Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/14/1986 Meeting (2) M I NUT E S e Eugene City Council City Council Chamber July 14, 1986 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Richard Hansen, Debra Ehrman, Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten, Freeman Holmer, Ruth Bascom, Roger Rutan. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Jeff Mill er. The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was call to order by His Honor Mayor Brian B. Obie. I. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Obie said the Pub1ic'Forum is an opportunity for citizens to express opinions and provide information to the council about issues which are not scheduled for council consideration. No one addressed the council. e II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Glenwood Refinement Plan, Phase I (memo, ordinance, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced consideration of Phase I of the Glenwood Refinement Plan. Terry Jones of the Planning Department gave the staff report. She said the council held a work session on the plan on July 9, 1986. She said the 1984 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study indicated that Eugene should complete a refinement plan for the G1enwood area and that Eugene should provide services and eventually annex the area. She reviewed community involvement during preparation of the refinement plan. She said proposed changes to the draft of the plan are included in a memo dated June 16, 1986. The changes were recommended by the Gl enwood Planning Team, the Glenwood Community Organization, and the Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions. She al so revi ewed the process for adopting the plan. Ms. Jones said Phase I of the Glenwood Refinement Plan has about 65 acres. It includes two large industries, Farwest Steel Corporation and Pape' Brothers, about 25 homes, and some vacant land. She said sewers can be provided to the area. She said the refinement plan recognizes that the Metropolitan Area General Plan designates the area for industrial use and e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 1 the refinement plan provides for a long-term transition from residential to industrial use. e Ms. Jones said the transportation element of the refinement plan is the most controversial element because of the need for a secondary access. The only vehicular access to Glenwood is via 22nd Avenue. A secondary emergency access is needed. In addition, there is no bicycle or pedestrian access to the area. She said Revision 4 on page 3 of the June 16 memo indicates that attention will be given to the rail crossing at Henderson Street as a pedestrian-bicycle access. She said the rail crossing was closed by the Public Utility Commissioner (PUC). The owner of Farwest Steel owns property on both sides of the rail crossing and is concerned about pedestrian access to the property. Answering a question Mr. Hansen asked at the work session, Ms. Jones said a pedestrian access approaching the rail crossing by way of Seneca Street would be possible if the PUC approved it. That option or one of several others could satisfy Revision 4. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. Margaret Marino, 3825 East 21st Avenue, was a member of the planning team and lives in the area. She said she submitted written testimony to the counci 1. She said the Glenwood area did not have a community organization when the Metro Plan was prepared and, therefore, the residents had very little input. She said the refinement plan is a compromise and the major problems involve transportation. They probably can be worked out, in her opinion, as long as access via Henderson Street is an option. e Ms. Marino said the 25 residential properties in Phase I are small and cannot be sold for industrial use easily. She said many owners are elderly and are not well. They.have lived in the neighborhood for a long time. She said the owners purchased their land for residential use and want to sell it for residential use. She wished the Metro Plan designated the Glenwood area for mixed use. She said the owners of residential properties would have more options if some of the area were designated for commercial use. She said the industrial designation is short-sighted. Mike Farthing, 975 Oak, represented Dale and Ruth Fischer, the owners of Farwest Steel. He said the Fischers own about 13 acres in Phase I and about 40 acres in Phase II. He commended the City staff and the planning team for their perseverance in developing the refinement plan. He said it reconciles diverse interests. He recommended its adoption. Mr. Farthing said the Fischers would like Henderson Avenue vacated because it bisects their property in both the Phase I and Phase II areas and the granting of an emergency access will probably be a condition of approval for the vacation. The Fischers will have to decide about accepting the condition. He said economic policies ;n the Metro Plan support the consolidation of the Fi scher property. He said the PUC and Southern Pacific Railroad officials consider the Henderson rail crossing closed permanent 1y and a State law encourages the closing of at-grade rail crossings. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 2 , Mr. Farthing said the Fischers want to comply with the policies in the refinement plan. They are troubled by Revision 4 which seeks a e pedestrian-bicycle access at Henderson Street. He said the Fischers would consider locating a pedestrian-bicycle path from Seneca Street along the right-of-way on the south side of the railroad to the rail crossing. He emphasized tbat the Southern Pacific Company must approve a crossing at the railroad. There being no additional request to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. Answering a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Jones said the Farwest Steel and Papel Brothers properties are within the City limits and are zoned 1-2, zoned 1-2, Light-Medium Industrial. The residential properties and most of the vacant properties are not in the city and are zoned County RA, Suburban Residential. She said the owners of most of the vacant properties would like to annex them so they can be developed. The residential zoning will probably not be changed until the properties are annexed. Replying to a question from Ms. Wooten, Ms. Jones said Henderson Street has been the historical access to the G1enwood area. It is still used by pedestrians even though the crossing is officially closed. However, reopening it for vehicular traffic would necessitate approval by the PUC and the Southern Pacific Company of a request for a new rail crossing. She said a pedestrian-bicycle access might be approved more readily. She said the City might not be able to accept the liability that Southern Pacific officials would require. She said planning team members would like governmental agencies to begin the process of negotiation. She said e four other emergency access points are possible but they would be more expensive because roads would have to be constructed. They probably would not be very direct. Answering questions from Ms. Bascom and Mr. Hansen, Ms. Jones said a pedestrian-bicycle access to Glenwood will be important for employees in the future. She said the Fischers probably would consider an easement for pedestrian-bicycle access using Seneca Street if a rail crossing ;s approved. Ms. Bascom said the TransPlan encourages the use of alternate modes of transportation and pedestrian-bicycle accesses are important. CB 2889--An ordinance adopting the Glenwood Refinement Plan, Phase I Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, 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. Ms. Wooten said she will support the refinement plan with reservations. She said it is important for the City to provide services to the area but she is concerned about the residents. She said the neighborhood is unique e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 3 and she did not want it to lose its identity. She hoped the staff will be sensitive to the concerns of the residents and consider multiple-use in e the neighborhood. Mr. Hansen said he will support the refinement plan. He hoped the staff will work wi~h the owners of Farwest Steel and other properties to provide access to the area. Ms. Schue shared Ms. Wooten's concern about the owners of residential properties, but she said the council cannot consider the Metro Plan designation of the area at this time. She said the existing industries and the owners of large, vacant parcels should be accommodated but she did not think the residential parcels need to be sold for industrial use at this time. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0 Council Bill 2889 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed (and became Ordinance 19392). B. Renegotiation of Pacific Northwest Bell Franchise Agreement (memo, ordinance, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Susan Smernoff of the e Finance Division gave the staff report. She said the City negotiates franchise agreements with private businesses that use the public right- of-way. The agreements include a fee because the companies use the public right-of-way for business activities and because the City incurs long- term maintenance costs when the public way is cut to install or repair facilities. Ms. Smernoff said both the City and Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) agreed in February 1986 to terminate and renegotiate their franchise agreement and the negotiations have been intensive in the last several weeks. Twenty- one issues were discussed. Agreement was reached quickly on most of the issues but there was extensive discussion on the definition of IIcompetitive services,lI the amount of the franchise fee, and the substitution of the franchise fee for City permit fees. A wri tten and verbal decision by PNB representatives to accept the negotiated agreement was reached last Friday, July 11. The City assumed the negotiations were in good faith, but Ms. Smernoff said she received a phone call at 3:50- p.m. today from the Portland offi ce of PNB i nformi ng her that PNB officials will not sign the agreement. Ms. Smernoff discussed the City Charter provi s ions for changes in franchise agreements. She recommended the council hold a public hearing on the proposed ordinance and take the first reading of it this evening. She suggested the council take final action on the ordinance on August 11, 1986. ,e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 4 Answering a question from Ms. Wooten, Ms. Smernoff said her discussions with PNB officials today indicate they do not agree with statements in the e agreement concerning the definition of gross revenues. In addition, they do not support the six-percent fee and they do not want to pay permit fees. Mr. Holmer said he does not object to users being charged the franchise fee but he wondered if six percent covers the City's costs for allowing the use of the right-of-way. Ms. Smernoff responded that the present three-percent franchise fee covers only direct maintenance costs. The proposed six-percent fee will cover long-term direct and indirect costs as well as the "lease costll of the right-of-way. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. Hollis Lasley, 1735 Rio Vista Way South, Salem, said he is PNB Community Affairs Manager for Salem. He said he represented Bruce Hall of PNB. He said PNB welcomed the opportunity to renegotiate the franchise agreement with Eugene. He said PNB paid the City a franchise fee of $577,000 in 1985. He said PNB is charged for the repair when a street is cut. Mr. Lasley said PNB representatives stated during the negotiations that the final agreement would have to be approved by a PNB vice president. He said PNB officials saw the the ordinance in its final form only thi s morning and would like to negotiate some changes. He said PNB does not want to say it wants to change something but its business is changing. He said statements concerning competitive services are important to PNB's survival. He said PNB would like to continue negotiations. e There being no additional requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. Ms. Ehrman said she woul d prefer to postpone the fi rst readi ng of the proposed ordinance because the public hearing was held on an ordinance that might be changed. Responding to a comment from Mr. Rutan, Ms. Smernoff said the PNB and City staffs worked from the same draft and changes to the draft were shared. Bruce Hall agreed to them in writing. Verbal agreements were reached with representatives in Seattle and the language agreed on appears in the proposal before the council. Replying to questions from Ms. Wooten, Ms. Smernoff said repairs made when streets are cut are adequate for a short time. However, in a year or two, seepage gets into the cut and that section buckles or sinks. After numerous cuts have been made, the City has a major repair job to do on the street. She said Portland charges PNB a five-percent privilege tax fee. Numerous phone calls were received in one month from the public when the Portland fee was increased. Answering questions from Mr. Hansen, Ms. Smernoff said the only change in gross revenues is the subtraction of competitive services recognized by e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 5 the Public Utility Commissioner (PUC). The competitive services to be subtracted are Centrex services, private line services, and radio type services. She said the staff prefers to rely on decisions of the PUC - about which services should be subtracted because of the technical nature of the telecommunications field. PNB estimated that the services to be subtracted w_ould be about $36,000 annually under the current three- percent agreement. Mr. Hansen said he would like to know what percentage of PNB gross sales the services to be subtracted would be. Ms. Bascom said she is disappointed that what is to be included in the gross receipts is not resolved. Responding to her question, Mr. Gleason said the negotiating and public hearing processes will have to start over if the council does not have a first reading on the proposed ordinance this evening. If the co unci 1 has the first reading and substantial changes are not made in the ordinance, the second reading can occur on August 11. If substantial changes are made, the process will be started again. Ms. Smernoff added that the changes proposed to her by PNB officials would be considered substantial. Mayor Obie encouraged the council to have the first reading. Ms. Wooten said she will support the first reading. She said it is very important to inform the public of the effect of the fee increase. She did not believe telephone users should bear the entire burden of PNB's costs of doing business in the right-of-way. e Mr. Holmer said council approval of the first reading will be unilateral approval of the ordinance. He said he will support the first reading in the hope the negotiations will result in a second reading in August. He said he will need more information about differences to approve a second reading. Mr. Hansen said he would like more information about the gross revenues. He said groups lobby the PUC when the PUC makes decisions and, therefore, the City should set its standards when defining gross revenues. He said he did not know what IInet uncollectables" meant. Ms. Bascom agreed with Mr. Hansen. CB 2890--An ordinance granting to Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Company the nonexclusive privilege to use the public way to construct and maintain public communication facilities within the City of Eugene; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, that the bill be read by council bill number only and that the City Council adopt first reading of the ordinance at this time. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 6 Ms. Ehrman sa i d she will support the motion but the council will be approving only what the City will agree to. e Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. C. Appeal of Sign Code Board of Appeals Decision (Alder Street Market) (memo, ordinance, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. He asked City Attorney Tim Sercombe to address the council before the staff report. Mr. Sercombe said the the council will hear the appeal of a denial by the Sign Code Board of Appeals of a variance request because the council was the second- step appeal body. He said the council recently changed the procedures and an Appeal Board is the final step in the future. He said the proceeding is a quasi-judicial one. He briefly discussed quasi-judicial procedures and standards. Answering a question from Mayor Obie, Mr. Sercombe said Chapter 2 of the City Code refers specifically to quasi-judicial procedures and the hearing is determined to be quasi-judicial because of case law. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interests were declared by the councilors. Building Official Larry Reed gave the staff report. He said the Sign Code Board of Appeals denied a variance to Jim and Belinda Gracen for a e projecting sign (awning) over the public sidewalk for the Alder Street Market at 798 East 11th Avenue on June 16, 1986. The request was for projecting signs on 11th Avenue and on Alder Street. The Gracens appealed the decision. He distributed copies of Section 8.800, 8.808, and 8.640 of the City Code. Mr. Reed said the Sign Code states that a variance may be granted if a practical difficulty or physical hardship exists. He sa i d a physical hardship may involve the shape of a lot, the location of structures on a lot, or topographi c or other phys i ca 1 conditions of a lot. He said economic hardship exists if the value of non-conforming signs cannot be fairly or reasonably amortized. Mr. Reed said no economic hardship was claimed in the Gracen appeal and the Sign Code Board of Appeals determined that no practical difficulty or physical hardship existed. He said the Sign Code Board of Appeals determined that granting a variance to the Alder Street Market would give a special privilege to the market because it would allow a projecting sign that other businesses in the sign district cannot have. Mr. Reed introduced Barbara McDonald, Sign Inspector, to complete the staff report. Ms. McDonald said the Alder Street Market is within the Outlying Commercial Sign District. She reviewed the signs permitted in the district and said no signs extending over the property line are permitted. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 7 She said the Gracens stated that the awnings will be constructed whether or not the name of the market can be on them. She said the wall of the e building is on the property line and the proposed awning would extend four feet over the right-of-way. The name of the market on the awning makes the awning a projecting sign under the Eugene Sign Code. She said 13th Avenue betwe.en Kincaid and Alder streets and the downtown mall are designated the Pedestri an Auto Si gn Di stri ct. Projecting signs are permitted in the Pedestrian Auto Sign District. Ms. McDonald said the proposed awning could be constructed so that a wall sign could be mounted and the awning could be constructed without the lettering which makes it a sign; consequently, any hardship resulting from the denial of the variance is a self-made hardship. Answering questions from Ms. Bascom and Ms. Wooten, Ms. McDonald said some signs in the area do not conform to the Sign Code. She said 11th and 13th Avenues were designated different sign code districts because 13th Avenue had more pedestrian traffic. She said the Gracens were told they could apply for a sign district boundary change to the Pedestrian Auto Sign District. She sa i d property owners, not the Ci ty, should seek sign district changes. She said the building owner has not said anything to the City about a wall sign. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. Thomas Beaurline, 70 Grimes Street, said James and Belinda Gracen leased half of the first floor at the corner of 11th Avenue and Alder Street for a convenience food market for the University area. He said the building has e been an eyesore on the block but interior alterations and exterior painting are being done. Mr. Beaur1ine said the proposed awning would revitalize the corner and protect people from the sun and rain. The awning would be illuminated at night and would have small lettering on it. He said a hardship will be created if the Gracens cannot have an illuminated sign. He sa i d the building owner will not allow an electric sign on the building but it would be hard to see anyway. He said many establishments within two blocks of the Alder Street Market have awnings with signs on them so the proposed awn i ng wi 11 not look out of place. He urged approval of the appeal because it would beautify Eugene and promote business. He submitted a photograph to the council. Sy Zeer, 2716 Harris, represented Sy's Pizza which is in the neighborhood. He urged approval of the variance. He said his business needs a new awning becau se the old one is falling apart. He said the City will allow businesses to invest in awnings and businesses need to put lettering on them. He said the Alder Street neighborhood is a valuable part of the community and lettering on awnings which are approved by the City should be permitted there. He said Vancouver, British Columbia, has many beautiful awnings with graphics. He said awnings protect people from the rain and identify businesses. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 8 ::\. Mark Virtue, 4410 Fox Hollow, said back-lit awnings are considered wall signs in Salem. He said the Eugene Sign Code should be changed to permit e back-lit awnings. He said the proposed awning with lettering will be back-lit and will upgrade the image of the business. It is economically more advantageous than both an awning and a sign. He said rain protection is needed in a 11 sign districts in Eugene. He said back-lit awnings ill umi nate the sidewalk at night and assist police offi cers and firefighters. Mr. Virtue said the Eugene Sign Code does not address back-lit and down- lit awnings and should do so. He said many of the businesses on 13th and 11th have awnings and wall signs and the appearance is messy. He said back-lit awnings would be more attractive. He said the alley between 12th and 13th Avenues divides the Outlying Commercial and the Pedestrian Auto sign districts but the stores on both sides of it have the same clientele. He suggested the council review the Sign Code and designate back-lit awnings to be wall signs or exempt them from regulations. There being no additional requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. Ms. Ehrman said back-lit awnings were not considered when the council reviewed the Sign Code recently. Mr. Reed asked if he could respond to some of the comments made in the testimony. He said the staff tries to help businesses but the proposed projecting sign over the public sidewalk at that location is not permitted by the code. He said the Sign Code currently permits back-lit awnings. The Gracens were told they could request a change in the sign district for the Alder Street Market or seek e an amendment to the Si gn Code. In addition, he wished the Planning Commission had heard the comments about awnings when the Sign Code was updated last May. Ms. McDonald said projecting signs were permitted in the Pedestrian Auto District because of pedestrian traffic. They probably were not permitted in other districts because signs close to the street are distracting to vehicles and because of clutter. Replying to questions from Ms. Wooten, Ms. McDonald said the proposed awning would be similar to the one at Humphrey Yogurt and the Muffins in the downtown. The vinyl is a new material. She said the downtown core area, Willamette Street between 7th and 8th Avenues, Fifth Avenue from High to Pearl Streets, and the downtown mall are designated the Pedestrian Auto Sign District. Projecting signs are permitted in that district. Answering questions from Mr. Rutan and Ms. Bascom, Ms. McDonald said sign district boundary change requests are submitted to the Planning Department. Mr. Beaurline said the proposal is to add small lettering to the awning to identify the store. Replying to a question from Ms. Schue, Ms. McDonald said the initial design was for an awning with lettering. It was to be the identifying sign. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 9 Beginning comments by councilors, Ms. Ehrman said she does not think the proposed awning with lettering will be offensive. She said it would help e security in the area. She suggested a revision of the sign code to permit such signs. Mr. Rutan said pedestrians have always used 11th Avenue and perhaps the 11th Avenue and Alder Street area should be designated the Pedestrian Sign District. However, the counci 1 cannot do that now. The council must consider the appeal. Ms. Schue agreed with Mr. Rutan. She said the the proposed awning with lettering is definitely not permitted in the Outlying Commercial District but she does not know why the lettering is prohibited. She said the owner probably cannot wait for the Sign Code to be changed. Mayor Obie suggested the council deny the appeal and request the Planning Commission to review the Sign Code to permit back-lit awnings. Ms. Wooten said other businesses in the neighborhood will want back-lit awni ngs wi th lettering. She suggested the City initiate a sign code boundary change to the Pedestrian Auto Sign District for the area. She said it would be fruitless for the council to revise the Sign Code again so soon. Mr. Hansen said some awnings are impediments and the counci 1 should carefully consider permitting them everywhere. Ms. Schue pointed out that awnings are permitted in the Out lyi ng e Commercial District but signs on the awnings are not permitted. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to deny the appeal to the.decision of the Sign Code Board of Appeals which denied a variance to the Sign Code for the Alder Street Market. Mr. Hansen said an awning protects people but lettering on an awning makes it a sign. He said the council should carefully define signs and awnings if they are permitted in more places. Ms. Bascom said the proposed awning will enhance the area. She hopes the council will consider permitting lettering on awnings. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to direct the Planning Commission to consider a Sign District Boundary change to Pedestrian Auto Sign District for a four-block area including 11th Avenue. Mr. Holmer said awnings which include advertising might be appropriate for many areas of the city. He suggested the change be considered for all sign districts. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 10 Ms. Wooten said his suggestion might take a long time to implement. She said the change she suggested could be approved expeditiously and it is e appropriate because the area has heavy pedestrian traffic. Mayor Obi e suggested the motion be changed to di rect the Planning Commission to consider a change to the Sign Code which would allow advertising on all awnings. Ms. Wooten and Mr. Rutan agreed to the change in the motion. Ms. Bascom said she would like to consider classifying awnings with lettering as wall signs. Mayor Obie agreed to incorporate her suggestion into the motion. The motion is: Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to direct the Planning Commission to consider a Sign District Boundary change to Pedestrian Auto Sign District for a four-block area including 11th Avenue and to analyze and adopt findings about changing the Sign Code to permit lettering on awnings throughout the city or to classify awnings with lettering as wall signs. Ms. Schue expressed concern about the Alder Street Market. She said the sign code may be changed to permit the proposed awning three months from now. Mayor Obie asked the staff for a recommendation about the Alder Street Market. e The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. D. Annexation/Rezoning Request for Property Located North of River Avenue and East of River Road from Lane County RA Residential District to City RA Suburban Residential District and C-2 General Commercial District (memo, map, background information distributed) City Manager Michea1 Gleason introduced discussion of the annexation/rezoning request. Jim Croteau of the Planning Department gave the staff report. He said City services can be provided to the two lots in the request. They are continguous to the city limits. He said an elderly woman owns the properties. She requested the RA zoning district for Tax Lot 1300 because she will continue living there and her taxes will be lower than if it is rezoned to the C-2 zoning district requested for Tax Lot 1400. He said C-2 zoning will be requested for Tax Lot 1300 when the woman no longer lives on it. No ex parte contacts or confl i cts of interest were decl ared by the councilors. Answering questions from Ms. Ehrman and Mr. Rutan, Mr. Croteau said the owner thinks her taxes would be higher if Tax Lot 1300 is rezoned to a e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 11 commercial district. The zoning on Tax Lots 1000, 1100, and 1200 is C-2. The criteria for applying the City RA zoning district to Tax Lot 1300 are e recognition that the RA zoning is an interim district and that the lot is used residentially. The annexation/rezoning request was initiated by the owners of the property. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. Res. No. 3989--A resolution authorizing annexation of property north of River Avenue and east of River Road to the City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District. Final Order No. AZ 86-3--A final order rezoning property located north of River Avenue and east of River Road from Lane County RA Residential District to City RA Suburban Residential District and C-2 General Commercial District. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to adopt the resolution and to approve Final Order Number AZ 86-3 concerning property located north of River Avenue and east of River Road. Roll call vote; the motion carried e unanimously,7:0. Mayor Obie recessed the meetinQ at 9:16 p.m. and reconvened it about ten mi nutes 1 ater. E. LCDC Periodic Review (memo, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced discussion of the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) Periodic Review. Teresa Bishow gave the staff report. She said the Periodic Review is a process to ensure that local planning programs remain in conformance with the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. She said the purpose of the public hearing is to hear testimony on the Final Periodic Review Order. She said the council received written testimony from Richard Gold, Al Urquhart, and Barbara Kelley. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. Al Urquhart, 1820 01 i ve , said he must send the council much wri tten material to get it into the record. He said he disagrees with the finding in the Periodic Review that there have been no substantial changes in the Willamette riverfront area. He said the area was open space and vacant in e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 12 1976 although it was zoned for heavy industrial use. He said it was shown as open land on the map which accompanied the resolution which e incorporated the Willamette Greenway into the Statewide Planning Goals. He said the findings of the resolution stated that public uses, including parks and recreational developments, were desired uses in the area. He said the Planning Commission stated that the land south of the Willamette River would be used for public recreational or institutional use and the land was developed that way. Mr. Urquhart said the proposal to deve lop the riverfront into an industrial park signifies a substantial change in the use of the Willamette Greenway; therefore, the findings for the Periodic Review are not correct. He also said the use regulations are not adequate to control the change because they do not state how the local government will interpret the State regulations. He said he disagrees with the Goal 5 and 8 inventories and will include by reference all the testimony he submitted about Goal 5 during consideration of the Supplemental Findings for the Riverfront Research Park. Gary Kutcher, 2638 Hawkins Lane, said he opposes the development of the Riverfront Research Park because the area should be open space. He said the proposed changes are substantial. He said closed research will be permitted in the research park. I t wi 11 increase activities in the community connected to the nuclear arms race. He read from an initiative petition for the November ballot which concerns nuclear weapons. Richard Gold, 907 River Road, #58, asked if the councilors received eight pages of written testimony and 68 pages of accompanying documentation from e him. Ms. Bishow said Mr. Gold told her specifically that he wanted only the eight pages of written testimony sent to the council and no additional written testimony was submitted by Mr. Gold. Mayor Obie suggested the documentation be available for councilors to read in the Mayor's office. Mr. Gold spoke of a conflict of interest on the council. He said several wetlands have been destroyed because there is no effective management criteria for wetlands in the Metro Plan. He said the wetlands most recently destroyed are north of the Valley River Center parking lot. He said the wetlands are within the Wi 1 lamette River floodplain and they were filled without permission or a permit. He referred to a DSL violation notice dated January 27, 1985. He wondered why the fi 11 has not been removed. He said the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife opposed the fill and said its potential impact on the whole Delta Pond complex should be considered. He read from an August 27, 1985, letter from Mike Houck of the Audubon Society of Portland which stated there is no objective process for judging Willamette River wetlands. Mr. Gold discussed the West Eugene Parkway (6th/7th Extension) and said it will impact at least ten acres of the Bertelsen Slough. He said the slough e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 13 is part of the Amazon diversion channel which goes to the Fern Ridge Reservior. He said the City has ignored the toxic waste issue and has e permitted toxic wastes to be dumped into the Amazon diversion channel. He discussed industries that produce toxic waste and laws that regulate them. He read part of an article from the New York Times of July 28) 1986. Jude McNesby) 2638 Hawk ins Lane, represented S.O.S., Inc. (Save Our ecoSystems). She said Valley River Center applied for a permit to fill the wetlands along the Wi11amette River with 50,000 cubic yards of miscellaneous material. The wetlands are in the Willamette Greenway. She said neither State nor Federal policies permit the use of wetlands for private commercial use and the case will be lost in the courts if it is pursued. She said the wetlands are sensitive waters that belong to the people of Oregon and are needed by wildlife. She said approval of the permit will result in the destruction of the Wi1lamette River wetlands. Ms. McNesby said officials of Valley River Center want to fill an area used by beavers, nutrias, raccoons) muskrats) oppossums, and many waterfowl. She said one of the largest Blue Heron rookeries is in the area. She said the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife does not approve the project. Howard T. Bonnett, 1835 East 28th) submitted written testimony. He said he disagrees with the conclusion in the Periodic Review that the Willamette riverfront area has not changed. He said the University applied for and received a conditional use permit in 1980 to construct four playing fields and other sport facilities on about ten acres along the ri verfront. He discussed statements in the staff notes for the e conditional use permit public hearing. Mr. Bonnett asked if any testimony was presented that indicated that some other location met the need for.the sporting facilities in the Wi11amette Greenway. He said the conditional use permit was extended to January 1987 and there was testimony that the facil ities are needed. He sa i d no specific place to relocate the facilities has been cited. He concluded that a need for the facilities exists and no other site for them has been i dent ifi ed. Mr. Bonnett said the plan for the Willamette Riverfront has been changed because the City did not properly evaluate the riverfront according to the LCDC criteria for Statewide Goals 5, 8, and 15. He said the University of Oregon community needs the Wi11amette Riverfront for open space. He said 17,000 students and other members of the community use the open space now and more people would use it if it were maintained better. Summarizing) he said the land is valuable for open space and is fulfilling a need established in a public planning effort) no findings have indicated that the uses can be fulfilled at another site, and the site has not been adequately inventoried under the Statewide Planning GoalS criteria. He recommended that the council rescind its actions concerning the Riverfront Research Park) complete an inventory of Goal Five open space, and use the LCDC Goals and Guidelines to determine the best use of the site. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council ' July 14) 1986 Page 14 There being no additional requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. e Answering questions from Ms. Bascom, Ms. Bishow said the modifications to the Willamette Greenway Management Provisions in the Eugene Code will probably be presented to the council in September. Ms. Wooten said she would like to be briefed about the Willamette River wetlands issue. She said she would also like additional information about Item #2 on page 5 of Mr. Urquhart1s written testimony. It concerns the lack of heavy industrial uses in the Goal 15 inventory. Mr. Holmer and Ms. Bascom said they would like to be included in the briefing on wetlands. Mayor Obie directed the staff to inform the other councilors about the briefing on the wetlands issue. He continued consideration of the LCDC Periodic Review. F. LCDC Periodic Review--Metropo1itan Plan Amendments (memo background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Teresa Bishow gave the staff report. She said several Metropolitan Plan amendments were generated during the Periodic Review of the Metro Plan. The amendments primarily ensure consistency among the Metropolitan Plan, the TransP1an, and the Public Facilities Plan. e Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. He continued consideration of the amendments. G. Metropolitan Area Public Facilities Plan (memo, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced discussion of the Metropolitan Area Public Facilities Plan. Teresa Bishow of the Planning Department gave the staff report. She said the LCDC Periodic Review process requires adoption of a Metropolitan Area Public Facilities Plan. She said Exhibit A contains changes to the plan draft recommended by the Eugene and Springfield Planning Commissions. She recommended the counci 1 defer action on the plan until the Lane County Planning Commission has acted on it. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 15 Mr. Holmer said the Public Facilities Plan does not address solid waste disposal, jails, fire stations, or electrical supplies and they should be e included in some long-range plan. Ms. Bishow responded that the plan reflects only the requirements of the State Legislature. Mr. Gleason ~aid Mr. Holmer's suggested could be incorporated into the work program of the Planning Commission, Ms. Brody added that the Urban Services Policy Committee is considering some of the things Mr. Holmer mentioned. The information might be compiled into a supplement of the Public Facilities Plan. Mayor Obie continued council consideration of the Public Facilities Plan. III. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: FINDINGS AND MINUTES OF HEARINGS OFFICIAL AND AWARD OF CONTRACTS (memo, findings, minutes distributed) A. Sanitary Sewer on Goodpasture Island Road from 750 Feet to 1,700 Feet North of Valley River Drive (2235) B. Storm Sewer 300 Feet East of G1enwood Boulevard from 22nd Avenue to Interstate 5 Freeway (1-5) (2239) C. Sanitary Sewers to Serve Knoop Lane from Mayflower Street to River Road and River Road from Park Avenue to 200 Feet South of Thomason Street (2149) e D. Paving, Storm and Sanitary Sewers to Serve Pitchford Avenue from Willow Creek Road to 2,300 Feet West of Willow Creek Road and Sanitary Sewers to Serve Willow Creek Road From Pitchford Avenue to 300 Feet South (2245) (memo, findings, minutes distributed) City Manager Micheal introduced consideration of findings and minutes of the Hearings Official for several public improvement projects. He said the projects will be initiated if the council approves the findings and minutes. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to approve the findings and minutes of the Hearings Official dated July 1, 1986, concerning various public improvement projects and to authorize the award of the contracts. Answering a question from Ms. Bascom, City Engineer Bert Teitzel said the City will do an unusually good job of patching Knoop Lane after the sewer project because of concerns expressed by residents. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 16 Mayor Obie adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. to July 16, 1986. . (Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick) mncc0714 e e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 1986 Page 17