with them during the study. . 121 4f22(74 - -10 ~ Counc~lwoman Beal asked whether the study would make recommendations with regard to changing commercially-zoned land if it was not particularly suitable for com- mercial use. Mr. Blayney doubted that recOIr.r.!endations krouid be made on specific properties, but recommendations would be included on general problems and sol~- tions for typical situations. John porte!, planning director, added that probably the only area on which recommendations would be made was the downtown central bUsine~s district. The consultant was charged, he said, with looking at strategies ,for various alternatives for commercial development in the downtown and Goodpasture .Island areas and not at specific commercial reuse. , Colilfn' 4/10/74- rile' i I , i , i -- \ R. ;J city Use of Armory - Response to Letter from commissionerOmlid - Manager stated the County Commissioners have been wrestling with new office facilities for the County in accordance with the Civic Center Plan which has been d.iscussed for a number of years. The initial 'plan called for the taking down of the armory and the replacement on that land with a county office building. There has been some interest in preserving the armory because of its possible historical value. The Commissioners wrote to the City stating that, if the armory is to be saved, pernaps the City would consider purchasing it at theprice~~e__~9uE~Y9-!j,gJ~cl}1!L~paiclJg!'-i:t_.- ----~--- e There is no question but that the present city staff is in some areas badly overcrowded. At this time the City is in a very critical budgeting situation; the vota of the people will determine whether or not the existing level of services can even be continued. It :is difficult to proceed to secure more space when reductions in staff may be forthcoming.' :'It would therefore be difficult to justify advocating spending money to make the ' jarmory usable until the outcome of the 74-75 budget is known. A cursory investigation \ lof the armory has indicated it would cost about $270,000 to bring it up to code. This :would allow use of the south portion, as well as the basement for storage, etc., and it ~would lower the ceiling for single floor use in the auditorium portion and seal off the \north portion. If those steps were taken, staff feels the move should be mor~ permanent: \tor,say, at least 20 years. To bring it "up to snuff" for 20 years or more could cost :somewhere around $500,000. It is therefore the feeling of city admini'stration that '[using the armory for office purposes is not economically sound. Code requirements 'become stricter when talking about using a buildinq for assembly purposes. It would :seem more econo.mical'in the l~ng run to pursue the addition of the tower to City Hall, jwhich would also keep City offices in one location. . :Mr. Murray stated that, as' a member of the Vision 2000 Commi ttee, they were to advise i the County Commissioners on their building program. ~'he Committee has discussed at ;great length the issue of the armory. In discussing the armory, it has not focused particularly on the reason to preserve that building being one of history only.. Other reasons include the fact thi building might have some functio~al use for the community. Another factor is that it really is not necessary to tear it down. Last week the Vision 2000 Committee made a recommendation that the building plans for the County need not be delayed and that there was no immediate need to tear down the armory; therefore, a subcommittee should be established and the armory should stay for the immediate future .until the subcommittee could explore the various uses for funding. The City would be impeding the work of that committee if the city were to get involved now. ;Commissioner Omlid disagreed with Mr. Murray on the committee's charge. The charge was really to work on the design of the new building. He stated there should be leconomic justification to the taxpayers if the armory is to be preserved. He said !they purchased the armory for the specific purpose of replacing it with the public .service building. Leaving it standing does cloud the design of the new building somewhat, ibut it can be worked out with one plan or another. He feels a.broader based opinion is . 'needed to preserve it. His request of the Council is for help in solving the problem of what to do with it. He further stated the City could lease it for $1 a year if they wished to refurbish it and use it for office space. Mr. Keller mentioned that City administration had stated they would probably have to ,look for office space outside City Hall and wonders why the feeling is that using the armory only one block away is economically unfeasible. :. Manager clarified that, if a choice is possible, it is preferable to preserve the continuity by not splitting up the staff. If expansion is needed before such time as the tower is built, there will have to be a split; but staff feels t~e armory would be too expensive because of its need for refurbishing. An estimate for the cost to build the tower is 2 1/2 million dollars. Mrs. Beal asked if it might not De wise to lease space at the armory. Manager said that, right at the moment, there is substantial . inventory for lease int'h~ "dC;w~town area. Mr. Keller asked how many square feet would be in the tower. Manager said about 42,000 square feet. (The armory is talking about 34,000 square feet). He also commented that projections of space needs assuming current need plus future p~(; would indicate that, in 20 years, we might need as much as another' 70,000 squa ; i ___.__ .............. .' .......,.. . .----..--..-...-.;--:c.---j 4/22/74 - i1 rz..'2.. Mrs. Campbell would hope that matter could be postP~ned in t~at there should .c ecommendations from the new subcommittee. commiss~oner,~l~d was concerned <~ is costing about $25,000 a week while waiting for dec~s~ons. that the Council was not'interested in taking it off was the general consensus the County's hands. be Ln that Corom. 1+/1.7/7L, File '. Mr>. Williams moved s'econded by' Mr>. Her>shner> to appr>ove, affir>m and file as noted Items A tlrr>ough R. l.t~rns. noted th4t .I:ternK,. chqngeCDf ownershlwfor Sidetra.ck Tavern Liquor license, w;a,s; a.doed" to, ih.e' cons:ent "calendar ,'having' not previouSly been. taken to a cornmi ttee -meeting. d R l~ 11 te Motion car>ried, all member>s Vote was taken on the motion as state. 0 :Lca vo . 'loting aye except Mr. Williams abstaining on Item I. III - Ordinances Council Bill No. 501 - Levying assessments for paving R&dgeway Drive from Good.~astlii>e' Is'l.and' Road to 1000 feet north in Knutson Bros. Planned Unit Development (72-44-7" ;___,~ -re"adfor'The first time on Apr>il 8, 1974, and referredto;;Assessment Panel for> hear>ing on April 15 1974 %as broug0t back for ~onsideratiOn,of' Panel'r~commenda- -.or, _ ' ~ __. _ . .~: . ,_',"_' .. _-cn_--_. . _ _.,' ~ '#. . _ __'" _.,.. '__ . "': .. KfSW,:fo,~evy:. a~'pt~f>-esed. and~re'a<Ltpe~-cs~<;.:~nd tiITte-by' cotin~c.~l~ lire:r'I:umbe~~an(l~title"- ~-- ,~~~.;i-J}l~r~J?~g~~.~:.c:ouncilrri~l!)re;sjn:t Teque.sfing.that i t--be r>eaaH in - fulr: Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmembers present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17033. . Couqcil Bill No. 502 - Levying assessments for storm sewer within replat of Shasta Gardens (72-66), read for the first time on April 8, 1974 and referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 15, 1974, was broug~t back for consideration of Panel recommendation to levy as proposed and read the second time bY'council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. !1r. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given tinal passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17034. Council Bill No. 503 - Levying assessments for storm sewer between Sally Way and Marlow Lane from Norwood Street to Hilham Road (73-50), read for the first time on April 8, 1974 and referred to Ass,essment Panel for hearing on April 15, 1974, was brought back for consideration of Panel recommendation to levy as proposed and read ~. the second time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present ~ requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Her>shner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17035. Council Bill No. 504 - Levying assessments for paving, pedestrian way, sidewalks, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within Oakway Subdivision (73-37), read for the first time on April 8, 1974 and referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 15, 1974, was brought back for consideration of Panel recommendation to levy as proposed and read the second time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting 'aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17036. Council Bill No. 509 - Calling hearipg Jurie 10, 1974, re: E.R.A. Alley Vacation, the north-south and east-west alleyways l09ated in the block bounded by Sixth and Seventh Avenues and Olive and Willamette Streets, and the 160-foot long alleyway located between 7th & 8th Avenues, extending 'westward from Willamette Street was read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read~ID full. '.' Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be ~ad 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. 4/22/74 - .12 t2~ .: - J. V .- ~, ~ Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. RollcalL_vote. A,ll council members present voting aye, except Mr. McDonald abstaining, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17037. Council Bill No. 8891 - Vacating Tyler Street between 15th and 16th Avenue (Suess) was submitted and read the first time on June 9, 1969, was brought back for consideration and read the second time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read In full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17038. Council Bill No. 510 - from Bertelsen Road to 1300 number only~ there being no Levying assessments for paving north side of 5th Avenue Feet West (73-23) was read by council bill title and councilman present requesting that it be read in full. I Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be referred to Assessment Panel for April 29, 1974 hearing and brought back for Council consideration of Panel recommendations on May 6, 1974. Motion carried unanimously. Council Bill No. 511 - Levying assessments for paving, sanitary and storm sewer on Wildwood Street from Inglewood Street to 450' N; Ridgeway Drive from Flintridge Avenue to 450' North; Inglewood Street from West boundary of 2nd Add to Flintridge to 45' West; Ironwood Street from Ridgeway Drive to 650' North and Cedar Ridge from Ironwood Street to Wildwood Street; sanitary and storm sewer in area between 320' east and 800' west of Wildwood from 100' North to 1000' North of Flintridge Avenue (73-35), was read by council bill title and number only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Ii Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be referred to Assessment Panel for April 29, 1974 hearing and brought back for Council consideration of Panel recommendations on May 6, 1974. Motion carried unanimously. Council Bill No. 512 -)Lev.Y.lng'asse1?sments for sanitary sewer in the area between Candlelight Drive and 900 feet West~of Candle light Drive from 160 feet North to 160 feet South of Royal Avenue (73-52), read by council bill title and number only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be referred to Assessment Panel for April 29, 1974 hearing and brought back for Council consideration of Panel recommendations on May 6, 1974. Motion carried unanimously. Council Bill No. 513 ~ Paving Warren Street from 450 feet South of Kevington to 1500 feet south of Kevirtgton was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. - Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bilE15.e :re-';d 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. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17039. Council Bill No. 514 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving Warren Street from 450 feet South of Kevington to 1500 feet South of Kevington was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read'in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be read the secon d 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. Mr. Williams moved seconded"by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17040. Council Bill No. 515 - Paving Lindley Lane from Centennial Blvd. to Bardell Avenue was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. ~. -=- ---=- ~ ,.,~,- ..,.~ -..~~~ >0-_ ~ -" -- -;- "-' ~ ~ --..-.--:,..:~.:~ -~.="':',:~ ..-:_=~;,. ---- - --- _ -r.=..,"~,",""""-~---- ~ 4/22/74 -13 124 Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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 lirianlmously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. -- Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17041. Council Bill No. 516 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving Lindley Lane from Centennial Blvd. to Bardell Avenue was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be read the second time by council bill number and title only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the billwas'read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17042. Council Bill No. 517 - Paving streets within Somerset Hills II Subdivision was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title'only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. -- Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Iaershner that --the- bill h~-re'.ild:"'the' E[ecorid:tlm~-bY:c-o.uncil _ ':j2Jtt-l}~mber ?plY,_;tL~h uii_animous-~cofisent~of-t.ii~~oiYtr~IjltM:~~~0rtineI1:'-Fb~ 't0~Ysfd~1-.: --- e.-t~i;s't~rnE[;:' - Motion carried unan"i'rnous-ly ana-the-b-ill~was read thEi-'second time by council bill number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council~members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 170l.j::3. Council Bill No. 518 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving stree\~ .within Somerset Hills II Subdivision was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17044:. .. Council Bill No. 519 - Paving north/south alley between Mill Street and Ferry Street from 3rd Avenue tp ~ block north was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only , there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered I 17045. Council Bill No. 520 ~ Adopting plans and specifications for paving north/south alley between Mill Street and Ferry Street from 3rd Avenue to ~ block north was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. 1f; Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17046. \ 2..5 4/-2/74 - 14 J Council Bill No. 521 - Sanitary sewer on Lindley Lane from Centennial Boulevard fo Bardell Avenue was sUbmitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. .. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17047. Council Bill No. 522 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer on Lindley Lane from Centennial Boulevard to Bardell Avenue was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. I Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. - Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17048. Council Bill NO. 523 - Sanitary sewer to serve Lots 5-10 of Pt. Thomas Addition was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. Mr. Williams moved s~conded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17049. Council Bill No. 524 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer to serve Lots 5-10 of Pt. Thomas Addition was submitted and read for the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. -- Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17050. IV - Resolut:Lons Resolution No. 2271 - Setting new rates and schedules for Eugene-Springfield Ambulance Service, effective May 1, 1974, and repealing Resolution 2068 (June 26, 1972), was read by number and title. only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members pres~nt voting aye. Resolution No. 2272 - Establishing a policy for assessment of the costs of street and street related improvements was read by number and title only. . Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Resolution No. 2273 - Authorizing payment of bills and claims for period April 8 through 22, 1974 was read by number and title only. A question was raised regarding the payment of $4,371.60 for Schematic Design Services - p.a.D., to Moore, Unruh and Smith. Mr. Williams wondered if the City was obligated to pay it. Manager said that the contract had been approved by the city attorney and the City is committed to pay it. In explanation of the situation, Mr. Williams pointed out that the PAD program ~ 4/22/74 -15 \2b has be~n discussed at several joint housipg committee meetings. There has been some ".i;""",. "i~<,!icationthat the rent may be well in excess of what private sector is providing in ;~1.~i2A~n~D~~Ub9idizep.~~~tion. It would be premature to say what action the housing committee . will recommend to the city but there seems to be some legitimate question as to whether ~. . - ." th,,:.proposal will go forward as proposed. He wondered how much farther the city must go .a ';:'~2-1.l~_.p~:foi-.>t'::-~~ki~~K~a decision to cut losses. Manager said the city has a legal commitment to mak W. ~ this payment. The other portion of the contract has already been paid, so this payment -" .would finish up the obligation. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Resolution No. 2274 - Calling hearing on abatement at 2420 University Street was read by number and title only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution~ Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Resolution No. 2275 - Agreement by City to participate in Community School Program jointly wi th 4J. Ci ty contribution subj ect to budgetary approval. Resolution was read by number and title only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried the meeting was adjourned to Monday, May 6, 1974. -- Announcement was made that the League of Oregon Cities meeting would be SNitched from~~~w :':"1~y'9 and switched from the Hotel to the B,lack Angus., 4p.m. workshop and 6:30 dinner. Invitations have gone out and spouses are invited. McKinley Manager . . \"2.., 4/22/74 - 16 J