Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/09/1990 Meeting (2) . e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall April 9, 1990 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Emily Schue, Robert Bennett, Shawn Boles, Bobby Green, Freeman Holmer, Roger Rutan. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman. The regular meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. Mayor Miller recognized members of a Boy Scout troop from the LDS Church, Ward 3, Troop Number 579, who were attending the meeting to observe government in action. I. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Miller explained that the public forum allows citizens the opportunity to express opinions and to provide information to the council. He requested that testimony presented during this segment be on city-related items and not on items which are on present or pending agendas. Jerry Rust, Lane County Commissioner, distributed a written statement and addressed the council on the topic of urban transition and tree-cutting. Referring to a Circuit Court order that enabled Springfield to stop logging within the urban growth boundary, Commissioner Rust requested that the City consider seeking an injunction to halt logging in the south hills area between the city limits and the urban growth boundary until a proposed ordinance adopting the City's tree-cutting ordinance within the urban growth boundary can be enacted. He also asked the council to pass a motion urging the adoption of that County ordinance. Answering questions, Commissioner Rust expressed optimism regarding the likelihood of the County adopting that ordinance to become effective April 24. He added that the issues of annexation procedures and a tree code would be an appropriate work item for the council. William Fien, 3030 Willamette Street, proposed an amendment to City Ordinance Section 8.002(27) to permit an outdoor fire for a Native American sweat lodge. Mr. Fien maintained that Native Americans have a right to practice traditional religion and the sweat lodge is an integral part of that MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 1 - tradition. He said that fire division instructions for a safe fire would be followed. Vaughn Baker, 681 West 18th Avenue, identified himself as a Vietnam veteran and Native American. He said that his right to worship the god of his fathers is violated if he is denied the traditional Sioux method of contacting his god through the sweat lodge ceremony. Mr. Baker asked that freedom of religion be applied equally and fairly to all people. Randy MacDonald, 3032 Ferry Street, distributed written material and requested that the City investigate the possibility of using unbleached paper whenever appropriate and cost-effective. He said this could help reduce dioxin pollution and create a market for reasonably-priced unbleached paper. Bill Blair, 350 Pearl Street, proposed installing a merry-go-round on the downtown mall to replace the fountain at Broadway and Willamette streets. He said this would draw parents and children to the center of the city. Mr. Blair also proposed an amusement park and dancing facility to provide activities for young people. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes of January 24, February 12, 14, and 21, 1990 e B. Findings and Recommendations of Hearings Official and Approval of Improvement Project (Sanitary Sewers in Cross Street) To approve the Hearings Official findings and recommendations of March 26, 1990, and to approve improvements for construction of sanitary sewers in Cross Street from Garfield Street to 612 feet west. C. Call for Public Hearing: Initiation of Alley Vacation (City of Eugene, Steve Bennett) (AV 90-1) To initiate alley vacation proceedings and call for a May 14, 1990, public hearing for an alley vacation located north of East 27th Avenue, between Willamette Street and Oak Street. D. Resolution Regarding City Surveyor Res. No. 4173--A resolution designating the City Surveyor to perform the duties of the County Surveyor under Chapter 92 of Oregon Revised Statutes. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to approve the items on the City Council Consent Calendar. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 2 . e - III. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AND OF REVISED CHARTER FOR THE CAL YOUNG NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Christine Donahue, Planning and Development Department, gave the staff report. She said the proposed charter revision reflects the actual practices developed since the neighborhood organization was first organized in 1978. It includes many of the provisions for the model charter for Eugene neighborhood organizations and was drafted by a committee and reviewed by the City Attorney prior to its being taken to the neighborhood. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, the public hearing was closed. Res. No. 4174--A resolution approving and accepting the Cal Young Neighborhood Association amended charter. Mr. Holmer moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Holmer commended the committee responsible for drafting the revised charter, but objected to language in Section 1 of the resolution. Mr. Holmer moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to amend Section 1 of the resolution to delete reference to the neighborhood association as the official voice of the area, replacing it with ". . . and recognition of the Cal Young Neighborhood Association as an official voice of the neighborhood area . . . II - Mr. Boles asked whether this would apply to all neighborhood associations. Mr. Holmer responded that it would not. Roll call vote; the motion to amend Resolution No. 4174 carried, 5:1, with Ms. Schue voting in opposition. Roll call vote; the amended resolution was adopted unanimously, 6:0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION/REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST HILLS AREA, IN THE VICINITY OF SPRING BOULEVARD, EAST 40TH AND EAST 43RD AVENUES (POLANSKY/SIMPSON ET AL. AZ 90-1) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Cathy Czerniak, Planning and Development Department, reviewed the annexation criteria found in Section 9.158 of the Eugene Code and the zone change criteria in Section 9.678(2). These criteria require that the property to be annexed must be inside the urban growth boundary (UGB) and the annexation must be consistent with MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 3 . adopted plans and policies. Public services and facilities must be available and the proposed change must be consistent with the Metropolitan Area General Plan and with applicable neighborhood refinement plans. A sign district redesignation is also requested along with the annexation and zone change. Sign district criteria are found in Section 8.830 and require that the change must be consistent with the purpose and description of the requested sign district. e Ms. Czerniak reported that the request before the council was submitted by the property owners. The proposal consists of 15 separate tax lots under four separate ownerships and is located in the southeast hills area of Eugene. The properties are within the urban growth boundary and the area to be annexed is contiguous to the existing city limits. Urban services can be provided as needed for development. On March 27, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this issue at which the majority of the testimony related to the tree cutting that has occurred on the property. Recognizing that the City currently has no authority to regulate tree cutting in the area outside the existing city limits and within the urban growth boundary, the Planning Commission concluded that annexation is the only tool available to the City to mitigate the cutting that has occurred on the property. Based on criteria in the South Hills Study, site review procedures or planned unit development procedures can be required prior to development of the property. The study explicitly gives the Planning Director the authority to determine the proper development procedures to be used to process development requests in the area. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the annexation and zone change. If the council approves the request, the annexation portion will be forwarded to the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission for final action. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. Charles Torrence, 2394 Charnel ton Street, represented the property owners requesting the annexation. He said that recent public attention has focused on the tree-cutting issue and that concern should be directed to the Lane County Board of Commissioners who are responsible for enacting specific ordinances to regulate activity in the urban growth boundary area outside the city limits. Mr. Torrence explained that six families own the property and have agreed to work together to create a unique development of one-acre lots with urban services. He added that reseeding and new tree planting will occur to mitigate the loss of existing trees. Mr. Torrence maintained that the proposed development meets annexation requirements and urged council approval. Lawrence Bahn, 4525 Spring Boulevard, opposed the proposed annexation at this time because plans have not been completed for development of the area. He complained that new residents disregard the rights of existing residents. Mr. Bahn expressed particular concern about the potential increase of traffic in the area. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 4 ~ Barry Davis, 1725 East 43rd Avenue, was concerned that the proposed annexation may not be consistent with the Metro Plan. He observed that a natural resource was lost while the council was on its spring recess. e - Carl Chief to, 4491 Spring Boulevard, spoke of the difficulty of separating the tree-cutting and annexation issues. He claimed that logging was being undertaken for commercial purposes with disregard for its consequences on the environment, neighbors, and roads in the area. He requested a moratorium on logging and on annexation until issues relating to urban services (notably sewers and fire protection) are resolved. Mike Sobol, 3962 Spring Boulevard, considered annexation a privilege that brings financial benefits and he urged approval of the proposed annexation only if appropriate site review restrictions accompany the action. There being no further requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. Planning Commissioner Jerry Gaydos reported that the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed annexation carefully and voted unanimously that it was consistent with adopted plans and policies. Referring to alignment and condition of roads in the area, Ms. Czerniak said the County currently considers them to be local access roads which do not receive County maintenance. As part of the development process, the City would work with developers to determine the appropriate route for streets, access points, and what types of improvements are required. She emphasized that approval of the annexation and rezoning request would not give approval to any specific development plan. The South Hills Study requires the Planning Director to review any development plans to determine whether standard subdivision procedures or planned unit development procedures would be appropriate. In its review, the Planning Commission indicated that planned unit development procedures would probably be applied to development in this area. Ms. Czerniak also pointed out annexation must occur before the City becomes responsible for sewers and fire protection in the area. Pat Decker, Planning and Development Department, commented on the proposed annexation's consistency with adopted policies. She noted that the City is unable to control timber harvest outside the city limits but can control the design of urban developments within the city limits. Saying he usually favored annexation of areas scheduled for development, Mr. Holmer wondered about the feasibility of annexing already-developed properties that would add to the tax base. Mr. Gleason responded that there are still questions to be answered relative to urban transition issues. Responding to questions from Mr. Boles, Mr. Torrence said the proposed development's uniqueness was based on the size of the lots and the generous buffering spaces. Logging of the property was not a business venture to provide revenue to be used for development. Mr. Torrence indicated that the MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 5 . e . area would be replanted and the developers intended to work with City staff during the development phase. Ms. Schue commented that Mr. Holmer's question about annexation of developed property raises questions about controlling development. Mr. Holmer said he would expect urban transition agreements to give the City a chance to achieve the same objectives as would be achieved if annexation occurred prior to development. Responding to questions from Mr. Bennett, Ms. Czerniak said that the potential for surface movement is specified in the South Hills Study among the criteria to be used by the Planning Director in determining the appropriate development procedure. Mr. Rutan observed that the request appears to meet the requirements for annexation and appropriate development standards can be applied once annexation occurs. Answering a question from Mr. Green, Ms. Czerniak said the annexation request could be heard by the Lane County Boundary Commission in early June and she would expect that preliminary work on mitigation could occur at that time or even earlier. Without annexation, the City would have no authority to request mitigation and development could occur in accordance with County regulations. Mr. Torrence clarified that logging has been discontinued on the property proposed for annexation but continues on other property in the area. At Mr. Boles's request, City Attorney Bill Gary clarified that the South Hills Study identifies two criteria to be considered in conjunction with annexation. One relates to maintenance of the property as a desirable residential environment prior to annexation and the other relates to whether services are reasonably available. Res. No. 4175--A resolution furthering the annexation to the city of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Service District for property located in the southeast hills area, in the vicinity of Spring Boulevard, East 40th, and East 43rd avenues. Final Order AZ 90-1--A final order rezoning the properties from County RA/UL and AG/UL to City R-l. Redesignation from County Residential to City Residential Sign District. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the resolution and final order. Mr. Boles moved that councilors be given an opportunity to view the property themselves to determine whether it has been MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 6 e e e maintained in a state that makes it a desirable residential environment, and that action be delayed 45 days. The motion died for lack of a second. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:1, with Councilor Boles voting in opposition. At 8:53 p.m, the council recessed briefly. v. PUBLIC HEARING: COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF MANAGEMENT OF TREE CUTTING IN THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY Commissioner Gaydos reviewed the recommendations of the Planning Commission, which included requiring mitigation for the tree cutting that has occurred, sending a letter to property owners in the area, and forwarding to the council a motion that the City work with the County to establish a mechanism for preserving trees and vegetation in the urban transition area. \ City Attorney Bill Gary described the legal problems associated with the regulation of tree cutting inside the urban growth boundary and outside the city limits. In his opinion, the State Forest Practices Act does apply in that area because the definition of forest lands is broad enough to encompass those within the UGB. Therefore, to conduct a logging operation (defined as both harvesting and clearing land for other development) on that land, notice must be given to the Department of Forestry, a 14-day comment period is then required, and if the operation is within certain specified resource areas (such as a riparian zone, a wetland, or watershed), a plan must also be submitted for review and approval prior to the logging. Mr. Gary concluded that the City might seek a judicial order to prevent any logging that is taking place in violation of the Forest Practices Act (FPA). Mr. Gary did not believe that home rule powers would create a problem in the application of the Forest Practices Act. That act establishes the floor of regulation and if the County enacts regulations with lesser restrictions, the FPA would prevail, but if the County's act were more restrictive, it would take precedence. Mr. Rutan expressed confidence that the County commissioners would act expeditiously on this matter and he hoped the council would address the situation during the interim. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. Lawrence Bahn, 4525 Spring Boulevard, showed the council photographs of the logging operations in the area being discussed and encouraged the council to take action to assure preservation as mandated by the South Hills Study. Mike Burton, 1782 Sweetbriar Lane, urged the council to take an active role in helping the County adopt a tree ordinance applicable to areas within the urban growth boundary. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 7 e e e Dennis CasadYt PO Box 5028, complained that public notice was not provided of the commissioners' recent discussion of tree cutting. Mr. Casady purchased land in the area several years ago with the intention of harvesting its timber and felt he should not be subject to the same tree-cutting regulations that apply within the city limits. Jim Bryson, 2030 South Shasta Loop, emphasized the importance of coherent planning that provides for the interests of all citizens. He hoped Eugene would avoid development that is inconsistent with what its citizens desire. Mond Rummelt 2030 South Shasta Loop, identified herself as a local businessperson and resident of the area where logging is taking place. She supported the rights of property owners as long as there is adequate regard for the common good, and pointed out that there is a difference between precommercial thinning and logging. Barry Davis, 1725 East 43rd Avenue, supported seeking injunctive relief or a restraining order based on the Metro Plan rather than the Forest Practices Act in order to control timber harvesting within the UGB. He maintained that the cost of enforcing the City's tree protection ordinance within the UGB would be far less than the value of preserving the trees and the city's ridgeline. Mr. Davis asked the council to encourage the County's adoption of the City's tree preservation ordinance within the UGB. Dena Bahn, 4525 Spring Boulevard, showed the council photographs of the area being logged and expressed concern about the fire hazard created by slash. She said that Goshen provides fire service to the area but is too far away to provide adequate protection to homes endangered by the logging. Mike Sobol, 3962 Spring Boulevard, said that this particular annexation request points out the need for logging regulations within the UGB. He encouraged councilors to view the area in person and asked for immediate action to halt logging activity. Carl Sheffler identified himself as an area resident who expected tree cutting to continue at an accelerated rate in order to complete the activity before restrictions are imposed. He maintained that Goshen does not provide fire protection to the area nor does any other district. There being no additional requests to speak, Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. Mr. Gary stated that that if adopted by the County, the City's tree ordinance would allow tree cutting with a permit and logging in appropriate circumstances (consistent with the Metro Plan). He opposed seeking to enjoin logging based on provisions in the Metro Plan and zoning ordinances because a comprehensive plan usually governs the land use decisions of governing bodies that function within a geographic area but is not typically a self-executing regulation of personal conduct. The area in question is currently zoned agricultural and would be zoned residential if annexed. The zoning ordinance MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 8 e e - does not address the harvest of trees. With respect to urban transition, Mr. Gary said that the current agreement does not authorize the City to enforce the tree ordinance outside the city limits. Mr. Gary summarized the issues facing the council as: 1) consideration of a resolution urging the County's adoption of the City tree ordinance within the UGB; and 2) direction to the City Manager regarding enforcement of the Forest Practices Act. Mr. Boles saw two additional tasks facing the council as: 3) requiring that the developers of the Polansky/Simpson property take action to mitigate the tree cutting that has already occurred; and 4) sending a letter to property owners in the south hills expressing the council's strong opposition to a Wcut and annex" approach to development. Mr. Bennett supported Mr. Boles and Mr. Rutan's earlier comments and said he respected the rights of property owners as long as their actions are consistent with the public's interest. He did not consider the tree cutting that has occurred in the south hills to be in the best interests of the community and chided those involved for damaging the reputation of developers in general. Mr. Bennett urged the council to direct Mr. Gary to take an aggressive legal position and do what is necessary to stop tree cutting immediately. Ms. Schue, Mr. Green, and Mr. Boles concurred that legal action is probably appropriate. Mr. Holmer agreed that the City should urge the County to adopt the tree ordinance and follow the City Attorney's advice to seek compliance with the Forest Practices Act. Regarding an immediate injunction, Mr. Holmer said this should be left to administrative discretion because it has not been determined against whom such an injunction would be sought. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to communicate to the Lane County Board of Commissioners the council's encouragement for rapid adoption of a County tree-cutting ordinance to apply within the urban growth boundary and out~idQ thQ city limits. Roll call vote; the motion carried 6:0. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to instruct the City Manager to take appropriate action to stop logging within the urban growth boundary and outside the city limits until the Lane County Board of Commissioners has sufficient time to act. Mr. Gleason said that he would interpret the motion to direct representatives of the City to find means for near-term enforcement of applicable restrictions on logging. Ms. Schue affirmed that this was the motion's intent. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 9 e e . Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. Ms. Schue commented that the additional actions identified earlier by Mr. Boles (to require mitigation and send a letter) were instructions from the Planning Commission to its staff and did not require council adoption for implementation. Mr. Boles continued to express concern regarding the implementation of the commission's instructions. Ms. Czerniak responded that letters to property owners would be sent by the end of the week. She added that mitigation had not yet been discussed because the property could not be annexed until the Lane County Boundary Commission takes action on the proposal. VI. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING WHITEAKER REFINEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GRAY'S SEED AND GARDEN SUPPLY, RA 90-1) Mr. Gleason introduced the topic. Teresa Bishow, Planning and Development Department, reported that the amendment would allow a low-density residential zoning designation to be applied to the southwest corner of 5th Avenue and Madison Street (a single tax lot that is presently vacant). This designation would allow the expansion of Gray's Seed and Garden Supply on to the site. Site review would be attached to assure that no permanent nonresidential structures are constructed on the property. Ms. Bishow noted that factors identified by the Planning Commission as items to consider at the time of any rezoning are issues of concern for site review and are not to be viewed as specific site review criteria. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. Jim Saul, III West 7th Avenue, spoke on behalf of Gray's Seed and Garden Supply. He said the amendment would permit nursery use of the affected lot, and that a full range of commercial uses would not be allowed. It would also assure the long-term availability of the property by expressly precluding any nonresidential structures from being developed. Mr. Saul noted that the Whiteaker Community Council endorsed the proposed amendment. There being no additional requests to speak, the public hearing was closed. CB 4207--An ordinance amending the Whiteaker Refinement Plan; and declaring an effective date. 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, 6:0. Council Bill 4207 was read the second time by number only. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 10 e 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. 19678). VII. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING INSTITUTION OF PROCEDURES FOR ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY (SHERATON DRIVE) City Manager Mike Gleason explained that this was a standard procedure and does not necessarily mean that the City will proceed with condemnation but will begin the negotiation process. CB 4208--An ordinance authorizing the institution of proceedings in eminent domain for the acquisition of property interests along Sheraton Drive, from Chateau Meadows to 1,570 feet north, for the purposes of construction of street improvements; 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, 6:0. ~ Council Bill 4208 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. 19679). VIII. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF HEARINGS OFFICIAL/ORDINANCES Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to approve the Hearings Official's findings and recommendations of March 26, 1990 (Contracts 88-501, 88-15, 88-18, 89-29, and 89-34). The motion carried unanimously. CB 4209--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sidewalks, storm and sanitary sewers in Roosevelt Boulevard between Highway 99 and Maple Street (Contract 88-501). CB 4210--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sidewalks, sanitary and storm sewers, and street lights on Shadow View Drive from Chad Drive 630 feet north and on Chad Drive from Shadow View Drive to 228 feet west (Contract 88-15). - MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 11 e CB 4211--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary and storm sewers in Willakenzie Road from 700 feet west of Bogart Lane to 900 feet east of Bogart Lane (Contract 88-18). CB 4212--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, storm and sanitary sewers in Crenshaw Road from Debrick Road, 1,900 feet to approximately the top of Gillespie Butte (Contract 89-29). CB 4213--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewers in Morse Street from Bethel Drive to 600 feet west (Contract 89-34). Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, that the bills, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill numbers only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. Council bills 4209, 4210, 4211, 4212, and 4213 were read the second time by number only. Mr. Boles pointed at that the Whiteaker community supports appropriate small business. e 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. 19680, 19681, 19682, 19683, and 19684). The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. to April 11, 1990. ReSlte~~tlb_uri /J;/% - - ( , ~ Micheal Gleason, City Manager (Recorded by Mary Feldman) mncc 040990-730 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 9, 1990 Page 12