Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/28/1977 Meeting . M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL March 28, 1977 Adjourned meeting--from March 14, 1977 of the Common Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by President Eric Haws at 7:30 p.m. on March 28, 1977 in the Council Chamber with the following Council members present: D. W. Hamel, Ray Bradley, Jack Delay, Scott lieuallen, and Betty Smith. Councilmen Tom Williams and Brian Obie were absent. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS I-A-l A. liquor license Application 2111 West 11th, name undecided (RMB, new outlet), RIV Properties, Inc., D. R. Radke, President. Manager reviewed OLCC report. He noted that there were six non- objectors and two non-committal property owners in the area. Staff had no objections. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. . Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith to approve the liquor license application and forward to the OlCC. Motion carried unanimously. I-A-2 B. Proposed Code Provisions for Public Improvement Procedures Recommended by Public Works Department Manager noted the improvement notices being considered were a result of the new charter which takes effect April 1. The two ordinances came from the fine work of a special committee of the Council and the Public Works Department, who had been working on the changes for several months. He noted the new ordinances would replace the old charter, and that in general the existing policy was being proposed. Amendments made to the sections of the present City Code merely clarify present practice and do not encompass any changes in policy. The assessment policies and procedures are consistent with those now in use. The two proposed ordinances would include: 1) provisions for repair, construction, or construction of sidewalks; 2) process of assessing adjacent properties for street, alley, storm and sanitary sewer improvements. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. There was no further discussion by Council. Council action will be taken on these ordinances at April 11 meeting. . 3/28/77 --1 ~51 1-A-3 thru 1-8-1 C. Proposed reV1Slons to City's water policy Recommended by Planning Department Manager said under the new charter effective April 1, the responsibility of water extension services will become that of the Eugene City Council. Recent litigation under the present water policy demonstrated certain weaknesses that result in many extensions leading to urban sprawl outside urban service boundaries. One of the most important aspects of the revised policy was a redefinition of what is a health problem with regard to action preventing the spread of a communicable disease. Gary Chenkin, Planning Department, said no further communication had been received by the Planning Department regarding the revised water pOlicy. He reviewed the present water policy, which was adopted ori- ginally in February of 1972, and redefined in March of 1975. That policy provided for extensions if the property was within the urban service area in a location that should be in the City but could not be legally annexed and the owner signed an agreement to annex when it became legally impos- sible; or if there was an existing health hazard to existing property occupants which could only be corrected by securing City water. He said the proposed revision for the Council is not so much a departure from present policy as it is a more detailed expression of that policy. For example, with Boundary Commission approval, service would still be avail- able to properties outside the city but within the urban service boundary provided: 1) annexation is inappropriate or legally impossible; 2) water service will not prolong the life of non-conforming 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. He said that outside the urban service boundary the proposed policy recognized existing service to Lane Community College and the Airport. Elsewhere, 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. In areas once part of the water districts served by EWEB but subsequently dissolved, special provisions would be included for forwarding requests for extension to the Boundary Commission with informa- tion regarding the City's policy. Under the new policy, the criteria for providing water within the urban service boundary area remains essentially the same, although it somewhat tightens up the criteria, providing more protection to the city. Mr. Delay asked why under Section 2.2.4, item No. 10 the requirement that the contract be recorded at the expense of the City and why the charge was not made to the person. Mr. Chenkin replied that the agreement had been runni ng three to four pages long and was expensive to record. He said it had been an administrative hassle and administrative cost to get the papers recorded. There had been a development of a one-page notice of agreement, which is recorded by the City saying that the longer agreement was on record. 3/28/7 7--2 .t5~ .. .. ,-" . e Public hearing was opened. Randall V. Douglass, 4115 Donald Street, spoke in favor of a modifica- tion of a proposed revision. He was an educator from the Mormon Church, and requested a modification of paragraph 3.2, dealing with water use inside the urban service boundary. His suggested change was to read as follows: II.. .only to i nstructi onal uses at/or adjacent to the coll ege, which use the college's sewage disposal systemll. He noted the church owned property in the area and had plans for providing supplemental education adjacent to LCC. He felt it was an integral part of the community and would be necessary to have water service to that area. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Mr. Chenkin replied the reason for the exceptions of water service to the airport and LCC was that those were specific users which have been receiv- ing water service for some time. He noted a concern over the suggested amendment as to whether it would include residential users or would be strictly for instructional purposes, not dormitories. Ms. Smith asked Mr. Douglas to clarify. Mr. Douglas said there would be no dorms attached, that the buildings would be strictly for daytime instructional use. Ms. Smith asked if there would be any private residences, to which Mr. Douglas replied none. Mr. Lieuallen noted his concern that a mistake had been made in allowing City water service to supply Lane Community College and he did not think it would be a good idea to expand on that mistake. Mr. Delay questioned Staff regarding Section 2.2.1, in regard to water service for "vacant landll, asking if it was the intent to prohibit subdivisions. Mr. Chenkin replied the purpose of that particular state- ment in the revised water policy was to exclude water lines from being built purely for speculative purposes where no structures existed. He said water could be provided where structures already exist, although there could be extenuating circumstances for providing water to other areas. Mr. Bradley expressed concern with the word 1I0rdinarili' in Section 2.2.1 of the ordinance. He questioned when would the City 1I0rdinarily" provide water. Mr. Chenkin repl ied that "ordinarilyll it did not provide water unless it could be shown that the plans conformed to the adopted plans by the City for development. He said a request would have to conform to all policies of the City and a signed agreement to annex be completed. Mr. Bradley then questioned if he had vacant land and wanted water for irrigation, would the water service be extended. Mr. Chenkin replied that it would be a possibility if the request conformed to all the plans and policies of the City. Mr. Bradley then asked if it would be possible to delete the word ordinarily. Mr. Chenkin replied that that would clearly change the policy. There could be a development complying to City's plans and ordinances requesting water service, and as such should have that option. e e 3/28/77--3 ~3 Mr. Bradley then asked if it was possible to change that section so that vacant land did not receive the water and water was supplied only to structures. Mr. Chenkin replied if the purpose was not to allow water to any vacant land under any circumstances, then the word "ordinarily" could be deleted. Mr. Bradley then asked how the City would be affected if it did not provide water to vacant lands. Mr. Chenkin replied that the result would be a series of subdivisions with large lots with water-well supplies that would ultimately fall heir to the City as annexation pro- gressed. With the portions of property having no prior approval of conforming to the City policies, he felt it would be contrary the compact urban growth plan of the City. He also noted another disadvantage would be that it might bring pressure for expansion of a special services district where the City would not have authority or control over these districts. Mr. Bradley then asked how enforceable the agreement for consent to annexation was. Mr. Long replied that the weight of authority is that they are enforceable and that the agreements were going to be made to run with the land ownership. Mr. Bradley asked under Section 2.2 re- garding the recommendation by the City to the Boundary Commission for water extension, why the property owner does not request for himself rather than the City requesting from the Boundary Commission. Mr. Chenkin replied that under state statutes the City through EWEB has to be the provider. Mr. Bradley questioned under 3.3.1 communicable disease hazard, how that would be decided and who would decide. Mr. Chenkin said the definition of a communicable disease under the proposed policy would narrow the problem. He said it would depend on individual circumstances, for instance a Lane County Health Officer or through some other recognized authority. Mr. Lieuallen questioned if the City Council were in disagree- ~ ment with the definition of a health hazard, if it could find itself in court. Mr. Long replied that was one of the reasons why the language in the present revised policy is as it is. The, concern was that the City did not want to get into a situation where someone else's judgement would be binding. As the language now stands, it provides protection to the City by making it a determination of the City. Mr. Bradley asked how real the concerns were for proliferation of special service districts and large lot subdivisions outside of the urban service area boundary. Mr. Chenkin replied that proliferation of special dis- tricts was more of a problem in the past than it was right now, but that it is still a problem as there are five special water districts existing. In regard to the large lot subdivisions, he noted that had occurred, outside the area, and there was no reason to believe that it would not also occur within the urban services boundary area, if the opportunity were there. Mr. Martin questioned if it were still possible for a private water company to be created by land owners unilaterally, if the land owners had a water supply. Mr. Long replied that it was possible. Mr. Martin then noted that another community in Oregon had received a federal grant which made available to it a water supply system outside the city boundary and thus the City lost all control over service to that area. It reduced the City's authority to deal with the urban area outside the boundary. Resolution No. 2643--Authorizing revisions in the City's water policy was read by number and title. 3/28/77--4 ;;t5lf e e Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the resolution. e Ms. Smith moved to amend the original motion to include the recommen- dation in Section 3.2, stated by Mr. Douglass. Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Bradley moved that the word "ordinar;'ly" be deleted from Section 2.2.1. Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Bradley moved that Section 2.2 read "only criteria for extension outside the urban services boundary would be if there were a communicable disease". Motion~ died for a lack of a second. - Mr. Lieuallen felt the issues involved in the revised City water policy were containment and control of population growth in the area, and City control over the standards of that growth. There were occasions requiring the need for safety valves and flexibility to meet the changes in unexpected situations which would arise. He felt the words which Mr. Bradley objected to were necessary for that safety valve effect and flexibility. He said the policy speaks to the containment and control, and he was in favor of adopting it. Mr. Bradley said he felt the policy to be the most liberal one for allowing urban growth. He noted in his opinion there were three different tools for urban growth: 1) an infilling process within the corporate boundaries; 2) annexation; and 3) use of this water policy vehicle which provides for growth without annexation. He said there was a need for the Council to decide how it wants to handle growth through annexation and said he saw a danger in taking the third step of opening up the possibility of providing for growth without annexation. Mr. Delay shared Mr. Bradley's concerns regarding the lack of control of growth, but he felt an interim policy was necessary and the present one would be the best route available, being most practical and pragmatic, and that he was in favor of the revised water pol icy. Mr. Bradley noted another concern regarding the drought situation in the Pacific Northwest and yet the Council was considering adopting a policy that would take away water from the residents of the City of Eugene who were subsidizing the water and would extend it to people outside the area. Mr. Lieuallen said it was his understanding that water could be provided outside Eugene only if there were an ample supply for the citizens within the area, and that that contingency would be handled in the policy. Mr. Long noted EWEB had not said that the water supply was in any danger. He noted also that the City has a present policy and set of practices that it has,used over a number of years that do not include safeguards included in the revised policy. Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. 1-8-2 D. Request for taxi rate increase: Dial-A-Cab Company Manager said staff was recommending an increase from $6 to $8 an hour for waiting time but was not recommending a traffic delay charge. The last taxi increase was July 1, 1976. Public hearing was opened. e 3/28/77--5 ~55 Robert Edmond, Manager, Dial-A-Cab, said the request for traffic delay charge was made because that was where taxis lost more money. He cited examples of being held up at railroad crossings and traffic jams at Valley River Center. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Resolution No. 2644--Authorizing taxi rate increase in waiting time rate from $6 to $8 per hour was read by number and title. Mr. Bradley questioned whether the traffic delay was unique only to this company. Sherm Flogstad, Finance Director, replied memos had been received from other taxi companies. He continu~ that it was found the waiting time charge could be raised, but not the traffic delay charge. There were only seven intersections of major concern in the City, each involving not more than two-minute delays. Mr. Bradley asked if there was any way to determine whether $8 an hour w~s a fair price to pay. Mr. Flogstad said the $8 per hour charge was arrived at by averaging rates from the number of cities reviewed and their waiting time charges. Manager reviewed the several cities and their waiting time rates and noted that Portland was the only city who allowed a charge for delay of time. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to amend the motion to allow a rate increase from $6 to $7 per hour. e Discussion was held as to whether the City Council was considering only the waiting time charge or the waiting time charge and traffic delay. It was determined that only the waiting time charge was being considered ~ at this time. Mr. Flogstad noted the taxicab companies lose more revenues ~ if they are called by a customer and asked to wait than if they were able to go out on more runs. I-B-3 Vote was taken on the amendment to the motion which failed with Haws, Lieuallen, and Smith voting no; Bradley, Delay, and Hamel voting aye. Vote was taken on the original motion which passed with all Council members present voting aye, except Mr. Bradley voting no. E. Code amendment re: Selection of Court jurors Recommended by Court Administrator Manager noted this request was recommended as a way to alleviate the problem of selecting jurors and having a full number of jurors ready for hearing court cases. He said in the past if the number of jurors necessary was not available at court time, persons were summoned from the street without notice. This created problems for them personally and for their employers and work schedules. The proposed ordinance provides for summoning of alternate jurors at the time the original jury is selected, which would insure that jurors had prior notice to appear at a specific time. He said the defendent in the City would have a full jury panel prepared to try the case as scheduled and the Police Department would not be placed in a position of attempting to summon unprepared and sometimes unqualified citizens from the public off the streets. He noted that Ms. Sandra Adams of the Municipal Court was available to answer any questions ~ by the Council. .., 3/28/77--6 a5~ . Public hearing was opened with no testimony being presented. Council Bill 1426--Code Amendment re: Forming of juries in Municipal Court, adding Sections 2.790, 2.795, 2.800, 2.805, and 2.810 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. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, 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. The bill was read the second time by the bill number only. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Role call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17941. ~ 1-8-5 thru II-A-I F. Public Works Department (opened March 22, 1977) (tabulation attached) Bids were for various improvement projects by the Public Works Depart- ment, with the tabulations distributed to the Council. Don Allen reviewed the various bids. e Public hearing was opened. Dean S. Morrow, 1888 Sunrise Boulevard, spoke against the proposed improve- ment (No.1, Job No. 1198). He said there had been some question as to whether Sunrise Boulevard was the appropriate name. He was one of four property owners on the street and all were objecting to the paving improve- ment. He said it was being requested by one property owner at the expense of the other property owners. The property owners felt that more people were involved who owned property than just the one man, noting that the improvement had raised taxes and cost a lot of money. The property owners did not feel they would get their money's worth out of the improvement and asked the City Council not to award the contract for the improvement at this time. Dave Swaggerty, 1895 Sunrise Boulevard, noted he had sent a letter of opposition in November of 1976. He said in pursuant discussions with City staff, the sole criterion for improvements was the number lineal foot of frontage. He said the four combined property owners own more property and are all opposed to the improvements in that area. They do not want the street improved and he petitioned to Council to oppose this improvement. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. e Mr. Allen noted that the criterion for improvement petitions was 50 percent of the front lineal footage on any piece of property in an area. He said the Eugene City Council has complete authority to approve with zero percentage. It had been the policy to try to improve no less than one public block at a time, noting that the property owners have the right to petition, but that the decision was completely the City Council's. 3/28/77--7 ~7 Ms. Smith asked if this intiative for improvement came from 50 percent 4It of the people in the neighborhood. Mr. Allen replied that 57 percent of the front lineal footage property owners were in favor of the improvement although some property had been taken away for the intersection so it had been reduced to 49.73 percent front 1 i neal footage. Mr. Bradl ey asked how many property owners were included, to which Mr. Allen replied five individual property owners with eight lots in a one-block section. Mr. Bradley then asked what would be the public policy that would promote the approving of the petition for paving. Assistant Manager replied it had been the City's policy for some time that all streets should be improved. He noted the cost maintenance on unimproved streets was greater than on improved streets, and also noted that the City could be open to liability in areas where there was a drainage problem without storm sewers and gutters. He said these services were part of a full range of urban services that were to be provided for residents within the city. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to award to low bidders the contracts for the four presented improvement petitions. Mr. Bradley moved to amend the motion to segregate the paving of 19th Avenue from 18th Avenue to Sunrise Boulevard from the other three improvement items. Mr. Delay noted a point of order that such a segregation was a ruling the chair. President Haws then segregated the first improvement petition from the other three improvement petitions. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the low bid from R. C. Parsons and Sons be awarded for the paving of 19th Avenue from 18th Avenue to Sunri se Boul evard. Moti on carri ed wi th all Council Member'S present voting aye, except Mr. Haws voting no. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to award low bids on item number two (job No. 1307) to Morse Brothers, Inc., item number three (jOb No. 1255) to R. C. Parsons and Son Construction Company, Inc., and item number four (job No. 1089) to R. C. Parsons and Sons Construc- tion Company, Inc. Motion carried unanimously. e. e 158 3/28/77 - 8 . Com 3/16/77 Affirm Com 3/16/77 Affirm Com 3/16/77 File e Com 3/16/77 Affirm Com 3/16/77 File Com 3/16/77 Affirm . II. Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items as requested. Previously discussed in Committee-of-the-Whole on March 16, 1977 (Present: Council President Haws; Council members Obie, Williams, Delay, Lieuallen, and Bradley) and on March 23 (present: Council President Haws; Council members Hamel, Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, and Smith). Minutes of those meetings appear below in different type print. March 16, 1977 Committee-of-Whole I. Items from Mayor and Council A. Council Workshop--Mr. Williams requested that an agenda item be added regarding the Council meetings being held anywhere other than the City Council Chamber at night. He noted that perhaps the Wednesday meetings could be considered a Council meeting in order to act on some items once rather than twice. B. Rose Grant Appeal--Mr. Haws noted a letter from the Grants addressed to City Council, a request for reconsideration of the appeal. Mr. Porter said the waiting period for recon- sideration of appeal was one year unless the City Council waives the one-year period. Mr. Haws requested that this item be put on March 23 Committee-of-the-Whole agenda. C. Field Burning Hearing--It was announced by Mr. Haws that the health impact of the field burning hearing would be held Thursday, March 17, at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chamber. Mr. Williams will make a statement on behalf of the Council. D. Request for Council Consideration of Use Tax for City Services-- Mr. Haws noted a citizen request had been made to him in re- gard to use taxes for City services. He requested the staff look into the matter and report back to Council at the March 23 meeting. Mr. Delay noted that he understood the Use Tax to be some kind of basic service charge for City services pro- vided on tax exempt structures. E. Meeting Scheduled--Mr. Haws noted a Homeowners-Builders Associa- tion meeting March 29 and an Easter Seals KVAL appearance March 26, requesting any Council person wishing to make an appearance and greet on behalf of the City. No Council person offered to attend. F. Lane County Boundary Commission and EWEB Suit on Peterson Property-- Mr. Haws requested statement report on this issue. Mr. Long reported that his office would be in association with the EWEB counsel. He noted the Boundary Commission had enjoined EWEB from providing service within dissolved water districts, noting they were extra territorial and required Boundary Commission approval. EWEB's contention was that it had a contract arrangement with the water district and, therefore, it was within the boundary. Mr. Long noted the City wants a decision from the court as to what its obligation is under ~5~ 3/28/77 - 9 Com 3/16/77 Affirm Com 3/16/77 Affirm Com 3/16/77 Affirm Com 3/16/77 File Com 3/16/TI Pub Hrg contracts signed by EWEB, involving contracts signed before City water policy came under City jurisdiction. Mr. Martin noted that the state had enjoined all such activity until this matter is litigated. Mr. Long noted the defense of the City of Eugene is acting through EWEB. He said there was no policy decision adopted by the City, but that it would be necessary to have a decision from the court. He mentioned that the City water extensions at issue applied only in those areas where a contractual agreement had been made to do so, and cautioned Council to avoid such future agreements. Mr. Haws requested that City Council be apprised of the matter as the litigation continues. . G. Time Schedules--Manager noted that for future Committee~of-the- Whole meetings, an 11:30 meeting time had been set. He re- quested input from Council as to whether this was a convenient time. It was determined to place this item on the agenda for the scheduled work session. H. Code Provisions for Public Improvement Procedures--Materials were distributed to Council. Manager requested Council to look over the proposed Code revisions between now and the March 23 Committee-of-the-Whole meeting. He indicated this was a product of the Special Assessments Committee and had been thoroughly checked over by the staff and the Committee, and that enactment of the ordinance would have to be done March 28 to meet the April 1 deadline. e I. Council Work Session--Manager indicated April 9 appeared to be the best date for the work session, with only Mr. Williams not able to attend. It was the consensus of the Council that a date should be determined whereby all Council members would be present. Decision was made to tentatively postpone the work session to May 14, with Mr. Williams, Obie, Haws, Lieuallen, and Delay indicating they could attend on that date. Staff will check with remaining Council members to firm up the date. Assistant Manager indicated that Agenda items would be listed with Council members given a chance to poll the agenda items for the highest priority in order that as many items as possible could be covered in the one day. J. Royal Hudson Steam Locomotive Visit to Eugene--Manager noted the Royal Hudson is a steam powered version of the model that carried the Royal family across Canada in 1939, and would be on display in Eugene from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. on April 8. Eugene is one of a num- ber of cities being honored by the visit of this Royal H,~dson. M~. B=adley asked if this infoTmation were correct, to which Manager replied it was. K. Room Tax SUbcomm1tt~e--Minutes and reports distributed to Council~ Manager noted the next meeting of the Room Tax Subcommittee would be March 24, at 2 p.m. in the Mayor's office. The major item for discussion was review of pending applications. . l"O 'Z,I?R/77 - 1() Mr. Bradley arrived at the meeting. . Mr. Obie questioned the use of "civic center facility". Manager indicated it was a consensus of terminology, that the Committee did not want to use the word "auditorium", but that it did want to direct money to a specific group out of the room tax funds. Mr. Obie asked if it could not be called a "cultural class convention center". It was noted in discussion that it was the feeling of the Subcommittee that the money should be allocated to a physical facility in the Eugene area. Mr. Delay asked if any effort had been made to notify groups involved in room tax service funds. Mr. Haws requested that staff send letters to each organization involved and that good news media coverage be given for the public hearing to be held. - Mr. Williams questioned why 50 percent of the funds had been allocated for a civic facility and only 25 for each of the other two categories. Mr. Haws replied that it was the consensus of the Committee that some funds should be allocated to some physical facility. Manager noted other reasons included that historically and initially the money was slated for facilities~ that more money lately had been put into the cultural and recreational services, 30 to 40 percent; that tourism promotion had been close to 25 percent; and it was felt that there should be some concentration on development of a cultural convention facility, as that was the original intent of the use of the room tax funds. Mr. Williams wondered if the SO percent allocation would be spent over a two-year period, and if a feasible plan for the other eighteen million to be raised was in order. Manager replied no, plans had not been developed and the money would be spent when the plans were made. Mr. Williams then asked about the last time funds were appropriated by City Council for money to provide for an organizer for planning for such a facility. He asked if that money was usefully spent? Mr. Long, City Attorney's office, replied that that effort was still underway and had not come back to the City with any specific proposal. He indicated his understanding of the Room Tax Subcommittee meeting was that the Committee felt it wanted to save some money to see what develops so that it could be in a position to participate in the development of such a facility. It was also his understanding the Commit- tee felt that perhaps the City should take more of a leadership role in making something happen in regard to developing a fac i lity. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that a public hearing be scheduled Wednesday, April 6, 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber. 4t ~'I 3/28/77 - 11 Corn 3/16/77 File Com 3/16/77 File Corn 3/16/77 II. Pub Hrg Corn 3/16/77111. Affirm Corn 3/16/77 IV. Pub Hrg Mr. Delay requested that documents for the public be prepared to fill them in on the background of the work of the Sub- committee before the public hearing is held and requested staff to prepare such documents. . Vote was taken on the motion which passed unanimouly. L. Legislative Subcommittee--Manager noted no meeting had been held March 10. The next meeting would be March 17, 12 noon in the McNutt Room. M. Governor's Conservation Meeting--Manager noted the meeting would be held Wednesday, March 16, 1:30 p.m. in Harris Hall. He urged Council members to attend and make comments on Revenue Sharing. In that regard, Mr. Williams stated he had had a recent meeting with the Governor in which he determined the Governor had a very strong commitment to Revenue Sharing, and that he sees it as a continuing program. Liquor Licenses A. 2111 West Ilth--name undecided (RMB, new outlet); R.I.V. Properties, Inc. D. R. Radke, President. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen to schedule a public hearing March 28, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. e Review of Loan Bids for Housing Rehabilitation Resolution distributed to Council. Manager noted this would appear on the March 28 Council meeting agenda as a resolution item. Mr. Williams noted a conflict of interest on this item. Annual Update of Eugene Bikeway Master Plan--Copies distributed 3/9/77. Diane Bishop, Public Works Department, indicated there were three changes in the Master Plan: 1) addition of a bikeway along Summit Drive from Fairmount Drive to Floral Hill Drive; 2) change of 1-105 from a separate path on freeway right-of-way to a street route on Dapple Way, Roan, and Sorrel Way; 3) addition of a bikeway on 30th Avenue on Hilyard to Agate. Mr. Williams questioned whether anyone had ever ridden up the steep Summit and Fairmount bike route. Ms. Bishop replied that the bike path had been put in at the request of both neighborhood groups in the area, and that it would be used as a pedestrian pathway as well as a bikepath. Mr. Obie asked Mr. Lieuallen if in the Bike Committee meetings any discussion had been held concerning covering of bikeways. Mr. Lieuallen replied no. Mr. Obie requested that the Bike Committee might explore that thought. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Williams, to schedule a ~ public hearing April 11, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. - ~~ 3/28/77 - 12 Com 3/16/77 V Pub Hrg . e Com 3/16/7111. Pub Hrg e e Seneca Road Paving Project from West 11th to Roosevelt Boulevard-- Report, map, and design distributed to Council. Mr. Allen, Public Works Department, indicated Council had authorized this project two years ago, but because of the right-of-way problem one year ago progress had been slowed. He said that hearings had been held in the neighborhoods with neighborhood organizations and citizens. The Public Works Department was now asking Council for a hearing to go to the final design in the project. ----__ Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to schedule a public hearing April II, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. Amendment to Ordinance for Selection of Court Jurors--Memo and ordinance distributed to Council. Manager indicated that the nature of this ordinance was to eliminate what is termed jury snatching off the street. The present ordinance states that a jury of 12 persons with six alternates are chosen; if any of the six alternates cannot be served, are excused, or do not appear the court does not have a jury panel at the time of trial. If the court does not have six jurors, either the case must be continued and rescheduled at a later date or the Eugene Police Department is contacted by the court to summon from the public on the streets qualified jurors as needed to complete the jury panel. This causes trial delay, inconvenience, and additional expense. Persons summoned from the street must, without notice, adjust their personal and/or work schedules to appear as jurors. This also causes hardships on the employer, if there is one. Mr. Obie wondered how many times this type of situation occurs. Ms. Sandy Adams of the Municipal Court said that 50 to 60 percent of the cases end up with one to two jurors short. Mr. Obie asked about the cost in regard to the new ordinance. Ms. Adams replied that it was expected a reduction in cost would result, as there would not be as much waiting time for jurors to come in off the streets. Mr. Bradley asked if it would not be possible to get Lane County jurors when the Municipal Court was short. Ms. Adams replied that this had been tried several times, but there was still a waiting period of up to two hours. Mr. Long, City Attorney's office, indicated that jurors had to be citizens of the City of Eugene, and that Lane County has jurors from allover the County. Mr. Haws expressed a concern with Section 2.800 in regard to a juror being unable to attend without great inconvenience. He wondered if this might not open up possible abuse, and end up by getting jurors weighted to one element of society. Ms. Adams replied that there was a formal request for excused absences and she did not think that it had been abused. Mr. Delay con- curred with a feeling of unease about the Section 2.800, indicat- ing it looked like a big loophole. He felt there might be poten- tial abuse and that perhaps one element of society would be more represented on juries. Mr. Long indicated that the language was in ~~3 3/28/77 - 13 Com 3/16/ VII. 77 Affirm substantial agreement with the State statutes, that jurors would prefer to have the option of not serving. He said the exclusion of certain elements of the society is true allover the country and there is not a great deal that can be done about it. Mr. Bradley asked if it might be possible to have a panel of voluntary jurors and wondered if any thought had been given to this idea. Ms. Adams replied that it would not be possible to do so according to State statutes, but that some legislation coming up in the present State Legislature would permit such a panel of voluntary jurors. Mr. Williams suggested that if such a bill does come up, it be brought up before the Legisla- tive Subcommittee and he would oppose it. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to schedule a public hearing March 28, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. Springfield and Lane County request to consider Resolution directed at Legislature for creating elected LTD Board Letters and Resolution distributed to Council. Manager noted that a letter had come in from Commissioner Archie Weinstein requesting that the City Council make its wishes known today at l:30 p.m. before the County Commission. Mr. Obie expressed opposition to Governor appointment of LTD officials, feeling that it took away the opportunity for local citizens to make input. He indicated, however, he was not in total support of the Springfield position, but would like to see some determination made as a compromise between these two positions. He would prefer the proposed Springfield position over the present system. Mrs. Phyllis- Loobey, Lane Transit District, noted that the Board had determined it was not appropriate for it to take a position on the issue. That is part of the legislative process. Mr. Williams said he shared the concerns of Springfield and the County. He did not support the idea of election of the director of LTD. He noted that in history of government, every time special service districts began to proliferate, their ability to make any coherent governmental decisions was extremely limited. He said the idea of an appointed body by the Governor having the power to tax was most offensive and he felt the logical place for the LTD was very clearly under the control of the County Commissioners. Assistant Manager noted it was necessary to deal with the legis- lature in terms of how the State statutes are being applied in other areas of the state and noted the case in Portland where special service districts cross over boundaries. 3/28/77 - 14 ~{Jf e -------------~-- --------- -. ~~-- . - Mr. Delay noted a general concern over lack of control over special service districts, and indicated that he felt it too soon to make such a decision without knowing the changes and what effects they would have. Mr. Lieuallen noted there were two members on the LTD Board who were local citizens, that they conduct their business in an open process, and that local citizens have a great interest in the group. Therefore, he felt there was great input from the local citizens. He did note that the tax basis is a problem. Mr. Williams moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the City express to the County the feeling that the Eugene City Council is clearly concerned with the problem of the operation, governing, and taxation of the LTD system currently being used, but that the City Council did not feel it was appropriate to make any other suggestions for change at this time without further study. Mr. Delay and Mr. Bradley both noted they felt the language too strong in the motion, indicating sympathy with the Springfield concerns over the lack of local control, but that they were not necessarily dissatisfied with the LTD current operation, but had general concern with the formation of the special service districts. e Vote was taken on the motion with Williams, and Obie, voting yes, Haws, Delay, Bradley, and Lieuallen voting no. Motion did not carry. Mr. Bradley moved that in theory, it was the consensus of the Eugene City Council that the formation of a governing authority for a special service district be appointed by the Governor, and should be carefully studied and examined. Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Williams, to adopt the position taken by Springfield City Council. Motion did not carry with Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, and Haws voting no, Williams and Obie voting yes. Assistant Manager noted that perhaps Council should direct staff to appear before the County Commissioners with a statement including the following items: 1) there was a diversity of opinion among the City Council; 2) the City Council was interested in exploring a more responsive form of dealing with the problems; 3) there were no concrete proposals before the City Council; and 4) that the City Council was divided in its support of the Springfield proposal. Mr. Martin was requested to appear before the County Commissioners expressing those opinions. e ~'5 3/28/77 - IS Com 3/16/ 77 Approve VIII. Consideration of various Neighborhood Organization Charter matters A. Far West Neighbors--Letter and charter distributed to Council. Manager noted that this was a charter and request for recogni- tion from a new neighborhood group. He said this raised a question of neighborhood organization policy, in that per- haps more effort should be made to try to get other neighbor- hood organizations to consider absorbing the new areas not already organized. Maps of the neighborhood organization districts were distributed to Council. - Sarah Maraguchi, representative of the Farwest Neighbors, indicated that the discussion of boundary lines had been held at great length at the organizational meetings. The major discussion centered on the south boundary, and that the group had decided that they wanted a homogeneous group in the area. Discussion was held concerning the possibility of absorbing this group into contiguous neighborhood organizations. It was noted that the Friendly Area Neighbors was too large an organization; that the 27th Street area was an area with very unique problems. Ms. Beth Campbell, Neighborhood Liaison staff, asked why this was suddenly an issue, noting that 98 percent of the city's households were covered and could not foresee there being one or two more groups to be formed. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to accept the charter. Mr. Bradley raised the question of the use of the "natural" term in the membership qualification. Mr. Long, City Attorney's- office, indicated this meant "other than corporations". He further explained that under the City policy, participation was open to all property owners, but restriction could be placed on who could vote. He said some charters excluded non-property owners as a class, but that this particular charter seemed to indicate some businesses would be able to vote and some would not be able to vote. e Mr. Williams said he did not approve of exclusion of businesses as a class and that allowing some and not others to participate discriminates against a certain class of citizens. He said this type of division should not be made. Mr. Lieuallen agreed that it was not fair that anyone who has a legitimate interest in the area should not be able to vote. It was determined that the charter was not in conflict with City policy. Mr. Delay noted that pe~haps an attempt by the neighborhood groups should be made to include those parts of businesses in the area that they see as having a real interest in the area. Mr. Long noted that the process of excluding some businesses, but not all had not been discussed before the City Council, again, reiterat- ing that the charter did not seem to be in conflict with City policy. - 3/28/77 - 16 :?," e - Com 3/16/77 Approve Com 3/16/77 Approve Com 3/16/77 4liile Mr. Haws noted that two separate issues were involved: the acceptance of the proposed charter, and perhaps a change of policy regarding the exclusion or inclusion of businesses as membership in the charters. Vote was taken on the motion, which ended in a tie with Bradley, Obie, and Williams voting no and Haws, Delay, and Lieuallen voting yes. Mr. Delay noted he felt the Council was making a mistake in not accepting the charter. He said that it had been established that the charter was within the City policy and he felt this was a rehashing of policy matters. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to table the item for discussion at the Committee-of-the-Whole meeting on March 23, with neighborhood group representatives providing more feedback. Ms. Campbell indicated that charters for neighborhood organi- zations in the entire city would have to be questioned. Vote was taken on the motion. Motion carried with Mr. Lieuallen, Obie, Williams, and Bradley voting yes; Mr. Haws and Mr. Delay voting no. Ms. Campbell expressed concern about what was expected of staff and the neighborhood organizations and how they should proceed. Manager indicated this specific issue h'ad not been covered in the policy and did need some clarification. Mr. Long noted that charters can exclude nonresident property owners, but this particular matter permits some, but not all, property owners to participate. B. West University Neighborhood Organization--Change in boundary requested. Memo distributed to Council. Manager noted that the boundary change would move Kincaid to the center of the street, and extend south from l8th Avenue to 19th Avenue. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to accept the change in boundaries. Motion carried unanimously. C. Active Bethel Citizens--Change in charter, letter and charters distributed to Council. It was noted that the major change in the Charter was a statement of purpose in Article II, whereas the previous charter had simply included a statement of. goals. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to accept the new charter. Motion carried unanimously. IX. Metropolitan Update of 1990 Plan--Mr. Bradley distributed to Coun- cil a more complete version of the re-evaluation summary. He indicated Council should review the larger version as compared to the shorter version distributed prior to Council members, indicating he wished the larger version to be distributed to the public if Council so wishes. ~'7 3/28/77 - 17 Committee-of-Whole March 23, 1977 Com 3/23/77 File Com 3/23/77 File Com 3/23/77 Approve Com 3/23/77 Referred to Assessment Panel Approve Com 3/23/77 II.. Approve .' I. Items from Mayor and Council A. Metropolitan Plan Policy Committee Hearings--Mr. Bradley announced that MPPC public hearings will be held April 5 and 7. 'B. Historic Review Board Publication--Manager noted distribution to the Council of a publication entitled "A Guide to Historic Sites and Structures", and he commended staff and the Historic Review Board for the publication's quality. C. Legislative Subcommittee Report--March 17 minutes have been distributed to Council members. There will be no Legislative Subcommittee meeting March 24, due to a lack of a quorum. The next meeting will be held March 31. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to accept the Legislative Subcommittee Report of March 17. Motion carried unanimously. D. April Assessment Panel Appeals 1. Appeal by Jack and Anna Gilbert of denial by Zoning Board of Appeals, Assessor's Map 17-04-22-3 1, Tax Lot 4699, for variance to permit reduction of interior yard. 2. Appeal by Thomas Connick of denial by Zoning Board of Appeals, AKA 18-03-09-2 0, Tax Lot 5600, for variance 1n front of setback line. e Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to refer the two appeals to the April Assessment Panel. Motion carried unanimously. Liquor Licenses A. Adding new partner, ]-Eleven, 205 East 18th, PS, Southland Corporation, Gary Lloy~ Hardin B. Change of Ownership, Monroe Street Market, 1123 Monroe, PS, Mildred Jane Plummer Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to recommend approval on items A and B. Motion carried unanimously. . ~lo8 3/28/77 - 18 Com 3/23/III. 77 pt.erg Com 3/23/ 77 Pub Hrg -- Com 3/23/77 V. Pub Hrg . Annexation Requests Recommended by Planning Commission February 21, 1977. Official Report and maps have been distributed to Council members. A. Located along Skyline Drive, east of Barber Drive, A 76-19, Earl and Della Legault B. Located south of Judkins Road, west of Henderson Street, A 77-1, Booth-Fisher C. Located east of Coburg Road directly south of Beltline Road, A 77-2, Breeden Bros., Inc. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to schedule a public hearing on items A, B, and C, for April 11, 1977. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye except Mr. Hamel abstaining on item B. IV. Easement/Street Vacations Recommended by Planning Commission February 21, 1977. Official report and maps have been distributed to Council Members. A. Entec, Inc. Easement Vacation located south of the intersection of Fox Hollow Road and Dillard Road, EV 76-9. B. Sorenson Easement Vacation located west of Echo Hollow Road, south of Avalon Avenue, EV 76-10. C. Williams Bakery Easement Vacation located south of East 13th Avenue, between Columbia Street and Moss Street, EV 77-1 D. Dornbush Street Vacation, a portion of Clinton Drive, east of Debrick Road, SV 76-8. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to call a public hearing for items A, B, C, and D for May 9. Motion carried unanimously. Cal Young and Willagillespie Roads Paving Project Report and map have been distributed to Council members. Public Works Director noted that staff's intent is to let the contract in November with construction the following season depending on the weather. It is a joint City-County project. The major item to be accomplished, following the public hearing, is acquiring right-of-way, he said. Staff's report indicates that volumes are expected to be lower west of Spyglass and on Willagillespie; therefore, a narrower roadway is proposed, whereby many of the existing trees can be s;lved and remain in a "parking strip" between Cllrb nnd Ridewnlk. Mr. lI.:1w8 wondered-what was meant by the "parking Htrip". Public WorkH /)irr~cl.()r clllrificrl l 1111 I. it i.1 1101 a strip to be used for parking, but rather it is a "green strip" between the curb and the sidewalk to be used for trees Mr. Haws requested more complete information be provided prior to hearing on tree removals. ~,~ 3/28/77 - 19 ,-- Com 3/23/77 VI. Pub Hrg Com 3/23/77 VII. Affirm Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to schedule a public hearing for April 11. Motion carried unanimously. . Proposed Code Provisions for Public Improvement Procedures-- Memo and ordinance were distributed March 17, 1977. In addition, some corrections have been distributed to Council members "today". Though it is desired that a public hearing be scheduled for March 28 on the matter, the ordinance would not be submitted for passage until the April 11 Council meeting, after the new Charter goes into effec t. Shirley Swenson, Finance Research Analyst, summarized the changes to be made to the original ordinance draft. It was the original practice that, if a sidewalk or culvert abut- ting a property was to be repaired or reconstructed, a notice was posted with the property owner. It is now proposed that a notice be sent to the owner of the property by first class mail at the owner's address as indicated on the County Assessor's records. Sections 7.156 and 7.157 would be amended to provide that if the sidewalk construction is part of a larger improvement project, notice shall be sent in accordance with the public improvement ordinance. Also, on sidewalk construction required by Council, the owner shall have 20 days from date of notice to obtain a permit and 20 additional days to complete construction. In the public improvement ordinance, the term "standard street" was changed to "maximum assessable width". Also, in the table on page _ five, to make a provision for mixed use and historic use, a category entitled "other" was added, with a factor given of 1.0--10.0 (accord- ing to the most intensive use of the parcel and to the zone listed, in which that use is allowed, which has the lowest factor). On page eight, a housekeeping change provides that the City Engineer should be notified, rather than the Department of Finance. In Sub-section 3, wording was substituted to state that notice shall be sent by certified mail. On page 11, the last sentence was amended to say when the deferral ends the property owner may pay the assessment in full, or may in 20 or fewer semiannual install- ments pay the assessment and interest thereon at the rate then authorized by ORS 223.250 from the date the deferral ends until the assessment is paid in full. On page 12, the sub-section was amended to say that a subdivision or resubdivision, either by a subdivision or major or minor partition, is filed by the owner of the property. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to schedule a public hearing for March 28. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Anti-Fluoridation Petition for Referendum-- Petition, Finance Department memo, and memo from City Manager were distributed to Council. Manager related that the County could hold a special election May 24. which would cost the City about $10,000. Mr. Hoehne, County Elections Department, . ~70 3/28/77 - 20 . fears the state may hold an election May 17 and prohibit any other proposals to be on that ballot. He recommends the matter be on the June 28 ballot with the City and School District budget measures. Since the School District budget will be on the June 28 ballot, the cost to the City would range about $5,500. Manager said he understands from the Attorney's office that all that is irrelevant because of the law governing initiative elections. Joyce Benjamin, City Attorney's office, explained the City Council choices. She said the matter cannot come before the City Council until the petition signatures have been verified and filed with the City. The matter will then go to the City Council, who has 30 days to take action. Council can enact whatever the petition seeks or reject it, in which case it will be submitted to the voters by the clerk not less than 90 days after it was first presented to the City Council. The City Council also may call a special election or, if there is no action, the City Clerk will then have to refer the matter to the voters at the next election not less than 90 days thereafter. On top of that, Ms. -Benjamin said that the Attorney General opinion says "next election" means the next regular statewide election which, in this case, means a May primary. Mr. Hamel felt that, if the matter were on the June 28 ballot, it might encourage more people to come out and vote whereas they might not be so inclined if the ballot contains only the City and School District budget measures. - It was understood that the City Attorney's office would prepare a memo summarizing the Council's choices once the petition signatures have been verified and filed and the matter is brought be- fore the Council. Manager noted that on the fluoride issue, the petition had not yet been received, but that the attorney's opinion had been received for Council consideration of possible Council actions. He noted that the five choices were: 1) The Council may enact the petition by ordinance. The ordinance would be subject to possible referendum by the proponents of fluoridation; 2) the Council may enact the proposed ordinance and refer it to the voters at a special or general election; 3) the Council may reject the proposed ordinance; 4) the Council may take no action on the measure; 5) the Council, if it rejects the proposed ordinance or takes no action on it, may enact a competing ordinance to be submitted to the voters at the same election. He noted that if Council rejects the proposed ordinance or takes no action on it, the recorder must submit it to the voters of the city at the next election held not less than 90 days after it was first presented to the City Council. The phrase means that at least 90 days must elapse before the election. He noted that the City Attorney's office had advised the Council had 30 days to either ordain or reject the petition after receiving it. - ~7( 3/28/77 - 21 Ms. Smi~h noted a ~oncer~ in whic~ she h?ped the Council would not open ~p the l~sue f?r dlSCUSS1?n at thlS partlcular meeting and would not get lnto a dlScusslon of the lssue until the action is official. President Haws noted two persons in the audience had requested to testify, Richard Greene, 1651 Grant Street and Jeanne A. Fox, 60 Fairway Loop, Eugene. Public testimony was not taken. . Com 3/23/VIII. 77 File Report of Willamette "Gut" Committee--Memo and March 8 Gut Committee Report have been distributed to Council. Council was asked to review the report and provide feedback. James Donnelly, 2175 Olive, expressed two concerns. The Committee included, among many suggestions, the construction of a public . restroom facility on Oak or Willamette between 28th and 29th, thus eliminating the need to use business restrooms or front yards of residences on side streets in the area. Mr. Donnelly cautioned that, if a public restroom facility is to be built, it would have to be constructed in such a manner as to thwart the vandalism which usually occurs in public restroom facilities. Also, he noted the Committee's suggestion on changing Willamette Street to a one-way grid from Donald and 32nd Streets to 19th Avenue heading north, no left turns at 24th place and on 25th Street, with an extension of the Amazon Parkway to Ferry and 30th Avenue. He felt that change might be unsatisfactory, as businesses will probably complain regarding difficult access to their establishments from people approaching the area from the north. Motorists would have to take the Amazon Parkway to 29th, down 29th to Willamette, and north again on Willamette, thus causing a mile or so detour. He felt it might also cause a problem with emergency vehicles getting to the area. Mr. Haws asked that Mr. Donnelly's suggestions be incorporat- ed into the record. Assistant Manager noted, too, that the report has been distributed to the affected neighborhood groups and that the staff had not completed its analysis of the suggestions put forth. e Com 3/23/77 IX. Affirm Request for Rehearing of Appeal of Planning Commission's Denial of Harlow House Rezoning (Rose Grant)--The applicant has requested a rehearing of the rezoning issue due to the fact that, when it was presented to the City Council, the hour was late and she did not feel enough time was granted to present her case. City Manager said he fears that, if this matter is heard again, the City Council would be opening itself up to all sorts of requests for rehearings. Too, Council had noted in denying the appeal that the applicants could resubmit 1n a year. Gary Chenkin, Planning Department, noted that it is already too late to apply for Historic Review Board funds for this year. Even if the matter were reheard by the Council and rezoning to H Historic District were approved, an application to qualify for Historic Review Board funds would not be considered until next year. Stan Long, City Attorney's office, explained that in the past Council has reconsidered zoning matters very rarely. It is his opinion that, as with court matters, requests for rehearings should only be granted if new evidence is available that was not available at the time of the original decision. He feels that, if this request is granted, Council will be in a position of receiving never-ending requests. 272.... 3/28/77 .' . ~.. 'r - 22 . Com 3/23/ x. 77 Approve e e Mr. Delay f:lt that.significant concerns were raised at the time of the hearlng showlng the differences between the Historic Review Board and the Planning Commission and he feels those differences should be. resolved before the next hearing of this type is held. Mr. Chenkln reported that staff is working on amendments to the Code.to rectify this situation. He said the new charter will provlde more flexibility as well. Mr. Bradley did not feel that the applicants received enough time to be heard, or to present their slides or their witnesses M d h' . anager n?te t at many ZOnlng cases allow only five minutes per side. Ten mlnutes was allowed for the applicants on this matter, so the Manager felt they had at least an average time for presentation. Mr. Bradley moved to schedule a rehearing. Motion died for a lack of a second. Discussion of Neighborhood Organization Policy and Application of Far West Neighbors for Charater Approval--City Attorney's opinion on requirements for charter approval of neighborhood organizations, as well as memo from neighborhood liaisons on the Farwest Neighborhood Association proposed charter, have been distributed to Council members. The proposed changes to the Farwest charter would bring the charter within the guidelines of the neighborhood organization policy. Section 1 would be restated to say that participation would be open to any property owner or tenant within the association boundary. Section 2 would state that voting membership would be open to all natural persons 18 years of age or over residing within or owning property within the association boundaries. Section 3 would say that, to vote, a member must have attended a general membership meeting in the previous year and must have entered his name on the rolls. Membership would cease immediately if the requirement were no longer fulfilled. Sara Moriguchi, Farwest Neighborhood Association, felt the changes to be perfectly satisfactory. Mr. Lieuallen suggested a change in Section 3 from "must have attended a general membership meeting in the previous year" to "must have attended a general membership meeting within a year". Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr.-Delay, to approve the charter with the editorial change. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith that items A, one through nine; and B, one through ten be approved, affirmed, and filed as noted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. ~73 3/28/77 - 23 II-A-2 . III. Ordinances Council Bill 1398--Concerning MU Mixed Use District; renumbering present Section 9.476 to 9.482; adding new Section 9.476 to 9.482; and declaring an emergency as read by council bill number only. Manager noted that this item had been carried over from the March 14 Council meeting, and lacked unanimous consent for passage on that date. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1398 be approved and given final passage. Mr. Bradley said he had voted against the council bill two weeks previous because of his concern that this amendment had basically resulted from the Westside neighborhood rezoning situation and questioned staff whether this Code amendment had generated out of that process. Gary Chenkin, Planning Department, replied the idea of the Mixed-Use District was generated through that particular study, but did not necessarily limit the use of I this Mixed-Use District to that area, that it would be applicable through- ... out the city. He said it was not a way to get around the Blayney Study, ~ nor contrary to that study. Mr. Bradley said he felt that the Blayney Study had requested a rezoning of the Westside area to high density and he wondered what happened in the process that the mixed-use district evolved. . ~~ 3/28/77 - 24 . He questioned why the rezoning process had not been continued. Manager noted the decision to consider the mixed-use district had evolved from several hearings at the Planning Commission level. He said it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that there was potential for reconciling a series of difficult decisions in zoning a particular area by having a mixed-use district zone available. Mr. Lieuallen said the particular issue had come before Council previously and he had followed the status of the westside neighborhood rezoning process through the minutes of the Planning Commission, noting that those minutes were avail- able to the City Council as well. Mr. Bradley felt the process perhaps might be in error. Mr. Chenkin replied that it was not his evaluation that the process was wrong. He said the Planning Commission felt it was taking charge of its duties in making a more advantageous zoning use to bring the Westside neighborhood area, in particular, into more conformity with the Blayney Study objectives. He said the Mixed-Use District would be more appropriate. Mr. Lieuallen noted the idea had not come all of the sudden, but had been coming for a long time and he had been following the process. He noted that Mr. Bradley could check through the past minutes of the Planning Commission to see how the process had evolved. _ II-A-3 Vote was taken on the motion which passed, with all Council members present voting aye except Mr. Bradley voting no. Mr. Long of the City Attorney's Office noted there was an emergency clause to the ordinance, and that the Council did not have a two-thirds vote to enact that emergency clause, so this ordinance would take effect in 30 days. Council Bill 1427--Calling public hearing May 9, 1977 for easement vacation located south of intersection of Fox Hollow Road and Dillard Road (Entec, Inc.,) (EV 76-9) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1427 be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be con- sidered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read by council bill number only. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1427 be approved and given fi nal passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17943. Council Bill 1428--Calling public hearing May 9, 1977 for easement vacation located west of Echo Hollow Road, south of Avalon Avenue (Sorenson) (EV 76-10) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. e 3/28/77-- 25 :1.7.5 Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. smith, that council bill 1428 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, with all Council .4It' members present voting aye, except Haws and Bradley abstaining, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1428 be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion carried with all members present voting aye except Haws and Bradley abstaining, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17944. - Council Bill 1429--Calling publiC hearing May 9, 1977 for easement vacation located south of East 13th Avenue between Columbia Street and Moss Street (Williams Bakery) (EV 77-1) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. ' Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1429 be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be con- sidered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read by council bill number only. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1429 be approved and given fi nal passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed ~ and numbered 17945. ,., Council Bill 1430--Calling public hearing May 9, 1977 for street vacation, Dornbush Street, a portion of Clinton Drive east of Debrick Road (SV 76-8) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1430 be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be con- sidered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read by council bill number only. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council Bill 1430 be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17946. - II-A-4 IV. Resol uti ons Res. No. 2645--Approving and accepting new charter for Far West Neighbors was read by number and title. 3/28/77-- 26 e "- 710 . - e Mr. Hamel moved, second by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Res. No. 2646--Approving and accepting amended charter for West University Neighborhood Organization was read by number and title. Mr. Hamel moved, second by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Res. No. 2647--Approving and accepting amended charter for Active Bethel Citizens Organization was read by number and title. Mr. Hamel moved, second by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Res. No. 2648--Authorizing Manager to enter into loan agreement with Citizen's Bank for housing rehabilitation was read by number and title. Mr. Hamel moved, second by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Res. No. 2649--Authorizing payment of bills and claims for period March 14, 1977 through March 28, 1977 was read by number and title. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. UP<llb rPtiou dUl) m~, seconded, Char~y ~ Ci.ty Manager and passed, the meeting was adjourned. CTH:DT:jkm/CM7blO 3/28/7 7 -- 27 :1..77 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Engineering Division 1'-Iti~;J (/ 10.77 ... "':J :..1. j Bid No.1. . Opened: 3-22~77 '-. J. -; ',' , . I( 1. PAVING: 19th Avenue from 18th Avenue to Sunrise Blvd. (1198) Bidders Contract Cost Basic Alternate ~. R. C. Parsons & Son Construction~ Inc...............$25,935.80 2. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc............................ 3. Wi1dish Construction Co.............................$34,925.50 4. Morse Bros., Inc.................................... 5. Benge Paving~ Inc...................................$34,153.79 6. Shur-Way Contractors~ Inc........................... Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City Storm Swr. $4,300.00 Amount Budgeted $ 7,000.00 (77-78 Budget) 28' Paving $ 5" Concrete 211 A. C. Drive 23.60/F.F. 1.35/SF 0.45/SF COMPLETION DATE: June 3~ 1977 $27,554.35 $32~162.17 $33,294.45 $33~307.65 $33,398.33 $34,210.01 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~ (.' 2. PAVING, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER: Within Seychelles West Subdivision; and sanitary sewer in area between Minnesota Street and West Irwin Way and between Barger Drive and Jessen Drive (1307) e Bidders Contract Cost Basic Alternate v(. Morse Bros, Inc...............................~... . 2. Benge Paving, Inc.................................$350~512.71 3. H & J Construction................................ 4. Wi1dish Construction Co...........................$371,366.17 5. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc......................... Cost to Abutting Property $339,564.00 $347,336.29 $347~88l.09 $364,932.77 $462,421.80 Cost to City Sanitary $11,000.00 Storm 1,000.00 Amount Budgeted None Paving San. Swr. Stm. Swr. San. Service $ uraO.OO/Lot 875.00/Lot 300.00/Lot 165.00/Lot COMPLETION DATE: October 1, 1977 ( . Page 1 of 2 ~18 _'. .._ .... "'.....'-....._...........""....., .~.....,_~.,....._...."__..~n_n..--,.~_h.....-"_......,....". ~,,,,,,~,,,,,_,,,,,,,,,,",,..~....._-....,...__~~. --". 7-~ -. ~_..__._-._--_.".......,_..."' .........-~-_.- , \ \ 3. . SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER: Between Agate Street and Columbia Street from 19th Avenue to 20th Avenue (1255) . '. '\ '/ C'l Bidders Contract Cost 1. R. C. Parsons & Son Construction, Inc.....................$ 13,272.05 2. Shur-Way Contractor, Inc..................................$ 15t527.75 3. Wildish Construction Co...................................$ 22t120.00 4. Kenneth R. Bostick Construction Co........................$ 23,692.50 5. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.................................$ 23,735.70 6. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.............................$ 23t861.50 7. James A. Hill.............................................$ 24,931.00 Cost to Abutting Property None Cost to City $ 13,272.05 Amount Budgeted $ 21,707.00 COMPLETION DATE: May 6, 1977 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. SIDEWALK: 28th Avenue, Friendly Street to Chambers Street (1089) . Bidders ' Contract Cost 1. R. C. Parsons & Son Construction, Inc.....................$ 22,368.85 2. James A. Hil1.............................................$ 30,074.42 3. Wildish Construction Co...................................$ 31,114.63 4. Shur-Way Contractor, Inc..................................$ 32,441.96 ( Sidewalk $ 1. 60/Sq. Ft. Cost to City $ 1,500.00 Amount Budgeted $: 700.00 p7-78 Budget) Cost to Abutting Property COMPLETION DATE: May 20, 1977 ~ Page 2 of 2 - '----" -:'_',-, .,.....:.:Y--..; ( .;;Ji CJ a-1