Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/23/1983 Meeting (2) e e re M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber May 23, 1983 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: John Ball, Freeman Holmer, Mark lindberg, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten. COUNCILOR ABSENT: Dick Hansen. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUST~!ENTS Mayor Keller introduced a letter that he wished the council to approve so that it could be sent to the lane County Budget Committee which was meeting at the present time. He asked the councilors to review the letter dated May 23, 1983. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the council authorize the letter to be forwarded to the Lane County Budget Committee. Ms. Wooten stated that she agreed with the intent of the letter but, referring to that portion of the letter requesting the County Assessor's budget to be in the base budget, asked if it would be possible to add the Assessor's budget to the A levy with law enforcement. Mayor Keller responded that the thrust of the letter is to include the Assessor's budget in the A ballot. Mr. Gleason clarified that the letter's intent is to have the Assessor's budget in the base budget and council was requesting, barring that option, that the budget be in the A ballot. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Request for Demolition of Historic Landmark Located on the East Side of Oak Street between 11th Avenue and 12th Avenue at 1143 Oak Street (Alpha Tau Omega House) (H 80-3) (memo, map, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason announced the agenda item and introduced Pat Decker of Planning. Ms. Decker, presenting the staff report, clarified the format of the hearing and parties to be heard, following quasi-judicial pro- ceedings. She stated that the request for demolition of the ATO house had been dealt with by the Historic Review Board according to City code. She stated that the board had directed staff to work with the owners on alternatives to demolition in line with the requirements of the code. Mr. Decker stated that Mr. Bennett of Bennett Management Company had presented an alternative to MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 1 e demolition and had stated that any alternative to demolition must involve a public and private funding package to be financially feasible. Ms. Decker stated that the council has received recommendations in favor of the funding package as an alternative to demolition from various boards and commissions that are advisory to the City Council. She stated that the council action will need to address three points: 1. Act on a recommendation of the Downtown Commission to support restora- tion of the former ATO house by making an exception to the 'policy' of focusing the Commercial Redevelopment Loan Program on the Central Eugene Project renewal area and approve use of those funds on the ATO Restora- tion if a package can be put together and is found acceptable to the owners within the 60-day time frame set up by the Historic Review Board. 2. Act on a recommendation of the Historic Review Board to support restoration of the ATO house by making an exception to the Historic Restoration Loan Program guidelines on interest rates for commercial structures, allowing a three percent loan rate rather than the usual nine percent rate for commercial structures. 3. Consider a report from the Historic Review Board, including its recommendation for preservation of the structure, using the existing loan programs or for demolition of the structure if the funding package cannot be put together by the end of the 60-day period (June 6, 1983). - Ms. Decker summarized that the council is being asked to rule on the demolition permit and on the use of various programs which are key to an alternative to demolition. She added that the staff had recieved a letter from the individual who had been in the process of documenting the ATO house, stating that he could not complete the documentation due to accepting a position ~sewhere. In the event that the council did approve the application for demolition, Ms. Decker asked that an effective date for the permit be set two weeks later than the original June 6 deadline. Carmi Weingrod, Chairperson of the Historic Review Board, reviewed the main points considered by the board in its recommendation to council. She stated that the board and the council had approved landmark status for the ATO house in 1980. She stated that the board had worked to find alternatives to demolition as required by code when the owners made the request for demolition in February 1983. She explained that the board had considered the following criteria for demolition in making its recommendation: 1) the safety hazard of the structure; 2) an improve- ment project for the property which cannot be located elsewhere; 3) the possible financial hardship of the owners; and 4) the retention of the structure being in the best interests of the public. She stated that the structure had been nominated on May 12 by the State Advisory Committee for historic recognition on the Nation~ Register and the nomination had been forwarded to the Federal government. Ms. Weingrod stated that the board had voted unanimously to support the use of three loan programs to support the alternative to demolition put forth by Mr. Bennett. Public hearing was opened. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 2 Mayor Keller asked councilors to declare any ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. ~ Councilors Wooten and Lindberg stated that they had spoken to Mr. Bennett on the ATO house but did not feel this would prejudice their decision. Councilor Schue stated that she had received information from Mr. Bennett on the rouse but al so felt that her decision would not be prejudiced. e - Speaking in favor of the request for demolition: Robert Moulton, 260 East 11th Avenue, Eugene, an attorney for the owners of the property, reviewed the Hessels' history with the building. He stressed that the hazards associated with the property due to its use by vagrants and the lack of maintenance were causing the Hessels to become increasingly liable for the unsafe structure. Mr. Moulton stated that the Hessels had owned the building since 1964 until selling the property to Stephen Meyers in 1976; Mr. Meyers had in turn sold the property in 1978 to Gerald Dalros. Mr. Moulton explained that Mr. Dalros, due to financial difficulties, had been unable to make the payments on the property or to locate funding to renovate the building, thus the Hessels reassumed ownership in February 1982. Mr. Moulton stated that the owners have not received payments on their land sale for the past three years and the property has continued to be assessed for property taxes which are now estimated at $52,000. Mr. Moulton emphasized that the Hessels have had to pay approximately $70,000 to ~cover the property and should not be asked to suffer further. Donald A. Gallagher; 825 East Park Street, Eugene, an attorney representing the Hessels in regard to offers for the property, stated that he wished to speak on the two conditions contained in Mr. Bennett's offer. Mr. Gallagher stated that the conditions are: 1) the Hessels are to carry a portion of the purchase price back on a land sale contract or mortgage, and 2) the City is to make a loan of $125,000 to assist in the rehabilitation. Mr. Gallagher stated that the Hessels are requesting that the City's loan be subordinate to the interest being carried by the Hessels on the purchase price. Speaking in opposition to the request for demolition: Robert Bennett, 250 Palomino Drive, Eugene, addressed the issues of property taxes and supply and demand as editorialized by the Eugene Register-Guard. Mr. Bennett explained that the restored property would be more valuable to the city than a parking lot and that the additional office space should be looked at as a long-term program. He stated that while the project may not meet the council's criteria fur economic development, it is important to realize that no jobs are permanent in the constructi on busi ness. He stated that the goal of hi s cOOlpany is to look for development opportunities and that he planned to occupy office space in the renovated structure. Mr. Bennett stated that the building would add interest in the downtown area and would have a good business use. He said that his company's plan is good and that it has received community support. Scott Wylie, 310 East 14th Avenue, Eugene, stated that he is an architectural designer and contractor. Mr. Wylie commented that the ATO house doesn't fit into any style of architecture, therefore people might be uncertain of the success of the rehabilitation. He suggested that the ATO house be compared with the other II uglyll buil di ngs in the market pl ace to see exampl es of how restora ti on can be successful. Mr. Wylie displayed an architectural drawing of the ATO house by MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 3 e e - Albert Pastine which shows a conception of the building after restoration. Mr. Wylie stated that he supported Mr. Bennett's proposal and felt that the loans from the City were an appropriate use of public money. He explained that the restoration work is much more labor intensive than building a parking lot and would have a more beneficial result. Brad Perkins, 1590 Mill Street, Eugene, stated that he is a consultant for renovations and that he has been talking with the committees involved with the ATO house. He stated that he is concerned with the lack of understanding in the Register-Guard editorial and explained that 119 buildings had been demolished and 143 had been changed so drastically that the downtown area is losing its identity. Mr. Perkins distributed pictures of the house taken recently and in 1910, explaining that restoration would not be as difficult as stated in the editorial. Mr. Perkins stated that the building has been nominated to the National Register and the main problem is that the building has been an eyesore for too long. He stated that it takes a trained eye to see the beauty in the building, a building which he believes to be structurally sound. Speaking from an economic viewpoint, Mr. Perkins stated that businesses would desire to locate in a building close to downtown, especially in a building with interior space that has some character as opposed to the intimidating or boring architectural style of a new building. Mr. Perkins said that the proposed parking lot would provide only a view of the backs of the Kiva and St. Vincent's de Paul buildings. He said he felt that the spending of a $125,000 subsidy is outweighed by the property's value and future use. He said the project maximizes the use of the land and is part of a national trend toward restoration. Mr. Perkins explained that the restored property would add dollars to the tax base. Mr. Perkins stated that while the Hessels want to get out of the property, they also feel the property should be restored. He said that the restoration would be in line with the council's past actions with regard to restoration and with the recommen- dations of the committees involved. Mr. Perkins stated that the restoration of the ATO house is in keeping with the goals and policies of the Metropolitan Plan for providing continuity and linking the past with the future. Joe McCoy, 388 East 11th Avenue, Eugene, representing the 700 Club, said that his organization is presently talking with the Hessels in an attempt to alleviate Mr. Hessel's problems as well as those of the community. He said that the building, when restored, could be used to rehabilitate and assist those individuals who had torn the building apart as well as providing office space for counseling and social services. Mr. McCoy stated that the funds to restore the building could be provided by the CDBG, Commercial Redevelopment, and Historic Preservation loan programs, as well as by private donations and the 700 Club. He stated that the OverPark is only a block away and is never filled to capacity, therefore another parking lot is not needed. He restated that his organization is talking to ~Ir. Hessel and that others from the 700 Club are becoming involved in the project. Ms. Decker, referring to Mr. Gallagher's statement, said that the condition of the Hessels carrying part of the purchase price would be the same under the proposals made for demolition or restoration. She stated that Mr. McCoy had presented his proposal to the Historic Review Board, but that no formal proposal for funding or eligibility for various funding programs had been received by the board. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 4 e e e The staff notes and minutes were entered into the record and the public hearing was closed. Councilor Lindberg asked if the subordination of the loan had precedent and had been agreed to by staff. City Attorney Tim Sercombe stated that this procedure fits within the guidelines of Federal regulations. Mr. Lindberg asked if the $55,000 approved from CDBG funds would revert to Housing if the project were not supported. Ms. Decker stated that it was her understanding that those funds would be reprogrammed. Councilor Smith asked if the offer proposed by Mr. Bennett is acceptable to the Hessels. Mr. Gallagher said that the offer is acceptable as long as the conditions of the loan and the subordination are met. Councilor Obie asked the staff to sumarize the three funds and interest rates to be used for financing the City's portion of the project. Ms. Decker said the funding would be composed of: 1) $50,000 from the Commercial Redevelopment Loan Program to reduce the interest rate on market rate funds to six points below the market rate; 2) $55,000 from CDBG funds at an interest rate of three percent; and 3) $20,000 from the Historic Restoration Loan Program at an interest rate of three percent. Mr. Obie asked if any of the funds would affect the City's economic redevelopment program. Ms. Decker said they would not. Mayor Keller asked what the terms of the loans would be. Ms. Decker said that it would be a determination of staff for either 30 years at an appropriate interest rate or a 30-year amortization period with a call at 10-12 years on anyone of the loans. Councilor Ball asked what the fair market value of the property would be after restoration and how that value was determined. Ms. Decker said an appraisal by HUD would have to be performed and that it was staff's determination that the fair market value exceeded the loan. She added that the total amount of the funds for the project is 80 percent of the $418,000 for development costs. She said she was not aware of a fair market value having been set. Mr. Gleason stated that an appraisal will be performed after the project is put together and it will be reviewed by HUD. Mr. Ball asked if the staff had calculated the difference to the tax base of the renovated building versus the parking lot. Ms. Decker stated that this had not been done. Mr. Ball asked if staff had calculated the total subsidy, given the two options for the loans. Ms. Decker said this had not been done, adding that the issues the council is dealing with are primarily of policy. She said that the terms of the loan would be determined after staff had received the council's approval for further negotiation. Mr. Ball asked Mr. Bennett what percentage of the building space his company planned to occupy, the construction time frame, and tentative move-in date. Mr. Bennett responded that he would occupy 75-100 percent of the office space, depending on the layout of the bUilding. He said he wished to begin construction before the Fall and complete construction in the Spring. He said that his occupation of the building depended on finding a subtenant for his present office, his lease having two years to run. Mr. Ball asked why Mr. Bennett had used a "no vacancy" factor in his projection. Mr. Bennett admitted that it was not the usual method, but he had attempted to make the figures appear better based on his plans to occupy the space. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 5 e Councilor Holmer asked when the project would be completed. Ms. Decker said that it depended on Mr. Bennett's negotiations with the owners and with private financial institutions. She said Mr. Bennett was seeking the council's approval of the project so that he could obtain the required public and private loans. Mr. Gleason, referring to an earlier question by Councilor Ball, stated that the renovated structure would be assessed approximately $13,000 in property taxes based on a fair market value of $500,000. Councilor Holmer asked Mr. Moulton and Mr. Gallagher for their expectations of the project's completion. Mr. Gallagher stated that it was his understanding that the sale was dependent upon Mr. Bennett obtaining the loans. He said that the Hessels have until August 1 to accept the second offer on the property. Councilor Smith asked if the City and Mr. Bennett can comply with that time schedule. Ms. Decker said that the sale can proceed with the understanding that the staff has the council's approval to proceed with the loans. Ms. Smith stated that she was concerned that the Hessels should not lose any more money. Ms. Decker said that it had been stated in the staff notes that Mr. Bennett only needed the council's support of the project to proceed with the loan applications. Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, to accept the recommendation of the Historic Review Board, and further, to adopt the policy recommendation outlined in the staff memo dated May 19, 1983. e Councilor Ball stated that he was uncomfortable with the amount of information given and that he was being asked to dedicate public funds without a fair market value of the property. He said that the City will be in third place for the loan and therefore he cannot determine the loan-to-value ratio. He said there was inadequate information for him to proceed, although he commended the staff and Mr. Bennett for their work. Mayor Keller responded that others were also concerned and that an amendment to the motion calling for an interim report would be appropriate. Mr. Ball said he understood that the approval must be made tonight, but that he is not ready to commit the funds. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Gleason if a fair market value could be obtained by Thursday. Mr. Gleason responded that a value appraisal would take approximately one month and that the appraisal had not been performed because funding for such an action is substantial and had not been approved. Councilor Holmer stated that the shared Mr. Ball's concern over the use of public funds in this manner and the issue of adding to the supply of office space in the downtown area. He also stated that he disagreed on the propriety of restoring the building based on aesthetic grounds. Councilor Lindberg asked staff to clarify if HUD would perform the appraisal. Ms. Decker said that the HUD funds will require a fair market appraisal, but that HUD would not perform the appraisal. Answering Mr. Lindberg's question of the cost of the appraisal, Ms. Decker stated that it has not been decided whether it will be paid for by the developer or by the City. Mr. Lindberg asked if the appraisal will satisfy Mr. Ball's questions and the requirements for the loans. Ms. Decker stated that the appraisal was a necessary step in obtaining the loans and would address Mr. Ball's questions. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 6 e e e Councilor Obie asked staff to clarify the importance of the appraisal. Ms. Decker stated that HUD will not allow the funds to be used if the fair market value does not indicate a sufficient value in the property to support the mortgage. Roll call vote; the motion carried 4:3 with Councilors Wooten, Lindberg, Obie, and Schue voting aye and Councilors Smith, Holmer, and Ball voting no. The meeting was recessed at 8:54 p.m. and reconvened at 9:08 p.m. B. Council-Initiated Improvements on Lorane Highway from Chambers Street to Fillmore Street (1992) (memo distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item and stated that City Engineer Bert Teitzel would present the staff analysis. Mr. Gleason stated that he was removing himself from the issue since he lived within the area involved, even though no conflict of interest exists. He stated that the issue had occurred around the General and T-2000 plans prior to his arrival in Eugene and he had attempted to deal with the issue without prejudice. Mr. Gleason turned the meeting over to Assistant City Manager David Whitlow. Mr. Whitlow introduced Mr. Teitzel, stating that Mr. Teitzel would talk on the specifics of the project improvements as well as the street design and construction and the resulting long-term maintenance requirements. Mr. Teitzel stated that the project involved Lorane Highway from Fillmore Street to Chambers Street. He said the design of the highway from Washington Street to Chambers Street had been included in the TIP several years ago to develop a design and time schedule for the improvements. He stated that the involved section of the highway is a significant scenic drive but that staff has not made a determination on how the improvement should look. Mr. Teitzel said he wished to address separately the issue that the Fillmore to Chambers section is similar to most connectors in the City bordered by subdivisions. In reviewing the reasons for the improvement, Mr. Teitzel explained that the proposed curbs and gutters will control the drainage of the streets, eliminate the ditches and shoulder erosion, and eliminate gravel being washed into the streets. He added that the curb and gutter will provide a durable edge to the pavement and a vertical separation between the roadway and the pedestrian walkway. He stated that the curb and gutter will increase the usable portion of the street. Mr. Teitzel presented slides of the proposed improvement area and a similar improved area. He stated that a minimal 28-foot section such as the Lorane Highway would provide two nine and one-half-foot travel lanes, two four and one-half-foot bike lanes, and a five-foot sidewalk. He said that Fox Hollow Road is the best example of an improved section similar to the proposed area. Mr. Teitzel said the project was initiated in 1980 by the Eugene 4J School District Safety Committee. He said the project is supported by the Eugene Bicycle Committee and the administrative staff of the 4J School District. He added that a letter had been received from Terry Lindquist, the district super- intendent, in support of the project. Mr. Teitzel said that staff has proposed the sidewalk to be on the north side of the highway, with one crosswalk at Hionda Street. He stated that staff does not feel the project will harm the existing banks and vegetation. He stated that if the project is approved, the bids will be advertised on June 27, an appraisal hearing will be held on July 18, and the contract will be awarded on July 25. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 7 e e e Councilor Obie asked for an estimate of the total assessment to adjacent property owners. Mr. Teitzel said the property owners along the improved section would be paying for an equivalent 20-foot wide street (approximately $40 per front foot), with the City paying for the center eight-foot section of the roadway. Although the project is budgeted for $70,000, Mr. Teitzel approximated the cost of the project to be $110,000, of which $90,000 would be assessed. Public hearing was opened. No public testimony was given in favor of the proposal. Speaking in opposition to the proposal: Joe Farmer, 1680 Lorane Highway, spokesperson for the Lorane Highway Committee, stated the committee's displeasure with the proposal. He said the plans completely ignore the wishes of the committee and the 94 property owners between Washington Street and Chambers Street. He said it is the desire of the committee to retain the unique rural atmosphere of the area. Mr. Farmer stated that the committee has met with City representatives and has corresponded with Mr. Lindquist. Referring to the October 6, 1983, letter from Mr. Lindquist to Mr. Teitzel, he said the committee had found the school district to be in favor only of a four-foot wide walkway from Fillmore to Chambers, and not in the project as proposed by Mr. Teitzel and Mr. Allen. He said the committee feels that only resurfacing under the City maintenance program and the installation of the gravel walkway is needed. Mr. Farmer commented that communication is lacking, stating that the opinions of the property owners have been ignored while the project has progressed. He said the property owners recognize the need to update the highway with improved shoulders and drainage and that the committee has researched the issues of safety and environmental impact on the area. He stated that Jan Gunn of the committee had met with Mr. Lindquist and representa- tives of the district and they had agreed on a four-foot wide gravel shoulder from Fillmore to Chambers, a painted crosswalk at Hionda, and appropriate "School Zone" signs in the area. Mr. Farmer distributed pictures of a gravel walkway on Gilham Road similar to the one proposed by the committee. He said that the crosswalk as proposed by the City is inappropriately placed and would require his children to cross the road twice. Mr. Farmer, distributing pictures of the Hionda and Lorane Highway intersection, suggested placing a stop sign at the intersection because it is a blind corner. Mr. Farmer stated that increasing the width of the roadway from the present 20-22 foot width will add to the problems, stating that people who live along newly widened roads have observed vehicle speeds to increase after the improve- ments. He added that the highway is part of the Coast to Coast Bicentennial Bike Route and that bikers surveyed had called for an open roadway rather than the designated lanes. He said that parking is now restricted and curbs would eliminate on-street parking and would create problems for vehicles entering or leaving driveways. Mr. Farmer said that the highway was built many years ago and has been enjoyed by many people. He stated the City Engineer treats the two sections of the highway differently, with Fillmore Street as the dividing line. Mr. Farmer stated that the highway is similar to those found in the surrounding valleys and asked the council to reexamine the facts and make an on-site inspection prior to making a final decision. He stated that the property owners wished to preserve the rural setting in which they had chosen to reside. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 8 e e e Carroll D. Fentress, 3883 Blanton Road, Eugene, Chairperson of the Crest Drive Citizens Committee, stated that he is new to Eugene, but he objects to the project because it is: 1) not needed or requested, 2) a waste of taxpayers' money, and 3) the first step in ruining the character of Lorane Highway. Ed Deardorff, 675 Lorane Highway, stated that the project is not essential because the highway is adequate to handle the present amount of traffic. He stated that the residents do not want another "Fox Hollow" and that only minor improvements are needed. He said the Planning Commission had given the school board credit for initiating the project, but the school board, when questioned, had denied it. Mr. Deardorff said that attention should be given instead to the school on 29th Avenue which does not have a continuous sidewalk for the children approaching the school. He added that the Lorane Highway area needs better police and fire protection and occasional maintenance more than the new project. He said he feels the council is attempting to ramrod the project through without concern for the desires of the property owners. Pat Collins, 701 Lorane Highway, stated that he had lived in the area for 27 years. He stated that the citizens should be asked what is desired before action is taken. He stated that the school board and the Bicycle Committee do not want the new project, but the City wants it and wants the property owners to pay for it. Mr. Collins said he could not afford to pay the assessment and that he was tired of the waste in City management. Mr. Farmer presented an additional comment, stating that there is presently sufficient walkway for children to use in going to school but that the project would eliminate the walkway on the south side of the highway. Public hearing was closed. Mr. Teitzel said that in studies performed, speeds have either remained the same or have increased two to three miles per hour in other areas where the street has been widened. He added that the Eugene Bicycle Committee has endorsed the project and cited a May 13, 1983, letter from Mr. Lindquist as evidence of the school district's support of the project. On the issue of the sidewalk location, Mr. Teitzel stated that the staff had agreed with Mr. Lindquist's suggestion of the north side of the highway, adding that a sidewalk on that side would better serve the residents. In reference to the Frances Willard School on 29th Avenue, Mr. Teitzel said that a sidewalk has not been requested by the district safety commi ttee. Councilor Schue asked if traffic counts had been performed on the highway. Mr. Teitzel responded that counts have been taken over the past ten years at the Hionda intersection. He said that the traffic has decreased from 550 to 450 cars per day. He added that the 85 percentile vehicle speed at the intersection is 32 miles per hour. Councilor Wooten asked for clarification on the extent of the drainage and erosion control problem. Mr. Teitzel stated that there is little problem on the section involved in the proposal, but the Washington to Fillmore section has some problem with soil being washed onto the roadway. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 9 e e Mayor Keller asked how many adjustments had been made to the original proposal in the past eighteen months based on citizen input received. Mr. Teitzel said the original proposal for the Washington to Fillmore section called for a 26-foot wide roadway with a four-foot wide sidewalk; he added that the area has room for a 28-foot wide roadway and a five-foot wide sidewalk as is requested in the present proposal. He said the plans have been adjusted as late as last week in an attempt to develop the best plan. Mr. Teitzel said the proposal is a modification of the normal 36-foot wide roadway and that one of the two original sidewalks has been deleted. Mr. Teitzel said the issue of removing trees is only involved in the Washington to Fillmore section. Councilor Wooten asked for the comparative traffic counts between Lorane Highway and Gilham Road. James Hanks, City Traffic Engineer, said the area north of Crescent on Gilham Road has less traffic than the Lorane section, but that the approximately 500 cars per day is not a significant number. Councilor Lindberg asked whether the gravel walkway as suggested was feasible. Mr. Teitzel commented that a gravel walkway is seen as a temporary measure by the staff and that it would require more maintenance; therefore, adding additional cost to the initial cost of installation. He stated that the walkway on Gilham Road was installed by the County. In regard to questions by the council, Mr. Teitzel said that no growth projections for the area involved had been made, but that the main thrust of the proposal is for the safety of the children in the area. He added that the suggested stop sign would create a problem because Lorane Highway is the main street and people would tend to run the stop sign. He added that in July 19B2 the school district had stated 50-60 children could potentially use the walkway, but now most are bused or driven to school in cars. He said the district transportation department said that it would probably eliminate one bus route if the sidewalk were installed. Councilor Obie stated that this was not a zoning issue, but that it was a long-standing issue and that he could understand the feelings of the residents. He said he believed the $90,000 assessment to be a major factor and compared this situation to the Goodpasture Island situation in that the residents are against the proposal. He said that 75 percent of the traffic on the roadway is probably by the residents and therefore is not a significant number. He added that the proposed improvement will be easily done, but that the improvement of the rest of the Lorane Highway will call for substantial cut and fill and will change the nature of the neighborhood. Mr. Obie said he is empathic to the residents and cannot support a council-initiated proposal that has no support from the residents. Councilor Wooten stated that she could not support the proposal at this time and suggested that some interim work such as the stop sign and the gravel walkway could be done to protect the children in the area. Councilor Ball said that, in looking at the safety aspect of the situation, there is a considerable difference between a gravel shoulder and an elevated sidewalk. He stated that he appreciated the input of the school district and realized the burden to be placed on the property owners, but he would support e the proposal. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 10 e e e Councilor Lindberg stated that all the assessment projects of the past thirty months have raised the issue of the City policy to urbanize the streets. He said it is unfair to take exception in this case unless the council is willing to alter the policy. He stressed that either there are to be no council-initiated projects or the people will be served capriciously. He said that the improvement is not just for the adjacent property owners but for all residents of Eugene, and therefore he would support the project. Mayor Keller commented that all the street improvements in the past ten years have been opposed; he said no residents have ever said the improvements were wanted or needed. He said that the staff had worked with the Lorane Highway Citizen committee to bring about a compromise but the committee did not want a compromise. He said the City is in the urban, not the rural, business, and that residents must realize that sooner or later the streets will be improved. He said, referring to the improvement of Willamette Street, that it is better to improve the highway now instead of waiting until later when construction costs will be much higher. Res. No. 3778--A resolution authorizing paving and sidewalk on Lorane Highway from Chambers Street to Fillmore Street. Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried 5:2, Councilors Ball, Holmer, Lindberg, Schue, and Smith voting aye and Councilors Obie and Wooten voting no. C. Rezoning Requests 1. Property located at the northwest corner of Chambers and 9th Avenue from RA Surburban Residential Distreict and RG/SR Garden Apartment Residential District with Site Review procedures to I-2/SR Light-Medium Industrial District with Site Review procedures and RP/SR Residential Professional District with Site Review pro- cedures (Gene Gustafson) (Z 83-2) (map, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the topic and presented the background information on the request. There were no ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. The staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Since there was no public testimony, the public hearing was closed. CB 2640--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from RG/SR Garden Apartment Residential District with Site Review proced- ures to I-2/SR Light-Medium Industrial District with Site Review procedures for property located at the northwest corner of Chambers Street and 9th Avenue. Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of April 5, 1983 be adopted by reference thereto; MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 11 - that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council; and that enactment be con- sidered at this time. Roll call vote; motion passed unanimously. Council Bill 2640 was read the second time by council bill number only. Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19142. CB 2641--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from RA Surburban Residential District and RG/SR Garden Apartment Residential District with Site Review procedures to RP/SR Residential Professional District with Site Review procedures for property located at the northwest corner of Chambers Street and 9th Avenue. Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of April 5, 1983 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 passed unanimously. Council Bill 2641 was read the second time by council bill number only. e Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19143. Property located on the east side of Willagillespie Road north of Country Club Road from RG/SR Garden Apartment Residential District with Site Review procedures to RP Residential Professional District and application of the Professional Office Sign District (Lorenz/ Allsup) (Z 83-4) (map, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the topic and presented the background information. 2. There were no ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. The staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Since there was no public testimony, the public hearing was closed. - CB 2642--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from RG/SR Garden Apartment Residential District with Site Review procedures to RP Residential Professional District, and a change of sign district from Residential Sign District to Professional Office Sign District for property located on the east side of Willagillespie Road north of Country Club Road. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 12 . e - Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of April 12, 1983 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 passed unanimously. Council Bill 2642 was read the second time by council bill number only. Councilor Schue moved, seconded by Councilor Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19144. The meeting was adjourned to May 25, 1983. (Recorded by Thom Strunk) MDG:TS:bm/CM26a18 MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 13