Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/22/1982 Meeting (2) -,. ... M I NUT E S - Eugene City Council City Council Chamber November 22, 1982 7: 30 p.m.. COUNCILORS PRESENT: John Ball, D. W. Hamel, Mark Lindberg, Gretchen Miller, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. 1. AGENDA ADJUSTMENT City Manager Michea1 Gleason recommended that the agenda be amended to delete consideration of Council Bill 2532, an ordinance levying assessments for improve- ments on Goodpasture Island Road, under the item, 1I0rdinances for Second Reading--Levying Assessments.1I He said that the council had received two requests to hold a hearing on this item and noted that such consideration would require a two-thirds vote of the council. He said that the opinion requested from the City Attorney by the Hearings Panel members on matters raised at the Hearings e Panel hearing on this ordinance had only recently been received and that councilors had, therefore, had little time to study the opinion. Mr. Gleason said he had consulted with Hearings Panel Chairperson Betty Smith and that she had concurred with the recommendation that the item be postponed for consideration at the next meeting of the Hearings Panel. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to refer Council Bill 2532 to the Hearings Panel for consideration at its December meeting. Councilor Obie suggested that this matter be heard by the full council rather than the Hearings Panel, since the issue was complex and difficult and had generated considerable public interest. Councilor Schue said that she and Mr. Obie had sat on the Hearings Panel the first time this item was discussed and that she and Ms. Smith had sat on the panel for the second hearing, at which there had been additional public testimony. She felt that the matter could be returned to the Hearings Panel. Ms. Smith amended the motion to defer consideration of Council Bill 2532 to a future meeting with a public hearing before the City Council. Ms. Schue agreed to the amendment. Councilor Miller noted that only the issue of benefits to property owners from improvements in certain situations would be considered and that under the City Charter the council could not amend the assessment policy relative to a specific case, since such amendment could not take effect for six months after its e adoption by the council. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 1 ~ Mr. Gleason said that the matter would need to be postponed to an uncertain date e in the future. He thought the council might hear the matter in January 1983. A vote was taken on the amended motion. Roll call vote; motion carried 6:2, with Councilors Ball, Hamel, Lindberg, Obie, Smith, and Wooten voting in favor and Councilors Miller and Schue voting in oppos it i on. Mayor Keller asked citizens interested in being notified of the council hearing date on this matter to contact City Engineer Bert Teitzel. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Consideration of Resolution Reaffirming Naming the Eugene Performing Arts Center the Hult Center for the Performing Arts (memo, resolution distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Tim Sercombe, City Attorney's Office. Mr. Sercombe gave a brief history of the proceedings surrounding this item and discussed the options available to the council for action. He said that on December 17, 1980, the council had adopted Resolution No. 3454, which set up the process for naming the spaces within the Eugene Performing Arts Center complex. He sa i d t hat the council had at that time acknowledged the bestowing of names on spaces in the complex as an important aspect of the fundraising activities of the Eugene Arts Foundation. He said that the resolution had addressed the future naming of the center, of the halls within the center, and of the arcade area. He said e that the resolution had identified the criteria of public effort/service and of the magnitude of gifts for use in selecting names. Mr. Sercombe said that, following the criteria identified in Resolution No. 3454, the council had, on April 28, 1982, accepted the recommendation of the Eugene Arts Foundation and adopted Resolution No. 3657, naming the small performance hall Soreng Hall. He said that, similarly, the council had, on September 8, 1982, accepted the recommendation of the foundation and adopted Resolution No. 3715, naming the large performance hall Silva Hall. Mr. Sercombe noted that both of these resolutions referenced Resolution No. 3454 and were adopted without public heari ngs. Mr. Sercombe said that on September 23, 1982, the council had accepted the recommendation of the Eugene Arts Foundation and had adopted Resolution No. 3718, naming the entire center the Hult Center for the Performing Arts. He sa i d that at tonight's hearing the council would reconsider Resolution No. 3718 for the purpose of mooting the litigation and obtaining public input. Mr. Sercombe noted that a public hearing was not legally required on this matter, but that the council had agreed to hold a hearing in response to a petition for such hearing. Mr. Sercombe said that expressions of concern had been voiced by members of the public regarding the manner in which this item was listed on the council agenda. He said that all items listed on council agendas for public hearing traditionally include a proposed action to focus debate. He said that the council was not obligated to adopt the proposed action. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 2 \ Mr. Sercombe said that the council had two options for action on this matter: it could reaffirm Resolution No. 3718 or it could request staff to prepare a substitute resolution identifying either another name for the center or a process to be used in determining a name. - Public hearing was opened. Those speaking against the resolution were: Morley Young, 1579 Larkspur Avenue, said he hoped the public hearing would settle some of the problems regarding the legal process followed in naming the center. He said that a policy on the relation of private donations to public projects was lacking. He felt that the adoption of criteria for naming the center space was "quietly devised" without the knowledge of the voters and taxpayers. He said that the Hult gift was supposed to total $3 million but that by mid-October $2.5 million still had not been received. He said that funds from the gifts to the center would not be available to offset operating costs of the center until 1986 or 1987. Mr. Young said that the council had recently taken $75,000 from the sewer fund to pay Performing Arts Center bills and noted that these funds had been provided by the public, not by the Eugene Arts Foun- dation. He said that the people of Eugene wanted to honor the Hults for their gift and suggested that the name Eugene Performing Arts Center be returned to the center in honor of the citizens of Eugene, who had financed and would continue to finance the center, and that the council provide some alternative tangible and appropriate recognition to the Hults, such as naming the lobby or the arcade area after them. He concluded by suggesting that the council draft a policy on the treatment of private donations to public buildings and make this policy known to the public. e Tom Heusel, 1515 Polk Street, No.5, read a letter regarding the council's decision on naming of the Hult Center and expressing regret at the decision's having been made in the setting of a special council meeting held during a celebratory dinner. He said that the council now had the opportunity to correct that awkward situation. Mr. Heusel said that the Eugene Arts Foundation had circulated documents detailing "m~orialization opportunities" but that these documents, which Mr. Heusel felt detailed the "selling" of names for spaces within the center, were not made available to the general public. He was concerned that as of October 15, 1982, $2.5 million of the Hult gift had not been received. He cited a letter written by Benson Snyder of the Eugene Arts Foundation stating that no funding for local arts groups would be available from the foundation until 1986 or 1987. Mr. Heusel said he wondered who would support these groups until that time. He asked the council to continue to be sensitive to the needs of the community. Glen Gibbons, 1050 West 5th Avenue, said that he had been among those supporting the 1978 $18.5 million bond issue for construction of the center. He said that the purpose of the protest of the naming of the Hult Center was not to defame the Hults but to enshrine the citizens of Eugene and their contribution. He said that the issue surrounded the manner in which decisions regarding public policy are made. He raised questions regarding the operation of the Eugene Arts Foundation. He said that the linkage between this group and the City of Eugene was not serving the citizens of the City and noted that the Arts Foundation was not subject to Oregon public meeting law. He urged the council to take over the tasks of the foundation and ensure public access to the work and decisions of this group. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 3 Dottie Neil, 2150 Amirante, said that the Performing Arts Center should carry . the name of the people of Eugene and that the $18.5 million "gift" of the citizenry should be so honored. She thanked the council for holding this hearing. She urged that funds be made available to allow people of all income levels to attend events at the center. Chris OINeill, 731 West 11th Avenue, regretted the situation in which the public hearlng was 6eing held after the decisions had been made, with little chance for those testifying to influence the outcome. She felt that public officials should see~ the opinions of citizens before making decisions. She was upset that the records of the Eugene Arts Foundation were not available to the public and said she understood that even the mayor did not have access to these records. She felt that the "progressive" members of the council should, particularly, have prevented this situation and insisted on an adequate public process. Rachele Raia, 1515 Polk Street, No.5, questioned the wording of the resolution being considered by the council, which proposed an action based on public testimony before that testimony was even heard. She felt this indicated the council did not plan to consider the testimony. She did not feel that the City Attorney should have discussed the litigation with reporters. She said that in these financially difficult times many citizens made as great a sacrifice to pay the property taxes that would support the center as the Hults did in making their donation. Frank Fair, 660 West 12th Avenue, said he was a member of Citizens for Open Government. He said that the controversy over the naming of the center had eroded the public's confidence in the processes of City government. He felt e that donors to the center should make their gifts unselfishly and that the name of the center should be returned to the people of Eugene, whom he felt had made the greatest gift to the center. Those speaking in favor of the resolution were: John Alvord, 29193 McTavish Lane, supported the naming of the center after Nils and Jewel Hult. He discussed the impact that the Hults had had on the community. He said that the Eugene Arts Foundation had joined in a partnership with the City of Eugene, through the City Council, to provide funding for the center for the future. He said that the Hult gift would be used primarily to fund an endowment for arts groups beginning in 1987. He said that the foundation still had $2.1 million to raise by the end of 1983 to me~t its goal. He said that the public-private partnership between the City and the foundation was important and should continue. He urged the council to reaffirm the naming of the Hult Center. Maurie Jacobs, 2910 Harlow Road, discussed the contribution of the Hults to Eugen~ in terms of community activities. He noted that Nils Hult had been the head of the first Civic Center Committee over 30 years ago and that the Hults had also served the community in activities of the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, the Boy Scouts, the University of Oregon Foundation, and the Lane County Auditorium Association. Mr. Jacobs said that even without their monetary contribution to the center, the Hults had, through their service to the community, earned the honor bestowed on them in naming of the center. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 4 Denny Guehler, 2090 Dewey Street, said he was on the board of directors of the e Communlty Center for the Performing Arts. He said that he had been an actor in Eugene for over eight years and thus knew first hand the experience of local arts groups and the need for attracting donations to the arts. He felt that the Hults should be recognized for the example they had set for others of wealth and means in investing in and supporting local arts groups. Jackie McClure, 2510 Cresta de Ruta, said that she and her husband had circulated a letter of gratitude to the Hults at the October open house at the center. She said that the letter had been signed by more than 400 people who supported the naming of the center for the Hults. She said that the Hult family had been hurt by the actions of citizens protesting the naming of the center and that the fundraising efforts of the Eugene Arts Foundation had been made more difficult. She felt that the action of the council in naming the center for the Hults had been made with decorum and was an appropriate action for the circumstances. Les Anderson, 2110 Hubbard Lane, said that he was the chairperson of the Civic Center Commlssion, chairperson of the Performing Arts Commission, and a member of the board of the Eugene Arts Foundation. He said that these groups had held countless public meetings and had worked to encourage public participation in the entire process of planning for the center. He said that the Performing Arts Commission had recognized early in the process that the $18.5 million dollars budgeted for the center would not meet all the center's financial obligations and had decided to encourage private contributions. He said that the Eugene Arts Foundation had already paid $1.1 million for capital improvements for the center and would be contributing to operating expenses for the center, to keep ticket prices lower, and to support local arts groups. Mr. Anderson said e that Nils Hult had been one of the original members of the Eugene Arts Foundation board. He commended the Hult family for its gift to the community. Mr. Anderson quoted from an editorial supporting the naming of the center for the Hults and lamenting the "petty" quibbling over the naming. Mr. Anderson urged those who had spent effort in challenging the naming of the center to turn their efforts toward working to raise more funds to support the center. Freeman Holmer, 996 Lariat Drive, commended the City Council for holding a publlC hearlng to allow the controversy over the naming of the center to be set to rest. He said that the taxpayers of Eugene had provided the financial base for the center, but he emphasized the importance of private gifts to the center's success. Mr. Holmer listed some of the contributions of time and money made to the community by the Hults, including service/donations to Lane Community College, Sacred Heart General Hospital, Lane Council of Governments, Oregon Historical Society, the State Civil Service Commission, and the Eugene Symphony. Mr. Holmer said that a permanent endowment, such as that made by the Hults, deserved permanent recognition. Michael F. Fox, 330 North Adams Street, waived his time in favor of other speakers. Elizabeth Fox, 340 North Adams Street, waived her time in favor of other speakers. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 5 Richard L. Hansen, 2744 Tomahawk Lane, said that he had recently been elected e to the Clty Council. He supported the naming of the center for the Hults. He pointed out that commericial businesses pay 65 percent of area property taxes. He urged the council to reaffirm the naming of the Hult Center. Robert E. Moulton, 260 East 11th Avenue, waived his time in favor of other speakers. Janet Johnston, 2555 Central Boulevard, noted that she was the president of the Eugene Symphony Association but that she was speaking on her own behalf. She felt that the names of the Hult Center, the Eugene Hilton, and the Eugene Conference Center, all located in Eugene Centre, were a good reflection of the public/private partnership used to construct the complex. William Bain, 1755 Balboa, said that the building of the Eugene Center complex was a I5-year project, with history going back 30 years. He noted that commer- cial and industrial property taxes had paid a good portion of the property tax contributions that had made the center a reality. He felt that the council had participated in good representative government in making the decision to name the center for the Hults. The time alloted for public testimony having expired, the public hearing was closed. Mayor Keller asked that the names of the following people who had requested to speak but who had not been called on due to time constraints be entered into the record. e Those who requested to speak in opposition to reaffirming the ren&~ing: Peggy Heusel, 2210 Van Buren Street. Lois Young, 1579 Larkspur Avenue. Pat Albright, 2712 Jackson Street. Guido Palandri, 1770 Skyline Boulevard. John Bauguess, 364 East Broadway, No.4. Dean Mordhorst, 91662 Coburg Road. Don Di Fazio, Walton Creek Road. Those who requested to speak in favor of reaffirming the renaming: Charlotte Lemon, 1280 Mill Street. Mayor Keller also entered into the record a petition submitted by Richard F. Freeman, 2322 West 23rd Place, containing signatures of ten people who supported the naming of the center for the Hults. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 6 Councilor Miller noted that she had not attended the previous hearing on this e matter and asked for an opinion from the City Attorney regarding her ability to participate in the present deliberations. City Attorney Les Swanson responded that he believed, based on her having heard the testimony at the present hearing and on her having been present at the original meeting at which the criteria for selecting names for parts of the center were adopted, Ms. Miller should partici- pate in the deliberations. Mr. Lindberg asked staff to respond to the allegations made during public testimony that there were improprieties involved in the sewer fund inter- departmental loan to the Performing Arts Center. Assistant City Manager David Whitlow responded that the council had approved this interfund loan appropriation in October. He said that this type of loan process was used frequently in the City to cover cash flow deficits. Mr. Whitlow noted that the process was used for such items as covering lags in the flow of property tax payments, allowing the takeover of ambulance service by the City in the recent past, and, in the instance cited in public testimony, covering the time lag between payment of construction costs and receipt of funds from the Eugene Arts Foundation. Mr. Whitlow noted that the interfund loans were governed by State law, which required an audit of the funds. Councilor Wooten said she understood that Room Tax Funds were being used to subsidize the cost of tickets at the Hult Center for people in lower income brackets. Mr. Gleason said that the cost of all tickets was underwritten by the Room Tax funds and Eugene Arts Foundation operational subsidies. He noted that, for most productions at the center, 35 percent of the tickets were sold at a price below that actually needed to pay the full-share cost of the tickets. e Councilor Wooten requested that staff review that policy with the council and make information on the subsidies known to the public. Councilor Ball asked to what extent the proceedings of the Eugene Arts Foundation were required to be made public. Mr. Gleason responded that the endowment procedure was complex and involved information about the personal financial arrangements of the estates and trusts of donors. He said that for this reason, much of the work of the foundation was necessarily private. Mr. Gleason said that he had personally reviewed the cash flow statements of the foundation and found them to be all in order. Mayor Keller noted that the council had received an update on the foundation's proceedings at a dinner/work session meeting several months ago. He said the council could request another update if it wished. Councilor Ball asked if matters considered by the foundation other than the private estate matters referred to by Mr. Gleason, such as the general decision- making meetings of the foundation, were open to the public. Mayor Keller called on Benson Snyder, executive director of the Eugene Arts Foundation, to respond to this question. Mr. Snyder introduced Gary Williams, counsel to the foundation. Mr. Snyder said that the foundation was a public charity with non-profit charitable corporation status (501-C-3), and was, as such, required to maintain good stewardship. He said that forms filed by the foundation with the Internal Revenue Service, the State of Oregon, and the e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 7 Eugene Charitable Solicitations Commission were available for public scrutiny both through the taxing agencies and in public libraries. He said that the - foundation board would be receiving its second full audit report at its December 1, 1982, meeting. He said that copies of the audit report were available for perusal by donors, council members, and members of the public with a bona fide interest in the report. Mr. Snyder was concerned with the fact that today someone had contacted the foundation's broker and requested private information about the foundation's investments/holdings. He said that the terms, commitments, and covenants between donors and the foundation were not a matter of public record unless they affected the foundation's ability to meet its commitments. ~w. Snyder said that the foundation had fulfilled its monetary commitments to the City. He said that he would be happy to respond to questions from councilors regarding the fiscal integrity of the foundation on a need-to-know basis, but that he would not discuss matters pertaining to any donor's relation with the foundation. Mr. Snyder said that the foundation still had to raise $2.1 million to meet its goal. He said that the endowment income from the foundation would be available to the center commencing in 1986. Councilor Ball asked if the procedures and minutes of the foundation were available to the public. Mr. Snyder said that the foundation's minutes were subject to audit along with the foundation's financial records. He said that the minutes contained information on privileged communications between donors and the foundation and were therefore not available to the public. He noted that the foundation held annual public meetings and worked in close cooperation with local arts organizations. e Councilor Lindberg asked for clarification of the City's relationship to the foundation. He said the question that had been raised during public testimony was, as he perceived it, not related to the fiscal integrity of the foundation so much as to the informational integrity. He said that some members of the public seemed to feel that the council had delegated responsibility for naming the center to the foundation. Mr. Lindberg felt that making information available to the public would clear up this misconception. Mr. Gleason said that the council had taken action in the past to aid the foundation in encouraging cash grants and endowments to the center and that one such action had been to allow the foundation to recommend, subject to council review, the naming of the center and the two performance halls after significant providers of service to the community and significant contributors to the foundation. He noted that the foundation's action was only a recommendation and that the final decision on naming was left entirely to the council. Mr. Gleason said that the financial data provided to him by the foundation had always been timely, accurate, and frequent. Councilor Lindberg said he was anxious to set at rest concerns expressed by certain members of the public regarding a possible conflict of interest in the foundation's selection of the brokerage firm of Foster and Marshall, where Mayor Keller had until recently been employed, as its broker. Mayor Keller responded that he had at no time served as broker for the foundation or for the Hult family and that there was therefore no conflict of interest involved. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 8 Councilor Miller addressed concerns that had been raised during public testimony e regarding the resolution that had been prepared for the council on this item. She said that staff prepared resolutions on almost all items on the council's agendas, but she noted that the resolutions do not always get passed, and that the council is free to select any course of action it wishes. She said the reason that a resolution was prepared in advance was that resolutions adopted by the council had to have been available for public scrutiny before the council could vote on them. Ms. Miller conceded that the council had not served the public well with the procedures followed in adopting the Hult Center name at the September 23, 1982, recognition dinner and special council meeting and said that a better procedure on the naming of public buildings needed to be developed for the future. She felt it was important to convey a sense of community appreciation for gifts to the center and to encourage such contributions. Ms. Miller felt that the taxes of Eugeneans and the prices of tickets at the center were already high enough and that private contributions would allow the center to prosper without unduly raising either of these items. She did not feel that naming of the center for the Hults should in any way remove the people of Eugene's sense of ownership of and pride in the center. Councilor Obie said he was pleased with the sense of public pride in the center that had been expressed during testimony. He regretted the accusations of conspiracy that had been made and felt that the actions of petitioners had been irresponsible and had jeopardized the fundraising efforts of the Eugene Arts Foundation. He felt that public participation should entail public responsibility. He reaffirmed his support of naming the center for the Hult family. Councilor Smith concurred with the statements of Councilors Miller and Obie. e She said that the council could not act efficiently without preparation of tentative resolutions by staff for consideration by the council, since such resolutions were effective in focusing council debate on an issue. Ms. Smith felt the council had done the right thing in making its initial decision to name the center for the Hults and urged reaffirmation of that decision. Councilor Schue said she felt it was entirely appropriate that the center should be paid for by a combination of public and private funds and said that the council had always known that pUblic funding would not be sufficient to support center operations and that private funds would be needed. Ms. Schue agreed that the original decision regarding the naming of the Hult Center could have been made in a more appropriate setting. She felt that meeting could be described as confusing or chaotic, but not as the conspiracy some citizens seemed to believe occurred. She said that she believed the City's legal position regarding the special council meeting was sound but that she was not willing to spend City funds to take this matter to court. She therefore felt it was appropriate to take action to reaffirm the original decision. Councilor Wooten agreed that the council had made a mistake in the process that had been used for naming the center. She agreed with the opinion of the City's legal counsel that there had been no violation of the Open Meetings Law. She felt that the City's General Fund could not be expected to cover the initial operating deficit which the center could be expected to experience in its early operations. She therefore felt that the Hults' donation was a colossal relief to the taxpayers, since it would help offset operating deficits. Ms. Wooten e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 9 said that the Eugene Arts Foundation does not dictate to the councilor the Hult e Center and noted that Hult Center staff members are public employees of the City. She felt that the people of Eugene would not lose a sense of ownership of or identity with the center due to the name of the building. Councilor Lindberg said the City needed to store in its institutional memory the breakdown in communications that had occurred between the City and the public regarding this issue and to ensure that there is a better job of communicating on future similar issues. He did not feel that naming the center for the Hults should reduce the public's sense of ownership of the center. He suggested that a plaque be installed at the center and that a statement be included in the logo on center stationery indicating that the Hult Center was built by the citizens of Eugene. Councilor Ball agreed that the special council meeting of September 23 was a poor public procedure. He felt that the council and staff had learned from this and would make certain that there was no repetition of this oversight. He felt that the public-private partnership between the council and the foundation could be more open and more accountable to the public and urged the council to work toward this. Councilor Wooten said the council needed to develop a policy regarding private endowments to public buildings. Councilor Hamel felt that the objections to the process and the Hult Center name were being made by people who had only lived in the City of Eugene for a short time. He said he respected the attitudes and contributions of the long-term e residents. Res. No. 3736--A resolution reaffirming and readopting Resolution 3718, entitled, IIA resolution naming the Eugene Performing Arts Center, the Hult Center for the Performing Artsll. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolution. Mayor Keller said that the September 23, 1982, recognition dinner and announce- ment of the generous gift of the Hults was a grand moment in the City's history. He referred to misconceptions voiced in public testimony and said that it was never the responsibility of the Eugene Arts Foundation to name the center or the halls within the center but, rather, to raise funds for the center. Mayor Keller commended the foundation for the excellent fundraising job, particularly in the current economic hard times. He felt that the success of the foundation's efforts would greatly relieve the financial burden on the public. He said that the council supports the notion that the center belongs to the citizens of Eugene and said that the tremendous turnout at the center's October 3, 1982, open house was an example of the pride of ownership the citizens feel for the center. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 10 B. Appeal of Planning Commission's Denial of a Zone Change Request for Property Located at the Northeast Corner of Cal Young Road and Gilham Road from RA Suburban District to C-1 Commercial District (Bill e McCabe) (Z 82-20) (memo, map, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Croteau, Planning. Mr. Croteau said that the request was for neighborhood commercial zoning for property at the northeast corner of Gilham and Cal Young roads. He said that the Planning Commission had heard the matter on October 19, 1982, and had voted 3:3 on a motion to approve the request. Mr. Croteau noted that, according to the bylaws of the Planning Commission, this constituted a denial of the request. He said that the the attorney for the applicant/appellant had submitted a letter to the Planning Department, requesting a postponement of the counci1's consideration of this item. Mr. Croteau said that the council could take action to postpone consideration of the matter to January 24, 1982; or could hold a hearing at this time on the appeal. He said that if the council upheld the appeal, the council would need to meet in a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to reconsider the matter. Councilor Obie noted that several people were present who wished to speak on the matter. He said that if the public hearing on the matter were held at this meeting and closed without the counci1's taking action on the matter, further public testimony could not be taken at the future loeeting at which action would be taken. Responding to a question from Mayor Keller, those present who had asked to testify on this matter agreed to a postponement of the public hearing on this item to January 24, 1982. Mayor Keller said that he hoped staff would make the item the first on the agenda. e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to postpone consideration of the Bill McCabe rezoning request (Z 82-20) to January 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. C. Annexation/Rezoning Request for Property Located on the East Side of Capital Drive, East of Crest a de Ruta Street from County RA Suburban Residential District to City RA-PD Suburban Residential District with Planned Unit Development Procedures (Byers-Jones/McCarthy) (A/Z 82-3) (map, backaround information distributed) Vote-- Recommende approval by Planning Commission October 19, 1982. Annexation request: 4:1 Zone change request: 4:0 Mr. Gleason introduced Tom Hayes, Planning. Mr. Hayes said that the request was for annexation and rezoning of 4.4 acres of land located on the east side of Capital Drive. He said the property was currently zoned County RA and that City RA/PD zoning was requested. Mr. Hayes noted that this was the last developable piece of land in the area and noted that the Alpert property to the north had been annexed to the City in December 1981. Mr. Hayes entered into the record a letter, dated September 28, 1982, on the matter from Donna and Gordon Goles, surveys and maps done by neighbors in the area and submitted at the Plannlng Commission hearing, and two memoranda from the Planning and Parks and Recreation departments regarding connection of Capital Drive through Hendricks Park to the park road system. He noted that the response of the Parks Department had been that this connection would not be feasible. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 11 Mr. Hayes said that the Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) and the Eugene - Fire Department had said it would be difficult to provide service to additional development in this area. He said that EWEB was working with the Parks Department to identify a site for a possible additional elevated water reservoir to serve the area. Mr. Hayes referred to the vicinity map for this item that had been included with meeting agendas and noted that since the Planning Commission hearing, an additional 50 feet had been added to the request on the east side of the property, to accommodate a future loop road to serve the site. He said the inclusion had been made so that the road would be located within City boundaries. He noted that this strip was to be used only for a road and not for future development. Responding to a question from Councilor Schue, Mr. Hayes said that property to the east of the ridgeline that was involved in the request could be serviced from Capital Drive, but that this parcel was probably the last one to be proposed for annexation with servicing to be provided from the east. Councilor Wooten asked if there were a solution to the traffic problems on Capital Drive. Mr. Hayes said that City Traffic Engineer Jim Hanks had responded to traffic issues at the Planning Commission hearing and had noted that, unfortunately, some solutions, such as widening roadways, were not feasible, but that in some areas, residents could cut back landscaping to reduce or eliminate blind curves. Mr. Hayes noted that Planning Commission President Randy Thwing was present and could respond to questions from councilors on matters discussed e at the Planning Commission hearing. Councilor Wooten noted that an increase in automobile trips for the area from the present 400 to approximately 700 trips per day had been predicted as a result of the annexation and subsequent development of the property. Mr. Hayes said that this was correct but that the Planning Commission had not felt that this increase would "make or break" the Capital Drive traffic situation. Responding to a follow-up question from Councilor Miller, Mr. Hayes said that a traffic count done at the time of the Alpert annexation had confirmed that the estimate of 10 automobile trips per household per day for this area was accurate. Responding to a question from Councilor Miller, Mr. Hayes said that installation of an elevated water reservoir to serve the area was feasible both in terms of engineering and financing. He said that costs of such installation would be charged to the EWEB district as a whole. Regarding fire protection, Mr. Hayes noted that the three existing homes on the subject property currently have no fire protection whatsoever. Councilor Wooten raised the question of connecting Capital Drive through to 30th Avenue. Several councilors said that this was not a viable option. Mayor Keller asked councilors to declare for the record any ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest related to this item. Councilor Miller said that several people had mentioned the matter to her but that her judgment was not influenced by these contacts. e Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 12 - Public hearing was opened. e Paul Mehnert, 540 Oak Street, said he was a planning consultant with David Pedersen and Associates, representing the applicants, Ms. Byers-Jones and Mr. and Ms. McCarthy. He said that the subject property represented the last two tax lots adjacent to Capital Drive. He said that the property was surrounded to the north, west, and south by properties receiving the full range of City services. He said that the annexation request was especially crucial since it would provide fire and emergency services to the existing homes on the property. Mr. Mehnert said that the annexation and rezoning would primarily represent infilling, since the land was clearly committed by surrounding uses to future urban use. He said that Ms. Byers-Jones intended to develop her property through a planned unit development, with density of less than five units per acre, as per the provisions of the South Hills Study. He said that to date the McCarthys had no development plans. Mr. Mehnert said that he had discussed the issues of traffic and storm drainage control with City Engineer Bert Teitzel and City Traffic Engineer Jim Hanks and that he believed these problems could be adequately addressed. Mr. Mehnert urged the council to approve the request, as recommended by the Planning Commission, based on the findings made by the commission and staff. Michael McCarthy, 2855 Capital Drive, said that he and his wife were homeowners and parents with the same concern for addressing traffic problems in the area as other neighbors. He said that he and his wife had made the request primarily because the annexation would provide fire protection for their home. There being no further public testimony, public hearing was closed. e Res. No. 3737--A resolution forwarding a recommendation to the Boundary Commission for annexation of property located on the east side of Capital Drive, east of Cresta de Ruta Street to the City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that findings supporting the annexation as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 19, 1982, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Councilor Miller pointed out that problems similar to the traffic and service provision problems identified relative to this request would arise whenever annexations of land formerly developed in the County were considered. Roll call vote; motion carried 7:1, with Councilors Ball, Hamel, Lindberg, Miller, Obie, Schue, and Smith voting in favor, and Councilor Wooten voting in opposition. CB 2580--An ordinance authorizing re~oning from County RA Suburban Residential District to City RA-PD Suburban Residential District with Planned Unit Development procedures for property located on the east side of Capital Drive, east of Cresta de Ruta Street. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 13 Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes e and minutes of October 19, 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 2580 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; motion carried 7:1, with Councilors Ball, Hamel, Lindberg, Miller, Obie, Schue, and Smith voting in favor, and Councilor Wooten voting in opposition. The bill was declared passed and numbered 19060. D. Revisions to Industrial Zoning District Regulations (CA 82-4) (memo, additional information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Gary Chenkin, Planning. Mr. Chenkin said that there had been little controversy regarding this item at the Planning Commission's hearing. He referred to the memorandum from the Planning staff that had been included with meeting agendas and said that the revisions would bring the City Zoning Ordinance into conformance with the Metropolitan Area General Plan. Mr. Chenkin said that under the proposed revisions the former M-1 and M-2 industrial districts would be replaced by the 1-2 Light Industrial District, and the former M-3 District would be replaced by the 1-3 Heavy Industrial District. Mr. Chenkin noted that the council had previously adopted city-wide performance standards e that apply to the industrial districts, that meant that many uses formerly listed as conditional in industrial zones no longer needed to be conditional, since the performance standards should assure compatability and appropriateness of uses. He said that use of performance standards rather than the conditional use process should streamline the process of citing new industry. Mr. Chenkin said that the ordinance also included added regulations regarding minimal standards for provision of bicycle parking and changes in height regulations to guarantee protection for solar energy use. He noted that staff had worked closely with the Chamber of Commerce Code Committee in developing the proposed revisions. Mr. Chenkin said that the Planning Commission had voted unanimously to recommend adoption to the council. Public hearing, was opened. There being no members of the public who wished to speak, public hearing was closed. CB 2581--An ordinance concerning industrial zoning districts; amending sections 7.180, 7.410, 9.268, 9.270, 9.296, 9.310, 9.324, 9.338, 9.352, 9.366, 9.380, 9.394, 9.408, 9.448, 9.450, 9.452, 9.468, 9.470, 9.472, 9.474, 9.492, 9.510, 9.534, 9.540, 9.542, 9.544, 9.546, 9.554, 9.582, 9.586, 9.587, 9.593, 9.644, and 9.702 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing sections 9.462, 9.464, 9.466 of that code; adding a new section 9.454 thereto; and declaring e an emergency. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 14 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. e Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2581 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 19061. E. Rezoning Request for Property Located on the Northwest Corner of West 11th Avenue and Seneca Road from M-2 Light Industrial District to C-2/SR Community Commercial District with Site Review Procedures (Industrial Finishes and Systems, Inc.) (Z 82-19) (map, additional information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Croteau, Planning. Mr. Croteau said that the subject property was located on the northwest corner of West 11th Avenue and Seneca Road, adjacent to the Fred Meyer site. He noted that this was the last piece of land in the area still zoned for industrial use. He said that the Planning Commission had voted 6:0 to recommend approval of the request to the council. He noted that the commission had recommended application of the site review suffix to provide for ingress, egress, and on-site traffic circulation relative to West 11th Avenue and Seneca Road. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. e No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by councilors. Public hearing was opened. Allen Gardner, 915 Oak Street, referred to written materials previously submitted relative to this application. He said that this industrially zoned property was completely surrounded by commercially zoned property. He said that the applicant found application of the site review suffix acceptable, so long as it was applied only in relation to ingress and egress of traffic. He said that Stuart Barr, President of Industrial Finishes, was available to respond to questions from councilors. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. CB 2582--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from M-2 Light Indus- trial District to C-2/SR Community Commercial District with Site Review Procedures for property located on the northwest corner of West 11th Avenue and Seneca Road. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 19, 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 e unanimously. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 15 Council Bill 2582 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. Ro 11 call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19062. F. Authorization Regarding Reconstruction of Oanebo Bridge (memo distributed Mr. Gleason introduced Bert Teitzel, City Engineer. Mr. Teitzel said that the reconstruction involved an assessment to property owners of approximately $60 per front foot. He noted that the City would be required to make an advance deposit of $39,940 on the project. Mr. Teitzel distributed a memorandum, dated November 22, 1982, containing information on bids received. Public hearing was opened. There being no members of the public who wished to speak, public hearing was closed. Responding to a question from Councilor Obie, Mr. Teitzel said that the assessment to adjacent properties was only for construction on the street leading to the bridge, not for the bridge itself. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to authorize staff to forward an advance deposit to the State of Oregon for the City of Eugene's share of the anticipated construction and engineering e costs associated with the reconstruction of Danebo Bridge. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. III. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING A. Approval of Hearings Panel Minutes of October 25, 1982, and November 18, 1982, and Adoption of Findings of Fact (findings, minutes of October 25 and November 18 distributed) Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the Hearing Panel minutes of October 25, 1982, and November 18, 1982, and adopt the findings of fact. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Levying Assessments Mr. Gleason noted that the council had voted earlier in the meeting to postpone consideration of Council Bill 2532. CB 2556--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer to serve area from 160 feet east of Harrison Street to Glenwood Boulevard and between Southern Pacific railroad tracks and 160 feet south of Glenwood Drive (81-42) e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 16 ) Mr. Gleason introduced Bert Teitzel, City Engineer. Mr. Teitzel said that this e item had been referred back to the City Attorney by the Hearings Panel, with questions about assessing the half-cent levy to the entire parcel and not just to the 160' that is normally assessed on a lateral assessment. He noted that the City Attorney's written opinion had previously been distributed to councilors. Mr. Teitzel said that the City Attorney had stated that it is up to the council how to make the assessment. Mr. Teitzel noted that the City's practice had been to assess the whole area and said that the City Attorney recommended that the levy be made as calculated by staff. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Responding to a question from Councilor Wooten, Mr. Teitzel said that one person had objected at the public hearing to the assessment recommended by staff. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19063. CB 2535--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and storm sewer on Williams Street from Harriet Street to Royal Avenue (81-07). Mr. Teitzel said that a petition had been received from 14 property owners to reopen the hearing on this item. He said that staff recommended that the hearing not be reopened, since there had been adequate opportunity for public testimony at the Hearings Panel hearing. e Mayor Keller noted that the council had received a request from Mark Lewis, 971 Williams Street, to testify on this matter. He noted that a two-thlrds vote of the council would be required to reopen the hearing. Councilor Wooten asked why staff recommended that the hearing not be reopened. Mr. Teitzel responded that there had been one staff hearing and one hearing before the Hearing Panel on this item and that most of the petitioners had spoken at those hearings. Mr. Teitzel did not believe that any new issues had been raised since those hearings. Councilor Miller said she believed that a hearing on Williams Street had taken place about a year ago. Mr. Teitzel said this was the case. Mr. Ball moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to reopen the hearing on the Williams Street assessment and hear the views of those wishing to testify. Motion failed 5:3, with Councilors Ball, Wooten, and Schue voting in favor, and Counclors Hamel, Lindberg, Miller, Obie, and Smith voting in opposition. l~. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be amended to delete property associated with pending bankruptcy action. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 17 Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the amended bill be e read the second time by council bill number only, with the unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at th is time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2535, as amended, was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the amended bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19064. CB 2555--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within and adjacent to Sterling Estates subdivision and sanitary sewer on Gilham Road from Kidder cul-de-sac to Walton Lane (81-24) Council Bill 2555 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 ca 11 vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19065. CB 2557--An ordinance levying assessments for paving on 2nd Avenue from Monroe Street to Southern Pacific railroad tracks and paving Adams Street from 1st Avenue to 2nd e Avenue (82-02) - Council Bill 2557 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 ca 11 vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19066. CB 2558--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and storm sewer on Sycamore Avenue from Adams Street to 65 feet east of Ash Street (82-04) Council Bill 2558 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 19067. CB 2559--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and sidewalk on Norkenzie Road from Beltline Road to 125 feet north of Balboa Street (82-06) Council Bill 2559 was read the second time by council bill number only. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 18 . Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved e and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19068. CB 2560--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer on Maple Street from Roosevelt Boulevard to Cross Street (82-07) Council Bill 2560 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 19069. CB 2561--An ordinance levying assessments for for paving and storm sewer on McKendrick Street from Graham Drive to Karyl Avenue (82-08) Council Bill 2561 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 19070. CB 2562--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer on Willagillespie Road from e Country Club Road to 300 feet south of Clinton Avenue (82-15) Council Bill 2562 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 19071. CB 2563--An ordinance levying assessments for storm sewer between Bailey Lane and Tandy Turn from Coburg Road to serve tax lots 17-03-20-41-3300 and 17-03-20-41-7900 (82-17) Council Bill 2563 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Ob~e 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 19072. CB 2564--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and sidewalk on Bailey Hill Road from 5th Avenue to 7th Avenue (82-18) Council Bill 2564 was read the second time by council bill number only. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 19 . Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present e voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19073. CB 2565--An ordinance levying assessments for storm sewer in Acorn Park Street from 14th Avenue to 17th Avenue and in 14th Avenue from Buck Street to Acorn Park Street, to serve Ivy Glen PUD; and street paving on 14th Avenue from Acorn Park Street to Buck Street (82-19) Council Bill 2565 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 19074. CB 2566--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer on Crane Lane from Garfield Street to 400 feet east Council Bill 2566 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 19075. CB 2567--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer between Cresta-de-Ruta and Capital Drive to serve tax e lot 18-03-40-31-00300, 2995 Capital Drive (82-21) Council Bill 2567 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 19076. CB 2568--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within Summeroaks Industrial Park (82-27) Council Bill 2568 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 19077. CB 2569--An ordinance levying assessments for paving on Fir Acres Road from Bond Lane to Willagillespie Road (82-28) Council Bill 2569 was read the second time by council bill number only. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 20 , - ~ . Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present e voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19078. CB 2570--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer between Fox Hollow Road and West Drive from Fox Hollow Road to Martin Street (82-30) Council Bill 2570 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 19079. C. Ordinance Amending Ordinance #19047 CB 2583--An ordinance concerning assessmen~s for paving and sidewalk on Crescent Avenue from Gilham Road to Coburg Road; amending Ordinance #19047; 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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2583 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. Roll ca 11 vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19080. Meeting was adjourned to November 24, 1982. Respectfully submitted, ??~ ;P?-'~ (~:?'.P _~... Micheal D. Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Darcy Marentette) MDG:ce/CM8b1 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1982 Page 21