Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/23/1989 Meeting (2) e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall October 23, 1989 7:30 p.m, COUNCILORS PRESENT: Ruth Bascom, Robert Bennett, Shawn Boles, Debra Ehrman, Bobby Green, Freeman Holmer, Roger Rutan, Emily Schue. The adjourned meeting of October 18, 1989, of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. I. RECOGNITION OF FORMER MAYORS GUS KELLER AND ED CONE Mayor Miller introduced former mayors Cone and Keller and reviewed some of their many accomplishments, He thanked them for their years of dedicated public service to the City of Eugene and announced that plaques honoring each of these former mayors and those councilors with whom they served will be added to the display of "Elected Officials" in the Council Chamber. e II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes of September 25 Dinner Work Session; September 20, September 25, and September 27, 1989, City Council Meetings. B. Authorization to Exchange Real Property with Lane County Ms. Schue corrected the minutes of September 27, 1989, page 3, to indicate that Mr. Boles voted against the motion that the council meet in executive session and she voted in favor. Mr. Boles corrected the minutes of September 20, 1989, page 4, to have the motion he made that the Board of Directors be comprised of five elected officials be seconded by Mr. Holmer. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to approve the items on the City Council Consent Calendar as corrected. Ro 11 ca 11 vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 1 ~- e III. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE GLENWOOD AREA, BETWEEN THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD PROPERTY, INTERSTATE 5 AND HENDERSON AVENUE (VIK, AZ 89-3) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Cathy Czerniak, Planning and Development Department, summarized the criteria on which the council's decisions on agenda items III and IV would be based. Section 9.158 of the Eugene Code specifies that property to be annexed must be inside the urban growth boundary and the annexation must be consistent with adopted plans and policies. Public services and facilities must be available as prescribed in adopted plans and policies and the annexation must result in a boundary in which services can be provided in an orderly and efficient manner. Zone change criteria in Section 9.678(2) of the Eugene Code require that the uses and densities that will be allowed must be able to be provided with services and must be consistent with the Metro Plan and applicable neighborhood refinement plans. This request for annexation consists of Tax Lots 100 and 1501 and includes portions of Henderson Avenue, 22nd Avenue, and Morton Street rights-of-way, The rights-of-way have been included in the proposal to facilitate road improvements that will be required prior to development of the parcel. The action being requested is a first step in making this property available for industrial development. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the annexation, e rezoning to 1-2 SIR, and redesignation to City Industrial Sign District. During its discussion, the commission acknowledged that the area is a transition area, ultimately designated for industrial uses. The five site review criteria recommended in the Glenwood Refinement Plan were to be applied to ensure that development in the area is compatible with adjacent residential property, that buffering will occur, and that access issues will be addressed as development occurs. The Planning Commission added a note to the Site Review criteria asking that buffering occur as early in the development process as possible. With respect to the sign district, the Planning Commission recommended that the entire parcel be redesignated to Industrial Sign District to avoid further expansion of the Highway-Oriented District prior to completion of the revision of the sign code and because the Highway-Oriented District is most appropriately applied to commercial rather than industrial properties. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. Jim Saul, 111 West 7th Avenue, represented the property owner, Trygve Vik. He concurred with the Planning Commission recommendations for annexation and rezoning but disagreed with the recommendation for Industrial Sign District designation. Mr. Saul requested that the portion of the property with direct frontage on Interstate 5 (the first 200 feet back from the centerline of Interstate 5) receive the Highway-Oriented District designation. He said that the property immediately west is so designated, and fair and equal e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 2 e treatment should be considered. In addition, Mr. Saul maintained that because no final decision has been reached on the update of the sign code, it is too early to base decisions on the proposal to discontinue extending the Highway-Oriented District east of Henderson Avenue. He argued that the Highway-Oriented District is presently applied to properties designated for industrial use in the Metro Plan and zoned accordingly. Mr. Saul informed the council that during the past year, Mr. Vik has been approached by the City of Eugene Public Works Department with a request to place a sign on the property advertising the City of Eugene. For a private individual to place such a sign, the Highway-Oriented District would be required and Mr. Saul said the City should abide by the same standards that it applies to individuals. Randy Thwing, 975 Oak Street, Suite 650, asked the council not to base its decision on proposed changes to the sign code and to look at the facts and circumstances in the code as it presently exists. He said the appropriate designation is highway-oriented because the property is adjacent to and abuts a parcel with the same qualities that has that designation and because the code provides that signs in the Highway-Oriented District be oriented to traffic traveling at higher speeds than those on local or collector streets. David Boswell, Hilton Hotel Director of Sales and Marketing, spoke on behalf of Spencer Whitted and requested that the property be designated so as to allow construction of a billboard to advertise the Eugene Hilton and the City Conference Center. Mr, Boswell commented that many travelers on Interstate 5 bypass Eugene because there is a lack of signs directing them to downtown. e Shelley Dement, 446 Charnelton, concurred with Mr. Boswell's comments and pointed out that the Hilton has been on a waiting list for two years for billboard space in this area. There being no additional requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. Responding to questions, Marsha Miller, Building and Permit Division, explained that the ability to have a billboard is the main difference between industrial and highway-oriented sign districts. Any sign over 200 square feet in size is considered a billboard. As the council's representative on the Community Sign Advisory Committee, Mr. Rutan confirmed that the property in question was one of the sites proposed for a billboard-sized sign advertising Eugene. Regarding the Hilton Hotel's request for a sign, Mr. Gleason explained that billboard sites are subscribed on a waiting-list basis. State regulations require a certain distance between signs. Mr. Boles referred to written testimony received from Mike Holman and asked about the issue of access on 22nd Avenue. Ms. Czerniak explained that the portion of 22nd Avenue east of Henderson Avenue is included in this annexation proposal. The portion on the other side of Henderson Avenue is already within the city limits and is scheduled for improvements in FY92. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 3 e That road currently does not meet City standards although it is paved and curbed, Development on Tax Lot 100 would require a minimum level of improvement, paid for by the developer of the vacant industrial property, prior to development. Those improvements would include an asphalt mat but not sidewalks or curbs and gutters. The City will not initiate improvements to be assessed to the residential property owners along the eastern portion of Henderson Avenue. Mayor Miller said he considered the request for highway-oriented designation reasonable, Ms. Miller added that there may be adequate room on the property for more than one sign and noted that billboards are limited to 1,300 square feet per half mile. Answering questions, City Attorney Tim Sercombe said that certain types of public signs are exempt from application of the Sign Code. The sign moratorium to be considered as agenda item VIII could be designed to be applicable to any application filed after the effective date of the ordinance or to any application that has been filed at the time of the ordinance. The council could proceed with annexation and postpone a decision on sign designation by redrafting the final order to omit the final paragraph. Another order would be drafted for consideration at the time the council wished to take action on the sign code change. Ms. Schue commented that the council's task should be to consider the number of billboards that are appropriate, not what their content should be. e Mr. Bennett referred to the minutes from the Planning Commission's October 3, 1989, meeting and asked for an explanation of the statement that II. . s ta ff has consistently applied the Industrial Sign District on other annexed properties in the area.1I Ms, Miller explained that the industrially zoned properties in this area to which the Industrial Sign District was applied were not adjacent to Interstate 5 and therefore were not eligible for the highway-oriented designation. She said that on June 24, the Planning Commission discussed extending the highway-oriented sign districts as part of the Sign Code revision but voted not to make that extension in the area in question. Mr. Boles asked for clarification on the request for early buffering. Ms. Czerniak said that the request came from a property owner who asked that prior to construction, buffering be required. The Planning Commission also heard testimony that claimed it would be difficult for a developer to place landscaping or fencing prior to completion of development. The commission responded by not requiring early buffering but asked that creation of a berm or anything that would buffer the residential property during development be considered during the site review process. Mr. Saul pointed out that under the revised Sign Code, the Highway-Oriented District is to be applied to more than two miles of West 11th Avenue, Beltline Road, parts of Garfield Street between 11th and 7th avenues, and the Pape property adjacent to the property being discussed, all of which are designated and zoned industrial. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 4 e Mr. Rutan recommended that the council reach a decision on both issues in order to give the applicant an indication of the council's direction. Ms. Schue preferred delaying a decision on the sign issue until the council has an opportunity to discuss billboards in general as part of its consideration of a revised sign code. Ms. Ehrman concurred. Mr. Sercombe described the council's action as a quasi-judicial procedure. With an application before it for a change in sign district boundary, the council is obligated to take action within 180 days. If the council chooses to delay its decision in order to receive additional information that is relevant to its decision, it must reopen the public hearing and allow the applicant the opportunity to rebut that information. Ex parte contact would have to be avoided. Res. No. 4149--A resolution furthering the annexation to the City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Service District for property located in Glenwood between the Southern Pacific Railroad property, Interstate 5, and Henderson Avenue. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried, 7:1, with Mr. Boles voting nay. e Final Order A/Z 89-3--A final order rezoning the property located on Morton Street between the Southern Pacific Railroad property and Interstate 5 from County C-1/UL to City I-2/SR. Redesignation from County Outlying Commercial Sign District to City Industrial Sign District. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to approve the final order, rewording the third to last paragraph as follows: "Now, therefore, based upon the above findings and the record in this proceeding, the City Council approves the Planning Commission decision and recommendation on the zone change, and it is hereby ordered that: .The sign district map established under Section 8.813 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended to reflect redesignation to City Industrial Sign District of all but the first 200 feet of the property adjacent to Interstate 5 which will be redesignated to Highway-Oriented Sign District." Mr. Rutan commented that in his experience, the sign industry is highly regulated in terms of billboard density, spread, and size on the interstate highway system, The matter before the council represents a minute addition to a limited inventory. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page.;5 ~ e Ms, Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to divide the question and omit reference to sign district redesignation. Roll call vote; the motion carried, 5:3, with councilors Bascom, Boles, Ehrman, Green, and Schue voting in favor; and councilors Bennett, Holmer, and Rutan voting against. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to approve the final order rezoning the property located on Morton Street between the Southern Pacific Railroad property and Interstate 5 from County C-1/UL to City I-2SR. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to redesignate the property located on Morton Street between the Southern Pacific Railroad property and Interstate 5 from County Outlying Commercial Sign District to City Industrial Sign District, except for the 200 feet immediately adjacent to Interstate 5, to be redesignated to City Highway-Oriented. Roll call vote; the motion carried, 5:3, with councilors Bascom, Rutan, Bennett, Green, and Holmer voting aye; and councilors Boles, Ehrman, and Schue voting nay. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION/REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF CENTENNIAL BOULEVARD AND SOUTH OF KINSROW AVENUE (WILLAIM B. CHASE) (AZ 89-4) e City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Neil Bjorklund, Planning and Development Department, reported that this proposal involves five tax lots in the Willakenzie area. All owners and residents of the proposal area have consented to the annexation which was initiated by the property owner in order to obtain sanitary sewers and other urban services to enable the property to be developed with high-density residential units. The proposed annexation is contiguous with the existing city limits and meets the criteria for a double-majority annexation. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the annexation and rezoning request and adopted site review criteria to address concerns about compatibility, traffic, natural features, and potential historic features, Answering a question from Ms. Bascom, Mr. Bjorklund said that site review would cause staff to review the proposal in terms of how buildings are constructed so as to minimize the number of trees lost. A particular grove of trees is within the floodway and he pointed out that there are additional restrictions for that reason as well. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. Arthur C. Piculell, 02008 Southwest Military Road, Portland, Oregon, identified himself as the proposed developer of the site. He said the majority of the vegetation in place that is of concern is located in the floodplain area. Based on State law, that growth will probably remain in e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 6 place. Another concern has to do with the Chase residence, constructed in e the 1930s. Mr. Piculell hoped to move the house elsewhere on the site. There being no additional requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. Res. No. 4150--A resolution furthering annexation to the City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Service District for properties located east of Centennial Boulevard and south of Kinsrow Avenue. Ms. Bascom reminded the council of its recently identified strategic goal to improve alternate modes of transportation within the metropolitan area. She considered this particular development an example of how bicycle traffic could be encouraged and she urged the council to explore the opportunity. Ms, Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Final Order All 89-4--A final order rezoning property located east of Centennial Boulevard and south of Kinsrow Avenue from lane County AGIUL to City of Eugene R-4/SR High Rise Multiple-Family Residential e District with Site review Subdistrict and redesignation from County Residential Sign District to City Residential Sign District. Ms, Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to approve the final order. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. V. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING METROPOLITAN PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION NORTH OF AWBREY LANE (MA 87-6) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Teresa Bishow, Planning and Development Department, reported that the council approved an ordinance concerning Metro Plan amendments related to the urban growth boundary expansion north of Awbrey Lane on September 25. Since that time, Lane County and Springfield have approved the amendments with four changes. The council was asked to approve the revised ordinance so that all three jurisdictions will have adopted the same version and the matter will not have to go before the Metropolitan Policy Committee for conflict resolution. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing, e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page} :; e Jim Saul, 111 West 7th Avenue, Suite 300, spoke on behalf of the property owners who concur with the amendments before the council. He submitted a three-page memorandum from the Lane Council of Governments summarizing the acreage impacts of the wetlands in west Eugene and the inventory material. There being no additional requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. CB 4167--An ordinance amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Text and Urban Growth Boundary and taking a Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 2 Exception to Goals 3 and 14; and repealing Ordinance No. 19635. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only and that enactment be considered at this time. While she was not initially in favor of bringing this piece of property into the urban growth boundary, Ms. Ehrman said she thought it was important for the three jurisdictions to have the same text language. Mr. Boles said that while he could support the first three changes, he was concerned about the fourth change and asked to delete the last sentence which referred to changes in technology. e Mr. Rutan pointed out that any change would require the entire matter to go before each jurisdiction again and he urged the council to avoid that further delay. Ms. Schue reiterated the point raised by Mr. Rutan, Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Council Bill 4167 was read the second time by number only. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr, Rutan, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion carrying, 7:1, with Councilor Boles voting against, the bill was declared passed (and became Ordinance No. 19641). Mr. Gleason requested that the council allow staff to work on a financing issue related to developments occurring in the Glenwood, Highway 99, and other areas that are within the urban growth bou~dary. He hoped to develop an annexation policy that would follow the general plan but would allow annexation to occur after development begins and taxes are generated to be used for financing the infrastructures. Ms. Schue reminded councilors of Eugene's long tradition of doing what Mr. Gleason suggested and said that Valley River Center was built outside the city and then annexed. She considered Mr. Gleason's suggestion a logical policy development. Councilors Holmer and Bennett concurred. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 8 e VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: PROPOSED WITHDRAWAL OF RECENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTIES FROM WATER AND PARK AND RECREATION SPECIAL DISTRICTS City Manager Mike Gleason explained that the recent annexation of these properties requires the withdrawal action in order for the property owners to avoid duplicate tax liability. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. CB 4168--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the River Road Water District and River Road Park and Recreation District, that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on August 4, 1989 (Hall/Moore, EC EU 89-08) CB 4169--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the River Road Water District and River Road Park and Recreation District, that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local government Boundary Commission on July 25, 1989 (Arnold, EC EU 89-21) e CB 4170--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the Glenwood Water District and Willamalane Park and Recreation District, that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on July 8, 1989 (Fischer, EC EU 89-22) CB 4171--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the River Road Water District and River Road Park and Recreation District, that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on August 22, 1989 (Brown, EC EU 89-23) Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, that the bills, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Council bills 4168, 4169, 4170, and 4171 were read a second time by number only. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page~9 ~ e Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, that the bills be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote; a 11 councilors present voting aye, the bills were declared passed (and became Ordinance Nos. 19642, 19643, 19644, and 19645). VII. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING AN ALLEY VACATION LOCATED SOUTH OF 8TH AVENUE BETWEEN WILLAMETTE AND OLIVE STREETS (CITY OF EUGENE) (AV 89-2) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Jerry Jacobson, Planning and Development Department, reported that the alley proposed for vacation currently serves as an access aisle to the surface parking lots on the half-block bounded by Willamette Street, 8th Avenue, and Olive Street. The Eugene Renewal Agency is the owner of those parking lots. The request does not involve the east-west alley which currently services businesses on the south half of the block. The vacation is necessary to prepare the site for development and will result in the consolidation of two parcels into one development site. Since there are various utilities in the alley, right-of-way and easement will be retained that will provide right-of-entry for the maintenance or repair of the utilities. The easement described in the ordinance will allow the right to build over the easement above a clearance of 16 feet. The Downtown Commission unanimously recommended approval of the vacation request. e Responding to questions from Mr. Holmer, Mr. Jacobson said the alley is owned by the City of Eugene. After the vacation, it would be owned by the Eugene Renewal Agency. Mr, Gleason said that occupation of the alley would be incorporated into the value of the land transaction which is expected to be over $3 million. At Mr. Green's request, Mr. Jacobson clarified that standard ordinance language includes a statement that no valid objections have been made when no objections are received. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, the public hearing was closed. CB 4172--An ordinance vacating a 14-foot-wide alley located between Willamette Street and Olive Street, extending 160 feet south of 8th Avenue. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote; a 11 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 10 councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed e (and became Ordinance No. 19646). At this point, Mayor Miller asked councilors to complete their ballots for the vacant positions to be considered under item IX. VIII. RECOMMENDATION FOR SIX-MONTH MORATORIUM ON BILLBOARDS, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTERS, AND FLASHING SIGNS City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Marsha Miller, Building and Permit Services Division, reviewed the sign code update process. After the council's adoption of an interim code in June 1988, a lengthy citizen involvement process began. The purpose of a revised code was to rewrite unclear language; evaluate standards; and propose changes in light of State court requirements, new technology, and input from the community; and streamline the regulations and permit process, At its September 26 work session, the Planning Commission directed staff to develop a proposal for a moratorium on billboards. Since then, 13 applications for billboard permits within the city have been received. Nancy Nathanson, Planning Commission president, reported that the Planning Commission has reviewed the many comments received at its public hearing and requests the imposition of this temporary moratorium on sign permits for billboards, electronic message centers, and flashing signs. She expressed a concern that discussion of these types of signs could encourage a large e number of applications for new sign permits that are based more on speculation than demand or need, resulting in an increase in the number of signs for which limitations or prohibitions are being considered. Mr, Rutan asked about current restrictions on the types of signs included in the proposed moratorium. Ms. Nathanson responded that although regulations apply to size and placement of these signs, there may be a safety hazard which has not been adequately explored. Additionally, she expressed a concern relating to community values and said that protecting the city's environment is an important aspect of the economic development strategic plan. Answering Ms. Ehrman's inquiry, Mr, Sercombe said the effect of the moratorium on the 13 applications already received would depend on the direction of the council. Saying she would support the moratorium, Ms. Bascom said she thought more signs are being allowed in Oregon than elsewhere and she hoped to see that trend reversed. She asked that the moratorium be made applicable to those applications already submitted. Mr, Green pointed out the interesting fact that electronic signs had been delivered to the Hult Center earlier in the day. He said he considered neon lighting critical to the vitality of the downtown area. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page ,11 ~ --- Mayor Miller questioned the propriety of making a major change in the code e when its revision was initiated in order to achieve legal compliance and not to make substantive changes. He also asked whether the moratorium would unfairly benefit some businesses at the expense of others. Ms. Nathanson said some public testimony suggested that the moratorium would give economic advantage to some, but the commission had not discussed the issue thoroughly enough to analyze the economic situation. Mr. Holmer asked whether the council, as a matter of principle and consistency, should decline to make operative the Hult Center's electronic message center. Ms. Nathanson said discussion leans favorably toward permitting those signs currently in place that may be prohibited under a new ordinance. Mr. Rutan commented that the present sign code is a very restrictive ordinance and he questioned the need for the action under consideration. He doubted that the discussion would produce a large number of reactionary applications for permits. Saying he considered all billboards offensive, Mr. Boles maintained that aesthetics drives economic development factors. Mr. Bennett said that the Planning Commission made an honest effort to address the issue comprehensively and he would support the proposed moratorium. e Ms. Schue commented that the council was told that the existing sign code was complex and difficult to administer and that legal problems with wording restrictions needed to be addressed. She recalled that direction to the Planning Commission involved those areas and did not include direction to allow more signs. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to consider an ordinance that would impose a six-month moratorium on the consideration of an issuance of any permits for billboards, electronic message centers, and flashing signs within the City of Eugene's jurisdiction (the area within the city and within the urban growth boundary) and request the City Attorney to prepare such an ordinance, Roll call vote; the motion carried, 6:2, with councilors Holmer and Rutan voting nay. IX. BALLOTING TO DETERMINE INTERVIEWEES FOR OPENINGS ON THE DOWNTOWN COMMISSION, EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN PARTNERSHIP, AND PLANNING COMMISSION Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to reappoint Julie Aspinwall-Lamberts to the vacant at-large position and Sue Prichard to one of the vacant "pecuniary interest" positions e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 Page 12 on thelDowntown Commission, Roll call vote; the motion e carried unanimously, 8:0. Ms, Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to interview Victor Blum, Joanne McAdam, and Brad Perkins for the remaining opening on the Downtown Commission. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to reappoint Nancy Nathanson to an at-large position on the Planning Commission, Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. After their votes were tabulated, councilors agreed to interview the two applicants who received the most votes for the remaining at-large position on the Planning Commission. Ms, Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to interview Jenny Sirnio and Richard Duncan for the vacant at-large position on the Planning Commission. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr, Rutan, to reappoint Thomas Hoyt to the vacant at-large position on the Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Partnership. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. At 9:30 p.m., the meeting adjourned to October 25, 1989. e (Recorded by Mary Feldman) mncc 102389-730 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 23, 1989 PageJ3 r.