Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/22/1976 Meeting .' M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL November 22, 1976: e Adjourned meeting - from November 8, 1976, of the Common Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by Council President Gus Keller, presiding in the absence of Mayor Anderson, at 7:30 p.m. on November 22, 1976, in the Council Chamber.with the following Council members present: Eric Haws, Wickes Beal, Tom Williams, Neil Murray, Ray Bradley, D. W. Hamel and Edna Shirey. I. Presentations A. Award of Achievement for Lowest ~ccident Frequency in Group VI 1975-76 Presented by League of Oregon Cities and State Accident Insurance Fund. B. Banner Designed for "Craftsmanship 1976 Eugene Oregon" Lotte Stresinger mentioned the banner was made for a U of 0 craft show through room tax funds. The banner was made by Barbara Neill and belongs officially to the State; a letter to the business office at the U of 0 will transfer it to the City. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that staff write a letter to . the U of 0 requesting their release of the banner so that the city can enjoy. Motion carried unanimously. II. Proclamation - Canvass of Votes Cast in November 2, 1976, Election Mayor - R.A. "Gus" Keller 21 , 978 EWEB Wards 1 and 8 Jerome Kernoschak 986 John A. Tiffany 7,524 e Neil Murray 18,548 Jon Silvermoon 3,506 Overvotes 81 Overvotes 14 Undervotes 5,769 Undervotes 2,748 Couneil Ward 2 EWEB Wards 2 and 3 Jack J. Craig 1,954 Camilla P. Pratt 5,272 Betty Smith 3,285 Chuck Pressman 4,418 Overvotes 7 Overvotes 26 Undervotes 1,015 Undervotes 3,486 Council Ward 3 EWEB Wards 6 and 7 Jack Delay 3,196 Richard F. Freeman 4,981 Thomas C.Moreland 1,609 Overvotes - Overvotes 11 Undervotes 4,831 Undervotes 2,125 EWEB Fluoridation Measure Counei 1 Ward 7 Yes 20,455 Gary Bond 688 No 19,094 William Carlstrom 881 Overvotes 28 , Richard Charters 440 Undervotes 7,785 Scott Lieuallen 1,811 Overvotes 20 Undervotes 1,416 Council Ward 8 - John Hazen 459 Brian Obie 3,341 Edna Shirey 2,063 Overvotes 10 Minutes 11/22/76 -1 Undervotes 935 557 ,. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to accept the canvass of votes as presented. Motion ~arried unanimously. - III. Public Hearings A. Use of trailer for mobile home sales lot office at 4625 West 11th Avenue (northwest corner of 11th and Beltline (Spears) Public hearing was held with no testimony presented~ Res. No. 2591 - Authorizing trailer for mobile home sales lot office at 4625 West 11th Avenue was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to adopt the resolution subject to four conditions outlined by staff. Motion carried unanimously. B. Appeal from approval of minor partition south of Crest Drive and east of Mt. Calvary Cemetery (Skyline Nine, Inc.)(M 76-50) Submitted by Mary M. Frank, 3325 Olive Street Approved by the Planning Commission September 27, 1976. Due to concerns expressed about drainage and soil conditions, the developer was required to submit engineering geologists report. After a review, staff concluded that approval could be recommended subject to certain conditions: 1. That an engineering geologist. be retained to evaluate plans for siting and foundation and to engineer a drainage system; 2. Because of the large size of parcels, that the developer file a deed restriction limiting to single family. In September, the Planning Commission upheld the staff decision and added that Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code dealing with hillside situations . be followed. Public hearing was opened. Mary Frank, 3325 Olive, said the soil investigation indicates the need for many things. Safe secure housing rests with the City of Eugene and, if council approves, it seems imperative that strict guidelines be specified with continual inspection. Joyce Salisbury, 3330 Olive, noted that recent repair has cost her more than $10,000. The southeast corner settled causing a crack. Steps had to be removed because they were too heavy, plus a back concrete patio. She expressed concern about lack of drainage plans. Bill Peterson, 2833-C Willamette, said they have built over 60 hillside homes (Peterson Construction) and have done extensive study. There is enough property there for seven homes and only 3 were platted, he said. Only 3 or 4 trees will be removed. Water from the cemetary will be diverted to the street. He believes that, if Mrs. Salisbury's builders had followed the same criteria, she would not have had any problem. Denis Grace, 5166 Alpine Loop, noted it is a very sensitive development, particularly as regards any tree cutting. Public hearing was closed. . Mr. Saul noted it remains the staff position that, despite the problems, there are adequate safeguards. The builder will have to demonstrate that Chapter 70 standards are met. Minutes 11/22/76 -2 558 Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission decision subject to the conditions outlined by staff. Morion carried, Mr. e Hamel, Mr. Murray, Mr. Keller, Mr. Haws and Mr. Williams voting aye, and Mrs. Beal, Mr. Bradley and Mrs. Shirey voting no. C. Zone Changes 1. Chambers House at southwest corner of 10th and Taylor (1006 Taylor) - From R-2 to H-Historic (Z 76-36) No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by council members. Staff notes and minutes were received as part of the public records. Mrs. Dahlquist, 1006 Taylor, encouraged passage. Council Bill 1288 - Rezoning to H-Historic District the area at the southwest corner of 10th Avenue and Taylor Street was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that findings supporting the rezoning as set out in Planning Commission staff notes and October 6 minutes be adopted by reference thereto; 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. e Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17804. 2. Collier House at southwest corner of 13th and University - From PL to H-Historic (Z 76-37) No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by council members. Staff notes and minutes were received as part of the public records. Phyllis Collier Kerns, 2865 Central, spoke in favor of the rezoning. Council Bill 1289 - Rezoning to H-Historic District the area at the southwest corner of 13th Avenue and University Street (1770 East 13th Avenue - Collier House) was read by council bill number and title only, . there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that findings supporting the rezoning as set out in Planning Commission staff notes and October 6 minutes be adopted by reference thereto; 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. e. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, except Hr. Murray abstaining, the bill was declared passed and number 17805. 559 Minutes 11/22/76 -3 I D. Appeal from Sign Code Board of Appeals action with respect to sign for Valley River Twin Cinema, 1077 Valley River Drive (Moyer Theatres) Submitted by staff, plus cross-appeal filed by Moyer Theatres. e Patti Lathrop, Public Works, noted that on March 30, 1971, a sign permit was issued. The sign is 156 square feet. Annexation took place in June, 1971, after the time the sign was erected. On March 11, 1974, the sign district was changed to outlying commercial and in December, 1975, a letter of non-conformance was mailed to the president of Moyer Theatres, noting the sign would have to be removed by June 3, 1976. Wayne Landsverk, 1111 Wilcox Building, Portland, claimed the removal deadline was premature since notice was not received until December, 1975. Secondly, he has requested to see files of the sign program and has been refused. Mr. Landsverk added that a cheap sign with a short life expectancy would have been erected had they thought it would have to be changed. As it was the sign cost $5280 at the time of installation. Ray Wolfe, 1926 Potter, who served on the ad hoc conunittee on signs, was concerned that the sign ordinance not be eroded. He suggested that council should not defer a difficult situation which will be no different 5 years from now. Larry Moyer, 909 N. W. 19th, Portland, described the investment to date in the sign, arguing he would not have put it up if he knew it was coming down in 5 years. Mildred Det1i~, 1428 E. 21st, member of the sign code board, asked ,_ how it was possible for a sign permit to be issued in 1971 when no zone classification existed. Mrs. Lathrop had gone through the records and could find nothing to justify the sign being allowed. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to uphold the staff appeal and deny the appeal of Moyer Theatres. Motion carried, Mr. Haws, Mrs. Beal, Mr. Murray and Mr. Keller voting aye, Mr. Williams, Mr. Bradley and Mr. Hamel voting no and Mrs. Shirey abstaining. - E. Code Amendments reconunended by Planning Conunission October 11, 1976 1. Changing the word "report" to "decision" re: Conunission action on zone. changes 2. Permitting convenience grocery stores as conditional use in M-2 zones under certain conditions 3. Permitting wholesale bakeries as condi~iona1 use in C-2 zones Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Counci 1 Bi 11 No. 1290 - Amending City Code Sections 9.680 and 9.682 by changing word "report" to "decision" regarding Planning Commission action on zone changes; Section 9.466 to permit convenience grocery stores in M-2 zones under certain conditions; Section 9.422 to permit wholesale ,,- bakeries in C-2 zones was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Minutes 11/22/76 -4 SIoO Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that the council bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent e of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that the council bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All council members present voting aye, except Mr. Williams abstaining on part 3, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17806. F. Willamette River Greenway - Planning Commission recommendations of October 19, 1976 Adopting of refinement plan, certain amendments, and forwarding information to LCDC In reviewing the background, Mr. Saul, Planner, mentioned that the Planning Commission questioned whether the Eugene Sand and Gravel property in the county north of Beltline west of Delta should be included in the boundaries. Staff recommended inclusion for several reasons. It is adjacent to the river, and the general plan designates that area as eventual recreational-type use. An amendment to delete the sand and gravel operation from the Greenway Plan was defeated by the Planning Commission. Mel Jackson, Parks, member of Willamette Greenway subcommittee, spoke about the work of the committee in straightening out the boundaries. e He supported adoption of the plan. He mentioned 3 areas of exception to the Planning Commission's recommendations: Autzen Stadium, Washington-Jefferson Park area, and the Millrace. John All tucker, 3000 Delta Highway North, spoke against inclusion of the production site in the greenway boundaries. He urged inclusion of the gravel ponds located on Goodpasture Island and requested that only the ISO-foot minimum width through his property north of Delta Highway be recommended until an interpretation of "intensification" and "changes" is complete. Mr. Saul noted that staff recommended inclusion of the sand and gravel property because Goal IS specifically provides for gravel extraction within the greenway area. Council Bill No. 1291 - Amending City Code Section 9.259 re: compliance with requirements of statewide planning goal IS (Greenway boundaries) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel 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 by council bill number only. e Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17807. 5"1 Minutes .11/22/76 -5 Resolution No. 2592 - Adopting refinement plan re: Greenway boundaries was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Murray, to adopt the resolution. - ;;;:;,..- Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to amend the motion to modify the recommended boundary of the Greenway north of Beltline Road west of Delta Highway to include the public owned property and locate the boundary 150 feet back from the ordinary low water line on that property that is in private ownership. Vote was taken on the amendment which carried, all council members present voting aye except Mrs. Beal and Mr. Bradley voting no. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to amend the motion to exclude Autzen Stadium and parking lot and making the boundary conform to that proposed by the Department of Transportation. Vote was taken on the amendment which carried, all council members present voting aye except Mrs. Beal and Mr. Bradley voting no. Vote was taken on the original motion which carried unanimously. G. Bids - Public Works Department (opened November 16, 1976) Bid No. 13 Opened: 11-16-76 l. SANITARY SHIER: 1st Avenue from Seneca Road to 650 feet west. . B.; dders Contract Cost l. L. D. Van Over Construction) Inc.........................$ 17,754.44 2. H& J Construction Company...............................$ 18,352.00 3. Shur-Hay Contractors, Inc................................$ 21,983.00 4. Wildish Construction Company.............................$ 22,145.00 5. James A. Hill, Contractor................................$ 24,238.04 6. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc................................$ 25,233.00 7. Kenneth R. Bostick Construction Company..................$ 35,937.00 Cost to Abutting Propey'ty: 'Cost. to' City Amount Budgeted Sanitary Lateral $ O.ll/Sq.Ft. 0 0 Sanitary Di rect $ 725.00/Each Cm1PLETION DATE: January 14, 1977 Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to accept the low bidder. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. IV. Items to be acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items as requested.' Previously discussed in Committee of the Whole on November 10, 1976 (Present: Council President Keller; Council members Haws, Beal, Murray, Williams, Bradley, Hamel and Shirey); and on November 17, 1976 (Present: -- Council members Keller (presiding), Haws, Beal, Murray, Bradley, Hamel and Shirey). Minutes of those meetings appear below in different type print. 5'(O~ Minutes 11/22/76 -6 e Comrndttee-of-the-Whole November 10, 1976 I. Items from Mayor and Council - A. Bradley Introduction--Mr. Bradley introduced his brother, who is visiting in Eugene from Southern California. File B. Housing Conditions for Elderly--Mrs. Beal stated that at a recent meeting of service providers for the elderly a repre- sentative of the Home Help Agency stated she had a client whose housing was in deplorable condition, over-run by rats, etc. The client's health condition was worsened by the housing. Ironically, said Mrs. Beal, the present housing would have to be condemned first before being put on a priority list for new housing; however, housing that is occupied cannot be condemned. Mrs. Beal moved that where a medical agency or doctor feels a patient's health is affected by inferior housing it can be condemned or repairs forced by owners or patient be put on a priority list for subsidized housing. Motion died for lack of second. e Manager suggested that staff investigate and come back to Council with recommendations. Mrs. Beal added that there are many cases of this type, though this is the most serious one. She also added that the Building Department responded promptly to the Home Help Agency's request that they investigate the housing conditions at the particular site in question. Mrs. Beal moved, seconded by Mr. Murray, that the Mayor pro tern appoint a committee to look into these matters. Mrs. Beal feels that city should be able to take steps to assist occupants when a medical agency or doctor feels a patient's health is affected. She also feels housing funds should be appropriated for short term occupancy for elderly and those with medical problems aggravated by substandard housing. Mrs. Beal suggested appointing a representative from the Home Help Agency to the committee. Manager noted, too, that immediate action will be taken on the particular case cited by Mrs. Beal. Mr. Williams felt that perhaps appointing a committee should wait until after parameters and options are defined. He said that priority in housing is generally a function of the Lane e Minutes 11/22/76 -7 5~3 County Housing Authority as it relates to subsidized housing. On the particular case in question, Mr. Williams does not . know what mechanics the city has available to attend to the matter. The city has not been in the social service delivery kind of function, he said. Manager responded that the city would be working with the county. He also felt it would be appropriate for the Joint Housing Committee to deal with the matter. Mr. Williams said that the Joint Housing Committee has operated under the assumption that their role is to work toward the pro- duction of new housing and in areas of dispersal in at- Affirm tempting to subsidize housing. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. C. Neighborhood Refinement Plans--At Mr. Murray's request, staff will provide Council with a list of the neighborhood refinement plans currently under way and when Council can Affi rm reasonably expect to see them. D. Blayney Recommendation Re: Maximizing Residential Land Use-- Mr. Murray noted that the Planning Commission has postponed immediate action on zone changes in the Westside area near downtown to explore zoning ordinance changes. He is concerned with the length of time it will take to accomplish that task and how much housing will be lost in the meantime. e '--- It was understood that staff would bring a report Affirm back to Council on the matter. E. Water Extension Policies--Mr. Murray wondered about instructing the Council representative on the Plan Policy Committee to move quickly toward stricter controls and standards on the water extension policy, in light of recent litigation. At Manager's request, discussion of that matter Affirm will be delayed until the November 24 committee meeting. F. City-County Pedestrian Bridge--Mr. Haws feels that the new City-County pedestrian bridge is ugly and distasteful and wonders if any more finishing touches will be added. It was understood that staff will look into the matter and report Affirm back. G. Youth Commission Selections--Mr. Haws reported that Youth Commission members were interviewed on November 9 by three Council members who recommended appointments as follows: Term ending 1/1/78 - Judith Andrew Bret Rios Andria Parker Approve - _. stoLt Minutes 11/22/76 -8 Term ending 1/1/79 - Sarah Hogue Thomas Merr iam e Julie Rutledge -- Term ending 1/1/80 - David Adams Don Chalmers Carol Lee 1st alternate - Gale Orford 2nd alternate - Ann Talbot 3rd alternate - Kathy Rotenberg Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Harne 1 , to confirm the appointments of the Youth Commission members and alter- nates. Motion carried unanimously. H. Introduction--Newly Elected Council Members--Council President Keller introduced the four Council members-elect: Brian Obie, Betty Smith, Jack Delay, and Scott Lieuallen. File 1. Introduction--Human Rights Specialist--Manager introduced Paul A. (Andy) Clement, Human Rights Specialist who will be working in the City Manager's office. File J. Joint Meeting with Springfield, Eugene, and Lane County-- Manager announced a joint meeting of Springfield, Eugene, and Lane County on November 18 at 7:30 p.m. at the Thunderbird regarding a presentation of regional sewer alternatives by the e Metropolitan Sewer Advisory Committee. Affirm --' K. League of Oregon Cities Arrangements--Manager announced that the City Manager's van would pick up those persons needing transportation to the League meeting Sunday, November 14. He also noted that the Eugene delegation would meet Sunday evening for dinner at 8:00 p.m. at Ford's Restaurant in Portland. File L. "No Through Trucks" Proposal for Roosevelt, Elmira and Royal-- Manager noted that staff is having difficulty in defining alter- natives and wishes to postpone the public hearing, scheduled for November 22, until January 24. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to postpone the public hearing until January 24. Motion carried Approve unanimously. II. Liquor License--Change of Ownership 17th and Lincoln Market, 295 w. 17th Avenue (PS) Jack and Anna Mueller Manager reported staff investigation revealed no objections to the change. Approve e -" Minutes 11/22/76 -9 5~5 ---- ------ Mrs. Beal moved, seconded by Mr. Harne 1 , to recommend approval of the change of ownership. Motion carried unanimously. e III. Proposed Changes in Amazon Neighbors Charter Revised Charter with changes underlined and the present charter were distributed to Council members. Approve Mrs. Beal moved, seconded by Mr. Harne 1 , to adopt a resolution approving the revised charter. Motion carried unanimously. IV.-Review With Council Members and Council Members-Elect A. A2Pointment of New Budget Committee Members--Manager noted that Budget Committee terms are expiring January 1, 1977, in Wards two, three, and seven; and a vacancy exists in Ward one for File balance of term ending January 1, 1978. Appointments are to be recommended by Council members serving in those wards fairly soon since staff wishes to schedule a preliminary discussion on fi scal situations in early December. Mr. Haws wondered if reappointment was necessary should a Budget Committee member move out of the ward from which ap- pointed. City Attorney will research the question and report back. B. Budget Meeting--It was understood that a Budget Committee meeting would be held December 2. A time for the meeting e '-" will be set so as not to conflict with a meeting with Lane Transit District, also scheduled for that date. File C. Council Orientation Meeting--Before the end of the year, staff wishes to meet with the Council members-elect to discuss Council procedures and guidelines. December 16 was suggested File as a possible date for this meeting. V. ~evision of Resolution 2440 Re: Goodpasture Island Plan Amendment Memos, revised resolution with changes underlined, and Resolution 2440 have been distributed to Council. James Spickerman, acting city attorney, explained that the Council, by Resolution 2440, Approve amended Eugene's 1990 Plan and referred that amendment to Lane County and the City of Springfield for comment. Lane County subsequently took a "no comment" stance with the idea that it would go on to L-COG. The problem is that a state statute re- quires the County to hold at least one public hearing when an amendment to the comprehensive plan is considered by the Board of County Commissioners. It was therefore the court's determination that the city was trying to exercise jurisdiction outside its bounds. Mr. Spickerman suggests that the Council readopt the plan amendment by resolution and that it urge the Board of "'-" e Minutes 11/22/76 -10 5 toft, County Commissioners to amend the County version of the 1990 Plan in a manner which is in accord with the state statute. e -" Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Harne I , to amend Resolution 2440. Motion carried unanimously. VI. Implementation of $5 Million Parks Land Acquisition Serial Levy Memo of November 8 from Joint Parks Committee has been distributed to Council Members. Mrs. Shirey, committee chairperson, said that the committee feels the plan is flexible with enough checkpoints and review processes along the way to assure Council that the committee is on the right track. Parks Director Ed Smith reviewed the criteria to be used in establishing the implementation of the acquisition program. Questions to be considered will include: (1) Has the parcel in question previously been identified as a potential site; (2) Is the area being pressured for development, thus causing immediate concern; (3) Is there an opportunity to coordinate an acquisition in conjunction with another improve- ment program funded from another source; (4) Does it fulfill the adopted five-year implementation plan; (5) Is there a po- tential of being able to receive matching funds; (6 ) Is there Approve competition with other buyers for the same land. He also noted that constraints could include availability of funds not coin- ciding with the immediacy to acquire, no willing seller, costs associated with acquisition, title problems, multiple or ab- sentee owership, method of payment for purchase, or relocation requirements and provisions. e Mrs. Beal moved, seconded by Mr. Harne 1 , to approve the "- parks implementation plan. Motion carried unanimously. VII. Guidelines for Presentation of Written Materials at or Before Council Hearings October 19 memo from City Attorney's office has been distributed tOApprove Council members. Stan Long, assistant city attorney, noted that there are two types of hearings: Quasi-judicial, involving certain land use questions, and legislative. Council should decide whether it wishes the guidelines to apply to one or both types of hearings. In addition. Council needs to decide how strict it would like the guidelines to be--do they want voluntary compliance or do they wish a stricter form set out by ordinance. The difficulty with strict controls, he said, is how to deal with exceptions, such as recently discovered information, etc. Mr. Haws felt that voluntary compliance would be the most satis- factory. Mr. Williams said that he also favored voluntary com- pliance but felt that a statement should be added that material to be considered should be submitted by noon on the Friday preceding a Council meeting. e - Minutes 11/22/76 -11 5b7 I I . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Williams, to direct staff to prepare a statement reflecting Council's wishes and e '--- i bring back for discussion. Motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Shirey expressed concern that people attending hearings are not always aware of the time limits. If neighborhood groups were aware of the time limits prior to the hearing, they could more satisfactorily work out speaking arrangements among themselves. Manager responded that the mechanics of a public hearing start on a Friday afternoon at the time the Council agenda is put together. Every effort is made to keep the total of public testimony under two hours, he said. Assistant City Manager also suggested public hearing time limits could be set at the committee-of-the-whole meeting at which the hearing date is established. The press could then include that time limit in its advertisements. VIII. Quasi-judicial Hearings Set for November 22, 1976 Chambers House located at southwest corner of 10th and Taylor (1006 Taylor) (Z 76-36) Public Hearing Collier House located at southwest corner of 13th and University (Z 76-37) '-' . \_, e 5~8 Minutes 11/22/76 -12 . '---" Committee-of-the-Who1e November 17, 1976 ... Present: Council members Keller (presiding), Haws, Beal, Murray, Bradley, Hamel, and Shirey; Council members-elect Delay, Lieuallen, Db ie, and Smith; City Manager and staff; and others. 1. Items from Mayor and Council A. Leave, Councilman Haws--Mr. Haws announced he would not be present for committee meetings during the next two weeks. File B. Quorum, Human Rights Commissions--Councilman Haws commented on reports he had received that the Human Rights Commissions were not meeting regularly because Commission members were not too active. Assistant Manager said that problems, resulting from a combination of some members' absence and the Commission's focusing on substantive programs, had been resolved. Mr. Haws asked staff to monitor the meetings and report to the Council should further problems be encountered. Councilwoman Beal reported that the Commission on Aging had been meeting regu- larly and considering well defined agendas which they were File pursuing. tit C. NLC Congress of Cities, Denver--Councilman Murray suggested .- that invitation be extended to Council members-elect to attend the Congress of Cities in Denver, November 27/December 1. It was understood that the newly elected Council members would contact the manager's office for registration and hotel reser- File vation information should they wish to attend. D. Report, Regional Dog Control Authority--Councilman Bradley said a new director had been hired for the Authority--a Mr. Lancaster from Wichita. Also, that the Authority is in the process of locating a new site for the pound, whether on a contractual File lease arrangement with the County in its solid waste management area in Glenwood or on property yet to be purchased is not known. The present contractual arrangement for use of the Lane Humane Society's pound facilities will be continued, he said, until a new site is found. Mr. Bradley reported too that the firm of Harms and Harold had been retained as in-house counsel for the Authority; legal questions arising for individual agencies will be handled by the legal counsel for the respective agencies. E. Voting Delegate, NLC Congress of Cities, Denver--Manager recommended since Councilman Keller will not be attending the meeting in Denver that Councilman Haws be named official voting delegate for the city of Eugene, with Councilman Bradley designated as alternate. Approve e .-' Sb9 Minutes 11/22/76 -13 I '- Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Hamel to designate Council- man Haws as voting delegate, Councilman Bradley as alternate, . at the NLC Congress of Cities. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye, except Councilman Haws voting no. F. League of Oregon Cities Conference, Portland, November 14-16-- Manager reported briefly on the meeting, noting the retirement of Councilman Williams as president of the League and the election of Mayor-elect Keller to the Board of Directors. He described the meeting as a constructive and useful session with the usual routine workshops and a fine dinner for the Eugene delegation. There was also an outstanding performance by staff and Mr. Keller depicting "the way council and Planning COImnission meetings should be conducted." Public Works Director Don Allen was the star performer. In response to Councilwoman Bea1, Mr. Keller verified that a more accurate report was that "it was File the way meetings should not be conducted." Manager continued that the single most important announcement coming out of the convention was that made by Governor Straub regarding his partial support of the League's state revenue sharing proposal which would partially answer financial difficulties being experienced by Oregon cities. There remains, however, much work to be done with the Legislature in this regard to determine how much in total will cities receive and what kind of distribution formula will be applied. G. Joint Meeting with Metropolitan Sewer Commission was announced e for 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 18, wherein Eugene, Spr ing- field, and Lane County will consider alternatives proposed by the Commission for a long-range regional sewer system. The meeting will be held at the Thunderbird on Coburg Road. File H. Appointments, Boards and Commissions--Copies of lists of boards and commissions, indicating terms expiring, and 0 f applicants for appointment were previously distributed to Council members and members-elect. Manager asked for a definitive determination of the appointing authority--the Approve present Council, or the Council to be seated on January 3, 1977 . Councilman Haws raised the question of appointment procedure for the Human Rights Commissions, whether appointment after interview by the full Council was still desired. Stan Long, assistant city attorney, noted the manner of appointment was included in the language setting up the new structure for the Human Rights Commissions When the Women's Commission was created, so any change now would require a code amendment. 'e 510 Minutes 11/22/76 -14 . . Councilwoman Beal noted that most of the terms expiring on the Human Rights Commissions were for members who had served only e one year, so that reappointments would probably be appropriate; the Council would not have to interview very many applicants. In response to Councilwoman Shirey, Mrs. Beal said she felt it would not be necessary to interview for reappointment. Councilman Murray noted that HCDC is in the process of drafting a funding application, so appointment of those members as quickly as possible would be extremely advantageous. He thought those appointments should be made before the first of the year so that there would be no lag in memberhsip during the work now in progress. Councilman Haws suggested going ahead with a public hearing to determine whether to amend the code with regard to appoint- ment procedure, but Councilman Keller brought the discussion back,to the issue of whether the present Councilor the newly elected council should make the appointments. Councilman Bradley thought the new Council should appoint for those terms expiring January 1, 1971. Councilwoman Beal, however, disagreed, noting that some of the terms--for example, the Budget Committee--did not coincide with Council terms. Because of that, she said, there might be some Council members who would not have had the opportunity to recommend a Budget Committee member. e Councilman Hamel thought the present Council should appoint sometime between now and December for those terms expiring January 1 to avoid any lag in the work of committees. Assis- tant Manager suggested three options: Waiting until after the first of the year and the new Council making the appointments, going ahead with the present Council making the appointments now, or having the new Council recommend appointees to the present Council for action now. Councilman Murray reiterated the desire for appointments to the HCDC as quickly as possible because the Commission would be short three members and the work now in progres makes this a "bad time" for the Commission to be short. Mr. Long noted that historically it has been understood a member would serve until his successor is appointed and takes office. He said he would look at the language creating the Comissions to be sure that applied in this instance. Councilwoman Shirey also thought the present Council should make the appointment so as to avoid any lag in work of the Commissions. e 57/ Minutes 11/22/76 -IS I I Mr. Haws moved second by Mrs. Beal that the four newly elected Council members and the four remaining Council members meet and make recomendations for appointment e ~- by the present Council with regard to those terms expiring January 1. 1977 . Beth Campbell. neighborhood liaison. asked if the deadline for applying for appointment would be extended beyond the November 15 date. Manager answered that it would not. Councilman Bradley wondered what legal weight a recommendation made by newly elected Council members would have if it was made before they officially took office. He thought it would be getting into a "gray area" and might set precedent with regard to decisions in other areas of concern. Stan Long answered that the Council has the authority to appoint any committee to make recommendations. That was what was happening here. he said; the Council was designating a committee to interview applicants and make recommendations for appointment. He added. however, that he would still like to look more closely at the code because there may be a legal obligation for the Council itself to interview finalists. Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, all Cou~cil members present voting aye, except Councilman Bradley voting no. Councilman Haws remarked that the intent of his motion was to e ~- set the process in gear because of the time element involved. Councilwoman Shirey suggested that in the future the process should perhaps take place a little earlier in the year. Mrs. Beal moved, seconded by Mr. Williams. to discuss the matter at a Committee- of-the-Who1e meeting. Motion carried unanimously. __.~~_ _. __u___ 1. Hearing Panel Report--November 8, 1976 re: Zoning Variance, 140 High Street Council Member Haws opened the hearing by stating its purpose was the appeal of David Allen Filer from a Zoning Board of Appeals decision of September 30, 1976 regarding 140 High Street. Council Member Haws further stated that he would ask for a presentation from staff and then give 15 minutes to each side to present their arguments. He further stated that the Approve appellants have the burden of showing that the Zoning Board of Appeals decision should not be upheld. Mr. Haxton explained by way of background that the partnership of Unthank, Sed er , Poticha and Frank Blain, Jr. submitted an appeal in proper form in the building division office on September 8, 1976. The staff made its evaluation and posted the public notices on Saturday, September 25. 1976 prior to 10 : 00 a. m . Mr. Haxton further stated that a hearing was held e "- before the Zoning Board on September 30, 1976 and the appeal was granted. Mr. Haxton related that Mr. Filer, representing the East Skinner Butte Friends & Neighbors, appealed the Board action for Council consideration. -51~ Minutes 11/22/76 -16 \ Mr. Haws questioned Mr. Haxton as to whether there were two issues, one dealing with the fence and the other dealing with e building coverage. Mr. Haxton replied that there were three issues, those mentioned by Mr. Haws and the other the density provision, which is based on a room count formula and this particular proposal has a discrepancy of some three and a fraction square feet per room short. Council member Haws asked Mr. Haxton to explain the issue regarding building coverage. Mr. Haxton replied that in an RG Garden Apartment Zone building coverage can be 30 percent of the lot area and parking coverage also 30 percent with a maximum of 60 percent coverage of the lot area. He explained that the ordinance has some "and/or" wording that would permit a developer, under one interpretation, to put 60 percent of the lot for building and none under parking. He further explained that the building division interprets the Code to impose a maximum lot coverage of 30 percent for buildings and 30 percent for parking with a maximum of 60 percent. Mr. Haxton stated that the appeal proposes 31.44 percent for building and 26.59 percent for parking coverage for a combined maximum of 58.03 percent, and the building official has interpreted this not to be allowed since 31.44 percent exceeds the interpretation. Council Member Haws then asked for an explanation of the wall or fence issue. Mr. Haxton replied that the proposal has a courtyard arrangement along High Street wherein private court- yards would be enclosed by masonry walls located in required 12-foot front yard setbacks. He explained these walls would be e approximately five feet high and would be more than allowed by the Code. Public hearing was opened. Martha Filer, 235 East 3rd Avenue, chairperson for the East Skinner Butte Friends & Neighbors, replied, stating that there was misinformation or a false statement on the original request by Mr. Blain and Mr. poticha: (1) the tax lot number was incorrect; leaving Lot 900 out of the request; and (2) the statement that visibility was not impaired was false. Mrs. Filer stated that Al Williams, traffic department engineer, did not make a statement on the plans until after the Zoning Board of-Appeals made its decision and that he wrote on the plans that it would require at least 150- to l75-feet vision clearance for the curve and these plans would allow 120-feet maximum. Mrs. Filer stated that Mr. Williams said his policy was to give an opinion, put it on the plans, and ask that the developer and the city work it out. Mrs. Filer said she would like some kind of statement from the city regarding these two discrepancies. Mrs. Filer further stated that she felt a 2 l/2-foot wall was not safe for elderly people using the Campbell Center, and that the wall did not offer privacy. e Minutes 11/22/76 -17 513 I I Sheila O'Malley spoke regarding the city's decision to place a moratorium on conditional use permits in the Skinner's Butte area because the area is special. She further stated that she e feels that the proposed development is not compatible with what is happening in the neighborhood. She stated that there is a regeneration going on in the neighborhood, with a sharing, helping feeling, and she feels the proposed development is inconsistent with the philosophy that was beginning to develop. She further stated that the point about traffic is important. Brian Simonitch, 208 East 2nd Avenue, stated that with his interpretation of the Code regarding granting of variances, it would appear that the Zoning Board of Appeals did err in that 1I...unnecessary physical hardship..." was not the case in this regard as Mr. Poticha had stated at the hearing that he could juggle these things around any way he wanted. He further stated that the applicant would not be deprived of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties clasified in the same zoning district and that the granting of the variance would be IImaterially injurious" to the properties in the vicinity. He further stated that he feels this wall is incompatible with the neighborhood. David Filer spoke regarding Item No. 3 which states that the transcripts of the hearing will give evidence to possible collusion between and lack of deportment proper to a public hearing by Mr. poticha and members of the Zoning Board. Mr. Filer further stated that the transcript from the meeting is not a verbatim transcript and that the tape is not available. e At this point, Dee Unthank spoke on behalf of the owners of the property submitting the request, stating that there was a descrepancy of only one percent in lot coverage and that he felt that there was misunderstanding about the 2 1/2-foot wall, that the variance was being requested because they did, in fact, want the wall higher than the 2 1/2 feet. He further stated, in regard to Tax Lot 900 being left off the application, that all calculations had been made including Lot 900. He further stated that the project would conform with traffic department requirements. He added that he was not at the Appeal Board meeting but could not believe the inference about deportment or collusion. Grant Seder stated that when they had approached this project, they had attempted to design first and did come up with minor variations, these are items which were appealed. He stated that these items are not crucial to the project, but they do what is the best job on the site. At this point, Mr. Seder presented for introduction into the record an editorial in the Whiteaker Neighborhod News, Volume 3, No. 7, of November, 1976. Mr. Seder stated that all they ask is that a determination be made as to whether the Zoning Board took proper action. e Minunes 11/22/76 -18 51Lt Council Member Haws ordered the editorial mentioned entered as a part of the record. e At this point, Council Member Keller asked that Mr. Filer again state his implications of collusion. Mr. Filer replied that because of the deportment at the hearing between Mr. Poticha and members of the Zoning Board of Appeals, it seemed, and he would have been willing to enter the tape recording of the testimony as evidence, that this conduct between the members of the Board and Mr. poticha has such an air of friendliness that the judgment of the Appeals Board was colored by that air. Also, he said, there were occasions during the testimony when people speaking against the Board's decision were interrupted, and that questions were made by the panel to members of his group that were placed in a tone of arrogance and aggressiveness. He futher felt that some explanation of why the evidence was not available should be made. Mr. Filer further stated that they had assumed that the wall was five feet and this gave them more concern about visibility with this height. Council Member Keller questioned where a statement regarding traffic and visibility could be obtained. Mrs. Filer responded with her concern regarding the statement by Mr. Blain and Mr. Poticha that the curve poses no visibility problem. However, she did not have time to get a statement because of the short notice of the meeting. She further stated that after the Appeals Board meeting Mr. Johnduff of the building department e gave her information from the traffic engineer that the curve would require 150- to l75-foot clearance at a minimum. ~e further stated that when she was able to talk to the traffic engineer he related that this opinion was his, but that he does not want to take sides, his office does not like to get involved in this sort of thing, that his statement was on the plans, and it is up to the developer and the city to work out the discrepancy. She said the traffic engineer stated that he would present his statement if required by the Planning Commission or City Council. At this point, Mr. Haws asked if these plans had been viewed by the Zoning Board. Mrs. Filer responded that the traffic engineer's statement was not on the plans in time for the Board to see it. Public hearing was closed. Mr. Haws asked that staff respond to questions raised. Mr. Haxton replied regarding comments about the appeal request, stating that the original document did not include Tax Lot 900. He further stated that a vicinity map was not produced for the Zoning Board following regular staff procedure. Mr. Haxton responded to the statement regarding visibility being impaired by stating that because fences, wall, or landscaping were not outlined on the appeals documents, an investigation was not made in this regard. He stated that staff could evaluate vision clearance when a more definite plan is proposed prior to e Minutes 11/22/76 -19 575 constrllction. He further stated that the Code requires handrails or safety rails projecting above the height of the wall to e prevent hazard, and that pedestrian safety or vision clearance cannot be waived until a more definite plan is submitted prior to construction. Mr. Haxton stated that the problem of the recording of the hearing happened because the person doing the recording did not understand the recorder and one side of the tape was blank. Mr. Haxton further stated that, contrary to what had been stated to Mr s. Filer, he had discovered that the last half of the tape was available and that the items she is interested in may be available on that recording. He further stated the transcript is not word for word since the recorder does not use that kind of operation. Council Member Haws asked for staff recommendation in this matter. Mr. Haxton stated that it was his feeling that the panel should decide whether the appeal process was defective in enough areas to have denied due process and if so, they might recommend that the Zoning Board of Appeals hear the issue one more time, with emphasis on processing. Council Member Haws stated that he could not determine from the record why the Zoning Board of Appeals did what they did because the transcript did not make it clear. He expressed a request that in the future the Zoning Board of Appeals would e make findings when they make a decision so that it can be determined why they granted or did not grant an appeal. Council Member Keller commented that the opposition to the variances made light issue of all except the fence issue. He further stated that this issue was unclear because it appears to vary from 2 1/2 feet to 5 feet. Mr. Keller stated testimony ,from people who said "they heard" cannot be proved, and therefore only issues should be addressed. He stated his concern about people coming out with such strong words as "collusion," when in fact these things could not be proved. Councilman Keller made a motion to recommend approval of the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals, granting the variances. Council Member Haws seconded, stating that he agreed that the burden of proof was not met. However, he felt the building coverage issue and the fact that the Zoning Board of Appeals did not make their findings clear should be pursued. The motion carried and the meeting was adjourned. Copies of the report were previously distributed to Council members, recommending denial of the appeal and upholding the Zoning Board decision to grant variances. e Minutes 11/22/76 -20 51(, Manager called attention to correspondence received by the Council at this meeting from David Filer) member of the East e Skinner Butte Friends and Neighbors) requesting a public hearing b~fore the full Council. Councilman Murray asked whether those making the appeal would have the opportunity at the November 22 Council meeting to give testimony. Stan Long) assistant city attorney) advised that the issue would have to be considered under Fasano regulations. Testimony in addition to that given before the hearing panel would not be taken unless the bearing was reopened; this would require a two-thirds majority vote of the Council. He said th~t vote could be be taken at this time; it would not be finalized until the November 22 meeting so further public hearing) should it be decided to reopen) could not be held until the December 13 Council meeting in order for notice of the hearing to be given. Councilma~ Keller called attention to the report and noted that the hearing panel made its decision based on the facts presented.. The major thing) he said, was that since so much of the testimpny at the hearing was based on hearsay the hearing panel coula make no other decision than the one it made. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Haws to hold a hearing on the issue before the full Council at its December 13 meeting. e Mr. Murray'asked whether there would be any drastic conse- quences becasue of having to delay a hearing until December. Mr. Haws wondered if written testimony could be submitted so that the hearing could go ahead on November 22. Mr. Long answered that there was no authorization for that procedure although it was a reasonable alternative. Councilman Keller said he would oppose the motion because adequate testimony had been given before the hearing panel from both sides of the issue. Having served on the panel and also having driven the area, he felt the decision made would not be changed by another hearing. Councilwoman Beal wondered also about ramificaitons of a delay) whether the developers of the project had deadlines to meet. Mr. Long said that under Fasano a simple state- ment with regard to delay) without getting into the merits of the varianJes themselves) would be permissible on the basis that type f information was needed to decide a procedural question. Otto Poticha, one of the applicants for the variances, said the project had been in process for four months now; another month would not be of major importance. Certainly it is a delay, he said) but of no great consequence. e , Minutes 11/22/76 -21 517 1 Vote was taken on the motion to reopen the hearing. Motion defeated, lacking a two-thirds majority vote - Council members Haws, Beal, Murray, and Shirey voting aye; .Council members Keller, Bradley and Hamel voting no. e - Councilman Haws asked for some response from staff, perhaps in January, with regard to conduct of Zoning Board meetings, whether it is required to make findings to support its de- cisions and submit them in a "readable" record for hearing panel information in making its decisions. He felt the pro- cedure should be "tightened;" also, the information would be of benefit to Council members-elect. Mr. Dana Davis, 303 Willamette, \fuiteaker Neighborhood, requested a public hearing on the variance granted. There is some question as to whether the Zoning Board acted in accordance with the Code. Mr. Murray moved, seconded by Mrs. Beal, that Council post- pone action on the hearing panel report until a full hearing before Council on December 13. Motion carried, Mrs. Beal, Mr. Murray, Mr. Haws, Mr. Bradley, Mrs. Shirey voting aye and Mr. Hame 1, Mr. Ke ller, an d Mr. Williams voting nay. Discussion was held on the manner in which the Zoning Board con- ducted the hearing and whether there were findings of fact. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Murray, to reconsider the issue. Motion carried unanimously. e ~ J. Appointment, Council Subcommittee on Substandard Housing-- Mayor-elect Keller appointed Councilwoman Beal to chair, and Counc i lmen Haws, and Hamel for a subcommittee to develop recom- mendations with regard to helping occupants of substandard housing when doctors or health officials feel such substandard housing is affecting health. Also, to consider whether housing Approve funds should be appropriated under certain circumstances in this regard. It was understood staff would arrange time and place for meetings of the subcommittee. K. Council/LTD and Budget Meeting, December 2--Manager said Council was invited on a bus tour, starting from the LTD 10th Avenue terminal at 4:00 p.m. It was anticipated the tour would last about an hour. Newly elected Council members were also invited. Manager added that a budget meeting would Affirm follow, beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the McNutt Room. II. Liquor License--Change of Ownership--Sam's Place, 825 Wilson Street ('RMB) Submitted by Kathy L. Dement and Jacqueline S. McCullough. Staff had no objections. Approve Mrs. Beal moved second by Mr. Haws to recommend approval to the Oregon Liquor Control Commission. Motion carried unanimously. e ~- III. Code Amendments A. Changing the word "report" to "decision" re: Commission action on zone changes - Pub. Hear. 518 Minutes 11/22/76 -22 - . - . - . t'UO .t1ear. M-2 zones under certa1n cond1t10ns C. permitting wholesale bakeries as conditional use in C-2 zones Pub. Hear. ~ Recommended by the Planning Commission on October 11, 1976. ~ Copies of report setting out details of the proposed amendments -' were previousl~ distributed to Council members. Mr. Haws moved second by Mrs. Beal to set public hearing on the proposed amendments for the November 22 Council- meeting. IV. Willamette River Greenway Copies of Planning Commission report, staff notes, and minutes of October 19, 1976 were given to Council members recommending adoption of plan refinement including Greenway boundaries, adop- tion of certain amendments to comply with State Goal IS, and forwarding required information to LCDC. Manager noted the December 1, 1976 deadline for forwarding the material to LCDC. Mr. Haws moved second by Mrs. Beal to set public hearing on the recommendations at the November 22 Council meeting. Pub. Motion carried unanimously. Hear. V. Water Extension Policy Copies of Resolution 2448, setting out criteria for extension of water service beyond the city; Ordinance 17492, regulating extra- territorial water extensions; and Council minutes of December 22, 1975 and February 14, 1972 covering Council discussion and action in this regard were previously distributed to Council ~ members. Stan Long, assistant city attorney, explained provisions __ adopted by the Council wherein water may be extended beyond the urban service boundary when a health hazard exists. He noted also the change 1n the role of the Boundary Commission whereby the Commission can approve or disapprove sewer and water extensions. He said, however, the statute 1S unclear as to whether the Boundary Commission can order such extensions. The Commission, being an appointed body, makes legislative decisions in the same manner the Legislature itself makes decisions, giving cause to question whether review of Boundary Commission decisions would be of any purpose. Mr. Long contined that the Commission also considers annexations, and that water and sewer extensions are decided by the Boundary Commission as are annexations, however not necessarily on the same criteria. He said a recent case from the Court of Appeals says that annexations are not matters affecting land use, giving the potential of ultimately having to face the situation that water and sewer extensions cannot be used to regulate land use. In addition, with the effective date of the revised city charter of April 1, 1977, the city will have the legal right to control water extension by EWEB. All of these things, Mr. Long said, call for re-examination of the city's water extension policy and for asking the Legislature to clarify its statutes with regard to Boundary Commission authority. He thought too the time for ~ reconsideration was opportune because of the General Plan update ~ in process and the fundamental question of whether sewer and ~ water extensions were going to be a part of the city's land use policy. 57'1 Minutes 11/22/76 -23 At Councilman Murray's request, Jim Saul, planner, read the text from the General Plan covering the city's policy with regard to extension of water service beyond the urban service boundary to the . effect that such extension would not occur except in case of an immediate health hazard. Mr. Murray commented that in the best interest of the city and its people a more forthright and res- trictive statement should be included in the 1990 Plan; the.re should be a more literal definition of "health hazard." Councilwoman Beal wondered if some provision could be made with the County whereby the County would include as part of its permit for new development the statement that the city would not furnish water unless the area was annexed to the city and that an applica- tion for water service would not be accepted on the grounds of health hazard because the developer had been forewarned. John Porter, planning director, suggested that staff could bri?g a report to the Council on ways of enforcing the 1990 Plan and present policy in a legal manner, giving options for Council consideration. He thought the term "health hazard" had to be de fined. Council members Shirey and Murray agreed the suggested procedure would be appropriate. Mr. Murray hoped, though, that staff would look at the whole question of health hazard, because simple redefinition of the term perhaps might not be the answer. Mr. Porter said as a matter of information that the Boundary Commission staff is looking at its water extension policy. Before any report is brought back to the Council, he said, contact would be made with both the county and Commission staffs. He said it e would not be a short-term thing; he couldn't see bringing anything for at least two to four months although he hoped to have something before the effective date of the charter, April 1. In response to Councilman Murray with regard to timing in terms of the General Plan update, Mr. Porter said it was very good because they didn't expect the Plan update process to be much beyond program detailing before January. It probably would be a year, he said, before that came to the Council. Councilman Bradley, in response to Mrs. Shirey, said that as the Council's representative on the Plan Policy Committee he ~ould relay the city's concerns. He said the Committee was just now identifying the issues and he would convey the need for putting the water extension issue at the top of the list. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Hamel to authorize staff to re-examine the existing water extension policy and report back to the Council with alternatives by February 15, 1977; Approve in that re-examination to take into consideration legal information given at this meeting and policy issues raised by the Counci I. Motion carried unanimously. e Minutes 11/22/76 -24 .580 VI. Interim Design Criteria Policy, East Skinner Butte was suggested by East Skinner Butte Friends and Neighbors, and copies of the e submittal were previously distributed to Council members. Manager recommended referral of the proposed policy to the Planning Commission. Councilman Murray asked if the Commission was act1vely considering establishment of an historic district in this area. John Porter, planning director, explained the inventorying process underway in the westside area which included the East Skinner Butte area. He said information and data from that inventory could well indicate historic designation for East Skinner Butte. However, he hesitated in proposing any legislation until that work was finished and an evaluation of the overall area made. Otto Poticha, architect, called attention to the "special district" that was already in the zoning code which could cover the subject ar e a , this in addition to the "historic" designation already suggested. He said if the suggestion made by the East Skinner Butte Friends and Neighbors was adopted, it would require a major overhaul of the existing zoning code. He added that he thought the sugges- tion was submitted as a critique of the proposed project at 140 High Street, and he felt referral would only be wasting the Planning Commission's time. Mrs. David Filer, speaking for the East Skinner Butte Friends and Neighbors, denied the submittal was the result of the 140 High project. She said their group had been working on the e refinement plan and was told that this suggeston would have to be submitted as part of the plan, following the timetable set for completion of that work, sometime in June. On the other hand, she said, they are not able to do anything about issues arising while the refinement plan work is going on. So this site review process was submitted as an interim policy. Councilm'an Murray felt the issue was one of policy and procedure-- A the request did come from a legitimate group, recognized by the pprove city, for hearing of a proposal on a planning issue in their area. He thought they had the right to be heard. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Hamel to refer the proposed interim policy to the Planning Commission for recommendation. Motion carried unanimously. VII. Banner Presentation, Lotte Streisinger Manager informed the Council that Lotte Streisinger and Barbara Neil would present to the city a banner designed by Ms. Neil File for the Craftsmanship 1976 Eugene Oregon exhibition held at the University Art Museum in September. The fair was partially funded by Room Tax funds, and the banner must be released to the city by the University before it can be used at other exhibitions. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Harne 1 , to approve, affirm and file as noted items A-H under November 10, 1976, committee and e Items A 1-7, 10 and 11 and B through H under November 17, 1976 committee. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. 58/ Minutes 11/22/76 -25 V. - Ordinances "'---'" Council Bill No. 1292 - Levying assessments for paving Waite Street e from Bell Avenue to Elmira Road (76-02) (1203) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1292 be referred to Hearing Panel for hearing on December 6, 1976 and recommendations brought back for Council consider- ation on December 13, 1976. Motion carried unanimously. Council Bill No. 1293 - Levying assessments for paving Sarah Lane from Bonnie View Drive to 200 feet north (76-3) (1209) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1293 be referred to Hearing Panel for hearing on December 6, 1976 and recommendations brought back for Council consider- ation on December 13, 1976. Motion carried unanimously. Council Bill No. 1294 - Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Royal View Subdivisions (76-13) (1231) was read by council bill number Bud ti tIe only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. "- Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. e 1293 be referred to Hearing Panel for hearing on December 6, 1976 and recommendations brought back for Council consider- ation on December 13, 1976. Motion carried unanimously. Council Bill No. 1295 - Sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Banks Subdivision (1299) was read by number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1295 be read 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1295 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, tliIe bill was declard passed and numbered 17808. Council Bill No. 1296 - Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Banks Subdivision (1299) was read by num- ber and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. e ---- 1296 be read by couricil 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. 58~ Minutes 11/22/76 -26 . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1296 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All e CO\IDcil members present voting aye, the bill was declared: lp.assad V and numbered 17809. Council Bill No. 1297 - Paving streets within Banks Subdivision (1299) was read by number and title on~y, there being no CO\IDcil member pre- sent requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1297 be read by council bill number only, with \IDanimous 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council 'Bill No. 1297 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17810. Council Bill No. 1298 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving streets within Banks Subdivision (1299) was read by number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it i;be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1298 be read by council bill number only, with unanimous consent e 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Council Bill No. 1298 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye; the bill was declared passed and numbered 17811. \iI. Resolutions Resolution No. 2593 - Authorizing amendment to Amazon Neighbors Charter was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt Resolution No. 2593. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Resolution No. 2594 - Repealing Resolution No. 2440 and re-adopting amendment to 1990 General Plan re: Goodpasture Island area was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt Resolution No. 2594. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members prese~t voting aye. . Resolution No. 2595 - Authorizing payment of bills and claims for -...../ period November 8 through 22, 1976 was read by number and title. 583 Minutes 11/22/76 -27 . " - Mr. Haws~moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt Resolution No. 2595. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, a1ili Council members "- present voting aye, except Mr. Williams abstaining on the e accomt payable entitled "Citizens Associates" for $1,340.00. Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adj ourne d. C~;IY~ ~ Ci ty Manager .......... e "",-, . S8Lf Minutes 11/22/76 -28