Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/1983 Meeting M I NUT E S e Eugene City Council City Council Chamber September 26, 1983 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: John Ball, Richard Hansen, Freeman Holmer, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Mark Lindberg. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Code Amendment Concerning Bed and Breakfast Facilities (memo, background information, ordinance distributed City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Planning Commission staffperson Jerry Jacobson presented the staff report, giving a brief history of e the issue. He stated that the two bed and breakfast establishments currently operating in the West University area were handled under conditional use per- mits. He said the establishment in the R-1 zoned area resulted in a complaint which was heard by the Planning Commission and the Land Use Board of Appeals. Mr. Jacobson said that both groups upheld the bed and breakfast use in the R-1 area. He said the City Council directed staff to draft an amendment to the Eugene Code, as this type of establishment responded to the City goal of enhance- ment of tourism. Mr. Jacobson outlined the proposal for allowing bed and breakfast establishments in the various zoning areas and the subsequent require- ments for parking and review. He said he had received a call from Marilee Cook, 1570 Tyler, Eugene, who wished to go on record as being in support of the bed and breakfast establishments. In response to questions from the council, Mr. Jacobson said that the two present establishments were the Campus Cottage at 19th Avenue and University and Potter, and the Gena Hutton Bed and Breakfast Inn on the northwest corner of Onyx Street and 22nd Avenue. Mayor Keller commented that this was the South University area rather than the West University area. Mr. Jacobson, in regard to the limit of two guestrooms placed on establishments in RA and R-1 districts, said that the Campus Cottage, located in an R-3 district, had two guestrooms but the owner had said she would like to expand, this business being her primary source of income. He said that Gena Hutton was apparently satisfied with two guestrooms. Mr. Jacobson said that two guestrooms would be appropriate for supplemental income. He said that the requirement for off-street parking could be a problem if parking area surrounding the establishment or home did not - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 1 exist, especially in an RA or R-1 district. He said that one requirement of a e conditional use permit would be the compatibility of the parking with the neighborhood. He said the Gena Hutton establishment could accommodate parking in the existing driveway. He said that providing off-street parking for any use could be a problem. He added that other communities which had instituted bed and breakfast ordinances required one parking space per guestroom. Public hearing was opened. Jim Saul, 2780 Elinor Street, Eugene, said he was representing Ursula Bates, the owner of the Campus Cottage Bed and Breakfast Inn, located at 1136 East 19th Avenue. He read a letter from Ms. Bates, who could not be present, to the council. The letter stated that the bed and breakfast inn was located in an R-3 zoning district and had operated as a two bedroom guest facility under a condi- tional use permit for the past 15 months. It added that the growing business and a high occupancy rate had caused the owner to turn away increasing numbers of guestroom requests. The letter concluded with a endorsement from Ms. Bates of the proposed code amendment for bed and breakfast establishments in R-3 zoning districts. Mr. Saul said that he had assisted both owners during their conditional use proceedings. He felt the proposed code revisions were an attempt to balance the concerns of those favoring and those with apprehension of the bed and breakfast facilities. He felt the revisions to be reasonable and urged the council to adopt them. Jessie Waldstein, 1270 East 22nd Avenue, Eugene, said she lived directly across e from the Gena Hutton Bed and Breakfast Inn, located in an R-1 district. She said that the South University Neighborhood Association and other residents of the area had sent letters and had testified before the Planning Commission in opposition to bed and breakfast establishments in an R-l district. Referring to the letters, she said that the residents and members of SUNA did not wish the intrusion of small motel businesses next to homes. She asked what authority the Planning Director had to follow through on complaints by residents, especially in regard to parking. She said that while Mr. Jacobson stated that the Gena Hutton facility has four spaces to accommodate her parking needs and one space each for the guestrooms, the guests were parking their cars in the street, and not in the garage where there were supposedly two units. She said that no one had confirmed these spaces in the past year. She said that the spaces under the house had not been used in the past five years. She referred to the testimony of David McAndrews, the president of the Motel Owners Association, who said that the bed and breakfast facilities were an unfair competition when so many motel rooms were vacant. She also referred to a situation in Ashland where an area was supposedly ruined, with property values diminished, due to bed and breakfast facilities. Ms. Waldstein said that the council should consider the concerns of the residents involved. She said the President of SUNA was supposed to speak in opposition to the bed and breakfast facilities, but he apparently was not able to attend. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 2 In response to the statements made by Ms. Waldstein in regard to the auth- e ority of the Planning Director, Mr. Jacobson said that section B.1.(h) of the September 26, 1983, proposed amendment had been modified to call for a review of the facilities by the Planning Director to ensure that all the approval condi- tions were being met. In response to a concern stated by Mr. Obie, Mr. Jacobson said that the restriction calling for owner-occupation for facilties in RA and R-1 districts, with modification in R-2 districts, had been included as a . response to the concerns of the residents. He said that it was hoped that the restriction would ensure compatibility with the residential nature of the area. He said staff felt this restriction would be a balance between allowing the facilities but maintaining the owner-occupancy requirement. In response to a question by Ms. Schue, Mr. Jacobson said that each house must have two parking spaces in an RA or R-1 district, or one and one-half spaces if it is a multi-family unit. He clarified that a two-guest room bed and breakfast facility in a R-1 district would need four parking spaces. Councilor Smith asked if the changes in the original amendment were an attempt to meet the concerns of the SUNA members. Mr. Jacobson said that he and Mr. Chenkin had attended a SUNA meeting and changes had been made in the requirements for RA and R-1 districts, to include the requirements for separa- tion of facilities, year-end review, and parking spaces. He said that he and Mr. Chenkin had attempted to explain to the SUNA members the task of drafting the code amendment and that it would be up to the council to decide if such facilities were appropriate for RA and R-1 districts. e In response to a question by Mr. Hansen, Mr. Jacobson said that most of the responses in favor of establishing these facilities were for R-2, R-3, and R-4 districts. He said that few responses had been received from RA and R-1 districts. He added that he had not received any complaints on the operation of the facili- ties, but acknowledged that a problem possibly existed with parking. He said that the Campus Cottage facility in the R-3 district had received positive neighborhood response and no formal complaints had been received by the Planning Department. CB 2683--An ordinance concerning bed and breakfast facilities; amending sections 9.252, 9.312, 9.326, 9.338, 9.340, 9.352, 9.366, 9.380, 9.394, 9.410, 9.422, 9.436, and 9.586 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emer- gency. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, 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. Mr. Hansen said he has stayed in numerous bed and breakfast facilities and that he was pleased to provide a method for development of these facilities in Eugene. He said, however, that he was concerned that RA and R-1 districts would give outright use of a facility limited to two bedrooms. He said that it might be appropriate to exclude these two districts until the program is developed. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 3 Mr. Obie said he was concerned with the owner-occupancy requirement for RA and e R-l districts, stating he felt it might discriminate against those people who could only afford to lease the space to supplement their income. He also said that the requirement for the use to be integrated with a commercial structure in a C-l district might not be necessary. He said that the use of an old house in a C-1 district might be an appropriate transition from a harsh commercial district to one of the residential zones. Mr. Ball, responding to the concerns of Mr. Hansen, said he did not think outright use was being given in RA and R-1 districts. Mr. Jacobson said that operation in these districts would require a conditional use permit, which would require a public hearing. He said he shared Mr. Hansen's concerns, but stated that the process included an opportunity for review. Ms. Wooten agreed that the review period would provide an opportunity to address the concerns of the residents. Ms. Schue said she appreciated the efforts of the Planning Commission in develop- ing the ordinance and its attempts to balance the concerns of the neighbors. She said she believes such facilities to be a good idea. She said that they should be compatible with residential areas throughout the city under the proper circumstances and review. She said she would support the ordinance as it was written. Mr. Hansen said that he apparently did not have support for his suggestion. He said he believed that few people would invest funds into establishing a facility in an RA or R-1 district if the possibility existed that it might be taken away within a one-year period. He said he still felt that these two districts should e not be included in the ordinance. Mr. Gleason, in regard to the concerns of councilors Hansen and Obie, said that these concerns could be flagged at the review period to ensure that they are dealt with. Mayor Keller said that he would support the recommendation to remove the RA and R-1 districts from the amendment. He said that staff had not heard many com- plaints from people unhappy with the facilities. He stressed that the facilities were in the South University neighborhood, and not the West University neighbor- hood as stated earlier. He said that many of his neighbors had concerns about a facility being located in their neighborhood. He encouraged Mr. Hansen to pursue alternatives. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen, to amend the requirement in B.l.(b) to read "operator-occupied." Ms. Smith, with regard to the intent of the amendment, said that it weakened the position of review and control over the facilities in RA and R-l districts rather than strengthening it. Mr. Obie responded that it would only weaken the amendment if one assumed that a person leasing the property to supplement his or her income would not have the same concerns as a person who owned the property. Ms. Smith said she opposed the amendment, stating that the requirement for owner-occupancy strengthens the residential compatibility. He again responded that no such distinction between renters and owners would be made if someone - leased property in an RA or R-l district and operated a home occupation. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 4 Mr. Hansen said that he did not want to be involved in the motion as he had an e alternative motion. Ms. Schue said she did not feel the discussion to be important. Referring to the letter from the bed and breakfast owner in Ashland, she said that the remodeling required to operate a facility would deter renters from investing the time and funds to establish a facility. Ms. Wooten asked Ms. Smith if her objection to the amendment was based on the idea that a person could establish a chain of bed and breakfast facilities. Ms. Smith responded that she felt the ordinance would be stronger with the owner-occupancy requirement. The motion failed: Mr. Hansen, Mr. Obie, and Ms. Wooten voting aye; Ms. Smith, Mr. Holmer, Mr. Ball, and Ms. Schue voting nay. Mr. Obie asked the staff for the background requiring a facility in a C-1 district to be integrated with a commercial structure. Mr. Jacobson said that the requirement came from the Eugene Code as it pertained to dwelling units in a C-1 district, the code requiring any dwelling unit to be integrated with a commercial structure. He said that the requirement dealt with an existing commercial use on the site and did not deal with older residential structures that might exist in a C-1 district. Mr. Hansen moved to delete the opportunities for bed and breakfast facilities in RA and R-1 zoning districts as a conditional use from the code amendment. The motion failed for lack of a e second. Roll call vote on the original motion; motion for second reading passed unanimously, 7:0. Council Bill 2683 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed (and become Ordinance No. 19182). B. Soreng Theatre Rental Structure (memo, resolution, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced the agenda item. Richard Reynolds, Executive Director of the Hult Center, presented the staff report. He said the Soreng Theatre was the 500-seat hall in the Hult Center complex which had been originally intended for access by local artists. He explained that the experience of the past year had been that the theatre was only used 25 percent of the available dates and that approximately 33 percent of those uses had been by local performers. He said that most of the tenants did not break-even in the facility. He outlined some of the factors which created problems for the tenants. He said much time had been spent in reviewing the running costs with the tenants, stressing that although the rehearsal costs were the same for both the Soreng and the Silva - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 5 halls, there was five times the possible gross receipts in the Silva Hall to e offset these costs. He added that the running costs for the Soreng Theatre were similar to those of the Silva Hall without the capability of earning those costs back through ticket sales. He said the tenant must keep down running costs in order to break even, stating that a tenant must limit the cost of the talent in the production to $2,500. He said the market for the talent must be pin- pointed, there being little room for error in operating in the Soreng Theatre. Mr. Reynolds said he would help tenants to develop a budget and to make the decision of whether to proceed with production. He said the stagehands had voluntarily reduced their wage rates by approximately 20 percent for local arts organizations for both theaters. Mr. Reynolds referred to the Rate Structure Analyses printout, distributed to the councilors, which outlined what was neces- sary to generate income and the categories of the users. He then outlined four recommendations on rental rates for the Soreng Theatre: 1) no change in the assessment for non-performance events: $250; 2) non-profit performing arts companies will be assessed a minimum rent of $50 against 10 percent of the gross receipts, not to exceed $250; 3) commercial promoters will be assessed a minimum rent of $100 against 15 percent of the gross recepts not to exceed $350; 4) professional, local performing artists, whose presentation is not affiliated with a qualified non-profit arts company, will be charged no minimum, and will be assessed a rent of 5 percent against the adjusted gross receipts (gross receipts less house charges and patron user fees). He said that it was important to note that the reimbursables would be collected in all cases. Mr. Reynolds said that word of the changes had spread and the number of holds and contracts on the Soreng Theatre had doubled those of the Silva Hall. He said that the Eugene Arts Foundation had assured him that a e donor can be found to cover any deficit below the $28,000 budgeted for rent of the Soreng Theatre. In response to a question, Mr. Reynolds said that the number of inquiries and holds for the theater indicated a good chance of the new rates producing the $28,000. He added that there might be a $4,000 to $6,000 slippage, which could be covered by the Eugene Arts Foundation. Mr. Hansen asked if accounting costs would be increased under a gross sales formula and whether any consideration had been given to an across-the-board 10 percent rent without any guarantee. Mr. Reynolds responded that it had been considered, but it was decided that commercial renters were better able to pay the rent; adding that two of the three commercial users had made a profit. He said that the theater was intended as a local-access facility, but he wished to encourage more experimentation by commercial users. In regard to accounting, he said that no additional cost would be incurred. Mr. Hansen asked what determination was used to ensure that the theater collected all the costs from the tenant. Mr. Reynolds said that a deposit was usually required and that a review committee could be used to study the budget of the tenant and to deter- mine the marketability of the tenant's product. Mr. Hansen asked if any con- sideration was given to taking a higher percentage from the successful tenants to cover those productions which operate at a loss. Mr. Reynolds responded that the profit margin was so small that any increase in the amount charged might result in the loss of those tenants. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 6 In response to a question, Mr. Reynolds said that the Oregon Repertory Theatre e would have added 40-45 dates to the usage of the Soreng Theatre, not including the ORTis Christmas production. He added that the present number of holds on the theater did not include any ORT productions. In regard to cleaning costs for the hall, Mr. Reynolds said this cost was recovered in the rental fee, adding that the cleaning required was minimal. Answering a question on private ticket sales, Mr. Reynolds explained that all tickets supplied to the tenants were considered sold unless they were returned prior to the closing of the show. In response to a question by Mr. Holmer, Mr. Reynolds said that he did not remember the first yearls budget for the Soreng Theatre. He said that he did not have the actual figures on the present budget, but that the amount taken in was far below what was budgeted. He explained that the deficit would be covered by a donor whose intent would be to encourage the opportunity for local artists to perform in the center. Ms. Wooten added that it was the spirit of many of the donors to the center to encourage local artists, stressing that many people felt the center could remain vital only so long as local artists performed there. Mr. Holmer acknowledged that the organizations were worthwhile, but he still wanted to flag the possible $6,000 deficit as an expenditure. Mayor Keller said that the additional dates picked up by ORT would help to decrease the deficit. Public hearing was opened. Linda Devine, 795 Willamette Street, Eugene, said she was the Executive Director of the Lane Regional Arts Council. She read a statement from the council into e the record supporting the rental structure. The statement said the council saw the reduced rental rate as a signal that the Hult Center welcomed the use of the Soreng Theatre by local artists. She said the council was aware that the rental costs were only a portion of the total cost for performing in the space, the average additional cost being over $600 per night. She said that the council was requesting that any press releases promoting the lowered rental rate for the Soreng Theatre include a statement informing local independent performers of the range of additional costs. She said that this information would preclude later explanations. She urged the council and the Hult Center staff to look closely at the competitive stance of the center to increase use of the facility and how such use could affect the market for the use of the Community Center for the Performing Arts and other performing facilities in the metro area. She said the Arts Council felt that it was necessary for all facilities to remain alive to provide a diverse showcase for the area talent. She asked the council to approve the proposed rental structure, but to also view other policy changes in regard to their impact on the entire arts community. In response to request by Mayor Keller, Ms. Devine repeated her statement on press releases, adding that none of the news coverage on the proposed rental structure had included the additional costs of renting the Soreng Theatre. Sura John Lentz, 5115 Fox Hollow Road, Eugene, said he was a former co-coordi- nator of the Community Center for the Performing Arts and was currently on the board of directors for that facility and for the Lane Regional Arts Council. He said he was also a singer and musician. He said the CCPA recognized that the proposed rate change would probably provide more access for local artists to the - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 7 Soreng Theatre, but that it was also recognized that the WOW hall could also e host most of the performances suitable for the Soreng Theatre. He said that the CCPA was hesitant to endorse any plan that created unnatural competition. He said that the proposed rates and Mr. Reynolds' request for the City Council to consider making a contribution to cover any deficit of the Soreng Theatre might create more stress in the survival of the CCPA. He said that the CCPA would speak neither for nor against the rate change, but it would remind the council of the larger vision of the performing arts community. He said the health of this community as a whole must be maintained to fulfill the promise of a desti- nation point area. He suggested that the council take these factors into consideration in making its decision and that it actively seek input from the artist community. He said the staff of the CCPA needed to know the council realized there was more to the Eugene arts community that the Hult Center. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Reynolds said that the Hult Center was also interested in the success of any group that could operate without a deficit. He said that the center had referred business to the WOW Hall for the reasons previously stated. He said that concern was shared that any action of the Hult Center did not jeopardize the existence of the WOW Hall. Res. No. 3800--A resolution approving and adopting the policy statement and the user rates established in Resolution No. 10 of the Performing Arts Commis- sion, and amending Resolutions Nos. 3442 and 3475 e of the Eugene City Council. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Ball stated that Ms. Devine's comments concerning full disclosure on the cost of renting the Soreng Theatre were appropriate. He said that he had received several telephone calls regarding the additional costs not being understood prior to the rental. Ms. Wooten said she was pleased that the council was proceeding with the rate structure and endorsed the suggestion that the arts community be used as a source of information. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. The meeting was recessed at 8:58 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. C. Rezoning Requests: 1. Property located south of Clark Avenue, west of Jefferson Street, north of 4th and 1st avenues, and east of Monroe Street and River Avenue from I-2 Light-Medium Industrial District, R-2/10A Limited Multiple-Family Residential District with a maximum density of 10 units per acre, RG 2.5/SR Garden Apartment Residential District limiting density to a minimum of 2,500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit with Site Review suffix, R-2 Limited Multiple-Family e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 8 Residential District to MU-R Whiteaker Mixed-Use District, and e change of sign district from Residential and Industrial to Pro- fessional-Office (City of Eugene: MU-R Whiteaker Residential Mixed- Use District) (Z 83-5) (Area 3) (map, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced the agenda item. Jim Croteau of the Planning Department presented the staff report, stating that the item had been referred to the Planning Commission and had been before the council in June 1983. He explained that Ms. Davis had two tax lots, but only one was in the mixed-use area. He said the Planning Commission had heard Ms. Davis's request and had recom- mended that both tax lots be excluded from the mixed-use area. Mr. Croteau explained that the zone change had been initiated in response to a policy set forth in the Whiteaker Refinement Plan of 1977 which called for three mixed-use areas. He said the City, working with the Land Use and Site Review Committee of the Whiteaker Community Council, had decided to write a special mixed-use district that emphasized high-density residential development and encouraged complementary neighborhood-scale commercial use. Mr. Croteau said that staff had sent letters to the property owners in the area in February 1983, explaining that under special circumstances the staff would do the paperwork and recommend the zone change to the Planning Commission for those owners who wanted to be included in the mixed-use area. He said that of the 190 letters sent out, 31 replies were received. Mr. Croteau referred to a letter from Micheal Brock who owned tax lot 14100. He said that Mr. Brock was requesting that his property, having first been excluded, be included in the mixed-use zoning. He said that tax lot 14100 had been rezoned to R-2/10A in 1980 as supported by the Whiteaker e Refinement Plan. He stated that Ms. Mulder was present to answer any questions of the council and added that any change in the Planning Commission recommenda- tion would require a joint meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission. In response to a question by Ms. Schue, Mr. Croteau said that Mr. Brock's property had been included in the recommendation when it originally went before the Planning Commission, but that the commission had excluded it from the rezoning request. He said that Mr. Brock was now requesting that his property be included in the mixed-use district. There were no statements of ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. The staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Della Davis, 196 Monroe Street, Eugene, said she did not understand the rezoning. She said the property in the area was a combination of residential, mixed use, and light industrial uses. She said she did not understand why all property north of the Southern Pacific railroad tracks and east of Adams Street could not be zoned MU-R Whiteaker Mixed Use. She said that her first request on the form sent out by the Planning Commission was for mixed-use, but she said that she had received a letter from the Planning Commission which stated only one of her lots would be included. She said that she had requested that both lots be similarly zoned and that she would prefer that both lots to be zoned mixed-use due to the better opportunity for sale of the property. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 9 Mike Brock, P.O. Box 941, Eugene, corrected the record, saying that he owned tax e lot 14000, and not tax lot 14100 as earlier stated. He said that his property had appeared in the Whiteaker Refinement Plan in the MU-R zoning during the past several years. He said that it was originally recommended by the Planning Department to the Planning Commission to be zoned MU-R, and that no objection had been raised prior to the day before the May 3, 1983, meeting of the Planning Commission. He said that Ron Saylor had then submitted a letter to the Planning Commission which objected to the inclusion of the property in the MU-R zoning. He said that he had been unaware of the objection due to his being out of town. He said that he and Mr. Saylor had since reached a solar easement agreement which protected Mr. Saylor's property from any solar encroachment. He referred to the letters which stated that Mr. Saylor had withdrawn his objection to tax lot 14000 being included in the MU-R zoned district, submitted to the council. Mr. Brock requested that the property be returned to the MU-R plan. He said that the property had been zoned R-2/16 when he purchased it in 1979 and that it was downzoned in 1980 to R-2/10 without any contact of the property owners in the area. He said that Mr. Croteau had referred to the downzoning as an interim zone, stating that he had also referred to the downgrading as an interim zone at a May 3, 1983, Planning Commission meeting in response to a question by Ms. Mulder as to why the property was again being rezoned. Mr. Brock said the rezoning process was very confusing and that it had been very difficult to keep up with all the meetings and objections. He said he had known of no Objections to his request until the one submitted one day before the Planning Commission meeting on May 3, 1983. Mr. Brock said that his lot would be left in the interim zone if it was not included in the MU-R zone. He said e he was questioning which way the Planning staff would move in regard to the interim zone. Mr. Brock said that the downzoning interfered with development plans that he had for his property. He referred to a letter from the City which had stated that staff would initiate the rezoning of his property. He said he signed the response and returned it by certified mail. He said that in discus- sions with Susan Smernoff and other Planning Department staff, there had been no apparent problems. He said that Ms. Smernoff had mistakenly assured Mr. Saylor that solar access would be included in the MU-R zoning. He said that the Planning Department was trying to stop the interface of industrial and residen- tial zoning. He said he supported Ms. Davis's request to have her property included in the MU-R zoning, stating that such action softened the interface between the two zonings. He said he and other property owners had written letters on the MU-R zoning and the previous downzoning. He said that he had never received an adequate response to these questions. Nettie Schoolcraft, 86956 Bailey Hill Road, Eugene, submitted a letter which was read to the council by Mr. Brock. He said that Ms. Schoolcraft owned five tax lots to the northwest of tax lot 14000. The letter stated that Ms. Schoolcraft was supporting Mr. Brock's request to have his property, tax lot 14000, returned to MU-R zoning. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 10 Mr. Croteau, responding to Ms. Davis's testimony, agreed that the area was being e developed in a spot-zoning manner. He said the area was in a mixed-use district in which a variety of zonings were appropriate. He said that this mixed-use did not mean that the entire area must be blanketed with a mixed-use zoning district. He said that the mixed-use zoning district was never intended to be uniformly applied to a large geographical area, but that it was just a tool to allow mixed-use to occur. He said that staff had initiated the process by sending out almost 200 letters asking the owners to request rezoning of their property. He said that one of Ms. Davis's lots was within the mixed-use area and the adjacent lot was in an industrial area. He said that when she discovered that the lots were being zoned differently, she requested that both lots be excluded. The council referred the request back to the Planning Commission and Ms. Davis submitted a letter requesting both lots to be excluded from the mixed-use district. He said that Ms. Davis could apply on her own to have the two lots included in the mixed-use district and that staff would be willing to to discuss with Ms. Davis any future ideas or plans for her property. In regard to Mr. Brock's request, Mr. Croteau said that his property had been included in the request when it went to the Planning Commission, but it was then excluded primarily due to an objection of his neighbor. He said that staff has no vested interest in whether Mr. Brock's property was included in the MU-R zoning, stating that staff was merely a vehicle to allow the mixed-use district to apply to those properties where desired by the owners. In regard to the testimony of the lack of notice, Mr. Croteau said that notices of all the public hearing dates had been mailed to the owners of record. He said that he could not find any evidence of error in notifying Mr. Brock or any other owner e involved in this request. Eleanor Mulder, the Planning Commission chairperson, stated that she had not studied the issue, but said that her memory of the situation was that the exclusion of Mr. Brock's property had been based on Mr. Saylor's objection and a possible lack of consistency with existing zoning. She said that the commission had been concerned that a line had to be drawn somewhere and the property north of Mr. Brock's lot was consistently low-density residential. Mr. Mulder said that the opportunity had been available for Mr. Brock to resolve some of the problems prior to this. She said that she was not sure how the commissioners would have acted if the present information had been available. In response to a question by Mayor Keller, Ms. Mulder said that the question of a height limitation referred to the issue of solar access and the height limitation present in the MU-R zoning. Mr. Croteau said the mixed-use district allowed a maximum height of 60 feet. Mr. Saylor's objection was based on the possibility of a 60-foot building being constructed next to his property. In regard to any agreement between Mr. Saylor and Mr. Brock, he said that the City would only enforce City regulations. In response to Ms. Schue's question of Ms. Davis's second lot being suitable for mixed-use zoning, Mr. Croteau said that a line had to be drawn between what was appropriate for industrial and for mixed-use. He said that the line had been drawn between her two tax lots and that the council had sent the request back to the Planning Commission for clarification. He said that Ms. Davis had then requested that both lots be excluded, as presented to the council at this meeting. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 11 Ms. Wooten said that she was supportive of having Mr. Brock's property included e in the mixed-use zoning due to the agreement reached between Mr. Brock and Mr. Saylor. In response to a question on the proposed request, Mr. Croteau said that an amendment would have to be made to include tax lot 14000 in the mixed- use zoning district. CB 2660--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from I-2 Light-Medium Industrial District, R-2/10A Limited Multiple-Family Residential District with a maximum density of 10 units per acre, RG 2.5/SR Garden Apartment Residential District limiting density to a minimum of 2,500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit with Site Review suffix, R-2 Limited Multiple-Family Residential District to MU-R Whiteaker Mixed-Use District, and change of sign district from Residential and Industrial to Professional-Office for property located south of Clark Avenue, west of Jefferson Street, north of 4th and 1st avenues, and east of Monroe Street and River Avenue. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of July 18, 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. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to amend the motion to e include tax lot 14000 in Council Bill 2660, Roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to amend the motion to include Ms. Davis's property (tax lots 3100 and 3200) in the mixed-use zoning. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Roll call vote; the motion to approve Council Bill 2660 as amended passed unanimously, 7:0. The second reading of Council Bill 2660 was held pending the outcome of a joint meeting between the Planning Commission and the City Council on this item. Joint meeting to be scheduled. 2. Property located east of Fairway Loop, between Eastwood and Southwood Lanes from R-2/10PD Limited Multiple-Family Residential District with a density limitation of 10 dwelling units per acre and Planned Unit Development procedures to RP/PD Residential Professional District with Planned Unit Development procedures (Bennett and Band J Development) (Z 83-10) (map, background information distributed Mr. Gleason introduced the agenda item. Mr. Croteau, presenting the staff report, said that the request had received a unanimous recommendation from the - Planning Commission. He said the Planning Commission recommendation had included MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 12 a change in sign district, but stated this change had not been included in the e council materials. He said that a sign district boundary change would be presented to the council as a routine item at some later date if the present request was approved. In response to a question, Mr. Croteau said that the cost of any public improve- ments required to provide access would be incurred by the developer. He said that the issue of access for this property and the entire area had been reviewed by the Public Works Department and by staff. There were no statements of ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. The staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Jim Saul, 44 Club Road, Eugene, said he was representing the owners of the property. He said that his only testimony would be to state that Rob Bennett, one of the owners, was present to answer any questions by the council. He said that the particular rezoning did carry the Planned Unit Development review suffix and that such review included reconsideration of the issue of access to the property. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. CB 2684--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from R-2/10PD Limited Multiple-Family Residential District with a density e limitation of 10 units per acre and Planned Unit Develop- ment procedures to RP/PD Residential Professional District with Planned Unit Development procedures for property located east of Fairway Loop, between Eastwood and Southwood lanes. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of July 19, 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; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Council Bill 2684 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed (and became Ordinance No. 19183). e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 13 i I!. ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING: LEVYING ASSESSMENTS (memo distributed) e CB 2664--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer in Glenwood Boulevard from Glen- wood Drive to 1,100 feet south and in Moon Mountain from Glenwood Boulevard to Laurel Hil Drive, and sanitary sewer to serve Tax Lots 18-03-03-02-01100, 01200, 01300, and 01302. Mr. Gleason said that staff was recommending that the council not act on this item due to problems with right-of-way acquisition. He said that staff may resubmit the project to the council next year. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. to September 28, 1983. Respectfullysubmitt #:.'1 o . 0 ,i,::..; 0 o 01''';:'_. :1 ' Mic~eal D. Gleason City Manager e (Recorded by Thom Strunk) TS:ky/CM23a7 - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1983 Page 14