Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/1975 Meeting --~_.- -----..~~ M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL December 4,1975 e Special session of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon, called for the pur- pose of considering filing a writ of review with regard to extension of water service to Shade Oaks Subdivision east of Goshen. The meeting was called to order by Council President Neil Murray at 7:00 p.m. on December 4, 1975 in the McNutt Room with other Council members present: Gus Keller, Wickes Beal, Tom Williams, D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, and Edna Shirey. Councilman Ray Bradley was absent. I - Extension of Water Service, Shade Oaks Subdivision Mrs. Beal moved second by Mr. Hamel that staff prepare and file a write of review (Boundary Commission decision of November 6, 1975 authorizing Willamette Water Company to extend water service to Shade Oaks Subdivision). Councilwoman Beal said the intent was to preserve the 1990 Plan, that although the issue is complicated, the principle is clear. Councilman Keller asked the city attorney's ideas on the issue. Stan Long, assistant city attorney, said that the record with regard to the decision I is not very strong, there is the hazard of some precedent that would be difficult~ to live with, and that the errors appear to be procedural so that the record could be corrected through reconsideration of the issue by the Boundary Commission. He added that there was no way to assure that the decision of the Boundary Commission, upon reconsideration, would be the same. e Councilman Keller then asked Keith Parks, general manager of Eugene Water & Electric Board, if there was any doubt about the earlier Council statement setting forth the city's policy with regard to extension of water services beyond the urban boundary. Mr. Parks answered that the question was one of interpretation of the 1990 Plan, and there was no way of predicting what the Water Board's action would be. Councilman Haws asked if Boundary Commission reconsideration would be on the exist- ing record, or do novo. Also, what precedent would be set that would affect the city in the long run. Mr. Long answered that most attorneys for legislative bodies would encourage de novo hearings. With regard to precedent, he said that one issue would be whether Fasano requirements apply to Boundary Commission decisions on small parcels of land where conflicts arise. Councilman Williams wondered how the extension of water service to the Shade Oaks Subdivision conflicts with the 1990 Plan when the Plan itself provides for service to established development with public health hazard. Councilman Murray said his recollection was that water was not the issue in the item referred to. Gary Chenkin, assistant planning director, explained that lack of water was not considered a health hazard, that it was the bacterial count involved. He said further that the recent policy statement by the Council related also to substances in the water as a public health hazard, not the lack of water. Councilman Williams then referred to a section of the Lane County code based on state law wherein public health hazard was defined as "contaminated or inadequate water supply." He drew a comparison between a person on a raft on the ocean where there e is adequate water who would die if he drank the water, and a person on a desert who would die of dehydration for lack of water. Councilwoman Beal asked if there were other properties that could be served, noting the Boundary Commission decision limited service to existing houses. She asked for ~30 12/4/75 - 1 >, - ~------ -..----- L- ~~stimate of the number of places n7eding water, and if th7 reason for extension :~Shade Oaks was based on the economlC strength of the appllcants. Mr. Parks ~~exPlained the reason EWEB had coin-op water taps was because of the number of people outside the city without potable water. He said the question of numbers e was how far extension of service was to go - Veneta was having problems. On the other hand, there are some houses near water mains which the city has asked EWEB not to serve, yet in this instance the extension would be 3000 feet. He added that the Water Board had tried to adhere to the 1990 Plan, but the Board is a service agency, not a police power agency, and that the general governmental bodies are those who were responsible for the 1990 Plan. Councilwoman Shirey said there were older less expensive homes now without service that should have it before extending water to this subdivision. She wondered whether the Boundary Board decision would be strengthened by taking the issue to court. Mr. Long answered that if, upon writ of review, the court agrees that the Boundary Commission must state reasons for extending service, then in de novo hearing the petitioner may not be able to make its case so strongly as on the present record. It is possible, he said, that the Commission's decision would be strengthened; it was almost a behavioral science issue. Councilman Murray said he would support the motion because (1) a "lukewarm" opinion was always difficult to deal with; (2) it would not be proper to pass the responsi- bility for a major land-use decision to the Water Board; (3) it is of critical importance to hold the line in this type of policy statement; (4) the city's policies, not the county's or other agencies' policies, should be adhered to. He said the property owners could seek other solutions. Councilman Williams reiterated his opinion that absence of water is a threat to health and safety, noting staff's response in Boundary Commission deliberation with regard to the policy to extend service to existing development when there is e an immediate threat to health and safety. Councilman Haws said that the Boundary Commission didn't find that there was a health hazard. Also, there are no facts that there is a health hazard, there- fore the case shouldn't be made that there is one. Vote was taken on the motion to file writ of review. Motion carried - Council members Murray, Beal, Hamel, Haws, and Shirey voting aye; Council members Keller and Williams voting no. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned. ~ )#V Charles T. Henry City Manager e 12/4/75 - 2 "b3/