Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/1989 Meeting e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Eugene Community Conference Center December 4, 1989 5:30 p.m. ,. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Ruth Bascom, Rob Bennett, Shawn Boles, Emily Schue, Freeman Holmer, Bobby Green. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Roger Rutan. The regular City Council meeting of December 4, 1989, was called to order by His Honor Major Jeff Miller. Council members discussed the National League of Cities conference in Atlanta which Councilors Boles, Schue, and Green had attended recently. Ms. Schue said that she gained a lot of experience from the conference, but returned with mixed feelings about the City of Atlanta. Mr. Boles commented that Atlanta, although once well-regarded, has degenerated over the past few years. He added that he felt Eugene council members are much more informed about important community issues than council members from other cities. Mr. - Green added that he found the conference to be useful and noted that it provided a good opportunity to info-share between communities. 1. UPDATE ON WETLANDS AND WETLAND IMPACTS ON INDUSTRIAL LANDS Pat Decker, Planning and Development Department, introduced the topic and presented an update on the wetlands issue as it relates to industrial lands. Steve Gordon, Lane Council of Governments, directed the council's attention to a memorandum explaining the implications of agricultural wetlands on urban development. Mr. Gordon indicated that the position taken in this memorandum reflects the position of both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Gordon said that recent changes in methods for delineating wetlands appear to have significant impact on the amount of acreage in the West Eugene Industrial Area and other parts of the Eugene area that are subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Under the former definition, three factors needed to be present to delineate a wetland area: the presence of hydric soils, a presence of hydrology, and a predominance of wetland plant species. As a result of the National Wetland Policy forum, the directors of the EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Soil Conservation Service, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Department have adopted a manual which offers minor changes in the identification and determination of wetlands jurisdiction. These changes particularly impact e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 1 Dinner/Work Session ~~- ~ e lands where agricultural use has eliminated wetland plants, but where hydric (wet) soils and hydrology (water) are still present. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Gordon said the directors of all four agencies have adopted the manual nationwide, and that the broadening of this wetland definition does seem to be supported at the federal level. Mr. Holmer commented that a good portion of the hydric soils now considered as wetlands are in urban areas, and asked for a practical distinction between hydric soils and agricultural wetlands. Mr. Gordon noted that ninety percent of what are currently considered as disturbed wetland areas have occurred as a result of agricultural practices and that both hydric soils and hydrology needed to be present to constitute an agricultural wetland. Ms. Bascom inquired about whether other areas are experiencing the same impact as Eugene as a result of broadening the definition. Mr. Gordon responded that the wetland impact in Oregon is different than in other states because Oregon's statewide land use planning program requires urban growth boundaries. Mr. Gordon noted that there is little difference in the definition of wetlands that makes a distinction between those areas with potential wetland value and those without. He added that he felt the EPA should work toward establishing an incentive program which would give local communities credit for the mitigation of historic wetlands that lie within their urban growth boundaries. e Ms. Schue commented that many cities offer strong support for the preservation of wetlands, and warned that the council must use caution in devaluing the idea of wetland preservation. She offered Hillsboro, Oregon, and Arcata, California, as good examples of communities that have strongly endeavored toward the preservation of wetland areas. Mr. Miller acknowledged that some wetland areas are of important benefit, but alerted the council that some caution must be used in attempting to preserve wetland areas which have no potential future benefit as wetlands. Mr. Boles offered suggestions for possible approaches to dealing with the wetlands issue. He indicated that policy creation can be targeted at the Federal or State administrative levels or within the State legislative process. Mr. Gordon concurred that there are legal, legislative, and administrative solutions. He agreed with Ms. Schue that a congressional solution would be difficult to reach because of strong sentiments in favor of the Clean Water Act. Ms. Decker asked for council direction on this issue, and indicated that the recommendations from staff are for the council to direct it to: 1) work with Federal and State agencies to determine the status and effect of recent changes in the standard method for determining which wetlands are subject to regulation; 2) work with these agencies to determine how they will treat areas covered by the new methodology and what replacement ratios will be e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 2 Dinner/Work Session e required for restoring wetlands on agricultural lands; and 3) pursue Federal action to amend the new methodology. Mr. Holmer expressed concern with Recommendation 3. He acknowledged that wetland preservation seems to have strong support, and suggested that before council authorizes staff to take any action at the federal level, it should first determine how best to proceed toward a solution. Ms. Ehrman also expressed concern with Recommendation 3, and suggested that the City attempt to garner state support in the wetlands issue. In light of these concerns, Ms. Decker said it would be possible to amend Recommendation 3 to read: liTo di rect staff to work with cities in the state of Oregon, the State Division of State Lands, and the Legislative Committee toward finding a solution." Through this action, the council would achieve a more collective, statewide approach. In deciding what further action to take, Mr. Boles recommended that the council decide whether it is willing to spend the sizable amount of staff resources that will be necessary to come up with a solution, knowing that it might not make any headway on this problem. He suggested that, with the advice of the technical staff and consultants, the council should make a decision itself on what constitutes a rational and fair mitigation strategy and immediately begin implementing this strategy, assuming that the Federal government will soon offer its approval. If Federal approval is not forthcoming, the City might consider a joint legal challenge, possibly with the State, contesting unequal policy enforcement. e Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Gleason said that the City cannot simply ignore the problem posed by this new definition of wetlands, but must try to recommend a national policy that will balance the national need to preserve wetlands with the regional need for valuable agricultural and industrial lands. He emphasized that ignoring this problem will have enormous consequences for many businesses such as Spectra Physics that are caught within this wetland debate. Mr. Gleason said that the City is working with State and Federal governments in an effort to develop a practical mitigation strategy. He added that the City has received grants through and assistance from the Lane Council of Governments to help create a rational mitigation plan. Ms. Schue commented that although ignoring the problem might seem like the best solution, it is likely to have enormous financial consequences in the future. Mr. Gleason said that although many attempts have been made to find a solution to this problem, a fair solution has not been identified. For this reason, the City has agreed to use Federal grant money to attempt to find a solution. He acknowledged Mr. Boles' concern for the unequal enforcement of wetland policy, but emphasized that the City is not in a position to litigate. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 3 Dinner/Work Session ~- e Mr. Holmer complimented staff on its efforts to inform the public about the wetlands issue. Public information sessions held by the City have been numerous and well-attended. He suggested that before the council makes any decisions, it should hold another public hearing to obtain more public input. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Gordon said that some of the Federal grant money directed to the City has been received. He noted that the $50,000 in Federal grant money was appropriated for three specific purposes: 1) to evaluate the correlation between water quality problems within the Amazon corridor and associated wetland areas; 2) to create new EPA guidelines for stormwater quality; and 3) to determine the feasibility of creating a wetland experimental station/nature center. Responding to Mr. Green's request for further clarification regarding staff1s Recommendation 3, Ms. Decker said that staff would work with other cities at the state level and with the Division of State Lands to craft a series of statements suggesting a policy solution and offer suggestions for how the Federal agencies might better implement wetland preservation goals. The City would work with representatives in Washington in an attempt to put this revised policy into place through both the Legislative Committee and congressional delegations. Mr. Boles said that he is not opposed to the staff recommendations assuming the $250,000 Federal grant is forthcoming. Ms. Schue also expressed her support of the staff proposal, but emphasized the importance of addressing this issue with a regional approach. e Ms. Ehrman requested a budget outline demonstrating the amount of staff time and effort that would be necessary to come up with a solution to this problem. Ms. Decker responded that solution-finding is so endemic to the work that staff is already performing, it would be difficult to formulate a separate budget which would accurately reflect the added staff responsibility in terms of finding a solution. Mr. Holmer inquired about the impact of this new methodology of wetland determination on industrial lands. Mr. Gordon responded that under the previous definition of wetlands, impact to industrial lands was a problem; under the current wetland definition the problem has increased substantially. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to direct staff to 1) work with Federal and State agencies to clarify the status and effect of recent changes in the method for determining which wetlands are subject to regulation; 2) work with these agencies on how they will treat areas covered by the new methodology and what ratios of replacement will be required for restoring wetlands on agricultural lands; and 3) direct staff to work with cities in the state of Oregon, the State Division of State Lands, and the Legislative Committee toward finding a policy solution. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 4 Dinner/Work Session e Ms. Ehrman said that the council should be aware of what issues will be delayed in giving the wetland issue priority for staff time. Mr. Boles added that the City should forewarn potential developers about the pitfalls of wetland impact and apprise them of its implications for development. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. II. REPORT FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION--INDUSTRIAL LAND REPLACEMENT Gary Chenkin, Planning and Development Department, introduced the topic. On September 11, 1989, the council requested that the Planning Commission attempt to identify 100 to 200 acres of land, including the Central Eugene Industrial Area, that could be developed with industrial uses in the relatively short-term future as a partial replacement for areas that are otherwise restricted by the presence of wetlands. The replacements were to be either undeveloped residentially or commercially designated lands, or undeveloped industrially designated lands that might experience development sooner if they were designated to another industrial category in the Metropolitan Plan. The Planning Commission identified six sites based on a series of criteria the commission and council agreed to at the September 11 meeting. The commission also recognized significant redevelopment potential in the Central Eugene Industrial Area over the long-term. Mr. Holmer asked whether owners of adjacent properties have been notified of possible zoning changes to obtain community feedback. Mr. Chenkin responded e that property owners have not been notified because the Planning Commission did not want to needlessly inform property owners of possible zoning changes before narrowing site selection. Nancy Nathanson, Planning Commission President, said the Planning Commission recommendation is for the council to choose one or two of the six possible sites on which to conduct further site evaluation. The Planning Commission recommended the removal of site 2 south of West 11th Avenue and site 3 southeast of Barger and Greenhill from further consideration. Ms. Nathanson indicated that site 2 is geographically too hilly to be of much industrial use and is designated for residential use. She suggested that it might serve a more appropriate function if developed in a combination of residential use and park land. The commission found site 3 to be problematic in that the areas adjacent to it are designated and zoned for residential use and will continue to be designated residential. Changing the zoning of site 3 to light-medium industrial might also result in a substantial increase in traffic on Barger Drive; public testimony has shown that the Barger Drive area already has many traffic safety problems. Mr. Boles reminded council members that they can also decide not to choose any of these sites. Under the new methodology of wetland determination, these sites are also heavily impacted by wetlands. Mr. Chenk;n responded that the Planning Commission concluded that there ;s developable land on each site that could be integrated with wetland areas. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 5 Dinner/Work Session e Mr. Green questioned the Planning Commission's reasons for removing site 6 northwest of Highway 99 and Beltline Road from further consideration. Ms. Nathanson responded that not only is site 6 impacted by wetlands under the new methodology, but it is currently designated and zoned residential and, in fact, several new homes have been constructed on this property within the ,past several years. Ms. Nathanson noted that rezoning this property from residential to industrial might be appropriate in the future, but does not seem favorable now. ,. Mr. Bennett asked whether the commission has evaluated the impact of its zoning recommendations on future site marketability. Mr. Chenkin responded that the sites were included in discussions with John Lively of the Metro Partnership and were reviewed by Lee Beyer of the Business Assistance Team. Both agreed that the commissionls recommended changes would increase their future development potential. Mr. Bennett expressed concern that this issue is being addressed in the wrong manner. He felt that the potential for enhanced marketability should be the first and ultimate consideration in site determination; lesser emphasis should be placed on the requirement for expediency in zoning changes. Mr. Bennett added that neither the council nor the commission have the type of marketing expertise that is required to fairly determine site marketability. Ms. Bascom noted that the Planning Commission is following council direction to choose sites that would meet certain criteria but would also accommodate specified time limitations. e Mr. Bennett reiterated his earlier concern that consideration for marketing and timing is crucial. In the interest of local land use planning, it is extremely important to create land that will be marketable. Mr. Bennett suggested that the council seek advice about industrial marketing from someone with expertise in the marketing field and then use this information to zone land that is desired by those types of industry and employers that our community is seeking. Ms. Ehrman agreed with Mr. Bennett's suggestion, but noted that in the interest of time and expense, there are two sites which the Planning Commission recommended should be removed from further consideration. Mr. Boles expressed concern that further property analysis might be an expensive, lengthy process. He noted that the rationale behind this project initially was to identify lands that could replace some of those that are highly impacted by wetlands. These new sites are as heavily impacted by wetlands as were the original sites that these were to replace. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Green, that the council postpone its decision on site selection until these sites have undergone some marketing analysis, at which time the council will choose one or two sites out of five possible sites, excluding site two from further consideration. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 6 Dinner/Work Session e Mr. Green asked about the added financial expense for further market analysis of these recommended sites. Abe Farkas, Planning and Development Department, estimated that it would cost approximately $2,000-$3,000. Responding to a question from Mr. Holmer, Ms. Bascom said that residents of these properties should be contacted about possible plan redesignations and zoning changes only after site selection has been narrowed. Ms. Ehrman said that if the council is going to proceed with further analysis of the sites, all six sites should come under review. Mr. Miller agreed that it might be beneficial to include all six sites in this analysis. Ms. Schue indicated that she does not feel there is any need to have a technical review on property which has already been rejected for potential consideration. She said that before the council proceeds with further analysis, several more sites should be eliminated from consideration. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to amend the motion to exclude site 3 from further technical analysis. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. The motion carried, 6:1, with Councilors Bascom, Schue, Green, Bennett, Ehrman, and Holmer voting aye; and Councilor Boles voting nay. There was also an understanding that the Central Eugene Industrial Area e should be the subject of some market analysis along with the other individual sites still under consideration. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitteqy -;)';; ,:,' ,>-'~, .:~.~;~;l~;'~>:;;;? Mi ChCl";~:?:':7~- City Manager (Recorded by Traci Northman) MNCC 120489-530 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 4, 1989 Page 7 Dinner/Work Session