HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/25/1982 Meeting
::= --' ~
.
e
e
M I NUT E S
Eugene City Council
City Council Chambers
January 25, 1982
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Gretchen Miller, Betty Smith, Mark Lindberg, D. W. Hamel,
Eric Haws, Cynthia Wooten, Emily Schue.
COUNCILOR ABSENT: Brian Obie.
The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was
called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller.
Mayor welcomed Scout Troup #175 to meeting.
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Consideration of the Planning Commission Recommendation re:
West University Refinement Plan (memo, maps, and background
information distributed)
Micheal D. Gleason, City Manager, introduced Jody Miller, Planning Department,
to qive the staff report.
Ms. Miller said that the public hearing was on the West University Refinement
Plan draft, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council on
that draft. It is a refinement plan to the Metropolitan General Plan. It is a
comprehensive long-range plan with four elements: Transportation and Parking,
Neighborhood Design, Public Facilities and Services, and Land Use, Housing, and
Commerce. The Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the plan with some
changes. Ms. Miller introduced Randy Thwing, chair of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Thwing said that after five years of study by the planning team, six months
of study by the Planning Commission, three public hearings, and twelve planning
sessions, the Planning Commission was able to unanimously forward a compromise
recommendation for competing land uses in a complicated area. He described the
area and the components that made it difficult to balance competing needs. Issues
that confronted the Planning Commission were: the balancing of residential/non-
residential uses, balancing planned areas of competing uses, and relating plans
to city-wide goals and guidelines. Predominant uses were residential, hospital-
related, commercial, and educational. The compromise unanimously approved and
sent to the council was to allow outright use of clinics in the R-4 land north uf
13th with a site review suffix. The second recommendation was to preserve housing
stock south of 13th by removing future non-residential uses from the area by
changes in R-3/R-4 zoning. For the existing clinics in residential zones south of
13th, expansion would be allowed through the conditional use permit process onto
land under development control as of December 1, 1981. Changes in the City's
R-3/R-4 zone were considered along with other considerations. The R-3/R-4 changes
will be forwarded to council at a later date. Mr. Thwing explained those changes.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 1
''.
;. __I
e
Ms. Miller reviewed the other Planning Commission recommendations: 1) The
South University Neighborhood Association segment be deleted, because SUNA did
not endorse the plan draft; 2) A definition of "policy" and "proposal" appear
at the beginning of each policy and proposal section; 3) Changes in the intro-
ductory text; 4) Small changes in the Transportation and Parking, and Public
Service and Facilities elements; 5) The terms "path" and "processiona'" be
deleted; 6) Proposal 7--Emerald Canal--be deleted; 7) In the Land Use,
Housing, and Commerce element, the Introductory text be changed, and other
amendments summarized by Mr. Thwing.
Additions to the plan regarding commercial interests in the plan area are
recommended. The map and text in the Land Use Diagram section is clarified but
remains essentially the same. One recommendation is to make housing an outright
use in the commercial zone, and another is to reduce the residential parking
requirement. The R-3/R-4 hearing is on the council agenda for February 8, 10,
and 17. Several letters had been received and given to members of the council.
The letters were from Sacred Heart Hospital, Chamber of Commerce Subcommittee,
Lane County Medical Society, Stephen Brye, and Dale Fisher.
Public hearing was opened.
Testifying in favor of the Planning Commission recommendation:
e
Ed Mahn, Chamber of Commerce Subcommittee on Land Use, said that they sought a
balanced solution for competing land uses. Economic issues in the area were not
addressed in the neighborhood plan when clinics were not allowed in certain
areas. The Chamber did not get all they desired, but members felt that they had
input into the plan, whereas the initial plan had had limited input from vested
interests. No businesses were represented. He urged the council to review the
minutes of the past meetings.
Tom Slocum, 540 Oak, said this plan contained business and commercial elements
that the original plan lacked. Intense feelings had surfaced in the five years
it took to develop the draft plan. The plan is a reflection of the neighborhood
charter which prohibits fair and equal representation by all who have an interest
in the neighborhood. Property owners and businessmen have not been allowed to
vote. The neighborhood association should be representative of all the interests
in the neighborhood. The unresolved issue of R-3/R-4 is a cornerstone in this
plan. He urged the acceptance of the Planning Commission recommendation.
Sister Monica Heeran, Administrator of Sacred Heart Hospital, explained the wide
geographic area the hospital serves, and stated it is the second largest employer
in the area. It is important to the community it serves. The hospital felt the
original plan did not address the needs of the hospital and its support services,
so they were opposed. The Planning Commission provided a fair hearing. They
believe that the recommended plan is a good compromise and they support it.
e
Dr. Dennis Collis, 677 East 12th, representing the medical staff at Sacred Heart
Hospital, said they became involved when the West University Refinement Plan
document was presented to them. They appeared before the Planning Commission.
The compromise before the council would allow physicians to practice close to
the hospital. For the good of the patient and the future quality of care, the
council should accept the plan.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 2
e
e
e
~l
Dr. Bert Hoeflich, 750 East 11th, Lane County Medical Society, said that the
area is residentially mixed use. It is expensive land that the medical community
has developed with a pleasant planning code. He urged councilors to drive in
the area. He said there is not much land for future medical development. The
Planning Commission plan is acceptable.
Dr. Samuel Graves, 735 Nadine Avenue, stated that he represents Serenity Lane (a
clinic south of 13th). He said the clinic has had community support. It has
treated 1,900 patients and touched 7,500 lives. The original draft made Serenity
Lane a non-conforming use with no expansion allowed. The Planning Commission
offered a fair hearing on this issue. It is a good recommendation.
Jim Saul, PO Box 1650, Eugene, said he had worked with the Chamber Subcommittee
in preparing testimony. He said the council should consider this plan in
relation to other City refinement plans, which include business/ commercial
elements (Whiteaker or Bethel/Danebo). Those economic issues were not addressed
, in the original draft, therefore it was the obligation of the Planning Commis-
sion to incorporate those elements. He said questions have been raised about
housing in the area. From 1960-1980, housing increased by 1,769 units; in
contrast, clinic use represents 5.5 acres of residentially-zoned land, or
6-percent of the residential land area. Mr. Saul reviewed the recommendation as
explained by Ms. Miller and Mr. Thwing. He recognized that it was the preroga-
tive of the council to change the document, but he urged that careful considera-
tion, time, and study be given before significant changes are made, and that
public hearings be part of the process of change. They believe that the recom-
mendations were appropriate.
Dick Case, 616 East 16th Avenue, Eugene, Board of Directors of Serenity Lane,
said the clinic has been in its location ten years. He is a volunteer and noted
the good works that the clinic does in helping people deal with alcholism.
It is estimated there are 16,000 alcholics in Lane County in need of help.
Expansion has been considered for seven years. Appearance of the structure
would be a top consideration. Serenity Lane supports the changes made by the
Planning Commission.
Edward Duke, 3412 Breezewood, Eugene, Executive Secretary of the Lane County
Medical Society, said the Medical Society had not been consulted before in
developing the plan draft and welcomed the opportunity to appear before the
Planning Commission. They support the recommendations as a reasonable compromise.
Jeff Reingold, 1065 High Street, Eugene, manager and owner of property in the
neighborhood, said concerns had been addressed and the document was a reasonable
compromise. His major concern is housing. The plan has three elements to
increase the housing stock in the area: 1) No new clinics south of 13th.
2) Reduction of parking requirements. 3) Allow residential uses in commercial
zones.
Testifying against the the Planning Commission recommendation:
Sarah Mahler, 1588 Patterson, chair of the Refinement Planning Team that developed
the orlglnal plan, and a member of the neighborhood that is not in support of
the Planning Commission's recommended plan, speaking for the neighborhood, said
that they were caught between planning fads. The goals of the City had changed
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 3
-
e
e
from downtown housing to economic development. This neighborhood was in conflict
and developing blight. Four years ago, developers were talking about a shortage
of buildable lots. Now things have changed and developers are holding lots. In
looking at WUNRF, it is necessary to consider 20-year long-range needs of the
city. The City's goal of a developed, concentrated, economically efficient
neighborhood around the core of the city is a viable one, but housing opportuni-
ties will be lost with this plan. The kind of neighborhood they are envisioning
is what is on 12th Street now. When 12th Street is changed, the relationship of
West University to downtown changes. Traffic and pedestrian flows have not been
considered. Now 12th is strip-zoned R-4 between 11th and 13th, which are zoned
C-2. Medical facilities could be located on 11th and 13th. There is already
available land for expansion of medical facilities close to the hospital. No
special considerations are needed. 12th Street is a stub street blocked by
Sacred Heart on the east and and a church on the west. It is narrow and residen-
tial. Ms. Mahler said that under this plan, 12th Street would become the same as
13th and 11th. Groups opposed to this plan were not opposed to the health care
community, she said. The West University area can accommodate just so many cars.
The new hospital wing has cut off bicycle traffic with no alternative transporta-
tion offered. The plan increases conflict in the neighborhood. There is a
weakness in the public service element of the plan. There should be facts and
figures concerning R-3/R-4 redevelopment, and the relationship of the doughnut
urban renewal area. Rezones are now done on demand. The patchwork the Planning
Commission has made of the neighborhood plan is an ill-considered botch that
causes more problems, and should be remanded to the Planning Commission.
Harold Lannom, 460 East 15th Avenue, said this neighborhood has the highest den-
sity and the lowest income in the city. Citizens pay more for housing there
than in any other area of the city. The vacancy rate is lower. In this area,
where people drive less, over 125,000 cars are driven through in one day. All
this, plus observable urban blight, constituted factors for the neighborhood
refinement plan study. The Planning Commission study has down-graded this study
to an argument concerning clinics. Housing, not profit, is the issue. People
live in substandard housing. West University Neighbors has been encouraged to
accept the Planning Commission recommendation because housing will be an outright
use in C-2, and the WUN concept is still in the plan. Mr. Lannom said that
housing is already an outright use in C-2. Affordable housing that is needed
cannot be built on this expensive land. It was too expensive for the clinics.
The WUN concept is good. Legal battles and lack of funds make the chance for
its survival poor. This recommendation would not solve the housing demand.
As a refinement of the general plan, this document fails in objectives 5, 7, 9,
10, 15, and 20. It does not comply with the LCDC order of June 26, 1981:
"Eugene and Springfield must amend high-density zoning regulations to exclude
non-residential uses which may compete for development of high-density land,
unless it can be proved that excluding these uses will not prevent high-density
uses occurring on high-density land." The original draft plan conformed to all
of the above. The Community Goals and Policies Document 1974, chapter 11,
policy 3 was read. There are 19 acres of commercial land not producing tax
income in the neighborhood. West University Neighbors have submitted a list of
misconceptions to be made part of the public record. Mr. Lannom suggested the
plan be sent back to the Planning Commission with directions to comply with the
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
Page 4
January 25, 1982
.
Metro General Plan, to address issues raised by the West University Neighbors,
and to document all changes that are recommended to the council. Consultation
with all affected parties is essential.
John Drake, 36-1/2 East 14th Street, No.1, Eugene, rejected the recommendation
because 13th and 11th streets will become commercial with no opportunity for
housing.
Mary Kay Crumbaker, 383 East 11th Street, Eugene, chair of the West University
Nelghborhood Association, said Ms. Mahler and Mr. Lannom had covered her concerns
about mixed-use. She did not want to see commercial use segregated from housing.
e
Jack Delay, 1708 Alder Street, Eugene, said anyone who underestimates the ability
of this area to become a slum and underestimates the role of public policy, does
the city a great disservice. Voluntary citizen labor of nearly four years pro-
duced the plan. The plan stresses people-oriented amenities and workable residen-
tial solutions to rebuild a mix of stable and transient housing. The recommenda-
tion of the Planning Commission is not the refinement plan put forward by those
who live in the area and understand the neighborhood. For example, the entire
mixed-use transitional areas have been replaced by commercial zoning plus a
clinic strip. As another example, the expansion of clinics and their use of
residential streets for access, a constant problem for the neighborhood, is now
granted official legitimacy rather than being controlled. What the plan repre-
sents on paper is exactly what the problems have been on the ground. Other
interests are being placed ahead of people and their residential interest. The
plan guarantees public policy backing it. Mr. Delay suggested two things. First,
that if the council does not listen to the residents of the neighborhood, they
had better be sure of what they are doing. Second, that the plan be sent back
to the Planning Commission and WUN for in-depth review.
-
Paul Bishow, 1590 Ferry Street, No.1, Eugene, supported the statements of others
but added that the draft plan already makes many allowances for change that are
sought by the medical community and Chamber of Commerce. The Planning Commission
plan is unbalanced, since many goals in the draft plan that were in keeping with
the Metro Area General Plan are not viable or possible. It is wrong to change
the purpose after the fact. The amended plan should be sent back for further
work and study.
Adrienne Lannom, 460 East 15th Avenue, Eugene, explained that she had been pro-
hibited from participation at the Planning Commission level. She said she is
assuming that ownership of property in the plan area is still the standard which
determines disqualification from participation in this legislative process and
that it is still being applied. Because she had been required to remain silent,
the testimony was difficult. She was angry and disappointed with the recommenda-
tion. She raised a procedural objection. Despite a publicly established dead-
line, the Planning Commission continued to consider additional testimony submitted
after the deadline by the hospital, clinic, and other commercial interests
(Chamber of Commerce Subcommittee), and to communicate directly with that group
exclusive of other affected interests. Ms. Lannom endorsed the materials sent
to the council by the WUN executive committee on January 20, 1982, and incor-
porated the material into her testimony. She agreed with the action to withdraw
support of the draft following the action of the planning commission. The
commission offered no reason for its changes, no documentation, and the changes
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 5
e
e
e
conflicted with policies contained in the Residential Land Use and Housing
Element of the Metropolitan General Plan (also referenced). Ms. Lannom urged
rejection of the recommended policies (page 8), particularly those that permit
non-residential uses in high-density residential zones. Despite LCDC's recogni-
tion that housing is permitted outright in C-2 and C-3 zones (page 56), it still
orders the cities of Eugene and Springfield to "amend high-density zoning to
exclude non-residential uses which may compete for development of needed high-
density land..." The policy to permit existing clinics south of 13th Avenue to
expand onto land under their "developmental control" is flawed. Will the
council examine and evaluate the impacts on existing housing? Does the council
want to guess what the Building Division will do in order to handle "developmental
control"? These non-conforming uses should be permitted to replace their
current development when necessary. Nothing in Chapter III-B of the Metro Plan
can justify the economic expansion of existing "industry" at the cost of needed
resources--high-density land (page III-B-1). Neither economic growth, per se,
nor industrial development as an end in itself, is desirable. The council has
replaced downtown housing as its highest goal with economic development this
year. The council should clarify its position on both priorities. Until the
inventory of health care needs ordered by LCDC is completed, it is premature to
equate one health care system by one provider, with what is described in the
Metro Plan's Public Facilities and Services Element, as essential health care
services. Independent inventory and evaluation are needed. Ms. Lannom submitted
statements from a speech by the Chief Deputy to Governor Atiyeh. Until it is
independently determined that policies are needed to address health care services
and those policies are developed, the policy additions to the refinement plan
are not warranted. Ms. Lannom suggested two options: 1) Reject the refinement
plan and use the policy guidance contained in the Metropolitan General Plan; 2)
Return the draft to the Planning Commission with instructions to bring it into
conformity with the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the General Plan
and the LCDC compliance order.
Charlotte Lemon, 1280 Mill Street, Eugene, said that some of the houses on 11th,
12th and 13th Avenues are historically significant. It makes the area an
interesting mixed-use area. East 12th Avenue, with peak traffic of 3,600
bicycles a day, should remain residential to avoid increased car traffic. Site
review would help little in retaining the character of the area. They should
not value economics at the expense of long-range stabilizing plans for Eugene's
livability.
Ann Blandon, 310 East 14th, Eugene, a business owner on High Street, felt small
business thrives in a mixed-use area. Her customers come by foot and bicycle.
It is vital to have residences in business and commercial areas. It is important
to maintain the historic quality of the neighborhood for tourists and visitors.
The unique area should not be destroyed.
Scott Wylie, 310 East 14th, Eugene, referred to his letter submitted to council.
He favored further study because of the uneven-handedness of the process. He
likened the changes made to the plan to a building whose columns have been
removed. He likened the "housekeeping changes" made to the plan to putting
aluminum windows on Deady Hall and covering it with aluminum siding. He
urged the council to return the plan to its original form.
Alice Callicott, 325 East 14th, Eugene, was opposed to the City Council's
adoption of the refinement plan as amended by the Planning Commission.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 6
-
Margaret Dillion, 1648 Alder, Eugene, Oregon Student Public Interest Research
Group, said the group would be holding an educational forum on the West Univer-
sity Refinement Plan at the Erb Memorial Union, February 3, 1982, at 7 p.m.
Alan Johnson, Suite 200, 915 Oak, Eugene, speaking for Dr. Diane Reed, 1461
Hilyard, the Kidron Counseling Clinic and the Alcohol Counseling and Educational
Services, said this clinic was overlooked. There are six clinics south of
13th Avenue. He referred to paragraph 14, page 15 of the January 14 memorandum,
which he said needs to be modified to be consistent. Paragraphs thirteen and
sixteen also need to include the following sentence: "No new clinics will be
allowed in the area. However, the existing clinic at 1461 Hilyard may remain
and expand as a conditional use on land under developmental control as of
December 1, 1981." Mr. Johnson, speaking as a citizen and member of MAPAC, said
MAPAC voted December 16, 1981, to recommend to the City of Eugene, that its
citizen involvement program be modified to enfranchise all property owners as
well as residents in a neighborhood area. In this area, 96 percent of the
residents do not own their own homes. Students are there for a short time.
There is only a small group of residences remaining. This item is on MAPAC's
January 27, 1982, agenda.
Ed Mahn, Sacred Heart Administrator, commented on the state of the health care
industry. It is the highest regulated industry and must have state and federal
endorsements to expand or change its program. The amount of patient days
assures good quality care for Eugene citizens. He commented on why the doctors
in the hospital should be located together. A letter was submitted.
e
Yvonne Olsson, Eugene District 4-J Board of Directors, referred to a submitted
letter from the Superintendent of Schools regarding School District 4-J's
concerns about the plan. They were concerned about the traffic change on Pearl
and Oak streets. This change would obliterate the school bus garage facility.
It would stop the use of Civic Stadium. Ms. Olsson elaborated on the added cost
to the taxpayer of this traffic-flow change (i.e., they would have to move their
facilities--the maintenance garage and Civic Stadium). She asked that the
traffic-flow change be eliminated from the proposal so that School District 4-J
does not have to consider moving these facilities. She urged better communica-
tion between the City and School District 4-J.
Michael Matteucci, 457 East 12th Avenue, Eugene, said the City Council should
observe the medical clinics and consider whether they have changed the character
of the neighborhood already. He asked the councilors to consider livability
on 12th Street.
Dyan Colven, 344 East 14th Avenue, Eugene, supported the West University Neighbors'
position on the refinement plan.
Wilma Downie, 1630 Patterson, Eugene, pointed out on the map how much land had
been designated commercial instead of mixed-use. She asked the council to call
those areas "commercial with housing."
Public hearing was closed.
--
Mr. Lindberg suggested that the council not send the refinement plan back to the
Planning Commission. He suggested formation of a council subcommittee. Ms.
Miller did not favor sending it back to the Planning Commission either, and was
prepared to work on the refinement plan. Ms. Smith agreed. She favored a task
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 7
e
force of council members and asked staff to respond to the testimony of Mr.
Johnson and Ms. Olsson. Ms. Wooten and Ms. Schue favored council work sessions.
Mr. Lindberg moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the council create
an open subcommittee of three people, with Mr. Lindberg to serve
as a member of Ward 3 (which includes the West University Neigh-
bors), inclusion of a member of the elected officials group that
drafted the Metropolitan Plan (Ms. Miller and Mayor Keller), and
any other third party.
Mayor Keller suggested the whole council deal with the matter at their Monday
night meeting and then decide if the formation of a subcommittee was necessary.
Mr. Lindberg and Ms. Smith were willing to wait to consider formation of a
subcommittee until after the work session, February 8, 1982.
B. Community Develop Block Grant Three Year Plan (memo and
subcommittee minutes distributed)
Mr. Gleason introduced Chris Hofmann, HCC.
Ms. Hofmann said that the proposal was a plan for spending the Community Develop-
ment Block Grant funds from the federal government for the next three years. For
the next year, staff expected a 16 percent cut in funding. It is appropriate to
look at the program this year and determine future priorities. A subcommittee
of council and the Community Development Committee developed the suggested pro-
gram. She referred to this suggested three-year plan in the staff notes.
e Councilor Smith left the meeting.
Public hearing was opened.
Michael Connelly, Southwest Oregon Native American Consortium, asked where and
how their group could be a part of the allocation process, since some of the
funds were supposed to help low-income unemployed. The average Indian family
brings home $1,500 per year, and the unemployment rate is around 75 percent
locally. He was disappointed that the City had not been responsive to the needs
of the Indian community, and that his group had not been notified of this
meeting except through a newspaper notice.
Bob Dorste, 359 Polk, Eugene, noted the difficult process and the subcommittee's
work under the time constraint. He spoke in favor of the plan.
Jim McCoy, 341 Van Buren, Eugene, Neighborhood Economic Development Community
Organization (NEDCO), said the ideas and energy were available in the community
to make this plan work. In the area of central-area housing, they will be able
to work with the private and public sectors to make housing happen in the
central area. They look forward to working with the City. He also anticipated
a program of local enterprise which would help the local economy and create
jobs. They look forward to working with the CDC, the Economic Diversification
Task Team, and the neighborhoods to develop such an economic program.
-
David Lunney, 2522 Van Ness, Eugene, wanted to be sure that the Economic Diver-
sificatlon Plan and the funds allocated were brought together. Local performing
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 8
e
arts producing organizations qualify in all categories. People are working for
poverty-level wages for the economic betterment of Eugene. It is important for
those moneys to develop tourism and encourage and attract people to Eugene.
e
M. T. Tenario, 1350 Chambers, Eugene, director of Eugene Child Welfare Project,
sald that the project is funded by the federal government and is an effort to
keep Indian children in Indian homes. The Southwest Oregon Native American
Consortium is attempting to get Block Grant funding. They have presented
testimony at public hearings, but their needs are not incorporated into the
public plan. They have endured frustration, humiliation, and even racist
remarks. Staff was not cooperative. They contacted the local Equal Opportunity
staff and the Portland HUD office. The local staff said they wished to help the
Indian community. They did not hear from her again. The Indian groups were at
this meeting only because they saw the notice in the newspaper. She had submit-
ted her application for the Eugene Commission on the Rights of Minorities. She
was told that there was a vacancy and then was told that there was not a vacancy
after submitting her application. She quoted staff notes concerning the Block
Grant regulations for economic development where the subcommittee members
were advised "that low- and moderate-income people did not have to be the sole
beneficiaries, nor did the benefits have to be direct". Ms. Tenario said they
had been advised to prepare examples for a report to the City and to the
Portland office. She urged that Indians be given equal consideration. She
explained that they were not a neighborhood, but that Indians are scattered
throughout the city. She asked for the council's assistance.
LaVerne Edwards, 1260 President, Eugene, was concerned that the funds would
only go to one or two neighborhoods. She asked that all fees be included in the
administrative allocations, including attorney's fees. Under Plan B, she said
there would not be so much housing in the West University area, and therefore
funds would not need to be allocated there.
Public hearing was closed.
Ms. Schue recognized that the City worked through neighborhoods and asked if the
Indians' problems had been addressed. Ms. Hofmann explained that HUD regulations
targeted neighborhoods. Mr. Gleason explained that the federal goals targeted
geographic areas. There is some regulation softening, but these regulations, by
their very nature, make it impossible to fund certain types of programs. Mr.
Lindberg recognized that the Indian Consortium was eliminated when the subcom-
mittee decided to eliminate the Independently Funded Activities category.
However, under the Economic Development category the Indian Consortium could
apply for funding. Housing rehabilitation loans might be available to the
group. They could also work with the neighborhood groups.
Ms. Miller saw this as a trend to cut federal money from these programs in
future years. To clarify the record, she said that they had received Ms.
Tenario's application for Community Development Committee membership. An
incumbent was reappointed to the Community Development Committee.
Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve the Community
Development Block Grant Three-Year Plan. Roll call vote; motion
carried unanimously.
-
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 9
~
\ .~. .
.
C. Code Amendments Re: Zoning Ordinance
1. AG Agricultural Zoning District Uses (CA 81-1)
Recommended approval by Planning Commission November 10, 1981
Vote: 7:0
2. General Provisions: Performance Standards (CA 81-2)
Recommended approval by Planning Commission December 7, 1981
Vote: 4:1
3. M-1, M-2, and M-3 Industrial Zoning District Uses (CA 81-3)
4. Floodway Use Provisions (CA 81-4)
5. Residential Site Review, Planned Unit Development, and Conditional
Use Permit Provisions (CA 81-5)
6. Controlled Income and Rent Housing Provisions (CA 81-6)
7. Planned Unit Development Findings (CA 81-7)
Recommended approval by Planning Commission November 10, 1981
Vote: 7:0
e
CB 2411--An ordinance concerning zoning regulations; amending Sections
9.296 and 9.298 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an
emergency (CA 81-1).
CB 2412--An ordinance concerning zoning ordinance performance standards;
amending Sections 2.370, 2., 9.254, 9.450, 9.464, 9.470, and
9.710 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing present Sections 9.636,
9.638, 9.640, 9.642, 9.644, 9.646, 9.648, 9.650, 9.652, 9.654,
9.656, and 9.658 of that code; adding new Sections 9.636, 9.638,
9.640, 9.642, 9.644, 9.646, 9.648, 9.650, 9.652, 9.654, 9.656,
9.658, 9.660, and 9.662 to that code; and declaring an emergency
(CA 81-2).
CB 2413--An ordinance concerning zoning regulations; amending Sections
9.450, 9.452, 9.464, 9.466, 9.470, 9.474, and 9.702 of the Eugene
Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency (CA 81-3).
CB 2414--An ordinance concerning zoning regulations; amending Section
9.254 of the Eugene Code, 1971; amending the caption preceding
Section 9.604 of that code; adding a new Section 9.607 to that
code~ and declaring an emergency (CA 81-4).
CB 2415--An ordinance concerning zoning regulations; amending Sections
9.268, 9.508, 9.512, 9.550, and 9.688 of the Eugene Code, 1971;
and declaring an emergency (CA 81-5, CA 81-7).
e
CB 2416--An ordinance concerning zoning regulations; amending Sections
9.254 and 9.724 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an
emergency (CA 81-6).
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 10
"
':
," . .
This item was postponed to Wednesday, January 27, 1982.
e
II. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING
A. Approval of Assessment Hearing Panel Minutes of November 16, 1981
(minutes and background information distributed)
Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve the Assessment
Hearing Panel minutes of November 16, 1981. Roll call vote;
motion carried unanimously.
B. Levying of Assessments
Mr. Andrew Paulson, asked to testify concerning CB 2391--the paving of Hawkins
Lane. Mr. Tietzel said that Mr. Paulson's notification had been returned
unclaimed.
CB 2391--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and constructing
sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and sidewalk on Hawkins Lane from
Glen Mar to south city limits (80-11).
Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that CB 2391 be referred
back to the Hearings Panel. Roll call vote; motion carried
unanimously.
e
CB 2390--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and sidewalk on Cal
Young Road from Norkenzie Road to Willagillespie Road, and
Willagillespie Road from Cal Young Road to Delta Highway (79-22).
Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present
voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18912.
CB 2392--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and
storm sewer within and adjacent to Judson Subdivision (80-23).
Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present
voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18913.
The meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
~./:. . -R;:;7if4/
,/ /" ,. .:j //// /_,
Mict;~;\~;;~';e~
Ci ty Manager
(Recorded by Beth Conant)
4Ia MDG:BC:cm/CM7b8
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
January 25, 1982
Page 11