HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/17/1977 Meeting
M I NUT E S
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
August 17, 1977
e
Adjourned to meeting from August 10, 1977, of the City Council of the City of
Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 12 p.m.
on August 17, 1977, at the King's Table, Oakway Mall with the following
Council members present: Eric Haws, D. W. Hamel, Tom Williams (arrived late),
Ray Bradley (arrived late), Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, and Betty
Smith.
1. Items from Mayor and Council
A. National Energy Plan: A Critique--Jack Delay distributed report to
Council and highly recommended they study it carefully.
B. National League of Cities Regional Meeting--Seattle, August 11 and 12,
1977 . Jack Delay attended, noting members of the Springfield City
City Council and Mayor also attended. One of the subjects of discus-
sion was a double taxation situation. He cited both the states of
Utah and Florida were addressing the situation through legislative
acti on. He wondered if River Road and Santa Clara people were getting
a higher level of services than the rest of the County in relation to
the amount of taxes being paid. Also, the elderly, low-income, and
those on fixed incomes have both City and County taxes to pay. Hi s
e question was, how much service was being delivered to the citizens of
Eugene and whether they are subsidizing other areas. He fel t lower
County taxes attracted citizens to live on the fringes of the City.
It was a matter of tax equity, and whether some citizens were being
over taxed and under serviced.
Mr. Williams and Mr. Bradley arrived.
He felt it was very much in the interest of the citizens of the
community for staff to look into this situation. He requested City
Manager communicate with the Springfield and Lane County government
officials to see if there is mutual interest in jointly exploring the
tax inequity program in terms of services being delivered.
Mayor Keller said the problem was being pursued and the League of
Women Voters have been asked to respond. Manager said he had no
satisfactory response as to the progress being made by the League of
Women Voters. However, Multnomah County had done a study which he had
made available to the League for their study.
It was the consensus of the Council that the City Manager would
report to the August 31 Council meeting regarding what progress the
League had made and what might be done further in this regard.
e 8/17/77 --1
feW
-
- ~
C. Site Value Assessment--Mr. Delay said this was another item which
had been discussed at the NLC meeting. He felt it could be useful
as a growth management tool in Eugene. The basic idea would be
- to have an assessment based primarily on improved land such as is done
in Australia and elsewhere. This would reduce taxes on other types of
residences in the city, but would increase the evaluation of undevel-
oped land, would relieve development pressures on the fringes of the
city, and would eliminate one of the problems of deteriorating neighbor-
hoods by allowing homeowners to make improvements without the assess-
ment of their property going up. He requested Council to consider the
idea.
D. Population Growth Study--Mr. Delay had a copy of the National Popula-
tion Growth Study broken into regions with a copy of the Northwest
Region available to Council members.
E. Community Development Committee--Mr. Delay reported a Tuesday meeting
had been held of the Committee to review final approval to let contracts
for two programs, one in the Whiteaker neighborhood area and one for
Looking Glass. The question had been raised as to whether or not
there was adequate coordination of delivery and funding of social
services with other existing agencies and whether or not there was
violation of City policies in delivery of the social services. It had
been the consensus of the Committee that it had established a policy
whereby any social services program funded through the CD Block Grant
would be funded for only one year. Secondly, CDC did not feel it
appropriate to hold up taking action on approval of the adopted
programs before considering a policy problem, if there was indeed a
e policy problem. He suggested perhaps the question could be handled
administratively. He noted CDC has the authority to expend the funds
as outlined in the CD Block Grant and approved by Council.
Manager reviewed the administrative review processes for the two
applications. He noted that CDC was to be seeding initial efforts and
not continuing funding past one year's time. In the Whiteaker case,
the City was now to fund personnel already on the job and who had been
funded previously by a State agency. Mr. Delay said the CDC discus-
sion resulted in a feeling that the staff had checked out the programs
with the appropriate agencies and they felt they were not going
against City policy. He failed to see a direct conflict between
existing City policies, but he noted in the future that coordination
with all agencies involved should be insured.
F. Councilor Absences--Mr. Hamel will be absent Monday, August 22 and
Wednesday, August 24; Mr. Lieuallen will be absent Wednesday, August 24.
G. Transfer of Funds for Community Schools Coordinating Committee--Mr.
Obie asked for clarification from Manager as to the background and
reason for the transfer. Manager replied that the actual same dollar
amounts were being transferred to the City Manager's Office from the
e 8/17/77--2
b21
Parks Department at the request of the Community School Coordinating
Committee, with the endorsement of Parks and Recreation. At budget
time, Parks and Recreation was placed in a position of evaluating their
e programs against the community schools. They would rather not do the
evaluation of the community schools and their personnel asked for the
change. Mr. Obie was satisfied with the clarification.
H. Agenda Classification--Manager noted agenda items for current routine
were: two, four, and eight; current non-routine were: one and five
through seven; less immediate was nine.
I. Closure of Spencer Butte--Ed Smith, Parks and Recreation, reported that
Spencer Butte Park area would be closed Thursday morning, August 18,
and would remain closed until the weather permitted opening again.
Closure was created by the extreme fire hazard and the lack of water
in the area.
J. Smog Pollution Alert--Marty Douglas, LARAPA, reported the Eugene
area had three different pollutants: 1} Carbon monoxide; 2} suspended
particulates; and 3} photochemical oxidants. The photochemical
oxidant level had exceeded its safe level of 200 micrograms per
cubic meters. He noted Tuesday, August 16, the level had reached 226.
As a result, the City was on alert for that particular pollutant. The
urban smog was caused by urban vehicular traffic, high temperatures,
and stagnant air inversion in the area. The alert will remain as long
as the hot weather remains. The alert means that a request is made to
the community to make more use of mass transit and less use of indivi-
dual automobiles, and for people with heart and respiratory problems
to curtail their physical activity. He noted the pollution alert was
e in effect throughout the valley with Portland experiencing an amount
double that in Eugene.
K. Assessment Panel Hearing--Manager reported an appeal had been received
from a recent Zoning Board of Appeals meeting requiring an Assessment
Panel Hearing. Mr. Obie and Mr. Hamel consitute Council's membership
on the panel. It was decided that the meeting would be held Monday,
August 29, 4 p.m. in the Council Chamber.
L. Request for Delay of Addressing Agenda Items--Manager requested if
any City Council member wished to request delay of a particular item
appearing on an agenda, that he or she so indicate at the beginning of
each meeting so persons present and interested in that item could
1 eave.
M. Analysis of Election Results by Precinct--Alice Rutter expressed
thanks to the media for their fine coverage of alerting people to the
budget levy election August 9. She gave a special thanks to Ann
Baker, who will be leaving, and noted Lee Wilkins will be covering for
the Register-Guard. She reviewed various charts by precincts, noting
comparisons in the under-votes in budget elections, voter turnout. and
distribution of yes votes and density. The August 9 budget election
had passed by 2,600 votes more than a 2-1 margin, and had won in 47
out of 52 precincts. She noted the City budget had never won by such
a standard. She gave special thanks to the Budget Committee and City
- Council members, Rosalie Lemert, and Don Powell for their efforts in
the campaign.
8/17/77 --3
(02.1
N. Work Flow Diagram for Civic Center Auditorium Project--Distributed
to Council. Manager noted Council would want to review the chart
and perhaps hold a discussion at some later date.
e II. Segregation of Assessments
A. South side of Whitbeck and west end of vacated Brawner Boulevard,
SE 77-13, William E. Shehan.
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve the segregation.
Mayor Keller noted receipt of a memo from Attorney's Office indicating
roll call votes should be taken on appropriate motions.
Vote was taken on the motion with Haws, Hamel, Williams, Bradley,
Delay, Lieuallen, Obie, and Smith voting aye.
III. Improvement Petitions
Before reading the improvement petitions, Manager said on Resolution No.
2736 that 520.12 feet of frontage outside of the City limits would
not be assessed.
Res. No. 2734--Authorizing initiating process for paving, sanitary sewer
and storm sewer to serve 1st Addition to Bonner Subdivision
(1455) was read by number and title.
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution.
Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously with Councilors Haws,
Hamel, Williams, Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, Obie, and Smith voting
aye.
e Res. No. 2735--Authorizing initiating process for street paving on Balfour
Street adjacent to Tax Lots 17-03-17-32-2605 and 2615 was read
by number and title.
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resoluton.
Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously with Councilors Haws,
Hamel, Williams, Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, Obie, and Smith voting
aye.
Res. No. 2736--Authorizing initiating process for paving Crescent Avenue
from Gilham Road to 800 feet west (1490) was read by
number and title.
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution.
Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously with Councilors Haws,
Hamel, Williams, Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, Obie, and Smith voting
aye.
IV. Liquor License Application--Ken and Sue's Taco Tap, 2750 Roosevelt Blvd.
(RMB), Change of Ownership, Kenneth Hillsberry, Applicant.
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to recommend approval and
forward to OLCC. Motion carried unanimously.
e 8/17/77 --4
lo'-.3
v. Authorization to Execute Contract with Consultant for Auditorium-
e Convention Center-Sports Complex Feasibility Study. Requested by
Civic Center Commission--Memo and Work Program distributed to Council
Manager reported Council had received a list of the bidders who met
the specifications, with Dean Baumgartner available to answer questions.
Mr. Haws asked if the money would be expended from Room Tax funds, to
which Manager replied yes.
Mr. Bradley was curious about the name, questioning whether the scope
had expanded to look at sports activities. Mr. Obie, a member of the
Commission, said his impression was the initial charge had been to
investigate all areas of use. Mr. Bradley's impression was the initial
charge was for an auditorium and felt it had been expanding since that
time. Mayor Keller noted the Commission, rather than excluding anything,
at this point, was to come up with answers as to what, in fact, the
community needed. The Commission was taking a broad view of possibili-
ties, with the consultant to come up with the best alternatives available.
Mr. Lieuallen felt it was necessary for the Commission to respond to all
viewpoints and assess all the community's needs initially, receiving input
from all those in the community as much as possible. The consulting firm
is to find out what can actually be done.
Mr. Delay questioned the two Council members for comments as to how
they came up with the particular recommendation. Mr. Obie reviewed
- the procedure, saying that nine bidding firms had made presentations
in writing. Dean Baumgartner had provided the Commission with what
he felt to be the best three bidding consulting firms. Discussion
was held by the Commission regarding the three, with an opinion asked of
Mr. Baumgartner as to the one he felt was best. The Commission elected
to take his opinion.
Mr. Williams understood the firm of Jack Jarvis had done an excellent
job for LCAA, noting the price was less than ERA, and wondered why the
Commission had shifted to selecting ERA. Mr. Obie replied, a concern
by staff and members of the Commission regarding Jarvis, in that Jarvis
had done the previous study and might be approaching this study with
prejudice. Mr. Haws wondered if it would not be cheaper to ask Jarvis
for an update, rather than asking a new firm to do a completely new
study.
Mr. Baumgartner replied the study done by Mr. Jarvis was completed in
1971 and was considerably less in substance than the current proposals
from other bidders. He noted a broader base and larger geographic area
had been addressed in the present proposals.
Mr. Haws questioned why EDCON had been rejected. He noted the bid price
was $15,000 lower. Mr. Baumgartner replied, it was basically a feeling
of lack of experience in comparisons to the others bidding.
e
8/17/77--5
~2~
Mr. Delay expressed feeling uncomfortable with the notion that Jarvis
had been rejected, based on a feeling that there might be prejudice
and he wanted more concrete evidence. He noted the firm's bid was less
e expensive and it was an Oregon corporation. Mr. Baumgartner replied,
the evaluation of the biddings had been based on responses for requested
proposals sent out in April. Ten points had been requested on the RFP
evaluation from each bidding firm. In some instances bidding firms added
or deleted various points, noting the Jarvis Corporation had eliminated
two of the ten points, while the ERA made additions which would be helpful
to the development. The explanation satisfied Mr. Delay. Mr. Obie noted
for Mr. Delay also that ERA's maximum cost was $45,000, while Jarvis'
estimated cost was $40,000, and that the two costs might not be that far
apart in actual outlay.
Mr. Haws returned to EDCON, noting the $15,000 difference, and said per-
haps the firm was younger and less experienced, but he wondered what ERA
would provide for the extra $15,000 that EDCON would not. Mr. Baumgartner
replied EDCON had been one of the three finalists. His final recommenda-
tion was not EDCON because he was uncomfortable with with the bid. He
noted the bid price was less than 50 percent of the closest bid and felt
there might be a possibility of lacking experience in bidding or trying to
buy the bid. When additional information was requested, the type of
information given by EDCON was not sufficient. He felt EDCON would not
provide the quality report needed. He said he lacked confidence in
EDCON's bid. Also, Mr. Baumgartner noted when the time frame of 18 months
was set up, the bidders were contacted to see if they could conform. He
said EDCON replied it could conform but would have to rebid.
e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to authorize the City
Manager to execute contract with Economic Research Associates of
San Francisco for a feasibility study. Vote was taken on the
motion, which passed with Hamel, Williams, Lieuallen, Obie, and
Smith voting aye; Bradley, Haws, and Delay voting no.
Mr. Bradley noted his reason for voting no was that he favored the Jarvis
firm; Mr. Haws favored EDCON and the saving of $15,000.
Mr. Williams wondered if he could change his vote. He personally felt
great reservations about the City Council's actions, noting a number
of years and the amount of money that had already been poured into this
project. He said Council was getting ready to spend another $100,000
and felt, with a lack of unanimous decision, perhaps the Council should
slow down and look more closely at the action it was taking. He was
not sure that the lack of unanimity came from which consultant to choose
or if the question was whether a consultant was needed at all. He felt
the major decision of spending this money for such a long-standing project
should be supported unanimously by Council.
- 8/17/77--6
~~
Mr. Obie appreciated Mr. Williams' comments, but felt if the question
were one of agreeing with the concept of a city civic-center complex,
that called for another motion.
e Ms. Smith supported the recommendation of the Civic Center Commission.
She noted the Civic Center Commission had been appointed by the City
Council and had been directed to do a job. Council had gone on record as
supporting a civic center complex. The Commission had returned the
unanimous decision to the City Council, regarding the consulting firm, and
she felt the Council needed to look to the Commission for judgment and
direction.
Mr. Delay agreed with Mr. Williams' comments. He said he had seen suffi-
cient questions raised to make him uncomfortable with the decision. He
noted the end result of a civic center for Eugene would come out of the
professional firm hired to lay the groundwork. He felt City Council
should take a more active role in this major decision and suggested a
willingness to spend money for oral presentations by bidding firms and
the Council could base its evaluation on those presentations.
Mr. Lieuallen understood the reservations expressed, but said his problem
was that, no matter how many firms made a presentation before him, he
wondered whether he would be in any better position to make a good judg-
ment. He was willing to look into the matter further, but was unsure it
would make that much difference. He cautioned Council to be careful about
predetermining the end product according to which consulting firm was
picked.
e Mayor Keller noted the parameters put on the bidding firms by setting
a stringent date deadline. He said the Commission had been established
by City Council and had been charged with its duties, and had exercised
good judgment in those responsibilities. He noted the consistency of
areas of disagreement between the Council, and that perhaps it might be
better to give the Commission different instructions so that the Council
would be supportive of the Commission's decision. He continued that he
hoped City Council would move ahead with the process. He felt if Council
expected the Commission to finish its job, it should not hold the Commis-
sion back.
Mr. Delay noted he was not questioning the work of the Commission.
He was questioning, on a major decision such as this one, whether keeping
to a certain arbitrary time frame was the most important factor. He
wanted to know how extensively the Commission was involved in reviewing
the three bidding firms and how comfortable they were in its choice.
Mr. Obie said it was important to remember there were 15 members of the
Commission, each concerned with getting something built. He said it
was their desire to do that with as much excellence and expediency as
possible. He reviewed the many meetings that had been held to date and
the amount of time given to the study. He cautioned Council the advice it
receives will be what it pays for.
Mr. Williams indicated he did not intend to make a motion for reconsider-
ation, the reason being that he saw two possible choices: Jarvis and ERA.
He felt the dollar difference between the possible outcomes was small.
e 8/17/77--7
~lb
Mr. Bradley left the meeting.
- VI. Withdrawal from Oakway Water District
Res. No. 2737--Calling public hearing August 31, 1977, re: withdrawal
from Oakway Water District (Oxbow Way/Sunshine Acres
area) (A/Z 77-3-Adams) was read by number and title.
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution.
Motion carried unanimously.
VII. Approval of Minutes--August 10, 1977
Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve the Council
minutes of August 10, 1977. Motion carried unanimously.
A short recess was taken.
VIII. Tree Removal in South Hills
Jim Saul, Planning Department, cautioned Council the whole issue of tree
cutting and removal was a very complex one, as it involved adopted City
policies and ordinances. He said as the City Council considered possible
changes, it should look back at previous considerations of this issue and
what led to those decisions. The issue had been looked at and debated for
some time by previous Councils, and had resulted in the South Hills Study
and the Tree Cutting Ordinance. One main purpose of the South Hills Study
was to identify those portions of the Ridgeline which were most significant
- to the City and the best ways to preserve them. The Joint Parks Committee
had concluded the best method of perserving significant portions of the
Ridgeline was through direct acquisition by the City. This decision was
limited by money available and policy contrary to that adopted by the
City. As a result, the final recommendation attempted to provide a
balance of some acquisition and allowing some development in the Ridgeline
area. The recommendation to the City Council had been that all develop-
ment in the South Hills area over 701 feet be reviewed through the PUD
process to allow for clustering of units and preservation of major
vistas and major stands of vegetation. That recommendation caused most
concern, and after a series of meetings the recommendation was deleted and
the present standard was inserted. City Council expected development
would be allowed and PUD requirements would be used only in exceptional
ci rcumstances. -....-.,. .._-~
.. . -...~._'-"'-'" - .~
. .... .. ,. '.---- ~:en the Tree Cutting Ordina~ce tlas being con~idered in 1974, Counc~l was
informed of the exception of approved subdivisions and the necessity for
amendments to the Land Division Ordinance to remedy that defect. The Council
did not adopt emergency legislation and a citizen's advisory committee
looked at the issues of how to deal with subdivisions, etc. The report
back to City Council in April of 1974 maintained the exemption of approved
subdivisions from the Tree Cutting Ordinance. He said all issues were dealt
with at that time and the ordinances and policies existing now were not
the result of omission or inattention in the past.
e
Co'll 8/17/77 -- 8
He reviewed several possibilities and options for City Council. The
first possibility was a moratorium and referred to a memo from City
Attorney's office regarding moratoriums which could not affect tentatively
e approved subdivisions, of which there are nine in the South Hills area at
this time. It could affect subdivisions which have been submitted but
have not received tentative approval, of which there are six in that
area. He noted Council's request for definition of a geographic area of
concern, stating that the Staff could not do so until Council specified
what its concerns were--the entire South Hills area as defined in the
South Hills Study, or a lesser area; a concern regarding old growth
Douglas firs, second growth, or all trees; or a concern regarding large
trees or smaller trees as well. He said the staff had technical data to
define the geographic area depending on nature of Council's concern. He
noted from Attorney's memo that a moratorium should be used only for a
limited time and for a specific purpose. He also noted Council had always
requested the Planning Commission and Planning Department staff opinion
before initiating a moratorium.
The second option available to Council was reconsideration of previous
policy decisions as to the extent of the use of the PUDs in the South
Hills area. The advantages included a design team requirement, encourage
cluster developments to preserve trees, and greater public involvement.
The disadvantages included expected significant opposition from the
developments sector, the effect on housing costs, the desire on parts of
consumers for different types of housing, and concern from neighborhood
groups to preserve single-family residences in their neighborhoods.
The third option open for Council were certain amendments to the Land
e Division Ordinance. One could allow removal of trees only within public
rights-of-way or public utility easements, and only allow removal of
trees after a building permit had been obtained. However, it would
provide no guarantee that trees would not be removed.
Mr. Saul continued that to move beyond such an amendment the Council
would have to consider a further amendment that individual building
permits be reviewed as to tree removals. He said this raised a philo-
sophical issue of the legitimate extent of City review and whether City
Council wanted to be involved in such a process, and major costs involved
in both the private and public sector.
I
Mr. Obie expressed appreciation for Mr. Saul's presentation and the
Attorney's memorandum. He felt it not practical to place a moratorium on
development at this time. He had spent a great deal of time in the past
week talking to three different groups of people: people living in the
area, builders but not subdividers, and subdividers. He had come to the
same conclusion that subdividers should not be allowed to remove trees
except in the public rights-of-way and public utility easements, and trees
be allowed to be removed after building permits were issued. He felt that
would solve the bulk of the problem. He suggested a public hearing be
held on such an amendment and allow the matter to rest for a period of
time to see if that would solve the problem.
e 8/17/77--9
~2g
Mr. Saul reminded Council that such an amendment would have to be reviewed
. by the Planning Commission prior to coming to Council for consideration.
Mr. Delay questioned what could be done to encourage more PUD development
in the South Hills area. Mr. Saul said that unfortunately the primary
factors encouraging such were beyond the scope of City Council: namely,
property owners can get more money for subdivisions; a greater demand for
single-unit housing than PUDs; and interest rates and availability of
loans.
Mr. Delay expressed appreciation for Mr. Obie's stance. However, he
felt it more necessary to have a final solution to the problem. He felt
that in perhaps another six months, the problem might occur again. He
felt Council should at least explore more fully some firm means to main-
tain the integrity of the South Hills area.
Ms. Smith wondered if plans had been developed for changes in the Tree
Cutting Ordinance. Mr. Saul replied there were several elements involved:
should it apply to the entire property or just right-of-way and public
utility easement, to what level of detail, and what size of trees and what
species.
Ann Ramp expressed delight that the City Council was reviewing the matter
so seriously and expressed appreciation on the parts of various neighbor-
hood organizations. She said in case any Council member did not feel it
was a matter of clear cutting, he or she should drive up Shields Avenue to
look at the area. In relation to the PUDs in the area, she noted it being
e totally unfair to the builders as the time involved drove their costs up
considerably. Dewey Newman, respresenting Hawkins Heights Neighborhood
Association, realized the problems the staff had in the past. However,
the neighbors in his area had thought there was an ordinance to prevent
the tree cutting and would like something done to prevent such a procedure
happening in the future. He felt the use of PUDs was a red herring and
said individual homes can be made to maintain the environment. He appre-
ciated Council's attention to the matter.
Mr. Obie wondered if an amendment could be made to the Tree Cutting
Ordinance and not be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Saul
said no, the change would have to be made in the Land Division Ordinance
and reviewed by the Planning Commission. Joyce Benjamin, City Attorney's
Office, said in reviewing the time schedule, Council could be making
a final decision by the end of September or the first part of October.
Mr. Saul said the Planning Commission could hear the reviews at its
meeting September 6, but it would mean bypassing City policy of notifi-
cation to various neighborhood groups and others in the city.
Mayor Keller said that as the Council looked at both items, the appro-
priate thing was not to panic. The Council needed to look at the problem
as it exists and then find the appropriate tool for solution. He noted
the amendment may still not solve the problem. He said Council could call
the Committee back and look at the whole problem sometime in the future.
e
8/17/77--10
~~
--
Mr. Obie expressed concern for the South Hills area where there are
fifteen subdivisions already tentatively approved. He said substantial
. acreage could be destroyed prior to Committee coming up with a recommen-
dation. He said if an amendment were passed at this time, it could always
be subtracted if a better solution were found at a later date. He ex-
pressed dislike for a moratorium, but said the City could not afford to go
without available resources.
Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the Planning Commission
review the Land Division Ordinance on September 6, with preparation of
an amendment allowing the cutting of trees in public rights-of-way and
public utility easements, and tree cutting after a building permit is
obtained.
Ms. Smith hoped the staff would make special effort to notify neighbor-
hood groups and others interested in such an amendment. Mr. Hamel noted
that he would have to vote no on the motion for that reason.
Vote was taken on the motion which carried with Obie, Smith,
Lieuallen, and Delay voting yes; Mr. Hamel voting no.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to hold a public hearing
September 26 on a moratorium for tentative approval of any sub-
division in the South Hills are~to reactivate to the Joint Parks
Committee1s study, all subject to the Planning Commission recommenda-
tion on a land division amendment at that time.
Ms. Smith noted a conflict of interest and abstained from voting.
e Vote was taken on the motion which carried with Obie, Hamel,
Lieuallen, and Delay voting aye; Smith abstaining.
IX. Discussion of Council Assistance
Carried over to the August 31 meeting.
Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned.
c~e2~
City Manager
CTH: DT:jm/CM7bl
e 8/17/77 --11
~30