Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/28/1977 Meeting .. - e "-- - '-... MINUTES EUGENE CITY COUNCIL Feburary 28, 1977 Adjourned meeting from February 14, 1977 of the Common Council of the City of Eugene, Ore<Jon was called to order by His Honor, Mayor Gus Keller at 7:30 p.m. on February 28, 1977 in the Council Chamber with the following Council members present: Eric Haws, D. W. Hamel, Tom Williams, Ray Bradley, Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian <l>ie, and Betty Smith. I. Public HearinQs I-A-l A. Blain Alley Vacation (AV 76-6), located west of High Street, north of East 2nd Avenue; retaining public utility and pedestrian easements Recol11lTlended by Planning Commission December 13,1976. Manager indicated this alley vacation had been r~quested by the adjacent property owner. Both Tax Lots 200 and 1000 are owned by the applicant. Petitioner: Frank Blain Mr. Saul, Pl anni n9 Department revi ewed background for the Council. He said review of this proposed vacation indicated the following considerations are pertinent to the request: 1. The alley is presently unimproved. 2. There is a substantial grade change between High Street (the east end of the alley) and the intersecting north- south alley (the west end of the alley). In order to establish a uniform grade for improvement of the alley, it would be necessary to import fill. This would result in the creation of a grade difference between the alley and the adjacent property which would reach a maximum of about 10 feet at the west end of the proposed vacation. 3. Because of the steepness of the slope, it is highly un- likely that the remainder of the alley to the west would be improved. 4. The alley is not needed for access to adjacent properties. 5. Review by the Public Works Department and other agencies indicate that there is no need to retain this alley. However, both the Public Works Department and EWEB have indicated that public utility easement should be retained to accommodate existing utilities. In view of the physical difficulties associated with the improvement of this alley as well as the effect such improvement would have on the adjacent property and the effect that retention of the alley is not necessary to serve the public, the Staff recommended at its December 13, 1976 meeting that the proposed alley vacation be approved. The recommendation is subject to retention of public utility easement. Public Hearin<J was opened. Otto Poticha, 1820 Kona Street, spoke in favor of the alley vacation. He cited the same concerns of improvement of the alley 2/28/77 --1 131 "'---- as had been stated by the Planning Commission. He represented the owner of the site who would like to be able to develop both halves of the property as one parcel. He said an addi- tional concern was for the area growing denser over a period of time and the alley would provide for some open space. He said the request was for an easement and therefore it would not be possible to build on the easement. He indicated the alley could be used as a parking area and would connect with the upper alley; also, he saw no value in having the alley as it presently stands and would like to see the city vacate it. Brian Simonitch, 208 East 2nd Avenue, spoke as the representative of the East Skinners Butte Friends and Neighbors, against the alley vacation. He was also representing the following people: Leif L. Selkregg, 205 East 2nd; James O'Malley, 224 East 2nd; Martha Filer, 235 East 3rd; and Sheila O'Malley, 224 East 2nd. Mr. Simonitch distributed to Council a memorandum regarding vacation of alleyways. He asked the Council to view the docu- ment very carefully, as it constitutes a legal argument which will be litigated in regard to the alley vacation. He cited the City Council does not have the authority to grant the vacation at thi s time under these procedures as there was not adequate advertising done, and no adequate criteria used in preparing the report for the alley vacation. He said the City Code says the Common Council shall have the power and authority within the limits of the City of Eugene to provide for the vacation of any street or alley on the petition or with the consent of not less than three-quarters of the owners of the property adjoining or abutting upon such street or part thereof to be so vacated. He also said the Council must determine whether or not the vacation would be in the public interest. He indicated there was a con- flict between whether the City Code and the State Statutes, which one should have authority in an alley vacation. He felt, as did the people he was representing, that the city was in violation of the state law and would be liable for an injunction to keep the City Council from proceeding any further. He again said that the application was defective, citing that no proper notice had been sent out, no notarization had been granted, and consent of the property owners had not been part of the application. He also cited the balancing test under state statutes which would have to indicate who has precedents and interests, saying that none were adopted. He said that there were inadequate procedures used in determining to proceed with the alley vacation and that the city would have to consider willfully disregarding the state statutes. He asked the Council to suspend any action and to give more consideration than had been given prior to the meeting. Public hearing was closed with no further testimony being presented. . \ -- e Ms. Smith asked for a response from the City Attorney. Mr. Long replied t~at the City has taken a position of vacating e '- 2/28/77--2 138 . e I-A-2 e alleys under its charter, whereas the memo is taking a position that vacation of alleys is a matter of state concern. He indi- cated it would take some time to review the memo. Manager indicated staff could have a response for Council in two weeks and Council could go ahead and give first reading at this time and hold over for second reading at the next Council meeting. Mr. Haws said as he saw the matter, based on the staff notes and background, the alley was not really needed by the City. C. B. 1356--Authorizing alley vacation of Blain Alley (AV 76-6), located west of High Street, north of East 2nd Avenue; retainin9 public utility and pedestrian easements, 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. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the Blain Alley vacation matter be tabled for legal clarification. Motion was defeated, with Bradley and Delay voting aye; Haws, Hamel, Williams, Lieuallen, Obie, and Smith voting no. B. Vote was taken on the motion as stated which carried, with Haws, Hamel, Williams, Lieuallen, Obie, and Smith voting aye; Bradley and Delay voting no. Lacking unanimous consent, C. B. 1356 will be given second reading at March 14 meeting. Withdrawals from water districts (Oakway and Glenwood) Manager indicated there were three withdrawals from water districts to be considered by Council, one from the Glenwood Water District, and two from the Oakway Water District. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. C. B. 1357--Withdrawing from Glenwood Water District that portion of district annexed to city November 4, 1976 CU 76-63 Lane County and declaring an emergency 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 the second time by Council Bill number only. 2/28/77 --3 13CJ -- 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 ~nd numbered 17866. - I-A-2 C.B. 1358--Withdrawing from Oakway Water District area identified as CEU 76-23, South Goodpasture Island and declaring an emergency 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 the second time by Council Bill number only. 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 17867. I-A-2 C.B. 1359--Withdrawing from Oakway Water District area identified as CEU 76-31, K. Ray Barnes and declaring an emergency 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 the second time by Council Bill number only. 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 17868. C. Annexations I-A-3 1. Area east of Spring Avenue, north of Central Boulevard (Lemke) (A 76-15) "- ~1a nager i ndi cated the Pl anni ng Commi ssi on in its Ja nuary 24, 1977 meeting had heard testimony on the annexation; the Planning Commission sent no recommendation to the Council as it had a tie vote, 3: 3. Mr. Jim Saul, Pl anning Department, said that the request for this annexation included the parcels consisting of 1.25 acres. He indicated this request is within the pro- jected urban service area, the Public Works Department indi- cated the property can be served with sanitary sewers by an extension from the west. Consequently, a full range of urban services, including water and electric service, and police and - 2/28/7 7 --4 1 if 0 . fire protection areavailable to the property. Mr. Saul said that at the time of the public hearing by the Planning Commission, a number of people in the area had expressed concern over the effect the development of this parcel would have on the street and questioned the feasibility of access on Spring Boulevard for fire equipment to the site. He said that several members of the Planning Commission were concerned regarding the fire equipment's ability to negotiate Spring Boulevard, as it is a very narrow street, and had used this as a basis for their negative votes. He said subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing, a review with the Fire Chief indicated that fire equipment could negotiate Spri ng Boul evard and, in fact, the Fi re Department woul d prefer to have this property in the City as it would provide fire pro- tection for that development. Public testimony was opened. - David Pederson, 440 2nd Avenue; Herb Nill, 2140 Essex; George Mast, 1648 East 23rd; and Jan Hansen, 277 Spring Boulevard; all spoke in favor of the annexation of the Lemke property. Some of the points raised were: The conditions of the sur- rounding streets should not be a legal basis for considering annexation of some property; the property in question would be considerably upgraded and more in conformance with the neighborhood; the street needs to be improved, and will be if it is annexed to the city; the Association of General Contractors supports the annexation as it would provide work for many contractors who are now out of work; and that the increase in traffic should not be a basis for not annexing as there would be only six lots developed and it would not cause that much .more traffic. Everett L. Holdren, 2109 Essex Lane, spoke against the annex- ation, representing the Fairmount Neighbors. He said the group was opposed to the annexation and the development of the property citing the increased traffic on narrow Spring Boulevard, and the fact that the development would alter the quality of the nei ghborhood. He sai d he objected to the annexati on as a citi zen who would have to pay for some of the street improvements. David Edmington, 3145 Whitten; Shannon McCarthy-Dodson, 2285 East 29th Avenue; Ray Dodson, 2285 East 29th Avenue; Judi I-brstmann, 1835 East 28th; and George Mayer, 2850 Spring Boulevard; all indicated opposition to the annexation. They cited the follow- ing reasons: the increase of traffic on narrow Spring Boulevard; the improvement would upset the balance of the neighborhood; the fact the fire trucks would be unable to set up because of overhead wires and only one fire hydrant in the area; the doubt of the City's ability to improve the road; the fact many people who live in the neighborhood wish it to remain as it is; the difficulty of entering and getting out of driveways. e Public testimony was closed, there being no further testimony presented. 2/28/77--5 ILfI '~ Mr. Delay asked Mr. Saul if there was a potential hazard with additional housing if streets are too narrow. Mr. Saul replied that many of the statements in the public testimony which were made were correct to a certain extent. He indicated that the street does have a very narrow ri ght- of-way i nheri ted from the county, and while present improvements for paving are not the normal city standards, it would be adequate to accommodate the existinq level of development in the area if it were annexed to the city. He would not characterize it as being hazardous. -e Mr. Bradley asked what public purpose would be served by annex- ing this portion of property to the city at this time. He stated that governments act in the public health, welfare, and safety, and was concerned about sufficient rationale for annexing this property at this time, and how the City of Eugene would benefit. Mr. Saul replied that the City of Eugene had adopted plans under which it would consider annexation. Through this plan, it estab- lished guidelines for extending services to the projected urban service area through annexations. At urban level, development should occur both within the city and outside of it; and the ideal way for the policy to be carried out would be for the City to be the sole initiator of annexation and provide a rate for develop- ment. He stated that was not possible, so the annexations are dealt with at the request of owners. He said this annexation was consistent with guidelines as set out by the City Code. Mr. Lieuallen asked if it would be possible that this annexation force improvement of Spring Boulevard. Mr. Don Allen, Public Works Department, said that improvement of streets is generally done through the decision of property owners unless the City determines a need is there and the street should be improved. Mr. Lieuallen questioned the access for fire trucks. Mr. Allen replied he would have to rely on the testimony given under the auspices of the Fire Chief. Mr. Obie, in reply to Mr. Bradley's questions, indicated he felt an infilling within the City of Eugene and the use of the prop- erty for housing where services exist is.compatible with the City's guidelines. He reminded the Council that this particular annexation leaves options for only one to eight lots being devel- oped; that the Council should concern itself with whether to annex the property and not how the property is developed. e Mr. Bradley expressed concern with infilling in the corporate area of the city and said that this annexation was not compatible. He said he felt there was a need to set priorities within the corporate areas of the City of Eugene. He said it was possible for annexation of all areas around Eugene and there would still e: 2/28/77 --6 \ "\ d-.. . be areas in the corporate area of Eugene not developed. He felt a higher priority should be given to areas within the corporate area of Eugene. Mr. Saul replied that the City has adopted both policies and there is nothing saying which policy takes preeminence over the other. He said both policies are important to maintain a livable environment for the community, that is what the guidelines and goals are all about. He said it is necessary to have a committment to the inner city, but also to have a liberal annexation policy to property on the fringe areas of the city. He said it is not possible to segre- gate one policy, there is a need to exercise a balance of both, and to keep the balance of both in order. 1-8-1 Resolution No. 2632--Forwarding to Boundary Commission recom- mendation for annexation of property east of Spring Avenue, north of Central Boulevard, was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried. All Council members present voting aye, except Mr. Bradley voting no. I-B-2 2. Area along north side of Skyline Loop, east of Barber Drive (Rutledge) (A 76-16) Manager-indicated this annexation had been recommended by the PlanninQ Commission at its meeting of January 24, 1977, and the request is for annexation of a parcel consisting of approximately .72 acres. Mr. Jim Saul, Planning Department, indicated that the parcel to be annexed is in the projected urban service area, that it is contiguous with the existing city limits, and the Planning Commission had recommended approval. The intent of the annexation would be to develop the area with single-family residences. e -. Public Hearing was opened. Ruth Cope1y, 590 East 40th Avenue, said she was speaking as a representative of Mr. Rutledge, and as buyer of the property. The plan would be to build a single-family house and they wished to have city services for that dwelling, and indicated they would appreciate favorable action by the City Council. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Resolution No. 2633--Forwarding to Boundary Commission recommendation for annexation of property along the north side of Skyline Loop, north of Barber Drive, was read by number and title. - Mr. Lieua1len asked in the continuing discussion of the policy of annexation, if this development will necessitate street im- provement and storm sewers in that area. He asked what the reason is for the general public or developer or the resident to assume the capital constructions costs. Mr. Saul indicated 2/28/7 7 --7 1~.3 - the Council is in the midst of considering the matter of assessing costs and the appropriate time for changing the present assessment procedures would be at that time. He said the City has already committed itself to improvements. Mr. Bradley asked on a policy level if any municipality can fairly require the property owner to bear the full costs of extension ofci ty servi ces. Mayor Ke 11 er di d not allow answer to the question, as he said it would be a change of policy and ruled Mr. Bradley out of order. e. Vote was taken on the motion which carried, with all Council members present voting aye. A short recess was taken. I-B-3 3. Area north of Beltline Road and east of Coburg Road (Cone-Breeden) (A 76-13) Manager indicated that the annexation of this area had been recommended unanimously by the Planning Commission at its February 1, 1977 meeting. Jim Bernhard, Planning Commission Chairman, said that the annexation criteria discussed by the Planning Commission in regard to this piece of property were: it was within the projected urban service boundary; it was contiguous to the present city limits; it could be served with urban services; there was a shortage of park lands in the area; mass transit is available; it includes improvement of traffic concerns and would allow for orderly traffic solution; it could utilize large vacant land for specialized projects and orderly development; the General Plan would allow for an opportunity of an area developed for PUD and light industry; there is limited employment oppor- tunity in the area; it would provide an opportunity to coor- dinate, plan, and review a large parcel of land over time, with control. In response to. plans and policies and general guidelines adopted by the city, he said the Planning Com- mission had recommended 6:0 for annexation and the property included 390 acres. e No ex parte contacts or reasons for conflicts of interest were declared by Council members, other than by Councilwoman Smith, who indicated she would abstain from discussion and voting on this item. Pl anning Commission Staff Notes and minutes of February 1, 1977 were received as part of this record by refer- ence thereto. Public hearing was opened. Mr. Thomas C. Moreland, 460 2nd Avenue East, spoke as an architect in representing the legal interest of the applicant. He indicated Data General Corporation does not have any legal interest in the property, that they had received from the property owners an offer to negotiate long before the Plan- ning Commission's hearing. He indicated his support of the annexation of this area, based on the following comments: e 2/28/77--8 \'+'1 . that the area is within the urban services boundary; that there is a need for a modified M-l light industrial use in the Eugene area; the dispersal of housin~ opportunities necessary; the dispersal of industrial sites is desirable; and that it would be desirable to plan an entire area while the opportunity exists. II-A-I Irvi ng Fl etcher, Executi ve Secretary of La ne Co unty La bor Counci 1 in Eugene, spoke in favor of the annexation. He said the Labor Council supported work for organized labor and felt the City Council was responsible for facilitating economic growth. William Boyd, 2315 Mcr-tlrran, president of the University of Oregon, spoke in favor of the annexation. He said he was speaking as a citizen and urged the City Council to make Eugene attractive to industry of high research orientation. He said he felt that the information processing industry was one of the most desirable kinds to attract to the city and that the city needed to diversify and lower its reliance on the timber industry and the University of Oregon. . Mr. George S. Fe nn, Box 8, Henderer Road, El kton, spoke as a person with an interest in Da ta Ge nera 1. He sai d the poss i- bility of Data General locating in the Eugene area would greatly increase the employment opportunities for women, minor- ities, and handicapped. He also indicated there was a possi- bility of new enterprises springing from this particular one, which would provide more economic growth for Eugene, and urged annexation of the area. Robert B. Bennett, 85334 South Willamette, urged annexation of the area in the respect that it might draw the right kind of light industry in the area that would be needed for Eugene's economy, and would add dollars and jobs, culture, diversity, and economic stimulation. He recommended annexation and the rezoning and also the passing and sending of a resolution of encouragement to Data General. El don Schafer, 2230 Hideaway Court, President of Lane COl11l1unity College, said his board, at its January 12 meeting, had passed a resolution to encourage the passage of annexation and rezoning of this area. He said that the Lane Community officials had met with Data General and that the Data General people were delighted with the staff and facilities at LCC. He indicated the need in Eugene to diversify its economic base; and in order to retain a solid economic base, to encourage light industries to the area. He said LCC was ready to assist in training people for the economy. .... Emerson Hamilton, 2159 Escalante, President of the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, said that by annexing and rezoning this area, it would attract a non-polluting light industry which would use the excellent labor pool existing in Eugene. He said the Chamber expects overtures from some industries for this type of zoning in the future; and that these types of businesses e 2/28/77 --9 1'15 are needed in Eugene. He urged the City Council to annex and rezone the area. . --- George Boehnke, 2040 Wil1amette Street, spoke as a citizen with a concern for the community. He urged annexation to bring light industry to Eugene. Allen Mann, 317 S.W. A1 der, Portland, spoke as a represen- tative of the Department of Economic Development, State of Oregon. He indicated that there was some misunderstanding as to the number of people imported to an area when an industry like Data General would set up its building site and industry. He cited a letter from Hewlett-Packard indicating that out of 600 employees, only 200 had been imported out of the Corvallis area. He sai d that Hew1 ett- Packard expected by 1986 to have a total employment of 3,000 with only 15 to 20 percent of that number being transferred in from out of the area. He urged passage of the annexation and rezoning. B. M. Estes, 6730 liE" Street, Springfield, concurred with the testimony that had been given, and urged passage of the annexation and rezoning. Kenneth Pelikan, 2134 Fairmount Boulevard, spoke in favor of the annexation and rezoning issue. As student body president at Lane Community College, he said that bringing in light industry to the area woul d impact LCC and that there woul d be a variety of instructional programs and expansion of the electronic program. He said that the students at LCC sup- ported clean industry coming to the area. -- Lee Robinson spoke as a citizen of the area. He said that he wondered if there was a need to annex the areas around Eugene and a need for a new tax base. He said there was a need for some industrial growth, and wondered if this could not occur within the city limits without expanding the agricultural land in the outlying areas. He asked Mayor Keller if Data General had actually said it would come to Eugene and make their site here. Sandra Bishop, 1190 West Broadway, asked Council to recognize the necessity of planning for a long-term need. She indicated she did not see the necessity for taking agricultural land for housing and industry. She felt the need for that land should be used as agricultural and farm producing land. She suggested the Ci~y Council should postpone action at this time, and look at the larger implications of what they were doing. Ms. Sydney Herbert, 2750 Onyx Street, spoke against the annex- ation, indicating she felt there was an opportunity for housing within the city limits, and it would not not be necessary to annex this agricultural land into the city, that it is good e ...... 2/28/7 7--10 {fib "-' farm land and should be used as farm land. She suggested the City Council hold off annexation of this land for now, get some kind of planning process underway, and use exceptions procedures for agricultural lands within the urban services bou nda ry a rea. i.. I. I Robert Weiner, 209 East 30th, was speaking on behalf of the New American movement. He said he thought the annexation of this property would not be in the best interest of the major- ity of the people in Eugene. He raised questions as to who the housing would be for; would the houses be energy guzzlers; that the new industry coming in would reduce employment was a false argument; that this industry would bring high tech- noloqy and would not use the existing labor force in the area; city growth leads to higher taxes; the costs of city services goes up. He said he did not feel that this prime agricultural land should be paved over for a bUilding pro- ject to raise taxes. He urged opposition to the annexation. '--.. Jean Reeder, 345 East 19th Avenue, spoke as a citizen, home- owner, and taxpayer. She expressed concern about the cost to the community and public by developing this large piece of property. She questioned what the costs would be if this land were annexed, and whether the developer or the public would end up paying those costs. She urged postponement of the annexation, stating that growth control policies need to be looked at further. e Bob Freeman, 690 West 31st, questioned also the increase in city cost, citing the need for police and fire protection if this area were annexed; he cited the traffic overflow into the area and the inadequacy of the Ferry Street Bridge right now to handle the traffic; he stated that costs should be estimated for the public before any action were taken. Mrs. W. F. Cowan, 29771 Gimpl Hill Road, indicated she was very much in favor of preserving this land as farmland. Eleanor Mulder, 2775 Emerald, said that she did not disagree with the proposition in the annexation that M-1 land was needed for light industry; but she was concerned with taking over 260 acres of prime agricultural land for housing. She urged the City Council not to annex the 260 acres for housing and neiqhborhood commercial. '- Alean Kirnak, 1505 East Orchard, said that assuming Data General comes into this area if the area were annexed, that a number of trade-offs would be needed to be made by the community. She cited loss of farmland, the increased need for services, increased cost to the taxpayers, population growth, which in- volves an economic loss. She cited a study that she had recently done with Hewlett-Packard in Corvallis indicating that a great proportion of oeople that were hired by Hewl ett-Packard had e 2/28/77 --11 Pt? been transferred from outside the area, thus, making this particular argument of using the labor force in Eugene a rather weak one. She said there was serious doubt Data Gen- eral would provide jobs for the people living in this area now, that the unemployment problem will not be solved. She said the economic costs would be very high, and growth on farmland is too high a cost for the public to pay. She urged opposition. . Jon Wostmann, 10 Jefferson Street, said he owned a tract of land adjacent to the proposed annexed area. He questioned the use of this agricultural land for residential area, stating that with 3,000 acres inside the city limits available for development, that should be used first. He urged the City Council, since planning was underway, to deal with expan- sion, hold off until the plans are completed, then assess more clearly if it is necessary to sacrifice agricultural lands for a housing development. -- David Waffle, 546 Polk Street, indicated he felt it would cost the city too much to develop this area into housing; he urged denial of the rezoning and annexation, and asked the City Council to stop leap-frogging annexation and fill in the land within the city. Will Carlstrom, 1091 West Broadway, indicated he felt the information presented in testimony had been overwhelming. He said that he felt the information was saying that, yes, the city was going to be able to make some more money and retain interest in big labor and big business. He said he felt the City Council should take caution in its actions in this rezoning and annexation. e Daniel Go1drich, 2262 Birch Lane, said that he had some con- cerns; the street-carrying capacity in Eugene; what Eugene citizens' preference would be in relation to growth; and the need for jobs which would meet Eugene's residents' needs. He questioned development would meet this need for jobs. Tom Bowerman, 1370 East 25th, said he felt this was good farmland and should not be paved over for industrial and housing uses. He urged the City Council to consider this issue and the future of Eugene.. He said there was a diver- sity needed, but perhaps soil farms rather than suburban sprawl would be the answer. David Filer, 235 East 3rd Avenue, said he felt the City Council has an obligation to look at the future of Eugene, indicating he did not want Eugene to be "Californicated." He said by taking prime agriculture land and converting it to residential and industrial uses, there would be a high cost to all in the city, and he was opposed to the annexation. e 2/28/77--12 tlf8 . Thomas C. Brandt, Mohawk Star Route, said he fel t the Cou~cil should reevaluate standards of building solely for a prof1t and look more into the needs of the people of Eugene. Michael A. Granro, 1207 Polk Street, asked if the City Council felt this was the kind of vision that the people would want to develop for the City of Eugene in the future. Shawn Boles, 3145 Whitten, urged the C~ty ~ouncil to loo~ closely at the quality of the informat10n 1t has before 1t, to assess growth across time and the resource demands and the local food production needs. R. Tim Renn, 294 West 11th, said he felt the.ploy of using Data General as a possible fishhook looked llke subterfuge to him, and that the Breeden Bros. ~evelopers we~e the ones who would benefit from this annexat10n and rezon1ng. He urged opposition. Public testimony was closed, there beinq no further testimony given. .Jim Saul, Planning Department, replied to testimony,' saying the property was classified under soil classification system as Class If or IV soils, with a mixture of both on the property. According to LCDC definition of urbanizable land, this property would have to be so considered, that it is within the urban growth boundary and can he served by urban services and facilities. He said it was impossible to exclude prime agricultural land from any area located close to the Willamette River area, and Council should recognize the need to accommodate expanded growth. fie said there was a need for annexation of this property to accommodate housing, that this will be a long-range development plan by the property owners, and will give the City the power to regulate planning as it develops. In regard to the 3,000 available acres within the city, he said that figure needed to be modified by a number of factors includin~ the availability of property for development and that the data used to arrive at this figure were over a year old, with some of the property already committed to development. In the Willakenzie area, no parcel over five acres in size with urban services available exists which is not already committed to development. He said the statement about the amount of land aVllilahle had to be taken with some caution. . Councilman Haws asked how much money the annexation will actu- ally cost the taxpayers. Mr. Saul said it was impossible to have a dollar figure available. Mr. Haws then said that at the last budget meeting it was indicated police services were stretched pretty thin. He asked if this will make a differ- ence as far as police protection, would there be a need to increase it to this area. . Mr. Martin responded that there were two features involved here: 1) operating costs; and 2) capital outlay costs. For operating costs, he said these are service costs by the city. ~ sai? that in constructing single-family dwellings, there 1S a h1gh cost for new construction generated, which generates ILf9 2/28/77 - 13 -----' a very high income to the city for operating services. He s~id that the city was clearly ahead in operat~ng costs when deal1ng with new construction. As far as the cap1tal outlay costs, he said there was no way of knowing what those wo~ld ~e.. Mr. Delay replied he was dismayed at the fact that the.c1ty 1~ 1nc~pable of determining the costs for capital outlay 1n deal1ng w1th infillinq and annexation. Mayor Keller then stated that the economic' study was the City Council's j?b, and h: felt it was not fair to intimidate staff when the C1ty Counc11 was to blame and had not given the economic study priority. Mr. Lieuallen asked why this particular kind of ho~sing pr?ject qualified to meet the needs more than other areas 1n the C1ty. Mr. Saul replied that the area was suitable for urb~n devel- opment and referred Council to several Staff Notes 1n the Plan- ning Commission minutes. Mr. L~euallen then asked what th: . density for single-family dwell1ngs would be. Mr. Saul sa1d the zonlng recommended by the Planning Commission does allow for a variety of development types and that this was the reason for PUD attachments t~ the~. Mr. Lieuallen then asked if there was a need to have res1dent1al development on such large portions of land as opposed to smaller portions in the area. Mr. Saul said the bes'~ answer he could give would be that both types are needed, depending on the range and scale of development being discussed. . Mr. Bradley then asked what should be the role of agricultural land use within the metropolitan area. Mr. Saul replied that the Council had _ made one policy choice throughout formulation of the general plan, and to a great extent, that policy choice is that at least within the pro- jected urban service area, agricultural use is at best interim. Mr. Bradley asked if there was any other reason to have agricultural land use, other than interim use waiting for the expansion of urban services within a metropolitan area? Mr. Saul said he could not respond in a narrow sense, that to reach a valid determination, staff would have to look at present and projected housing needs, transportation conditions, the economy and the availability of land. Resolution No. 2634--Forwarding to Boundary Commission rec- ommendation for annexation of property north of Beltline Road and east of Coburg Road was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Delay then read a statement outlining his concerns for annexation and rezoning of this property. He said the issues of growth and economic development needed to be faced in relation to t~e cost !o local government, inequitable'prop- erty taxes, C1ty cutt1ng staff services, the raising of an additional $2 million to maintain city services and the com- ~act growth policy stating of infilling the city before annex- 1n9 areas outside the city. He said that the impact of growth to the city could mean a larger tax cost as there would be a necessity for more schools, more police protection, more fire e. ~. 2/28/7 7 --14 /50 . protection, that there would be more crime in the area, and that growth costs money and demands many services from the city. He asked what benefits such annexation and rezoning will be offering to the citizens of Eugene, if it would just be asking them to dig deeper into their pockets. He said qrowth does not solve the unemployment factor. He gave three recommendations to the Council: 1) deny the request; 2) recognize the value of compact growth policy and place a two-year moratorium on any further annexation; 3) initiate a government task force to study the problems of growth. Mr. Bradley concurred with Mr. Delay's statement saying that the two competing policies seem to be an infilling of the city area, as opposed to annexation of area outside the city. He asked how annexation affected the livability of the citizens in Eugene when dealing with a limited amount of resources. He urged postponement of action and a moratorium on annexation also. He said there were other kinds of land uses for Eugene, olenty of property in Eugene, and a surplus of industrial land in the area. He said he did not feel there was a crisis situation where it was necessary to annex this property before discussing the issues and implications further. Mr. Lieua1len indicated he was not clear as to what the pattern of development should be in that part of the city. He said he was glad to see high level of debate in the community. He felt there were a lot of possibilities and he was not clear on the pattern of development needed. He said the Council should con- sider the future agricultural needs as well as housing needs for the city and said he would like to postpone the matter, too. . Mr. Obie expressed the opinion that the housing issue was the one involved, rather than industry and its opportunities. He said perhaps the housing issue is the greatest issue in the community today, and was bothered by the speakers indicating a lack of need for housing when several neighborhoods were upset with policies of placing ten-unit developments in the neighbor- hoods of single-family dwellings. He said this development would have the opportunity to relieve those pressures. He felt that relative to the future, if the housing pressures were not relieved, that the value of the livability in Eugene was going to be destroyed. He said this had been indicated as marginal farmland and posed the questions as to where people are going to go and where they are going to live. He said he felt this need of housing was a great one. He indicated again that he felt the housing issue is the greatest one, and he felt the Plan- ning Commission had done a good job in its preparation and its recommendation for annexation and rezoning. . Mr. Williams then stated that he felt secondary employment was an issue which had not been addressed in the testimony. He said the City of Eugene had created an image as being inhospit- able to industry. In the 1974 Community tDals Conference, he 2/28/77--15 15/ -/ said the specific purpose was to deal with the growth question, and 80 percent of the people had agreed on this statement. He said that the Council should attempt to moderate economic via- bility of the city. He stated he felt the city should be looking for clean, nonpolluting industries in the area. He felt that to deny new industry, and at the same time lose industrial base, will damage the people living in this area now and their children in the future. Mr. Lieuallen stated he had no problem with the M-1 portion of the proposal zone, but he is still not convinced of the need for the extensive housing. III-B-6 \ Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to postpone the issue of annexation until the March 14 Council meeting. .- Mayor Keller said he felt it was highly inappropriate to post- pone this action. He indicated it was a tough decision to be made, but that all information available had been presented to the Council by the Pl anning ColTl11ission, that the Pl anning Com- mission had voted 6:0 to annex the area, and that the Council would have to face the issues and go ahead with them. He said he felt the main issue was planning for future growth, and that people were saying Eugene should be different, and then the Council does not make it different. He said the Council should take the lead and be innovative. He said that there were indi- cations in the Planning Notes that these issues had been addressed, and he felt the Council should encourage nonpolluting industries in Eugene. He said he felt it was a grave error for the Council to postpone decision at this time as the issues are there and the Council has the burden to make those decisions. He said the hard facts of life and livability are at issue, and the Council should be prepared to attain livability in Eugene. He said stalemate is not the answer. He said good controlled growth with innovative planning will create job and economic opportunities for the citi- zens of Eu gene. Mr. Bradley again reiterated he wished to postpone. He asked how a good decision could be made without actual capital outlay costs and the cost to the taxpayers, the effects of growth, and the need for the update of the 1990 Plan and what it's going to say. Mr. L i eua 11 en said he di sagreed wi th the Mayor on the Pl an- ning Commission Notes, that he had heard more questions raised than answers given and felt it was reasonable to postpone. Mr. Delay indicated he was also in favor of postponing. Vote was taken on the motion to postpone, which failed, with Delay, Bradley, and Lieuallen voting aye, and Hamel, Haws, Obie, and .Williams, voting no, and 9nith abstafning ,--. Mr. Haws said that he would like, in the future, for annexations of this size to have the cost available to the people. He said in further discussions of annexations, he would like three points covered: 1) general policy statements on annexation; 2) capital outlay costs of annexation; 3) and consideration of a moratorium on annexation. 2/28/77 --16 \5~ . e . ,Jt Mr. Bradley then appealed to the Council to vote against annex- ation for the reasons already given. He felt it would not be a responsible decision to make at this time. III-B-7 Vote was taken on the original motion, which carried with Lieuallen, Hamel, Haws, Williams, and Qbie voting aye, Delay and Bradley voting no, and smith abstaining. III-B-8 D. Rezoning from County AGT Agriculture, Grazing, and Timber-raising Oi strict and County RA Surburban Residential Oi strict to Ci ty R-1 PO Si ngle-Family Residential Di strict (260 + - acres), M-1 PD Limited Industrial District (120 + - acres), and C-1 PD Neighbor- hood Commercial District (10 + - acres), all with Planned Unit Development Procedures (Cone/Breeden) (Z 77-2) r,1anager said Planning Commission at its February 1, 1977 meeting had unanimously recommended this rezoning, with the property being located north of Beltline Road, east of Coburg Road, including Tax Lots 101, 200, 300, 302, 1200, and 1201. Mr. Jim Bernhard, Planning Commission, stated that this request for rezoning with PUO attachments to control development of the property and to keep it in a land bank property for a feasible period of time was being requested by the Pl anning Commission. jt No ex parte contacts or reasons for conflicts of interest were declared by Council members, with the exception of Council person smith, who said she would abstain from discussion and voting on this issue. Pl anning Commission Staff Notes and minutes of February 1, 1977 were received as part of this record by ref- erence thereto. Pub1 ic Hearing was opened. Mr. Bradley moved to postpone to the March 14 Council meeting the issue of zoning. Mayor Keller indicated it was inappropriate for a motion to be made in the public hearing. Mr. Long, of the City Attorney's office, said the Chair could make a ruling and would stand unless Council members wished otherwise. Mr. Bradley moved to override the Mayor's decision. Motion died for lack of a second. . Thomas C. Moreland, 460 2nd Avenue East, testified as to the ration- ale for the location of the zones. The M-l zoning of 120 acres would be located at Belt1ine at its intersection with Coburg Road. He said it was felt this was the most desirable situation for the industry, and would offer buffer from the Beltline area. The C-1 zoning would be located at the intersection of Coburg and Crescent and would be a route anticipated for a residential development. R-1 zoning would be the balance of the area, with six acres ex- cluded for a park in the development. He indicated the M-l zone was needed for a suitable site for light, non-polluting diversified 2/28/77--17 \53~ .---- IV-A-2 _. industry. He encouraged the City Council to rezone this area as reques ted. Mike Farthing, 1495 West 24th Place, said he was an attorney repre- senting one of the owners selling the property. He indicated he felt this rezoning would make an opportune area for residential and mixed industrial use land for the city of Eugene. .. Mr. Robert Bennett, 8534 South Wi1lamette, said that it would be presumptuous for him to speak for Data General and their decision to choose a location. He indicated to the Council that the City of Eugene was in a very competitive situation. Data General needs qood facilities and it would be wise for the city to rezone this area to attract qood industry, for example, Data General. Sydney Herbert, 2750 Onyx Street, referred to her written presentation to the City Council. She indicated she felt there was a violation of procedure and requested the Council to make a justification and submit it to both the Boundary Commission and the LCDC. Sandy Bishop, 1190 West Broadway, said she saw a need for the re- zoning for light industrial use, but asked the Council not to rezone for the residential and C-1 use to prese~ve the agricultural land. Public hearing was closed, with no further testimony being presented. Mr. Saul responded staff would advise an exception was noi required in regard to LCDC goals involving agricultural lands. Such an exception is not required upon a finding that either the land has been physically developed or built upon, or that the land has been irrevocably committed to nonfarm uses. In this particular instance, this property has been irrevocably committed to nonfarm uses. Mr. Haws asked if the zoning of M-l land would be limited to only that use. Mr. Saul replied that most M-l zoning uses were clearly within the research and development area. . c. B. 1360--Rezoning to City R-1 PD Si ngle-Family Residential District (260 + - acres) M-1 PD Limited Industrial District (120 + - acres), and C-1 PD Neighborhood Commerci al Di strict (10 + - acres), all wi th P1 anned Unit Development Procedures 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 of February 1, 1977, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by Council Bill number only, with unani- mous consent of the Council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Mr. Bradley requested that either postponement or denial of this request be made by the Council, stating that he felt there . -' 2/28/7 7--18 ~ lS~ e IV-A-3 e e was an inadequate showing of pUblic need regarding housing. He said there was no need to rush into a decision, but that more industrial and commercial and housing locations should be developed within the city of Eugene. He also wanted to wait and see if the annexation would be approved by the Boundary Commission. Mr. Delay said that he did not believe there was a case made for a need for rezoning to C-1 and R-1. He would agree to allowing for the M-1 rezoning, and hold off on the others for more information. Vote was taken on the motion, which passed with Council members Bradley and Delay voting no; Haws, Hamel, Williams, Lieuallen, and Qbie voting yes, and Smith abstaining. Lacking unanimous consent, the matter was set over for second reading to March 14. E. Code Pmendment re: Downtown Developemnt District--amending Sections 3.700, 3.705, and 3.720; adding Sections 3.730, 3.735, 3.740, and 3,745; and declaring an emergency Manager indicated that at the January 24 meeting there had been some objection to the proposed amendment from the banks. He said in the ensuing two weeks, meetings had been held with the banks, savings and loan associations, and other consumer financing insti- tutions in the city. A compromise amendment had been worked out and approved by all three institutions. The ordinance as it now reads will now provide for a quarterly tax which will apply to five-tenths of one percent of time deposits and one and three- fourths percent of demand deposits; resulting in annual rates of two percent and seven percent, respectively. Estimated annual revenue is $20,400 from banks and $13,800 from savings and loans, for a total of $34,200. Public hearing was opened. Navarre Davis, 3556 Black Oak Road, indicated as Chairman of the Downtown Development Board, the Board was in complete support of the adoption of the ordinance as it now reads. He said the rates had been adjusted to reflect demand deposits for all three insti- tutions and would urge adoption because the groups have publicly recognized their responsibility to support parking programs; and the Downtown Development Board is responsive to the concerns and has made the compromises outlined in the amendment. Public hearing was closed, with no further testimony being presented. C.B. 1319--amending code re: Downtown Development District; amending Sections 3.700, 3.705, and 3.720; adding Sections 3.730,3.735.3.740, and 3.745; and declaring an emergency was read by number and title only, there being no Council member present re- questing that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read the second time by Council number only, with unanimous consent 2/28/77 --19 155 IV-A-4 F. -- -- of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by Cou~ci 1 Bi 11 number only. 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 17869. . R evi si ons of t!.!L Water Pol icy Manager indicated the revision and new resolution were recommended by the P1 anni n~ De pa rtment Fe brua ry 10, 1977. Mr. Ga ry Ch enk in, Planning Department, stated the new revisions would replace the policy adopted by the Council in March 1975. He said the proposed revision by the Council was not so much a departure from present policy adopted in March 1975 as it is more a detailed expression of that pol icy. For example, with Boundary COHlmission approval, the service would still be available to properties outside the city but within the urban service boundary provided: 1) annexation is appropriate or legally impossible; 2) water service will not prolong the life of nonconforming uses; 3) the property is served by an approved means of sewage disposal; and 4) the owner signs an agreement to annex at the City's option. Mr. Chenkin said that outside the urban service boundary, the proposed policy would recognize existing service to Lane Community College and the airport. Elsewhere, he said proof of a communicable disease would be required. Current policy requires the existence of a public health hazard, but does not necessarily require the presence of a communicable disease. He stated that in areas once part of the water district served by EWES, but subsequently dissolved, special provisions would be included for forwarding requests for water extension to the Boundary Commissison with information regardi ng the Ci ty' s pol icy. He sai d exi sti ng statutes are not clear as to the City' s responsibility in this type of situation. Therefore, it would appear to be the best course of action to allow the Boundary commission to consider service according to its own standards, but with full knowledge of Eugene's policies. - Public hearing was opened. A 1 etter from the League of Women Voters in support of the pro- posed changes in the City's water policy was read by City Manager. Public hearing was closed, with no further testimony being presented. Mr. Db i e andMr . Delay each expressed a des ire to have thi s item postponed with further di scussi on at a Committee- of- the- Whole meeting before the Council takes action. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to direct staff to prepare a resolution for revision of the City water policy, e 2/28/7 7 --20 15" . IV-B-l -- e with discussion to be held at a future Committee-of-the-Whole meeting. The motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. G. Road Improvement--Royal Avenue to West 11th Avenue, Bertelsen Road Don Allen, Publ ic Works ~partment, stated this road improvement had been initiated by the City Council and in October 1975 had agreed to proceed with the preliminary design. He indicated that the proposed design ~uld be from West 11th to Elmira, 44-foot paving, curb to curb, providing two travel lanes and two bike lanes, from Elmira to Royal, 46-foot paving, curb to curb, pro- vidinQ two through travel lanes, a left-turn lane, two bike lanes, and sidewalks. He said the projected need included: 1) providing safe facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists; 2) to improve road- way surfaces and drainages; 3) to improve facility to handle ex- pected traffic increases due to development. He said the funding would be a combination of private owner assessments and city funds. He indicated a packet of materials had been sent to the City Council prior to the meeting and the City Council had toured the area on two different occasions. He said the procedure for the Council ~u1d be: 1) to stop the project and not go to final design; or 2) to proceed to the final design in which there would be one more public hearinq for awarding of the contract. Mr. Williams left the meeting. Public hearing was opened. William Wacker, 352 North Bertelsen Road, indicated he had moved to the area in 1947. He said where once the area was mostly farms and agricultural land, it has now been built up and that he was expressing a dislike for the heavy traffic going through on Bertelsen Road. He recommended that truck traffic be taken off Bertelsen, and that Beltline Road be blocked at the south end. Mr. Ralph Bratz, 783 North Bertelsen Road, indicated there would be a problem in getting in and out of the driveways and asked that the city consider doing away with the turn lanes and get rid of the truck traffic in the area. James Anderson, 5006 Blanton Road, spoke as an attorney representing Lane Ply~od Company. He said the property of Lane Ply~od abuts Bertelsen road and that the company opposes the paving project. He indicated reasons for the opposition were: 1) economic--that in paying for the improvements, the taxpayers will have to pay the city for its city costs; 2) a lack of need for paving and widening the street; and 3) if there were a ban on through truck traffic in the area, it would equate with an increased cost of time and gas, etc. for his company, which would be passed on to the tax- payers. He asked that the Council note an exception to the Staff Notes that Bertelsen is not an arterial through street. He urged opposition to the road improvement. 2/28/77--21 157 Larry Clark, 321 S.W. 6th, Portland, spoke as a representative of the U.S. National Bank trust account for Martinsons, who owned. property in the area. He said the people oppose the paving project as they own 77 acres in the area, the economic aspect of the land being used as agricultural will serve an undue burden as the assess- ment will be $48,000 on agricultural land. He said that his clients felt that it was premature to improve the road. Public hearing was closed with no further testimony given. C. B. 1361--Authorizing road improvement on Bertelsen Road, Royal Avenue to West 11th Avenue, 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 C. B. 1361 be read the second time by Council Bi 11 number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, with all council members present voting aye, Mr. Obie abstaining. 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 17870. IV-B-2 H. Appeal of Pl annin9 ColTlT1ission denial to zone property located on a. '- northwest corner of Ascot Drive and Harlow Road from R-1 to H Historic .., (Elmer Harlow House) (Z 76-43) Recommended by Pl anning Commission December 21, 1976. Copiesof the Commission's report were previously distributed to Council members. Manager indicated that this appeal had been filed by Philip and Rose Grant. He said there appeared to be two major issues raised in this appeal concerning the Harlow House: 1) whether the Planning Commission can legitimately question the judgement of the Historic Review Board concerning the historic merit and the particular structure; and 2) whether the Pl anning Commission was correct in its determination concerning the lack of historic merit for this particular structure. No ex parte contacts or reasons for conflicts of interest were declared by Council members. Pl anning Commission Staff ti>tes and mi nutes of December 21, 1976 were received as part of thi s record by reference thereto. Public hearing was opened. Mr. Philip Grant, 2991 Harlow Road, indicated he felt that the Planning Commission had exceeded its authority and acted improperty that the Harlow House was one of two houses of its style in the area, the only one on the north side of town and best maintained. He questioned the leqality of the decision, saying that by denying . -- 2/28/77--22 \58 " . IV-B-3 . the request for a zone change, the Planning Commission was trying to establish authority in setting its own guidelines and criteria. Ma rston Morgan, 77712 Murray Creek Road, Cottage Grove, questi oned what public interest was served in not recognizing this building as historic and not accepted by the Historic Board. He urged the Council to accept this appeal. The public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Mr. Saul responded as to the legality of the issue, that the Historic Review Board is simply a board of recommendation, and there is no illeqality in not accepting its recommendation. He said in regard to the zone chanqe criterion, that the sole justification to rec- comend a zone chanqe is that if the house is historic and if it merits recognition. He said that the Harlow House is a very nice home, but that does not make it an historic home. Mr. Obie asked if the Council would have to hold a meeting with the Planning Commission if it were to disagree with the denial of the appeal. Mr. Long, City Attorney' s office, said it was required by Ci ty Code. Mr. Delay asked what time frame was in- volved with this denial. Mr. Saul replied that if the denial was upheld by the Council that the refiling date would be one year from the date of its decision. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to uphold the Planning Comn- mission's denial of the application. Motion carried, with Council- men Bradley and Qbie voting no, Council members Haws, Hamel, Delay, Lieuallen, and Smith voting aye. I. Liquor License Application 1243 West 7 th Street, Le Provencal e Re staurant- -new outl et (RMB) R. J. Nicolai and G. S. Roddier; Manager indicated that staff had no objections to this liquor license. Public hearing was opened. Mr. Ralph Lake, 1055 Charnelton Street, said he was in attendance to answer Council's questions. Public hearing was closed, with no further testimony being presented. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to forward the liquor license application with approval to the OLCC. Motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye. 2/28n 7--23 15~ IV-B-4 II. Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items as requested. Previously discussed in COmmitte~.of-tlle-Whole on.February 16 (Present: Mayor Keller; Council members Haws. Hamel, Bradley, Lleuallen, (bie and 9nith) and February 23 (Present: Mayor Keller; Council members Haws: Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, Obie, and 9nith). Minutes of those meetings appear below in smaller type. February 16, 1977: I. Items from Mayor and Council A. LCOG Request--Eric Haws distributed a memorandum to Council members on the subject of compensation to LCOG board chairman for income lost while representing the agency. He indicated he would like Council to review the memorandum and discuss at next week's Committee-of-the-Whole meeting. B. Council Members' Agenda--Ms. Smith will be out of town March 10-22; Mayor Keller will be out of town March 16-31; and Mr. Obie will be out of town March 18-30. C. 19~0 Update Summary--Mr. Bradley said Council wil1 be rece1v1ng packets this week with a summary report of the 1990 Update Plan. D. Tri-Agency Dog Control--Mr. Bradley indicated the Tri-Agency Committee had been meeting in public hearings with some of the smaller cities in the surrounding area in an attempt to contract for dog services. A meeting will be held at Harris HaIl at 7:30 p.m. on February 22, 1977. '- E. Gut Committee--Mr. Bradley reminded Council members the Gut Committee will be meeting February 17 at 7:30 p.m. 1n an attempt to solve the problem on Willamette Street. F. Court of Appeals--Mr. Brad ley brought up the issue of a Court of Appeals recent land-use case in Washington County and asked staff to make a report back to Council on the decision which 'was made in this case. G. Community School Coordinating Committee--Mr. Lieuallen said that he had attended a meeting a week ago with this committee and there was no need for any future action to be taken re- garding this committee at the moment. H. Liquor License Approval--Mr. Lieuallen said he noted in a newspaper article recently where a restaurant on 7th Avenue, La Primavera, had been approved for a beer and wine liquor license. He said, however, just around the corner there is a restaurant named Rib Shack which had come before the Council for approval of a liquor license and had been denied. He cited that the owner of the Rib Shack was black and he wanted to make public note that he suspected the motives of the OLCC in failing to grant the liquor license to this small restaurant and maybe others. '--- 2/28/77 --24 IloO . File File Rile File - File Affirm File File . . 1. Appointments-- I. Historic Review Board--Jan Muller, Mrs. Dorothy Gilmore; four-year terms ending 1/1/81 were recommended by Mayor Keller. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel that the appoint- ments to the Historic Review Board be approved. Motion carried unanimously. Approve 2. Garbage Board--Mayor Keller reported appointing Jim Hershner with no set term; other members: Wallace Swanson and Fred Farrand. File 3. Downtown Development Board--Mayor Keller reported appointing Mike Feig to fill unexpired term of Mayor Keller, term ending 1/1/78. File e J. Cone/Breeden Annexation and Rezoning--Mayor Keller said that at the last Committee-of-the-Whole meeting discussion was held on the possibility of separating the annexation and re- zoning issues for the Council's consideration on February 28. Mr. Saul responded he had discussed this issue with the City Attorney's office and there was no impediment to segre- gating the two items. Mr. Long said ordinarily the Council would consider an annexation issue months prior to making a rezoning decision and that it made sense to him to deal with an annexation first since there would be no need for rezoning if the property were not annexed. He made the distinction that in considering an annexation, it is a political and ad- ministrative matter in which the council can act and accept public hearing in any way it wishes; however, in a rezoning issue, Council would be considering proposals and making a determination of recommendations presented to it operating under the quasi-judicial Fasano proceedings. Mr. Haws indi- cated he agreed to having these two issues as separate items for discussion. Mr. Bradley said he felt the two issues should be discussed, separated by a period of time, with the Boundary Commission approval of the annexation and then Council consideration of rezoning the issue Mr. Saul said he felt the matter as presented to the Council is appropriate and that, in terms of staff time, it makes sense, is more equitable, and more cost effective to all participants to go ahead to consider the items as proposed. Mr. Porter said this rezoning request has a PUD plan with various stages of development and that the present land is zoned as agricultural in the county, which is not in the concept for its use within the city. He said when the property is annexed, the city needs to know how the property will be used when it's annexed. Therefore, he was in favor of considering both the annex and rezoning during the same meeting. e Ms. Smith indicated she would abstain from discussion and voting on this matter, both at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting and the Council meeting. 2/28/77--25 "I Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to separate the annexation and rezoning issues on the Cone/Breeden property for Council discussion as two separate items at the February 28 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. k. Executive Session--Manager indicated at Executive Session held February 16 at 11 a.m., two items of discussion were presented: acquisition of certain property in the Bethel- Danebo area, and a suit and litigation process with the Shade Oaks development area. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel that the City Manager and staff be authorized to acquire the l2-acre Lassen Bros. property in the Bethel-Danebo area for park purposes and, if necessary, exercise right of eminent domain. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel that the Manager and staff be authorized to negotiate with Shade Oaks representatives regarding a water extension contract with conditions most favorable to the city rather than continue litigation. Motion carried unanimously. 1. Special Council Meeting--Manager reminded Council members and those in attendance that a special Council meeting had been called for February 21, 1977 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers to consider the Community Development Fund Appli- cation 1977-78. m. Room Tax Subcommittee Report--Manager explained that at the Room Tax Subcommittee meeting February 10 recommendation was made to enlarge the subcommittee's membership and to proceed with adopting goals and procedures to facilitate processing of applications; to create a new subcommittee of the Budget Committee to adopt goals and guidelines for future processing of applications for room tax funds. It would recommend such goals and guidelines to the Council and recommend allocations to the Budget Committee. The enlarged Subcommittee initially would include the present Council Subcommittee, all members of the present Room Tax Allocation Committee, and two members from the Budget Com- mittee. He said there will be an ordinance prepared for official formation of the subcommittee and outlining the goals and guidelines. Discussion was held concerning appointments. Mr. Bradley asked who would appoint to the committee, to which Mayor Keller replied, "The mayor makes the appointments." Ms. Smith quoted the by-laws stating that the mayor makes the appointments to the Room Tax Committee and indicated she felt the Council should get on with the business before it and not debate the matter of appointments. Mr. Obie agreed with Ms. Smith and said he would like to see alternatives \ 1.0 )... 2/28/77 --26 APpro. Approve Approve File -- - . ~ - '-- - '-- to the process as he did Oot feel comfortable with the pro- cess and would like a chance to review the alternatives before the public hearing is held. Mr. Haws indicated he had stated his view on the choice of apPOintments for the Subcommittee, saying he felt the Council members should be responsible for appointing the Council repreSentatives and to pick memhers at large, with the mayor apPOinting the representatives from the motel/hotel business and the chair- man of the Hudget Committee appointing the two Budget Committee repreSentatives. Mr. Haws and Mr. Bradley both concurred they would like staff to prepare the ordinance to reflect the two different viewpoints of appointments and this issue would be discuSsed when the ordinance came before the Council. Mayor Keller announced that he had apPOinted Mary Jane O'Brien and Richard Hanson from the Budget Committee as the two Hudget Committee members for the expanded committee which will be meeting Thursday, Fehruary 17 at 2 p.m. in the Mayor's office. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to approve the concept of the new expanded committee, with staff to prepare an ordinance, with alternatives of appointment. In the interim, the expanded committee will proceed with outlining goals and guidelines. Motion carried unanimously. Approve n. Legislative Subcommittee--Minutes of February 17 meeting were distributed to Council. Manager said there were no conflicts in any of the Legislative SUbcommittee's recommendations on the hills it reviewed at that time. Mr. Haws made a request tbat in the minutes, the reasons are given for the SUbcommittee's OPpOsition or agreement with various bills. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to accept the report of the Legislative Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Approve II. lmErovement Petitions A. Sanitary seWer Tax Lot IB-03-16-3 0-2100 on Skyline east of Barher, 100 perCent assessment approval--no costs; B. Paving and sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way within Deodar Plat--assessment totally within SUbdivision__ no city costs; C. Paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way within 3rd Addition to Meadowbrook--assessment totally within sub- division--no city costs; O. PaVing and sidewalks on Elizabeth Street from Royal to 285 feet south--63.2 percent of assessable on petition--city costs: street--$2,900, storm sewer--$2,600; E. Paving, Sidewalks, and storm sewer 00 Concord from Hughes to Berntzen--61.3 perCent of assessable On petition--city COst $50,000 storm sewer; and F. PaVing, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way in Souza 2nd Addition--assessment totally within SUbdiviSion__ no city costs. I~ 2/28/77-_27 Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to approve the improvement petitions. Motion carried unanimously. "- III. Report from EWEB Mr. Tiffany, a representative from EWEB introduced himself, stating that EWEB is starting a campaign to conserve power and water and would appreciate the support of the City Council in EWEB's ,attempts to conserve power and water. He said it would be very helpful as the year progresses, as the critical time wil1 be late summer and early fall. EWEB should have enough water for domestic service within the City as the flow in the McKenzie River seems to be considerable, but they may not be able to pump all of the water out of the McKenzie River that will be needed. He asked the City Council as the City govern- ment to help EWEB in determining ways to conserve power. He said, "Please go easy on electricity, turn down the hot water heater, turn down thermostats, and keep lights from burning when not necessary." He said it is very unlikely there will be enough snowpack the remainder of this spring to see the city through next winter. Mr. Lieuallen asked if perhaps a brochure or article could be printed in the paper giving specific ways for conserving power and water. Mr. Tiffany replied the task force at EWEB will be distributing printed materials. Manager said that in three or four weeks, a detailed plan for electricity and water conservation in the city departments will be distri- buted and that the city will be working with EWEB in dealing with consumption in various areas in the city. Mr. Obie asked, in the event of an emergency, who is responsible for preparing an emergency plan? Mr. Tiffany replied it would be EWEB's responsibility. IV. Proposed Sale of City-owned Removable Houses 828, 850, and 868 West Broadway and 515 River Road. Manager explained that the sale of this property would conform to the Charter and the City Code. Mr. Lieuallen asked if there would be a requirement attached to the sale that the homes be maintained as housing. Mr. Paul Osborn said they would be sold under con- tract as rehabilitation housing. Mr. Haws asked why the houses were going to be sold. Mr. Osborn replied that in accordance with the 1977-78 Block Grant plans, which call for development of Monroe Park. These houses need to be removed. Community Development funds in the amount of $189,000 have been set aside for the development. Also, the Greenway regulations permit occupancy of 515 River Road. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to authorize sale of the above-mentioned homes. Motion carried unanimously. ',"-- v. Review of 1977-78 Community Development Fund Application Application distributed to Council under separate cover. Mr. Charles Kupper of the HCC Department distributed a three-page outline to Council and asked that they note figures in column 6. He reported the following as items for consideration in this Application: Housing site acquisition; housing rehabilitation; lCot.t 2/28/77--28 Approve . Affirm e Approve - . minor home-repair programs; minor home and yard maintenance, both cleanup and pickup, primarily aimed for the elderly; small business structure rehabilitation; historic preser- vation; social services, including day-care programs and neighborhood outreach workers; open space and parks develop- ment; streets and urban beautification; community development planning; architectural barrier removal, and program admini- stration. Mr. Kupper continued that the elements of the urban renewal portions of the Application were to continue urban renewal programs in Eugene and would include admini- stration costs, real estate distribution and acquisition, tax assessments and maintenance of property owned, site clearance, site improvements, and relocation activities. Manager said that these items would be considered at a pub- lic hearing with the official action to take place at the special Council meeting on Monday, February 21. .- Mr. abie expressed concern regarding the large portion of budgeted monies for administration, saying that he felt per- haps the budget should be reviewed as he would like to see more of the money being spent in the community. Mr. Kupper indicated that the review of these budgeted monies would go through the Budget Committee. Mr. abie asked staff to prepare the rationale or alternatives for budgeting the administrative costs and wondered if there were other resources in the com- munity which could be used to administer some of the work being proposed. He said he felt that the staff was a very responsible, competent, and quality staff, but questioned whether the amount of $568,000 to administer one year's funds was necessary. Mr. Lieuallen replied that he also felt the staff was of very high quality, very responsible, and hard working and indicated that in federal programs where a loan application process is required for every 10an appli- cation approved, staff time has to be spent on perhaps four more applications that were not approved. He indicated he felt confident that the rehabilitation program was wel1 worth the expenditure. Manager replied to Mr. abie that the answers to his questions should be determined at the hearing of the budget review process at the departmental level where he felt this would be the best time to go into those kinds of concerns. Mr. Lieuallen indicated that one bright spot in the use of these rehabilitation monies could be seen in his own neighborhood, where there are a number of senior citizens, and how much they have appreciated the minor home and yard maintenance. File IV. Proposed Revisions in City's Water Policy Memo and resolution distributed to Council. Manager said there were some changes in the City policy required relating to when and in what circumstances water could be supplied to areas out- side the city's urban service area. .- 1"5 2/28/77 --29 '- Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to establish a public hearing February 28, 1977 to consider the proposed revisions in the City's water policy. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Bradley asked what responsibility the Boundary Commission has in the role of extending water service outside of the city. Mr. Chenkin replied there wil1 be an addition to the proposed rovisions which the Council will receive shortly addressing this problem. He said the Boundary Commission approves extensions) but cannot order them. VII. Report of Joint Affirmative Action Work Committee Proposed report format distributed to Council 2/10/77. Mr. Gary Long of the Personnel Department indicated that a joint meeting of the staff and Human Rights Council had agreed on the proposed format. He said the implications will be to try to produce a report with an initial cost of $5)000 for the first report, and an ongoing annual cost of $2,000 thereafter. The report should be ready in about eight weeks. He said the report would include role definitions between Council and staff and Human Rights Commission. Mr. Obie brought up a concern about the necessity of spending money in this way to which Mr. Long replied he felt it was necessary to show conformance to federal regulations. He said there was a possibility of losing federal monies if the city was not in compliance with affirmative action, and that such a report would meet compliance with federal regulations. '-- Andy Clement of the Human Rights Commission read a letter from the Aging Commission indicating they did not accept the affirm- ative action report and did not support it. Copies of the letter will be supplied to Council members. Mr. Martin said that the concerns expressed by the Aging Commission will be dealt with in a written part of the report. VIII. Boundary Commission Council received a draft letter for a request of a joint meeting with Council and Boundary Commission. Diane Nechak indicated that the Boundary Commission would prefer to have an evening meeting. It was the consensus of the Council that the draft letter be approved as written, and a joint meeting be scheduled some even1ng. IX. Request by Joint Housing Committee for $8,000 from Revenue Sharing for Palace Hotel Memo distributed to Council. Manager said the money had been appropriated for the Housing Committee out of revenue sharing funds and had been unanimously approved by the Joint Housing Committee for this expenditure. Mr. Obie said that if the funds had been set aside and are available and had gone through a process of approval by the Joint Housing Committee and HCDC, then he was in favor. l ~" 2/28/77 --30 Pub. HI File - Aff i rm - . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to authorize the expenditure. Motion carried unanimously. Approve e x. Consideration of Referral of Panhandle Policy Issues to Planning Commission for Further Study Letter distributed to Council. Mr. Saul asked the Council not to refer to the Planning Commission the Panhandle Policy for further consideration and not to open at this time the Policy for further consideration. He said that the Policy had been recently reviewed and established. In December, 1975, notifi- cation had been sent to the neighborhood organizations that the Policy was going to be considered. In March, 1976, a public hearing was held. In response to that public hearing, a proposal was drafted containing changes requested and this proposal was again sent to all neighborhood groups. Staff met with the neighborhood groups and the Planning Commission held another public hearing in April, 1976, at which time the Willa- kenzie Neighborhood Association stated its opposition to the proposal, the same reasons as stated in the letter received by Council. However, the Planning Commission did recommend the Policy as stated. Council considered the Policy in a meeting in May, 1976 and also received a copy of a letter from the Willa- kenzie Neighborhood Association. In May, the Council approved and adopted the Panhandle Policy as recommended by the Planning Com- mission. Mr. Saul further explained that to date 139 applica- tions had been received for minor partitions and, of these, 38 were approved for panhandle lots with only one appeal to date. He said he felt an extensive review of the Policy at this time was not necessary, citing having only one appeal out of 139 pe- titions. He reiterated he would request the Council not to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission, citing time pressures, problems, the recent consideration of the Policy, and the fact that there are other major policies coming up in the next few months for the Planning Commission to be considering. Council took no action on referring the Panhandle PoI icy to the Planning Commission, therefore, the Policy stands. Affirm There was a request by Dr. Glen Purdy, 2490 Lariat Meadows Drive, soeaking for Adolph Sandin, 2425 Lariat Meadows Drive; William Kirk- patrick, 2230 Sandy Drive; indicating that they wished for Item II-A-10 on the Panhandle Policy to be segregated for discussion, asking for postponement on action of that item to the Council's March 14 meeting when the appeal will be considered. e 2/28/77--31 1~7 Feol'uary 23, b77 '---- I. Items from Mayor and Council A. Oregon League of Cities Workshop in Cottage Grove, March 12-- Mr. Delay indicated he wishes to attend; Mr. Li.euallen indicat- ed he might attend. B. County Commissioners Reorganization Issue--Mr. Bradley express- ed a concern over the reorganization proceedings with the County Commissioners at present and wondered if it would be appropriate for the City Council to take a public stand regarding the reorganization. He indicated the City does make up 65 percent of the population of the County. Mr. Obie said he felt this was a critical issue relative to the relationship between the City and the County governments. He said he felt that Commissioner Rust was sincere in his request for input. He indicated that the cities of Lowell and Oakridge have spoken and acknowledged the Commissioner's right to set up guidelines for reorganization, requesting them to do so in a manner with good judgment, etc. He said he felt it appropriate for the Council to address the issue and make a decision. Ms. Smith indicated a concern over the reorganization plan. She said the credibility of the City and the County were both at stake. She supported a decision by the Council to make a statement about its concerns and asked staff to comment in order to guide the Council in its decision. '- Manager said that preliminary discussions had been held among the staff and it was decided not to proceed any further. He said it was very difficult to determine what was going on, and that the staff concerns should focus on working relationships with the staff of the County. He indicated that a statement could be presented to the City Council outlining the areas of general concern and need for effective working relationships with the County. Mr. Delay said he felt this was an excellent idea and said this was an area where the City Council should and could take a position. He also indicated that he felt the issue problem had been blown out of proportion. He said Commissioner Rust was, to his way of thinking, right in trying to work towards organization as established by the original charter and he found no problem with that. Ms. Smith asked if it would be appropriate for the Councilor the'City staff to attend the hearing and express its desires and concerns. Mr. Delay replied that he felt the City Council is not in a position to review the County Commissioners' proposals, but he felt it was appropriate for the City Council to make a pronouncement \~8 2/28/77 --32 . File e e . . e - concerning the working relationship between the City and the County. Mr. Bradley said he felt the City Council was not in a position to review the County's reorganizational plans and asked again if it would be appropriate for the City to make its concerns and wishes known. Mayor Keller asked if the City Council could adopt a resolution expressing its concerns. Manager indicated he would like a little time to put together a statement of concerns and said it was difficult to determine at this time what affects the reorganizational plan might have on the city. Mayor Keller asked if staff could prepare for the Council such a statement for March 2, Con~ittee-of-the-Whole meeting. Assistant Manager indicated no detail or substance existed regarding the proposed reorganization on which the City could make an assessment. He said that the City staff is not sure how the County proposes to restructure its reorganization. Mayor Keller asked Mr. Bradley if his request was to have the staff respond back to the Council at next Wednesday's meeting. Mr. Bradley expressed concern over time and felt it might be necessary to have staff make their statement sometime "todayll so that the County would at least be notified of its concerns. Mayor Keller indicated that he felt that it was appropriate and asked Manager to convey "today" to the County Commi ss i oners the concern of the City Council and also to prepare a report for Council to consider at the March 2, Committee-of-the-Whole meeting. Manager indicated that he would prefer a written communication or have the City Council present a statement today rather than have the chief administrative person make such a statement. Mayor Keller said he would make a statement "today" on behal f of the City Council. Affirm C. 1990 Update Proposal--Mr. Bradley indicated the Council had recieved a copy of the Update Proposal and asked that it be scheduled for future consideration at a Committee meeting. File D. Gut.Committee--Mr. Bradley reported a meeting of the Gut Committee had been held Thursday, February 17, at which about 50 people attended. He said a report would be ready for the Council in March. He also indicated that City Council members might consider riding with police officers on a Friday or Saturday night to see first hand what goes on in this particu- lar problem area. File E. Liquor License Applications--Mr. Lieuallen requested that consideration be given to removing the City Council from reviewing liquor license applications unless staff sees some problems with a particular application. Manager responded that he would have to review the State law and check with City Attorney to see if this could be done. File 2/28/77 --33 t fo~ F. P1anninQ Commission Resignation--Kenneth W. Reeder effective April 1,1977: Mayor Keller indicated the resignation of Mr. Reeder from the Planning Commission saying that Mr. Bernhard had asked the City Council to please expedite the process in picking a new member for the Commission. Mayor Keller sug- gested a possible procedure: 1) advertise on the vacancy until March 5 at 5 p.m.; 2) March 7, the City Council would meet to select finalists; 3) City Council would meet on March 9, at 5 p.m. to interview the finalists and make a selection. Mr. Delay said he felt it was a good idea to expedite the process, but the problem existed with the National League of Cities Convention would have a meeting during that period of time where both he and Mr. Bradley would be out of town. Mr. Obie suggested changing the time to April. Mr. Haws said it was his impression that the Planning Commission meetings are very lengthy and sometimes very frequent, and perhaps the Council needed to make a decision and appointment before April. Mr. Porter, Planning Director, said that there are six voting members with two ex-offici members and that the Planning Com- mission can operate with five voting members but it would be very helpful to have a new member appointed, as it takes at least six months of training to acquaint a new Commission mem- ber with the processes. Mayor Keller expressed appreciation for Mr. Porter's concern and also said he wanted staff to real- ize the pressures of the Council. Mayor Keller then suggested advertising for the position until April 1 at 5 p.m. and work out a time schedule for interviews and selection later. '-- G. Eugene Renewal Agency Consu1tant--Joan Mazo, Chairperson of the Eugene Renewal Agency, stated the Agency has retained a consulting firm to undertake a study aimed at improving down- town Eugene as a location for major retailing. A committee is to be formed to consult with the retained consultant firm and she was asking Council to send two representatives to serve on the Committe to work directly with the consultants. She said the Committee would be meeting for approximately two to four months and would probably have very frequent meetings, perhaps weekly. Mayor Keller asked for Council members with an inter- est on serving this Committee to indicate to him between now and March 2, and he would make an appointment of the two mem- bers next at that time. Councilman Haws requested copies of Ms. Mazo's letter regard- ing the consultant be sent to the Council members. - Mr. Obie asked how important it was that City Council members be represented on this Committee. Mayor Keller responded that the thrust of the study is to approach one of the key Community '-- \10 2/28/77--34 . Affirm e Affirm e . Goals, that of improving the downtown area. He said he felt it very appropriate and extremely important for a City Council member to sit on the Committee. Mr. Lieuallen ex- pressed an interest in serving on the Committee. Mr. Bradley then asked about whether the appointments should be made by Councilor Mayor. Mayor Keller said the letter requested an appointment and he would take the names of Council persons who were interested and proceed. He indicated to Mr. Bradley that if he had a problem with the appointment process he should call and they would talk it over. Mr. Haws then expressed his concern about the discrepancy in appointments between Council and Mayor. He felt this was an issue which was going to have to be discussed and get cleared up to reach some agreement on how it's going to be done. He reiterated his preference for Council appointments and felt it should be set on an agenda for a discussion item. Mr. Delay concurred with Mr. Haw's statement. H. Tree Bids on West University--~1ayor Keller indicated he had re- ceived a letter regarding the original contracts and bid bonds beinq requested, asking whether it was a City policy or an HUD policy. He requested that staff report back to the Council on this matter. A f fi rm e I. Time Limit Set--Mayor noted that because of the length of the aqenda for "today'sll meeting the following time limits would be set: Item V, 5 mi nutes; Item V I, 3 mi nutes; Item V II, 10 minutes; and Item VIII, 15 minutes. File J. Contribution to Morse Ranch Board--Mr. Rex Bonney, representa- tive of Sheetmetal Workers Local No. 332, reported that he had been working for two years with the local labor unions and had File raised over $600 to contribute to the Morse Ranch Board for re- habilitation purposes. He stated that Senator Wayne Morse was one of the best friends of labor and he had hoped that more money would be raised in the future. Ms. Dorothy Leeper, President of the Morse Ranch Board, thanked Mr. Bonney for the generous gift. Mayor Keller noted that this is the largest Qift any group has yet given to the Morse Ranch. K. Room Tax Committee Report--Manager indicated that at the meetinQ held February 17, it was decided to request freezing the third- and fourth-quarter allocations for the room tax fund and the expanded Subcommittee would process the second Quarter request for allocations. He said the third- and fourth-quarter funds would be combined with the allocations for the 1977-78 year and those allocations would be made shortly after July 1. '.e \11 2/28/77 --35 Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to freeze third and fourth Quarter room tax allocation funds. Mr. Obie said wondered how in the interim situation of study by the subcommittee, people were going to get their money. Manager said the third- and fourth-quarter funds would be allocated after the whole system had been developed and worked out, that the allocations would be made in July or later. Ms. Smith said that this does not mean that the money will not be allocated, but will be done at a later date. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. L. Legislative Committee Report--Manager indicated minutes were attached to the agenda and that there had been no split votes on any of the items discussed at the meeting of February 17. Mr. Haws moved, seconded. by Mr. Delay, to accept the Legislative Subcommittee report. .- Mr. Bradley expressed concern over Senate Bill 2 and said that he was concerned over the items brought up by the Youth Commission and felt they should be addressed by the Council. Manager indicated that Senate Bill 2 had been scheduled for the Thursday, February 24, meeting with written statements to be submitted by both the Youth Commission and the Police Department and felt it premature for the Council to get into discussing this matter at this time. Mr. Bradley then expres- sed concern that the Legislature might act before the City Council has a chance to take a stand on Senate Bill 2. Mr. Lieua11en said he didn't think that would be a problem and that the procedures that had been set up should be followed. He said that if there was a time problem, testimony can be taken under the new resolution. Mayor Keller indicated that Mr. Bradley could appear before the Subcommittee and express his concerns on the Senate Bill. ~1r. Bradl ey then expressed concern over the recommendati on of the subcommi ttee on Se na te Bi 11 78 whi ch said II i tis not the City's Dosition" and felt it should say "city has taken no position." Smith said that was the intent of the task force. -- Mr. Bradley then expressed concern over House Bill 2614, asking why this issue was addressed by the City Council. He said he felt it was a morality issue relating to family relations and was not an appropriate concern for the City Council. He asked if the City Council wanted to look at every criminal law. Manager indicated the Subcommittee was responding to problems raised by the various commissions and staff. Mr. Bradley stated a policy issue was involved: What kinds of bills are filtered to the City Council for discussion. Manager indicated discussion on this particular bill had been requested by the Women's Commission. t1~ 2/28/77--36 e Approve Approve e e' - Vote was taken on the motion which carried, all Council members present voting aye except Mr. Bradley abstaining on HB 2614. M. Assessment Panel Report--February 16, 1977 Present: Council members Haws and Hamel, Zoning Administrator Gene Haxton and City Attorney Stan Long Written appeal from the Zoning Board of Appeals' decision of December 22, 1976 regarding density variance at 140 High Street was received from Otto R. Poticha. Mr. Haxton explained the chain of events leading to the appeal as follows: 1. Appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals by developers; 2. Zoning Board of Appeals heard appeal on September 30, 1976 and granted variances; 3. The action of the Zoning Board of Appeals was appealed to the City Council by David Filer, representing East Skinner's Butte Friends and Neighbors neighborhood group; 4. The Assessments Panel reviewed the action, upheld that action, but questioned the findings of fact process; e 5. Mr. Filer again appealed, and the Council referred the matter back to the Zoning Board of Appeals with instructions to use findings of fact process; 6. The Zoning Board of Appeals on December 22, 1976 reviewed their action and denied the variance for additional density and upheld the interpretation of the Building Official that indi- vidual maximum lot coverage in regard to building and parking must apply; 7. That action was appealed by Poticha, which brought the matter to the Assessments Panel. Mr. Haxton stated that the appeal had changed in that one issue regarding the fence setback has been dropped due to the fact that the Zoning Code has been amended in this regard. Mr. Haxton further stated that the Panel is therefore to review the interpretation of allowed lot coverages in RG zone districts and to consider the vari- ance in maximum density in RG zone districts from 400 square feet to 397.62 square feet per room count unit. - Mr. Haws questioned whether it was the interpretation of the Building Official that the and/or provision had no effect. Mr. Haxton stated the Building Official has determined that the individual maximums shall not be exceeded. Mr. Haxton stated it was the recommendation of'the staff that the variances not be granted. 113 2/28/77 --37 ~ Mr. Poticha stated that it was his feeling that if the and/or provi- sion were not intended to be used that it would have been amended since ~ 1968 when it was originally adopted. He further stated that the Code requires that there be one and one-half parking spaces on site for each room in an RG zone; therefore, a developer must come reasonably close to the 30-30 provision. Mr. Poticha stated that he felt the "and" is redundant and contended that the "or" is the usable part of the state- ment. Mr. Poticha further stated that he sat in at the meetings when the Code was adopted and he did not feel it was the spirit of the Plan- ning Commission to deal with the Code in a dual meaning, to only deal with the part of the Code that deals with the "most restrictive". He stated that the argument was made that the "or" does not count because the "and" would be the "most restrictive"; but that in fact when you see other maximum lot coverages, you find that, for example, in the R-3 zones you have maximum lot coverage of 50 percent, maximum parking coverage of 30 percent, II and" is 80 percent, but "or" is 70 percent and that would be more restrictive. He stated that this would not in fact be more restrictive, because the cost of land in this zone district is so high that the buildings go over the top of the cars and combined coverage allows you to build more parking or building. Mr. Poticha stated that in regard to the density issue, he felt that when there was such a discrepancy of 400 feet to 397 feet, that it was appropriate to take the matter to the Board of Appeals because that was what the Board was designed to handle. Martha Filer of 235 East 3rd Avenue spoke regarding the density issue, stating that the Code does not include any reference to a variance ~ with respect to density. Therefore, she felt there is no allowance ,., in the Code for variance on that issue. Mrs. Filer stated she felt the Code is very clear concerning the and/or provlslon. Mrs. Filer presented an exhibit which was made a part of the record regarding the grammatical necessity for the and/or. She stated that the phrase "and/or" has to be used because neither the word II and" nor the word "or" coul d be appl i ed every time you read it and that because there are various possibilities you could not use just the word "and" or the word "or". Mr. Long stated that the question should be asked "What were the legis- 1 ators tryi ng to accompl ish when the Code ws adopted II , and that when an administrative agency charged with the enforcement of regulations has over a great period of time interpreted a statute in a certain way, that that interpretation is entitled to great weight when ascertain- ing the meaning of that statute. . Recommendation: It was the unanimous decision that the findings of the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting of December 22, 1976 should be incorporated in this decision and the appeal of the appellant should be denied. . Mr. Haws noted two major issues were discussed by the Assessment Panel: 1) Variances for density and that the appellants did not meet standards; and 2) the 30-30 issue. Mr. Delay asked that language be added to Section 9.556 of the Code to clarify that particular section, to which Manager replied that it is being developed. - \1't 2/28/77 --38 - Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to accept the Assessment Panel Report. Motion carried unanimously. Approve II. Liquor License Applications 1. 1243 West 7th Avenue--Le Provencale Restaurant (new outlet, RMB) R.J. Nicolai and G.S. Roddier Schedule hearing February 24, 1977 2. 1166 Highway 99 North--Allison Lanes, Inc. Change of ownership from Fairfield Lanes--Arthur Wick, Jr. Council approval only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approve the change of ownership for Fairfield Lanes, and to schedule a hearing for February 24 for Le Provencale Restaurant. Motion carried unanimously. Approve III. Improvement Petitions 1. Sanitary sewer 500 feet north of Lorane Highway from 100 feet northwest of Whitbeck to 450 feet northeast of Whitbeck Boulevard; totally within subdivision, no City costs. .e 2. Sanitary sewer 300 feet east of Whitbeck from 450 feet north of Lorane Highway to 260 feet north; totally within subdivision, no City costs. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Ms. Smith to accept petitions. Motion carried unanimously. Approve IV. Annexation Hearings--Schedule for February 28, 1977 1. Annexation to city parcel 1.25 acres located east of Spring Avenue north of Central Boulevard (Lemke) (A 76-15) (map attached) 2. Annexation to city parcel 0.72 acres located along the north side of Skyline Loop, east of Barber Drive (Rutledge) (A 76-16) (map attached) Mr. Haws asked if the hearings could be set over for another meeting, as he understood the Feburary 28 agenda was quite heavy. Manager re- plied that the Planning Department is trying to have people appear before the Council in the same order as they apply to Planning. These applications have been in the process for a substantial period of time. Mr. Saul, Planner, said that on the Rutledge annexation only the appli- cant had given testimony. On the Lemke annexation, there had been a concern over the fire access being adequate and the Commission had voted in a 3-3 tie. Since that time, he had received information from the Fire Department indicating that the fire access would be enhanced if the area were annexed. He also cautioned the Council that the Planning Commission does have a large volume of material coming before the Council in the future. e 115 2/28/77 --39 "- Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Smith, to schedule hearings for February 28, 1977. Mr. Delay expressed concern regarding the annexation policy and, asked if it could be a scheduled discussion item at a Committee-of- the-Whole meeting in the future. Manager said that perhaps Mr. Porter and Mr. Delay could get together and have a discussion first. Mr. Haws and Mr. Bradley both expressed interest in attending such a meeting. Mayor Keller said that he felt that it was the general consensus of the Council that the item should be set for a Committee- of-the-Whole discussion. ""--' Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. V. Approval of request by LCOG Acting Executive Director for review of proposal for limited compensation to Board Chairman (memo and proposal distributed to Council) Mr. Haws indicated that this request was made, with the issue being whether the Chairman of the LCOG Board should be paid to offset his lost income. Mayor Keller expressed concern over the legality of doing something of this nature. Mr. Long, of the city attorney's office, said he did not know and that he assumed that the Counsel for LCOG had considered the problem. Mr. Obie asked whether compen- sation could be made to the members of the Planning Commission. Mr. Long replied it could not be made. Mr. Obie then said that because the Planning Commission members, who spend hundreds of hours of time are not reimbursed because of City policy, then he would not be in favor of reimbursing on a piecemeal basis, in this instance for the LCOG Board Chairman. Mr. Delay said that he did not like City policy but the Council was dealing with another Board at this time and sees no conflict. He said the merits of the case were that people are losing income by serving and should be compensated for that loss. Mr. Lieuallen raised the possibility that conceivably one Council member could become LCOG Board Chairman and be receiving money and that would be in conflict with the City Code. Mayor Keller said that was a concern of his as to whether it was legal or not. He asked staff to respond as to its legality. Mr. Bradley said the Council could make a recommendation to support this request based on the staff recommendations and findings. Mr. Lieuallen replied that the charter is the City Council's policy and the City Council would have to change the Charter to take another position. Mr. Long replied that the Charter limits the Council on what it can do and this question is different. LCOG is a separate governmental unit and has different funding, etc. He said it was not an easy question to answer. Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to instruct Mr. Haws to vote no on the proposed compensation request. "- 2/28/77--c40 \1b Pub Hrg . e . VI. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to table the item for discussion at another Commitee-Of-the-Whole meeting. Motion carried, with all COuncil members present voting aye except Mr. Obie voting no. PreSentation of proposed projects for Title II Public Works Act 1976 counterc clical funds financin (memo distributed to Council) Appr< '--- e '- Manager reported that Congress adopted the Public Works Act in 1976, providing for five quarterly payments to the City of Eugene based upon unemployment figures and population. He said that the City had received $449,814 of these funds and estimated another additional $280,000 will be received for a total of $730,000. This money must be Obligated within six months after receiving it. He said the City had until May 23, 1977, to obligate the first payment of $298,OOO. Another $152,000 must be obligated by July II. The deadline for obligating the remaining $280,000 depends upon the actual date the funds are received. He said because of the impact of the preparing departmental budgets for 1977-78, he was recommending Council's approval to allocate the entire $730,000 as Soon as Possible. He said it was a one-shot stimulation for the economy and was to assist cities in Sustaining general city services; it would allow Some flexible uses in some instances, although not for new Construction or new projects. He said that the staff was recommending the followin9 criteria to be used to implement Council's policy: I) improvement in long range financial circumstances of the City; 2) improvement of prOductivity of existing work forces; 3) improvement of the City compliance with the legal, safety, and other reqUirements; and 4) a one-time expenditure that is not disruptive to services when funds are termlnated. Mayor Keller indicated that since Council had been meeting for 1 and one-half hours the no smoking policy was not in effect. Mr. Bradley expressed his OPPosition to the violation of the "no smoking policy". He said either change the policy or stick by it. Mr. Delay concurred with Mr. Bradley's state- ment, saying a pOlicy had been adopted and if it was going to change then the Council should do so. Mr. Obie requested the staff to place the "no smOking po I icy" on the agenda for di s- cussion at the next Committee-of-the_Whole meeting. Affirm - - Manager continued with his discussion of the countercyclical funds and indicated that he hoped that the Council would take action soon as departments are in the process of drawing up their bUdgets for the 1977-78 year and expenditures of these funds would affect those budgets. Mr. Haws questioned what process the Council should take--a vote now or public hearing? Manager said he Would like Some reasonable consensus at Monday night's Council meeting, at the very latest the March 14 COuncil meeting. Mr. Haws then asked What the funds are for. Manager stated that Senator Muskie had started this program many years ago with the idea that in urban areas where a recession had struck and the fiscal squeeze was on, the cities need additional funds because they were Cutting back in their general services. -.. \11 2/28/77 --41 -. The money finally came through, although it had taken until January 1977 to secure regulations as to how the money could be used. The purpose of the money is to improve the economy in cities and to sustain general City services. Manager noted at the following items as priority requests for the money budgeted: 1) public works equipment, total $132,000; 2) police radios, total $114,000; 3) space problems, total $160,000; 4) Word Processing Center, total $74,040; 5) construction activity for three months, total $58,800; 6) Urban Renewal project staffing until June 1978, total $141,200; 7) Parcade interest payment, total $50,000; for a subtotal of $730,040. '- Mr. Haws questioned items six and seven, if the money was actually already budgeted. Manager said yes, that this would free up more money for other projects. On item No. seven Mr. Haws asked where would the money come from if they did not pay the $50,000 out of this federal funding where would the money come from. Manager indicated it would come from rents and from the Downtown Development District income. He went on to say that the Downtown Development District Board periodically receives money that goes into further downtown public development, such as additional parking facilities. Mr. Haws indicated that he felt it would be more beneficial to spend that money on item No. 12--centralized maintenance facility. Manager said that property taxes are involved in the Downtown Development District too and that the more other contributions are made, the less the community taxation contributes. Mr. Haws said that he was not sure that the people who pay taxes want the money to go there. Manager responded that he felt the community as a whole was interested in the revitalization of the downtown area. . Mayor Keller said that it was his understanding that the Down- town Development District had two tax levies supporting it: both passed on to taxpayers and any funds used to lessen the load will be beneficial to taxpayers. Mr. Obie commended the Manager and staff for the outlining of the proposed use of these funds. He indicated that he had a question under guideline No. one. He asked if it was a guideline to the city as a whole or as to the city as a municipality or both. Mr. Martin responded that it was hard to separate the two. The question is whether to spend now or wait. He said the staff felt it would be better to use the money now, as a drain on the financial resources over the next few years could be avoided, such as expenditures for Word Processing. Mr. Obie then questioned item No. five on the priority list and asked if this allocates staff funds to the rehabilitation of neighborhood refinement plans and if any alternatives had been considered. Mr. Porter replied that this money would be used to get the code administration process back in shape: to hire temporary help on a short time basis and to work on getting the records systems and operations up to date. He said it was a one- time shot and would help them through a very heavy crunch. Mr. Obie replied he would like to see other alternative plans and \18 2/28/77 --42 . - " - '-. perhaps restore the pursuance of neighborhood refinement plans. Mr. Martin replied the crunch is with the Planning Commission and what it has to deal with. He said this would be a one-shot source of money and would not deal with that issue which is a long-term commitment by the City. Mr. Lieuallen asked if the Code administration process was different and whether the Plan- ning Department would have the same crunch a year from now. Mr. Porter replied that certain legislative time restrictions have been placed upon the Planning Commission requiring them to meet certain deadlines, resulting in the Planning Commission getting behind in processing its legal obligations. Mr. Lieuallen then questioned the priorities of funding various hardware projects. He asked if in the budget process this money, such as had been directed to Public Works, Police, and Fire Departments, would free up money for instance for Library and Parks and Recreation. He questioned this imbalance and wondered if it could be made up somewhere else. Mr. Martin responded that the staff had looked at the library automated system and its poten- tial for high cost reductions, but that it was not a priority for them at this particular time as they are not ready to implement such a process. In six months to a year from now they will be in a better position to jUdge. He said the staff had tried to develop are ongoing rationale, looking at the possibility of getting more money in the future. Mr. Lieuallen asked if the Parks had anything to say about these priorities, to which Mr. Martin said yes. Mr. Lieuallen then asked about any suggestions being made for maintaining facilities. Mr. Martin said they are dealing with that suggestion in budget meetings currently. Mr. Lieuallen then asked about temporary employment and its impact on the budget. Mr. Martin replied that the City could hire people on a short-term basis, but then they would have a built-in unem- ployment liability, which the City is trying to avoid. Mr. Delay expressed a concern with item No. VI. He felt that it might be contrary to the Public Works contract. His under- standing of the intent was to put money into the economy as quickly as possible and item No. VI was not creating money for the economy, which he felt was not the intent of the Public Works Act. Mr. Martin replied that it could be interpreted that way. He said that efforts were being made to perserve the $800,000, with less demand on local resources to come up with funds. He also indicated these funds could be committed before the next 12 months have passed. Mr. Delay responded that if the money is going to be spent in that relatively short time frame then he felt perhaps it was not against the intent of the act. 'e "-- e '- . 2/28/77 - -43 11'J Ms. Smith questioned whether the additional funding will actually . come through. Manager replied that the January funds were received on schedule and they expected the April and July funds to come through on schedule. Ms. Smith replied that the Budget Committee felt it was best not to allocate funds unless those funds were certain. '- Mr. Bradley asked whether in assessing these priorities thought had been given to the 1976-77 budget priority items. Manager replied yes. Mr. Martin also replied that they were trying to find ways to spend the money to avoid laying off people next year. Mr. Bradley then asked whether buying equipment or hiring people would be in the best interest of the Act. Mr. Martin replied that situation could be looked at from two sides, that you could stimulate business by buying equipment which would allow more people to have jobs. Mayor Keller, indicating the May 23 deadline, asked if it might be appropriate to carry the discussion on to next Wednesday's meeting. Mr. Martin said that by next Wednesday the staff was going to begin to act on the Council's decision. He again re- iterated the fact that all departments are now currently working on budgets and that the impact of these priority fundings would have an impact on the budgets. They would have to know within another week and a half what the Council's decision would be. Mr. Delay asked if it would be possible to make a motion to con- sider action on items on which the Council agreed and then to discuss further items on which the Council disagreed. e Mr. Bradley indicated that he felt a policy issue was at stake. If he were an employee working on the labor force for the City, he would rather work an extra year and get laid off, than get laid off and have the City purchase equipment. Mr. Martin replied that a more basic policy was involved--whether the City becomes dependent on federal funding for its operations. He said the City was trying to avoid doing that. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approve items two, four, and five at this time with Council discussion at the March 2 Committee-of-the-Whole meeting on all other i terns next week. Mr. Bradley expressed his concern over the process saying he would like to see the Council support a policy decision: Either support the total package as being consistent with City policy and vote on it as a total package or reject the total package, or change the policy. Mr. Delay responded that he felt City Council's responsi- bility on most issues was to make a choice and make' some decisions and make some compromises. He indicated that he was trying to offer some assistance to the Manager and staff where there was "- . \90 2/28/77 --44 . VII. - consensus on items so that those departments affected could be working on their budgets. Vote was taken on the motion, which passed with all members present voting aye, except Mr. Bradley voting no. Manager indicated that it was his understanding that all other items would be discussed at next Wednesday's meeting and the departments could start work on their budgets accordingly. Referral of Systems Development Charge Proposals of Assessment Subcommittee to interested groups for review (memo and ordinance distributed to Council) Approve Manager indicated that this was a draft proposal which would estab- lish a development charge for: 1) arterial street system, 2) sani- tary trunk sewers; and 3) major storm drainage facilities. The charge would be levied on all new building construction within the City to offset some of the demand placed on the City for financing major facilities. Manager indicated that written proposals would be back from the group some time in March and then the revised proposals would be presented before a pUblic hearing with groups, including the Planning Commission and Housing Committee, Home Builder's Association, Chamber of Commerce, realtors, neighborhood groups, and others to testify at the public hearing. Hopefully, the discuss- ions and hearings would conclude in May. Mayor Keller indicated this process had been in development for quite some time and that action should be referred to those people with adequate time to respond back. Mr. Delay questioned whether consideration had been given to other important services provided by this city, for instance fire and police. Manager responded yes, those items had been dis- cussed, but it was decided that this was an initial effort in a step toward assessment charges and the proposed suggestion for an ordi- nance change was modeled on the experience of other cities. Mr. Allen, Public Works Director, stated that the intent of these proposed changes would be to develop a source of revenue for city- wide projects, that it did not support specific projects, but rather city-wide projects. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the proposed suggestions and proposed ordinance be passed on to the people concerned and their suggestions be returned by the end of March. Motion carried unanimously. Approve VIII. Status report on Phase I Eugene Growth Management Study (Presented by Planning Staff) Mr. Jim Farah of the Neighborhood Improvement Project in the Plan- ning Department reviewed a memo distributed to Council. He indicat- ed that under the Growth Management Study Phase 1 would produce a descriptive analysis of growth in Eugene, including a discussion to date of the urban service boundary on new residential construction ~ 181 2/28/77--45 '--' and the resultant cost for public services. Phase 2 would develop scenarios which allow comparison of public costs involved in various geographic locations of future residential growth. Phase 3, based on the results of Phases 1 and 2, would develop specific policies aimed at assisting in public decisions concerning management of future residential growth occurring within the urban service boundary. These policies would be intended to strengthen similar existing adopted policy statements, but would be more specific in nature. He indicated the tentative conclusions based on the Phase 1 study completed to date were as follows: 1) Eugene's population will most likely grow with the rest of the nation, at least to the year 2000; 2) in the last few years, immigration has been an increasingly important element of population change in Eugene, while natural increases have declined in importance; 3) in addressing the issue of community expansion, Eugene must consider court decisions which have set a fairly firm direction for local actions appropriate in dealing with future growth. In general these decisions suggest that, lacking a clear legal precedent, growth avoidance could be open to legal challenge, while growth control or management systems may appropriately be considered and implemented by local government; 4) between 1970-76 a relative shift has occurred in Eugene1s population age cohorts. Data for these two years show a slight decline in the proportion of population less than 18 years old and a slight increase in the proportion of between 19 and 59 years of age; 5) although the supply is declining, Eugene continues to have an available supply of vacant land (about 3,000 acres) currently zoned for low-density residential use. This land can accommodate substantial new resi- dential development. Since 1972 the average price per acre of vacant residential land within the Eugene area has increased substantially, however, much of this price increase can be attributed to inflation; 7) the results of data analysis are consistent with the proposition that the urban service area is an effective growth management tool; 8) while actual program costs in the categories of the community safety and community leisure have increased substantially during the past six years, real per-capita costs for these services have increased at a much lower rate; 9) the majority of the city's arterial streets are accommodating traffic flows at or above level of service "C" providing for stable traffic conditions; 10) fringe area elementary schools tend to have higher enrollment to capacity ratios than schools located in the city center; 11) increases in major crimes experienced in Eugene from 1970-76 may be attributed to a variety of factors such as increase or changes in the city's population, increased tendency by victims to report certain kinds of crimes, decline in economic conditions within the area, and changes in the system of reporting criminal offenses; 12) Eugene1s population increase from 1971-75 may not have adversely affected the natural environment as measured by levels of suspended particulates; 13) although the city's proportion of area employment declined slightly between 1963 and 1970, data on numbers of employees by place of work suggest that this trend has been reversed since 1970. -- -- \t~ 2/28/77 --46 ( . e ~. . Mr. Delay commented on item No. 12, stating the Committee should be careful in making conclusions in regard to this item. He said the City of Eugene is in violation of secondary standards in this area and that they have gone about as far as they can in restricting industrial pollutants in the air. Mr. Farah indicated another contributing factor was the suspended particulates coming from outside the area. - Mr. Delay indicated that, in the Phase 2 portion of the study, he would like very much to have included the different rates of population growth with some comparison of projected growth rate and costs associated with the development of growth rates. Mr. Obie expressed a concern on the private open space of 3,000 acres, which was alluded to in item No.5. He was in favor of having private ownership of open space land rather than public ownership and was concerned about the possibility of the public eating away at the private open space. Mr. Farah indicated that the 1990 Update Plan will speak to that issue. Mr. Bradley asked in regard to item No.1 whether LCOG statistics or City's statistics were used in analyzing the great rate of growth as to its accuracy. He asked what is the rate and is it accurate? Mr. Faran ;ndi~ cated that item No.1 speaks in general to the rate of growth and it is in the complete report which will be submitted to Council. Mr. Delay and Mayor Keller both indicated that they felt there was a necessity to have some cursory examination of the rate of growth impact. Mr. Porter replied that he felt that would have to be done in the Metropolitan Update Plan rather in the economic study which is being considered here and the consultants and staff are looking at the entire metropolitan area, rather. than just the Eugene area. File Mr. Bradley asked if the group was thinking about mini-management systems, to which Mr. Porter replied that they hoped to have better management tools for the future. Mr. Bradley said perhaps they could have a different popu- lation rate distinctive from the metropolitan area, to which Mr. Porter replied; "The Staff feels it has responsibility to provide services to the entire metropolitan-urban area". Ms. Smith asked what the next steps in the development of the plan would be, to which Mr. Farah replied; "Th at a full report will be distributed to Council on Phase 1 while the Committee is moving on to implement its study of Phase 2". Mr. Porter indicated th~t the Study Committee had to have a factual basis to give to Phase 2 and they are now giving the statistical conclusions drawn from Phase 1, in implement- ing Phase 2 of the study. IX. Resolution enabling participation in state price agreements (resolution distributed to Council) Manager indicated that the nature of this resolution would allow the City to take advantage of any potentially beneficial mass- purchasing sales that the State may arrive at. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to pass the reso- lution. Motion carried unanimously. Approve - I~ 2/28/77--47 '-- X. Firefighters' Contract agreement Mr. Long of the Personnel Department reported that on Tuesday, February 22, the City of Eugene and the International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, reached tentative agreement on a three- year contract to be effective July 1, 1977. The tentative agreement calls for a 6.5 percent salary increase during the first year of the contract. During the second and third year of the contract salaries will be adjusted according to a cost-of-living forumula, and a renegotiation of salaries will occur during the third year of the contract only if the consumer price index increases over nine percent. Mr. Long noted that this contract continues the pattern of product- ivity between the City and the Fire Department and said that this was the first three-year contract between the Fire Fighter's union and the City and also the first contract negotiated under the City's recently adopted collective bargaining procedures. Mr. Long expressed appreciation to Mr. John O'Connor of the Personnel Department and Mr. Frank Jackson of the Fire Department in their cooperation in reaching this agreement. e File XI. 30th and Hilyard Street Hearing Mr. Don Allen, Public Works, indicated the packet of materials would be coming to the Council for the 30th and Hilyard street widening hearing, which will be held March 14; that he would like to schedule a work session between the Public Works Department and the Council for March 9. Affirm '-- e Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve, affirm, and file Items A-IO through B-12, except II-A-IO, to be discussed at March 14 Council meeting. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. ~ e 2/28/77--48 1'~ IV-B-S e .B-6 - II I. 0 rdi nances A. Pmendment regarding r-t>bile ijJme Parks and Subdivisions; amending Sections 3.005, 3.285, 3.455(2), 8.568(4), 8.690, 9.254, 9.310, 9.312, 9.324, 9.326, 9.354, 9.368, 9.424, 9.452, 9.544, 9.802, 9.804, 9.806, 9.808, 9.810, 9.812, 9.814, 9.816, 9.818; repeal i ng Sections 9.706(3), 9.820, 9.822, 9.826, 9.828, 9.830, 9.832, 9.834, 9.8~9.8~and 9.840, and declaring an emergency. Manager indicated this ordinance had been previously discussed at the Council's February 14 meeting, and second reading and passage were to be considered at this time. C. B. 1337 --Amendi ng Eugene Ci ty Code rega rdi ng r-t> bi 1 e /t)me Parks and Subdivisions; amending Sections 3.005, 3.285, 3.455(2), 8.568(4), 8.690, 9.254, 9.310, 9.312, 9.324, 9.326, 9.354, 9.368, 9.424, 9.452, 9.544, 9.802, 9.804, 9.806, 9.808, 9.810, 9.812, 9.814,9.816,9.818; repealing Sections 9.706(3), 9.820, 9.822, 9.826, 9.828, 9.830, 9.832, 9.834, 9.836, 9.838, and 9.840; and declaring an emergency, 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 approved, and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17838. c. B. 1362--Levying assessments for paving Concord Street from Ja cobs Dr i ve to ItJg hes St reet was read by Co unc i 1 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 C. B. 1362 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on March 7, 1977, and Panel recommendation be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. r-t>tion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. C. B. 1363--Levying assessments for paving sanitary and storm sewer within 2nd Addition to Meadowbrook; and sani- tary sewer to serve the property within 160 feet of the south boundary of 2nd Addition to Meadowbrook 185 2/28/77--49 -- was read by Council Bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. e IV-B-6 Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that C. B. 1363 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on March 7, 1977, and Panel recommendation be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. C. B. 1364--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within 2nd Addition to Panorama View and sanitary sewer and storm sewer to serve property within 160 feet of the south boundary of 2nd Addition to Panorama View 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 C. B. 1364 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on March 7, 1977, and Panel recommendation be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. -' C. B. 1365--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer on Kin9swood Street within Piney Woods Subdivision and 50th Avenue adjacent to Piney Woods Subdivision; and sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Piney Woods SUbdivision 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 C. B. 1365 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on March 7, 1977, and Panel recommendation be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. C. B. 1366--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within Concord Plat; and sanitary sewer within 160 feet of the south and east boundaries of Concord plat 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 C. B. 1366 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on March 7, 1977, and Panel recommendation be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. -- .e 2/28/77 --50 \g~ e --- C. B. 1367--Levying assessments for paving 15th Avenue from Jefferson Street to Madison 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 C. B. 1367 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on Ma rch 7, 1977, and Pa ne1 recommendati on be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. C. B. 1368--Levying assessments for alley paving; between 5th Avenue and 6th Avenue from High Street to Pearl Street was read by Council Bill number and title only, there being no Council member present re- questing that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that C. B. 1368 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on Ma rch 7, 1977, and Pa nel recommendati on be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. . C. B. 1369--Levying assessments for sanitary sewer--Holly Street from Norkenzie Road to 800 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that C. B. 1369 be read for the first time and be referred to the Assessment Panel for hearing on March 7, 1977, and Panel recommendation be brought back for Council consideration for final reading on March 14, 1977. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. IV-B-7 C. B. 1370--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improvement of Bertelsen Road from 11th Avenue to Royal Avenue 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. . 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 17871. 187 2/28/77 -- 51 -- C.B. 1371- Construct a sanitary sewer on Bertelsen Road from 11th Avenue to Royal Avenue was read by Council Bi 11 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 for 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. 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 17872. C. B. 1372--Adopting plans and specifications for construction of sanitary sewer on Bertelsen Road from 11th Avenue to Royal Avenue 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17873. c. B. 1373--Construct a sanitary sewer to serve Tax Lot 18-03-16-30- 2100 adjacent to Skyline Drive was read by Council Bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. e _. - Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17874. C. B. 1374--Adopting plans and specifications for construction of sanitary sewer to serve Tax Lot 18-03-16-30-2100 adjacent to Skyl i ne Dr ive was read by Counci 1 Bi 11 number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. "- - 2/28/77-..52 t gg . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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. 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 17875. C. B. 1375--Improve streets within Deodar SUbdivisione 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 for 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and ~iven final passa~e. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17876. C. B. 1376--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improvement of streets within Deodar SUbdivision was read by Council Bill number and title only, there bein~ no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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. 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 17877. C. B. 1377--Construct a sanitary and storm sewer within Deodar SUb- division 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 for 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. 2/28/77-- 53 J8~ -. 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 17878. C. B. 1378--Adopting plans and specifications for construction of sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Deodar Subdivision was read by Council Bill number and title only, there beinq no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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. 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 17879. C. B. 1379--Improve pedestrian way within Deodar Subdivision 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17880. C. B'. 1380--Improve streets within 3rd Addition to Meadowlark SUbdivision was read by Council Bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting - '-' Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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 Counci 1 Bi 11 number only. 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 17881. C. B. 1381--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improvement of streets within 3rd Addition to Meadow- 1 ark Subdivi si on was read by Counci 1 Bi 11 number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. . 2/28/7 7-- 54 \~() . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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. 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 17883. C. B. 1383--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for construction of sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Meadowlark Subdivision 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17884. C. B. 1384--Improve a pedestrian way within 3rd Addition to Meadowbrook SUbdivision 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17885. C. B. 1385--Improve El izabeth Street from Royal Avenue to 300 feet south 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. . 2/28/77-- ss 191 IV-B-7 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 17886. C. B. 1386--Approving and adopting plans for improvement of Elizabeth Street from Royal Avenue to 300 feet south 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 for 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. 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 17887. C. B. 1387--Improve E1 izabeth Street from Royal Avenue to 300 feet south 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 for 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel that the bill be approved and !-liven final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17888. C. B. 1388--Improve Concord Street from Hughes Street to Berntzen 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 the bill be read for the second time by Council Bi 11 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 Counci 1 Bi 11 number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by t~. Hamel that the bill be approved and gi ven fi na 1 pas sage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. All Co unc il members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17889. '- .e 2/28/77-- S6 \'\~ .' C. B. 1389--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improvement of Concord Street from Hughes Street to Berntzen Street was read by Council Bi 11 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17890. C. B. 1390--10 improve Concord Street from Hughes Street to Berntzen 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 the bill be read for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17891. C. B. 1391--Improve streets wi thi n Souza Pa rk 2nd Addi ti on 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17892. C. 8. 1392--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improvement of streets within ~uza Park 2nd Addition was read by Council Bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. . 2/28/7 7 -- 57 {~3 IV-B-r Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for 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. 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 17893. C. B. 1393--Construct a sanitary and storm sewer within Souza Park 2nd Addition was read by Council Bill number and title only, there bei ng no Council member present requesti ng that it be read in full. . -... Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be read for the second time by Council Bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. ~btion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by Council Bi 11 number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and qiven final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17894. C. B. 1394--Adopting plans and specifications to construct sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Souza Park 2nd Addition 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and qiven final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17895. C. B. 1395--Improve pedestrian way within Souza Park 2nd Addition 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 for the second time by Council Bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at thjs time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by Council Bi 11 number only. "--- - 19if 2/28/77 -- 58 . 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 17896. C. B. 1396--Construct sanitary sewer to serve Tax Lots 18-04-12-11- 2700, 2703, and 2704 adjacent to Whitbeck Boulevard 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 for 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. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and Cliven final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17897. C. B. 1370--Adopting plans and specifications for construction of sanitary sewer to serve Tax Lots 18-04-12-11-2700, 2703, and 2704 adjacent to Whitbeck Boulevard 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 for 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 Bi 11 number only. 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 17898. IV-B-8 IV. Resolutions Res. No. 2625--Repealinq Resolution No. 2344 and establishing pOlicy governing city testimony was read by number and title only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vot~. Motion carried, with all Council members present votinCl aye. Res. No. 2635--Authorizing City purchases under terms of certain public agency-established purchase agreements was read by number and title only. '. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, with all Council members present voti ng aye. 2/28/7 7 --S9 1~5 '-- Res. No. 2636--Authorizing the institution of proceedings in eminent domain for the acquisition by condemnation of property in the vicinity of Royal Avenue and Candlelight Drive for public park site was read by number and title only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, with all Council members present voti ng aye. . Res. No. 2637--Authorizing payment of bills and claims February 14, 1977 through February 28, 1977 was read by number and title only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, with all Council members present voting aye. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned. ~)~ Charles T. Henry Ci ty Manager . CTH:DT:ml/CM23b5 CM25b2 '-- . ......... . 2/28n 7-- 60 \q~