Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/1983 Meeting MINUTES e Eugene City Council Council Chamber, City Hall June 15, 1983 11:45 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: John Ball, Dick Hansen, Freeman Holmer, Mark Lindberg, 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. ITEMS FROM MAYOR & COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS A. Appointments 1. Sister City Committee Mayor Keller announced that he had recently appointed Barney McCabe, 1245 Laurelhurst Drive, as chairperson of the Sister City Committee for an i ndefi n ite term. 2. Bicycle Committee e Mayor Keller announced his appointment of K. Ron Ballestros, 4027 Donald Street, to the Eugene Bicycle Committee, for an indefinite term; to fill the vacancy resulting from the resignation of Ben Pascal. 3. Private Industry Council Mayor Keller nominated Liz Cawood to the Private Industry Council. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approve the Mayor's nomination of Liz Cawood, 34496 McKenzie View Drive, to the Private Industry Council, term to expire December 31, 1984. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council President Schue and Council Vice President Obie recommended several appointments to positions on human rights commissions: 4. Commission on the Rights of the Disabled Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to make the following appointments to the Disabled Commission: Deborah Killian, 2240 Fillmore Street, Eugene 97405, to complete the unexpired term of Ellen Miller-Wolfe, term to expire January 1, 1984; - MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 1 James Ashley, 2285 Silhouette, Eugene 97402, to complete the unexpired term of Mary Porter Leistner, term to expire January 1, e 1985; Jane Alward, 2100 Madison Street, Eugene 97405, to complete the unexpired term of Paul Ciminello (who has requested to be appointed an alternate), term to expire January 1, 1986. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 5. Commission on the Rights of Minorities Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to appoint Ruben Scholander, 1490 Hayes Street, Eugene 97401, to complete the unexpired term of Emilio Hernandez, term to expire January 1, 1985. Ro 11 ca 11 vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Response to Councilor Question Regarding Management Audit of the Hult Center Responding to a question raised at a previous council meeting by Councilor Wooten, City Manager Micheal Gleason said that staff was in the process of preparing specifications to be used in a request for proposals (RFP) for a management audit of the Hult Center for the Performing Arts. He said that the RFP would be brought to the council for comment, probably by mid-July. Ms. Wooten asked when the report might be finished. Mr. Gleason said he hoped a contract would be signed in July, with a draft report available in September or October 1983. Ms. Wooten said that she hoped the report could be done as soon as possible to allow an opportunity to make mid-year budget adjustments. Responding to a question from Councilor Obie, Mr. Gleason said that there were e several firms with the qualifications necessary to bid on this assignment. Mr. Obie urged that if an accounting firm was to be used, the accounting firm that performs regular audits for the City not be considered. II. REPORT FROM COMMISSIONER SCOTT LIEUALLEN ON LANE COUNTY'S FISCAL PROBLEMS Lane County Commissioner Scott Lieuallen addressed the council. He introduced County Sherriff Dave Burks, County Assessor Bill Bain, Acting County Administrator Margaret Mahoney, County Finance Director Bud Rainey, and staff member Cathy Fish. He noted that District Attorney Pat Horton would arrive shortly and that Juvenile Services Administrator Paul Lenarduzzi was unable to be present. Commissioner Lieuallen discussed the County's recent financial history, noting that the discretionary funds available to the County in 1980-81 totalled $31 million, compared with a figure of $17.7 for 1983-84. He said that County employees had numbered 1300 FTEs in 1980-81, compared with under 500 FTEs in 1983-84. He said County departments had been reorganized and consolidated from 17 to seven and cited other economy measures that had been implemented. He noted that voters had soundly defeated a general purpose operating levy for the County in May 1983. Commissioner Lieuallen said that on June 28 a menu of levies would be placed on the ballot, including an A levy of $2.9 million to provide for sheriff, district attorney, and juvenile services, and five B levies for individual categories of service--sheriff, district attorney, juvenile department, assessment and taxation, and rat and mosquito control. He noted that the A levy must pass for any of the B levies to be successful. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 2 Commissioner Lieuallen discussed the drastic reductions in County services that . would occur if these levies are not successful and noted that under these circumstances it would be difficult for the County even to meet State-mandated requirements. He said he had come before the council both to make the plight of the County known and to let the City know how it would be affected. Mr. Bain discussed the reductions that had occurred in the Assessor's Office. He said that in 1979, 190 people had worked in the office and that next year the total number of employees in the office would be 30 to 40 people. He noted that 94 percent of the assessment and taxation responsibilites of his office were non-County and were done for the 90 taxing districts that his office serves. Responding to a question from Councilor Schue, Mr. Bain said that staff was insufficient even to process tax receipts and that this resulted in major delays in deposit and distribution of property taxes. Sheriff Burks said that both management and line personnel had been cut in his office and that there would be further cuts in patrol and investigative services. He said that transportation of jail inmates to the court was a major responsibility of his office and that while 22 employees had been used in the past to perform this service, only five would be available in the future. District Attorney Horton said that the City of Eugene was his office's major client. He said that if the levies fail his staff of 35 attorneys would be reduced to 9 to 15 attorneys in the coming year, which would be inadequate to serve 15 judges, two justices of the peace, and grand juries, and to provide services such as collecting for non-support, work with the Juvenile Department, and provision of legal advice to local police, including City of Eugene police. e Commissioner Lieuallen thanked the Mayor and council for allowing County representatives to address the council. Mayor Keller thanked those who had made presentations. Mr. Gleason said that City staff would keep the council informed as to the impacts of the County budget situation for the City of Eugene. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Housing Code Repeal and Related Amendments (memo, ordinance distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Tim Sercombe, City Attorney's Office. Mr. Sercombe said that the amendments before the council would repeal the Housing Code, as had been discussed by the Budget Committee in preparation of the FY84 budget; would make some changes to enhance enforcement of current code provisions dealing with abatement of unsafe buildings; and would retain the weatherization ordinance. Mr. Sercombe noted that these changes had been discussed by the Joint Housing Committee and that the JHC's recommendations would be presented by Chairperson John Van Landingham. Public hearing was opened. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 3 John Van Landingham, 1172 West 5th Avenue, said he was chairperson of the Joint e Housing Committee. He noted that at its June 6, 1983, meeting the JHC had voted 4:0 in favor of recommending repeal of the Housing Code to the City Council. He said that the committee had received testimony regarding repeal of the weatheriza- tion ordinance and that the group had voted 3:1 to recommend retention of the ordinance. He noted that the committee had recognized that there were problems with the weatherization ordinance but had felt that these could be addressed when the council reviews the ordinance, as required by the adopted code, in January 1984. Mr. Van Landingham, speaking both as a JHC member and as an attorney for tenants, said that some advantages of repeal of the Housing Code were that 1) there would be savings to the City; 2) the code includes regulations that are not related to health and safety and that have discouraged housing rehabilitation; 3) State landlord/tenant law provides some regulations to protect residents; 4) enforcement of the City Housing Code has not always been consistent or successful; and 5) the high vacancy rate provides its own protection. Mr. Van Landingham said that if the Housing Code is repealed, all that would be left in the City Code to protect consumers were regulations regarding dangerous buildings and nuisances, with no requirements for provision of water, electricity, and heat. He said that the existing high vacancy rate would not continue for long and that as the vacancy rate declines, the council should direct staff to begin work on a new housing code that would be simpler to administer and enforce, perhaps with imposition of fines, and would concentrate on health and safety i s s ue s . Paul Farrar, 23348 South Central Point Road, Canby, proposed several amendments to the weatherization ordinance. He noted that weatherization as currently mandated could cost $1,000 or more per home and that over 10,000 homes in Eugene e do not meet the requirements of the ordinance. He said this would result in expenditure of $10 million in private funds to comply with the ordinance. He said that weatherization needed to be done properly and that if over-weather- ization were required it could lead to structural damage or health hazards. He said it was imperative that weatherization inspectors be certified as per ORS 456.805 and that the enforcement procedure include provisions for a hearing and findings of fact before the City takes any enforcement action. Referring to page 10 of the old ordinance, Mr. Farrar noted that right of entry had called for a court order. He said that in the new ordinance the word "court" had been omitted. He felt that a court order should be required. He said that under Section 8.300(4) the City Council would no longer be available to hear appeals, and he thus urged the council to institute due process at earlier levels. Referring to Section 8.290(3) of the ordinance, Mr. Farrar suggested that the Building Official be responsible for providing proposed findings and that the owner be given the right to a hearing and appeal. Referring to Section 8.300(2e), Mr. Farrar said that appeals boards, such as the Construction Code Board of Appeals, should be required to adopt procedural rules and regulations. He noted that Assistant Superintendent of Building Inspection Larry Reed and Senior Plans Examiner Darrell Kahl had told him the CCBA had never done this. Mr. Farrar suggested that the council adopt rules and regulations for the board, as contained in Chapter 13 of the 1973 Uniform Housing Code. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 4 Laura Johnson, 1810 Fairmount Boulevard, said that she had followed the matter of the weatherization ordinance for some time and had opposed it. She felt that e the way the amendments before the council were written indicated that enforcement of the ordinance would begin immediately, whereas the original ordinance had called for council review in January 1984 with an effective date of January 1985. She said circumstances had changed since the adoption of the ordinance and that there were now surpluses of electricity, gas, and oil. She urged the council to eliminate the weatherization code and reconsider the matter if fuel shortages occur in the future. She discussed flaws in the existing ordinance that had been mentioned in a report distributed to the JHC by John Bennett of the Lane County Homebuilders' Association, including discrimination against owners of buildings with fewer than four units (buildings of four or more units are exempt under the existing ordinance). Ms. Johnson said that there was danger to residents of totally weatherized houses from trapping of harmful gases. Councilor Obie raised a point of order and noted that the agenda item dealt with repeal of the Housing Code, not with the weatherization ordinance. Mr. Sercombe noted that there would be a required review of the weatherization ordinance by the council in January 1984. He said that some of the process in the weatheriza- tion ordinance had been modified in the amendments before the council but none of the substance of the ordinance. Ms. Johnson noted that she had waited until 10:30 p.m. at the June 13 council meeting for an opportunity to speak on this matter, before being told that the item would be postponed to June 15. She felt that there were substantive changes proposed to the ordinance. Councilor Schue noted that the Joint Housing Committee had also struggled with e the weatherization issue and had agreed to have staff respond to concerns raised. She said the council was not prepared to discuss the weatherization ordinance at this time. Mayor Keller ruled that further testimony regarding the weatherization ordinance at this time was inappropriate and out of order. Councilor Hansen said that if the weatherization ordinance was being modified, citizens should be allowed to speak. He felt that if there were no modifications, testimony should be postponed until January 1984 when the council considers the matter. Mr. Gleason said that no substantive changes were proposed to the weatherization ordinance and that only changes were to provide uniformity in codification of the laws. Mr. Sercombe added that the process involved in the weatherization ordinance was modified in the proposed amendments by some stylistic and a few substantive changes but stressed that neither the changes nor the weatherization ordinance itself would be effective until January 1985, with a full council review scheduled in January 1984. Responding to a question from Councilor Wooten, Mr. Sercombe said that the changes included renaming the Housing Board of Appeals the Weatherization Code Board of Appeals, modification of language regarding the right to perform inspections, and definition of what constitutes a "crack" in a structure. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 5 Responding to a question from Councilor Holmer, Mr. Sercombe said that the City must eliminate the Housing Code since enforcement of the code had been eliminated in the FY84 budget. He said this must be done to protect the City from the risk e of judgments for failure to enforce an existing code. Don Kimmel, 3105 Lincoln Street, noted that the terms "grantee" and "transferee II were used in the amendments and were not defined. He also noted that Section 8.310 discusses cracks in plaster but doesn't define what constitutes a crack. Mayor Keller left the meeting. Council President Schue presided. There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Sercombe noted that the effective date of the weatherization ordinance remained January 1, 1985. Responding to a question from Councilor Lindberg, Mr. Sercombe said that under the amendments abatements could still be pursued under Chapter 6 of the code for nuisances and under Chapter 8 for dangerous buildings. Mr. Sercombe noted that the additions would address dangerous buildings that result from faulty construction. Councilor Wooten said she hoped the Joint Housing Committee and staff would work on development of a code that would protect renters if markets change. Responding to a question from Councilor Hansen, Mr. Sercombe said that enforcement against accumulations of rubbish and debris in yards would be covered under the nuisance definitions in Chapter 6. CB 2648--An ordinance concerning abatement of dangerous buildings; e the Housing/Weatherization Code; amending Sections 8.005, 8.265, 8.270. 8.275, 8.280, 8.285, 8.290, 8.295, 8.300, 8.305, 8.310, of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sections 8.315, 8.320 and 8.365 of that code; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Councilor Lindberg urged staff to monitor the situation and report to the council if there is a need in the future to consider reinstituting some type of housing code. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2648 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion carried 7:1, with Councilors Ball, Hansen, Lindberg, Obie, Schue, Smith, and Wooten voting in favor, and Councilor Holmer voting in opposition. The bill was declared passed and numbered 19150. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 6 Mr. Gleason said that staff would monitor the situation and report to the e council if it is felt that an additional ordinance is needed. Councilor Wooten urged the JHC to receive reports on the housing situation and keep the council informed. B. Code Amendments 1. Panhandle Lot Modification Code Amendments (CA 82-8) (memo, ordinance, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Kirk Mckinley, Planning. Mr. McKinley said that the amendments would make three substantive changes in the existing ordinance: 1) allow automobile access to rear lots by way of an abutting alley or an abutting property owner's driveway, so long as the panhandle is retained free of structures; 2) delete existing lot size requirements for panhandle lot divisions in new subdivisions and, instead, require a minimum of 6,000 square feet for rear lots and 4,500 for front lots; and 3) limit the number of rear lots that can be created to four. Mr. McKinley noted that the Planning Commission had voted unanimously at its April 5, 1983, meeting to recommend approval. Public hearing was opened. There being no testimony, public hearing was closed. Councilor Lindberg briefly left the meeting. e Councilor Hansen asked how many lots in the City might be affected. Mr. McKinley responded that about 50 lots would qualify for access off of alleys. He said it would be difficult to tell how many other lots would qualify since this was dependent on the placement of buildings on the lots. CB 2649--An ordinance concerning panhandle lots; amending Sections 9.015 and 9.095 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. [Note: Councilor Lindberg was absent from the chamber and did not vote on the motion.] Council Bill 2649 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 19151. [Note: Councilor Lindberg was absent from the chamber and did not vote on the motion.] e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 7 2. Group Care and Day Care Code Amendments (CA 82-9) (memo, ordinance, e background information distributed) Vote--6 :0 Recommended approval by Planning Commission April 5, 1983 Mr. Gleason introduced Tom Hayes, Planning. Mr. Hayes discussed highlights of the amendments, including consolidation and simplification of definitions and provision of standards for location of day care and group care facilities. Mr. Hayes said that the review process had commenced nearly a year ago, at the request of the council and Planning Commission. He said that both the commission and the Citizen Involvement Committee had worked with staff to produce a list of interested parties to whom referrals could be made. Mr. Hayes regretted that Family Shelter House had been omitted from this list and noted that Bill Uhlhorn was present to speak for that organization. Mr. Hayes also noted that Sheilah Ewing of the Oregon Child Care Network had distributed a letter to councilors expressing concern regarding the child care portion of the proposed development standards. Councilor Lindberg returned to the meeting. Public hearing was opened. Sheilah Ewing, 35950 North Morningstar Road, Pleasant Hill (97455), represented Oregon Child Care Network, an organization of day care providers. She said that the group wanted reasonable standards but felt that items A and C, regarding fencing and limits on the number of providers that could be located near each other, were not reasonable. e Bill Uhlhorn, 2625 Hilyard Street, said he is the Director of Eugene Emergency Housing, which operates a 35-unit apartment complex for mental health patients. He said that in 1978-79 he had presented a lengthy proposal to the Planning Department regarding land use provisions for group care, but that somehow his name had been deleted from the list of referrals for the proposed code amendments. Mr. Uhlhorn felt that location of group care homes was a major land use issue for the City and noted that while the City is committed to serving the handicapped population with group care, neighbors of proposed group care sites have often tried to prevent location of such facilities in their areas. Referring to page one of the amendments and the definition of permitted use, Mr. Uhlhorn noted that the State had passed legislation that would allow group care for five individuals and staff in any residential area. He said that exi sting laws allow group care facil iti es in the R-4, RP, and C-1 zoni ng di stricts but that the proposed amendments would be more restrictive and would require a conditional use permit in these zones. He said that the conditional use permit process requi res that the appl icant have control of the 5i te over the sometimes 1 engthy permit and appeal process and that this would present financial restraints for agencies trying to locate facilities. Mr. Uhl horn urged that parki ng requi rements be based on the largest number of staff present on any shift at the facility rather than the total number of staff over a 24-hour period. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 8 Councilor Obie suggested, in view of time constraints, that the staff respond at a future council meeting to the issues raised during the public hearing. . Councilors concurred with this suggestion. Oue to a lack of time, Items III-C (Easement Vacation Request for Daniel Johnson), 111-0-1, 2 (Revisions to Neighborhood Organizations' Charters), and V (Repro- gramming of West University Neighborhood Block Grant Funds) were held over to June 22,1983. IV. CONTINUED DISCUSSION CONCERNING ROOSEVELT BOULEVARD ASSESSMENTS (information distributed) Mr. Gleason noted that this was a continuation of the council's June 12 discussion of this item. He said that the application for Community Development Block Grant Jobs Bill funds was due by July 1, 1983. He noted that the council had received an opinion from the City Attorney's Office regarding assessments for the Roosevelt Boulevard project. Mr. Lindberg moved that, following the lines of the council's June 13 discussion, the $80,000 allocated for traffic signals be reallocated through the Joint Social Services program. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilors agreed to continue discussion of this item at the June 22, 1983, council meeting. e Meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, 7~ Micheal D. Gle son City Manager (Recorded by Darcy Marentette) MDG:DCM:pm/CM27a19 tit MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 15, 1983 Page 9