Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/19/1983 Meeting MINUTES e Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting McNutt Room, City Hall October 19, 1983 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: John Ball, Richard Hansen, Freeman Holmer, Mark Lindberg, Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten, Brian Obie. ABSENT: Mayor R. A. "Gus" Kell er COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Eleanor Mulder, Dorothy Anderson, Brian Bauske, Randy Thwing, Roger Rutan. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Robert Barkman The special jOint meeting of the Eugene City Council and the Eugene Planning Commission was called to order by Emily Schue, President of the Council. I. JOINT PUBLIC MEETING ON ZONE CHANGE REQUESTS A. R. A. Chambers and Associates (Z 83-13) e Tax Lots 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, and 1007--Assessor's Map 17-04-35-00 Rezoning request for property located on the north side of West 11th Avenue, extending from Seneca Street east past Tyinn Street from 1-2 Light-Medium Industrial District to C-2 Community Commercial District Terry Jones of the Planning Department presented the staff report on this item. She reviewed the staff notes and the October 19, 1983, Planning Department memorandum to the council. She said the Planning Commission had recommended a Site Review suffix on the C-2 zoning as specified in the draft findings and conclusions of the council to address the negative aspects of the strip com- mercial zoning. Ms. Mulder, referring to Section 9 of the draft findings, said that Ms. Anderson had previously suggested changing should to shall. Ms. Anderson clarified that she had requested a deletion of an "if possible" phrase in the language, which had been accomplished. She said she had no other changes. B. City of Eugene: MU-R Whiteaker Residential Mixed-Use District (Z 83-5) (Area 3) e MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 1 Tax Lot 3500--Assessor's Map 17-04-25-4 1 - Tax Lots 11500, 11800, 12900, 13100, 14000, 14300, 14900, 15000, 15300, and 15400--Assessor's Map 17-03-30-3 2 Tax Lots 2100, 2700, 3100, 3200, 5100, and 5200--Assessor's Map 17-03-30-3 3 Rezoning request 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 from 1-2 Light-Medium Industrial District, R-2/10A Limited Multiple-Family Residential District with a maximum density of ten 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 Residen- tial District to MU-R Whiteaker Mixed-Use District, and change of sign district from Residential and Industrial to Professional- Office e Jim Croteau of the Planning Department presented the staff report, reviewing the October 19, 1983, Planning Department memorandum to the council. He stated that the issue began in May 1983 when the Planning Commission considered rezoning a number of properties in the Whiteaker Mixed-Use Area. He said the commission recommended the rezoning of a number of lots to Mixed-Use, excluding Tax Lot 14000, owned by Michael S. Brock, and Tax Lot 3100, one of two adjacent lots owned by Della Davis. He said Ms. Davis, who had not testified at the commis- sion meeting, testified at the June council meeting. The council remanded the matter back to the commission in order to hear testimony from Ms. Davis. At that meeting, Ms. Davis asked that both of her lots be excluded from the rezoning, which the commission recommended to the council. At the subsequent council meeting, Mr. Brock requested that his tax lot be included and Ms. Davis requested that both her lots be included. Mr. Croteau explained that the council approved the inclusion of Mr. Brock's tax lot, contrary to the commission recommen- dation, based on the fact that Mr. Brock's neighbor had dropped his original objection to the rezoning. Mr. Croteau said that the difference in recommenda- tions by the council and the commission was due to a change in circumstances occurring between the various meetings. Mr. Bauske, speaking to the issue of the West 11th Avenue issue, said his position on numerous zone changes in that area was well-known to the commission and council. He said his statement on the Fred Meyer issue was included in the materials distributed. Ms. Mulder said she had attempted to weigh the diagram against the text on strip commercial on West 11th Avenue. She said strip commercial was not to be encouraged, e M1NUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 2 in favor of strip commercial, finding it hard to locate businesses when driving in the area, and stated that her prejudices were evident in this issue. e In response to a question, Councilor Schue said the findings of the council had not yet been approved. Mr. Thwing, addressing Sections 10 and 11 of the findings, asked why the references to the West Eugene Industrial Study were limited to Seneca Road west to Terry Street. He also questioned the statement in Section 11 which apparently limited the commercial area to one tax lot north of West 11th Avenue. Mr. Croteau responded that the boundary drawn in Section 10 was an arbitrary boundary drawn for the WEISe He stated that the 1I0ne tax lot deepll statement was an attempt to clarify that the strip commercial zoning fronted on West 11th Avenue. It did not refer to the commercial node on the west side of Seneca Road. He added that the strip commercial was located primarily east of Seneca Road and north of West 11th Avenue. Councilor Wooten, commenting on the Whiteaker Mixed-Use Area, said she concurred and appreciated the limitation of the Mixed-Use zoning to 1st Avenue. She said she felt strongly that the residential character must be maintained and that any exceptions must be carefully considered. Referring to Mr. Brock's case, she said she supported the request because she respected the attempt of the residents to seek a remedy on their own. She stressed that her approval of the request was contingent on the execution of the contractual arrangements between Mr. Brock and his neighbor, which she said apparently had not been done. The joint meeting was adjourned to 12:55 p.m. II. PLANNING COMMISSION HELD PUBLIC MEETING e III. CITY COUNCIL HELD PUBLIC MEETING The adjourned meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order by Emily Schue, President of the Council, at 12:36 p.m. A. REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST 11TH AVENUE, EXTENDING FROM SENECA STREET EAST PAST TYINN STREET FROM 1-2 LIGHT-MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO C-2 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (R. A. Chambers and Associates) (Z 83-13) (memo, map, background information distributed) Councilor Schue stated that she had missed the September 12 public hearing but she had reviewed the minutes of the meeting and would participate in the action. Councilor Obie said he also had missed the September 12 hearing and had read the minutes but would not participate, stating that ma~ of the issues present were issues that were present at the Fred Meyer hearing. He felt in conflict with the direction. He regretted that he was unable to participate in the discussion as he has some grave concerns about West 11th that has nothing to do with his property. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen, that the City Council reaffirm its support for the rezoning request for R. A. Chambers e and adopt the findings as recommended by the Planning Commission. MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 3 Councilor Holmer stated that he had also missed the September 12 meeting and had e just read the minutes from that meeting and would therefore participate in the action. Councilor Wooten said she had previously voted against the motion and again planned to vote against it. She said she, in general, concurred with the comments of Mr. Bauske. Councilor Ball said he had concerns similar to those of the Planning Commission with should and shall in the findings and conclusions. He asked what was specifically required in Section 9 of the findings. Mr. Croteau responded that the site review process would apply a number of criteria to the specific property and the specific set of plans to address the concerns of the commission and the council. He said the semantics would be lost in that type of review. He said that staff would attempt to balance the site review criteria to arrive at the best development and that staff had never viewed a great difference between should and shall. Councilor Ball said he had strong reservations about the application of the site review criteria, especially in Section 9C dealing with traffic. He said he had observed the traffic in the area and said he was not sure from the findings that his concerns with the potential generation of traffic were satisfied. He said he felt there was a substantial difference between strip commercial and strip industrial in the amount of traffic generated and that the commission was asking for trouble in adding to the confusion. City Manager Micheal Gleason said that staff had requested additional right-of- way for the third lane as each site review occurred. He asked if the third lane was present in this area. Councilor Ball responded it was not. Mr. Gleason e said the City would then require the additional setback to provide for the right-of-way. Assistant Public Works Director Don Gilman said that a special setback requirement existed for construction on the site in large developments. He added that construction in smaller sites would be more difficult. He proposed that the council deal with the setback now and with the right-of-way at some future time. Mr. Gleason clarifed that the problem east of the Fred Meyer development was due to the lack of a turn lane and that the City had been trying to require the right-of-way in each individual decision in order to build that third lane. Mr. Croteau said it was a newly created subdivision and the additional right-of- way on the north side of West 11th Avenue had been acquired. He said the site review process would set up the process to design the frontage to add the turn lane, but there was presently no time line for this process and that it was not in the Capital Improvements Program. In response to a question, Mr. Gleason said the traffic situation did not preclude development according to the site review procedure. Councilor Lindberg said that it might be appropriate to incorporate that fact in the findings. Planning Director Jim Farah commented that the council should review the purpose of the site review procedure, stating that such procedures would give direction to staff but were not the appropriate mechanism to limit development. He said the council should redesign the zone change to address this concern. e MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 4 Councilor Lindberg said his preference was to move in that direction. He said he believed industrial traffic would be greatest during the rush hours, thereby e glutting West 11th Avenue far beyond its current state, while the impact of commercial traffic would be dispersed over the entire working day. He asked for some staff response on this issue, stating that it might be appropriate to either redesign the zone change or to move in the direction of conditional use. Mr. Farah said he agreed with Mr. Thwing, based on the diagram and lot sizing. He said the council and commission took action one and one-half years ago to modify the 1-2 zoning to allow a variety of uses and that the 1-2 district still allowed commercial sales activities to occur in conjunction with wholesale manufacturing facility. He said that this type of activity might generate traffic throughout the day more than a larger parcel located in the interior of the West Eugene Industrial Area. He said the proximity of the small parcels and the high-volume traffic would confirm Mr. Thwing's comments. Councilor Hansen questioned if the should in Section 9 of the findings of fact meant that a site review shall be applied. Mr. Gleason responded that site review procedures would be applied if the council adopted the Planning Commission recommendation. The motion carried 6:1, Councilors Ball, Hansen, Holmer, Lindberg, Schue, and Smith voting aye; Ms. Wooten voting nay and Mr. Obie abstaining. CB 2691--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from 1-2 Light-Medium Industrial District to C-2 Community Commercial District e for property located on the north side of West 11th Avenue, extending from Seneca Street east past Tyinn Street. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of August 2, 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 carried with Mr. Obie abstaining. Council Bill 2691 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion carried with Ms. Wooten votinr nay and Mr. Obie abstaining and the bill was declared passed became Ordinance No. 19191). - MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 5 B. REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF CLARK AVENUE, WEST OF e JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH OF 4TH AND 1ST AVENUES, AND EAST OF MONROE STREET AND RIVER AVENUE FROM I-" 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 A CHANGE OF SIGN DISTRICT FROM RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL TO PROFESSIONAL-OFFICE (City of Eugene: MU-R Whiteaker Residential Mixed-Use District (Z 83-5) (Area 3) (memo, map, background information distributed) CB 2660--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from 1-2 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. e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, the bill be approved and given final passage. Councilor Wooten restated that she supported the Mixed-Use zoning in principal, but she remained concerned about high-density and commercial uses receding into commercial areas. She said she was pleased with the retention of the Mixed-Use along the north side of First Avenue. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed (became Ordinance No. 19192). Councilors Wooten and Hansen left the meeting at this time. The joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission was reconvened at 12:55 p.m. IV. Revised Land Use Application Procedures (CA 83-1) Modifies procedures required for annexa- tions, conditional use permits, land divisions, planned unit developments, sign district boundary changes, site reviews, vacations of easements and properties, e MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 6 variances, zone changes, and text amend- e ments to zoning, sign, and land division regulations. Changes (1) reduce processing time and steps, but preserve opportunities for citizen input, (2) establish maximum time frames, (3) provide for at least one public hearing, either on the original application or on appeal, (4) designate the appropriate initial decision level based on the extent to which established standards and policies are applicable, and (5) provide consistency in processes common to most application requests. Gary Chenkin of the Planning Department presented the staff report. He reviewed the flow charts outlining the revised land use processes and the October 19, 1983, Planning Department memorandum attachment which pinpointed the actors in the various processes. He said that 95 percent of the process changes were illustrated by the charts, the substructure change list attached to the October 24th memorandum, and the changes in finding noted on the backs of the charts. He said that the October 24th memorandum would be distributed to the council and commission outlining the substantive process changes. He reviewed the major changes occurring in the variance, PUD, zone change/sign district boundary change, and text change procedures. Mr. Hansen returned prior to this point and Ms. Smith temporarily left the e meeting. Mr. Chenkin said that he did not anticipate significant controversy at the public hearing. The joint meeting was adjourned at 1:12 p.m. (Recorded by Thorn Strunk) TS:clj/CM8b8 e MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission October 19, 1983 Page 7