The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/12/1975 Meeting - (I-A-l) - (I-A-2) (I-A-3) (I-A-4) - M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL May 12,1~75 . Regular meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by His Honor Mayor Lester E. Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on May 12, 1975 in the Council Chamber with the following Council members present: Neil Murray, Gus Keller, Wickes Beal, Tom Williams, Ray Bradley, Eric Haws, and Edna Shirey. I - Public Hearings A. Vacation of easement between Hilyard and Alder south of East 39th Place (Seabloom)(EV 75-1) Recommended by the Planning Commission on February 24, 1975. Map of the area was previously distributed to Council members. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. :Council Bill No. 833 - Vacating easement between Hilyard Street and Alder Street south of East 39th Place was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Munray moved s~cond by Mr. Keller~that the bill be read. the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered .at this time. Motion ca~ried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17353. ' B. Southeast Firs Neighborhood Charter Assistant Manager eXplained the overlapping of bounda~ies between the proposed Southeast Firs neighborhood group and the existing Oak Hills Homeowners Associa- tion, especially with regard to properties along Agate Street. Copies of the pro- posed charter, maps, and corresponden~e were previously furnished to'Council members. Public hearing was opened. Al Jacobsen, 3215 Agate Street, president of the Nob Hills Association, said that group had voted to remain a part of the Southeast Firs organization. He said the Nob Hills group covered properties lying east of Agate Street south of 30th Avenue and took in the 9th, 10th, and 11th Additions to Nob Hill, and that that area was not and had never been considered a part of the Oak Hills Homeowners Association. Others supporting Mr. Jacobsen's viewpoint and recommending approval of the South- east Firs charter were Fred Divita, 1655 Cameo Drive; Lloyd Staples, 3210 Agate Street; and Mr. Singh, 830 East 37th Avenue. They felt drawing of the boundaries of Southeast First group was an arbitrary action of the planning department with- out a satisfactory explanation of its purpose. Also, there were planning efforts going on within the area on which the group wished to make a concerted recommenda- tion and which could not be done until the charter was approved. Cordelia Ruddy, 3614 Agate Street, representing the Oak Hills Homeowners Associa- tion, said the boundaries for the Southeast Firs group was drawn in the manner submitted with the idea that one group could better work problems of the south- east section of the city rather than splitting into two groups. She was under the impression that everyone interested had received notices of the meetings at which the area was discussed but recognized that standard procedure usually comes under attack when controversy arises. She said the Oak Hills group was not in- terested in forcing membership on anyone who did not want to belong to that group. ~~" 5/12/75 - I Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Assistant Manager displayed maps with overlays showing the overlapping boundaries and sald notices were mailed to residents on both sides of Agate Street. In re- spons~ to Councilman Murray, he said that persons qualified to vote in the Oak Hills group were on the mailing list and had received notices of that group's meetings, that the notice was adequate, and that its charter included provision for amendment. . Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to deny the charter for the Southeast Firs Association. Councilman Murray said his motion was not with the intent of discouraging creation of this particular group, but more to protect the integrity of the neighborhood association policy. He said the Oak Hills group had been chartered and its boundaries accepted by the city as san appropriate size for planning. Also, there were adequate existing procedures by which a change in boundaries could be accomplished by those people wishing it rather than by the Council. Further, he said, he didn't think boundaries of a neighborhood group should be split over controversy on a single issue, that different points of view were to be expected within various groups. Councilwoman Shirey wasn't in favor of approving this charter because she felt existing charters accepted by the Council had to be protected. She thought the Agate Street improvement controversy may not have occurred had the street not been the boundary line for the Oak Hils organizatiqn and she would have like the two groups to work out a boundary that would not qverlap so that the Southeast Firs group could also be accepted. Councilman Haws wondered why the Southeast Firs group couldn't go ahead and operate effectlvely with the people in that neighborhood and the city even without its tIJ. charter having been accepted. He thought it might be better to have the groups operating separately rather than having one large group always confronted with petty differences. Assistant Manager felt there was a stronger commitment where a charter was accepted and an organization recognized by the city. He said staff had tried to work with the Southeast Firs group informally, recognizing that it would take some time for those people to organize and prepare their charter for Council consideration. He added that there were some neighborhood organizations looking at consolidation but that he didn't think the Southeast Firs group was particularly interested in discussing that at this time. Councilman Keller was disturbed that people living in the same neighborhood were not compatible unless there was some special interest pulling them together. He noted the unanimous ballot in the group wanting nothing to do with the Oak Hills organization. But he felt the two groups should sit down and reach some kind of settlement rather that continuing to pull apart. Vote was taken on the motion to deny the Southeast Firs charter. Motion carried - Council membe~Murray, Beal, Haws, Shirey, and Mayor Anderson voting aye; Council members Keller, Williams, Bradley, and Hamel voting no. Mayor Anderson in breaking the tie said the neighborhood associations should re- member that differences within the groups cannot be settled by the Council, the groups should bring about their own solutions. He thought the best course of action would be for the people interested to settle the differences through es-, ....,. tablished procedures after the present differences.had subsided. Timing in this ,.., charter request, he said, had been unfortunate and if the present differences can- not be resolved perhaps another request in a year or two would be appropriate. 5/12/75 - 2 2~ . Mr. Staples in order to be clear on the action stated then that the group did not have a charter. Assistant Manager said that since the Southeast Firs organization did constitute a fairly large group of people, it perhaps could develop boundaries contiguous to the Oak Hills group and then come back to the Council for considera- tion. There were no objections from the Council. C. Appeal from Planning Commission denial of rezoning property at north end of Grand Street (on west side) (Blinkhorn)(Z 75-1) Denied by Planning Commission on April 1, 1975. Appellant requested continuance of the hearing to the May 27, 1975 Council meeting because of inadequate time of notice of public hearing and not having sufficient time to prepare testimony. Staff had no objections. Council had no objections and it was understood the public hearing on this appeal would be carried over to the May 27, 1975 Council meeting. (I-A-S) D. Request for Tax Exemption - Edgewood Homes Association Council members viewed the area under consideration for tax exemption status on tour. Staff advised that the property did not fall within the language of the statute covering tax exemption status. Public hearing was opened. e George Alberti, 430 East 46th Avenue, member of Edgewood Homes Association Board of Directors, stated bases on which the tax exemption was requested: (1) The area regardless of private ownership was open to the public, and operated much the same as the Elks Club property; (2) parking available was similar to that at Amazon Pool, any overflow from the parking lot could be handled in adjacent on- street parking space; members using the property have indicated no increased traffic because of the pool use; (3) safety features were met through licensing by health department and periodically certified by Lane County, street lights were provided, lawn areas trimmed, lifeguard requirements satisfied; (4) Mr. Breeden has indicated he will relinquish reversion rights (to private ownership); and (5) the people accommodated would relieve some of the pressure on Amazon Pool. He said that although property tax was now being paid it was not producing income. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Jim Saul, planner, explained city staff position: (1) The area under discussion was owned by a private organization not comparable to the Elks Club tax exemption because that exemption was by reason of its being a fraternal organization; (2)the pool could not be accepted by the city because of its inadequacy for public use; (3) there was no intent on staff's part to infer the pool was unsafe, it does qualify for the type usage it now has; staff position was that if this pool would qualify for tax exemption, pools of any other association would also qualify; (4) if the city should through reversion rights acquire ownership, the pool could not be put to public use, rather it would have to be sold to abutting properties. Mr. Saul said that if tax exemption was approved, findings would have to be made with regard to conservation of natrual or scenic resources, protection of air and water supplies, enhandement of neighboring open space and/or recreational oppor- tunities, preservation of historic sites, etc. He said that probablay the most relevant of those would be the enhancement of recreational opportunities. e Assistant Manager said that staff was most concerned about reversion of the prop- erty to the public, that if that did occur the city would have the clear right to dispose of it in any proper way. 5/12/75 - 3 ~e. When ~sked if reversion rights had ever applied in a similar situation, Mr.Saul explained that the Spencer Butte Improvement Association had an agreement pro- viding that if th-e."Association for. any reason ever went out of existence prop- erty ~h i tsownership would revert to the county for park purposes. Councilman ..' Hamel ,commented that the Edgewood pool was not large enough to accommodate the area supporting it, that Breedens went along with the Spencer Butte group on the provision that it would pay the taxes. He favored staff's position to deny tax exemption status. ,Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to deny the request for tax exemption. ., In response to Councilwoman Shirey, Mr. Saul explained that if tax exemption is :approved state law required that the property would revert to public ownership. I. Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried unanimously. ~ ,:' '.E. Bids 1. Public Works Projects (opened April 29, 1975) (I-B-l) !~iJ:n(,> of Eiddc'r and-:Piojcct Contract Cost Coot to Abutting Prop. Cost to City ~.'\moun-r- Budgeted PAVltlG: 1. Hammerhead turnaround on 22nd Avenue 225 ft. west of Trillium Street (1120) 1. Genge Pavi-ng Inc .. $ 2,379.20......................$3.045.00...............................0 2. Shur->:ay Contract~~~:.i~~::::::::::::::::::..:$ 3.131.10 3. l,ildisr Construction COffipany..................$ 3.597.25 4. Eugene Sand & Gravel. Inc.....................$ 3,636.11 COMPLETION DATE: July 1. 1975 ------------------.------.--------------- -----------------------------------------------------.--------------------------------------------------------- STORM SEWER: 2. Hilyard Street from 35th Avenue to 36th Avenue (1111) -- 1. Nor.m Green & Sons .. ...........$ 3,267.40.................... ..$4,180.00...............................0 2,' .Kenneth R. Bostick.C~~~t~~~t;o~.co~pany.......$ 3,372.00 3. Wildish Construction Company..................$. 3,447.50 4. Shur-\!ay Contractors, Inc.....................$ 3.725.65 5... Copenhagen, Inc............. ..................$ 4,663.50 6. .Wick Bros. Excavation.........................$ 4,955.00 7. L. O. Van Over Construction. Inc..............$ 6,465.00 8. Dan D. Allsup Contractor. Inc.................$ 6,821.00 COMPLETION DATE: July 1, 1975 ----------------------------------------------------------------~------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SANITARY AND STORM SEWER: 3. Mahalo Hills 1st Addition (993) 1. Kenneth R. Bostick Construction Company...... .$27 ,268.~0......... ..San. Swr. Lat.. ..$$ 00' 630~/sq. f}t................. ..$500.00...........0 2. \Iildish Construction Company................. .$37,423.80 Levy:............. sq. . 3. Shur-I,ay Contractors, 1nc.....................$38,046.15 Servlce..........$124.00/each . 4. Hick Eros. Excavation........................ .$59.020.87 Stm. Swr........ .$402.00/per lot COMPLETION DATE: July 15, 1975 ------------------------------------------------------~ -------------------------~--------------------------------------------------------------------- ?AVI;:G, SAr;ITARY SE\.iER Aim STORM SHIER: 4. \.:iti1in Sleepy HollOl.i Addition; and sanitary se\~e~ . \.:ithin 160' north and south of Sleepy Hollow Addltlon; and stcrm sewer within Dapple Way Subdivision (179) ALTERNATE BID BASIC BID 1. H & J Construction....................... "$$6621 '095711.5347........ ..N$062B.910d9.85.... .. .~~~ ~~; 'l.~t""~ l~: ~~'j/ i<'" .~~~:~:~:: :Fi :m: ~~.. .$g5~~~) 00 2 Shur-t'!ay Contractors, Inc.................. , . .. ...... ..' . . .... 3: \.Iick Bros. Excavation......................$62.315.64..........$63,064.41 San.Swr.Serv...$ 190.00/Each 4. Imdish Construction Company.............. .$64,297.70.. ....... .$64,893.20 Stm. Swr...... .$1 ,452.00/per lot 5. Copenhagen, Inc............................$68,587.03..........$68,~64.34 (Sleepy HollOW) 6. Dan D. Allsup Contl'actor, Inc..............$77,529.46..........No Bld Stm. Swr.......$1.652.00/per lot ~ (Dapple Plat) _ COMPLETION DATE: August 15, 1975 -------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/12/75 - 4 24q e Bids were reviewed by Don Allen, public Works director, who noted objection of Larry O. Findley to being within the assessment district for the Mahalo Hills sewers. He also noted that these bids represented the fourth time bids had been called on the Sleepy Hollow paving and sewers and that approval of the petitioner had not yet been received on this bid price. Contract awards were recommended on the low bid on all projects, with award on the Sleepy Hollow project subject to approval of the petitioner. N2-'~ of tid(ler ~~d Project Contract Cost FAA Contribution Cont.r:tbution by- Agreement wi th P ~ilin!LCo . ~2.1on Sweet Field - Airport Construction ~~:, Project ~o. 8-41-0018-02, (Security Fence, Secc"ity Lighting. Aircraft Parking, Auto Parking & L ;shting \.;aH.'"ay, Paving Hangar Taxhlay) (1005) Cost to City A:::,JU;1t Budgeted 1. ;.1 ii di s h Cons truct i on Company................. S 1 93. 988.80. . . .. .. . . . .. . .. $81 .181 .82. . .. .. . . $82 ,676.23. . .. . . . .. . .. . . $1 ~'i~~' ~~. . . . . . . . $30,130.75 2. Eugene Sane & Gravel, Inc.... ....... ..... .,. .$258,225.63 530:130:75 Engineers Estimate = $252,241.52 COMPLETION DATE: October 1. 1975 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Allen recommended award of contract on the low bid subject to the city's receiving FAA grant, also to agreement with parking company on their paying a portion of the costs. Public hearing was opened. (I -B-2) e Larry Findley, 4820 Larkwood, said that apparently between the time this project first went to bid and now his property had been included within the assessment district. He said his property was already connected to sewers so that the new district would not be of benefit to this lot, and he didn't feel it would be wise to disconnect from the present line and connect to the new. He added that at no time had he received any advice with regard to possible assessment for sewer service, that he had bought the property with sewer service already available. Norma Brandhagen, 275 Sunshine Acres Place, didn't feel she should be obligated to pay for sewer service since her property was already connected to a line (Sleepy Hollow/Dapple Way project). She felt the cost should be absorbed by the developer of the property initiating the project. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Assistant Manager explained that both projects involved extension of sewers resulting in assessment against properties within 160 feet of the line not previously assessed for service. Mr. Allen explained that Ms.Brandhagen's property was 180 feet deep and had been assessed for the sewer on Sunshine Acres to a 160 feet of that depth. This line was being installed on an easement at the back of her property resulting in assessment against the balance of the property not previuosly assessed. (I-B-3) e Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to award contracts on the low bid on each of the projects, the award .on the Sleepy Hollow/ Dapple Way project subject to approval of the petitioner, and the award on Mahlon Sweet Field work subject to receipt of FAA grant and agreement with parking company on their assuming their por- tion of the cost. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, motion carried. 5/12/75 - 5 2..S .0 2. Parks Department - Tandy Turn Park concrete work (opened May 9, 1975) Wildish Construction Company Concrete Unlimited, Inc. Devereaux & Pratt K. A. Wardell $ 10,200.00 8,888.00 No bid 7,462.00 Office Estimate 7,557.00 Staff recommended award on the low bid price. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to award contract to K. A. Wardell on the low bid price of $7,462.00. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all council members present voting aye. II - Request for reconsideration of limitation on construction hours Code Amendment, Restriction on Construction Hours - Councilman Hamel said he had voted wrong on this issue at the April 28 Council meeting and asked to change his vote. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to reconsider the issue of changing hours during which construction would be allowed. 'Councilman Williams noted the tie vote in committee on this issue which resulted in the Mayor's voting to let the code stand as written. Mr. Williams felt that letting the April 28 council action stand (preparation of ordinance changing hours of construction) would result in staff work for no purpose because an ordinance probably.would fail to be adopted on the same tie vote. Councilman Murray commented on the number of people in the community who were concerned about this issue, in fac~some had sat through public hearings on other matters in order to voice thier opinions, he said. To reconsider the issue would make it moot and their involvrnent would go for nothing. Mayor Anderson thought there were two things involved, the request to reconsider and the segregation of decision making from public hearing. Councilwoman Beal felt the West Uni- versity Neighbors would not understand the lack of response from the Council in view of their having waited through both a committee and Council meeting for consideration of their request. Councilman Hamel said his vote at the April 28 Council was in error, that it was counter to that cast in committee. He said that perhaps other parts of town besides the West University area also should be considered. Councilman Williams thought it.important to note too that the vote at the April 28 Council meeting was not on an ordinance or change of policy, that it merely asked the staff to draft an ordinance that probably would not pass. Councilman Murray was un- comfortable with the probability of reconsidering any issue in a similar situation. Vote was taken on the motion to reconsider. Motion carried, all council members present voting aye, except Councilman Murray voting no. . . Comm 4/30/75 Approve Copies of letter from West University Neighbors was distributed to Council members expressing concern over previous Council action that would permit construction hours ~_= to stand as now in the code. ,., Mr. Hamel moved second by Mr. Keller to reconsider previous Council action of April 28. 5/12/75 - 6 2.91 . (II-A-l) tit e Clarification of status of the issue was requested by Councilwoman Beal. Councilman Williams explained that the Council action at the April 28 meeting was to reverse action taken in committee, i.e., committee motion to instruct staff to draft ordinance revisions was defeated, but when brought to the Council was approved (to prepare re- vision for 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.). However, he said, that action was to ask for preparation of an ordinance revision only, no policy change was made at that point. The Mayor agreed with that interpretation. Councilman Murray said he would vote against the motion to reconsider. He said his "no" vote was not with the intent of being impolite to Councilman Hamel who was requesting reconsideration because of his vote at the April 28 Council meeting (see committee minutes above). Instead, Mr. Murray said, his negative vote would be because he felt the 8:00 p.m. hour was a reasonable re- striction. Mayor Anderson declared the discussion out of order until after vote on the motion to reconsider. Vote on the motion to reconsider was taken. Motion carried - Council members Keller, Williams, Bradley, Hamel, and Haws voting aye; Council members Murray, Beal, and Shire~ voting no. Mr. Murray moved second by Mrs. Beal to reaffirm action instructing staff to prepare amendment to the city code that would change the time limit on construction noise from 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. and set up a permit system allowing construction under certain conditions beyond that time. Councilman Haws wondered if a public hearing was necessary. He thought the 8:00 p.m. restriction was a reasonable request, that major construction projects would be covered. It was pointed out that public hearing had already been held, that additional testimony was not deemed necessary. Councilman Murray took exception to a comment that construction noise was peculiar to the University area. He thought it was a citywide problem and called the Council's attention to recent community development questionnaire which identified areas in other parts of the city where control was needed. He thought the proposed change was reasonable, that it would make no drastic revision in construction practices necessary. Councilman Williams said he had no strong feelings about this issue but he noted staff's strong reservations about modifications and thought it might be worthwhile to have those reviewed. Assistant M~nager explained that staff concerns included suppliers, contractors, homebuilders, who sometimes were geared to later working hours. He said this restriction would have an adverse ffect on housing costs, and there was the po- tential of complaints requiring enforcement action coming after normal working hours. Mr. Allen thought the issue should go to public hearing because of interest expressed by homebuilders and contractors organizations because they had been contacted by staff with the word that no change would be made until an ordinance was prepared (according to previous Council action). Councilwoman Beal said that representatives of the West University Neighbors were present and should have an opportunity to be heard. Mrs. Beal moved second by Mr. Murry to reopen public hearing on the issue. Motion defeated - Council members Murray, Beal, Haws, and Shirey voting aye; Council members Keller, Williams, Bradley, Hamel, and Mayor Anderson voting no. Mayor Anderson in breaking the tie said he voted against the motion because he felt if public hearing was reopened and additional testimony taken, the homebuilders and con- tractors associations and others having an interest should also have the opportunity to be heard. 5/12/75 - 7 2SZ. Councilman Keller thought it would be a waste of staff time to have an ordinance draft prepared when it was not certain what the Council really wanted. He thought too that construction noise was only one facet and that it could be considered a temporary source of discomfort because in every neighborhood in the city at one time or another there would be building going on. . Councilwoman Beal disagreed. She thought construction was a continual thing to the point where she wondered if the city was "being run" for people with homes or for the construction industry. Councilman Murray thought there had to be a beginning point, referring ~o the com- ment that construction noise was only one of many. And with regard to allegations that restrictions would result in increased housing costs, he said that fact had never been. documented. He didn't think the restriction would add to enforcement problems, because there was only a slight revision being proposed. And he didn't think postponement was justified to accommodate those who weren't present because the issue had been well publicized. Councilman..Williams commented on the noises caused by dogs, teenage driver autos, power mowers, amplified music, etc., all of which were more annoying than construction noise and really not necessary in the sense that construction could be considered neces- say when employment was taken into account. He thought if the Council seriously wanted to deal with the problem of noise, there were other far more annoying types to consider than the temporary noises caused by construction projects. Councilman Murray thought the issue was being over-dramatized, that the issue was only a slight revision in hours and not a question of eliminating construction altogether. He suggested that after this revision was made, the Council might turn itself to the other type~ of noises mentioned. . Councilman Keller pointed out that if concern for people in the community was the focal point, it might be well to sp~ak to the fact that the homebuilders and con- tractors were also people of the community who were very concerned also about the proposed revision. Vote was taken on the motion to instruct staff to prepare an ordinance which would change limit on constructio hours from 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Motion carried - Council members'Murray, Beal, Bradley, Haws, and Shirey voting aye; Council members Keller, Williams, and Hamel voting no. A short recess was taken. III - Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items if requested. Previously discussed in committee on April 30, 1975 (Present: Mayor Anderson; Council members Murray, Keller, Beal, Williams, Hamel, Haws, and Shirey). Minutes of that meeting appear below in italics. A. Barger Drive Right-of-way - Council authorization was requested for amendment to resolution authorizing Barger Drive right-of-way negotiation and acquisi- tion (No.2373). Assistant Manager explained that it was found that by shift- ing the. road alignment somewhat to the south the expense of acquiring two commercial establishments could be avoided. The amendment would authorize negotiation on additional property not now included to accommodate the re- alignment. councilman Williams reported calls from property owners in the Barger Drive area saying they had offers from the city on the basis of condemnation, then the offers were wi thdrawn. Don Allen, publi c works director, explained tha t - 5/12/75 - 8 253 . -- negotiations were started on the basis of the first alignment. The property owners were informed that the offers were withdrawn and that a subsequent offer would be made. That would occur, he said, if the requested amendment is approved. It was understood the amending resolution would be an item on the May 12, 1975 Council agenda. Corom 4/30/75 Approve B. Code Amendment, Fireworks - Copies of proposed code amendment were distributed to Council members. The amendment would prohibit sale of fireworks at other than authorized places and would provide for other changes of a "housekeeping" nature. It was understood the amending ordinance would be brought to the Council at its May 12 meeting. Corom 4/30/75 Approve C.Room Tax Allocation Committee Recommendation - Mall Manager - Copies of memo from parks department were distributed to Council with agenda submitting information on the request for room tax funds ($6,000) to pay half the salary of a manager for downtown mall activities, the other half to be paid by the Eugene Downtown Association. Also distributed were copies of the mall manager's job description and Mall Commercial Activities Committee report of September 1973. Letter from Richard Hansen, manager of the Valley River Center, was noted in which objections to use of room tax funds for the benefit of a specific group (downtown.business- men) were stated. e Vince Farina, member of the Downtown Association, called attention to recommenda- tions of the Mall Commercial Activities Committee appointed by the Mayor, one of which was hiring of a mall manager through the use. of room tax funds. That recom- mendation was based o~ the earmarking of room tax funds for cultural, recreational, and tourist oriented activities, he said, recognizing that mall activities would also include those of a commercial nature. Mr. Farina said another recommendation of the Committee was that it would be reconvened to ascertain whether its recom- mendations had been accomplished. A great many had, he said, but nothing was done about calling the committee back into session. The Eugene Downtown Association, feeling something should be done, worked out the SO/50 formula for engaging a mall manager with the idea. that EDA would receive and pay for the time spent on com- mercial activities, the city would receive and pay for the time spent on cultural, recreational, tourism activites. That proposal was presented to the Room Tax Allocation Committee and approval was recommended to the Council. He said the suggestion for part-time management, hired separately by the EDA and the city, could result in nothing but conflict. The Association, as well as the Downtown Development Board, he said, felt this was a workable proposal that should be approved. Sally Weston, member of the,Mal1 Commercial Activities Committee, comme~ted that the report submitted from that Committee did not properly reflect ltS opinion. She noted the impasse in the Committee - some thought commercial activities on the mall would present obstacles, others thought they would en- hance the character of the mall. A year's delay was decided upon to determine if concerns about licensing commercial activities on the mall could be investi- gated, and to see if there would be genuine obstacles to such activities. She suggested that if pUblic money was to be used to help pay for a mall manager, he should receive some direction from citizens who were interested in more' than just "high school band concerts and beauty queens, etc." She thought too that the mall manager should be aware there was no unanimity about what his job should be - the Commercial Activities Committee recommendation was not so "cut and dried" as was presented. e Mr. Hansen didn't think it was the city's responsibility to fund management of activities for the benefit of individual businesses. He said that if a program was to be developed to promote cultural and recreational uses on t~e down~o~n . mall a separate application for room tax funds not tied to commerc~al actlv~t~es should be presented. 25+ 5/12/75 - 9 Mayor Anderson shared Ms. Weston's concerns. He expressed disappointment at lack of unanimity in the Commercial Activities Committee or in willingness of downtown interests to extend commercial activities into the mall area. He added that if this request was approved it should be understood that the city would expect in- creased participation by the merchants and/or others to develop commercial activi- ties into the mall, that a manager if appointed would develop that type of program, as well as cultural and recreational activities. ** Councilwoman Shirey felt that spending public money as proposed was not wise, that it was no~ consistent with expenditure of public funds~* She suggested that before any action was taken the matter of the charge to the Committee to consider com- mercial activities should be addressed. Also, she thought some process for re- view of the mall manager's activities and feedback perhaps after a year should be provided for. Mr. Farina called attention to the difference between a shopping mall, such as the Valley River Center (private property) where tenants are governed by lease terms and the downtown mall (public property), maintained and operated by the parks dep~rtment under a permit procedure. He quoted statistics indicating 7% of the city's property ta~s were paid by .04% of the land area downtown, and said that a strong thriving downtown area was necessary to a thriving city. He noted the many changes which had taken place downtown and looked forward to more, but at the same time suggested since it was city property, .the city should work with the merchants and other businesses to make it healthy and thriving. Mayor Anderson asked Mr. Farina whether the EDA and the mall manager would be willing to develop a program of expanding commercial activities into the mall area ~ithin the next year if the request before the Council was approved. Mr. Farina said there already was some of that type activity. The EDA had al- ready hired a person half-time for the commercial type activities. But any type of commercial activities allowed on the mall, he said, should be subject to the same type of. licensing requirements other businesses there have to meet. He thought there could be expansion through a meeting of the Commercial Activities Committee and EDA or its mall manager. Mayor Anderson pressed for a response - whether the EDA would accept that expansion as a part of the contract covering a.llocation of room tax funds. Al ton Lenhart, president of the EDA, didn't see a.ny problem. He said the Assocjation could work with the city, wanted to, in fact that was the goal. Councilman Murray thought expenditure of funds for this purpose was appropriate in view of the community goal to promote a strong, lively core center - "the heart of the city." However, he had reservations about combining commercial and cultural/recreational activities management in one job description. He called it a "blurring" of functions. He preferred the city's hiring a mall co-ordinator in a half-time position, if that was all that was needed, and at the same time encourage the EDA to hire a half-time'market development specialist. Councilwoman Beal expressed conc~rn about where responsibility would lie - who would select and hire the manager, who would give instructions, etc. Mr. Lenhart answered that the half-time job now is paid by EDA. If the other half-time is approved by the city, cultural/recreational activities not heretofore pursued because of lack of funds could be worked out. He thought the EDA was in better position to observe, would be in constant contact with the manager. The program, he said, should be given a try to see how it worked, changes could be made if necessary. Assistant Manager added that contractual arrangement required for allocation of room tax funds would provide for city veto. There would be firm commitment and a joint decision before any money was appropriated. John Perry, present mall manager, suggested provision in the contract for a steer- ing conmUttee comprising city representatives and downtown businessmen to give direction on mall activities. Mr. Hansen couldn't see how a manager could represent both the city and the business interests downtoWn. And he said whoever was manager was going to look out for the interests of "whoever had the clout," and that would be the businessmen. 5/12/75 - 10 255'. -- **See correction page 11 these minutes. e e e e (II-A-2) e In response to questions from Councilwoman Beal, Mr. Farina said that the EDA was made up of all businesses downtown - professional people as well as retailers _ and that they contributed through ad valorem and business license taxes and through funding of the free parking program administered by the Downtown Develop- ment Board. Also, that professional people involved in the Association included lawyers, doctors, accountants, bankers, etc., who recognized that a strong viable downtown center was necessary for the health of their businesses also. He noted that outlying shopping centers were very rapidly developing office space to accommodate the same type of activities. Mayor Anderson also in response to Councilwoman Beal said that membership of the Mall Commercial Activities Com- mittee had broad community representation - merchants, citizens, University students., etc. Councilman Keller thought there was no question about the difference between Valley River Center and the downtown mall. One of the great differences, he said, was the difficulty of gaining involvement of the varying interests in downtown activities, and he thought the proposed approach would achieve that. He strongly supported the idea, saying it would be worth the effort to try it, recognizing that splitting .of funding and duties would have to be spelled out. Councilman Murray said he supported the idea also but he couldn't understand the difference between one full-time manager as opposed to two half-time positions, taking into Consideration a slight question of co-ordination and workability. He thought trying the two half-time positions for a year would give the experience necessary eo assess the program, with the understanding there would be mutual input with regard to selection of two half-time people. Councilman Williams said one fact had to be added - that there already was $20 million public involvement in the downtown area [urban renewal program]. Trying to promote a healthy downtown was a valid point, he said, but untimely. The question was whether government could properly fund the manager position. He couldn't see the difference in the half-time and full-time positions, assuming the same individual could hold each. Mr. Murray moved that the parks department be encouraged to submit an application to the Room Tax Allocation Committee for a half-time appointment of a person to carry out the functions designated under the job description entitled "Mall activities and special events," and if that is funded that the downtown merchants be actively in- volved in the selection of the individual to fill that half-time position but that the individual will not be the same person to carry out the functions described under "Downtown Association market development." ThC!re was no second. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to approve the Room Tax Alloca- tion Committee recommendation to allocate $6,000 to fund half the salary of a mall manager. Motion carried, Council members Keller, Williams, Hamel, and Shire~ voting aye; Council members Murray, Beal, and Haws voting no. Comm 4/30/75 Approve Councilman Haws said he would vote against allocation of $6,000 to pay half of the salary of a mall manager because he thought employment for that position should be kept separate from the Downtown Association. He expressed concern about expediture of funds in one particular area but was willing .totest it for a year or so if the posi- tion was under supervision of the parks department. Mr. Haws moved second by Mr. Murray to allocate $6,000 of room tax funds for mall manager salary, the person filling that position to be hired by the city under the supervision of the parks department under guidelines originally set forth, with emphasis on cultural and recreational activities on the mall. ** Councilwoman Shirey said that when she voted in committee she thought she was voting on something t~at would open applications and a mall manager subsequently hired, she was not aware that the person was already picked. She asked correction of April 30 committee 5/12/75 - 11 25<0 minutes wherein it was stated she felt spending public money as proposed was not wise. She said ,her comments were in resonse to Mr. Hansen's statement that it was not the city's responsibility to fund activities for the businesses on the mall, and that she ~ felt spending public money on public property as proposed was in order and she sup- ~ ported that concept. Assistant Manager thought the Council should know that the EDA now employs a mall manager to cover commercial ctivities, the pending action is to fund that portion covering cultural and recreational activities. He said one thing yet to be settled was a firm understanding with EDA that there would be an equal voice in hiring the mall manager if that position is to be funded through a joint venture. Mayor Anderson asked Mr. Haws if the intent of his motion would preclude funding the other half of the mall manager's time by the EDA. Mr. Haws said the intent was to keep the positions separate. He said if the EDA wanted to hire a half-time person he had no objection if it was the same person because he felt a person couldn't be told what he could or could not do in his off hours. However, his intent was that the city's funds go toward cultural and recreational activities, not to promote commercial activities. He said he would like to see the city select the best person, in response to Mayor Anderson's question whether the same person could do both jobs. Councilman Murray was more comfortable with this than with the former position, paying one-half the mall manager's salary. He wasn't sure that one person could adequately fill two positions. Mrs. Beal had the same concern. She didn't see where a separation of authority could function properly, and that there really should be two persons to safeguard the spending of public funds for public purposes. Councilwoman Shirey said she hadn't supported the idea originally because she thought if the two positions were separated the commercial interests on the mall would be an extension of the downtown businesses, and she felt commercial activities on the 4It mall should be open to anyone. She wondered what type of commercial interests the mall manager would be promoting. Councilman Keller expressed some puzzlement about Council comments. His recollection was that the greatest concern was to get some commercial activities into the mall area, and funding this temporary one-year $6,000 help would get that activity off the ground. He couldn't understand the quibbling over $6,000 when the initial mall investment amounted to $20 million. He thought there should be some consensus so that the people involved would know from one day to the next what was going to be done. Mayor Anderson was in favor of funding the half-time salary for the one-year period to see if the proposal would work~ To fund the position on the basis of a half-time position, he said, would put the entire situation back into limbo. The Downtown Association has been urged to.promote commercial activities on the mall and this pro- posal brought by them didn't seem unreasonable. He felt it should be given a test. Councilman Murray was in favor of any program that would promote more activity in the mall area. However, his concern was the "blurring" of the two functions - com- mercial and cultural/recreational. He was willing to give it a try, but he couldn't understand if one full-time position could spend half his time on commercial activities and the other half on cultural/recreational activities why two half-time positions couldn't do the same thing. Assistant Manager said there would be some concern that duties ot a person working half-time in EDA employ might conflict with that employe's public service work as a city employe. Also, he said, it should be pointed out that the monies being allocated were also intended to be used for tourist and convention ~ type activities as well as recreational and cultural things, so that tended to also ... blur the situation. He thought it would be more sensible to fund the half-time salary on a contractual basis with the EDA. 5/12/75 - 12 2.57 e Councilman Hamel wondered if there was a way out if the EDA made other arrangements to cover their commercial interests, was there some way the money could be returned to the city. Assistant Manager said that a contract for services is always made up on allocation of room tax funds. In this case it would cover particular circumstances, how the individual's time would be used, etc., to make sure the public funds were spent for public purposes. If some situation arose where the monies were returned, they would go back into the room tax fund. Councilwoman Beal was concerned that with a mall manager completely under the super- vision of the EDA commercial interests other than those connected with downtown businesses would not have the opportunity to operate on the mall. She wondered about license fees for commercial activities there. Mayor Anderson answered that the permit system was pretty well owrked out and in complete control of the city, no mall manager would be able to assume control over use of the mall. Assistant Manager added that anyone wanting to engage in a commercial activity on the mall must have a permit, hiring of a mall manager would not change that provision unless the Council made a change in the code. Vince Farina, member of the Downtown Association and the Downtown Development District, expressed dismay at apparent distrust of the downtown business people and what they were trying to do. He said the EDA now employed a mall manager who was performing both functions, covering commercial activities as well as the cultural and recreational type. He reminded the Council that all of the businesses in the downtown mall area would be subject to license fees through city code provisions. Also, they would auto- matically be members of the Downtown Association. And this proposal presented by EDA was to expand those uses into the mall area and make them more meaningful. e Vote was taken on the motion to provide for a half-time city position through allocation of $6,000 room tax funds. Motion defeated - Council members Murray, Beal, Haws, and Shirey voting aye; Council members Keller, Williams, Bradley, Hamel, and Mayor Anderson voting no. (II-A-3) Councilwoman Shirey changed her vote to "no," saying she had pushed the wrong button on the voting mechanism. The result was defeat of the motion - Council members Murray, Beal, and Haws voting no; Council members Keller, Williams, Bradley, Hamel, and Shirey voting no. D. Mall Activity Permit was requested by Catherine Anne Lichty to sell cut flowers from a small cart on the downtown mall from 12:00 noon to 5:00 p.m. five days a week. Copies of the application and sections of the code governing mall activi- ties were previously distributed to Council members. Mrs. Bea1 moved seconded by Mr. Murray to approve the application. Corom 4/30/75 Approve Vince Farina, member of the Eugene Downtown Association, wondered why the applicant would not be subject to the same business license taxes paid by other businessmen in the downtown area. Assistant Manager noted the permit fee provided for in the code, although it was not specifically described as "in lieu of property taxes." Also, that few commercial activities had been tried on the mall and fees had been waived because they were beginning ventures and it was desired to see how they would work. He said the Council had the prerogative of treating this permit either way. e Councilwoman Beal suggested Ms. Lichty might report her profit over the summer months to give the city an idea of an appropriate license fee for that type of activity. Mr. Hamel thought this activity was pertinent to the issue of hiring a mall manager, that a manager could see that commercial activities were not started without payment of the same license fees paid by the businessmen. Mayor Anderson thought the downtown group would be involved in this aspect since it had next to a mandate to develop activities to extend the existing businesses into the mall area and it was assumed some positive program would be initiated. Vote was taken on the motion to approve the application. carried unanimously. Motion 25.8, - 5/12/75 - 13 Alton Lenhart, president of the Eugene Downtown Association, said the Association had no objections to this activity on the mall. However, they thought some guidelines should be prepared for similar uses in the future. Councilman Keller thought the ~. Council would be in favor of guidelines should many applications for this type ... activity be received in the future. He hoped the Association would continue to take the lead and that discussions of commercial activities in the mall area would con- tinue to be a matter of discussion between the city and the Association. E. Funding Low-cost Housing Eor Single Parents, 21st and Willamette - Copies of memo and proposal outlining the 20-unit twin-type apartment complex proposed by Wes Morgan, sponsor, were previously distributed to Council members. The Joint Housibg Committee recommended expenditure of $60,000 to fund the project from 1974-75 revenue sharing funds, subject to the sponsor's securing financial cornmrit- ment Within 90 days of Council approval. Councilman williams reported the unanimous recommendation of the Joint Housing Committee. He said it was his understanding that the Housing Committee was authorized to recommend expenditure of the funds budgeted for this purpose and he wondered if each individual project had to go through this process. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Murray to approve the funding as recommended. Comm 4/30/75 Approve Councilman Murray asked how many units were involved in the project. Mr. Morgan described the complex, patterned after one in Vancouver, Washington, primarily geared for use of single parents wi th one child. One advantage he mted was that the units could be converted to housing for elderly people should social changes occur to eliminate the need now seen for single parents housing. He said the project would have 20 units, each having two bedrooms with shared kitchen/ living area to house 40 people (plus children). Vote was taken on the motion to approve. Motion carried unanimously. e F. Legislative Subcommittee Recommendations - April 28, 1975 The Legislati ve Subcommi ttee makes the following recommendations: H.B.2607 - Open meetings law. Due to substantial changes in this bill the subcommittee recommends the Council advise Lane County representatives that the City supports re- ferral of the bill to the House Labor Committee. The bill which the City Council and the League of Oregon Cities originally supported was amended in committee to provide that all collective bargaining would be re- quired to take place in open meetings; that actions taken by governing bodies in meetings that do not com- ply wi th the open meetings law would be voided provided a challenge were filed within 30 days after the meeting; and that selections of persons to fill vacancies on boards and commissions must take place in open public meetings. Selection of chief executive officer of a public body (i.e. city manager, school superintendent) may occur in executive session only if the public body he.s met certain state standards spelled out in the bill regarding recruitment and selection. These provisions were not in the bill originally supported by the City and League of Oregon Cities. It is therefore felt that our prior commitment to the bill is now void. H.B.2686 and S.B.480 - Mobile Home Parks. The subcommittee recom- mends support of the League of Oregon Cities position that local standards be not pre-empted by the state. tit Councilwoman Beal noted hearing scheduled for Monday, Mal' 5.. on H.B.3252 (Kulongoski bill which would prohibit all vehicle traffic and other pollution sources in an air ~mergency alert). Since no posi tion was taken by th(? Council, Mrs. Beal sug- 5/12/75 - 14 ZS9, e gested pointing out to the committee at the hedri!l(! th<11 .:here was not sufficient data available on which to determine the source of poil; r-ion. Perhaps stopping all traffic in an alert situation would not abate UI.. ,;(lllution which could be coming from other sources, that until chemical In[orm<1Lion was accumulated to de- termine the source of pollution there would be .'lJ benefit from closing the freeways. Councilman Williams thought the approach of closing the entire Willamette Valley was appropriate but he felt it should be a "graduated" response rather than the "sudden death" situation proposed by this legislation. And Mayor Anderson thought there should be more involvement of local officials in drafting the terms of the bill, or at least consultation. There were no objections to Mrs. Beal's drafting testimony to be presented at the committee hearing on May 5. Councilwoman Beal reviewed the legislative subcommittee recommendations, noting the substantial changes in H.B.2607 (open meetings law). Councilman Williams thought the bill should be opposed and citl'd the effect it would have on Eugene's current situation in selecting a cittl manager. He said anyone currently having a job would not apply if the law required open meetings during the selection process. Those types of things should be protect~d from full public disclosure, he said, although perhaps not from press attendance. Councliman Haws recognized the si tuat.ion in selecting the ci ty manager and the reason for applicants' desiring confidentiality, but he could see no reason for "secrecy" in selecting persons to fill vacancies on the city's boards and commissions. He said also he was in favor of collective bargaining negotiations being open to the public. e Mr. Williams moved currently drafted. voting aye, except seconded by Mr. Keller to oppose H.B.2607 as Motion carried, all council members present Councilman Haws voting no. Comm 4/30/75 Approve G. Public Hearing Schedule, Arterial Street Projects - Copies of memo listing proposed schedule of public hearings on public works projects were distributed to Council members with agenda. Public works department suggested special Council meeting on May 19, 1975 at 7:30 p.m. for public hearing on improvement to Barger Drive, Roya.l Avenue, Chambers Street, and Hawkins Lane. Also proposed was joint meeting of the Planning Commission and Council on June 23, 1975 _ 12:00 noon - for presentation of 30th and Hi.lyard intersection and the West Amazon transportation study, including staff response to the League of Women Voters' letter concerning factors to be considered in the West Amazon environ- mental impact statement. It was assumed that no public hearings would be re- quired on the 29th and Willamotte intersection project or 11th Avenue improvement from Seneca to Bailey Hill Road other than the normal public hearing at time of contract award. There is the potential for hearings on areas designated for bus stops, on-street parking in relation to bike lanes, and speed zones set by the State Speed Control Board. Councilman Haws noted that several people had inquired of him whether the 29th .and Willamette project could be stopped. Assistant Manager explained prior Council commitment for acquisition of right-Of-way and engineering design work. Also that the Council at time of hearing on contract award could reject bids. However, he suggested that staff should have some direction if that is intended because of the expenditures now being made to acquire right-of-way. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to schedule special Council meeting on May 19 as proposed. Motion carried unanimously. Corrun 4/30/75 Approve e Councilman Murray a~ked what environmental impact there would be should the West Amazon arterial proj~ct not be approved. He wondered if the impact of doing nothing could be discussed at the Counci/Commission joint meeting. The public works director explained that was one of the required options. 5/12/75 - 15 2"0 ' H. Vacation utility easement, west side of Sunshine Acres Road from Dapple Way to Sunshine Acres Drive (Eslinger) (EV 75-2) Recommended by the Planning Commission on April 7, 1975. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to call public hearing (June 23, 1975). Motion carried unanimously. Comm 4/30/75 Approve - I. Sign District Change, 400 and 500 blocks between Washington and Lawrence - From Residential to Industrial (Planning Commission) (SDBC 74-6) Planning Commission reaffirmed its December 3, 1974 recommendation to change the sign district to Industrial (April 7, 1975). Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller that the sign district change be denied and that find.ings supporting denial be prepared fpr adoption at the May 12 Council meeting. Comm 4/30/75 ApproVe In response to Councilman Keller, Assistant Manager explained that if the Council reaffirmed its previous position to deny the sign district change (which sent the issue back to a joint Council/Commission meeting) negative findings would be prepared supporting that position to deny. If the Council indicated approval of the change, then the ordinance effecting the change would be brought back for final passage. Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried unanimously and it was understood the item would be on the May 12 consent calendar. Copies of findings were distributed supporting denial of the sign district change on the basis that it was not appropriate because of the adjacent public park development. J. Code Amendment, Parking Regulations - Copies of proposed changes were distributed to Council with agenda. The amendment would bring the code into conformance with present practices - allows motorcycles and similar vehic_Zes to park per- pendicular to the curb, requires vehicles to be parkfd within desiqnated spaces, and adjusts loading zone time limits to allow more uniformity in signs for special zones (to reduce sign costs). e Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to schedule public hearing on the amendment. Motion carried unanimously. Comm 4/30/75 Approve K. Improvement Petition - Paving alley between Wi1lamette and Oak from 26th to the south - Petitioned by owners of 59.1% of property to be assessed. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to approve the petition. Motion carried unanimously: Comm 4/30/75 Approve L. Hearing Panel Recommendations - May 5, 1975 Present: Council members Neil Murray and Ray Bradley; and staff members Gene Haxton and Ed Jolmduff. Appeal from Zoning Code Board of Appeals decis_ion of March 27, 1975 denying more than allowed number of horses at 2475 Crescent Avenue Copies of appeal together I-li th copies of appellant' s statement, staff notes, and minutes of March 27, 1975 Zoning Code Board of Appeals minutes h"ere previously dis- tributed to panel melnbers and by reference thereto are made a part of this record. Council members Murray and Bradley declared no ~x parte contacts or other reasons for conflict of interest that woul.d prevent them rrom paTticipatinc; in a decis_ion on this appeal. Robert Cornelison, 2475 Crescent Avenue, said he felt the Zoning Board decision denying his request to keep in excess of two horses at this property was based pri- marily on petitions circulated throughout an area not immediately adjacent to his property, that people across the street and along Cheryl most directly involved had given :'100% support of his request. He thought the intent of the ordinance restrict-. - 5/12/75 - 16 Ztol. . It e tit in,! the n~mber of horses H.'as to avoid indiscriminate use .of back'lar.d pasturiny of ar;i;71als, to keep people from crowdinq animals illto small areas '.dthout feed and care. He described the facility he Ivas mainta.ining, saying his horses Ivere not alloweJd to ru!! free. He could see no object.ion to allowing four or six horses if any horses at all were permitted under the same conditions. Outside of some little additional noise - which could not compare with consistent barking by dogs - he couldn't see the difference bet\veen ha'hng two, four, or six llorses. lie said he had attempted to :o'lim.:.nate dust problems and had hauled alVa~1 mamlre to avoid odor problems. He added that the entire (juest.ion to hifl' h'as one of ,,'hether the animals co:.:ld L'e handled in the available space in a faci li ty designed to handle up to six horses wi th adequate feed, traininy, and exercise. Co:mci1man l1urray asked Mr. Cornelison to comment on statement in the Zoning Board minutes that he (Cornelison) had been told only two horses would be permitted and that he hild agreed to that at the time the building permit for the barn lvas requested. ;':L Cornelison explained that when he applied for the building permit he thought the property was in the County, tha t tilL' permi t was requested on the basis of pre-ex.isting use - keeping four horses. He saili four horses ",'ere kept or. the property at the time of annexation and the lot size had not varied from that time. He said he had the cit'! attorney's opinion in writing conceding tile prior existence of four horses. Also, thJ.t nor:i1ing other than an addi tion to the barn had changed since that time. In response to the question about being told two horses only would be allowed, Mr. Cornelison said he called the building superintendent's attention to the pre-existing use (four horses) and had told him he would resist efforts to restrict the number to two. Bill Parsons, 2735 Cheryl Street, and Paul Valevich, 2755 Cheryl Street, supported Nr. Cornelison's request for variance as requested 'Thell could see no reason for re- str~ctinCi the number to tl"O horses if any were allo..'cd at all, and they felt th1t the additional horses would not have a negative effect or. the neighborhood. Richard Butler, attorney representing Dr. Gordon Miller of 2730 Chuckanut Street, sub- mitted for inclusion ~n the record of this hearing those petitions presented at the Zoning Board meeting. Ii.:' thought it doubtful that the Zoning Board was the proper body to consid'2r Nr. CornlC'ison's appeal, sayir;q the variance requested was for a u.sp d.iffl?rent than that perm.itted bli city ord~n.:lnce and should morc properly be ap- pealed unuer conditional use provisio~s of tlie code. Mr. Butler r~inted out an error with r:3qard to Mr. Corn1eJ.son's statement that the city attornes' hyi conceded four horses were kept on the property prior to applicability of the cit,I's ordinance. H~. [Butler) said that in the municipal court prosecution on violations of tllis ordinance, ti2!:? city attorney had Et.:lted for purposes of resolving the dispute that he was willing to "assume" the pre-cxistinll use '(four Ilorses). Ho:vever, the attorney further ex- plained, Mr. Butler sdid, that thF.' chan'Jc in the structuro. requirt!d compliance with the code. Mr. Butler added that a variance at this point h'ou1d serve only Mr. Cornelison's own pleasure, not the welfare of the neighborhood, and would be in direct violation of the code. Dr. Gordon Miller, 2730 Chuckanut Street, presented pictures to Council members show- .i"'H] his property ill relationship to that of MT. Cor.nclison' s and the seven-foot u::ilit~J easemont separating the tlvO properties. He described Mr. Cornleison's facility, noting damagt.' to trees plJnted for screeniny ptlTposes, stand.ing water I,hich he claimed made Un' exercise aruas totally unsuitable [01. horses, and existence of buildings \-.'hich 1essellc.'j the ,'mount of space actually a\:ill labla for keeping horses. fie sau1 the pl,;ce was a:] eyesore - unpainted buildings, })uildin" materials, piles of .,?;,-:nt.:re. Also, thc} place attracted flitJs and was a firu jia:~ard because of storage of !ic.::.roleu;;J byproducts n~ilr hay stora<]e. He said the erristing uses were unacceptable and ,e,ad ~!on.' far beyond the one- or two-horse maintenance intended. Others objecting to the proposed four/six horse facility were Peggy Miller, 2720 Chuck- an:1t; John Graham, 2715 Sarah Lane; Robt'rt Castle, 2760 Chuckanut; Paul Bendix, 2720 Sarah Lane; Paul Rozell, 2350 Crescent Avenue. Their objections were based on presence of flies, mosquitoes, and d.irt constituting a health hazard; depreciation of property '.'alues; il1ega1i ty; and doubt that the open area was sufficient to meet code provisions ior even th'O horses. Councilman Bradley asked Mr. Cornelison what practical difficulties or hardships would be encountered if t,he Zqning Board decision was affirmed and the appeal denied. Mr. 5/12/75 - 17 2Go2 C:;r:-wlison ,answered that the cost for hoarding horses I"ou.id amount to about $100 per TOilth per horse. fic' Oh':1Cdsix horses, he silid, tk-'O of which were i.n training elsewhere, <in:.;;'} t u:o I,'ol:}d hav.:, U.o be l,oarded out. He mentioned involvement of his fam.ily .':~ :"ar i 01.1$ hor-sl':: t .'-"d: :)] Ii-? an:i (}ndUT2lnCe pro9rams and said it w'ould be an i nconveni ence hav.ing to travel to train dnd ex.-,rcise the horses if they were not kept in the present fac:i:;.t~:. In t'urr:ik'!" rcsponse.to Counc.ilman Bradley, he said he would not have to tear (ic,:" an'.: bui Idings I that the l,!uldinq constructed originally had three stalls with tack rOG."" ar,d storage room COIN2rted to three additional stalls. ,e .'.iL Corne.Ii son I\'as then e[l von the opportuni ty to question those presenting test:.imony i;, oppos.itio:J to his appeal. D.iscussion between him and Dl'. M.iller centered on condi- ::i on of the ut.! li ty casement b",t.,'C'en the properties I present condi tion of the training arcoa, ma teria1s stored on Dr. Mi 11er' s property, problems vlhich neighbors might antici- !_:otc auring the comi,nq summer months, etc. Eel johnriuff, buildincJ department- explained the issue of "use" may have been clouded by the way the apJy.:al l\'a3 stated, that really the .issue was whether reduction in area of ., :I::,} to .L,,'ss t!::'lrJ th"" al1o;.ah1e minimum size required for keeping horses would be Cirar:t:Gd. He cited Section 9.7.34 for authority granted the Zoning Board to consider the appeal.. Mr. Johrlduff noted for the record that Mr. Cornelison had stated at the Zonin~; Board meeting that he had purchased additio!lal acreage convenient to his resi- dvnc:e. He said that: should be considered as a factor so far as the point of inconven- ~ence was concerned. !i,} noted too that the building permi t was issued on the basis of plans that showed three stalls plus three areas the same size as the stalls called "stora~.;s' areas." lie commented on inspections of the building and contacts with Mr. Cor- n"dison about the numher of horses al101\'cd and explained that there is little else can j,." 60ne \"1 th regard to .1101", a [wi Iding is going to be constructed other than to take the .3pp1.icant's wor6 that the construction I"ould proceed according to the plans submi tted. I,!I. Johnduff added that a site plan lvas also submitted by Mr. Cornelison and that the ];uilJing department would fo110',;' up with rr::gard to compliance to required landscaping ~-;:)Ct,'n -thereon. /.:r. Corneliso!1 in rebuttal. said he III3S making every effort to make the facility ac- ceprab1e and convenient for everyone jnvo1ved, that .it was not finished at this time :113] nly iJecause of uncertainty :'fLout ".lJat would be allowed. However, he felt if he was given the variance that in a few months - to a110.v lanr15c2pinq, improvement of the exercise circle, etc. - there would be no objections and the facility would in fact enhance the neighborhood with an "old country charm." He re- iterated his opinion that if any horses at all were going to be allowed on the property"he could see no difference in keeping two or six. .e Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Councilman Bradley expressed the opinion that the Zoning Board did have authority under the city ::'ode to pass judgment on this request Eor variance, since horses were allowed in the RA zone and the request was f6r reduction in'lot size. He felt there had not been enough pl.oof of practical difficulties or unnecessary physical hardships and that the appeal should be den1ec1~ . Councilman Murray concurred. He wondered if a time .limit should be imposed for reduction ~n the number of horses not" kept on the property. Gene Haxton, building department, noted Mr. Cornelison's appeal of the violation to circuit court and said that staff probably would not take any action until a decision in that case fI'as reached, so a time limitation would perhaps be in- appropriate. He thought there would be court action in a reasonable length of time. Recommendation: Unanimous, that the Zoning Board decision be upheld and that the appeal be denied; that findings supporting denial of the request as noted in building department staff notes and Zoning Board minutes of March 27,. 1975 be adopted, as well as findings of this Hearing Panel that sufficient proof of practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardship had not been shown; and that the number of horses now on the property be reduced to two within a reasonable length of time, subject to building department inspections. Approve - ~ -" 5/12/75 - 18 2.~3 Assistant Manager explained that action of the hearing panel sustained the Zoning Code Board of Appeals action. It M. Appointments 1. Sign Code Board of Appeals - Mayor Anderson asked Council for suggestions of persons who would be willing to serve on the Sign Code Board of Appeals, filling vacancy created by resignation of Rod Gillilan. 2. Airport Commission - Mayor Anderson announced appointment of Dr. Glenn Gordon, 1136 East 20th Avenue, as a member of the Airport Commission, replacing Norval Ritchey, for the term ending January 1, 1979. 3. Council Representatives to meet with tion and those requesting revocation Gus Keller and Edna Shirey. officers of the Downtown Westside Associa- of the Association's charter were named - 4. LCOG, Eugene Council Representative - Councilman Keller asked to be relieved of assignment on the LCOG Board because of conflicting meetings. It was understood Councilwoman Beal, alternate, would assume those duties. Discus- sion revealed that all Council members would be involved in budget meetings on the date of the May LCOG Board meeting, requiring representation from Eugene by someone other than Council members. N. Council Work Session, Affirmative Action Report - Councilwoman Beal announced work session scheduled for June 2, 7:30 p.m., to review conditions of employ- ment in the city covered by the Human Rights Commission subcommittee report. Assistant Manager added that copies of the report would be distributed to Council members prior to the meeting, together with graphs requested by Mrs. Beal depicting city employment figures. o. Trespass Case, Valley River Center - Councilman Haws said he was still con- cerned about statements in the article from the Wi1lamette Observer with regard to prosecution of a case involving labor union pickets at Valley River Center. e It was understood copies of the article would be distributed to Council members. p. Appointment, City Manager - Mayor Anderson announced Council executive session would replace the regular committee-of-the-whole meeting on May 7 to provide an opportunity for review of applications for the position of city manager with Paul Reaume of Callaghan & Co. The meeting will begin at 11:00 a.m. in the Alcove Room at the Eugene Hotel. The Mayor scheduled a press conference at 10:45 a.m. in the Empire Room at the Hotel preceding the meeting to discuss conditions under which members of the press would be able to attend. the executive session. In response to Councilman Williams, Stan Long, assistant city attorney, said that since no formal action would be taken at the proposed executive session it would not be necessary to hold the meeting at City Hall. Q. International Women's Year 1975 - Mayor Anderson announced recogni tion national Women's Year 1975 through activities of the Mayor's Committee national Co-operation. He said Catherine Lauris, former councilwoman, ing the Eugene Task Force for the program. of Inter- on Inter- was chair- R. Community Development Funds - Councilman Murray reported that recent communica- tion from HUD advised that supplemental funds allocated to Eugene would amount to $912,000 rather than the $1,133,000 originally anticipated and upon which the community development budget was based. As a result, a 19.5% reduction in each program item was recommended which would not alter established priorities. Those programs which would suffer from that reduction would . be carried over and given highest priority under the second year application. This procedure, Mr. Murray added, would allow the process to continue under present Council authorization and would not involve additional public hear- ings unless the Council directed otherwise. -- 5/12/75 - 19 2.<.0+ Corom 4/30/75 File Corom 4/30/75 Affirm Corom 4/30/75 Affirm Corom 4/30/75 Affirm Corom 4/30/75 Affirm Corom 4/30/75 File Corom 4/30/75 File S. CETA p~og~.., Special Construction Projects - Public works department reported a spec~a1 three-month CETA job grant of $79,000 which would be lost if not used before July 3lst~ It is planned to hire about 40 short-term employes to grade and gravel b~keway routes in the city. councilwoman Beal asked if any women would be hired for the work contemplated Ga~Y.Long, manager pro tem, answered that the jobs required primarily the . ab~l~ty to perform physical tasks and anyone meeting the requirements would be hired. . Corom 4/30/75 File Councilwoman Shirey wondered when asphaltic paving of the bikeways was expected. Mr. Allen replied that funds are not budgeted at this time, that the work would be done as the regular budgeting process would allow. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to approve, affirm, and file as noted Items A through S. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all council members present voting aye, except Councilman Bradley abstaining on Item E-Low-cost Housing for Single Parents. IV - Items Not Previously Discussed A. Housing and Community Development Commission - Copies of proposed ordinances were distributed which would create the Commission. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to approve creation of the Commission as proposed. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. B. Room Tax Allocation Committee Recommendation - April 28, 1975 Allocation of $850 to the School of Community Service Athletic Conference to supplement their matching funds under a Federal grant to explore human poten- tial through physical activity was requested. It was noted that this type of activity had the potential-for bringing additional business activity for the motel and hotel industry. .-, ., Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to approve the expenditure as recommended. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. C. 1975-76 City Budget - Staff recommended Council acceptance of the budget and asked that public hearing be scheduled and election set for voter consideration of $3,564,474 outside the 6% limitation. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to accept the proposed 1975-76 budget, schedule public hearing for June 9, 1975, and call election for June 17, 1975 on exceeding the 6% limitation by $3,564,474. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. D. 1975-76 Downtown Development District Budget - Staff recommended Council action setting an election. for exceeding the 6% limitation by $134,000. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to call election for June 17, 1975 on exceeding the 6% limitation by $134,000 for the Downtown Development District budget. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. e' 5/12/75 - 20 2,,5 (II-A-4) e e - v - Liquor License Renewal s Retail Malt Beverage (RMB) - Abby's Pizza Inn, 1970 River Road Black Forest Tavern, 2657 Willamette Clug Cigar Store, 933 Olive Street Cracker Barrel Tavern, 211 Washington East Broadway Pizzeria, 652 East Broadway Ed's Taco Villa, 2750 Roosevelt Boulevard El Sombrero, 146 East 11th Avenue Fourth Street Depot, 453 Willamette Street La Posada Mexican Restaurant, 685 East Broadway Laurelwood Golf Course Pro Shop, 2700 Columbia Oakway Golf Course, 2000 Cal Young Road Sidetrack Tavern, 295 Highway 99N Tiny Tavern, 394 Blair Boulevard Package Store (PS) - Albertson's #507, 1675 West 18th II 515, 3299 Hilyard II 531, 2 Oakway Mall Amazon Food Market, 1815 West 11th Barger Enterprises, 4925 Barger Drive Becker's Market, 1123 Monroe Street ,Billy's Market, III Monroe Street Bi-Mart, 1680 West 18th " 2030 River Road Bob's Superette, 595 East 13th Avenue Consumer Warehouse Foods, 225 River Road Custom Meat Co., 577 Pearl Street DariMart Store #3, 1735 West 18th " " 6, 800 Highway 99N " " 7, 2429 Hilyard Street " " 8, 1153 Valley River Drive " " 9, 853 West 28th Avenue Edelweiss Wine Chalet, 34 East 10th AVenue Drive N Save Market, 3061 Hilyard Street " " 2370 West 11th Avenue Duke's Market, 430 Gilbert Everyone's Market, 1245 Echo Hollow Hilyard Street Market, 1698 Hilyard Jones Market, 347 West 13th Avenue Lawrence Street Grocery, 395 West 11th Littl~'s Market, 544 East 13th Avenue Mayfair Market #402, 2175 West 7th Avenue " " 408, IS Coburg Roa<;l . " " 418, 57 West 29th Avenue McKay's Market, 2101 Bailey Hill Road " " 1960 Franklin Boulevard " "2021 River Road Mom & Pop Market, 2920 West 11th Avenue Northwest Wine & Cheese, 767 Wi1lamette One O'Clock Market, 698 West 6th Avenue Porter's Foods. 125 West 11th Avenue Safeway Store #234, 849 West 6th Avenue " " 288, 145 East 18th Avenue " " 319, 2060 River Road " " 320, 1500 Coburg Road " " 338. 1156 Highway 99N " " 513, 40th and Donald Serv-U-Market, 5045 Barger Drive 17th & Lincoln Market, 295 West 17th Avenue 5/12/75 - 21 2<0<0 Package Store (PS) (Continued) _ Tom's Market, 1490 East 19th Avenue 24 Hour Market, 2750 Roosevelt Boulevard Warehouse Foods Stores, 2101 West 11th Avenue Wi11akenzie Market, 1645 Coburg Road Ye Olde Wine Shop, 260 Valley River Center - Restaurant (R) - The Bavarian, 444 East 3rd Avenue Excelsior Cafe, 754 East 13th Avenue Lou & Ev's Cafe, 1295 Highway 99N Pizza Aurelio, 2890 Willamette Rico's Red Lion, 1795 West 6th Avenue Spaghetti Warehouse, 725 West 1st Avenue Tino's Spaghetti House, 1491 Willamette Class A Dispensers (DA) - Allisons' Coffee Shop, 1166 Highway 99N Bev's Steak House, 1905 West 6th Avenue Bnss' Steak Ranch, 2891 West 11th Avenue Branding Iron, 579 East Broadway Ed's Pit Barbecue & Hunter Room, 959 Pearl Street George's Restaurant, 1224 Wi11amette Holiday Inn, 225 Coburg Road Seymour's Cafe and Riviera Room, 996 Wi1lamette Veterans Memorial Association, 1626 Wil1amette Villa Roma Restaurant, 440 Coburg Road C Dispensers (1000 or more members) - Eagles, 525 Willamette Elk's Club, 2727 Centennial Renewal and Corporate Name Change - Fir Acres Market, 1390 Fir Acres Drive Campus Grocery Cart, 304 East 13th Package Store (PS) - Grocery Carts, ~Inc. ~Bill M~Cabe Change of Ownership -'McKay's Markets (formerly Shoppers Market) Highway 99N at Four Corners - Package Store (PS) -- Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to recommend approval of the applications. Motion carried unanimously, Mrs. Beal not present. VI - Ordinances Council Bill No. 832 - Levying assessments for paving alley between Willamette Street and Oak Street from 13th Avenue to 14th Avenue (74-47), read the first time April 28, 1975 and referred to May 5, 1975 panel hearing, was read the second time by council bill number and title only, there being no council member pre- sent requesting that it be read in full, and no protests or requests for hearing. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17354. Mrs. Beal not present. Council Bill No. 834 - Amending Section 8.200 of city code re: Fireworks was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be con- sidered at ,this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. i1a- .. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passaged Rollcall vote. All councll members present voting aye, Lhe bill was declared pa~sed an 5/12/75 - 22 numbered 17355. Mrs. Beal not present. 2~7 . Council Bill No. 835 - Amending Sections 5.220, 5.225, 5.235 and repealing Section . 5.240 re: Parking regulations was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller 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. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only, Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17356, Mrs. Beal not present. Gbuncil Bill No. 836 - Calling hearing June 23, 1975 re: Vacation of utility easement on west side of Sunshine Acres Road from Dapple Way to Sunshine Acres Drive was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council members present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller 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. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17357~ Mrs. Beal not present. e Council Bill No. 837 - Providing for Housing and Community Development Commission was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller 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. Councilman Haws wondered if it was really desirable to have two members from the Council, Planning Commission, and Renewal Agency on the Commission. He thought perhaps one from each agency would be sufficient, noting the present demand on their time. Councilman Murray said the Task Force thought the Commission would be dealing with sensitive and important projects and that the Council should maintain a close relationship. For that reason it was set up for two members from each agency. Furthermore, he said, it was really more or less a continuation of the Joint Housing Committee which now had two members from the Council participating so there wasn't too much change anticipated. Councilman Williams echoed those comments. He thought involvement of Council members was important to maintain credibility in dealing with a new program and new funds. Some readjustment in the future might be appropriate, he said, but he wasn't too concerned about the time commitment at this stage. ** See page 25** Vote was taken on second reading. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read th~ second time by council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and e numbered 17358 f . Mrs. Beal not present Council Bill No. 838 - Calling election on June 17, 1975 re: 1975-76 City budget and 1975-76 Downtown Development District Budget was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. 2.<ce 5/12/75 - 23 Mr. Murr~y moved second by Mr. Keller that tne bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of tne Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by . council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members .present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17359, Mrs. Beal not present. Council Bill No. 839 - Amending Ordinances 16553,16554,16555,16714,16748,16753, 16754,16877;16878,16891,16911,16937,16968,17162,17164, .17165,17166,17167 re: Land Use was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Coun~i1, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time.py council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered l7360~ Mrs. Beal not present. Council Bill No. 840 - Paving alley between Wi11amette Street and Oak Street from 26th Avenue to the south was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by.Mr. Keller 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. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17361, Mrs. Beal not present. Council Bill No. 841 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving alley between Willamette Street and Oak Street from 26th Avenue to the south was read by council bil Lmumber and title only, there being no council member present "requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Murray moved second by"Mr. Keller 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. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17362, Mrs. Beal not present. VII - Resolutions Resolution No. 2396 - Amending Resolution 2373 re: Negotiation and condemnation for Barger Drive right-of-way (change in road alignment) was 4IIt read by number and title. Councilman Williams asked if people on Barger Drive had been apprised of the change this resolution contemplated. He wondered if it could await the outcome of the scheduled 5/12/75 - 24 . z ...." tit May 19 public hearing dealing with the general area of this improvement. Don Allen, public works. director, said that the change was made public in conunittee-of-the- whole session, that reappraisals would have to be made and renegotiations started. How- ever, the property owners had not specifically been notified that this would be considered at this meeting. Assistant Manager added that time restraints on condemnation activities necessitated prompt action to avoid any major problems in proceeding with the improvement. Mr. Allen said that under this condemnation procedure as much as a 90-day lead time was necessary and that was important when considering the construction season in which to work. In response to Councilman Williams, Assistant Manager said adoption of this resolution now would not take from those people affected any right of legal redress nor would it treat them improperly in any way. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. Resolution No. 2397 - Authorizing ballot measures on June 17, 1975 election re: Exceeding 6% limitation by $3,564,474 for city budget, and $134,000 for Downtown Development District budget was read by number and title. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to adopt the resolution. Motioncartied unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal no present. Resolution No. 2398 - Appointing city manager effective July 14, 1975 was read by number and title. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. e' Resolution No. 2399 -Authorizing payment of bills, claims, and progress payments for period April 28 through May 12, 1975 was read by number and title. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously on rollcall vote, Mrs. Beal not present. Council\'ias reminded by Assistant Manager'.of meeting to review Housing and Community Development applications on June 2, and of the adjourned meeting for May on Tuesday, the 27th, because of the Memorial Day holiday on the usual meeting night. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried the meeting was adjourned to Monday, May 19, 1975. ~rIi1t A. K. Martin Asst. City Manager .e **Assistant Manager suggested that applications for membership on the Housing and Com- munity Development Commission would be accepted at the manager's office through May 30 for Council review on June 2. Appointment then could be made at the June 9 Council meeting. There were no objections.** 270 5/12/75 - 25