Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/1988 Meeting ------ ---- e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Lunch/Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall September 7, 1988 11 : 30 a. m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Ruth Bascom, Robert Bennett, Debra Ehrman, Freeman Holmer, Jeff Miller, Roger Rutan, Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten. The adjourned meeting of August 10, 1988, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Brian B. Obie. I. ITEMS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR, AND CITY MANAGER A. Contractual Services Mr. Miller reported controversy regarding the ordinance passed by the council in August and he said further consideration of the issues would be e appropriate. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to have a work session to obtain staff input on various concerns of the council and community regarding the public contracting ordinance. Ms. Bascom said staff response had already been requested and she preferred not scheduling a separate work session. Ms. Wooten requested a response to the AFSCME issues in addition to the other issues. Mr. Rutan favored holding a work session and said many of the issues are related to the council's relationship with the City Manager. He said it would be valuable to discuss that relationship in terms of the council.s delegation of certain responsibilities to the manager. The motion passed unanimously. B. Proposed Correctional Facility Ms. Ehrman referred to a session she had attended at Mayor Obie's request regarding a new State Corrections Division facility. She reported that sites have been narrowed down to the Eugene area, and several different types of ~ MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 1 -- - facilities are being considered: a restitution centert a drug and alcohol residential programt or a prison. Ms. Ehrman explained the Governor will issue a Certificate of Need that will specify the type of facility that is to be built. She said the process will move quickly once the certificate is issuedt so the City's input on siting and type of facility should be provided as soon as possible. She said the County is also involved in the process. Ms. Ehrman expressed the opinion that the community would benefit from a drug and alcohol program and she noted that the facility would be for prisoners transitioning back into the community. A three-member committee made up of a sherifft a representative of Correctionst and an elected official will review possible sites. Ms. Ehrman said the County had indicated that if most of the sites under consideration were in Eugenet the elected official on the siting committee should be a City official. Mayor Obie said he had received a letter from the State announcing the public hearing Ms. Ehrman attendedt and he expressed concern that the City's policy-makers had received such late notice. Although we have a responsibility to house criminals in this communitYt he felt the State had demonstrated insensitivity to the community in the initial stage of the process. Mayor Obie asked Mr. Gleason to appoint a staff member to follow the issue on the council1s behalf and to work with Ms. Ehrman if she is willing to continue her involvement. e Mr. Gleason agreed to discuss the situation with Ms. Ehrman to determine the level of staff support that is needed and he assured the council that the City would be involved. Ms. Wooten stressed the seriousness of the issue and requested more information. She recommended that Ms. Ehrman be appointed to the three-member siting committee. Ms. Wooten asked if the facility is contingent on the Governor's success in obtaining lottery funds for correctional facilities. Ms. Ehrman referred to a "Corrections Report" she had received in a recent pac ket. She said funding is already available for approximately ItOOO beds throughout the state. Of thoset 250 possibly could be located in our community. She agreed that it would be appropriate for a City official to represent the community's interests on the proposed committeet particularly if the facility is to be sited in the Eugene area. C. Traffic Diverters Ms. Ehrman reported a contact regarding diverters on 5th Avenue. She asked for clarification on a question about funds that were set aside for these diverters and about landscaping on the Chambers Connector. Ms. Wooten requested an update on the "temporary" diverters on West 24th Avenue near Chambers Street that were put in place eight years ago. She e MINUTES--Eugene Ci ty Counci 1 September 7t 1988 Page 2 -~- e asked that staff initiate a meeting with residents in the area to discuss whether that traffic diversion is still necessary. Mr. Gleason agreed to report back to the council. D. Downtown Development District (DDD) Review Group Ms. Ehrman said she and Councilor Holmer serve as council representatives on the DDD Review Group. She described their work as a re-evaluation of the downtown boundaries and tax. Many issues have been identified during the group's meetings, but no decisions have been made at this point. E. Human Rights Workshop Ms. Bascom announced that she would attend a workshop with the human rights commissions later in the day and she asked councilors to let her know ideas they would like shared. F. Maurie Jacobs Memorial Park Ms. Bascom said she had attended three meetings about the design of the memorial park proposed for the area between the Owens Rose Garden and the Greenway Bike Bridge on the south bank of the Willamette River. She reported a large turn-out at a neighborhood meeting on the issue and said the neighborhood could make significant contributions in the process of refining ideas. e Mayor Obie added that when the Maurie Jacobs Memorial Park Committee develops a conceptual proposal, a presentation will be made to the council. G. Riverbank Beach Ms. Bascom referred to the neighborhood meeting she mentioned earlier and said there was interest in developing a riverbank beach on the south side of the Willamette near the Greenway Bridge. She asked for a staff report on whether the City could encourage such a development and the liability involved in doing so. H. Styrofoam Referring to a conversation with a Portland Commissioner about statewide city issues, Ms. Schue asked whether there is council interest in addressing the problems associated with styrofoam, which she described as a permanent material that does not decompose. She recommended asking the City's Purchasing staff to comment on the issue. Mr. Holmer corrcurred with Ms. Schue's concern. Mr. Gleason said the organization is using up its existing supplies of styrofoam products and has begun switching to paper products. ~MINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 3 . Mr. Bennett referred to an article he had read in Business News regarding progress in technology in the area of plastics and said new developments in the biodegradation of plastics would influence any response to the issue. Ms. Schue responded that the use of paper products was an important consideration. I. Buil di ng Permi ts Mayor Obie reported continuing criticism of the City.s apparent inability to issue building permits in a reasonable length of time. Describing the backlog in August as reaching a crisis level, he proposed that the council direct staff to prepare an ordinance requiring permits to be issued after a reasonable length of time if the appropriate professionals agree that all codes have been met. Mayor Obie considered 45 days a reasonable period of time for the process. Mr. Bennett suggested reviewing practices in other communities. Mr. Miller also saw a need to address the timely issuance of building permits, but he emphasized the need to consider liability issues. He cautioned against jeopardizing the public by moving too rapidly. Ms. Wooten suggested the creation of different categories for building permits. While 45 days may be reasonable for plan check approval, it may not be appropriate for a major project. e Mr. Holmer asked about the architect and engineer sharing the liability for errors they might make. Mr. Bennett responded that while shared liability may be fair, he doubted its practicality because of the difficulty of obtaining insurance coverage. He said it was important to specify the type of permit when discussing the question of liability. Ms. Bascom indicated she would favor discussing the issue. Ms. Ehrman requested that a work session be scheduled before an ordinance is considered. Mayor Obie directed Mr. Gleason to schedule a work session as soon as possible and suggested that professionals be invited to participate. Mr. Rutan asked that an objective assessment of the actual performance level be included in the work session background information. II. ELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to elect Ms. Wooten as City Council President. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Obie cal'led for a meeting of the Council Committee on Committees as soon as possible. ~MINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 4 e III. RESOLUTION CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION CONCERNING WILLAMETTE STREET RECONSTRUCTION City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Mr. Bennett excused himself from participation in this agenda item. Rich Weinman, Eugene Development Department, gave the staff report. On May 18, 1988, the council adopted ballot language to place the issue of reconstructing Willamette Street on the November election ballot. In July, the council considered an election resolution and asked for information about a po 11 . Mr. Weinman said a private opinion poll would cost approximately $700 and could be completed on very short notice. September 7 is the deadline for placing the issue on the November ballot and for deciding whether there will be a voters pamphlet. Mr. Weinman referred councilors to their packets and a copy of the proposed election resolution and a copy of alternative ballot language explanation that was submitted by a private citizens group. Ms. Schue reported that an informal poll she conducted at the County Fair indicated public opinion was strongly in favor of keeping Willamette Street closed. Mayor Obie outlined three potential actions the council can take: 1) place the issue on the ballot and proceed with an election, e 2) vote to open Willamette Street, or 3) vote to keep the street closed. Based on the public hearing held on this issue, which had the largest attendance in the history of the community, Mayor Obie said he believes the only appropriate action the council can take at this time is to follow the expressed desires of the community by voting to keep Willamette Street closed. Mr. Holmer suggested that such a long-standing issue warrants an election with the advantage of full discussion in the voters pamphlet. He said a council vote at this time would be a mistake and would not be as definitive as a public election. Mr. Rutan said feedback from his constituents conflicted with Mayor Obie's description of the expressed desire of the community. He favored giving the community an opportunity to speak through an election. Mr. Miller said he supported an election because of the emotional quality of the issue. He said a council vote to keep the street closed carries assurance that the issue will not resurface only if there is also agreement not to reconsider the matter for a specified period of time. He pointed oct that such an agreement by the present council would not be binding for future councils. 4ItMINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 5 tit Ms. Wooten opposed opening the street to through traffic. She said she has a strong belief in the sanctity of the vote and said if the voters favor closing Willamette Street "forever," the council does not have the right to revisit the issue. She described Eugene as a living city that will grow and she recognized that changing circumstances may make opening the street desirable in the future. She agreed with Mayor Obie and favored a council vote at this time with no referral to the voters. Ms. Schue indicated her preference would be to keep the street closed and she said it was appropriate for the council to go on record regarding the issue. She proposed a two-step process in which the council would vote now and then refer its action to the voters for their consideration. Ms. Bascom pointed out that if the voters determine the street will be closed, that decision now does not preclude the issue from being raised in the future. Ms. Wooten maintained that taking final action at this time without referral to the voters would provide better government. Mr. Miller said only an election would provide the public with a sense of finality. He observed that a voters pamphlet would allow the council to respond to the issue in whatever way it chooses. Ms. Ehrman emphasized the importance of knowing exactly what is being referred to the voters. She described Ms. Schue's proposal as an opinion poll that would serve as a vote of confidence in the council's decision and she supported such a vote. e Because he saw a problem with the ballot language, Mr. Rutan said he would support Ms. Schue's proposal to refer the council's action to the voters for approval. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, that the Eugene City Council go on record to continue to keep Willamette Street closed to through traffic between 8th and 10th avenues. Mr. Miller said he would oppose the motion. He felt costs would be the same whether the street is opened or remains closed and is rehabilitated. He suggested the motion should specify that no additional money would be spent to keep the street closed. Ms. Wooten said the the spending of money is a separate issue the council can discuss later. The motion passed, 4:3:1, with Councilors Bascom, Ehrman, Schue, and Wooten voting aye; Councilors Holmer, Miller, and Rutan voting against; and Councilor Bennett abstain~ng. Ms. Wooten urged delaying any public affirmation of the council's decision until at least 1989, but Mr. Miller's preferred alternative was to refer the decision to the voters to obtain their expressed consent. Until that is done, he said there would be mistrust of the council's decision. 4ItMINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 6 tit Tim Sercombe, City Attorney's Office, informed the council that there is some legal question of whether the form of the action to close or open a two-block stretch of the street is something that is sufficiently legislative in character to be referred. If the council desires a straight referral of legislation that is passed as a resolution or ordinance, the ordinance needs to be prepared to deal with more than just Willamette Street and still have the effect of keeping Willamette Street closed. It has been structured in the form of an advisory vote for that reason. Mr. Sercombe's second point was that it is necessary for the council to act to both adopt the resolution or ordinance on keeping Willamette Street closed and to adopt a resolution calling an election, or referring that for an election, by the September 9 deadline. A ballot title, the form of the referral ordinance or resolution, and the form of the ordinance being referred, must all be prepared. He said the next available election date would be March 1989. Mr. Gleason said the motion, as it was passed, is not legislative so an advisory question related to that motion would not have to deal with the referendum prohibition against legislative review. Mayor Obie stated that it would be less costly to keep the street closed than to open it. He said the council's vote kept faith with the public sentiment expressed in testimony at the public hearing. He saw a vital need for the council to maintain flexibility and he considered the issue of what the e voters are voting on to be critical. Ms. Schue spoke in opposition to delaying a public vote. She said a March election would cost $25,000 for a vote-by-mail and she considered November the logical time to make a decision on an issue that has been around for such a long time. She asked Mr. Sercombe whether viewing it as an advisory ballot and using the language that has been prepared with an amendment would permit the issue's placement on the November ballot. Mr. Sercombe responded affirmatively, saying the council has a resolution before it calling an election on November 8. In response to a question from Ms. Ehrman about the possibility of having an advisory vote on the decision the council had made, Mr. Sercombe said the council needs to consider the structure of an advisory vote: whether it wishes to place a proposition before the voters in which a lIyesll vote is to open the street and a "no" vote is to keep it closed, or if it should be structured so a "yesll vote supports the council's decision and "no" does not. Ms. Wooten reminded the council of recent experiences with adv~sory votes and said the public perception is of a non-binding, "mock" vote by which the council mayor may not abide. 4IIMINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 7 e Mr. Holmer said the council had declared a particular position. If the resolution calling a special election was adopted as stated, it would provide an adequate referendum on the council1s action. Ms. Bascom thought the issue was how firmly the council would be locked into a particular position in future years. Mr. Miller asked about the cost of an election if the issue is on a ballot with other items. Mr. Gleason said the costs would be shared and the costs could be partially mitigated. Mr. Rutan said there is confusion on the council regarding the definition of an advisory vote and the matter to be referred to the voters. Mr. Holmer suggested moving on to the next agenda item. There were no objections. The council took a five minute break. IV. LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES OF AUGUST 4, 1988 Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the minutes of the August 4, 1988, meeting of the Legislative Committee. Ms. Wooten noted the committee's early discussion of the field burning issue. She requested further exploration of the issue and asked staff to investigate how the council should participate in the decision-making process. Ms. Schue concurred that discussion of the issue of air quality is needed. e Ms. Ehrman mentioned that the City of Corvallis had adopted a position favoring a ban on field burning. Mr. Gleason anticipated the City's involvement in the issue might require a commitment of staff resources. Ms. Schue remarked that Public Works staff member Terry Smith chairs a Department of Environmental Quality advisory committee on this topic and is a valuable source of information. Ms. Wooten requested an outline of areas for potential council involvement and a listing of the resources required in order to participate actively in the decisions that will be made regarding the field burning issue. She noted the possibilities of coordinating with the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority, other cities in the Willamette Valley, the League of Oregon Cities, and a Governor1s task force. Mr. Miller commented that smoke intrusion is a larger issue than field burning alone. Mayor Obie added that the council's actions should be positive as it approaches the agricultural community to assist in resolving a problem. Mr. Rutan observed that construction of a research park could help promote the development of the technology necessary to resolve the situation. ~MINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 8 e Mr. Rutan noted the success of the grant application for construction of a new public broadcasting station in Eugene (mentioned on page two of the minutes) and congratulated all those involved. Mayor Obie shared a letter from Melvin Waggoner of Oregon Public Broadcasting expressing gratitude to the council. Mr. Bennett called attention to the minutes' reference to centralized retail management (CRM). He noted that the grant mentioned is a technical support grant as opposed to a grant for out-of-pocket expense. He said Downtown Eugene, Inc. (DEI), a new, private, non-profit group representing downtown has been charged with the responsibility of working on CRM. As chair of DEI, Mr. Bennett said he would appreciate the opportunity to speak to the council on CRM. Mayor Obie directed staff to schedule this item for an upcoming dinner meeting. Mr. Holmer asked if the council's approval of the Legislative Committee's minutes indicated its approval of the actions and policies of the committee. He suggested reviewing the minutes without approval. Mayor Obie responded that according to written policy, the council's approval of the issues as recommended by the committee provides staff direction for working on the issues in a legislative environment. If a councilor disagrees with an individual item, that item can be removed and placed on the council's agenda for discussion. Ms. Wooten told the council that a comment attributed to her in the fourth paragraph on page five in the minutes was intended as a joke. e The motion passed 7:1, with Mr. Holmer voting no. V. RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE BALLOT MEASURE 8 City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Ms. Schue identified the issue as one the Legislative Committee felt should be presented to the council for separate action. Res. No. 4097--A resolution stating the opposition of the Eugene City Council to 1988 Oregon Ballot Measure 8, which proposes to overturn the governor's executive order EO-87-20 prohibiting discrimina- tion within the Executive Branch of State Government on the basis of sexual orientation. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Ehr~an, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried 7:0:1, with Mr. Holmer abstaining. Mr. Holmer explained his abstention was because the agenda item did not include the actual documents (Oregon Ballot Measure 8 and the Governor1s ~MINUTEs--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 9 . executive order EO-87-20) on which the council is being asked to express an opinion. He said excerpts and arguments in the staff memo are not the appropriate materials for presentation to the council. VI. WORK SESSION: REVISIONS TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE (CA 87-1) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Jerry Jacobson of the Planning Department gave the staff report. Mr. Jacobson introduced Joy Norwood, Historic Review Board chair; Nancy Nathanson, Planning Commission vice-chair; Carole Daly, Historic Preservation Ordinance Revision Task Team chair; and Karen Zisman, Preservation Con su ltant. Mr. Jacobson said the draft ordinance was developed by a task team over a period of 18 months. The ordinance being recommended by the Planning Commission and Historic Review Board represents a more comprehensive approach to historic preservation management for Eugene. The changes are consistent with State and Federal standards for regulation of historic landmarks. Mr. Jacobson explained that communities attaining those high standards in their preservation programs are eligible for Certified Local Government certification. Eugene has received this certification, which means the City can apply for and receive additional funding from the Federal government to supplement the historic preservation program. This approval and a $10,000 grant are conditional on the passage of the ordinance within six months. e Mr. Jacobson outlined the significant changes to the existing ordinance. They included the following: 1. Composition of the Historic Review Board will increase the number of professional experts with background in historic preservation. 2. Regulation will extend to properties on the National Register and not on the City Register. 3. Demolition of structures for which historic designation has been initiated will be prevented. 4. Interior features of historic landmarks may be designated. 5. Appeal of Historic Review Board decisions will be to the City Council instead of to the Planning Commission. 6. Demolitions will have pre-application requirements to determine whether the structure can be preserved, sold, or moved. Mr. Jacobson anticipated issues surfacing at the public hearing that will involve the role of the Historic Review Board. He said there is some feeling in the community that the board should be advisory and the Planning - MINUTES--Eugene Ci ty Counci 1 September 7, 1988 Page 10 - -- e Commission or City Council should make regulatory decisions. The composition of the board is also at issue. Interim protection of inventoried properties that are considered primary concerns some citizens. Finally, Mr. Jacobson said a letter had been received from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) staff. Although they feel the ordinance is an improvement, there is a suggestion that citizens, as well as the council, board, and property owner, should initiate landmark designation. The DLCD also indicated that resources newly identified through inventories should take precedence over neighborhood and metro plans in determining whether a structure should be a historic landmark. Mr. Jacobson said the issues identified by the DLCD would be addressed and brought to the council for further consideration. Ms. Ehrman expressed concern about letters from property owners who object to their properties being considered for designation. Mr. Jacobson said there is an issue of balancing private property rights and the public interest. Mr. Miller asked about the time line for property on which historic designation has been initiated. Mr. Jacobson said once the designation process is initiated, a public hearing is held within 45 days, a decision is reached within another fifteen days, that decision can be appealed to the City Council within ten days, and a public hearing will be held within 40 days of receipt of the appeal, with the council making its decision within 15 days of the hearing. To demolish a property already designated historic, Mr. Jacobson said there is a different process that requires up to 180 days. He said the task team discussed the timing at length and had in fact shortened e the time required. Mr. Bennett commented that he supports the effort to protect the public interest in the history of the community. He considers this interest worth protecting and said it may override some additional burden that may be placed on individual property owners. He observed that Eugene has demolished many of its historic buildings and his experience with State and Federal regulatory agencies has led him to believe that the value of some currently designated buildings is questionable. He recommended looking carefully at what is truly historic and what is not. Mayor Obie, Mr. Miller, and Mr. Rutan left the meeting at 1:20 p.m. Mr. Bennett observed that the best way for a historic property to provide a long-term benefit to the community is to assure that it functions economically in today's community. Interior features must be reviewed in the context of how the building will function in the future. How accessibility, and health and life safety issues are addressed will be an important part of the discussion of interior designation. Ms. Bascom asked about restrictions placed on the owner in the c~.se of the Quackenbush building. Mr. Jacobson answe~ed that the building is designated as a City Landmark. There is no interior designation and the building can continue to function with the uses allowed in the C-3 zoning. Exterior alterations require review according to the guidelines in the ordinance. 4It MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 11 e Demolition would require the owners to follow guidelines for demolition. Under the proposed ordinance, those guidelines would require that efforts be made for rehabilitation, sale or moving of the building. If all efforts to save and re-use the building fail, demolition could be permitted. Responding to a question from Ms. Bascom, Susan Brody, Planning Director, said the Mayflower situation could not reoccur under the new proposal. The Historic Review Board was considering designation at the time the Mayflower was demolished and under the new ordinance, this consideration would mandate a stay of demolition. Ms. Bascom expressed surprise regarding a new historic preservation staff position in the Planning Department. Ms. Brody explained that approximately $25,000 was being spent annually for the services of a historic preservation consultant. It was an administrative decision to convert those dollars into a half-time staff position to increase efficiency in providing support for the Historic Review Board and the preservation program. There was no increase in the budget. Ms. Bascom referred to historic district designations and mentioned the creation of work to fill staff time. Ms. Brody explained that the program is operating at a basic level and the demands in the area of preservation have grown in the last four years. Responding to questions from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Jacobson said the IIH Historic District" is a zoning district that allows certain uses. East Skinner Butte - is presently the only Historic District. He said the board's powers would not change significantly under the new ordinance. Ms. Wooten thanked Councilor Holmer for his participation in the re-drafting of the ordinance. The meeting was adjourned to September 12, 1988, at 1:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~?,~tra Micheal Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Mary Feldman) mncc 090788 4ItMINUTES--EUgene City Council September 7, 1988 Page 12