Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/21/1989 Meeting e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall June 21, 1989 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Ruth Bascom, Rob Bennett, Shawn Boles, Debra Ehrman, Bobby Green, Freeman Holmer, Emily Schue. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Roger Rutan. The adjourned meeting of June 14, 1989, of the Eugene City Council was called to order by Mayor Jeff Miller. I. ITEMS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER A. Cascade West Economic Development District Ms. Schue recently attended the annual dinner of the Cascade West Economic Development District. She said this district includes four counties--Lane, Linn, Lincoln, and Benton--and is operated through Lane Council of e Governments and District 4; The district was formed to take advantage of Federal legislation. Ms. Schue said the district has had some significant accomplishments, such as reducing the unemployment rate in the four-county area by one percentage point. Ms. Schue said some of the district's work has occurred inside the City of Eugene through the Business Assistance Team. B. Strike During World Veterans Championships Ms. Schue said that the press coverage surrounding the strike of the Oregon Public Employees Union (OPEU) makes it sound as if the City opposes the strike. Ms. Schue clarified that the City.s position in the labor dispute is neutral, and that the City urges both labor and management to work hard in the negotiations so that the issue is settled before the beginning of the World Veterans Championships. Mayor Miller thought that if the issue is not resolved before the World Veterans Championships, it would be inappropriate for the OPEU to target the games with a strike. Mr. Bennett noted his agreement with Ms. Schue's position, but felt it would be appropriate for the City to discourage the OPEU from targeting the World Veterans Championships with a strike. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 1989 Page 1 e C. Property Tax Exemption Boundary Mr. Bennett said one of his constituents owns property immediately outside of the property-tax exemption boundary for low-income housing. He questioned whether the existing boundary is somewhat arbitrary and requested a review of the criteria used in determining how the boundary is set. Mr. Sercombe explained that the property-tax exemption boundaries for housing in the downtown core were set in relation to old C-2 and C-3 zoning districts. Ms. Decker added that those areas that were included in the tax-exempt areas were also zoned multiple-family residential. The council asked for a staff report clarifying how the boundaries were set and what flexibility exists in these boundaries. D. University Parking Structure at 17th Avenue and Alder Street Ms. Bascom circulated a letter from herself to Dan Williams of the University of Oregon expressing concern about the proposed parking structure at 17th ~ Avenue and Alder Street. Ms. Bascom said the letter specifically addresses the fact that the bike routes on Alder Street are critical and that the plans for the proposed parking structure should take this into account. II. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE CONCERNING DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT e Dave Whitlow, Assistant City Manager, introduced the item. CB 4146--An ordinance concerning the Downtown Development District; amending Ordinance No. 19621; and declaring an emergency. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read a second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. III. WORK SESSION: DISCUSSION OF ANNEXATION AND SEWER ISSUES IN THE RIVER ROAD/SANTA CLARA AREA Pat Decker, Planning and Development Department, said that this is the second in a series of three planned work sessions for council discussion of sewer and annexation issues in River Road and Santa Clara. Ms. Decker said staff would be reviewing additional annexation and sewer options, and financing alternatives during the work session. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 1989 Page 2 e Ms. Decker reviewed Option 1 for addressing sewer and annexation issues in River Road/Santa Clara. She said Option 1 provides for sewer availability to all properties in the River Road area in the near future. In addition, Option 1 gives residents an opportunity to vote on issues, provides for lower sewer assessments because of the large-scale annexation, generates tax revenues which could be used to fund police services in the area, and provides for public hearings before the Eugene Planning Commission, Eugene City Council, and the Lane County Boundary Commission. Ms. Decker added that Option 1 would be based on a tax differential system and would provide for a gradual phase-in to the City tax rate. Ms. Decker noted that if the council chooses to proceed with Option 1, some type of fall-back strategies should be developed in case a remonstrance is filed and the election is lost. She said possible strategies include moving on to Option 2 and working with the County and Springfield to make the changes necessary to allow connection of existing development to sewers prior to annexation or utilizing the election results to process small annexations. Ms. Decker said staff has also developed an Option lA, which incorporates an advisory vote conducted by Lane County. She stated that asking Lane County to schedule such a vote is the only way to allow for a vote prior to the initiation of the annexation. Ms. Decker reviewed Option 2, which would: establish the inevitability of sewers; extend sewer availability to existing development in the near future; allow the connection schedule to be met; and would separate annexation and e sewer issues. Ms. Decker mentioned several drawbacks to Option 2. These included: financing of the sewers would not be backed by the full faith and credit of the City; other needed urban services would not be provided; and, the approach would require changes to the Metro Plan and the County Service District Agreement. Ms. Decker emphasized that Option 2 would provide for sewer connections for existing development; new development would still require annexation. Ms. Decker said staff examined several alternative methods for addressing sewer and annexation concerns in the River Road/Santa Clara area. These alternatives included an incremental annexation process, island annexation, returning River Road/Santa Clara issues to the County, repayment of the grant from the Environmental Protection Agency, and small area annexation elections. Ms. Decker said staff did not feel any of these options were worth pursuing. She reviewed some of the difficulties with these alternatives (see memorandum dated June 21, 1989). Terry Smith, Assistant Director of Public Works, described the logic behind staff's recommendation. He said there are two ways to approach annexation. One of those is the belief that in order for annexation to succeed, it must be done at the lowest possible expense. The second approach takes the view that annexation will succeed if services that people really want are offered in a cost-effective manner. Mr. Smith said what cities do best is provide cost-effective services. He said the City's ability to deliver cost-effective police service is one of its strengths, and should be used in e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 1989 Page 3 e the annexation of the River Road/Santa Clara area. For this reason, staff favors Option 1. Mr. Smith said staff has also been influenced by the belief that there is likely to be a referendum on whether sewers are constructed in the River Road/Santa Clara area unless the City clearly demonstrates that sewers will be constructed in the area. Mr. Smith said this is why staff has provided Option 2 as a fall-back position. Mr. Smith added that in the fall, the Environmental Quality Commission will probably rule that sewers should be provided to aJl area residents within a decade or so. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Smith said that the original agreement that the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) made with the County mandates that sewers be installed in the River Road/Santa Clara area. Mr. Smith explained that the Lane County Board of Commissioners adopted an ordinance which forces residents outside the City to connect to an available city sewer should the opportunity occur. Mr. Smith distributed and reviewed a handout detailing the sewer construction schedule, the time line associated with a council-initiated annexation of River Road (Option 1), and the time line for the provision of sewers ahead of annexation for River Road (Option 2). Mr. Holmer asked when the City will have to begin sewer design and construction for Santa Clara. Mr. Smith said the sewering of Santa Clara e probably will not occur for some time. He said if the City concentrates on the sewering of River Road, the sewering of Santa Clara would not begin until at least 1993. Mr. Holmer asked how the City can proceed simultaneously with amendments to the Metro Plan and an annexation-based sewer design process. Mr. Smith said staff feels it is necessary to begin working on both options now, because it would be too late to start from the fall-back position in May 1990. Ms. Decker qualified this statement saying that while this would be possible, it would most likely cause delay in sewer connections for property owners that have not been annexed. Mr. Bennett asked if staff has polled residents in the River Road/Santa Clara area to determine how they would vote in an annexation election. Mr. Smith said informal surveys indicate that less than 30 percent of the residents would vote favorably and 65-70 percent of the residents feel they need more information. Ms. Ehrman thought that the City should pursue Option 2, of providing sewers ahead of annexation for the River Road area. She felt that the residents in that area have already received a lot of information about annexation and sewers. Mr. Holmer thought that the City needs to try Option 1 before proceeding to Option 2. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 1989 Page 4 e Mr. Boles felt that options 1 and 2 are inextricably linked, and that they should be presented to the residents of the area as the only two options. He thought that staff should begin calculating the differences in cost under the two options and that this information should be distributed to residents as soon as possible. Mr. Holmer asked whether there are any regulations which prohibit the use of the same funding sources for sewer construction inside and outside the city boundaries. Mr. Smith explained that the City must provide similar privileges, such as a time payment plan, inside and outside the city. He said that if the City were to use the City's credit for a large project outside the city, the bond rating of existing city residents would be affected. To prevent this, the City can operate similar programs inside and outside the city limits using different funding sources. Mr. Green said the council has a policy that annexation proceeds sewering. He felt that the council should act on this policy. Mr. Bennett agreed. Ms. Ehrman thought that if the council decides to pursue Option 1, the election should be held earlier than May 15, 1990. Ms. Schue agreed. At 1:20 p.m., the meeting was adjourned to June 26, 1989. Respectfully submitted, e ~~. .... Mic eal Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Tanya Northman) MNCC 062189 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 1989 Page 5