Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/11/1977 Meeting . e - M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL- April 11, 1977 The regular meeting of the Common Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 7:30 p.m. on April 11, 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 Obie, and Betty Smith. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS I-A-l A. Liquor License Application--New Andy's Eugene Station, 5th and Willamette (DA), Andy's Diner, Inc., Burlington Northern Development Corporation, Denis Sakuma Manager noted staff had no objections. A review of the OLCC report indicated of the seven interviews conducted in the area, there were no obj ectors Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to approve and forward to OLCC. .Motion carried unanimously. I-A-3 B. Bikeway Master Plan Recommended by Planning Commission February 7, 1977 Manager said the Bikeway Master Plan would be reviewed annually. This was the 1976 annual review, and there were three changes noted. Ms. Diane Bishop, Bike Coordinator, reviewed the three changes: 1) a path along Harlow Road to Sunshine Acres to Dapple Way to Sorrel Way and then back along 1-105; 2) addition of a bikeway from Laurel Hill Valley to Eugene; and 3) addition of a bikeway on 30th Avenue from Hilyard to Agate. Public hearing was opened. Marna Brockhoff, 1844 Kona, said the Fairmount Neighbors group was in full endorsement of the bike path, not only for bicycle use, but for joggers. She said HCC funds had been requested earlier in the fall but were not allowed, as widening of Summit Drive was a problem. She questioned how this bike path would affect widening of the street and said she was totally in favor of the proposed changes and hoped Council would approve. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. &.Ko 4/11/77 --1 Res. No. 2650--1976 Annual Review and amendment re: Eugene Master Bikeway Plan was read by number and title. . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Lieuallen noted confusion regarding the Summit Drive amended bikeway plan in regard to the street improvement, asking how it would be resolved. Don Allen, Director of Public Works, said it would be brought before the City Council and asked for a deter- mination for improvement of the street. If Council approved, Public Works would incorporate the bike path within that street improvement. Rollcall vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. I-A-4 C. Orchard and Walnut, Franklin and Fairmount: Change of traffic from One-Way to Two-Way--Recommended by Planning Commission January 24, 1977 Manager said the street di recti on change had ori gi nated wi th the neighborhood organization and property owners along the streets. It had been unanimously recommended by the Planning Commission at its January 24 meeting, and had been described in notes and maps distributed to Council. Darrell Wilburn, Acting Traffic Engineer, noted reasons for the particular design and the change from one-way to two-way on these streets. It had come as a result of many requests received by the Traffic Division and by a request from the Fairmount Neighborhood .'. group. A contact of the affected property owners in the area indi- cated 55 percent were in favor of the change, and 27 percent opposed. He noted City staff saw no valid objection, with more than half of the property owners wanting the change, and recommended approval. Public hearing was opened. A written protest from Mr. and Mrs. O.J. Fogelquist, 1846 Orchard Street was entered into the record. Tommy Williams, 2086 East 15th Avenue, spoke as a representative of the neighborhood organization, indicating that a letter had been mailed to the City Council with 70 signatures approving the change, and only two people opposing. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Res. No~ 2651--Establishing that Orchard Street and Walnut Street between Franklin Boulevard and Fairmount Boulevard be changed from one-way southbound and one-way northbound to two-way was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. - dJI 4/11/77--2 ~-A-S D. Seneca Road Improvement--Recommended by Public Works Department Manager said this was an important stretch of road in an industrial area needing improvements, that Public Works Department had developed a design and distributed that design with map to Council. Don Allen, Director of Public Works, said the Council had in October 1975 authorized staff to proceed with initiating the improvements. In March 1977 staff held a hearing with opportunity for the affected parties to comment and ask questions on the preliminary proposal. He noted City Council had taken a tour of the area. The improvement is at Step 4, prior to final design, and Public Works was asking Council for authorization to proceed with the final design. He said Council had two alternatives: to stop the project, or to authorize for final design, with another public hearing required to award the contract. - He noted the paving of Seneca Road from West 11th to Roosevelt Boulevard would provide a 44-foot roadway with curbs, bicycle lanes, and travel lanes. An additional feature will be installation of railroad crossing gates and flashers at the crossing of the Southern Pacific Coos Bay line. Seneca was the only north-south arterial between Highway 99 and Bertelsen. The project would provide a smoother, wider surface for auto and truck traffic travelling to and from the industrial area, as well as connecting West 11th with Roosevelt and Highway 99. He noted the project will allow the road to be made safer for both auto, truck traffic, and bicyclists. He said the total cost of the project is estimated at $473,300 with the City paying $147,800 and the assessed share to property owners $325,500. He noted that bancroft assessments with installment payments over a ten-year period with a seven percent annual interest rate Were available, and a de- ferred assessment program available for the low-income and elderly. He noted at the recent staff hearing concerns had been expressed regarding the need for bike lanes,and this area was on the Bike Master Plan. Another concern expressed was regarding the east-west truck route, and that problem had not been resolved at this point. He said staff recommended the Council proceed with the project. e Mr. Obie asked with regard to the bike path whether there was another way to handle them, citing a safety aspect of mixing the bikes on a route with heavy truck traffic. Mr. Allen replied it was the standard procedure in the Bikeway Master Plan to incorporate it with a travel lane, and one purpose of establishing the 44-foot width of the street would be for greater capability in maneuvering large trucks. He said staff did not recommend a separate path be built as it would be an added cost factor, and he felt the plan was satisfactory as presented. Mr. Obie then asked Mr. Lieuallen, as a member of the Bicycle Committee, whether he would agree with the philosophy of building a bike path in a heavy industrial area. Mr. Lieuallen responded that any kind of delineation for bicyclists was helpful, not only to the bicyclists, but to motorists, in that it aided motorists to know that it was a designated bicycle route. He said it was best to do so in the streets to establish the legality of bike paths to be in the streets with traffic. Jf~ 4/11/77--3 Public hearing was opened. John Wheeler, 2725 Lincoln, representing Monsanto Company on Seneca Boulevard, asked why there was a necessity for another sanitary sewer as one was already there. Mr. Allen replied the proposal would be for an additional hookup if the sanitary sewer already existed in the area. Bert Kleinhaus, representing Southern Pacific Transport Company, questioned the need for bikeway paths on both sides of the street. He also noted that six tax lots had been assessed to the S.P. Company which were not owned by them. Mr. Allen replied the only difference in having bikepaths on one or two sides of the road would be in the type of curb used; there would be no cost difference. In regard to the tax lot assessment problem, he said it would be taken care of. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. C.B. 1431--Paving Seneca Road from 11th Avenue to Roosevelt Boulevard was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1431 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1431 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17947. C.B. 1432--Adopting plans and specifications for paving Seneca Road from 11th Avenue to Roosevelt Boulevard was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1432 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 wns r~ad thp spcond time by council bill number only. . e Mr. Haws moved, 5l'conded by Mr. II.HIlel, thllt cOlHlI.11 hIlI ~I\Ji' be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17948. C.B. 1433--Sanitary sewer on Seneca Road from 11th Avenue to Roosevelt Boulevard was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read .~ in full. .... 4/11/77--4 dJ3 e - l-A-6 thru I-B-2 . . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1433 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1433 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17949. C.B. 1434--Adopting plans and specifications for sanitary sewer on Seneca Road from 11th Avenue to Roosevelt Boulevard was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in fu 11 . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1434 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1434 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17950. E. Cal Young/Willagillespie Road Improvement--Recommend by Public Works Don Allen, Director of Public Works, explained this improvement project had been initiated by the Eugene City Council in October 1975. He noted the paving of Cal Young from Gilham to Willa- gillespie, and from Willagillespie Road to Cal Young to Delta Highway would provide a 36- to 46-foot roadway with curbs, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, travel lanes, and in some locations, a two-way center turn lane. Both Cal Young and Willagillespie are important arterial streets in the Willakenzie area. He said a staff hearing was held March 3, 1977 with property owners to describe the proposal and answer questions. The major concerns of. those in attendance were as follows: 1) Property assessment-- the City's policy and assessment formula were explained and it was mentioned that a committee of staff and Council is studying a possible revision to the formula; 2) Need for extra right-of- way--staff explained the appraisal and acquisition process, and stated that where ever possible the roadway alignment will take into account existing trees and locations of houses; 3) Roadway designs and capacities--staff felt that even accounting for devel- opment now underway and projected for the future, the proposed width would be adequate. Volumes were expected to be lower west of Spy Glass and on Willagil1espie, therefore narrower roadway without the center turn lane was proposed whereby many of the existing trees could be saved and remain in a parking strip between curb and sidewalk. He noted the county would participate under its arterial highway program by purchasing any required right-of-way ~8'tf 4/11/77--5 and sharing in the construction costs. He said the total cost would be $649,200, with $349,000 assessed to abutting property owners, $49,500 city costs, and $250,700 Lane County costs. He said the action requested by Council was for authorization to proceed with the final design so that plan preparation and right- of-way acquisition could begin. . Mr. Obie questioned whether the concerns expressed by those mosty directly affected would be addressed before final design. Mr. Allen said yes, the project would not begin before late fall or early next spring although no more public hearings were scheduled. Ms. Smith said she understood there woiuld be no parking on the streets and asked if parking was currently available. Mr. Allen replied that that was one of the problems with the affected property owners, noting that there would be no parking allowed along the street, although there are a few gravel parking strips in the area to date. Public hearing was opened. O.W. Russell, 1525 Cal Young Road, noted that the County had indi- cated to him that they could provide a better plan for the improve- ment of the street than the City. He expressed a concern for parking in front of the houses, noting that it would be impossible with the City's proposed improvement. He also cited that the people in the area had been assessed for sewers in 1975 and the road im- provement would increase their costs a great deal. He said 100 ... percent of the property owners are opposed to the proposed improve- ., ment and again cited the County could give them a better improvement than the City. He said the property owners would like to have a meeting with the Lane County Commissioners to work ~ut a plan by the County and to have the project federally funded. A petition and letter was presented to the Council on behalf of the property owners requesting the County handle road improvements. John Gilhott, 1376 Cal Young, asked when the improvement had first been proposed. Mr. Allen replied, October 27, 1975. Mr. Gilhott then replied he should have been informed of the proposed change at the time. He said the area is a raceway even though the road is very narrow and widening it would increase the speed of auto- mobiles in the area. He felt it would be better to have only one bike path and one sidewalk on one side of the street and leave a wider road. He also requested the Council look into license fees rill 101, Y' Ie:: :'Inri :'I ro'p'o:::t HI:'It td, I' II:::t::: 'n"t, it.IIle In H.e ',.::1 '111'1 Ill/V""!' "r lhe. t,i' I' Ie (,'lH,:: .lll11l",..\r.hl)r'), ifIll '.,,\ ("Illl'j 11".,.1, ::nl,1 Ioe hnol,nlleoll ffll.~ 1". regard to additional improvements ilnd was told there would be none for the n(~x t tNI YN~ Y'~,. IIc-"\/1 I d ~.llIu:: VolI c,y R I VI'Y hliel be~t' Ud- veloppd. the traffic had increased greatly on Cal Young Road, it WitS hnrd to ql'l. In ""HI out of drlvewny"" nnd UIf' floisp was trf'lntendou!'i. lie agreed. soml' improvement nCf'Cll'd to he' mnol' on ttll' road, hut fol t that the improvement would only benefit Valley River Center. He . concurred that the plan should be turned over to the County for road improvement. 4/11177--6 ~K5 . Bruce Robbins, 1071 Cal Young Road, said he was very much against the proposed improvement, citing there would be no parking, that the width of the street would cut too closely to his house, that Cal Young Road is a major arterial used by everyone and it was unfair for property owners to assume over 50 percent of the costs when the benefits apply to many people in the City of Eugene. He felt it a very unfair improvement policy. A show of hands was requested by Fred Eversaw, 1133 Cal Young Road, in which about 40 to 50 persons in the audience indicated opposition to the improvement project. -- Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Mr. Allen replied to the suggestion the County do the improvement project, saying the City was working with the County, and such a County improvement proposal had never been advanced to the City staff with regard to federal funding or the County wanting to do the improvement project itself. In response to the testimony regarding L-COG, Mr. Allen replied that it was not an implementing agency and did not have funds to give out. C.B. 1435--Paving Cal Young Road from Gilham to Willagillespie Road, and Willagillespie Road from Cal Young to Delta Highway was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1435 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. C.B. 1436--Adopting plans and specifications for paving Cal Young Road from Gilham to Willagillespie Road, and Willagillespie Road from Cal Young to Delta Highway was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1436 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. C.B. 1437--Sidewalks on Cal Young Road from Gilham to Willagillespie Road and Willagillespie Road from Cal Young to Delta Highway was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1437 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. - a.8~ 4/11/77--7 Mr. Lieuallen expressed reservations about the width of the street and the acquisition of right-of-way in this particular improvement 4It project. Mr. Haws said that he had reservations every time a street improvement was brought before the Council because of the necessity to assess property owners. He said obviously this street needed improvement, and there was a process the Council had to go through. He said the same problem occurred for all property owners who faced street improvements, that street improvements affect most everybody in the city at one time or another. The decision had to be made to either improve or not improve these streets. Mr. Obie noted that it was a difficult choice to determine when the situation was a concern to a particular neighborhood. He said there seemed to be accordance in the testimony that the street needed to be improved, but it was a matter of how it was improved. .iiHe felt the City did not have a good system for determining which 'streets are arterials and which are neighborhood streets, and that it ,was important that people be assessed only for improvements to normal neighborhood streets rather than arterial streets. Mr. Allen replied that both streets are considered to be arterial streets, and that the assessment used to be a charge to the equivalent of a 36-foot street for residential, but now the charge was to a 28- foot street and the difference between the costs would be picked up between the City and County. Mr. Delay said it seemed there was a definite safety problem in the area and that something had to be done, and wondered if it were ... possible to make adjustments in the design, if necessary. Mr. Allen ~ replied he would be glad to talk over the design with the Lane County officials and check out any other proposals that they might have. Mr. Haws noted that the people should be aware of the deferred assessment policy for persons in the low-income bracket. Mr. Hamel questioned whether it was appropriate to hold the decision to the next meeting while Mr. Allen and Public Works get together with Lane County to check out the possibility of other proposals. Mr. Allen replied that the proposal would not be going under contract until fall, and the only time crunch was getting rights-of-way, which could be a lengthy process. Mayor Keller noted that Council could instruct staff to proceed with those concerns that had been expressed, but that Public Works needed to get the process underway to avoid the escalation of costs. Motions on council bills 1435, 1436, and 1437 carried unani- mously and the bills were read the second time by council bill numbers only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1435 be. approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17951. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1436 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17952. .. 4/11/77--8 ~81 e Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1437 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17953. e 1-8-2 F. Annexations 1. Located along Skyline Drive, east of Barber Drive (Legault) (A 76-19)--Recommended by Planning Commission February 21, 1977. Jim Saul, Planning Department, noted these were two parcels of land consisting of .84 acre, and that a number of annexations had been approved along Skyline Loop Drive prior to this time. He said the general area was annexed in 1974 with the Skyline Loop health hazard annexation. A full range of urban services were available and could be extended to the area. He noted a soil analysis study had been made and the report showed that the western lot is stable. The eastern lot has sufficient area to site a single-family structure if proper control is exercised in siting an excavation. He noted the owner of Tax Lot 3100 was unwilling to petition for annexation at this time, and that if the subject properties were annexed, Tax Lot 3100 would become an island surrounded by the city, and then could be annexed by action initiated either by the Planning Commission or.by the City Council under the island annexation regulations. Mr. Lieuallen asked if Tax Lot 3100 were surrounded by the city, to what extent it would receive City services that it would not be assessed for; for example, streets. Mr. Saul replied that Skyline is a marginal gravelway and would need some form of im- provement. Mr. Lieuallen asked if recommendation ought to include all three lots if Tax Lot 3100 would essentially be in the city and be served by City services. Mr. Saul replied that Tax Lot 3100 is presently vacant. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Res. No. 2652--Forwarding to Boundary Commission recommendation for annexation of property located along Skyline Drive east of Barber Drive was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. 1-8-3 2. Located south of Judkins Road, west of Henderson Street (Booth/Fisher) (A 77-1)--Recommended by Planning Commission February 21, 1977 Mr. Saul noted the property consists of two parcels totalling approximately one acre. He said it was surrounded by the city limits on three sides, and was in the projected urban service boundary area, and that all urban services could be provided. He noted Council should take consideration of the question between Eugene and Springfield regarding the destiny of the entire Glenwood area. e Mr. Hamel noted he would be abstaining from voting and discussion on the issue. 4/11/77--9 In Public hearing was opened. Mike Farthing, attorney at 975 Oak Street, spoke as a representative of the owners of the parcels of land. He concurred with staff recommendations and was available to answer questions. e 1-B-4 thru II-A-9 Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Res. No. 2653--Forwarding to Boundary Commission recommedation for annexation of property located south of Judkins Road, west of Henderson Street was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye, and Mr. Hamel abstaining. G. Appeal of Denial of Commercial Solicitor's License (Jeffrey Park Stompro) Manager noted that the denial of appeal was requested by Jeffrey Park Stompro. He said the application had been reviewed by the Police Department and found the applicant had failed to supply necessary information, which constituted grounds for denial of the license. He said Council had not been sent additional information because of the concern of the civil rights and liability exposure. Public hearing was opened. Jeffrey Stompro noted he had applied for a license to sell fire ~ extinguishers in the community. He had a past criminal history and had asked for the Police Department to check with the officials in California as he could not remember all the arrests in that state. He had been told the license would be approved and then the next day some other charges came in and he found the license had been denied. He had asked to speak to the Chief of Police and was never given that opportuni ty. He di d not deny hi s .pas t crimi na 1 record whi ch occurred between 1973 and 1975. He noted to Council that while he was in the rehabilitation center in California he had fought forest fires, was accepted in a fire fighters' school, spent six months under the California State Department of Education in an extensive course, had a certificate of achievement as a certified fire pump fighter and pumper operator, and had completed over 1,000 hours in the course. He noted his record had occurred seven years prior, and ever since he had been out he had only one charge, that being a D.U.I.L. He felt he would like to become a productive citizen and had been part of the rnmmunity ~inrn lQ71;, lip ~Idrl hp hnrl hppn workina h"rr1 to support himself and felt he tliidlJeen denled ri l.o""nen,ial 11Ll'!n~l-! on ttle ha~l~ of his past record seven years ago, that he was a different person ~nd questioned what rehabilitation was all about. He noted his insurance company was prepared to post bond for him, that he wllsqul:Il1f1ed toY' the work, felt he was being denied by prejudice and discrimination, and appealed to Council to allow him to obtain the license. . 4/11/77 --10 ~8'i e Alice Lunsford, 1505 River Road, said she had known the applicant for two and one-half years and that he had been working very hard to rehabilitate himself and going to school. She noted he was a personal friend of hers and that vocational rehabilitation would go for naught if he was not given the opportunity to rehabilitate himself. Diane DePaolis, 1309 Willamette Street, spoke as an attorney from the Lane County Legal Aid Service in regard to the concept of rehabili- tation. She said if it were to mean anything, then people should be given the second chance to prove their rehabilitation to society. She said Mr. Stompro was not denying his past record and that his life since his last arrest had been an entirely different one. She noted he was 28 years old now, and had been much younger when he had gotten into trouble. She asked whether he would be able to continue the pattern of changing, working, and trying to succeed to become a productive citizen of society. She felt he had grown a great deal and should be given a second chance. She hoped that the City Council would give thought to the fact that he had been convicted and had served his time, he had rehabilitated himself, and what society was all about is giving a person a second chance. Sergeant Mel Olson, Eugene Police Department, said that the applicant had filed his application March 9, 1977, and that upon review of the application, he had contacted Mr. Stompro for further explanation of the work he intended to do. He noted the business would be a door-to-door business of entering homes and soliciting for sales of fire extinguishers. The applicant had listed three arrests, but a background check had listed other information: that he had been arrested nine times for 15 charges. He said Mr. Stompro had come in, discussed the matter concerning the 15 charges, and completed the endorsement of them. At that time, he was asked if there were any additional arrests, to which Mr. Stompro had replied no. Mr. Olson said he had advised Mr. Stompro he could see no problem with the license application on March 14, but on March 15 additional infor- mation had been received from California of a record of nine addi- tional arrests. He said Mr. Stompro had failed to supply the addi- tional information and had made no attempt to disclose the information. Under City Code, failure to disclose information was grounds for denial of a license. He felt that the proposed activity of door-to- door soliciting would be somewhat incompatible with the applicant's background and would not be in the best interests of the community's citizens. e Wilbur Thorp, 275 North Polk, noted that he had known Mr. Stompro for three years, Mr. Stompro had proved himself as a good friend and neighbor. and did not feel that his past should be held against him. Mr. James M. Dufour, 1139 Summit Drive, Mt. Hood, Oregon, said he had worked with Mr. Stompro and found him to be a very reliable worker and a good person, and should not be denied the license. . 4/11/77--11 ~~a Joy Lunsford, 14 West Hilliard, said she had gone to school with Mr. Stompro. She noted Pat Horton's plan to get juveniles off the street and rehabilitate them, and said that Mr. Stompro might still be on the streets if he had not had the chance for rehabili- tation for himself outside of the prison. She noted that he was a good person. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. . Mr. Haws asked Mr. Olson if the determining factor for denial was the additional information of nine arrests received March 15. Mr. Olson said that was correct, that under Section 3.005 of the City Code, failure to disclose information could be grounds for denial. Mr. Haws wondered why it took so long to get the information. Mr. Olson replied that it took three to five days by mail for the infor- , mation to be received. Mr. Olsen noted that the arrests were for a period of 1968 through 1970 and that there had been 14 convictions out of 18 total arrests on 20 charges, but that none of the convictions were as a juvenile. Mr. Obie asked Mr. Olson about the fact that Mr. Stompro had requested the Police Department to secure additional information. Mr. Olson indicated that Mr. Stompro had not taken the initiative, but he himself had taken the initiative to get the additional information. Mr. Lieua11en wondered if it was fair to say that Mr. Stompro had not acted in good faith after he had been offered a second opportunity to offer the information. Mr. Olson replied that was a value judgment ~ and that of the information supplied by Mr. Stompro, only two arrests ,., had been entered of his own accord. He said it would seem that after Mr. Stompro had been asked several times for additional information and he had replied no, that he was not being forthright after being given the opportunity to add the additional information. Mr. Stompro was given an opportunity to reply. He said that when he talked to Mr. Olson, there were 29 arrests listed, and he thought that the Police Department had the whole file and he was not inten- tionally holding back any information. He said to the best of his knowledge, the Police Department had all the information and he expected it was a complete record. He did not try to deny any of the charges and was acting in good faith. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to deny the appeal of a commercial solicitor's license. Mr. Lieuallen indicated that there seemed to be two issues involved here: 1) to simply decide what was the policy of an application not being filled out correctly and whether a Code had been violated; and 2) what happened to people who had been convicted with regard to the community's best interest, whether there were statistics showing that these persons were careful not to get arrested dg41n. Manager said it would take some time to get an answer. Mr. Lieuallen said if it were merely speculative, then he was ready to support the appeal. He questioned whether. there was a time limit in re- 4IIl. . submitting an application. Manager replied there was no time limit, ~ and that previously it had been done within a few months' time. 4/11/77--12 1~1 . Mr. Bradley said that a conclusion could be made that Mr. Stompro did not act in bad faith, as on March 14 he had thought the Eugene Police Department had all of the available information on him. He had also asked the Police Department to get the files and he noted the length of time involved. Mr. Bradley felt that the applicant did carry out the spirit of the Code by making the disclosure and he was not acting in bad faith. Mr. Delay reminded the City Council that testimony from the American Bar Association had borne out the fact that the precise question of past criminal record created a double bind for persons. He said he did not like the nature of the decision before the Council, and would feel comfortable for having a real reason for why a person should not get a license, rather than using a loophole. Mayor Keller responded that the reason was that there were rules and regulations which apply to all persons in requesting applications for licenses. He noted the Council should change the procedures if it did not like the process. He noted also that it would appear to be difficult to forget eight or nine arrests if he realized that information had to be submitted with an application. He also said the Eugene Police Department's responsibility did not cover the area of supplying past records for an applicant, but most importantly, there was an obligation to protect the citizens of Eugene. e Vote was taken on the motion, which passed with Haws, Hamel, Obie, and Smith voting aye; Delay, Williams, Bradley, and Lieuallen voting no; and Mayor Keller voting aye to break the tie. Ms. Lunsford requested Council explain its reason for denial: whether it was making a social judgment, not certain that the applicant should be in that particular business, or whether he had acted in bad faith. Mayor Kellor responded that each City Council member could be asked as to why he or she voted as he or she did. Stan Long, City Attorney, noted that the City Council is not required to give reasons for denial. Mr. Obie replied his reasons for voting for denial were that 1) the applicant had plenty of opportunity available to supply the information and 2) the information had not been provided. He felt it was not the responsibility of the City to provide that information. Mr. Bradley reminded Council that in another appeal almost identi- cal, the Council had granted the appeal on rehabilitation grounds and that it was now denying. He said it was only fair for each member to give his reasons for voting for the denial. Mayor Keller said each member could if he so desired. Mr. Hamel indicated he voted for the denial for the same reasons given by Mr. Obie. No other Councilors responded. 4IjI-B-lO H. Bids: Public Works: Four various improvement projects; bids opened April 5, 1977 (tabulation attached) Don Allen explained the nature of the various improvement petitions. Contract award was recommended to the low bidder on each of the projects. ~9Z 4/11/77--13 . Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to award contracts to the low bidder on each project. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye, except Haws and Bradley abstaining on contract award No.4 (job numbers 1188, 1377, and 1378). II. Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items as requested. Previously discussed in Committee-of-the-Whole on March 30 (present: Council President Haws; Council members Obie, Hamel, Delay, Williams, Smith, Bradley and Lieuallen) and April 6 (present: Mayor Gus Keller; Council members Haws, Obie, Hamel, Delay, Williams, Smith Bradley and Lieuallen). Minutes of those meetings appear below in smaller type. Com 3/30/71 Affirm Com 3/30/77 File Com 3/30/77 File :'1. Items from Mayor and Council A. Request for publicly-owned golf course--Mr. Hamel requested city staff inquire about the possibility of a publicly-owned golf course, citing the problems of young people, especially high school teams in the area, having those facilities avail- able to them. Manager said consideration had been made for acquiring more land at Laurelwood Golf Course which might make it possible to expand to 18 holes. Mr. Hamel said that golf course was too hilly, and wondered if other areas in the com- munity, for instance, Good Pasture Island, could be considered. FA Smith, Parks and Recreation Department, noted that his department had been doing some research on additional publicly- owned golf courses. He said that, at present, there was some research indicating the community could support 36 holes of public golf. e Mr. Bradley arrived. MS. Smith asked with regard to the plan to put a golf course .in Alton Baker Park. Mr. Smith replied that the land had been allocated for nine holes, and later had been changed to 18 executive type. He noted the additional land had been devel- oped and it was felt not economical or practical to put in just nine holes. Mr. Obie noted that it might be possible to consider putting such a golf course in the Bethel-Danebo area as there are very few recreational facilities in that part of town. Mr. Haws said he would like to consider the economic priorities, noting he would prefer 36 policemen to be hired over putting in 36 holes of golf iri the area. ~1anager was instructed to keep the Council .informed of future developments of such a golf course. B. Commission on Handicapped--Resignation of Mike Helm-~anager was asked to check for alternates and see which other persons were interviewed for the Handicapped Commission. . C. Department of Transportation Decertification Letter--Status Report-- Manager noted this was an informational item only, as there was hot enough material yet for any decisions to be made. ;tq3 4/11/77 - 14 . Mr. Bill Guenzler noted there were several concerns regard- ing this decertification information. He said federal require- ments state that the metropolitan area needs a planning process dealing with certain elements to receive funding. He also noted that $700,000 per year are involved, that the funds would accrue up to two years, but would not be lost if a plan were adopted prior to the expiration of those two years; that $600,000 accrues to a transit district which operates a bus system; and the state would not fund any project which is federally funded. He said, in specifics, for the city it could affect the following projects: 1) the 30th and Hilyard intersection widening, although he had been officially told it would not be affected as it would have reached a sufficiently advanced state of development; and 2) the Valley River Bike Bridge would, in his opinion, not be affected; but that the transit operational assistance would. e He said the reason for the decertification was that federal regulations require that by June 30 a transportation systems management element be produced, which meant a list of projects and appropriations that could be made. For an unconditional certification, a metropolitan area would need a long-range plan and transportation systems management element, a trans- portation improvement program for three to five years. He noted he felt it would be desirable for the metropolitan area to make a single, consolidated response by all jurisdictions to this decertification letter. He said the important thing was that transportation assistance through the urban mass transit could be withdrawn and the city could be faced in some way with curtailing the existing transit system, either by reducing the number of runs, or reducing manpower. The alternatives, he noted, were as follows: 1) the metro- politan area could develop a transportation system management element immediately to get conditional certification in some way; 2) it could develop plans and accept some period of de- certification; or 3) it could challenge the certification. He noted the two major issues to be considered were: 1) the loss in transportation system has to be analyzed; and 2) that the Springfield City Council has recently changed its transit goals, although technical preparation has been ongoing for quite some time. The Council would have to determine whether it wanted to go along with the different transit goal or con- tinue ahead with the technical preparations that had been neve10ped to date. e Mr. Guenzler noted that Friday, April 1, the Metropolitan Area TranRportation C~mmittee would be meeting to consider alter- nntlves and ~ive advice on the various issues involved. He said perhaps a report of that meeting could be received by Cornmittee-of-the-Whole meeting, April 6. He noted again that he hoped the metropolitan area (Eugene, Lane County, and ~9~ 4/11/77 - IS 1 I Springfield) would express a collective approach. John Porter, Planning Department, said more time was needed to find out a better course of action and that the report from the policy committee meeting would help in this understanding. . It was understood that more information will be presented to Council at Committee-of-the-Whole, April 6. Scott Lieuallen arrived at the meeting. Com 3/30/77 D. File Com 3/30/77 E. Approve Bikeramp Ceremony-~anager noted the ceremony would be held April 6, 11 a.m., at Alton Baker Park. He asked any Council members who wished to have bicycles provided to alert the Manager's office. Anti-fluoridation Petition-~anager noted the anti-fluori- dation petition had been received Tuesday, March 29, with 6,498 authenticated signatures. He said the legal opinion from the City Attorney's office had been distributed to Council members and that it would be impossible to schedule an election by Hay 24. Mr. Long, City Attorney's office, noted that of the alterna- tives presented to Council, many were very complex with legal problems existing. He said the easiest thing to do would be for Council to decide a date for the election and the City Attorney's office would then prepare the necessary papers. He said the city was free to call a special election on a 30-day notice, but was not required to do so. " Mr. Williams moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to authorize the papers for an election on the fluoride issue for the May, 1978 general election. Mr. Long noted that the law was unclear as to whether the city could be compelled to place such a ballot in a special election called for another purpose. He noted that if Council would indicate a date for the election and authorize staff to prepare the papers within a 30-day period, it would not get into some very complicated legal problems regarding the 90-day filing date and the application of state regulations. He noted that the City Council could pass a special ordinance indicating that the election would be held on the first election after a certain date, but not later than May, 1978. The issue then would go on whatever ballot election occurred h0tw~en that rlate and May, 1Q78. Mr. Williams noted his reason for the motion was that a very short time ago people in Eugene (approximately 70 percent) voted to put fluor ide in the wAtp.r. H(' BAl rl t t t R known that with special elections the average turnout is between 10 and 12 percent of the voting population. He felt it improper to take p;enernl clectlon nction amI place it in 11 poaltf.on of jeopardy where very few people vote. Mr. Delay said he was not sure the City Council should try to make a decision on how many - ~<t5 4/11/77 - 16 - people will turn out for any election, especially with the possi- bility of litigation over this particular issue. He felt that the Council should put it on the ballot at the next election after the 90-day period had expired, taking the lowest cost approach for the city. Mr. Williams noted that Mr. Delay could take the position that all elections are equal, but he felt it was an inadequate position. Mr. abie said that otherwise the city would face the possibility of another election following this one with people who are not satisfied with the results. He said the greater number of people voting would increase the likelihood that the city would not have to face another vote on this issue. Mr. Delay reiterated that the people had done everything that was required for them to get the issue on another ballot, and with the possibility of litigation, he felt the city should not take those kinds of chances. Mr. Long said the Attorney's office would be most comfortable if the City Council would select a date that is not past the next general election. He again reiterated the uncertainty of taking no action could lead to the city being governed by state statutes which are very unclear, and could result in legal problems. A vote was taken on the motion which failed, with Haws, Williams, abie, and Smith voting aye; and Hamel, Delay, Bradley, and Lieuallen voting no. - Mr. Long noted that in order to act within the 30-day time period, Council should designate a date for the election to be held, but not later than May, 1978, so that action could be taken April 11, and in the event a unanimous vote was not received, final reading could be held April 2S to stay within the 30-day time frame. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the election,on the fluoridation issue be set for June 28, 1977. Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to amend the motion to state that the fluoridation issue would be placed on the first election after June 28, and no later than May, 1978. Vote was taken on the amendment to the motion, which carried, with Smith, Ramel, Bradley, Lieuallen, and Delay voting aye; abie, Williams, and Raws voting no. Vote was taken on the main motion which passed, with Smith. Hamel. Lieuallen, Bradley, and Delay voting ayc; Obie, Williams, ;Ind II:IWS voli ng no. Mr. Williams raised the question if an on the ordinance and a two-thirds vote what would happen. Hr. Long responded the six votes would be there. emergency clause were placed was not received by Council, he would just hope that 4t 4/11/77 - 17 21fo Com 3/30/ II. 77 Approve Com 3/30 III. 77 Approve Com 3/30/ IV. 77 Pub Hrg Com 3/30/77 V. Affirm Liquor License Applications A. Andy's Eugene Station, 5th and Willamette (DA--new outlet) Andy's Diner, Inc., Burlington, Northern Development Corporation, Dennis Sakuma. Mr. Ramel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to schedule public hearing on item A for April 11, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. - I B. 4th Street Depot--453 Willamette (RMB, Change of ownership) Depot Enterprises, William B. Milius. Manager noted this request has been withdrawn by the staff, as a subsequent police report had been received requesting such withdrawal. C. The Bavarian--444 East 3rd .(RMB, change from Restaurant) Fred and Betty Van Herwaarden. Mr. Ramel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to approve the liquor license. Motion carried unanimously. Improvement Petitions A. Paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within 1st Addition to Velkommen Park (1369). Assessable property totally within sub- division; no city costs. B. Paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer within W.C. Fields Plat; assessable property within subdivision except sanitary sewer from south boundary of subdivision to Crescent through tentative plat of Crescent Moon; no city costs. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to authorize pro- ceeding with the improvement petitions. Motion carried unanimously. - Appeal of Denial by Planning Commission of Minor Partition (M 76-123) .91 acre end of Horizon Road--S.W. Endicott (Appeal statement distributed to Council) rrr. Ramel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to schedule a public hearing for April 25, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. Request by HCDC for approval of Standards and Guidelines for Implementing HE 2342 (Memo and materials distributed to Council) Mr. Jon Mills-Erickson, Planning Department, indicated this was a request for a resolution approval by the City Council concerning local property tax exemption for rehabilitating residential property. For the implementation it has required concurrence of School Districts 4-J and 52. Mr. Mills-Erickson noted the administrative process included eligibility of property for limited assessment, rehabili- tation improvements, reasonable rent, compliance with City Housing Code, and a period of limited assessment of five consecutive assess- ment rolls. He said the process to be followed would be that certi- fication would be applied for, the city would check the records, the person would do the rehabilitation improvement with city approval, and then would receive the tax exemption. Mr. Delay asked what the estimated cost to the city would be for this proposed change. Mr. Mills-Erickson explained that a $100 fee was required with $60 of that to pay the city cost, and $40 to the County e. ~87 4/11/77 - 18 e Com 3/30/77vr. Pub Hrg Com 3/30/ VII. 77 F. Com 3/30/7?III. File CO./30177IX. PUI Irg Assessor. Mr. Lieuallen asked whether the cost would be absorbed by the city or state, to which Mr. Mills-Erickson replied that the local government would absorb the cost. Manager noted this resolution would appear on the April 11 Council agenda. Gilham Road Paving Project, Beltline to Crescent (Report, map, and design distributed to Council) Don Allen, Public Works Department, noted the staff hearings had been held and the project was at the point now where the first public hearing should be held with authorization from the City Council to go to final design, and the second public hearing would be held to award the contract. He noted this was a Council-initiated project, and that the Council had toured the area. In referring to discussion held at the March 28 Council meeting regarding peti- tions for improvements, Mr. Allen said that the City does not have to have any petition for any improvements which the Eugene City Council desires. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to schedule a public hearing April 25, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. Field Burning Scott Lieuallen reported on the testimony he had given on the hearings on the field burning bills at the State Legislature earlier in the day. He noted there was some confusion over the past poli- cies the city had taken, with the confusion arising out of whether or not the machine field burning was a viable alternative and what tools were available to measure pollution in the air. He noted that the position he took was that the city supports the proposed phase-down, the increase in fees for field burning acreage, and the Field Sanitation C~mmittee as it is presently constituted. He said the League of Women Voters had presented a very strong testimony supporting the city's position. He noted that the growers' bill could possibly be passed out of Committee, and the future of the City's bill did not look too good. He said he had been questioned regarding what the City of Eugene was doing to try to avoid pollution in the air in Eugene and there will prob- ably be pressure in the future to consider emission test legislation. Other Matters Manager noted the Legislative Subcommittee would be meeting Thursday, March 31 at noon in the MCNutt Room; and the Room Tax Subcommittee has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday, April 6 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Mr. Williams asked for City Attorney's opinions on clarifying a conflict of interest in regard to the business affidavit report which Council members have to submit. Quasi-Judicial Hearings Scheduled April 25, 1977 A. Appeals of denial by Planning Commission 1. Application hy Louise Nickels for zone change from RP-SR to C-2, Tax Lot 1900--Assessor's Map 17-04-36-3 2 :1.C} 8 4/11/77 - 19 Com 3/30/77 Pub Hrg Com 4/6/77 Approve Com 4/6/77 File Com 4/6/77 File Com 4/6/77 File 2. Application by T. Harley Sipe for zone change from RP to C-2 zoning, Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 4, Teshner's Addition e B. Recommended approvals for rezoning by Planning Commission 1. Safley--located on the east side of Bertelsen Road, north of 18th, from M-2 to RA 2. Knutsen/Olson--located north of Willakenzie and west of Coburg, from RA to RP-SR 3. Evergreen Union Retirement Association--located west of Pearl and north of 4th, from M-2 to RG (Report and maps distributed to Council) Committee-of-Whole April 6, 1977 L Items from Mayor and Council A. Fluoride Issue Ms. Smith moved seconded by Mr. Haws to reconsider action taken by Council March 30, 1977, on the fluoride issue. Joyce Benjamin, City Attorney's office, noted that the item could be reconsidered only one time. In addition, she said that Council could set reconsideration for the April 11 Council meeting. Mayor Keller indicated it was his opinion that if the Council decided to reconsider and have testimony taken at this time that only those people who are opposed would be abLe to, testify. If it were done at the Monday night Council meeting then both sides could present their testimony. Mr. Haws indi- cated he did not want to hear more testimony because it would be a repeat of what had already been heard. Ms. Smith said it was her intention to set a date for the fluoride issue to be put on the ballot. - Vote was taken on the motion which passed with all members present voting aye except Mr. Bradley voting no. Mayor Keller noted this would be the last item for considera- tion on today's agenda. B. Downtown Development Committee--Mr. Lieuallen reported progress was being made, and he would have recommendations to bring back for Council consideration at a future date. C. Conflict of Interest Forms--Mr. Delay noted he did not under- stand some of the questions on the form and asked for clarifi- cation. Manager said a memo would be forthcoming from the Attorney's office April 7 for clarification. e D. Mayor Keller noted that former mayor Les Anderson was present at the meeting and welcomed him. ~~~ 4/11/77 - 20 Com 4/6/77 Affirm e Com 4/6/77 Approve Com 4/6/77 4IJfirm Com 4/6/77 Affirm Com 4/6/77 Approve e E. Executive Session--Manager noted the Executive Session to be held at 1:30 p.m. following Committee-of-the-Whole meeting in regard to park land acquisition matter. Council had received memo and took a tour of the area. F. ~andicapped Comm~ssi~--Manager noted there were two applicants who had been interviewed by Council who could replace Mike Helm, who resigned. Manager said one applicant, Collin Gray, did not live within the city limits, leaving only one applicant, who had been interviewed already, Rodney Bossart. There were six other applicants, three of whom had indicated Handicapped Commission as their first choice. Manager noted the Council could appoint the one person already interviewed or set a meeting for interview- ing the other applicants. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie to appoint Rodney Bossart to the Handicapped Commission. Mr. Williams wondered if it might be possible to leave the POS1- tion vacant until the Council had a chance to look at the process of appointment and make the appointment at that time, although he had no objection to this appointment. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. G. Planning Commission Ap2licant Interviews--Manager noted that a number of applications had been received, and the Council had received a letter requesting a few days extra time for further applications to be accepted. He said time was a critical factor and cited the instance a pre~ous night's Planning Commission meeting failing to start on time because of lack of quorum. Mayor Keller felt that adequate time and notice had been given for submission of applications and he hoped Council would decide to proceed. It was the concensus of the Council to meet 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, April 13, to consider applications and reduce the number to finalists for interview. Staff would pro- vide the applications to Council over the weekend. H. Work Session of City Council--It was noted that Mr. Haws could not make the May 14 session date which had been established, so Friday, May 13 would be the next considered date. I. Legislative Subcommittee Report--Manager noted that most of the items had been considered or delayed but that one item, House Bill 2433, had resulted in a split vote and it was necessary for the Council to discuss and take a position, as the Minority Commission was requesting authorization to testify in favor of the bill. ~oo 4/11/77 - 21 Mr. Williams explained the two bills, HB 2432 and HB2433, which had been considered by the Legislative Subcommittee. He noted the Subcommittee had been unanimously in favor of HB 2432, which would eliminate tax exemption for those organizations practicing discrimination. However, Mr. Williams and Mr. Obie felt that on HB 2433 there was a question of whether a club should be denied a liquor license because of discrimination and that perhaps the granting of a liquor license is something below a significant State action which involves the 14th Amendment. It was felt that an organization should be able to form a private club and serve whomever it wanted. . Mr. Bradley did not agree that it was below the State standard of significant action. He noted that in his opinion a signifi- cant State action in granting a privilege occurs whenever the State issues a license and therefore the State is involved. Mr. Delay noted he supported HB 2433, saying that clubs should be able to organize in any way they so desired. However, if a State liquor license was involved he felt clubs should not d iscr iminate. Mr. Obie said that at some point the government entity has to give a permit for something along the way, whether it be for a building permit or liquor license. He felt it was not the liquor license, but the right to form or not form a club which was the issue, and a club should be able to form in any way desired. Mr. Delay did not agree, saying a liquor license was primarily given to different organizations and therefore was a legitimate concern to address discrimination in any form. . Mr. Williams said he felt the issue was to determine what is significant State activity. He cited a case in which the pennsylvania Supreme Court had stated very clearly that liquor licenses were in the category of State actions which fell below the standards meeting the 14th Amendment. Mr. Lieuallen raised the question about public establishments discriminating and if they were subject to losing their licenses. Mayor Keller questioned who removed the liquor licenses or as- sessed fines. Manager noted that the person would file a com- plaint with OLCC and they would act accordingly. Ms. Benjamin said there had been cases in court involving public restaurants which had discriminated. Mr. Bradley felt there was a philosophical question involved in making the decision whether it was right or wrong, that the CounciL could not compare Oregon to Pennsylvania, as Oregon is known to have very strict laws governing liquor licenses. Mr Bradley moved seconded by Mr. Delay to support HB 2433. Motion failed with Delay, Bradley, Smith, and Haws voting aye, Obie, Williams, Hamel,and Lieuallen voting no and Mayor Keller voting no to break the tie. '. 301 4/11/77 - 22 . e Com 4/6/77 Affirm - Mr. Bradley questioned Senate Bill 411 regarding the closure of liquor establishments from 2:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. Captain Pat Larion, Police Department, said the Department felt it was in the community's best interest to have that closure time to allow people who were inebriated to go home and sober up, and to allow the establishment to clean up and start another day. He noted that policing problems increased if the establishments were allowed to remain open all night and the Police Department was not in favor of the bill. Mr. Bradley indicated he would rather see the bars open all night as opposed to seeing the drunk people getting out and driving on the road. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Bradley if he had evidence to support that position as valid. Mr. Bradley asked if the Police Department had evidence regarding in- creases in drunk driving arrests and accidents in the early morning hours. Captain Larion noted that the main concern would be from 2:30 a.m. until about 4 a.m., but if the hours were extended the Police Department would have to be concerned all day and all night. He noted that the people were going to have to leave at some point during the day or night to return home and the Police Department felt it would rather have those hours confined and therefore was in opposition to the bill. Mr. Hamel moved seconded by Mr. Haws to accept the report of the Legislative Subcommittee. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Bradley requested segregation of Item B-1-i.--Legislative Subcommittee report, March 31, 1977, regarding SB2433, denying a liquor license to an establishment that practices discrimination. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to support HB2433. Motion carried with Haws, Smith, Delay, Lieuallen, and Bradley voting aye; Obie, Williams, and Hamel voting no. J. Federal Decertification of Metro Area--Manager noted this was a follow-up item and that Council had received a memo and letter regarding the plan of action requesting conditional certification. He said the main purpose of the letter was to alert the federal government to the action being planned by the community and to hope that the federal government would reply if they had any objections to that plan of action. Mr. Bradley requested clarification as to the role of the City Council in regard to the Area Transportation Committee, L-COG's role, and MATC in the formulation of process and proce- dures. He questioned how MATC members were appointed and how much policy they were allowed to prepare. Mr. John Porter, Planning Department, replied that MATC was established by the L-COG Board, with established positions rather than individuals. 3o~ 4/11/77 - 23 Com 4/6/ II. 77 Approve Com 4/6/77 Pub Hrg Com 4/6/77 Approve Corn 4/6/77 Approve Manager noted that there is some consideration being given at this time for MATC to be differently structured, with the sug- gestion that MATC itself should include one elected representa- tive from each governing body in addition to the administrative officer. Mr. Bradley again reiterated his concern about the process and where the Eugene City Council fits in, what role it plays in regard to the decisions and the processes in attaining recertification. . It was understood that staff would respond to Mr. Bradley's questions and concerns. Liquor Licenses A. Locker Room Tavern, 211 Washington Street (RMB, change of owner- ship) Howard H. Keller B. O'Callahan's Restaurant, Inc., 440 Coburg Road (DA, change of ownership) David H. Swartout Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to approve the liquor licenses for Locker Room Tavern and O'Callahan's Restaurant, Inc. Motion carried unanimously. III. Denial of Commercial Solicitor's License (Jeffrey Park Stompo) Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to schedule public hearing April 11, 1977. Motion carried with all members present voting aye except Mr. Obie voting no. IV. Request to exercise option at 510 River Avenue at treatment plant site . Don Allen, Public Works Department, noted that the Council had taken no tour of the area but he had prepared photos which were passed among Council members. He said the City had attempted to buy the property for many years and now the property was on the market, the city surrounded the property on three sides, it would be appro- priate to buy the property on the open market and therefore staff was not recommending condemnation procedures. He noted the asking price was high but reasonable considering the open-market value. He said the best use of the property would be industrial, although it was not so zoned at this time. He said a 30-day option for $19,000 had been signed and there would be an opportunity for the City to recoup some of the expenses in regard to the development of the metro-sewer area. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that the City ex- ercise the option in purchase of the property. Motion carried unanimously. V. Fluoride Issue--Ms. Smith noted two major concerns: 1) there was a need to do everything possible to get the City and school budgets passed June 28, and felt there could be a negative vote on the City budget if the fluoride issue were not put on that ballot; and 2) a concern for an obligation to the citizens who had worked so hard to petition that this issue be put on a ballot. - Ms. Smith moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to put the fluoride issue on the ballot June 28. 303 4/11/77 - 24 . Mr. abie noted that he had several conversations with people in the community and that if the ballot were not held on that date there was talk of working toward defeat of the City budget and boycotting of William's bread. He noted he would support putting the issue on that ballot if those people would work on behalf of passing the budgets. Mr. Bradley was concerned, feeling that the City Council was being blackmailed. He said it should not be making decisions based on threats to the Council and that the Council does not know what other people who voted for fluoride in the water might do. He felt that the Council was making decisions based on what certain groups were saying and not on the substantive issues before the Council. He said the Council was assuming things which might not be true and recommended that the issue be put on a ballot after the June 28 election or in the general election, May 1978. Mr. Hamel said he had talked to many people regarding the fluo- ride issue. He said the City Council had told people how to get the issue back on the ballot and they had worked to do so. It was his feeling that if a group of people were interested in an issue on the ballot then perhaps there would be a better turnout for the June 28 election. e Mr. Delay said that he did not agree that the City Council was being blackmailed, but that it had a legitimate petition before it and should simply put it on the ballot. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. abie to amend the motion to read: "And regardless of the outcome of the election it will be placed back on the general election ballot in May, 1978." Mr. Haws noted the reason for his amendment was to satisfy both philosphies, the one being for an immediate vote on the fluoride issue, and the second being the concern for having the issue on a general ballot with more people voting then. Mr. Bradley noted he would rather see the City spend money on setting a special election for this one issue and separate it from the budget elections to avoid confusion. Ms. Smith strong ly opposed this position, noting that the Council had a respon- sibility to all taxpayers and the cost of the election should be shared. e Mr. abie said he was very much in favor of the amendment, feel- ing it was a very serious and fair motion. He reiterated Mr. Williams' concerns about the issue being decided at a general election at which a large turnout (70 percent) voted, as opposed to having the issue voted upon in a special election where a much smaller turnout would be voting. He felt the amendment was the best alternative, as it would give an opportunity for all people interested in this issue to vote in a fair way. Vote was taken on the amendment which did not carry with Bradley, Haws, and abie voting aye; Hamel, Smith, Williams, Lieuallen, and Delay voting no. ..30L{- 4/11/77 - 25 (, Mr. Bradley made a substitute motion to reschedule the flu~ride.issue election for the May, 1978 ballot. Mot10n d1ed for lack of a second. . Mr. Obie questioned whether there wasn't a State election .:oming prior to the June 28 local election and whether the 1ssue could be placed on that ballot. Manager noted there ~as.a.State election on May 17 and he had checked with County off1c1~ls, who have reported that there was serious doubt if a ~ocal 1ssue could be added, as State statutes might prohibit 1t. Mr: Haws reque~ted staff to look into information, he had re- ce1ved concern1ng cloud seeding with fluoride. Manager noted that the Governor had lost that battle. Vote was taken on the motion which passed with all members voting aye, except Mr. Bradley voting no. Item B.5.--Fluoride issue--Council approved putting on June 28 ballot. PUb,lic testimony was taken on the issue. Richard Greene, 1651 Grant Street said he supported the Council's action to allow voters to vote early, as he felt this was a very important and urgent issue. Stephen Brown, 195 East 49th Street, noted that he was a fluoride proponent, and felt the Council was being blackmailed by a small, vociferous group. He said that in the past general election, 20,455 people had voted in favor of fluoride to 19,394 against. He said in the last special elections held, there had been no more than 20,000 votes cast. He felt the issue being placed on a special election would, in effect, disenfranchise the 20,000 people who voted for fluoride. He recognized the legal obligation of the Council to put it on the ballot, but felt it should be placed on the general election ballot in May 1978. - R. J. Martens, 1457 East 22nd Avenue, thanked the Council for the position it had taken last week. In regard to the blackmail issue, he felt the new,s medi a had impl i ed there was a group organi zed to defeat the Ci ty budget. Me had never, in any group discussions with which he had been involved, seen any organized movement to that end. He felt city services were required and he was going to support the budget. Jeanne Fox, 60 Fairway Loop, spoke as a local dental hygienist. She noted that in an L-COG dental task force report, the No.2 priority had been given to dental health, with fluoride placed in the water supply to meet that need. She was in favor of putting the issue on a general election ballot where more people would be able to vote for the health measure. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Ubi e. to p I ace U\t:! n uor-l dt! issue on a ballot June 28, 1977, and regardless of the outcome, place the issue on the November 1978 ballot. Mr. Bradley moved to amend the motion to put the issue on the . general election ballot of May 197R. Oiscussion followed in which the / amendment was ruled out of order. A substitute motion was not lallowable. Mr. Haws and Mr. Obie withdrew their motion. !". :305 4/11/77 - 26 Mr. Bradley then moved to place the issue on the general election ballot of 1978. The motion died for lack of a second. Vote was Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Obie to place the fluoride issue on a ballot June 28, 1977, and regardless of the outcome, place the issue on the November 1978 ballot. taken on the motion which carried with Obie, Haws, Bradley, and Smith voting yes; Lieuallen, Hamel, Williams, and Delay voting no; and Mayor Keller voting yes to break the tie. Mayor Keller noted the reason for his vote was to give both sides an opportunity to vote on the issue. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that items A, B, and C be affirmed and filed as amended. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. e 11-B-4 III. Ordinances Manager noted that council bills 1438 and 1439 had been discussed at the Council meeting March 28, that these two ordinances were necessary to conform to the new charter which took effect April 1. C.B. 1438--Concerning sidewalk improvements: Amending Sections 7.243, 7.244, 7.248, and 7.250; repealing Sections 7.245, 7.246, 7.247,7.249,7.255,7.260, and 7.265; adding Sections 7.152,7.154,7.155,7.157, and 7.158; 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 council bill 1438 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that C.B. 1438 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17954. C.B. 1439--Concerning public improvements: Amending Sections 7.150, 7.155, 7.175, 7.190, 7.191, 7.192, 7.193, 7.194, 7.210, 7.220, 7.235, and 7.240; repealing Sections 7.180, 7.185, 7.195, 7.200, 7.205, 7.215, 7.225, 7.230, 7.270, and 7.275; adding Sections 7.166, 7.170, 7.175, 7.180, 7.190, 7.193, 7.197, 7.225, 7.230, 7.235, 7.240, 7.255, 7.260, and 7.265; and declaring an emergency 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 council bill 1439 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that C.B. 1439 be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17955. . -3o~ 4/11/77 - 27 II-B~5 C.B. 1440--levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Century Maples Subdivision (1248) (76-20) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1440 be read the first time and be referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 18, 1977 and Panel recommendation brought back for Council consideration for final reading on April 25, 1977. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. . C.B. 1441--levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and pedestrian way within Coraly Park Subdivision and sanitary and storm sewer to serve property within 160 feet of the east boundary of Coraly Park Subdivision (1238)(7628) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1441 be read the first time and be referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 18, 1977 and Panel recommendation brought back for Council consideration for final reading on April 25, 1977. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. C.B. 1442--levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Burnside Subdivision (904) (76-33) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1442 be read the first time and be referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 18, 1977 and Panel recommendation brought back for Council consideration for final reading on April 25, 1977. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. - C.B. 1443--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer and storm sewer within Nordian Park Subdivision and sanitary sewer to .serve area between Nordian Park and Chambers Street (1281) (76-37) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1443 be read the first time and be referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 18, 1977 and Panel recommendation brought back for Council consideration for final reading on April 25, 1977. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. C.B. 1444--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary and storm sewer within 4th Addition to Paradise Park (1280) (76-38) w~s read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. . ~07 4/11/77 - 28 e Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1444 be read the first time and be referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 18, 1977 and Panel recommendation brought back for Council consideration for final reading on April 25, 1977. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. II-B-S C.B. 1445--Levying assessments for sanitary sewer between 38th Avenue and 39th Avenue (if extended east) from Onyx Street to North Shasta Loop (1250) (76-46) 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 council bill 1445 be read the first time and be referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on April 18, 1977 and Panel recommendation brought back for Council consideration for final reading on April 25, 1977. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. 1446--Concerning the rehabilitated residential property limited assessment program; adding Section 2.940 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. C.B. e Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1446 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17956. C.B. 1447--To improve streets within 1st Addition to Velkommen Park and Juhl Street adjacent to south boundary of 1st Addition to Velkommen Park (1369) 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 council bill 1447 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17957. e C.B. 1448--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improving streets within 1st Addition to Velkommen Park and Juhl Street 3~ 4/11/77 - 29 adjacent to south boundary of 1st Addition to Velkommen Park . was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1448 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 the second time by council bill number only. 1," Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill b~ approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17958. 11-B-6 . C.B. 1449--Construct sanitary sewer and storm sewer within 1st Addition to Velkommen Park and declaring an emergency (1369) was read by co~ncil bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1449 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved ... and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members .., present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17959. , C.B. 1450--Adopting plans and specifications for constructing sanitary sewer and storm sewer within 1st Addition to Velkommen Park was.read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1450 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17960. C.B. 1451-~Improve streets within W. C. Fields Subdivision was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. 1 . Mr., Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1451 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 the second time by council bill number only. - 30~ 4/11/77 - 30 . II-B-6 e - Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17 961. C.B. 1452--Approving and adopting plans and specifications for improving streets within W. C. Fields 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 council bill 1452 Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17962. C.B. 1453--Construct sanitary sewer and storm sewer within W. C. Fields Subdivision and sanitary sewer from the south boundary of W. C. Fields Subdivision to the southeast 650 feet 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 council bill 1453 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17963. C.B. 1454--Adopting plans and specifications for constructing sanitary sewer and storm sewer within W. C. Fields Subdivision and sanitary sewer from the south boundary of W. C. Fields Sub- division to the southeast 650 feet was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that council bill 1454 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 the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17964. .3/0 4/11/77 - 31 II-B-6 ..: ~ Before action was taken on C.B. 1455--ordering special election June 28, 1977 regarding prohibiting fluoride in the public water, Mr. Long ex- plained that as a result of the action taken earlier in the evening on the fluoride issue, the Council had three options open to it: 1) it could delay to April 25 an ordinance providing for both elections to take place with the understanding that if the ordinances did not pass, Council would be encountering the problem of 30 day time limit for response to'the petition; 2) pass this particular ordinance and hav~/ the second ordinance calling for the second election with a second set of hearings included; 3) the special Council meeting to be held April 13 could include the special ordinance on the agenda at that time. In discussion which followed, Mr. Obie and Ms. Smith indicated they were in favor of voting and affirming the June 28 election at this time and consider a separate ordinance for the November 1978 election. Mr. Long suggested that the easiest course of action would be to take action on the ordinance for the June 28 election at this time and take action on another ordinance calling the 1978 election at another tim~. Mr. Williams said in regard to the dual elections scheme, he was not opposed to voting in November, but wondered what was gained by scheduling two elections at this time. He felt it was a trial run and it might irritate the anti- fluoride people. C.B. 1455--0rdering special election June 28, 1977, re: prohibiting fluoride in public water 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. 1455 be read the second time by council bill number only with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. e . .' .. Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to table the passage of this council bill for consideration at the Council's special meeting Wednesday, April 13, 1977. Motion to table was defeated with Williams, Obie, Delay, Smith, and Lieuallen voting no; Haws, Bradley, and Hamel voting aye. Mr. Bradley moved to postpone the issue until Wednesday, April 13, 1977 . Mayor Keller ruled the motion out of order as the content was the same as the previous motion which had failed. Vote was taken on the original motion as stated, which carried with all Council members present voting aye, except Mr. Bradley voting no. Lacking unanimous consent, the council bill will be :j' held for second reading at the April 25 Council meetin!:j. It was understood that staff would prepare a resolution and ordinance calling for the second election November 1978 ready for Council action at its special Council meeting April 13, 1977. . 311 4/11/77 - .32 eII-A-1V, - e Resol uti ons r: Res. No. 265ft--Concerning limited assessment and local property tax exemption for rehabilitated residential property in the City of Eugene, and adopting standards and guidelines was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 26~-Authorizing payment of bills, claims and progress pay- ments from March 28 through Apri 1 11, 1977 was read' by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to Apri 1 25, 1977. Ch~)~ City Manager CTH:DT:ml/CM8b17 ..3/~ 4/11/77 - 33 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Engineering Division . Bid No. 2 Opened: 4-5-77 1. PAVING, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER: Within Bonner Plat and sanitary and storm sewer to serve the area between Bonner Plat and Bertelsen Road (1332) Bidders Contract Cost 1. Wildish Construction Company....................................$ 247,220.45 2. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc...................................$ 259,333.25 3. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.......................................$ 262,383.31 4. ~~rse Brose. Inc................................................$ 267,764.90 5. Babb Construction Co., dba Delta Construction Co................$ 268,694.15 6. Benge Paving, Inc...............................................$ 271,102.43 7. H & J Construction..............................................$ 284,283.86 Cost to Abutting Property: 28' Pav $ 17.40/FF 36' Pav 19.50/FF Lateral $0.064/SF Service $150.00/Lot Storm $300.00/Lot San. Levy $0.005/SF 411fOMPlETION DATE: August 1S, 1977 Cost to City Storm Sewer $18,000.00 Amount Budgeted $ 26,850.00 (77-78 Budget) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. PAVING, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER: Withinlexington Park Subdivision and 1st Addition to Lexington Park (1337 & 1430) Bidders Basic 1. Wildish Construction Co...............................$ 96,088.32 2. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc............................$ 3. H & J Construction...................................$ 4~ Benge Paving, Inc....................................$107,077.58 5. Morse Bros., Inc.....................................$ 6. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, lnc........................$ Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City 28' PdV. $20.36/FF - $1,600/lot None Lateral $0.074/SF - $ 470/lot levy $O.005/SF - $ 32/lot Services - $ 200/Lot Storm - $ l85/lot Contract Cost Alternate 96,036.25 100,918.14 106,012.69 109,740.65 111,146.10 Amount Budgeted None COMPLETION DATE: August 1, 1977 Page 1 of 2 e 30 3~ 3. PAVING, SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND PEDESTRIAN WAY within Deodar Subdivision (1339) Bidder Basic Contract Cost, . Alternate $2e,714.69 1 . J a'me sA. Hi 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2 7 ,759. , 8 2~ Benge Paving, Inc.........................................$28,940.20 3. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.............................$ 4. Shur-Way Contractor, Inc......~...........................$ 5. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.................................$ 6. Wi1dish Construction CO...................................$30,788.70 ! Cost to Abutting Property Paving . $1,280/Lot San. Lat. 450/Lot San. Serve 240/Lot . Stonn 800/Lot Pede 'Way 130/Lot COMPLETION DATE: August 1, 1977 Cost to City San. Lat. $ 900.00 !.. 29,393..35 29,942.75 30,710.75 30,758.65 Amount. Budgeted None lHj . ., -----------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------ 4. PAVING AND SANITARY SEWER: Within Briarwood Subdivision, 1st Addition to Briarwood and 2nd Addition to Briarwood and sanitary sewer to serve the area 1601 south and west of Briarwood 2nd Addition (1188, 1377, 1378) Bidder Basic 1. Donald T. Devereaux........................................$ 2. Wildish Construction CO...................................$56,039.40 3. James A. Hil1..............................................$54t843.24 4. Benge Paving, Inc.........................................$ 5. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.................................$ 6. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.............................$ e Contract Cost Alternate $53,450.15 .54,690.64 55,620.93 55,982.42 66,792.55 76,047.99 Cost to Abutting Property 361 Pav. $28~00/FF - $1,700/Lot 28' Pave $28.50/FF - $1,560/Lot San. Lat. $0.105/SF - $ 890/Lot San. Serve - $ 155/Lot COMPLETION DATE: July 15, 1977 Cost to City 10" San. Swr. $2,500 :,1 EII.f 1II Amount Budgeted $ 2,300.00 (77-78 Budget) Page 2 01' 2 e 3{ .. ~ PAVING, STORM SEWER AND SIDEWALK: Gilham Road from Belt Line Road to Crescent Avenue (1383) Contract Cost Basic Alternate Bidders 1. Wildish Construction Company............................$186,848.26 2. R. C. Parsons & Son Cosntruction, Inc...................$187,742.59 3. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc............................... No Bid 4. Morse Bros., Inc........................................ No Bid $174,816.70 $179,841.44 $189,390.83 $193,720.50 Cost to Abutting Property Cost to City Amount Budgeted 281 Paving 361 Paving 4" Sidewalk 5" Sidewalk ]I' Driveway $ 20.85/FF $ 25.60/FF $ 1.35/SF $ 1. 45/SF $ 1. 75/SF Paving $ 53,500.............$ 39,500.00 Overpass 31,500.............$ 24,000.00 Stm.Sewer 24,600.............$ 5,500.00 COMPLETION DATE: September 19, 1977 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~ PAVING: Holly Street from Norkenzie Road ~to 900 feet west of Norkenzie Road (1416) Contract Cost Basic Alternate Bidders 1. Benge Paving, Inc...................................... No Bid 2. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc..............................$18,772.05 3. Wildish Construction CO................................$19,32l.80 4. Shur-Way Contractor, Inc...............................$19,572.95 $ 18,163.50 $ 18,199.40 S 19, 148. 05 $ 19,540.25 Cost to Abutting Property 281 Paving 36' Paving San. Service $ 23.35/FF 26.25/FF $162.00/Each Cost to City $ 650.00 Amount Budgeted None COMPLETION DATE: August 1,1977 . 1f8l. Page 2 of 3 1.1 5. PAVING AND SANITARY SHIER: Alley between 2nd Avenue and 3rd Avenue from Blair Boulevard td Van Buren Street (1294) Bidder Contract Cost 1. l-Jildish Construction Company.........................................$ 18,996.00 2. James A. Hill........................................................$ 19s945.05 3. Shur-Way Contractor, Inc..................~..........................$ ,22,870.90 4. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc........................................$ 30,630.95 Cost to Abutting Property Cost to City $ 5,200.00 Amount Budgeted $ 6,000.00 Paving Paving $ 1.033/~IFF 0.006/WSF COMPLETION DATE: August 15, 1977 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER: Within Somerset Hills III; within area bounded by Somerset Hills Addition, Somerset Hills II, and Somerset Hills III, and within 160 feet of boundaries of Somerset Hills III (1346) Bidder Contract Cost 1. Eugene Sand & Gravel~ Inc............................................$ 64,091.15 2. H & J Construction...................................................$ 73,686.25 3. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc........................................$ 75,136.20 4. James A. Hill........................................................$ 77,605.60 5. Shur-Way Contractor, Inc.............................................$ 82,822.17 6. Kenneth R. Bostick Construction Co...................................$104,734.30 Cost to Abutting Property Cost to City $3,800.00 Deferred Sewer Amount Budgeted San. Lateral San. Service Stm. Sewer $ 1,530.00/Lot 193.00/Lot 722.00/Lot None COMPLETION DATE: August 15, 1977 , ,ttg3 Page 3 of 3 ., . . " '. t~ ') . - DEPARTtlENT OF PUBLIC HORKS Engineering Division Bid No.4 Opened: May 17, 1977 SECURITY FENCING AND SIGNING: At Mahlon Sweet Field ADAP PROJECT NO. 8-41-0018-03 Job No. 1292 Bidders Contract Cost 1. Oregon Fence Company...............................................$ 8,671.46 2. San Jose Steel Company.............................................$ 10,547.09 Cost to Federal Aviation Administration Airport Grant: $ 7,803.46 Cost to City 10% of Contract-$868.00 ~Iount Budgeted $ 765.00 COMPLETION DATE: September 1, 1977 e . 4-8 Lf l~ CITY OF ETJGENE INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM TO: Charles Henry, City Manager FROM: Charles Kupper, H.C.C. Director SUBJECT: Approval of a contract award for the construction of the l"hiteaker Comfilllnity Cent(~r DATE: June 13, 1977 1) Powell Industrial Builders Base bid: Deduct Alternate #2 Deduct Alternate #3 $ 46,213 2) 657 2,086 $ 41~4io 2) Morris Kielty, General Base Bid: Deduct Alternate #2 Deduct Alternate #3 Contractor S 48,549 3,054 2,136 S 43,359 The City Counc n I s approva.~ is request.ed to d\'iard a contract to the '\c)"lest. bidder, Powell Industrial Builders rp lfgS , ., " . It e . ],t>