Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/22/1984 Meeting M I NUT E S - Eugene City Council City Council Chamber October 22, 1984 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Brian Obie, Cynthia Wooten, John Ball, Debra Ehrman, Freeman Holmer, Emily Schue, Ruth Bascom, Richard Hansen. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was ca 11 ed to order by Mayor "Gus" Ke 11 er. Mayor Keller welcomed Scout Troup 175 to the City Council meeting. 1. MOTION TO CONTINUE DELIBERATION OF METROPOLITAN PLAN AMENDMENTS AT OCTOBER 22, 1984, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ... - Mr. Gleason explained it was the desire of the Council to continue deliberation on amendments to the Metropolitan Area General Plan. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to continue deliberation on amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area e General Plan at tonight1s City Council meeting of October 22, rather than October 24, as previously indicated. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously; 8:0 II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Eugene Downtown Plan Draft (memo, background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Ms. Pat Decker, Planning Department. Ms. Decker reviewed the process the Council would follow. She referred members to "Revisions and Errata, May 1984 Draft Eugene Downtown Plan." This memorandum listed suggested changes and areas of disagreement between the Planning Commission and the Downtown Commission. Ms. Decker said the material did not cover the subject of the expansion of the tax increment district to the 5th Street area. Currently, the EDD and the City Attorney were reviewing this topic. A subsequent amendment to the downtown renewal district ;s expected. Ms. Decker referred members to the League of Women Voter1s letter favoring the option proposed by the Planning Commission concerning Willamette Street between 10th and 11th. Ms. Decker also referred members to the letter from Eugene Water and Electric Board suporting the downtown Plan and expressing appreciation for the responsiveness of both the Planning Commission and Downtown Commission to EWEB concerns. The public hearing was opened. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 1984 Page 1 (., . . Janet Calvert, President of the Board of Directors for Lane Transit District, sald the Board had invested in the 10th Street area and favored investment in e the area. It is the hub of a radial bus system. Transfer times are critical. Delays in walking could result in 3,400 transfer passengers missing their buses. The Board has taken the position that opening Willamette would be damaging to the District and its riders. The Customer Service Center would have to be relocated at a cost that would be $175,000 to $200,000 assuming no additional land cost. The cost of moving the Center would be $80,000. The costs to the system must be included in the costs of the City project. Robert Shaw, 1910 Van Buren, stated that Willamette Street was the main north-south artery .,Jt was the di vi si on between east and west. It is hard to tell people how to get to downtown because Willamette Street has been butchered. It is one of the problems with downtown. Suzanne Boyd, 3429 Stark, President of the League of Women Voters, questioned whether opening Willamette was a wise expenditure of public funds. She said the League favored the Planning Commission recommendation regarding the opening of Willamette between 10th and 11th. Bill Wiley, 975 Oak, stated that his offices overlook the Overpark and Mall. He was concerned about the deterioration occurring in the Mall area. He asked the members of the audience who advocate the opening of Willamette to raise their hands (approximately two-thirds). He stated that there are gateways to the Mall in all the directions but the South, where there is a barrier. He favored removing the street furniture that attracts vagrants. He favored opening Willamette to two-way traffic from 10th to 18th. He hoped the athletic - facility could then become a reality. Paul Covin, Lane Community College, said he wanted, to reinforce the testimony in favor of the Downtown Plan. LCC had some concerns about opening Willamette. He asked members to adopt option 1 recommended by the Planning Commission. Richard Skeie, President of Skeie1s Jewelry 1027 Willamette, stated that his family has had a store in the area for 62 years. He told how vital the area was before the Mall and contrasted that with the current state of the Mall. He said the valuation of his building went down $25,000 last year. People cannot get to the stores. There are no vagrancy laws. Increased circulation and security are needed in the area. Chester Pietka, 1251 Lincoln, praised the Downtown Commission and the Downtown Plan. There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Ms. Wooten thanked the EDD staff for the tax increment study for the 5th Street area. She asked the staff to compare expansion of the district with forming a separate district. She asked them to consider how the funds would complement parking and other projects in downtown. Ms. Wooten asked staff to study the costs of moving LTD as proposed by LTD. -- MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 1984 Page 2 Ms. Decker explained the options for the proposed opening of Willamette e between 10th and 11th avenues. Members asked if consideration could be postponed to a later meeting. They were told that at their meeting of October 31 there was time to discuss the issue further. After discussion members decided to approve the parts of the document on which there was consensus. Res. No. 3882--A resolution adopting the Eugene Downtown Plan. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, that the Council tentatively adopt the recommendations approved by both the Planning Commission and the Downtown Commission regarding the Downtown Plan. Members decided they would exclude from the motion the Priorities, and in the Revisions and Errata Item #.s 6,8,9,12,16,19,22,33,35,36,42,43, and 44. Mr. Obie and Ms. Wooten agreed to hold out of the Downtown Draft for further discussion the priorities, and Item #.s 6,8,9,12,16,19,22,33,35,36,42,43, and 44. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously; 8:0. Members decided to move through the items and take action on those items where there was substantial agreement and to hold the controversial items and the Priorities over for discussion at a later meeting. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Hansen to include Item #6, e option 1 (in Revisions and Errata) in the Downtown Plan. (Develop an incentive program to encourage taller buildings...) Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously; 8:0. Ms. Wooten moved seconded by Mr. Obie, to delete Item #.s 8 and 9 from the Downtown Plan and to give staff direction to carry out these functions as a high priority. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously; 8:0. Ms. Decker and Mr. Gleason said staff would be to improve signing as indicated in number 8 and 9. Ms. Wooten noted that the Performing Arts Commission would have to deal with the proposed sign for the Hult Center. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to remove Item #12 (in Revisions and Errata) from the Downtown Plan and to give direc- tion to staff to maintain and promote clean-up campaigns for the downtown mall. Roll call vote; the motion carried unani- mously; 8:0. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approve option 2, Item #16 (in Revisions and Errata), "Encourage use of outdoor spaces for entertainment and public events...1I Roll call vote; the motion carried; 7:1. Councilors Obie, Wooten, Ball, Ehrman, Holmer, Schue, and Bascom voting aye; Councilor Hansen voting nay. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 1984 Page 3 Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to approve option 1, Item #19 (in Revisions and Errata), IIDowntown Development, e Servi ces, and Marketi ngll . Roll ca 11 vote; the moti on carried; 7: 1. Councilors Obie, Wooten, Ball, Holmer, Schue, Bascom, and Hansen voting aye; Councilor Ehrman voting nay. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to approve option 2 Item #22, (in Revisions and Errata), "Aggressively pursue additional major retail activity to complement existing retail development downtown." Roll call vote; the motion carried; 7:0. Mr. Hansen abstained. Members requested staff review and evaluate traffic direction changes suggested in the document. Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to delete Item #33 (i n Revi si ons and Errata), IIConvert Lawrence Street from one-way to two-way between 6th and 13th avenues. II Ms. Ehrman voiced her concerns with converting Lawrence to two-way traffic. Mr. Ball said the motion was to study a possible street direction change. Ms. Bascom indicated this couid be looked at. Other members said traffic was usually less on a two-way street. Roll call vote; the motion failed; 1:7 with Councilor Ehrman voting aye and Councilors Obie, Wooten, Ball, Holmer, Schue, Bascom, and Hansen voting nay. e Members decided to hold over consideration of Item #36 in Revisions and Errata. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Mr. Obie to approve option 2, Item #42 (in Revisions and Errata), IIThis element (Downtown Design) describes a series of projects that should be implemented... II Mr. Hansen and Ms. Ehrman thought Option 1 was a more accurate statement of what would happen. Mr. Obie supported option 2 and said it was a critical issue of commitment to the plan. Mr. Holmer suggested substituting the language on page 3 of the document. Ms. Decker responded that the design elements are not prioritized. Roll call vote; the motion carried; 5:4 Mayor Keller, Councilors Obie, Wooten, Schue, and Bascom voting aye and Councilors Holmer, Ehrman, Ball, and Hansen voting nay. A short break was taken. B. Appeal of Sign Code Board of Appeals Decision Concerning Property Located at 904 West 6th Avenue (memo attached; background informa- tiondistributed) . Mr. Gleason introduced Ms. McDonald, Sign Code Inspector, who explained the Sign Code Board of Appeals had denied the request citing no proven hardship, and no unusual circumstances. Variances for other billboards in the area - had not been granted. Property owners in the area object to this request. Public hearing was opened. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 10, 1984 Page 4 ."" The public hearing was opened. e David Piper, 899 Pearl, representing Michael O'Connell, disagreed with the conclUSlon of the staff that a hardship had not been established. He said his client is asking for relief from the extra 7-foot requirement on Blair. The lot is a small triangle and development of the parcel is being hampered by the streets that dominate the entire parcel. Mr. O'Connell has attempted to design a 600-foot space building but has been unable to do so and this has necessitated the hardship. He noted that Mr. O'Connell would remove any billboard if the streets were widened. Pete Van Herwaarden, 632 Blair, said the property in question had had a service station and a photomat store. The lot was vacant for many years. The present owner knew when he bought the property that he could not build on it. Speaki ng for six property owners near the property they do not want the billboard over their properties. Debra Kamp, 1204 W. 4th, stated they did not want to see the billboard everyday. They live in a neighborhood. She applauded the Sign code. She said the Sixth and Blair intersection is dangerous and does not need distracting signs. People want a pleasant City. Gerald Kamp, 1204 W. 4th, told councilors the business people in the Blair neighborhood had taken great pains to improve the area. A billboard would detract from the image of a prosperous neighborhood. Austin' Petersen, 622 Blair, said he was born and raised in the Blair area. The e owners of the property had tried to indicate the property was bad for business. This was not the case. Several businesses had made money in that location. The owner did not want help when neighbors tried to talk with him. There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to deny the appeal. Mr. Obie stated that to grant the appeal would be in opposition to the ordinance. Ms. Wooten said the billboard would be a blight on the neighborhood she represents. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously; 8:0. III. CONTINUED DELIBERATION ON METROPOLITAN PLAN AMENDMENTS (memo, background information" distributed) Mr. Farah referred to the distributed material and to a recent memorandum distributed at the meeting, "proposed Modifications to Draft Findings". Mr. Farah, reviewed the four proposals as noted in the memorandum. He sai d the week th~~had been taken in developing the findings was well used. He sa i d the issue raised by the Emporium's proposal was a complicated balancing act. There are 19 pages of findings. He introduced Terry Jones and Steve Gordon. - Ms. Schue asked why the exception area was larger than the area requested. She was told there were 13 Exception Areas in the Metro Plan since its adoption and that the proposal did not expand any of these Exception Areas. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 1984 Page 5 Ms. Wooten asked if the modifications could be adopted into the Plan amendment. Mr. Farah said it would go on page i-14 on the exceptions paper. Ms. Wooten asked about a recommendation of Mr. Kloos. She was told that the actual siting would be a function of the codes of Lane County. In answer to a ~ question, Mr. Farah said staff had spoken to Mr. Miller, representing the ~ Emporium and Mr. Kloos, representing the Neighbors. They are speaking with their clients; it was believed the direction established in the Findings would be agreeable to the parties involved. Eugene could be the first metropolitan jurisdiction to pass the amendments. Ms. Wooten was concerned about tax lot 2100 and and the 150 foot setback for new buildings. She asked what this specific criteria would do to the future of the Metropolitan Plan. Mr. Farah said the working papers were supplements to the Plan and could be more speCific. CB 2789--An ordinance adopting amendments to the Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan; taking an exception under LCDC Goals 2 and 3 to certain properties; amending Ordinance No. 18927; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, that the bill, including the proposed modifications outlined in the memorandum of October 22, 1984, 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 unanimously; 8:0. The bill was declared passed (and became Ordinance No. 19293. IV. RECEIPT OF GRANT OFFER FOR INTERCEPTOR SEWERS IN RIVER ROAD-SANTA CLARA (memo, background information distributed) ~ Mr. Gleason said this was an informational item. The City had received the grant for construction of the interceptors and pump stations to serve River Road and Santa Clara. Construction will begin in the early sprin~. Mr. Ball suggested the Council acknowledge the effort of Terry Smlth in securing the grant. He has done an excellent job. V. 1985 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE (memo, calendar distributed) Mr. Gleason referred to the proposed meeting schedule and asked for adoption. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to approve the City Council meeting schedule for 1985. Mr. Keller recommended that the Council continue the practice of taking the first week in the month off from meetings. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously; 8:0. The meeting was adjourned to October 31, 1984. Respectf~Y su bmi~~ ~..~. ~ "..' . '0:/'-;;)10:>' /.' .. ..--.-- ~ . ." /' ~ ~ "-'. ~ Miche(l D. GleaS~ City Mana~er .., (Recorded by Beth Conant) BC:bc/CM27aI8 'MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 1984 Page 6