Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/12/1990 Meeting e e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall February 12, 1990 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Emily Schue, Rob Bennett, Ruth Bascom, Shawn Boles, Debra Ehrman, Bobby Green, Freeman Holmer. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Roger Rutan. The regular meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Gary Rayor, 2064 Friendly Street, expressed concern regarding traffic on Friendly Street. He indicated that the City's plans to install a traffic light on Friendly Street would increase the traffic on that street which, in turn, would decrease the quality of life in that neighborhood. He urged council and staff to reconsider the placement of this light. Randy MacDonald, 3032 Ferry Street, spoke about the lack of affordable housing in Eugene. He encouraged the Mayor and members of the council to support the Lane County Task Force's revenue plan including the Business License Fee. Randy Prince, PO Box 927, spoke about the City Code requirement for parking spaces. He felt that number of parking spaces required by the code is in many cases too high, and urged the council to make the code requirement less restrictive. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes of October 23 and November 20, 1989; and January 10, 1990 B. Call for Public Hearing on March 12, 1990, for Vacation of Zona Lane (SV 89-4) Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to approve the items on the City Council Consent Calendar. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 1 ~ e e e III. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION/REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE RIVER ROAD AREA, IN THE VICINITY OF MAXWELL ROAD AND THE NORTHWEST EXPRESSWAY (RIVER ROAD CHURCH OF CHRIST, AZ 89-6) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Cathy Czerniak, Planning and Development Department, summarized the code criteria for annexation and rezoning requests. Ms. Czerniak reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request for annexation 4-1. After the Planning Commission Public Hearing, the record was held open for an additional seven days for written comments at the request of a citizen. Seventeen people spoke in opposition to the request at the Planning Commission public hearing. Concerns raised during the testimony included the impact of traffic on the adjacent neighborhoods, preservation of the natural areas on this lot, potential hazards from the adjacent Southern Pacific railroad tracks and tank farms, loss of the rural atmosphere of the neighborhood, and concerns about the method used to process the annexation. Ms. Czerniak pointed out that many of the concerns expressed in the testimony had to do with development of the parcel, but said that detailed development plans are not required as part of the annexation process. In response to the many concerns raised during the public testimony, the Planning Commission recommended the attachment of site review criteria to Parcel 4306. In summary, the site review includes: buffering of existent low-density residential development, evaluation of ingress and egress to address evacuation needs in the event of an emergency, and preservation of natural features along the drainage channel. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of rezoning the portion of Tax Lot 4306 within 100 feet of Labona Drive to R-1, the remainder of the lot to R-2/SR, and rezoning of Tax Lot 4900 to RA. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. Larry Gaskin, 1580 River Road, spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He urged the council to approve the request for annexation and to amend the Planning Commission's recommendation for zoning so that the entire lot be zoned R-2/SR with the site review criteria addreSSing the buffering of adjacent development along Labona Drive. Mr. Gaskin expressed disappointment that the petitioner was not able to respond to staff's modified zone change recommendation at the January 9 Planning Commission meeting, and said that he felt that the church had been victimized by a flawed process in allowing subjective emotional appeals rather than objective criteria alter the Planning Commission's zone change recommendation. Dick Hinz, 1833 Labona Drive, testified against the request for zone change and annexation. He expressed concern about the safety risks posed by the proximity of the Southern Pacific tank farms to existing residential development and felt additional development would hinder evacuation in the event of an emergency. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 2 e e e J. H. Jeppesen, 1883 Labona Drive, identified himself as a long-term neighborhood resident and testified against the proposed request. Mr. Jeppesen urged the council to support the Planning Commission's recommendation for retaining a predominance of single-family dwellings on Labona Drive. He noted that the proposal to parallel a road out from the north side of Maxwell Road, will greatly compound already existing traffic problems. Catherine F. Westra, 1915 Labona Drive, spoke against the request for annexation and zone change and submitted additional testimony in opposition to this request from neighbors not present at this hearing. She concurred with Mr. Hinz's concerns for emergency evacuation of the area, and asked whether public testimony would be allowed at the site review hearing. Randy Prince, PO Box 927, spoke about the code requirements for parking spaces. He noted that in light of the apparent conflict that exists between considerations for traffic and the need for housing in this area, this annexation provides the impetus for the City to reconsider its code requirement for parking spaces. There being no additional requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. Responding to Mr. Gaskin's concern, Ms. Czerniak said that the seven-day delay process allowed at the Planning Commission level is the result of a change made at the last legislative session which allows any person to request a seven-day delay to allow additional written testimony to be submitted. Ms. Czerniak noted that considerable written testimony was submitted during the seven-day period raising issues similar to those presented at the public hearing. As a result of both the oral and written testimony and after considerable discussion, the Planning Commission decided to recommend rezoning a 100-foot strip along Labona to R-1, Low-Density Residential. Responding to Mr. Hinz' concern regarding the safety hazards posed by the Southern Pacific tank farms, Ms. Czerniak said that because the tank farms were constructed after some residential development in the area was in place, special features such as diking around the tanks were added to ensure the safety of neighborhood residents. Both the City and County emergency plans provide for evacuation in case of emergency. Responding to Ms. Westra's question regarding the site review process, Ms. Czerniak said that site review is an administrative process for which no public hearing is held, but written testimony can be submitted. The decision can be appealed to the Hearings Official. Notification of site review is sent to affected neighborhood groups and is sent to other interested parties upon request. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Czerniak said the recommended R-1 zoning along labona was to ensure that the low-density character in the neighborhood would be retained. The drainage area on the property provided a natural buffer between low- and medium- density development and would facilitate the preservation of the wetland area. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 3 e Concerned with property owner rights, Mr. Holmer asked whether the church has the option of withdrawing the application at this time. Ms. Czerniak said that the petitioner has this right. Ms. Czerniak said that the extensive site review that deals with traffic impacts does allow the City to require a traffic study to be conducted and paid for by the owner and developer to determine the most appropriate access po'nts. Mr. Bennett said that in his understanding, although R-1 zoning has a density limitation, it does not necessarily suggest single-family housing. Selecting an arbitrary 100-foot strip inhibits overall site planning and suggests to neighbors the high probability of single-family house development where, in reality, it may only be part of an overall development with a slightly lower density. Mr. Bennett emphasized that in deciding property zoning, consideration should be given to the general plan designation as a medium-density site. Ms. Czerniak responded that the 100-foot strip was specifically recommended to ensure retention of the low-density nature of labona Drive. e Mr. Bennett questioned the Planning Commission's assertion that every effort should be made to buffer new residential development on the subject property from the visual and noise impacts of the Northwest Expressway and the Southern Pacific railroad tracks and asked whether the City should use site review criteria in this manner. Ms. Czerniak responded that a portion of the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, the refinement plan for this area, requires that site review criteria be applied to properties fronting the Northwest Expressway and the Southern Pacific railroad tracks so that visual and noise impacts can be minimized. Mr. Bennett indicated that many of the concerns that the Planning Commission is attempting to address through the attachment of site review criteria should already be inherent in the City Code. Responding to comment from Mr. Bennett, Ms. Czerniak said that Public Works requested the traffic study provision in the site review because of significant traffic concerns. It felt that by articulating the concern in the site review criteria and reserving the right to require the owner or developer to pay for that study, the City can address traffic concerns and provide for the best traffic circulation possible in that area. Mr. Bennett commented that many of the site review criteria are so subjective that it will be difficult for the City to ensure that they have been fully addressed. Mr. Boles asked whether it is possible that the City might incur liability by allowing development on this property which is adjacent to the Southern Pacific tank farms, a potential safety risk. Bill Gary, City Attorney's Office representative, responded that it is not likely that the City would be held liable for making such a zoning decision. e Inquiring about a point made in Ms. Czerniak's presentation, Mr. Boles asked which definition of wetlands is being used to classify these lands and what is meant by the phrase "willingness of the State to work with the current MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 4 e e e property owner.1I Ms. Czerniak responded that the area has been designated as a riparian zone, and that the State would require further area delineation if development proceeds. Jan Childst Planning and Development Departmentt noted that confusion has been generated by the use of the term "setback.1I Although the term IIsetbackll usually means an area in which no building can take placet the term IIsetbackll in this case indicates the location of a zoning line. Responding to a question from Mr. Holmert Ms. Czerniak said that the Final Order that the council is being asked to adopt is based on the Planning Commission's recommendation. Council may want to direct staff to revise the Final Order. Mr. Green asked about the likelihood of a decrease in property value should the zoning of this property change. Mr. Gleason said that if compatible with the surrounding areat it would be unusual for development to denigrate the property value. Responding to a question from Mr. Miller, Ms. Czerniak said that the Metro Plan designates the general area of this request for medium-density development, the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan seems to indicate that a portion of this property phases into low-density development. Mr. Gleason said that the Planning Commission has made an interpretation of two documents which govern the same area. The council has the authority to dispute this decision. Ms. Ehrman remarked that it is unclear whether the recommendation for a 100-foot setback came from staff or from the Planning Commission. Ms. Czerniak responded that during the public hearing the Planning Commission raised questions about how to address some of the issues raised by neighbors. The 100-foot strip zoned R-l was one option presented by staff. Res. No. 4l64--A resolution furthering the annexation to the City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Service District property located in the River Road area in the vicinity of Maxwell Road and the Northwest Expressway. Withdrawal from River Road Water District and River Road Park District will be processed separately if the annexation is approved. Ms. Schue movedt seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimouslYt 7:0. Final Order AZ 89-6--A final order rezoning Tax Lot 4306 from County RA/UL to City R-2/SR and City R-l and rezoning tax lot 4900 from County RA/UL to City RA. Redesignation from County Residential to City Residential Sign District. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 5 e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt Final Order AZ 89-6. Roll call vote; the motion failed 2:5, with Councilors Boles and Bascom voting in favor, and Councilors Bennett, Ehrman, Green, Holmer, and Schue voting against. Mr. Bennett suggested that the council review both the Plcnning Commission's recommendation for zoning and its attached site review criteria. Ms. Ehrman indicated that while these site review criteria may be more stringent than normal, they are justified; this is the Planning Commission's attempt to deal with what has been a highly controversial situation. Ms. Schue and Ms. Bascom also offered support for retaining the Planning Commission's recommended site review criteria. Mr. Holmer requested that the council be made aware of the current site review criteria as outlined in the code, exclusive of these more highly refined statements. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to direct staff to bring back a final order that zones the whole property R-2 and includes the amended site review criteria AZ 89-6. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:2, with Councilors Schue, Bascom, Ehrman, Boles, and Green voting in favor, and Councilors Bennett and Holmer voting opposed. At 9:15 p.m., the council recessed for 10 minutes. e IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ORDINANCES REGARDING PROPOSED WITHDRAWAL OF RECENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTIES FROM WATER AND PARK AND RECREATION SPECIAL DISTRICTS City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Mayor Miller opened the public hearings. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearings. CB 4191--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the Glenwood Water District and Willamalane Park and Recreation District that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on December 7, 1989 (Vik, EC EU 89-31). CB 4192--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the Glenwood Water District and Willamalane Park and Recreation District that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on September 27, 1989 (Oregon Freightways, EC EU 89-26). e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 6 . CB 4193--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the River Road Water District and River Road Park and Recreation District that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on September 25, 1989 (Marshall, EC EU 89-19). CB 4194--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the River Road Water District and River Road Park and Recreation District, that part of the districts annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on November 8, 1989 (O'Leary, EC EU 89-29). CB 4195--An ordinance providing for withdrawal from the Santa Clara Water District that part of the district annexed to the city of Eugene by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission on January 23, 1990 (Smith, EC EU 89-30). e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, that the bills, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Council bills 4191, 4192, 4193, 4194, and 4195 were read the second time by number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, that the bills be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bills were declared passed (and became Ordinance Nos. 19662, 19663, 19664, 19665, and 19666). V. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION REGARDING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR NEW LOW-INCOME HOUSING City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Richie Weinman, Planning and Development Department, gave the staff report. He indicated that this ordinance is for new construction of rental housing and benefits both private and non-profit low-income housing developers. This ordinance contains provisions which address low-income housing, displaced persons, historic review, and the housing dispersal policy. Each application will be reviewed by council on a case-by-case basis. The ordinance has been reviewed by the Social Goals Committee and must be approved by District 4-J before it can take effect. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 7 - Noting that students are uniformly low-income, Ms. Bascom asked whether students will have the opportunity to occupy this housing. Mr. Weinman responded that State legislation stipulates the presence of a rent regulatory agreement and identifies the definition of low-income. Students who fit this definition would be allowed to occupy this housing. MaYlr Miller opened the public hearing. Carole Bruhle, no address given, representing the Homeless Action Coalition spoke in favor of this ordinance. She noted that the community has expressed its support for the funding package set forth in this ordinance, and urged the council and the business community to treat the homelessness issue with the careful consideration that it deserves. There being no additional requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. CB 4196--An ordinance concerning property tax exemption for new low-income housing; adding Sections 2.937, 2.938, and 2.939 to the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Council Bill 4196 was read the second time by number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, 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. 19667). Res. No. 4168--A resolution adopting standards and guidelines for processing applications for new low-income rental housing local property tax exemption. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. VI. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE REGARDING THE ADOPTION OF BUILDING CODES City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 8 4It CB 4190--An ordinance concerning the structural specialty code, plumbing code, and mechanical code; amending and renumbering Sections 8.010, 8.495, and 8.555 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sect10ns 8.015 and 8.579 of that code; and declaring an emergency. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 4190 was read the second time by number only. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, 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. 19661). VII. RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE ADOPTION OF THE CITY OF EUGENE FY89 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Warren Wong, Administrative Services Department Director, gave the staff report. e Mr. Boles noted that the materials were reviewed by members of the City Council Audit Subcommittee who were satisfied with the responses given by Coopers and Lybrand, the City's external auditors, and recommend approval. Res. No. 4165--A resolution adopting the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the City of Eugene for the year ending June 30, 1989 Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Mayor Miller adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency. VIII. RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE COMPONENT UNIT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF THE CITY OF EUGENE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1989 Res. No. 944--A resolution adopting the Component Unit Financial Statements of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1989 e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 9 e Mayor Miller adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency and reconvened the meeting of the Eugene City Council. IX. RESOLUTION CONCERNING DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TAX ELECTION Warren Wong, Administrative Services Director, reported that this action calls for a special election on May 15, 1990, to submit to the voters for approval a measure authorizing $183,450 tax on the ownership of real property in the Downtown Development District. The proceeds of this tax are used to support downtown marketing, parking, and recruitment. Res. No. 4166--A resolution of the City of Eugene, Lane County, Oregon, calling a special election on May 15, 1990, to submit to the voters of the city a measure authorizing $183,450 tax on the ownership of real property in the Downtown Development District. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. X. RESOLUTION INDEMNIFYING WORKERS' COMPENSATION SURETY BOND e City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. He said that as a condition of issuing a surety bond guaranteeing payment of worker's compensation claims and expenses, the Aetna Casualty and Surety Company requires the City to indemnify it for payments made under the terms of the bond contract. In addition to the contract, it is requiring that this guarantee of repayment be memorialized by an adopted resolution of the City Council. Res. No. 4167--A resolution indemnifying surety for payments under surety bonds on workers' compensation obligations. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. In response to a question from Mr. Holmer, Mr. Wong said that the cost of this bond is $7,365. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Wong said that a surety bond guarantees payment of claims on behalf of the City in the event the City does not make payments for its claim's liabilities. A surety bond also requires repayment of funds expended on the City's behalf. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. At 9:35 p.m. the meeting adjourned to February 14, 1990. ~ Respectfully submitted, MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 10 , e e e ?d~ -Mic(~~:r City Manager (Recorded by Traci Northman) mncc 021290-730 MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 11