HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/09/1975 Meeting
-
M I NUT E S
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
,June 9,1975
Regular meeting of the
Council President Neil
in the Council Chamber
Williams, Ray Bradley,
Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by
Murray in the absence of Mayor Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on June 9,1975
with other Council members present: Gus Keller, Wickes Beal, Tom
D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, and Edna Shirey.
I - Public Hearings
A. 1975-76 Budget - $39,665,964
Assistant Manager explained that the budget at this meeting would be the subject of
public hearing only to get it into order for adoption at the June 23 Council meet-
ing. It was anticipated, he said, that the modifications proposed would not change
the estimated tax levy from that for 1974-75.
Gary Long, acting city manager, explained the changes made in the budget since
budget committee consideration - appropriation to Library capital improvement to
restore funds appropriated in the previous year but not carried over, funds trans-
ferred from the sewer utility fund to finance parking improvements at the airport,
and other modifications consisting of only bookkeeping transactions.
Public hearing was opened.
I-A-l
Torn Hoyt, 460 Palomino Drive, explained that because of his interest in the business
tax recently proposed, he was prompted to review the city's budget proposals. As
a result, he was asked to organize a group representing the business community [he
explained he was not speaking for the Chamber of Commerce or any special business
interests] to review the 1974-75 city budget to become familiar with the budgeting
process. The intent was to inform the group with the hope they could make proposals
that might result in increasing the productivity of city employes or eliminate non-
essential programs, the primary objective being to assist the city from the business-
man's point of view. With review of the prior year's budget as background, he said,
the group attended 1975-76 budget committee meetings. Since they experienced the
same frustrations experienced by the budget committee, they were not able to make
any specific recommendations with regard to this budget, but after spending as much
time as they were able as unpaid public participants, they did have some suggestions.
e
.e
Mr. Hoyt said they found it imperative for the citizen to become informed in order
to present constructive criticism. There was consensus that the present budget
process needed changing, recognizing there were plans at this time for discussions
with the new city manager. upon his arrival to determine how to improve the process
and provide for greater input from the elected representatives. He said another
suggestion was careful consideration of the impact of new programs before they were
initially authorized, an evaluation of priorities with existing programs and impact
on future budgets in competition for tax dollars. He cited the $73,000 appropriation
in the present budget for neighborhood associations. He liked the concept and en-
dorsed the associations' contributions to city government, but he thought the associa-
tion memberships themselves could easily absorb some of the costs of such things as
the printing and mailing of newsletters now being financed by taxes. A third sug-
gestion was for consideration of putting out to private bid some of the services
now provided by city employes. He cited the parks department improvement in
"maintenance-per-man-hourtl figures and thought that pointed out that producitivity
in the past had not been at maximum. He said putting maintenance of certain parks
on specifications as a bsis for bids by private enterprise could benefit the tax-
payers.
Mr. Hoyt continued that after review of the budget process he was convinced the
taxpayes were at the mercy of the manager's office and city staff, and although he
felt an admirable job was being done, that still would not reduce the present con-
cern about development and adoption of future budgets.
6/9/75 - 1
.1>03
Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony.
Gary Long submitted figures on the changes in appropriations - $6,000 restored
to the Library capital improvement fund; $115,000 transferred to airport parking
facility; plus other transactions of a bookkeeping nature including $6,801, city's
share of financing improvements to the street abutting Echo Hollow Pool. He added
that in mutual agreement with its employes, the city was pursuing issues of pro-
ductivity, that this was about the only area where cost cutting could be achieved
given present inflationary pressures. Assistant Manager explained that the
"maintenance-per-man-hour" figures did not reflect maintenance required on unim-
proved park lands where there was the majority of park uses.
.e
Councilman Keller asked Mr. Hoyt if the work of his task force was now completed or
whether it would continue through the next budgeting process. Mr. Hoyt answered
that the committee would remain available and delighted to work with the city staff
in trying to improve the budgeting process. Their work in the future, he said, would
probably depend on requests made to them. He reiterated concerns about difficulty
of analyzing the budget upon its final presentation, that perhaps it should be
examined in two categories - budgeted items for existing city services and programs,
and evaluation of recommendations for new programs.
It was understood no action was required at thistime, that a budget
ordinance would be brought to the June 23. 1975 Council meeting for
adoption.
B. Annexation of area on north side of Capital Drive, east of Spring Drive and
Cresta de Ruta (Vance) (A 75-4)
.
Planning Commission on May 12, 1975 recommended approval. Copies of map of :
the area were previously distributed to Council members.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to schedule public hearing
on the annexation at the June 9 Council meeting. Motion carried
unanimously.
Comm
6/4/75
Pub Hrng
--
Assistant Manager explained that the area proposed for annexation covered
less than a quarter of an acre, enough for a.single building site.
Public hearing was held with no testimony presented.
Resolution No. 2407 - Transmitting to Boundary Commission recommendation
for annexation of area on north side of Capital Drive,
east of Spring Drive and Cresta de Ruta was read by number and title.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Hamel to adopt the resolution. Motion
carried unanimously.
C. Bids
~ublic Works Improvement Projects (opened May 28, 1975)
.:-\~~I':':';!'l.~
H::,:,,:- of BiJ.d~r ,an.: Project
Contract Cost
Cos t to
Abutting Prop.
Cos t to City
Budgeted
ALLEY PAVIr;G:
1. Eet\1een 15th Ave. 2. 16th Ave. from Hi1.l'ard St.
to Alder Street (1047)
1. \/alt's Concrete Company......................$ 12,055.90.............. ..... ....... .$0.7306/HFF.... ....................0
2. Shur-Way Contractors, Inc....................$ 12,659.55 + $0.0048/WSF
3. Co~crete Unlimited, Inc......................$ 13,605.27 Drives..$1.28/SF
4. \lildish Construction Company.................$ 13,970.18
COMPLETION DATE: August 1,1975
e'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6/9/75 - 2
'30.4--
..~;"".~;:~.:-
Co;t LO
Ab~~~p.t: .::~.'~;~:_ _ __,_._ ._._____._.__~_~_..::~.. .~C.:... ~_::___~',; .:.(~~~
e<
.~ ~,~ '.' r
~. :-,~ l -..:'; t.
C0,.cr:!ct CO~;:
2. Bet'.'een Pe3"1 St. & Hi~h St. from
14th :"ve. to 15th Ave. (1098)
1. \:a~ t's Concrete Co:rpany......................$ 9.726.65.............. .North 1/2.. .$0. 7500/HFF.............. .Oeferred.. .5832.00...........0
2. Shur-\.iay Contra~tors. Inc.................... $ 10.507.33 + $0.004600/\lSF
3. Concrl'te Un1 imited. Ine......................$ 11.113.65 South 1/2.. .$0. 7500/\JFF
4. \Iildish Constrli~tior. Company.................$ 11.563.95 + $0.006767/WSF
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
COMPLETION OATE: August 1. 1375
3. Between ~th Ave. & 5th Ave. from
IJashington St. to L~~lrence St. (1097)
1. i,a1 t' s Concrele Company......................$ 9.339.20......................... ..$0.8123/\JFF........................0
2. Shur-l!ay Contractors. Inc....................S 10.322.05 + $O.005439/\ISF
3. Concrete Unlimited. Ir.c......................$ 10.775.55 A.C. Drives..$1.28/Sq. Ft.
4. l-!i1dish Construction Company.................$ 11.095.94 COi1PLETlO:l DATE: August 1.1975
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
STREET \nDElm:G AND STORt1 SEllER:
4. Intersection of 2gth Avenue & Uillilmette
Street (859)
Lane County
1. Eugene Sand & Gravel. Inc....................$ 93.538.00.......................... .$46.769.00.................... .$45.769.0G......... .$50.500.00
2. \lildish Construction Company.................$107.986.75
3. Shur-\lily Contractors. Inc....................$1l3,717.55
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
COMPLETION DATE: Sept~ber 15. 1975
?SYI:.S:
5. aa1fo~r Street from roontrea1 Ave. to
l~O' ~orth ana 100' South (273)
AL TER~IATE BIO
BASIC BIO
L Eugene Sand" Gravel. Inc..............$ 9.291.95......tlo Bid.............28' P $19
2. Benge Paving. Inc......................$ 9.372.89......$ 9.625.48 5" av.....:........ .00/FF..........$470.00.....................D
Conc. Drlveway...$ 1.15/Sq. Ft.
3. \l1ldisn Construction Conpany...........$ 9.632.05......$ 9.946.D5
.4. Shur-(!ay Centl'actors. Inc..............$ 9.864.70......No Bld
--------------------------_______________________________________ CONPLETION DATE: August 1. 1975
,,'I !riG A!:O PEO<:STB.!.AN IIA Y: n_ _n __hn__h__n_ _n____n____n ----- n u__ --- -_ __ __ _n_ n _ _ ___ _ __ ____ __ _ _ _ __ __n
E. ~ithin D~pp1e ~ay Subdivision (1144)
L \lildish Construction Ccm~any...........$
2. Beng" Paving, Inc......................$
3. Ecg;'le Sand & Gravel. Inc..............$
4. Shur-Hay Contractors. Ine..............$
6.503.54......$ 6.860.49.. ......35' Radius Cul-de-Sac..$ 30.00/FF..... .....0
7.087.96......$ 7.111.78 Pedestrian Hay. ...... ..$417.50/Lot
7.130.00......No Bid
7.260.48......No 8id
COMPLETION DATE: Auiust 1, 1975
--------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
P.;-..;~:;s t..\'J Sr:,~jr7A?~r.~:LR:
7. 5Jring BlvG. frcm I;. Shasta loop to
OC0' S.E. of II. Shasta LC0p; sanitary
E~_er tc serve an areil btn N. Shasta Loop
and 5eO' So~th of N. Shasta Loop & between
S~rir.; Blvd. iln1 160' E. of Spring Blvd. (le91)
Deferred
1. l.iildisil ConEtruction Company...........$ 17.133.04......$ 16.2/.7.81....... .36' Pav..............$ 19.75/FF..... .Pav. (36'-20')..51.6.;.:.0,:.......0
2. Benge Paving. Inc......................$ 18.556.13......$ 17.864.52 28' Pav..............$16.00/FF
3. Eu~ene Sand'. Gravel. Inc............../:o Bid...........$ 18.054.65 San. Lat.............$ 0.045/SF
4. Shur-~iay Contractors. Inc..............r:o Bid...........$ 18.235.50 San. Serv.(3}....... $172.00/Ea.
COI.:PLETIm: DATE: August 1.1975
?AVi':G.. SM;iTARY sn:ER Arm STORt.' Sn!ER:
3. \.!i:hin Scuza Park Subdivision; and Sanitary
Se..,er ,./;tJdn 150' of a line extended south
6[0' fr~~ the S.E. corner of Souza Park. thence
\leEt 6';~ ft. to Danebo St. (985)
I.
AL TERNATE BID
BASIC BIO
STOR:.! SEHER
1.
2.
3.
4.
~:
"7.
\,ick BrJs.................................$ 99.997.74......No Bid............36'
~Ji1dish Construction Compuny............. .$104.603.55..... .$106.753.55
Eugfne Sand & Gravel. Inc............... ..$114.000..13.... ..No Bid
Call O. Allsup. Contractor Inc.............$116.40B.59......NO Bid
Benge Paving. Inc........................ .$123.445.07.... ..$121.801.13
K~r.r,~th R. Bostick Construction Company...$128.010.04......No Bid
Ourbin Cunstruction Company...............$136.727.53......No Bid
Pav.....$ 19.00/FF............ .57.900.00......... .$11.510.00
or.....$1.650.00/Lot
San. Lat....$ 450.00/Lot
and.....$ 0.D52/Sq.Ft.(outside Sub)
San. Serv...$ 134.00/Ea.
Stm. Sewer..$ 751.00/Lot
COMPLETION DATE: September 1. 1975
6/9/75 - 3
~05
S,L';',:IT.<3,RY SEj,:ER:
1. Norm Green & Sons........................$
2. Shur-14ay Contractors, Inc................$
3. liildish Construction Company.............$
4. L. D. Van Over Construction, Inc.........$
5. Kenneth R. Bos'tick Construction Company..$
6. Dan D. Allsup; Contractor Inc............$
4,741.00...................... ..San. Lat....$ 0.088/Sq. Ft...........O
5,155.70
5,276.20
5,764.00
6,021.00
6,542.00
_____________________________________________________ CONPLETION DATE: August 15, 1975
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
I
9. Along the south boundary of Senger Park
betvieen r:orv;ood Street and Gilham Road (1093)
Don Allen, public works director, reviewed the bids. Contract award was recom-
mended to the low bidder on each of the projects.
Public hearing was opened.
Frances Barkan, 68 West 25th Avenue, speaking for the Friendly Area Neighbors.
said they were never informed of the proposed improvement of the 29th and
Willamette intersection, that although plans for the project had been requested
they had never been received. She said the group wished to be informed of any.
proposed projects regardless of how long they had been under consideration. The
group also wanted appropriate studies on any street widening project to assure the
proposed construction would accomplish the intended purpose.
I-A-2
John Massoglia, 47-1/2 West 25th Avenue, transportation committee co-ordinator
for the Friendly Area Neighbors, also noted that plans on the project, although
promised to be sent to the group, had never been received. He felt public input
had been inadequate not only on the 29th and Willamette project but on the entire
south Willamette traffic problem. He asked delay of the project until there was
time for that public input.
Richard Higgins, 70 West 24th Avenue, thought the proposed widening of the inter-
section would only add to the noise at that location. He further thought the
widening was made necessary by development in the south hills and asked if the
city was moving toward construction of a freeway in terms of making Willamette an
arterial type street for its entire length to accommodate further projectedd~elop-
ment to the south.
e
I-A-3
Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony.
Assitant Manager read letters received from Crest Drive Citizens Association and
from Friendly Area Neighbors, both asking for delay in the project to afford
opportunity to obtain more in~ormation and to consider the long-range effect of
the improvement as well as to provide for more public input. In response to some
of the concerns expressed, he said this project had been under discussion each
time there was a major development in the southern part of the city and that the
improvement was designed to increase the safety at that intersection in handling
the present traffic loads as well as those projected within the 1990 Plan. He
noted county funds would be granted if used by October 1974 and said there was an
extension of that deadline to July I of this year when right-of-way negotiations
took longer than anticipated. Also, this project was given high priority in the
list of street improvements covered bya successful bond issue election and strongly
supported by the Council and the community. He added that the budget committee had
appropriated funds for the project for several years.
Mr. Allen took special note of public hearing held at the time the bond issue was
considered and said that the 29th and Willamette project was one of those on the
list of projects covered at that time. He explained that the main effect of the .~.
improvement was one of traffic safety, installation of left-turn lanes. There had ...
been quite a bit of contact with owners of adjacent properties in right-of-way
6/9/75 - 4
~.OCo
--
negotiations and the project was part of the city's capital outlay program, re-
vised several times, with completion scheduled for October 1974 under agreement
with the county. Extension of that deadline to July I was given by the county
with the understanding there would be no more extensions, since other cities in the
county needed the county money provided for in the agreement if Eugene would not be
using it. Mr. Allen further explained the problem of trying to project the highest
capacity of this intersection without the ESATS work being finalized. However,
he considered the improvement very important to the community because of the number
of accidents at that intersection and its being a continual source of complaints.
He thought the proposed improvement would withstand ESATS finalization and that it
should proceed. In response to Councilmen Haws and Murray, he said there had been
44 accidents investigated within the intersection in the last two years, 19 of
which involved injuries - many others were not investigated - and that the inter-
section had been one of the top ten most accident prone intersections in the city
for the last three years.
Councilwoman Beal wondered what would be accomplished by delaying the project.
Councilman Murray said his understanding was that those people expressing concerns
felt more public input was needed before a decision was made whether to proceed.
Ms. Barkan said that people traveling through that intersection, although realizing
it was crowded and not the safest in the city, felt they should be convinced by
actual figures that the proposed improvement was really needed. She said the
Friendly Area Neighbors in considering their refinement plan would like to see if
the widening really would accomplish anything. They were wondering how people far-
ther south on Willamette would react if in a sense a freeway was being created,
what percentage of accidents occurred on weekends, whether they were caused by
"kids traveling the gut," etc.
e
Councilman Keller said the main concern of most cItIzens living beyond that inter-
section was the safety factor. He noted the project had been proposed for longer
than the neighborhood group had been in existence and that it was part of the plan-
ning program. Delay would be rather costly, he thought, if the county funds were
lost, and he thought the project should proceed because of the accident record,
that it was unsafe not only for autos but for bikes and pedestrians as well.
Councilman Bradley asked if the public hearing on the bond issue was the only hear-
ing on this project. Mr. Allen answered that that was a "called" public hearing.
he project was initiated in a Council meeting, an open public meeting, even though
not specifically designated as a public hearing. Assistant Manager added that the
project did appear in ballot materials distributed to voters at time the bond issue
was voted on and that it ~as the subject of considerable deliberation in budget
committee meetings. The normal public hearing on a project of this kind is this
one, held at the time of contract award.
Councilman Bradley thought a policy issue was involved, that there should be the
same public hearing process when only city funds were used as when federal money
was involved. He suggested revamping the procedure to provide for public hearing
before a decision is made on contract award in order to have public input prior
to that time. He felt the safety factor had to be weighed against the question of
public input in making a decision that would have far-reaching consequences in
development of the southern part of the city. He said he would favor postponing
the project for public input in order to make an intelligent decision.
-
Councilman Williams said that in his five years on the Council there was no traffic
area in the city that had been discussed more than the 29th and Willamette inter-
section. Council had looked at it on tour many times and discussed its potential
in terms of traffic beyond that intersection and in planning development in the
south hills area. He said the fact that improvement of that intersection had not
6/9/75 - 5
..
''3"07
come to the specific attention of all neighboring partICIpants did not mean that
there hadn't been repeated public discussion and that its impact on the community ...
had not been through the public process. He commented on the danger involved in ,.,
driving the intersection and said he felt strongly that it should be improved.
Councilwoman Shirey thought a better process should be provided to bring all im-
provement projects to the attention of all those interested so they could be
heard. She felt the citizens were trying to express their concern about projects
that were occurring and she definitely wanted public input. She wondered how the
time element would be affected should there be postponement at this meeting to
give opportunity to work with those people wanting to be heard.
Assitant Manager said if the Council wanted to review the project with the neigh-
borhood, presenting drawings, showing amount of right-of-way acquired to provide
for left-turn lanes, etc., the matter could be postponed to the June 23 Council
meeting without losing the county funds. However, if the idea was to postpone
for the purpose of possible redesign or modification of the project, that would be
impossible in a two-week period given the work load in the public works department.
He thought there would be increasing degradation of the neighborhood if the inter-
section was not improved, that traffic would be seeking alternate routes thereby
increasing travel on side streets. He recalled that several months ago hearings
were suggested beyond those legally required and it was his understanding at that
time that the Council did not wish to pursue that other than this hearing when
contract for the work was awarded.
Assistant Manager continued that staff finds itself in a dilemma trying to develop
criteria for the types of projects to be taken to the neighborhood associations
until it becomes a technical question of deciding one intersection over another.
He said that right-of-way was already acquired for this improvement at a compara-
tively high cost to deal with a traffic problem as it exists. The project does ~
not anticipate any improvement farther south on Willamette. It is the tag end .
of a process, he said, which has been under study for some time and to which the
Council and budget committee made commitment.
In response to Councilwoman Shirey, Assistant Manager said the cost of the project
had been reduced by about $60,000 to $80,000 since it was first brought to the
Council because of redesign and reduction in the amount of right-of-way required.
Councilman Hamel felt most of the complaints were from people living north of 29th
in the Friendly area. There were people living in the area longer than five or
ten years who were not objecting, he said, and he thought a vote should be cast on
the contract award.
Councilman Murray stated his understanding that notification of this project did
not go to the neighborhood area not because of the nature of the project but because
of timing of recognition of the group. Assistant Manager answered that there was
obligation to inform neighborhoods of new installations. In this case, it was up-
grading an existing intersection only - introducing left-turn lanes, upgraind
signalization, and generally trying to improve aesthetics by reducing the number
of street light poles. So staff felt the nature of the change did not require
neighborhood notification.
Councilwoman Shirey wondered if it would be possible to notify groups of these types
of projects and let them decide whether they want to become involved. And she asked
those present objecting to the project whether they wanted only clarification of
the project that could be accomplished in two weeks, or if they wanted complete iIIl.. .
postponement in order to conduct studies and further hearings. Assistant Manager ~
said it would be difficult to decide on which project to give notification. In-
formation is given to neighborhoods from the public works department so there can
6/9/75 - 6
~o&
-
be some general feel whether review and comment is all that is wanted, or whether
they will ask for public hearings. In this instance, staff was unaware of any
major concern until the last two or three weeks and then it was not opposition so
much as request for information. Mr. Massoglia said he did have copies of blue-
prints of the project and that his group was asking for postponement of the project
itself, not just time for review and clarification.
Councilman Bradley asked how great the administrative burden would be if neighbor-
hood associations were to be informed of every project planned or designed.
Assistant Manager couldn't say other than it would delay projects a month or six
weeks to give people response time after notifications were sent out. It really
depended upon the type of project and would take some work with the Council to de-
termine the types of projects on which notice to neighborhoods was wanted. A
genuine effort had been made, he said, to assess the magnitude of this project as
to need of the neighborhood to know - it takes time and time is money when dealing
with many groups. Councilman Murray added that not everyone wanted to know about
every project, that it could lead to an inundation of reams of material most of
which would be irrelevant.
I-B-l
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to award contract to the low
bidders on each of the projects, excluding 29th and Willamette inter-
section (Item 4). Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all council members
present voting aye, except Councilman Bradley voting no.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that contract be awarded to
the low bidder on the 29th and Willamette intersection (Item 4).
e
Mr. Bradley moved second by Mrs. Shirey that the Council adopt the
resolution submitted by the Friendly Area Neighbors, that contract
award on Item 4 be postponed until the June 23 Council meeting, and
that staff be instructed to contact Lane County for extension of
time on county funds for the project.
Councilman Bradley thought public policy was involved and that the integrity of the
neighborhood group process needed protection. He didn't think it had been adequately
demonstrated so far as this project was concerned that the neighborhood association
process had been followed. Postponement to the June 23 Council meeting, he said,
would give opportunity for others to come before the Council. Further, he felt the
process needed changing if the decision making policy was to be decentralized.
Councilman Keller said his understanding was that those objecting wanted the project
postponed considerably longer than two weeks, and postponing the decision at this
time would really be evading the question. The project was not something that had
just come before the Council, he said. And it was not a case of not allowing input,
rather it was a case of the project's having more longevity than the neighborhood
group.
Councilwoman Shirey wondered what would happen if the issue was postponed two weeks
and then it was discovered the county funds would not be made available. Mr. Bradley
said he included contact with the county to the motion so that information would
be available at the June 23 meeting whether the county would allow further exten~
sion should a longer delay be decided upon.
e
Councilwoman Beal asked if there would be a chance of losing the county money if
the item was postponed to June 23. Assistant Manager referred to Public Works
Director's report that the county had given one extension with the understanding
there would be no more because other communities in the county could use the funds.
Whether further extension would be granted would be the county's decision. Mr.Allen
said county had given no assurance of when those funds would be used. He felt more
6/9/75 - 7
309
than just public work staff was involved in this problem, that there should be
opportunity to explain how performance of the process with neighbohrood groups
was beihg carried out.
.
Discussion between Councilman Haws and Assistant Manager brought out again that
the deadline set by the county on use of its funds was July 1, and that postpone-
ment at this time would be to the June 23 Council meeting. Mr. Allen explained
that more than the county funds were involved in the July I deadline - signal
equipment had to be purchased before that time. He made it clear that there was
no chance of getting another extension on county funds, the county has said that
if this project was not under contract by July 1 the money would go to some other
agency. Assistant Manager repeated that there was no way the nature of this
project would change in two weeks.
Councilman Bradley didn't like putting a price tag of some $46,000 on whether the
city was going to listen to neighborhood associations. He thought it better to
let the county give the money to some other city in Lane County and for the city
to go ahead with its responsibility and relationship with the neighborhood associa-
tions.
Vote was taken on the motion to postpone action for two weeks. Motion
defeated - Councilman Bradley voting aye; all'lother council member.s
present voting no.
Vote was taken on the main motion to award contract on 29th and
Willamette intersection improvement to the low bidder. Rollcall vote.
Motion carried, all council members present voting aye, except Council-
man Bradley voting no.
2. Parks Department Projects (opened June 5, 1975)
e
Irrigation at Cal Young & Meadowlark Schools:
*Ramsey-Waite Co., Inc. $15,327
JDB Irrigation & Landscaping $16,146
Wi1lamette Cascade Irrigation Co. $15,600
Fairway Irrigation Co. $16.200
Turf Irrigation Co., Inc. $15,971
Office estimate $24,500
Irrigation at Bailey Hill School:
*Wil1amette Cascade Irrigation Co. $ 6,650
Ramsey-Waite Co., Inc. $ 8,368
Fairway Irrigation $ 7,860
AIC Bike Path at Meadowlark School & Cross Country Track at Crest Drive
School:
*Benge Paving
Wi 1 dish Cons tructi on Co.
Eugene Sand & Gravel Co.
Office Estimate
$5.482
$6.296
$7.710
$6,525
Storm Sewer Systems at Harris &
*Norm Green & Sons
Shur-Way
Wi1dish Cunstruction Co.
Bostic Construction Co.
Office Estimate
Spencer Butte Schools:
$11,028.75
$12,303.50
$11,342.70
$11,356.00
$14,200.00
.
6/9/75 - 8
~,O.
e
II -
e
-
Staff recommended contract award to the low bidder on each project.
Public hearing was held with no testimony presented.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to award contracts
to the low bidder on each project. Rollcall vote, Motion
carried, all council members present voting aye, except
Councilman Bradley abstaining.
Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items if requested.
Previously discussed in committee on May 28 (Present: Mayor Anderson; Council members
Murray, Keller, Beal, Williams, Bradley, Hamel, Haws, and Shirey) and June 4, 1976
(Present: Mayor Anderson (arrived later); Council members Murray (presiding until
Mayor's arrival, Keller, Beal, Hamel, Haws, and Shirey). Minutes of those meetings
appear below printed in italics.
A. Appointments to the Housing and Community Development Commission - Mr. Murray
said that, with regard to appointments to the Housing and Community Development
Commission, he and Mr. Williams would request appointment as the two Council
representatives, since they were on the or.iqinal Community Development Task
Force. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Murray to confirm the appointments.
Mr. Bradley asked if the Council representatives should be required to go
through interviews. Mayor Anderson explained that Council members' time is
thinly spread, with activities hopefully distributed among all the members,
and that if Council members request an appointment or desire to take on a
responsibility the Council has made every effort to accommodate them.
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously.
B. Eugene Renewal Agency Board Appointments - Mayor Anderson said he talked with
Mr. Frank Shearer and Mr. iialJ.y Swanson, who have agreed to serve on the ERA
Committee. They were both on the orig.inal Agency committee, and it was Mayor
Anderson's recommendation they be reappointed.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Williams to reappo.int Mr. Shearer
and Mr. Swanson. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
C. Roving Wrecker's License - Cleo Wiggett - Mr. Martin said an application had
been presented by Mr. Cleo Wiggett for a roving wrecker's license. The State
requires Council review, and the staff finds it in order.
It was moved and secbnded to approve the license. Motion carried
unanimously.
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
At Mr. Martin's suggestion, Council agreed to release it to ft1r. Wiggett
i~nediately to enable him to carryon his work.
D.Request of Library Board to Spend up to $3500 from Operating Contingencies for
Librarian Recruitment
The Library Board has requested contingency funds to cover expenses involved in
bringing candidates for Librarian to Eugene to be interviewed.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve up to $3500.
Motion carried unanimously.
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
E.Air Quality in Basement of City Hall - At this time Hr. Martin introduced other
matters which would involve use of the contingency fund. He said that two years
ago offices were constructed in the City Hall basement. In the course of doing
that, it was discovered the air quality in the basement was not up to standards.
Research has been done and it is felt that the most economical solution is to
6/9/75 - 9
3\\
install a charcoal filt~r in the mechanical equipment at a cost of $3200-$3600.
This purchase is desirable now since summer months will intensify air
deterioration. Mr. Martin also explained that, by spending $2960 to install
some special roof-mounted air intake fans, energy costs at City Hall can
significantly be reduced within two years. Mayor Anderson mused that, in light
of the Council's concern for air quality, he would defy anyone to vote against
these suggestions.
Mr. Hamel moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the purchase of a
charcoal filter and special roof-mounted air intake fans for installation
at City Hall to improve the air quality in the basement and reduce
energy costs. Motion carried unanimously.
A question was raised about the use of a precipitator and Technology Coordinator
Greg Page said the problem involves hydrocarbons rather than particulate
matter, which is what an electrostatic precipitator would remove. In answer
to Mrs. Beal, Mr. Page said the source of the hydrocarbons is probably car
exhaust as the basement air intake is at approximately the same level as the
mufflers on cars traveling 7th Street.
F. Request of Valley River Inn to Connect Proposed Addition to the City Sewe~. - The
request was presented in the form of a letter and distributed to Council members
with their agendas. The request was to allow Valley River Inn to proceed
without waiting for legal annexation processes to go through. If the request
is approved, the City could delay annexation until after construction or annex
~and be responsible for inspection. In answer to Mr. Williams' suggestion to
explain the tax base as it is affected by annexation, Mr. Martin said State law
provides that, when an area is annexed to the City and the City's tax rate is
applied to the value, that portion of the value of the annexation falling
within the 6% limitation may be added to the City's tax base. The choices are
annex land wi th improvements and reap the benefi t of an increase in the tax_- base,
which is the amount on which a levy can be based without a vote of the people,
or annex prior to improvements and not be able to have the tax base grow in
what will be subsequent improvements to the property.
Planning Director mentioned that, if clarification is desired, the Livingston
and Blaney study explains the differences. He said he would provide the City
Manager with the report. Mr. Bradley felt the City should annex first to have
the kinds of controls it desires. As an example, he referred to the Valley
River sign built 2 1/2 years ago. The sign would not conform to the city code
though it was known that the prope:r;ty was going to .be annexed. He does not
feel the impact on the tax base would be that great to not annex first. On the
matter of the sign, Mr. Martin mentioned that part of the expansion of Valley
River will be the removal of that sign. He then went on to explain that the
request at this point is to indicate to the County that Valley River Inn may
connect to the sewer. Annexation has already been recommended so there is
no need to ask the Inn to petition. The only real issue is if the Council
will expedite it.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to authorize Valley River
Inn's connection to the sewer.
Mrs. Beal wondered how often this has been done in the past, and Mr. Martin
answered there have been a number of instances in which this has been done.
Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously.
6/9/75 - 10
3)2.'
--
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
e
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
.
e
G. Proposed Modification to Commercial Solicitors License - i1 pTonosed ord.inance
was distributed with the agendas. It allows a commercial solicitor employer to
secure a "crew license" for employees covered by a single hond, as opposed to
taking out a 1.icense and bond on each. It is felt tiwt the single bond will
still preserve public safety and concerns as before. Mr. Martin said that, if
Council concurs wi th the proposal, the ordinance w_i11 be p1aced on next meeting's
agenda. Ms. Shirey expressed agreement with the proposal as long as it will be
safe and protect the consumer. Mr. Martin said it is projected to improve that.
In answer to Mr. Haws' question regarding the maximum $10,000 bond per employer
as noted in the proposed ordinance, Mr. Murray answered that amount appeared to
be adequate protection. It would cover damage claims resulting from goods
sold door to door on a commercial solicitation basis. It was added the
ordinance does not include non-profit organizations.
It was moved and seconded to put the proposed ordinance on the
agenda. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm
5/28/75
Approve
H.Liquor License Applications
Renewal: Papa's Pizza, 1700 W. 11 tho RMB
Greater Privilege: Porter's Foods Unlimited of Oregon, 125 W. 11th, Restricted
RMB & Wine
Change of Ownership:
Inc.) - PS
Renewals - 18th Avenue Market, 1684 W. 18th
Thrifty Drug & Discount Store #528, 1560 Co burg Rd.
Palace Market, 3225 Donald Street
Larry's Prime Rib, 2855 ivillamette
Hide-a-Way, 796 Hwy. 99N
Friendly Tavern, 1667 W. 6th Ave.
Grocery Carts, Inc. 603 W. 19th (formerly Fir Grove Market,
Corom
5/28/75
Approve
e
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the licenses.
Motion carried unanimously.
I. Segregation of Assessment: Property Located on East Side of Central Avenue
(Chrones) - $3,645.87
Mr. Martin advised the segregation is in order.
It was moved and seconded to approve the segregation. Motion
carried unanimously.
Corom
5/28/75
Approve
J. Improvement Petitions
1. Wi110na Park and Wi110n~ Drive: Paving, Sanitary & Storm Sewers - Over 84%
2. K & R Plat (Robin Avenue extension to west): Paving, Sanitary and Storm
Sewers - Over 63%
3. 2nd Avenue from West of Monroe to West of Adams Streets: Sanitary Sewer-42.2%
4. Ron Plat off City View south of 25th: Paving, Sanitary and Storm Sewers-68%
Staff recommended proceeding.
Mr. Hamel moved seconded by Mr. Keller to approve proceeding. Motion
carried unanimously.
Corom
5/28/75
Approve
.
K. Vacation of Easements - Requested by EWEB - Maps were distributed with agendas
showing the easements. Neither of the easements are any longer required by EWEB
and they have asked Council to proceed with vacation. Staff has no objections.
1. On Arthur Gilbert property east of Wi1lagillespie north of Country Club Road
2. On Normal Mills property south of McKenzie Highway west of Mill Creek Road
Mr. ~urray moved second by Mr. Hamel to call public hearing
on the vacations. Motion carried unanimously.
Corom
5/28/75
Approve
6/9/75 - 11
'3'3
L.City Hall Space Problems - A memo previously distributed to the Budget Committee
describing the present space crunch at City Hall was presented again: Staff
feels the efficiency is being impaired because of limited space. If the problem
is addressed, there are three alternatives: 1) build the tower on the north wing
of City Hall - requiring a $2.6 million bond issue; 2) acquire existing office
space; or 3) lease existing office space for estimated first year rent of $30,000.
All three ~lternatives have been studied and staff feels the 2nd proposal would
give a 5-year reprieve and thus some planning flexibility. Building the tower is
the most desirable option but that option is not realistic at this time as other
ballot measures take higher priority. Staff would recommend acquiring an existing
office building in downtown Eugene. Ms. Beal asked what happened to the possible
plan of leasing from the county when their building is finished. Mr. Martin
said the cost of leasing and difficulty in getting commitments were two factors
that ruled out the county building. Mr. Murray expressed that he continued to
be bothered about failing to make a real attempt to work something out with
regard to the armory. It is rIa building right there, conveniently located".
He feels that possibility has never been thoroughly explored. Mr. Martin responded
that one of the reasons the county does not want to discuss it is because of the
indecision regarding the jail and a possible site for it. The jail has to rank
No. 1 and the City does not want to cloud that issue. Mr. Keller agreed with Mr.
Murray's thoughts and felt the commissioners should be requested to discuss it
and provide input. Mr. Martin felt that waiting for input on the armory could
be to the City's disadvantage if the commissioners decide to delay any decision
on it until completion of the jail study. Mayor Anderson suggested going into
executive session to enable Council to more fully discuss the options.
Mr. Bradley wondered if thought had been given to decentralizing some of the City
functions. Mr. Martin said it was considered - primarily moving parks - but
"interrelationships do not let us do that very easily"'. In answer to Mrs.
Shirey's question regarding building of the tower, Mr. Martin said the;e would
be a 2 to 2 1/2 year lag between the time it is decided to build the tower and
when construction can be started. To start on the project now would be unwise
because the City would be looking at a $2.6 million bond issue - then 18 months
of construction. No bond issue is needed to purchase a building.
Mr. Martin asked that, as a condition for the press to remain in the Executive
Session, they be required not to divulge the building in question or property
values while negotiations are underway.
It was moved and seconded to go into Executive Session pursuant to
ORS 192.660(2) to consider staff's recommendation regarding
acquisition of property. Motion carried unanimously.
Action recommended in May 28, 1975 executive session was authorized.
Report was to be brought back on Armory building.
M.
Lane County Economic Development Association - Copies of proposal for creation of
an Economic Development Association and sample resolution endorsing the proposal
were previously distributed to Council members. Councilman Hamel reported on
the meeting called by Lane County Commissioners to explain the proposal for a
commission with the general objective of creating more jobs for citizens now
living in the County through economic diversification, stabilization of employ-
ment patterns, expansion of existing area industry, attraction of new business
and industry. He felt such a commission would benefit Eugene in that it could
. work toward spreading new industry throughout the County rather than concentrating
it in the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan area. The proposed membership would
comprise one member each from Lane County Commission; Eugene, Springfield, and
other city councils in the County; LCOG; and Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield
chambers of commerce.
6/9/75 - 12
~l4
--
.
Corom
5/28/75
Approve
.
e
Keith Martin, assistant city manager, explained the county-wide economic develop-
ment plan now in existence which would be the basis for receiving Federal grants.
The Federal grant sought by the County based on this plan was rejected because
funds would not be concentrated in urban areas. Hence, the proposal for the
Economic Development Association with participation of the cities to develop
implementation strategy. Recommendations would then be returned to the cities
for consideration. He explained that because of time restraints a preapplication
had been submitted to keep open option for receiving Federal money ($30,000,
$10,000 in-kind match from local agencies).
CouncllmanMurray questioned the meaning of one of the functions of the commission
listed - to correct or minimize negative factors associated with interaction of
prospective clients and community in locating new business or industry. He ex-
pressed concern that the commission would become a quasi-official body which would
find itself intervening between a public body and the public in terms of taking
an advocacy position toward location of an industry. Mr. Murray also expressed
concern about the proposed function "to encourage development of industrial sites
and parks." He felt that was a "big step" and somewhat inconsistent with com-
munity goals statements calling for reduction of industrial zoned land where the
living environment would be impaired. Mr. Martin answered that the proposal
was an attempt at addressing the question of the community's willingness to ac-
cept new industry and the results of that new industry - to determine the environ-
mental price of having new industry. He agreed that the commission could take
an advocacy position with the Council as does any other city commission - Human
Rights, MAPAC, Joint Parks, etc. Councilman Hamel noted that the commission
would be concerned with the entire County, not just Eugene itself.
Mayor Anderson interpreted the proposal as one which would contain future in-
dustrial development in parks such as that on the west side of Eugene rather
than having a scatteration of industry.
-
Mr. Murray said that in general he shared the interest in the objectives of creat-
ing more jobs and revitalizing the economy. However, he thought the proposal
seemed too narrow and too conclusional. The language seemed to place emphasis
on attracting new industry to the exclusion of other concerns, genuine assurances
of having clean industries should be spelled out. Councilman Keller said he read
the proposal as a "give and take" which was necessary if the community was to have
~ndustry for economic vitality and still have something compati/Jle with the city's
programs. Mr. Murray agreed but thought the statement of functions was not
balanced enough.
Assistant Manager noted that economic development for the metropolitan area under
the proposed grant would remain in control of the Eugene and Springfield councils
and be based on the plan developed for this area. It was separate from the pro-
posed commission and would not deal with county-wide issues. The proposed commis-
sion would provide a forum for bringing in new industry to be located throughout
the County where it would be compatible and control location as well as type of
industry. Mr. Murray recognized the difference but said the language of the pro-
posal should be more explicit about major concerns rather than relying on taking
care of those concerns at a later time. Mr. Martin suggested taking care of those
concerns by including them in the resolution endorsing the proposal. Mayor Anderson
thought the major thrust of any resolution which might be adopted should be toward
utilization of the existing labor pool so as not to cause a major influx of people.
Councilwoman Beal thought the proposed commission would be setting up a quasi-
official body. She asked what the fiscal impact would be on the city and who would
staff the propnsed commission. Mr. Martin explained that the commission was en-
tirely separate from the Federal grant, that no planning would be done by this group.
Staffing was unsettled, he said. It could be through LCOG, or perhaps Lane County.
-
Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mrs. Shirey to approve the proposed
Economic Development Association in concept and request further
information and refinement to know what would be expected of the
city before adopting any specific resolution of endorsement.
3\5
6/9/75 - 13
Councilman Keller questioned whether there could be refinement unless or until
the commission was in operation to determine how it would function. Mr. Martin
called attention to meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 5, at which representative
policy bodies would be asked if they were willing to see the Association formed
and on what conditions. The County felt they would not be successful in forming
such an association unilaterally, that participation of the cities was necessary.
Approval of the concept with some stated reservations. he said, would probably get
the Association started. He noted meetings at the administrative level had taken
place in an attempt to co-ordinate the economic development effort.
e
Councilwoman Shirey asked if creation of the association was necessary to receive
Federal money. Mr. Martin explained that LCOG usually had carried on economic
development planning on an areawide basis. Because they cannot continue in that
function it becomes encumbent upon the affected agencies to continue the overall
plan developed. So now it becomes a matter of implementation strategy, he said,
trying to determine what to be done next and priorities so it can be taken to
the councils for consideration. Mrs. Shirey said she read the proposal - to cor-
rect or minimize negative factors, etc. - as minimizing impact rather than talking
about whether there would be one type of industry, to which Mr. Martin said he
was reading it in light of community goalS statements. He had no doubt the Council
would have' the ultimate say in developing new industry in the community.
In response to Councilman Murray, Mr. Martin said 100% Federal funding was originally
anticipated by the County. However, since rejection of the County's application
there was no information as to the percentage of funding until work program was
developed which would come through this emphasis on implementation strategy. There
would also be some "spinoff" for the growth study, he said.
Councilwoman Beal thought that LCOG should be applying for the grant and doing the
planning. And that attraction of new industry should be the function of the Chamber
of Commerce. She changed her motion to state that the Council would be interested
in finding. out moreabout this project. Mrs. Shirey, the second, concurred, saying
that perhaps some of the concerns stated could be passed on to the County Commis-
sion at the June 5 meeting.
-
Mayor Anderson felt the motion as changed would be saying nothing to the Commis-
sioners. He felt Council members having concerns should attend the June 5 meeting
to obtain answers rather than trying to "delve into the unknown" on the basis of a
written document trying to find out what would really happen. He said it was not
a case of signing a contract, that the proposal was an attempt to fill a most obvious
gap in location of new industry in this area, to have a specific co-ordinated group
of public bodies to which industry could look in trying to locate. He felt one or
two very desirable industries may have already been lost to this community and the
. existing labor pool because there was not the right process through which to work.
He noted that industry was interested not only in resources available, materials
and labor, but also was concerned the~e days about political and environmental
quality of an area and it would take a co-ordinated effort to convince a firm itself
that this is where it should locate.
Mr. Murray stated his personal concerns - first, that Eugene would again be the
"sugar daddy" for a county-wide program in terms of funding; and second, that the
city would take part in a proposal that really amounts to an industrial lobby.
Beyond those reservations, he said - speaking tor Eugene only - participation should
be conditional, based on recognition of adopted goals of a slower rate of growth
and still maintaining a viable economic and living environment. Mr. Martin said
a resolution could be adopted endorsing the proposal as long as it remained compatible
with the goals statements. This would enable the Association to get started. He
noted the benefit to Eugene of having a body able to make intelligent choices, de-
termining whether industries would be good for the community. And given the unem-
ployment situation and involvement in CETA, he felt there were many reasons for be-
coming involved in this kind of issue, within the guidelines of goals statements.
In response to Councilwoman Beal, he said there was no funding involved at this point.
--
6/9/75 - 14
~.'IO
e
e
-
Councilman Keller added that the type of industry wanted in the community takes
special handling and they could get response from a body such as the proposed
Association. If there was no effort to attract new business, he said, the result
would be a very sterile community. He favored acceptance of the objectives and
general theory presented, saying that asking for more specific information would
get nothing accomplished.
Mayor Anderson said he would like to see ado~tion ~f the p~oposed resolutio~ adding
a paragraph indicating the endorsement was g~ven w~th the ~dea that any pol~cy de-
velopments would be consistent with community goals. Mr. Murray asked that the
particular nature of the community goals should be noted.
Mrs. Beal with consent of the second (Mrs. Shirey) withdrew her motion.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to adopt the res~lution pres~nted,
amending it to call attention to Eugene's adopted commun~ty g~al ~f ~m~
plementing a slower rate of growth without sacrificing econom~c v~ab~l~ty
or living environment. Motion carried unanimously.
Corom
6/4/75
See action
below
Councilwoman Beal, expressing her concern about setting up another
agency without knowing "where it was going," moved second by Council-
man Bradley to refer the proposal to LCOG for discussion and evaluation
in response to particular questions raised in committee (see minutes above).
Assistant Manager said it was his understanding that LCOG had participated 1n the de-
velopment of this association. When Councilman Bradley asked why LCOG wouldn't do
what was proposed as the association's function, Assistant Manager said that historically
LCOG's role was in the long-range planning area rather than in execution and implementa-
tion. So they have deferred to general purpose agencies in the area covered who do have
that responsibility.
Councilman Murray asked whether the proposal had the formal recommendation of the LCOG
Board. Assistant Manager answered that LCOG was involved to the extent it is involved
in planning in areawide, integrated programs. This particular proposal, he said, was
more an implementation of planning so would not corne within LCOG's purview. He said the
resolution to be presented for adoption attempted to state that the city's involvement
was based on stated policies already developed within the community - he read that
portion of the resolution. Mr. Murray recognized the addition of reference to community
goals but shared Councilwoman Beal's concerns that this was a broad and far-reaching
proposal, brought on somewhat precipitously with a request for rather quick response.
He thought before moving ahead it would be better to refer it to LCOG for answers to
such questions as how much it ~ould cost, to whom the association would be responsible,
appropriateness of what seemed a "publicly financed lobby," lack of balance in the pro-
posed makeup of the association, etc.
Councilman Hamel said the proposed association would not be a political body, that it
was a group of people who wanted to wo~k together in an attempt to diversify the economic
base of Lane County. There was no intent to bring industry into the area that would
pollute the air and streams or increase the population. He compared the proposed group
to the industrial development corporation formed in the early 1960s and noted the very
orderly development of west Eugene as a result of that organization's efforts. This
proposal, he said, was an effort to move some industry into other areas of the county -
Cottage Grove, Oakridge, etc. - rather than having a concentration in the Eugene/
Springfield metropolitan area. Acting Manager Long added that the Council at this time
was being asked only whether it wants to make some sort of general policy commitment,
there would be no official city commitment necessary for 60/90 days, after the associa-
tion's bylaws and first year's budget were set up.
Assistant Manager noted that the Council in the future may be voting on a federal grant
that would fund implementation strategy for economic development in both Eugene and
'3\'7
6/9/75 - IS
Springfield, since LCOG's development staff has been charged with preparing an economic de-
velopment plan for the metropolitan area. He appreciated the concerns expressed and said
they were on record and a part of the resolution. So the Council could proceed, then if ...
at any time the association's program became incompatible with Eugene's stated goals ~
and policies, the city could withdraw. He suggested that Councilman Hamel as a member
of the group could make periodic reports to the Council with regard to the association's
activities.
Councilwoman. Beal said that the city in endorsing the proposal would be considered an
official member of the group and thereby expected to contribute; to what extent, no one
knew. She suggested the proposal should be turned back to LCOG and then when informa-
tion was gathered from that quarter a decision could be made on a more definite basis.
Councilman Hamel said everyone concerned with the proposal had the same concern, but
they felt the only way to find out was to "dig in" and get started. He suggested going
ahead with it to see what would develop, because it was something that would take time,
not something that would happen overnight. But Mrs. Beal thought if the program was
officially adopted by LCOG, then it would be known what staff and costs would be con-
tributed by other agencies, what commitments would be made by Eugene, etc.
Vote was taken on the motion as stated.
Murray, Beal, Bradley, Haws, and Shirey
Williams, and Hamel voting no.
Motion carried - Council members
voting aye; Council members Keller,
II-A-l
N. Traffic Diverter POlicy Statement was recommended by the Planning Commission on
May 19, 1975. In adopting the statement, the Council would:
(1) Recognize the positive value of traffic diverters for improvement of
living environment, particularly in older residential neighborhoods
having gridiron streets used by traffic neither originating nor terminat-
ing .within the neighborhood;
(2) Accept final responsibility for location, timing, and installation of traffic
diverters, recognizing that effective citizen input is a necessary and valuable
part of the process; and
(3) Recognize that a procedure would be required for processing traffic diverter
applications, that procedure to be stipulated by staff in accordance with
applicable codes and related policies.
e
The planning Commission also recommended consideration of traffic diverter pro-
cedure proposal:
(1) A proposal for a diverter may be made by any individual, group, organization,
or agency in the city, or may be included as part of the land use and cir-
culation component of a neighborhood refinement plan. Preference may be given
to a proposal accompanied by evidence that it is endorsed by people living
in the area in which the diverters may be installed.
(2) Following preliminary staff report and description of the request, Council
approval will be required prior to staff research with regard to approaches,
locations, and designs applicable to a particular area.
(3) Following research, various designs and locations shall be tested in the sub-
ject area, during which time close liaison will be maintained with applicant
and affected neighborhood groups, and .necessary local meetings will be held.
(4) Following adequate testing period, staff evaluation will determine the
advisability of a permanent diverter system based on but not limited to
(a) Reasonable likelihood that through traffic would be reduced; and
(b) The diverter system will not significantly impede pedestrian and
bicycle circulation, emergency vehicle service, delivery of pUbiic
services, and adequate mass transit system.
(5) Public hearing will be conducted before the City Council after which the
staff's recommendation may be approved, modified, or denied. Approval shall
be contingent upon but not limited to the same findings required of staff.
(6) If the permanent diverter system is approved, installation shall proceed
according to normal budget and construction processes.
-
6/9/75 - 16
'3\~
-
(7) Should conditions change or unsatisfactory results occur because of the
installation, staff analysis and recommendation for remedial action shall be
given the Council, after which the Council will hold public hearing and
re-examine original findings on which approval was based.
Assistant Manager cautioned that adoption of the policy would create major public
discussion as each proposal for a diverter was received, but staff felt with the
policy decision having been made and general reluctance of the community to
construct new major arterials, that this would be the most effective way of keep-
ing arterial traffic on arcerial streets. He said the policy statement was
strongly recommended by staff, but if there was any hesitancy on the part of
Council members to take the "flak" which was sure to corne, now was the time to
take that into consideration because it would affect dealings with neighborhoods'
plans and requests for solving traffic problems.
Councilman Murray thought it important to make the policy statement with regard
to traffic diverters. He said the reality of complications with traffic patterns
would have to be faced and regardless of Council action the interest in diverters
would not disappear - it was a case of staff taking a position on a case-by-case
basis or the Council's doing it itself. He noted comments in the Livingston &
Blayney commercial study with regard to traffic implications which would result
from any commercial expansion program and the statement that traffic would have
to be limited to certain specified streets or controlled by street closures.
Also, the thrust of community development to maintain livability and environmental
quality in the older central neighborhood presented the question whether anything
could be done without also doing something about traffic patterns. He cited com-
munity goals statements and policy already adopted about improving neighborhood
areas within walking distance of downtown by redirecting traffic and limiting
traffic to as few streets as possible and discouraging it on residential streets.
He said unless the Council was willing to do something in the way of traffic di-
verters, those policy statements should be struck.
e
Al Williams, traffic engineer, said if the Council did not intend to adopt this
policy, some of the neighborhood plans would have to be altered, because neigh-
borhood groups have in general built their plans around the community goals
statements. He warned the Council however, that if the policy was adopted
limited staff time would not permit a lot of diverter studies to proceed at one
time. He wanted it understood that the process involved in each diverter was
long and laborious and that quick action because of staff limitations was not
possible. Also, budgetary limitations would more or less control some of the
programs, unless funds were made available from other sources. The cautionary
note was sounded, he said, because several neighborhood groups had plans for
diverters,awaiting the Council's decis.ion, and there was not the staff capability
nor funds to go ahead with all at the same time.
-
Councilman Keller asked whether more through streets would be created on the
perimeters of neighborhoods as a result of installing diverters. Also, as traffic
increased whether there would be problems with the flow on existing streets, back-
ing up traffic, maybe creating air pollution problems. Traffic Engineer replied
that the arterial street system was pretty well defined. However, it was his be-
lief that on-street parking on arterials was a thing of the past, that as popula-
tion and traffic increased without construction of more facilities the space would
have to be provided through removal of parking. He emphasized that the idea which
might develop in some neighborhoods of closing collector or arterial streets could
not be supported by his department from a technical standpoint, and cautioned that
that might become an issue if the Council proceeded with the proposed diverter
policy. With regard to possibility of creating problems of traffic flow on the
arterials, he said, none were anticipated unless new development should occur
which would add more traffic than that normally projected. The amount of bypass
traffic brought back to arterial stree~~didn't amount to that much. He added
however that closing of any collector street would certainly cause problems.
Mr. Murray commented that the anticipated buildup of traffic on arterials did
not occur with the installation of the traffic diverter on the west side of town,
probably because traffic was dispersed to so many different points that it added
~\~
6/9/75 - 17
nothing to.. any one specific street. Mr. Martin referred to the Collision Index
report distributed to Council members which indicated intersections in areas
normally thought of as residential were diverters might be requested to direct
traffic on alternative routes not normally considered collector strc('ts.
Mayor Anderson wondered if there was any way to place more responsibility on.the
applicant for a traffic diverter to justify the need. He thought it should be en-
cumbent upon anyone or group asking for a traffic diverter to have already es-
tablished certain facts with regard to the effect on the adjacent neighborhood,
safety~ em~rgency services before Council consideration. Assistant Manager said
that warrants similar to those used as the basis for installation of stop or yield
signs, etc., had not been developed for traffic diverters. He hoped that experience
with them would give the opportunity to develop some criteria. Traffic Engineer
noted the present backlog of traffic control investigations and said diverter re-
quests would be handled the same way - first come, first served. Staff would have
to work with neighborhood groups, Mr. Martin said, and referred to Traffic Engineer's
cautioning that limited staff resources would allow only a certain amount.
Don Allen, public works director, said it was better to leave the procedural
element separate from the pOlicy statement to give more leeway. He said if pro-
cedure was adopted as policy an arterial street system policy would also have to
be adopted because the city was literally in a "no build policy" on major arterials
now. He also emphasized that diverters might be accepted more readily if they
were properly installed (as proposed under this policy) rather than the present
temporary, experimental type installations.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to schedule public hearing at
the June 23 Council meeting on the proposed traffic diverter policy
statement. Motion carried unanimously.
O. Graham Field Lighting - Copies of parks department memo and letter from Eugene
Sports Program were distributed to Council members with agenda proposing relighting
Graham Field for $35,000. Funds were budgeted in the 1974-75 budget, and staff
estimated contracting the work with ESP would save about $17,000. Because of
. ESP's involvement, they would have priority use of the field; however, they would
not have sole use.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to approve the proposal
as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
P.Requestto withdraw rezoning request, Coburg Plaza (intersection of Cal Young
and Willakenzie) - From C-2 to R-2 (State Finance)
Copies of memo from planning department were distributed with agenda to Council
members. The memo set forth the history of zoning and land use controls on
. the subject property dating from 1970. State Finance requested withdrawal of
its application to rezone from C-2 ~o R-2. .Staff recommended referral to the
Planning Commission before taking action.
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to
the Planning Commission for consideration
Motion carried unanimously.
refer the request to
and recommendation.
Q. Liquor License Renewals were considered for:
Retail Malt Beverage (RMB) - The Cooler, 20 Centennial Loop
Package Store (PSJ -
Baza'r Foods, 2010 Goodpasture Island Road
Jo's Market, 1976 Roosevelt Boulevard
Meier & Frank, 100 Valley River Center
The Market, 1201 West 11th Avenue
7-E1even Food Stores - 2777 Friendly Street
445 Coburg Road
2270 West 18th Avenue
588 West 7th Avenue
1316 Alder Street
6/9/75 - 18
3.k~
-
Comm
6/4/75
Approve
--
Corom
6/4/75
Approve
Corom
6/4/75
Approve
.
be carefully addressed. Mrs. Beal felt that, since it involves the entire
Budget Committee, the lay members of the Budget Committee should also be
included in making any decisions regarding the process. At Mayor Anderson's
suggestion, Council agreed to have him take the matter up with Mr. Henry when he
arrives and include it on the Council's self-study agenda.
Conun
5/28/75
Affirm
--
v. Preliminary Review, Housing and Community Development Commission Applicants was
conducted by Council to narrow the list of 45 applicants to 12 or 15 for interview
in selecting six public members of the Commission. Mr. Murray reviewed criteria
on which selection of public members was to be based and called attention to a
map pinpointing residences of those applying for membership on the Commission.
Keith Martin, assistant city manager, noted appointment of Councilmen Murray and
Williams representing the Council, Susan Franklin and James Bernhard representing
the Planning Commission, and Ruth Mazo and Williams Korns representing Eugene
Renewal Agency. Balloting proceeded resulting in selection of the fOllowing for
interview by the Council:
Gary Bond
Marc Levy
S. Gregory Lipton
Sarah Ruth Mahler
Jack T. McCulloch
Donald H. Micken
David E. Munz
Betty Ni ven
Jeffrey A. Reingold
Richard M. Satre
Emily Schue
Bryce E. Thalman
Barbara Trojan
Jack West
Stephen W. Wood
There were no objections to scheduling interviews at five-minute intervals begin-
ning at 5:00 p.m. (breaking for dinner at 6:15 ot 6:30) on Tuesday, June 10, 1975,
and it was understood staff would set up interview appointments on that basis.
Staff was instructed to present two questions to each of the candidates for re-
sponse during the interviews. They were: In terms of central purpose of community
development, i.e., prevention of urban deterioartion, elimination of blight, and
promotion of economic and housing opportunities, what does the candidate feel are
the community's most important needs and what can he or she especially contribute
to tackling those needs? To which area, housing or community development, does
the candidate feel his or her expertise is especially suited?
e.
John Porter, planning director, said a copy of the report submitted to the Council
with regard to the Commission could be sent to each candidate to be interviewed
in order to help. .hem better understand the two committees - housing and community
development. It was understood that Assistant Manager would work with Councilman
Murray in preparing a letter to be sent to the unsuccessful applicants, and that a
recently compiled list of city and county boards and commissions on which the un-
successful candidates might serve would be included.
Comm
6/4/75
Affirm
W. Public Officers Personal Liability for Public Acts - Copies of memo were dis-
tributed with agenda to Council members concerning personal liability insurance.
Mayor Anderson suggested deferral of discussion in light of Councilman Bradley's
absence and concern about the matter.
Stan Long, assistant city attorney, reviewed court actions which have taken
place in the case Brown vs Anderson et al (Goodpasture Island zoning), the most
recent action bei~g the court's striking complainant's request for damages and
penalties from each Council member and the Mayor personally. Mr. Long said that
the complainant now has the opportunity to plead something other than damages.
It was understood the matter would be an item for discussion at
the June 18 committee meeting.
Conun
6/4/75
Affirm
x. Request of Charles and Cheryl McCown to Have Amusement Device License Fees
Reconsidered
Finance Director's letter was distributed with the agendas, indicating a study
on license fees should be conducted. The staff feels the McCowns are being
charged on a comparable basis with others in the community having vending
machines, though there is a concern whether the charges are reasonable. Finance
Director indicated to the McCowns that he expected to have a re[XJrt back early
in June on the equity of rates being charged.
e
6/9/75 - 20
3~L..
-
Class A Dispensers - Foo's Restaurant, 2200 Centennial Boulevard
Meier & Frank, 100 Valley River Center
Thunderbird Motel, 205 Coburg Road
C Dispensers (1000 or more members) - Moose Club, 1666 West 12th Avenue
Mrs. Bea1 moved seconded by Mr. Murray to recommend approval
of the renewal applications. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm
6/4/75
Approve
R. Right-of-way Acquisi60n authorization was requested for:
1. 29th and Wi11amette public utility easement - Stanley A. and Gertrude L.
Jacobson - $110
2. Barger Drive - Mildred Coy, 5090 Barger Drive - $825
Ralph O. and Mildred E. Collins, 5050 Barger Drive - $690
3. Hawkins Lane, 18th to Highland Oaks - Negotiation and condemnation authorization
Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to authorize purchase of
uti1.ity easement and street right-of-way as requested, and adopt
resolution authorizing negotiation and condemnation procedure on
Hawkins Lane right-of-way from 18th to Highland Oaks. Motion
.carried unanimously.
Comm
6/4/75
Approve
S.
Site Acquisition, Fire Station No.9 - Staff reassessed It~ recommendation
(February 1975) for purchase of 1.31 acres from Northwest :Natural Gas Company.
Since the current recommendation involves four parcels of 'land, their value
and cost, and potential litigation, Council was asked to go into executive
session with press admitted providing they agreed not to reveal the parcels,
-their values and costs, until there was either a willing sale or the property
-chosen was acquired through condemnation. None of the press present objected
to the conditions set for their presence in executive session.
--
Mrs. Bea1 moved seconded by Mr. Murray to declare the meeting in
executive session under ORS 192.660. Motion carried unanimously.
During executive session four parcels were identified as Sites A, B, C, and D,
and appraised values and relative per-square-foot costs were reviewed.
Executive session was terminated, and Mr. Murray moved seconded by
Mr. Hamel to authorize purchase of Site A. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm
6/4/75
Approve
T. Council minutes, February 10, 1975 as circulated
Approve
u. Budget Process Proposal Submitted by Council Members Murray and Keller - Copies
of a letter from Mr. Murray and Mr. Keller were distributed with the agendas for
Council consideration. The Jetter regards the budget process. Mr. Keller said
he and Mr. Murray were concerned because they see the Budget Committee as a
rubber stamp committee, so much work being done in advance of Budget Committee
meetings. It is their feeling that the committee should be involved from the very
beginning to provide more opportunity for sound decision making. There is often
too little time to properly study some of the budget concerns. Mr. Murray added that
the budget is a most important and critical function and that, while their proposal
does require more time, it would be time well spent as he feels the Budget Committee
currently moves through the process much too hastily. Mr. Martin said there are
a myriad of possible solutions. He feels it involves the relationship between
the Council and the Manager, to what extent the Council wishes to be involved and
what the Council expects from the Manager. He suggested deferring any action on
Mr. Murray's and Mr. Keller's proposal until Council goes through their
self-critiquing sessions and until Mr. Henry arrives as Manager. Mr. Martin also
expressed a concern regarding the suggestion of breaking into subcommittees, saying
that no 3 members can speak for the entire body. He felt that suggestion should
-
':;0. ~
6/9/75 - 19
'S '2.\
-
Mrs. UcCown said it is a fact that their rates are comparable with others, but
the amusement device fee is out of line. She noted they will pay between
$4,000 and $4,400 to the City and double that to the State. When they
introduced the problem to the City, they had two alternatives - either encourage
all those with amusement device licenses to come before the City or to appeal for
an arcade license which would affect them alone. Others having amusement device
licenses did not care to come before the City with the McCowns because the
amusement device machines are only a small part of their ~ncome. Mrs. McCown
feels that, if the City chooses to study the overall problem, it might take a
long period of time. In the meantime they are paying another $4,000 worth of
licenses come July 1. What they are requesting, then, is an arcade license.
Mr. Martin said the Finance Director hopes to get back to the Council by the first
of June which will allow time to respond to the McCown's concerns.
Y.
r~~i~~~~Q~ to Join~e~_~chaiL-MAL~JJ10Jl on Sunday, June 22, in Springfield
Sponsored by Handicapped Students Association at Lane Community College _
Wendy Penifold of the Handicapped Students Association of LCC said their
organization, on Sunday, June 22, is putting on a wheelchair marathon to
help handicapped people get needed equipment. She invited the Council to
join Springfield City Council in the marathon. Mr. Martin suggested that
interested Council members should advise Ms. Penifold of their availability.
z.
West University Neighbors (WUN) - re .e.~_rJ'_~)_te_acql1~!ij,tj9D at_.12.t.b. between
Oak and~jllamet!~ - Mr. Martin said the City does not have financial
r~~ources to acquire the park site,though it would like to. Mr. Murray
mentioned the Joint Parks Committee has been working on it and will be
presenting a citywide parks bond measure for the Council to consider placing
on a ballot. One of the sites included in the package is this given site.
Mr. Murray feels this would be an appropriate ~ethod of handling possible
acquisition.
-
AA.
Luncheon, J. David Hunt - Councilman Keller reminded Council members of the
luncheon to be held June 12 at Asia Garden honoring J. David Hunt upon his de-
parture from the position of Eugene Renewal Agency director to assume a position
with the Portland Development Commission.
BB.
Petition, Speed zone on Agate Street - Councilman Keller noted receipt of petition
which he assumed had also been received in the Manager's office. Assistant
Manager said it had been received, forwarded to the State Speed Control Board,
and receipt acknowledged by them.
CC.
Committee Meeting, June 11 only, will be held at the Eugene Hotel to discuss
Affirmative Action report.
DD.
Joint Meeting with Planning Commission, June 23, to discuss 30th and Hilyard
environmental impact statement and preliminary information on West Amazon
Parkway, will be held at the International King's Table, Oakway Mall, at
11:30 a.m.
EE.
Budget Meeting, June 19, was scheduled tentatively, depending upon outcome of
budget election June 17. Council members were asked to hold that date open.
-
FF.
1974 Collision Index Report prepared by staff was distributed. Although it
indicated a general decrease in accidents, fatalities increased.
6/9/75 - 21
~23
Camm
5/28/75
File
Comm
5/28/75
File
Comm
5/28/75
File
Comm
6/4/75
File
Comm
6/4/75
File
Comm
6/4/75
File
Comm
6/4/75
File
Comm
6/4/75
File
Corrun
6/4/75
File
!)
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that Items A through Land
Items N through FF be approved, affirmed, and filed as noted (see
separate action on Item M). Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all
council members present voting aye, except Councilman Bradley ab-
staining on Items J, L, and R; Councilman Haws abstaining on Item L.
e'
III - Findings, Denial of 1st National Bank sign at Valley River Center
Denied by the Council at its May 27, 1975 meeting, upholding Sign Code Board of
Appeals action on March 31, 1975.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Hamel to adopt the findings presented.
Councilman Bradley said he couldn't support the findings as presented, because he
didn't think they were based on fact, that there were none which would sustain the
decision to deny the sign. Assistant Manager said that normal procedure was to pre-
pare findings for Council consideration; if the Council on motion did not accept
findings prepared by staff, then an attempt would be made to redraft them to include
amendments or modifications to the language proposed. Stan Long, assistant city
attorney, said it was not a question of approving findings, rather it was a question
of making findings the Council thinks are supported by testimony. If the findings
prepared do not reflect evidence or testimony in the record, he said, then Council
members could substitute their own, make additions or changes, etc.
Councilman Bradley then asked on what criteria the findings were based, that they
should support or not support that criteria. Stan Long replied that the Code pro-
vided for the granting of a variance where it was felt there existed a practical or
unnecessary physical or economic hardship inconsistent with objectives of the Code.
In his recollection, he said, there was no particular discussion of that criteria ~~
in the Council meeting, but minutes of the Board of Appeals reflected a practical
difficulty. The original request, he explinaed, was for two signs, but the Sign
Board determined that granting one sign was the extent of that practical hardship.
Vote was taken on the motion to adopt the findings as presented. II-A-2
Motion carried - Council members Murray, Keller, Beal, Hamels and
Shirey voting aye; Council members Williams, Bradley, and Haws ab-
staining.
IV - Ordinances
Council Bill No. 854 - Amending Sections 3.005 and 3.010 and adding Section 3.349
to City Code re: Commercial solicitors licenses was read
by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present
requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be read the second time by
council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and thaL,enact-
ment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read
the second time by council bill number only.
Mr. Kelxer moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final
passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmembers present voting aye, the bill was de-
clared passed and numbered 17374.
Council Bill No. 855 - Sanitary sewer on Martin Street from Center Way to
500 feet west was read by council bill number-and title only, there being no
councilinember present requesting that it be read in full.
-
6/9/75 - 22
32..4
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17375.
Council Bill No. 856 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer on Martin
Street from Center Way to 500 feet west was read by council
bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it
be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be read the second tine 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17376.
Council Bill No. 857 - Sanitary sewer to serve Oakway First Addition bounded by Cal
Young Road, west boundary of Oakway Addition, north boundary
of Fair Oaks Addition, and Norkenzie Road extended southerly-was read by council bill
number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be
read in full.
.e
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17377.
Council Bill No. 858 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer to serve
Oakway First Addition bounded by Cal Young Road, west boundary
of Oak way Addition, north boundary of Fair Oaks Addition, and Norkenzie Road extended
southerly was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council
member present requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr,. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17378.
-
Council Bill No. 859 - Sanitary sewer on 2nd Avenue from 85 feet west of Monroe
Street to 250 feet west of Adams Street was read by council
bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it
be read in full.
6/9/75 - 23
~zs
Mr. Keller mo~ed second by Mr. Williams 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 o~ly. 41'-
Mr. Keller moved~second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17379.
Council Bill No. 860 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer on 2nd
Avenue from 85 feet.west of Monroe Street to 250 feet west
of Adams Street was read by council bill number and title only, there being no
council member present requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17380.
Council Bill No. .861 - Sanitary and storm sewers within K&R Plat, and sanitary sewer
within 160 feet of Dove Lane from 700 feet west of Taney
Street to 1000 feet west of Taney Street was read by council bill number and title
only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be read the second time by council 4It
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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17381.
Council Bill No. 862 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary.and storm sewers
within K&R Plat, .and sanitary sewer within 160 feet of Dove
. Lane from .700 feet west of Taney Street to 1000 feet west of Taney Street was read
by"council bill number and title only, there being no council member present request-
ing that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17382.
Council Bill No. 863 - Sanitary and storm sewers within Willona Park, and 'sanitary
sewer within.160 feet of Willona Drive from Benson Lane to
212 feet west of Benson Lane was read by council bill number and title only, there
being no council member present requesting that it be read in full.
e
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be read the second time by council
bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered
..
6/9/75 -24
32(0
at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council
bill number only.
.e
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17383.
Council Bill No. 864 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary and storm sewers
within Willona Park, and sanitary sewer within 160 feet of
Willona Drive from Benson Lane to 212 feet west of Benson Lane was read by council
bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it
be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17384.
Council Bill No. 865 - Sanitary and storm sewers within Ron Plat, and sanitary sewer
in area 160 feet west of Cleveland Street from 25th Avenue
to the south, and Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 3, Woodhaven Addition north of 27th Avenue,
was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present
requesting that it be read in full.
e
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17385.
Council Bill No. 866 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary and storm sewers
within Ron Plat, and sanitary sewer in area 160 feet west of
Cleveland Street from 25th Avenue to the south, and Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 3,
Woodha~nAddition north of 27th Avenue, was read by council bill number and title
only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given. final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17386.
e
Council Bill No. 867 - Paving streets within K&R Plat was read by council bill number
.and title only, there being no council member present request-
ing that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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.
"! 21
6/9/75 - 25
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17387.
-'~
Council Bill No. 868 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving streets within
K&R Plat was read by council bill number and title only, there
being no council member present requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be read the second time by council
bill number only;'.with /uIl!lTlimoils consellt oLthe: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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. Kll council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17388.
Council Bill No. 869 - Paving streets within Willona Park was read by council bill
number and title only, there being no council member present
requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17389. _-
Council Bill No. 870 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving streets within
Willona Park was read by council bill number and title only,
there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full.
, i
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Ke ller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17390.
Council Bill No. 871 - Paving streets within Ron Plat was read by council bill number
and title only, there being no council member present request-
ing that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and ..
numbered 17391. ~.
Council Bill No. 872 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving streets within
Ron Plat was read by council bill number and title only, there
being no council member present requesting that it be read in full.
6/9/75 - 26
'3"Z..f>
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams 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.
e
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage.
Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 17392.
Council Bill No. 873 - Levying assessments for sanitary sewer in area from pro-
jected 38th Avenue to 160 feet south of 43rd Avenue from
100 feet east of East Amazon Drive to the east 2800 feet, 2nd phase (74-01)
was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member
present requesting that it be read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be referred to Assessment Panel for
hearing on June 16, 1975 and consideration of Panel recommmd&ions by the Council at its
June 23, 1975 meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Bill No. 874 - Levying assessments for paving Fox Hollow Road (reloacted) from
50 feet south of 43rd Avenue to East Amazon Drive, and Dillard
Road from Fox Glen to relocated Fox Hollow Road (74-36) was read by cquncil bill
number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be
read in full.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams that the bill be referred to Assessment Panel for
hearing on June 16, 1975 and consideration of Panel recommendations by the Council at its
June 23, 1975 meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
e
V - Resolutions
Resolution No. 2408 - Authorizing deed conveying portion of EWEB public utility ease-
ment on Arthur D. Gilbert property east of Willagillespie north
of Country Club Road (EWEB) was read by number and title.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion
carried, all council members present voting aye.
Resolution No. 2409 - Authorizing deed conveying portion of EWEB easement on Norman
Miller property south of McKenzie Highway west of Mill Creek
Road (EWEB) was read by number and title.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion
carried, all council members present voting aye.
Resolution No. 2410 - Endorsing creation of Lane County Economic Development Associa-
tion (amended to include reference to Eugene's Community Goals
Statements) was read by number and title.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion
carried, all council members present voting aye.
e
Resolution No. 2411 - Authorizing negotiation and condemnation for Hawkins Lane right-
of-way from 18th to Highland Oaks was read by number and title.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion
carried, all council members present voting aye.
6/9/75 - 27
3~9
Resolution No. 2412 - Authorizing payment of bills, claims, and progress payments for
period May.27 through June 9, 1975 was read by number and title.
Mr. Kedller moved s~cond bbY Mr. Williams ~o adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion ~
carrie , all councll mem ers present votlng aye.
Resolution No. 2413 - Authorizing condemnatioQ on building at 858 Pearl Street was
read by number and title.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion
carried, all council members present voting aye.
VI - Liquor License Renewals
Retail Malt Beverage (RMB) - Pizan's, 1225 Alder Street
(renewal and dropping partner)
The Keg Tavern, 4711 West 11th Avenue
Package Store (PS) - McKay's Market, 2699 Roosevelt Boulevard
Little Y Grocery Cart - 603 West 19th Avenue
Class A Dispensers (DA) - Club Crosstown, 1797 West 7th Avenue
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of the applications.
Motion carried unanimously.
Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned
to Monday, June 23, 1975.
e
/f/~
A. K. Martin
Asst. City Manager
--
6/9175 - 28
'330