Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/24/1982 Meeting ~ '- - e e ~ M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber May 24, 1982 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: D. W. Hamel, Mark Lindberg, Gretchen Miller, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten. COUNCILOR ABSENT: Eric Haws. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. I. DISCUSSION OF CITY SUPPORT FOR COUNTY TAX PROPOSAL Mr. Gleason said that the Lane County Budget Committee was in the process of reviewing the May 18,1982, defeat of its tax base proposal, and deciding whether to place another tax proposal on a future ballot. He said that because of the timing of placing measures on the ballot, a decision would need to be made within the next forty-eight hours. Mr. Gleason felt it was necessary for all local jurisdictions, including the County, the cities, the school districts, and Lane Community College to work together to solve the budget problems affecting them. He said that the State and Federal governments would no longer be able to help the cities with their problems and that the local governments must act together and accept full responsibility for local budgetary concerns. Mr. Gleason felt that the ability of the City of Eugene and the Eugene area to attract new businesses and industries would be severely crippled if action is not taken to provide adequate public safety, social services, and intergovern- mental cooperation in the area. He said that such cooperation is needed to provide the capital improvements, such as airport and sewer improvements, needed to serve new industry. Mr. Gleason said that property taxes were inadequate to support the activities of City and County governments, schools and community colleges, and that other taxing mechanisms must be found. Mr. Gleason recommended that the council authorize the mayor to meet with mayors of the other cities in the area and special district heads to discuss cooperative efforts at working toward solution of mutual budget concerns. He suggested that the Eugene City Council agree to work aggressively to support a county tax base proposal, provided that such a proposal can be worked out in the best interests of the citizens of Eugene. He believed that through such cooperation, at least $300,000 could be restored to the municipalities for public safety operations. Mr. Gleason said he believed that if some such action is not taken, there will be an initiative petition to place public safety funding on the ballot. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 1 e e e Mr. Gleason said that once the current budget gaps have been bridged, efforts need to be made to develop a "Lane County local government fair share tax support system," which would involve all the cities in the county, the school districts, and the community college. Responding to a question from Councilor Obie, Mr. Gleason said he anticipated that the County Budget Committee would recommend to the commissioners that an "N' Ballot request be placed on the June ballot, which would generate approxi- mately $2.7 million, with $2.5 million designated for law enforcement and the remainder allocated to support of such things as intergovernmental agencies and social services. Councilor Smith said that the council needs a clear picture of the effect of any County proposal on the citizens of Eugene. She said that the Eugene Budget Committee was especially concerned with funding for the intergovernmental programs in which the City and County participate jointly. Councilor Schue added that, as the City's representative to the Lane Council of Governments (L-COG), she was especially supportive of funding for intergovern- mental agencies, such as L-COG. She also expressed her personal concern that the school districts be included in any discussions, since they receive the major portion of the property tax. Councilor Obie expressed appreciation for Mr. Gleason's work on this matter. Mr. Obie agreed that the Mayor should be directed to proceed with negotiations with representatives of the other affected jurisdictions, but he felt that the council should only support an agreement which serves the best interests of the citizens of Eugene. Councilor Miller said she supported the suggestions made by Mr. Gleason. She said that voters in 20 Eugene precincts had supported the County's tax base proposal in the May 18th election and that this indicated recognition of the need for the City and County to work together and provide support for each other's activities. Councilor Lindberg said he felt that Mr. Gleason's suggestions were excellent, but that a major public education effort would need to be put together to convince the public to support a County levy. Mayor Keller said he sensed support from the council for his meeting with representatives of the cities within the County and of the school districts and community college to discuss the issues raised by the County's current budget predicament and efforts at working jointly to resolve the issues. He asked Council President Obie and Vice-President Schue to be available for consultation on this matter, since speedy action would need to be taken. Mayor Keller left the meeting to make arrangements to meet with the represen- tatives of the other jurisdictions. Council President Obie took over the chairing of the meeting. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 2 e e - II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinance Creating Downtown Commission (memo, ordinances distributed) Mr. Gleason said that when the council adopted the economic development program, it placed a high priority on revitalization of the downtown core. He said it was evident ~ that time that there was a problem with the structure and number of commissions and advisory groups dealing with the downtown area. The council had therefore asked these commissions and advisory groups to make recommendations on restructuring to provide a more workable system. Mr. Gleason introduced Steve Shephard, a member of the Eugene Renewal Agency (ERA) and of the subcommittee which had studied the issue and provided the recommendation being considered by the council. Mr. Shephard said that three members each from the ERA, the Downtown Development Board (DDB), and the Eugene Downtown Association (EDA) had discussed the powers and responsibilities of the existing boards and commissions dealing with the downtown area and had agreed on the proposal before the council for creation of a Downtown Commission. Mr. Shephard said that all the groups involved with the downtown area had given up something to reach the consensus before the council, in an effort to provide an advocacy group for the downtown area. Public hearing was opened. Hugh Prichard, 2671 Emerald Street, said that as chairperson of the DDB, he had served on the nine-member subcommittee that had developed the recommendation. He said that the DDB supported the recommendation and welcomed the opportunity to dissolve its own body upon creation of the Downtown Commission. He said that the DDB was confident that the council would install members on the new commission who would provide good representation for downtown businesses. John Matott, 2495 Hilyard Street, said that he was a member of the ERA and had represented that group on the nine-member subcommittee. He said that the ERA supported creation of the Downtown Commission as a means of reducing divisiveness as well as staffing costs and of increasing cooperation. He felt that creation of the new commission would draw the neighborhood groups into considerations for the future of the downtown area. He noted that the ordinance before the council placed final authority for certain decisions with political implications with the council and said that the ERA supported this restructuring. Elaine Denning, 975 Overpark Parcade, said that as president of the EDA she had served on the nine-member subcommittee. She said that the EDA supported creation of the Downtown Commission as a more efficient allocation of resources in the downtown area. She hoped the transition from the existing structure to the new commission would be smooth. Richard Guske, 1565 Polk Street, said he was the president of the Whiteaker Community Council. He read a resolution passed by the Whiteaker executive board, supporting creation of the Downtown Commission and agreeing to amend the Whiteaker charter in conformance with the boandaries agreed on for the commission. He said Whiteaker supported the integration of residents and businesses on the commission and felt such integration was in the interest of both groups. Mr. Guske said that Whiteaker supported the use of existing refinement plans for the downtown area, until the new commission has developed its own refinement plan. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 3 e e e Chester Pietka, 1251 Lincoln Street, referred to the experiences of the Data General Company, which had considered locating in Eugene several years ago. He said that the people of Eugene have worked too long for "things which don't sustain jobs.1I He urged the council to adopt the ordinance creating the Downtown Commission with the stipulation that the commission will be evaluated in three years to see whether it is working effectively. Laura Johnson, 1810 Fairmount Boulevard, said she supported all aspects of the proposal before the council, with the exception of the language in the ordinance which appeared to permit enlargement of the Eugene renewal area. She said that the map accompanying this ordinance seemed to include the 5th Street Market area within the renewal area. She said that if this is not the case and if the ordinance provides no opportunity for enlarging the renewal area through tax increment funds, then she would support the ordinance. LaVerne Edwards, 1260 President Street, said that while she was in favor of reducing the number of committees dealing with the downtown, she opposed any enlargement of the renewal district. She referred to previous discussion of creat ing a "doughnut" renewal area around the downtown and said it appeared to her that the ordinance before the council would make the "doughnut district" a part of the renewal area. Ms. Edwards said she opposed such action. She also felt that there had been insufficient opportunity for public involvement in the proposal before the council. She objected to granting public financing to a special class of people with no representation or opportunity for public testimony from neighbors or citizens from outside the downtown area. She said that she would support the ordinance if it does not allow any land to be removed from the tax rolls. She noted that new businesses locating in the downtown area are deliberately choosing to locate outside the renewal district. H. Thomas Andersen, 790 West Broadway, represented the West University Neighbor- hood Quality Project (WNQP), of which he is chairperson. He said that group was mainly concerned with the issue of expansion of neighborhood boundaries toward the center of the City. He noted that WNQP had come before the council a year ago to discuss the concerns of local businesses and residents regarding neighbor- hood boundaries. He said that at that time WNQP had agreed to postpone action on this matter until the nine-member committee had made its recommendation to the council. He said it was his understanding that if the ordinance before the council was passed, Councilor Wooten would propose expansion of the boundaries of WNQP to meet the boundaries of the Downtown Commission. He said that WNQP supported the creation of the Downtown Commission. Mr. Andersen then spoke as a member of the Joint Housing Committee. He said that group had expressed concern in informal discussion of the matter that the issue of downtown housing be addressed by the Downtown Commission. Mr. Andersen said that a subcommittee of the JHC, composed of himself, John VanLandingham, and Bob Linz, had met to discuss ways to bring housing issues before the commission. He said this subcommittee hoped that a person with interest in housing would be appointed to the Downtown Commission. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 4 - Don Kimmel, 3105 Lincoln Street, said he was the chairperson of the Crest Drive Neighborhood Association. He asked whether the Joint Housing Committee subcom- mittee meeting referred to by Mr. Andersen had been announced in compliance with Oregon Public Meeting Law requirements. He objected to the appointment called for in the ordinance of all seven members of the commission for four year terms. He felt that the members of the commission would have unusual powers under the ordinance and that it was therefore not advisable to select members for four-year terms. Mr. Kimmel felt that newly elected members of the City Council should take part in selection of the members of the commission. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Gleason introduced Michael Tharp, Department of Housing and Community Conservation. Mr. Tharp responded to concerns raised during public testimony regarding the boundaries of the commission. He referred to materials dis- tributed to councilors revising the wording on page 8 of the draft ordinance and adjusting the boundary originally proposed. Responding to the concern raised by Ms. Edwards, Mr. Tharp said that the boundary proposed was only for planning purposes and would not affect the boundary of the existing urban renewal project. He noted that under the ordinance, the City Council would assume the powers currently allocated to the ERA. He said that the Downtown Commission would advise the council on any proposed renewal district boundary changes, but that the council would have the authority for approving any such changes. e Regarding concern for downtown housing, Mr. Tharp said that the nine-member committee had not specifically listed concern for downtown housing as a responsi- bility of the commission but that a call for cooperation with other boards and commissions, such as the Joint Housing Committee, had been included in the ordinance. He said that any refinement plan developed by the commission would go through standard planning processes and would incorporate housing issues. Councilor Hamel agreed that downtown housing was a major concern of the council. He also concurred with Mr. Pietka's suggestion that the council request a review of the workings of the commission in a specified period of time, to evaluate how the new ordinance is working. Responding to a question from Councilor Lindberg, Mr. Tharp said that initial appointments to the commission will be for staggered terms, with members appointed for one-, two-, three-, and four-year terms. Councilor Smith agreed that scheduling a specific time for review of the workings of the commission would be a good idea. Mr. Tharp said that under the terms of the ordinance the commission was required to submit annual reports to the council. Councilor Wooten emphasized for those members of the public who had expressed concern, that the ordinance did not and could not expand the Central Eugene renewal project and that any recommendations from the commission for such expansion would be considered by the council, with opportunity for public testimony. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 5 e Ms. Wooten thanked the business and neighborhood representatives for their work on this matter. She said the council felt that dealing with downtown housing concerns was a primary responsibility of the commission. She personally felt there was a need for a resident's association to represent people living within the boundaries covered by the Downtown Commission. Councilor Lindberg thanked all those who had worked on the proposal before the council for the spirit of consensus and cooperation. Councilor Schue said she felt there was a need to record the legislative intent of the council that the Downtown Commission deal with the issue of downtown housing. Councilor Hamel asked why the ordinance included the requirement that the commission meet twice each month. Mr. Tharp said it was felt that the commission could cancel the second monthly meeting if it is not needed. CB 2471--An ordinance dissolving the Downtown Development Board; creating a Downtown Commission; amending Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sections 2.380, 2.381, 2.382, 2.383, 2.384, 2.385, 2.386, 2.387,.2.388, 2.389, and 2.390 of that code; and adding Section 2.150, 2.151, 2.152, 2.153, 2.154, 2.155, 2.156, 2.157, 2.158,.2.159, 2.160, 2.161, 2.162, 2.163, and 2.164 to that code; and providing an effective date. e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2471 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18969. CB 2472--An ordinance dissolving the commission now exercising the powers of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene, transferring such powers to the City Council of the City of Eugene, adding Section 2.955 and amending Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code, 1971. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2472 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18670. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 6 II-B. Code Amendment Reducing the Minimum Lot Size in Residential from 6,000 to 4,500 Square Feet (CA 82-1) (memo, background ordinance, distributed) Recommended approval by Planning Commission April 13, 1982 Districts information, e Vote--6:0 Mayor Keller returned to the meeting and resumed chairing. Mr. Gleason introduced Gary Chenkin, Planning Department. Mr. Chenkin said that the Planning Commission had voted unanimously to recommend this ordinance to the council. He noted that information regarding the proposed code amendment had been sent to all neighborhood groups and to a number of special interest groups in the community. He said that about two years ago the council had referred the question of reduction of the minimum lot size to the Planning Commission. Mr. Chenkin said that there are many reasons why it can be said the time has arrived to seriously consider the smaller lot size option for home ownership, including the following: 1) Assist in realizing the advantages of compact growth; 2) Metro Plan Housing Element policies including: a) Ensure regulations to encourage a variety of densities (#6); b) Modify regulations that add unnecessarily to housing costs (#10) ; c) Encourage increased density at various locations through code modifications (#23); 3) There is no consistent analogy between the present 6,000 square foot minimum requirement and quality; 4) Decreasing house- hold size with less need for large houses and lots; 5) Increasing housing costs, some of which are generated by land costs; 6) The larger lot option would still be available; 7) Cluster housing (smaller actual lots) is already allowed in PUD's and cluster subdivisions; and 8) The smaller lot option would provide for single-family home individual ownership, but without common area maintenance cost, home owners' association obligations, and the like. e Mr. Chenkin said that the Planning Commission had asked for an analysis of the impact of the proposed change. He said that staff had researched this and found that there are currently about 430 vacant parcels in the City of between 9,000 and 12,000 square feet, which would be divisible into two lots under the proposed ordinance. He noted that most of these lots were located in the Bethel and Willakenzie neighborhoods. Mr. Chenkin said that Active Bethel Citizens had expressed concern with the increased demand for parkland that would be caused by the code amendment. That group felt that people living on small lots would need parkland for recreation. They were concerned with placing this increased demand for parks on an area already underserved by parks. Mr. Chenkin noted that the council had received two letters on this subject. He said that ABC was dealing with this concern through the Parks Master Plan Update process. Mr. Chenkin noted that the ordinance before the council contained a number of related amendments, in addition to the amendment calling for reduced minimum lot size. He said that many were primarily housekeeping matters, for example, correcting or deleting obsolete definitions. He said that these amendments also dealt with technical points related to the reduction to 4,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size, including provisions for flexibility in setback and coverage require- ments. The amendments would also allow duplexes, triplexes, and four-plexes on smaller parcels and would allow cluster subdivisions without the current maximum density of six units per acre and four-acre maximum overall size limit. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 7 e e e Mr. Chenkin said it was hoped that the proposed amendments would reduce the cost of housing by expediting City procedures and make housing more affordable to a larger segment of the population. Public hearing was opened. Betty Niven, 3940 Hilyard Street, said that she was chairperson of the State Housing Council and that one of the responsibilities of that group was commenting on proposed legislation that would affect the cost of housing. She felt that the proposed changes would have a positive impact on the cost of housing and would provide increased choices of housing types. She felt that condominimum ownership and the accompanying responsibilities for working with homeowners' associations were not a good solution to the housing needs of many people, since they provide little flexibility and often do not result in lower cost than home ownership. Ms. Niven felt that the proposal before the council provided a much simpler solution to meeting the needs of people who want less expensive housing and smaller yards to maintain. Ms. Niven spoke for herself and for planning consultant Jim Saul in support of reducing the time involved in processing cluster subdivisions applications. John Bennett, 3960 Hilyard Street, represented the Lane County Homebuilders Association. He said that the association had worked with the staff of the Planning Department in development of the ordinance. He was especially suppor- tive of amendments to increase flexibility and decrease processing time for planned unit development applications. He said that in the Eugene-Springfield area, the average cost of a house lot currently accounts for 35% of the total cost of new housing. He said that Lane County currently ranks 17th highest among counties in the nation in terms of average house lot costs. He urged the City to pursue further measures to reduce the cost of housing, such as rolled curbs, lower-cost road construction techniques, and making row houses an outright use in residential zones. Mr. Bennett urged the council to adopt the ordinance. Roger Kaldahl, 927 Ellsworth, spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance. He felt it was unrealistic to say that the amendments would reduce the cost of housing. He noted that 40 percent of the annexable land in the Bethel-Danebo area is undeveloped and could, under the terms of the proposed ordinance, be developed entirely with small lots. He said that such development would increase the need for park space in the Bethel-Danebo area. Joseph Kaiserlik, 4566 Avalon, represented Active Bethel Citizens. He said he was chairperson of that group's planning and land use committee. He said that the proposed reduction in lot size would have a strong impact in the Bethel-Danebo area. He said that area was currently underserved with developed City parks. He urged that if the council passed the ordinance, it include provisions to design sideyards for maximum privacy, minimizing window-to-window contact. Jerry Liebersbach, 485 Berntzen Road, opposed the proposed code amendments. He felt they were unfair, since they would have a much more specific impact on one part of town than on other parts, and since they will make that part of town more "vulnerable" to high-density development. He said that, when applied in MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 8 e e e conjunction with the City's existing solar access regulations, the proposed amendments would result in treeless areas. He felt that the amendments would also reduce front-yard play areas, forcing children to play in the street, particularly in the Bethel area where there are no parks for children to play in. Mr. Liebersbach urged the council to postpone consideration of this matter until the newly nominated councilor from Bethel had been seated on the council. He said that there is no housing shortage in Eugene and that, in fact, due to the glut of houses on the sale and rental markets, the costs of housing are going down. He urged that, if the council did pass the ordinance, undeveloped land be exempted from the ordinance. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Chenkin noted that Planning Commission President Randy Thwing was present to respond to questions from councilors. Mr. Chenkin said that the concerns of the Bethel-Danebo representatives regarding parkland were legitimate and noted that these concerns were being addressed through the Master Plan Update. He noted that the 4,500 lot size proposed would not create high-density housing, since it would result in development at less than 10 dwelling units per acre. Councilor Schue said that the Joint Parks Committee had held a hearing at which representa- tives from Bethel-Danebo had spoken. She said that the committee was addressing the park needs of the Bethel-Danebo area, but that this issue was separate from that before the council. CB 2473--An ordinance concerning driveway curb cuts; land and zoning regulations; amending Sections 7.410,9.015,9.060, 9.254, 9.308, 9.310, 9.322, 9.324, 9.336, 9.534, 9.538, 9.540, 9.542, 9.544, 9.546, 9.550, and 9.556 of the Eugene Code, 1971; adding a new Section 9.567 thereto; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Councilor Obie said that he had for a number of years supported reduction of the minimum lot size. Referring to the suggestion that the council delay action on this item until the newly nominated representative from Bethel has been seated, Mr. Obie said that the current Bethel-Danebo representative had been a strong supporter of increased density. Mr. Obie felt that building on smaller lots would allow good use of existing public investments. Councilor Miller viewed the proposed amendments as continued implementation of the Metropolitan Plan. She noted that much of the inner city area is already successfully developed with small house lots. Ms. Miller agreed that there was a need for improved parks in the Bethel-Danebo area. Ms. Miller did not see any reason to delay action of this matter unless there was a demonstrated benefit to be provided by such delay. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 9 e Councilor Schue said she viewed the reduction in minimum lot size as a cost-saving measure in a time of tight public financing, since it would allow development of older areas already served by public utilities and would save costs for homebuyers. She said that the reduced front footage of the new, smaller lots would also result in lower assessment costs for property-owners. Mr. Lindberg and Ms. Wooten said that they would consider delaying the item until the new councilor from Bethel-Danebo is seated, but that past actions of the council weigh heavily in favor of approval of this ordinance. Mayor Keller expressed the sense of the council as feeling a strong commitment to the development of parkland in the Bethel-Danebo area and as wishing to proceed at this time with voting on the amendments. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2473 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18971. The council took a brief recess. Mayor Keller welcomed Scout Troop 6 from the First Congregational Church. e II-C. Rezonings 1. Property located south of Centennial Boulevard, between Alton Baker Park and Chevy Chase Subdivision from County RA Suburban Residential to City RA Suburban Residential (City of Eugene: Chevy Chase Area) (Z 82-5) (map, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Croteau, Planning Department. Mr. Croteau said that the requested rezoning had been initiated by the City of Eugene. He said that approximately 15 acres was involved in the request. He noted that the Planning Commission had held a hearing on the item on April 6, 1982, and had voted unanimously to recommend approval. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by councilors. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Jim Saul, 2780 Elinor Street, said that he did not support or oppose this specific application but that he was concerned with the use of the public need criterion in evaluating this and similar zone change requests. He said that the property in question had been annexed to the City in 1977, with no review for consistency with statewide planning goals. He noted that the property contained soils of classifications 1 through 4. He said that the question of need for - MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 10 e this zone change was therefore a valid one. He noted that there are more than 2,000 homes on the market in Eugene at this time and over 4,200 buildable RA/R-l lots are vacant and available. He quoted from the staff notes on this item, which said that the necessity of showing public need on this matter was "minimal." Mr. Saul said that the public need criterion had been very loosely applied to the application in question. He felt that the City should not place any greater burden of demonstrating public need on other applicants than it places on itself. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Croteau referred to the annexation of this property to the City. He said that City Code requires that the appropriate City zoning be applied when land is brought into the City. He said that in the case of this property, zoning had already been applied by the County and that, therefore, the City replaced the County designation with the corresponding City designation. Mr. Gleason said that there was difficulty in administering the issue of public need. He said that application of public need criteria at annexation and at the time of rezoning were two different issues. Councilor Miller felt that this land was irrevocably committed to urban develop- ment, since it is almost completely surrounded by urban development. She said that the school district has the capacity to accommodate development in this area and that the area is not appropriate for continued agricultural use. She questioned, given these factors, to what extent staff should be directed to go through the exercise of writing standards and criteria to support the rezoning. e CB 2474--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from County RA Suburban Residential to City RA Suburban Residential for property located south of Centennial Boulevard, between Alton Baker Park and Chevy Chase Subdivision. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of April 6, 1982, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2474 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr.Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18972. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 11 e e e 2. Property located along the east side of Coburg Road south of Beltline Road from R-1 Low-Density Residential District (Tax Lot 11900) and RA Suburban Residential District (Tax Lots 12000, 12100, and 12200) to C-2/SR Community Commercial District with Site Review Procedures and a change of Sign District from Residen- tial to Professional-Office Sign District (Liberty Communications, Inc.) (Z 82-7) (map, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Croteau, Planning Department. Mr. Croteau said that the southern portion of the property in question was developed with the studios of KEZI-TV, and the offices of Liberty Communications. He said that there was currently one single-family dwelling on the northern parcel. He said that KEZI located on this property in 1960, under a Lane County special permit. He said that the property was annexed to the City in 1966 and zoned RA. He said that approval of the request before the council would allow KEZI to expand onto the adjacent property. Mr. Croteau said that the Planning Commission had held a public hearing on this item on April 6, 1982, and voted unaimously to recommend approval. Mr. Croteau noted that Planning Commission President Randy Thwing was present to respond to questions from councilors. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by councilors. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Carolyn Chambers, 2225 Coburg Road, said she was executive vice president and treasurer of Liberty Communications. She said that Liberty Communications and KEZI have 135 employees, with parking for 70. She said that all corporate management for the 35 cable systems and 6 television stations owned by Liberty Communications is conducted from Eugene. She said that the business needs space for future growth. Jim Putney, 2225 Coburg Road, said he was the manager of KEZI-TV. He said that parking on the business's site is very difficult. He said that the rezoning was needed to provide adequate space for parking and for expansion of the business. Malcolm Scott, 101 East Broadway, said he was an attorney representing the applicant. He noted that the applicant had addressed all the goals and guidelines of the Land Conservation and Development Commission in his application. He said that the business had been located at this site for over 20 years and that there was no demand for residential use of the land. He said that this business contributes and will continue to contribute to the economic vitality of the area. He said that the applicant needs to remain at the present location to maintain visual line-of-sight connection with its transmission tower, located in the Coburg hills. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Hamel said he had witnessed the parking problems at KEZI and supported the rezoning. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 12 e CB 2475--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from R-1 Low-Density Residential District (Tax Lot 11900) and RA Suburban Residential District (Tax Lots 12000, 12100, and 12200) to C-2/SR Community Commercial District with Site Review Procedures and a change of Sign District from Residential to Professional-Office Sign District for property located along the east side of Coburg Road south of Beltline Ro ad . Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of April 6, 1982, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e Council Bill 2475 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18973. 3. Property located on the west side of Pearl, across from 4th, and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad from M-2 Light Industrial District to SO Special Development District and a change of Sign District from Industrial to Pedestrian-Auto Sign District (Grand American Discos) (Z 82-8) (map, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Croteau, Planning Department. Mr. Croteau said that the Planning Commission had held a public hearing on this item on April 6, 1982, and voted unanimously to recommend approval. He said that at that time, staff had neglected to include a recommendation for a change in Sign District from Industrial to Pedestrian Auto Sign District. He noted that the Planning Commission had considered the Sign District change earlier in the day and that the commission had voted to forward a recommendation for this change to the council, with an indication that this matter had not been considered in conjunction with the zone ch ange request. Mayor Keller asked councilors to declare any ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Mr. Obie said that he owns approximately 50 percent of the property in the Special Development District and that he would therefore abstain from discussion and voting on this item. No other ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by councilors. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Mike Yeager, a planning consultant with the firm of David J. Pedersen & Associates, 540 Oak Street, represented the owner and tenant of the property in question. He wished to make it clear that this application was not related to the disco which had formerly occupied this property and which had caused some problems for e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 13 e neighboring residents. He said that the applicant had no specific use in mind for the property at this time but wished to have the property annexed to the Special Development District. He said that when a specific use was proposed, that use would be proposed before the Hearings Official. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. CB 2476--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from M-2 Light Industrial District to SO Special Development District and a change of Sign District from Industrial to Pedestrian-Auto Sign District for property located on the west side of Pearl, across from 4th, and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of April 6, 1982, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council; and that enactment be considered at this time. e Councilor Miller asked that the record indicate that the attention of the Hearings Official be called to the minutes of the recent Council Hearings Panel hearing on a liquor license request for this property. She said that at that time there had been considerable testimony from nearby res)dents regarding problems and disturbances caused by the disco which formerly occupied this site. She said that, pursuant to this expression of concern, the Hearings Official might want to consider the suitability of any future proposed use in terms of such -things as noise and hours of operation. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously, with councilor Obie abstaining. Council Bill 2476 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously, with Councilor Obie abstaining. The bill was declared passed and numbered 18974. D. Public Works Contract Award (tabulation attached)" Mr. Gleason introduced Bert Teitzel, City Engineer. Mr. Teitzel said that this project was being funded in cooperation with the County Aid-to-Cities Program. Public hearing was opened. There being no public testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to award the contract to the low bidder, Morse Bros. Contractors. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 14 III. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING e A. Consideration of Hearing Panel Minutes of May 17, 1982, and findings of fact (findings, minutes distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Bert Teitzel, City Engineer. Mr. Teitzel said that the council would need to amend Council Bill 2461 as indicated in the findings. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the Hearings Panel minutes of May 17, 1982, and adopt the findings of fact. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Amendment to Council Bill 2461 Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to amend Council Bill 2461 as noted in the findings dated May 21, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. C. Levying of Assessments CB 2459--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way within Deertrail Subdivision and southwesterly portion of Treehouse PUD (79-48). Council Bill 2459 was read the second time by council bill number only. e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18975. CB 2460--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and sanitary sewer on Seneca Road from Roosevelt Boulevard to First Avenue (79-51). Council Bill 2460 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18976. CB 2461--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer to serve Willakenzie Island annexation area No.1 (AZ #78-11) located generally adjacent to Tulip and Balboa streets, Green Acres Road and Holly Avenue (80-64) as amended. Council Bill 2461 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved, as amended, and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18977. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 15 e CB 2462--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within and adjacent to Judson Subdivision (Contract #80-23) (80-323). Council Bill 2462 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18978. CB 2463--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within Fergus Manor Subdivision and within 160 feet of the boundary of Fergus Manor Subdivision (80-32). Council Bill 2463 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18979. CB 2464--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within Sundial Plat (80-44). Council Bi'l 2464 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, ~ the bill was declared passed and numbered 18980. IV. COMMENT ON MAY 26, 1982, COUNCIL AGENDA Councilor Lindberg noted he would not be present for the May 26 council meeting. Councilor Obie said that he would not be at the meeting either. He wished to go on record in support of moving ahead expeditiously to respond to the resignation of Councilor Haws and said he was in favor of appointing the person nominated in the May 18, 1982, election to represent Ward 6. Councilor Miller suggested that this item be placed early on the May 26 agenda. Mr. Gleason noted that the May 25 Budget Committee would begin at 7:30 p.m., not at 7:00, as had been indicated on some agendas. The meeting was adjourned to May 26, 1982. ~~ ~i~~~{'~~-1:~ ~ City Manager (Recorded by Darcy Marentette) ~ MDG:DCM:cm/CM8b8 MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 16 -' I.: . -- - /t.",'1 Engineering Division BID NO.: 4 Opened: May 18, 1982 1. PAVING AND SIDEWALK on Norkenzie Road from Beltline Road to 125 feet north of Balboa Street (Job #1837) Bidders 1. Morse Bros. Contractors. Inc.~----~----................'" 2. Staton Construction, Inc.---~--~-"~-------""-- 3. Eugene Sand & Gravel---------~~--------~----- 4. H & J Construction...----------------~------....-... 5. Wi1dish Construction CO. -...---....-......--...---...---- Cost to Abutting Property 20-Foot Paving 28-Foot Paving 36-Foot Paving 4 -Inch Sidewalk 5 -Inch Conc. Drive $32.00/FF $35.75/FF $43.75/FF $ 8.00/Lin. Ft. $ 2.35/Sq. Ft. COMPLETION DATE: September 1,1982 Contract Cost Basic $ ...0-. $122,827.01 $125,213.55 $127,155.27 $ -0... Cost to City $ 71 ,900.00 Al ternate $120,680.89 $ ...0- $ -0- $ -0- $132,655.73 .Amount Budgeted $ 68,100.00 (331)