Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/28/1977 Meeting M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL e November 28, 1977 Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order November 28, 1977, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller 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. ORDINANCES HELD FOR SECOND READING I-A-l A. Amendment to Human Rights Ordinance: Sexual Orientation Previously heard by Council October 24, 1977, and lacking unanimous consent, the council bill was brought back for second reading at this time. Manager reviewed for Council the amendment defines sexual orientation; relates term to statutes; prohibits discrimi- nation in housing, employment, and pUblic accommodations; with complaints to be filed before the Human Rights Council. Council Bill 1560--Concerning Human Rights; amending Sections 4.615, 4.620, 4.625, 4.630, 4.635, and 4.645 of Code 1971, was read by council e 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 the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion passed with Haws, Bradley, Delay, Lieuallen, and Smith voting aye; Obie, Hamel, and Williams voting no. The bill was declared passed -' and numbered 18080. - I-A-2 B. Rezoning from C-2 and R-3 to MU Mixed Use Downtown Westside Area Previously heard by Council October 24, 1977, and lacking unanimous consent, the council bill was held for second reading at this time. Manager reviewed the location of the property, noting the matter had had extensive public hearings and had received approval by the Planning Commission on two separate occasions. Council Bill 1543--Rezoning properties located between 7th and 13th Avenues, extending from Washington Street to lincoln Street, from C-2 and R-3 to MU Mixed Use (Eugene Planning Commission) (Z 76-38) 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 the bill be approved and given final passage. . 11/28/77 - 1 81f 1 Mr. Delay felt Council was setting a precedent on the basis of the arguments presented so far for taking out two small parcels from the tp overall zoning.' He hoped all Councilors would consider this in their voting. Roll call vote. The motion carried with Obie, Williams, Smith, Hamel, and Lieuallen voting aye; 'Delay and Haws voting no; and Bradley abstaining. The bill was declared passed and numbered 1808!. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS I-A-3 A. Code Amendment re: Buffering between Parking Areas and Abutting Streets Recommended by Planning Commission September 26, 1977, with a 5-2 vote. Manager said the Code amendment was directed at buffering on street frontage, not interior lot lines which are already regulated. The amendment wou1d not be retroactive, but applicable to new or extended lots. It would provide generally for a 2 1/2-foot high planting. Jim Saul, Planner, reviewed for Council the process from approxi- mately 1972 to date regarding the review of the City's existing parking regulations. He said in August 1975 the Council specifi- cally had a concern regarding landscaping and parking lots. In 1975 the Planning Commission had recommended various City parking regulations to the City Council, with the single exception of e screening of parking lots. He said the proposed amendment is in response to statements in both Community Goals and the 1990 Plan concerning the buffering of vehicles in parking lots from the abutting streets and properties. Existing regulations speak to landscaping on interior lot lines but at the present time no regulation speaks to landscaping on the street side. Planning Commission had received extensive negative testimony from citizens and the matter was postponed in 1975. Staff had since worked with businesses and citizens to develop a better ordinance which was now being presented to Council. He noted that this parti- cular ordinance has been reviewed by all businesses that had pre- viously expressed concern. Also, the Chamber of Commerce and all neighborhood groups had reviewed it. He said at the Planning Commis- sion no testimony had been heard in opposition. One concern expressed was that perhaps it should also cover screening of parking structures. The amendment specifies that all street frontages will have screening buffer area which would reach 2 1/2-feet high in a three-year period of time. Also, the amendment would apply only to new or expanded parking lots. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. 11/28/77 - 2 . 811.. Council Bill 1571--Concerning parking area buffering; adding a new e Section 9.593 to Eugene Code 1971; and declaring an emergency 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 the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Mr. Obie expressed some concern regarding the amendment in that he felt Council was moving too quickly. He questioned the timing from the standpoint of parking spaces available and the reduction that will occur in the future, and questioned the cost involved based on the analysis done by the Planning Department staff. He said the developer would bear the cost which would be passed on to the tenant, and ultimately would be passed to the consumers. He wondered if it were really in the best interests of the community right now. He noted the average of three existing parking spaces lost and expressed a concern about the unavailability of parking spaces in the Eugene area at the present time. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members e present voting aye, except Mr. Obie voting no, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18082. B. Rezonings I-A-4 1. Property located west of the northwest corner of Oak Patch Road and West 18th Avenue from RA to R-2jPD (Adkins) (Z 77-31) Unanimously recommended by Planning Commission October 4, 1977. Jim Saul said the property involved one acre and would be an addition to the already developed Oak Patch Development. If the rezoning is approved, a maximum of 18 units could be added. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by Council members. Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 4, 1977, were received as part of the record by reference thereto. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Council Bill 1572--Rezoning from RA to R-2jPD property located west of northwest corner of Oak Patch Road and West 18th Avenue was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. . 11/28/77 - 3 813 Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes e and minutes of October 4, 1977, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18083. I-A-5 2. Property located along west side of Danebo Avenue, south of Royal Avenue (Blair) (Z 77-35) from RA-PD to R-1 SR Unanimously recommended by Planning Commission October 4, 1977. Manager noted the location of the property and the change in zoning. It would involve no change in density and would be a proposed single-family development. Mr. Saul said the property encompassed 19.34 acres and several years ago had been rezoned to RA-PD. At that time there was extensive uncertainty about the particular alignment construction of the proposed Highway 126. Also there was concern expressed about the number of mobile home parks .locating in the Bethel-Danebo District. He said in this instance, the rezoning would not change the density but simply would change the type of review process. Planning e Commission had recommended approval and Mr. Saul noted several factors to be considered. He said in the intervening period, Site Review Procedures have been changed and appear quite adequate to review buffering between this property and industrial M-3 development to the south. Also, he noted there had been changes in the manner in which the City treats mobile homes as subdivisions and as mobile home parks. For those reasons, the Planning Commission did recommend approval. The applicant intends to develop the property in low-density residential single-family subdivision. There was a request by the Planning Commission to include a requirement that the Bethel School District receive notification during the site review so that it can assess the safe and effi- cient ingress, egress, and on-site traffic circulation, as well as the off-site traffic circulation plan of the development. Mr. Lieuallen asked for clarification on the concept of a single- family residential district in relation to the industrial district to the south. Mr. Saul replied this was not the first time the City had faced this situation of residential zoning immediately adjacent to an industrial zoning area in the Bethel-Danebo district. The Planning Commission had recommended in this area that east of Beltline the use of drainage and street system establish a buffer. He said that option mayor may not exist in this situation. In other areas where the City faced the same situation, large earth berms were used. . 11/28/77 - 4 814 Ms. Smith wondered to what extent the Bethel School District would be involved in the site review process. Mr. Saul said when the e application is submitted, a copy of the plans would be forwarded to the school district so they would have the opportunity to comment. He reiterated the primary concern of traffic pattern. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by Council members. Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 4, 1977, were received as part of the record by reference thereto. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Council Bill 1573--Rezoning from RA-PD to R-1 SR property located along west side of Danebo Avenue, south of Royal Avenue, 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 findings supporting the rezoning as set out in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 4, 1977, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members e present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18084. --------------- I-A-6 3. Property located southwest of corner of 5th Avenue West and Adams Street (Fogel strom) (Z 77-36) from R-3 to C-2 SR Recommended by Planning Commission October 4, 1977, with a 3-2 vote. Manager reviewed location of the property and the request for zone change. Mr. Saul said the area involved 13,456 square feet, and reviewed the surrounding development. The property immediately west is zoned C-2 and developed with a variety of uses: west is an office structure, immediately west of that is a single-family residence and west of that are commercial uses; immediately south the property is zoned C-2 and developed with a variety of commercial uses. At the southeast corner there is a small piece of C-2 zoned property with an office site. Further east of the site the property is zoned C-2 and developed with parking lot and Safeway store. North of the site is zoned R-3 and developed with older residences. He said if the requested zone change is approved, the applicant intends to expand and consolidate the existing house, office structure, and Xerox structure. In re- viewing the request, the Planning Commission was faced with the fact the zone change may not be consistent with the policy objec- tives of the City. He said the issue was set forth in the staff e reports and minutes. However, a majority of the Commission felt the change, with C-2 and site review attached, was justified. 11/28/77 - 5 815 -- No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by Council members. Planning Commission staff notes and minutes . of October 4, 1974, were received as part of the record by reference thereto. Public hearing was opened. Mike Farthing, attorney, 975 Oak, represented the applicant, Fogelstrom. He concurred with the staff recommendation to rezone with site review suffix. Also, the findings contained in the report ,do fully satisfy the Fasano criteria, and he urged Council to review those. He acknowledged the competing policy as outlined in the staff report. The competing plans and policies regarded consideration of-commercial versus residen- tial use close to the downtown area. He noted this was a very unique area and felt it was not an encroachment into a residential area. He said the subject property was surrounded immediately on three sides by commercial zoning. He did not feel it was precedent setting as there was a buffer between the commercial and residential areas. In regard to establishing public need, he noted the lack of available office space close to the downtown area. Many small lots are available but it will be difficult to develop with professional offices and allow enough space for parking. He felt it would help to resolve the issue of competing needs and would help revitalize this area in relation to downtown Eugene. He also noted it was felt the logical development in the area was hampered by its present zoning. This zone change would be appropriate due to its unique configuration. It would resolve a conflicting zone use on an existing block. Norm Fogel strom, 84520 Sarvis Berry Lane, said he was well oriented to e the community as he grew up on 5th Street. He noted the deterioration of the two pieces of residential property, and said the two houses are an island in a commercially zoned area. With this rezoning, development would result in upgrading of the property. He felt a necessity to have more office space available in this area, and to do so, he would need the zone change. He cited the economics of trying to develop R-3 property as being very remote due to the high cost of developing residential property. He again thought the re- zoning and change to commercial zoning would be a strong factor in upgrading the area. \ David Filer, 235 East 3rd Street, president of the Whiteaker Community Council, felt there should be denial of the rezoning, as the applicant had not established a need for the rezoning. He expressed the need to preserve residential property close to the downtown area and felt that issue should be addressed by Council. Area residents had not expressed the desire for professional offices in the neighborhood but had expressed a desire to retain the older houses, trees, and resi- dential character of the area. A lack of commercial facilities does not in itself demonstrate a need for them. He cited the inner city does need a potential for increased residential density, and the current zoning provides that potential. He felt the argument faulty in the statement of need for more office space. Because of the proxi- mity of the neighborhood to the downtown area and the alternative e 11/28/77 - 6 81b transportation available, residents do have access to virtually any . commercial uses that might be included in the proposed complex. He cited the abundance of C~2 zoning land in the area and urged the City Council to consider the need to reduce this R~3 zoning to commercial use. He also noted housing rehabilitation money has been earmarked for the area, allowing the residential flavor of the neighborhood to be preserved. He said the zone change makes sense only when a person looks at the existing zoning map. If Council were to look at the actual land use in the area, then the argument that the zoning is appropriate because it's surrounded by C~2 zoning dissolves. He said, in fact, the actual land use shows that existing zoning does not indicate accurately the actual land use which is predominantly resi~ dential along both sides. The only intrusion is the Xerox commercial structure which provides no neighborhood service. He felt by changing to the C~2 zoning, it would seriously intrude on the predominantly residential character of the neighborhood. He also noted that if this zone change were approved, it could put pressure on other properties in the area to request C~2 zoning which would result in even greater reduction in the current residentially zoned land. He continued, since City Council is firmly committed by policies to prevent erosion of residential land close to the downtown area; since neither public need nor the zone change need can be upheld; since the Planning Commission recommendation was much less than unanimous; and staff recommendation was very tentative, the City Council should deny the request. e Roscoe Cairn, 1008 West 3rd, could not see any way that the zone change would contribute to the character of the neighborhood, an area that is largely residential and small businesses. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Mr. Saul wanted to clarify in this particular case the staff recom~ mendation was not tentative, but quite straightforward; that the property should be rezoned because, in staff's opinion, this property did constitute an extremely unique situation and that it would not create a precedent for other property in the area. He also noted the development of commercially zoned property on all three sides. Mr. Bradley raised the question of vacancy statistics on professional office spaces in the downtown area, the Westside area, and the entire City. Mr. Saul did not have the exact figures and felt un~ comfortable with making a guess. Mr. Bradley said he was under the impression there was an abundance of office space in Eugene. Mayor Keller said such a request would require looking at many different types of office spaces, and as he understood, this was going to be an extension of the Xerox office space. Mr. Bradley was not sure that was the intent and said it could be quite an array of various office spaces under C~2 zoning. - 11/28/77 ~ 7 877 Mr. Lieuallen wondered when Council considered a rezoning if one of the things it had to consider was the need for the rezoning. Hi s . understanding was that the Council does not consider the need on the basis of what the developer says he might or might not do, but on the basis of all possible uses that could be put on the property. Mr. Saul responded that in general, the Planning Commission and Council had followed the practice of evaluation in terms of the overall appropriateness of the request for the district as opposed to zeroing in on a particular proposal by an applicant. Council has not held that that related solely to the question of public need. He said one of the problems involved is that it is extremely difficult for an applicant to demonstrate all the public needs listed in a C~2 District. He said the public need which would come in an applicant's statement would focus on perhaps one or two of those. Stan Long, City Attorney, said it had been extremely difficult to precisely define the term IIpublic needll. He said there were a number of things that could be involved, such as the need for more land of a particular kind of classification, the need to absolve ambi guity, etc. He said the need could be fairly specific or it could be very broad. It was a matter of Council's discretion based on the evidence before it. Mr. Farthing said with respect to public need, Council had two competing policies before it; he felt there was a third one involved. He said Council had general guidelines that propose there should be development in the most economically efficient manner. This existing e zone does not allow the most economic, efficient, or most appropriate need for the neighborhood. Mr. Bradley wondered if staff would recommend that this item be post~ poned until the Whiteaker Refinement Plan is completed. Mr. Saul said staff specifically did not make that recommendation because the City could not take the posture that zone changes or other forms of appli~ cation should be under moratorium until such plans as the Whiteaker Refinement Draft could be finalized. He said the most important point was that the Whiteaker Refinement Plan is simply a draft, and the City has never established a moratorium process waiting for such plans to be finalized. He noted the refinement plan had not even reached the stage of public hearings. Council Bill 1574~~Rezoning from R~3 to C~2 SR property located southwest corner of 5th Avenue West and Adams Street 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 findings supporting the rezoning as set out in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 4, 1977, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council; and that enactment be considered at this time. 11/28/77 ~ 8 .. 818 --~ Mr. Lieuallen felt he was going to vote against the rezoning. He did not see any need for the proposal but did find a continuing need e for housing. He also noted the abundance of office space in the downtown area and was not persuaded there was a general guideline that property should be developed in a more economically efficient manner. He said that was not a requirement of the Code. The proximity of incompatible uses argument was not persuasive in line of the recent Mixed Use rezoning. Also, with the consideration that the City has housing rehabilitation money available for this area, he was going to vote to keep the housing available for that rehabili- tation. Mr. Bradley felt the public need had not been demonstrated and would like to promote the policy of the maintenance of housing stock. Mr. Delay noted he was also going to vote against it on the second reading. He felt by going to C-2 zoning at this time, it would establish a precedent. He said actual uses in the area are primarily R-3, and zoning C-2 would increase the pressure on more commercial and parking areas. He also noted the Whiteaker Refinement Plan was in progress and did not see any reason to support this rezoning at this time. Mr. Hamel expressed difficulty with determining what was the public need. He thought the area.should be looked at as there were four parcels in the immediate area zoned C-2. He said if those were going to be changed to R-3, he could understand a zone change. However, he said this was a request for change from R-3 to C-2 on a very small parcel in which it might be possible to develop only one single residential unit. He e felt it was unwise to have an island of R-3 on this one side of the street. He expressed having mixed emotions about whether there is a need, but felt he would vote in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Obie's impression regarding office space being available in the City was that it was not that easy to find, and certainly not easy to find at a price that was in competition and in a good location. He felt the need for office space that takes people out of the downtown area and away from congestion on a main artery was desirable. He felt having office spaces in the surrounding neighborhoods was desirable. Mr. Wi 11 i ams concurred with the idea of having office space on the outskirts of the downtown area where parking was available. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by Council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. Voting aye were Obie, Williams, Smith, and Hamel; voting no were Delay, Haws, Bradley, and Lieual1en; Mayor Keller voted aye to break the tie. The bill was declared passed and numbered 18085. I-B-2 4. Property located west of Highway 99N and south of Elmira Road (Miller) (Z 77-37) from RA to C-2 SR Recommended unanimously by Planning Commission October 4, 1977. e 11/28/77 - 9 87't -~ Manager reviewed location and request for zone change. Mr. Saul said the property had been used for a number of years as an . outside storage shed. The area involved is approximately one- half acre in size. He said the bulk of the property on the west and south sides are either owned by the Oregon State Highway Department or developed with rather intensive commercial uses. The Planning Commission did recommend approval with addition of Site Review. Ms. Smith wondered if access would be primarily from Iowa Streett and if there would be any need for additional improvement to the road. Mr. Saul replied Iowa Street is a problem in that it is 20 feet wide and unimproved. He said the real problem with the question of access from Iowa Street was thatt in the need for improving the streett it would be necessary to acquire additional dedication and perhaps acquire additional right-of-way from the state. Howevert he continuedt those problems exist whether the zoning is R-3 or C-2. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by Council members. Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 4t 1977t were received as part of the record by reference thereto. Public hearing was opened. Mrs. Harry Mi11ert 362 Highway 99Nt owner of the propertYt indicated that her home was adjacent to this property zoned C-2. She said access to one piece of the property is off Iowa Street. The property e is now zoned residential but has lost its residential character and cannot be developed in any way that will conform to that zoning. If the zone change is a110wedt the development will be a storage building as an accessory to their business. She clari- fied for Council the business was 75 percent sales and service with only 25 percent well-drilling. She said as far as traffic was con- cernedt the development would not increase the traffic on Iowa Street. She said the lot had lost its identity as a residential 10tt and the request for zone change would appear to be a more legal deve- lopment for this particular piece of land and a more appropriate use. Public hearing was c10sedt there being no further testimony presented. Council Bill 1575--Rezoning from RA to C-2 SR property located west of Highway 99N and south of Elmira Road was read by council bill number and title onlYt there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Haws movedt seconded by Mr. Hamelt that findings supporting the rezoning as set out in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of October 4t 1977t be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by cQuncil bill number onlYt with unanimous consent of the Council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second e time by council bill number only. 11/28/77 - 10 ggo Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and . given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18086. A short recess was taken. II-A-I C. 1Uth and Overpark Assessments Manager noted the item came before Council because of a change in use. Home Federal Savings and Loan bought property originally owned by Montgomery Ward. It had not been previously assessed when owned by Montgomery Ward as free parking was allowed. Now Home Federal Savings and Loan will provide parking for customers and employees. Staff has recommended assessment be levied as a change in use has occurred. . Public hearing was ~pened. Dean Quick, 130 West 1st Street, Albany, attorney representing Home Federal Savings and Loan, reviewed for Council his previous remarks and number of documents submitted. He disagreed with the statement that there has been a change in use. He contended there had not been a change in use as compared to the use Montgomery Ward made of the parking lot at the time it was exempt from the assessment. He contended signs were in evidence showing the parking lot was for use by Montgomery Ward customers and employees only. He reviewed the past ten years of history of the assessments for this particular piece of property, including two suits which were filed regarding the e Overpark district. He noted for Council the original assessment on in the property was $186,518, later reduced to $101,000. He noted that an appeal on the suits filed, the Oregon State Supreme Court both affirmed and reversed some parts of the suit on the basis that certain procedural errors had occurred, noting these centered on this parti- cular piece of corner property. He reviewed the various ordinances passed from 1966 through 1972 at which time the Downtown Development District was set up for the free parking program. He said subse- quently, the parking area of this particular piece of property was leased to the City of Eugene. In January of 1977, a letter from Home Federal Savings was sent to the City that construction was beginning and the lease to the City would be terminated in February, 1977. He again alluded to the pictures taken in 1966 of signs showing the parking was for Montgomery Ward employees and customers, and yet the property was exempt. He said from 1966 to 1972, that was the status of the parking--for the use of Montgomery Ward customers. He con- tended Home Federal Savings and Loan intends to use the parking space for customers and employees in the same manner. He cited Section 4.475(d) which says only upon a subsequent change of use can an assessment be made. He contended no change in use of the property could be shown, and therefore, the property should be granted an exemption. The use of the property by Home Federal Savings and Loan at this time will be no different in any respect than the use made by Montgomery Ward when the exemption was granted. Therefore, he con- ~ tended the City could not make an assessment unless a change in use had been proven. 11/28/77 - 11 88/ Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. . Sherm Flogstad, Finance Director, said it was true that some lots in the downtown area had signs indicating parking for customers and employees prior to the construction of the 10th and Oak buil di ng. By agreement of those property owners, all such signs were removed and those lots, including the Montgomery Ward lot, were opened to the public. At first there were charges made to park by the hour with the lots operated by Diamond Parking; later the City used the golden token system with the cooperation of the Downtown Businessmen.s Association. Still 1 ater, they were included in the free parking system. The one consistency was that all the lots were open to the general public and not operated as a service or convenience for customers of a particular business. Home Federal Savings and Loan has indicated their parking lot would be for certain officers or employees and for customers only. Other lots in the City which are used for customers only have been assessed and staff recommends this lot be so assessed. When there has been a change in use from public parking, then the property has been assessed. Mr. Lieuallen asked for clarification. Stan Long, City Attorney, said the Code provides if a parking lot is open for the general use of the public, then it is exempt from assessment. The Code also says if there is a change in that use, if it is no longer open to the general public, then the exemption is lost. If the business provides parking only for customers and employees, then it is considered to be benefited. It is - understood that Home Federal Savings and Loan is going to have customer and employee parking only, constituting a change in use. Mr. Quick was saying because of photographs taken in the late 1960.s showing signs allowing employee parking, and the property having been exempt, then Home Federal Savings should have the same exemption today. He said when the Overpark was completed, the signs were removed, and the Montgomery Ward lot was used for the general public. After the Overpark was com- pleted, the City leased the parking lot which was open to the general public. He said it was evident there was a change from the City use to that being proposed by Home Federal Savings and Loan. Ci ty Council should decide if there has been a change in use in what is being proposed; and whether what is being proposed is a general use public parking facility. If not, then the entire property should be assessed. Mr. Obie wondered under zoning requirements if there was any requirement the Federal Home Savings and Loan had to have a general parking lot. Mr. Saul replied in a C~3 District there is no such requirement. In response to a question by Mayor Keller, Mr. Quick replied Home Federal Savings and Loan bought the land in June 1976, and at that time assumed approximately $96,000 in Overpark assessment. Mayor Keller continued he would assume that when a piece of property is purchased, the purchasor would be aware of any assessments against the property. He wondered if there was any way the purchasor would not have known. Mr. Long replied as a lawyer, he would assume it would be noted on a title report, and most purchasors would inquire -, "' 11/28/77 - 12 ggt into such assessments. Mr. Quick replied Home Federal Savings and Loan had no idea of the possibility of an extra assessment. They thought the $96,000 was against the entire parcel. The title report did not disclose anything other than the $96,000 assessment. He said 4It in talking to personnel from Cascade Title Company, it was noted to be a difficult problem in trying to anticipate parcels of property that had not previously been assessed. He also stated he did not feel the record showed any agreement that Montgomery Ward would take down the. signs when the Overpark was completed. Mr. Lieuallen said it appeared the exemption was granted to Montgomery Ward under the assumption it would become public parking. The signs came down after the exemption was granted. Therefore, Mr. Quick was saying if Home Federal Savings and Loan made the same use, then an exemption should be maintained. Mr. Lieuallen felt the exemption should not have been granted originally without some kind of an agreement. Mr. Long replied it is clear that the City Council could make a determination on exemptions based on what might Occur in the future. He said as far as it was known, the signs did come down, and that was a sufficient basis to grant the exemption. Council Bill 1559--Declaring previously exempted property within the boundaries of 10th and Oak Overpark Assessment District to be benefited property, levYing assessments thereon, directing entry of assessments, and declaring an emergency was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. Mr. /laws moved, seconded by ~lr. !-lame I , that the hi 11 be read the second time hy council bill numher only, with unanimous -." Consent of the (oll:1ci i, anJ th~lt enactment he considereJ at at this time. Mr. Lieuallen said he was going to support the motion because it seemed the property was going to have a change in use. He said the fact the property was exempt because it was used as a public parking lot and now there was a change to private use was the basis for assess- ment. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18087. II-A-IO D. Liquor License Application: New Outlet Lyon1s Restaurant, Villard and Franklin Blvd., (DA), Lyon1s Restaurants of Oregon, I nc. Manager reviewed the OLCC report, noting there were three objectors: Continental Auto Parts, German Auto Service, and Mocny's Barbecue. There were seven non-objectors. Staff found all papers in order and recommended - approval. :,,--r.~ 11/28/77 _ 13 '..-to _ 883 Mr. Bradley raised the question he had raised previously as to how many DA licenses have been allocated to Eugene based on Eugene's population. He felt it extremely important before making recom- e mendations to OlCC as Council might be exhausting a limited supply and find itself in a predicament where a particular applicant might be favored over another. He felt City Council should set up some criteria based on planning and development for distribution of DA licenses. Public hearing was opened. Maris laipenieks, 1875 Trousdale Avenue, Burlingame, California, spoke as senior vice president for lyon's Restaurant. He gave a background of the kind of restaurant, noting it would be a 24-hour family restaurant serving an extensive menu. He fel t it very important to obtain a liquor license as part of the total package of service to the customer. He described the interior of the restaurant as being divided into a coffee shop and a club room, with no cocktail lounge per see He entered exhibits of pictures of the restaurant, both inside and out, menus and various items regarding the restaurant. He cited the economic contribution to the community of approximately $1 million per year. He felt the general type of operation would be a great addition to Eugene. In rega rd to the limited number of DA liquor licenses possible, he said OlCC had indi- cated it was very much in favor of lyon's purchasing an existing busi- ness and transferring that license to Eugene so it would in no way exhaust the supply for future DA licenses. . Vernon Gleaves, 975 Oak, attorney representing the owners of the property, described the conditions of the location of the building , . ..... '-' and parking in the area. He noted the property was now owned by Myrmo, Inc., and the parking to be available for the restaurant would be in excess of total needed and would help alleviate parking in the area. He said it would be a leased operation and the land would continue to be owned by Myrmo's. The Myrmo Corporation is satisfied this restaurant would be a very good asset to the community. He said the proposed restaurant would be within walking distance of a number of motels and the heavily populated east side area where there is only one DA license at this time. lyon's had surveyed many properties in the Eugene area and had selected this as the best location for its restaurant. Donna Mocny, 569 Brookside Drive, entered exhibits to Council of letters and correspondence to OlCC. She indicated Mocny.s Restaurant had been in operation since May of 1975 with a beer and wine license. From the letters entered into the record, it was noted the numerous times Mocny's had applied to OlCC for a DA license. Each time the request had been denied. She felt there was an issue of discrimination against small locally owned "businesses as opposed to large corporations such as lyon's Restaurant; and also an issue of discrimination as her husband is black. She and her husband were not opposed to competition in the area, but . 11/28/77 - 14 ~.~ f\. 1V ~~ '~;;:;. 8gJf felt they had not been treated fairly by the OlCC in their - applications for a DA license. She raised this question before Council to make them aware of the problem that small businesses in Eugene are facing with regard to treatment by OlCC. She also noted the rigorous treatment Mocny's received in being surveyed for a beer and wine license as compared to other restaurants in the area who appeared to receive their licenses with no problems. She said, however, Mocny's had decided to wait the six month period and reapply for a DA license. Mr. Obie wondered if this request came from the liquor Commission. Assistant Manager noted the liquor license application request came from OlCC and was submitted to the local jurisdiction in an attempt to improve the relationship between OlCC and let the local jurisdiction know when there is a new outlet being proposed. The field investigator from OlCC makes its information available, as well as the internal City reports, before the matter is brought before Council. Council can then make an endorsement of no objection, objection, or no decision. He said it had seemed that the recommendations Council had made had had little impact except for a negative endorsement. Ms. Smith expressed concern regarding the situation, noting Council is not really making the final decision. She did not want to find Council in a position of selecting one outlet over another. Mayor Keller did not think Council wanted to get into the position of selling licenses. It appears Council could possibly get into a position where it is responsible to select those people who should - dispense liquor. He said the normal process was for approval or disapproval endorsement to OleC. Ms. Smith wondered if Mocny's were to reapply, whether or not a strong endorsement from City Council might have any bearing in the future. Assistant Manager again said he felt City Council endorsement had little impact except if it were negative. Mr. Lieuallen expressed strong feelings regarding the OLCC granting of licenses and the favoritism that seems to be shown. He said if it were a choice between a locally owned business as compared to a nationally owned business, he would vote in favor of the locally owned business. He was tempted to vote against the request. Mr. Hamel expressed sympathy with Mocny's Restaurant; he noted he had participated in both restaurants and felt both were very fine. He disagreed with Mr. lieuallen as he said tonight Council was not judging between the two, but simply being asked to approve only one. He said Mocny's might have been put at a disadvantage because it did not bring this matter up when it had been denied the license previously. However, City Council should act tonight on the basis of the information before it, and if there is a problem with Mocny's, then City Council should address that problem later, but should not impede lyon's request. e 11/28/77 - 15 K85 . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to forward with approval to OLCC. - Mr. Bradley expressed difficulty again because City Council had no established policies in determining where these licenses should be located. He felt it incumbent upon Council to set criteria reg~rding location in order to create a systematized standardization of promoting its own policies and goals. He felt it in the community's interest that the Council should take a very strong and active role in telling the OLCC where Council wants certain liquor licenses to be located. He said in this instance he would rather take no position, or only approve if the applicant is able to purchase and transfer their liquor license to Eugene. Mr. Delay cautioned Council to be careful in talking about such a jurisdictional problem. He said the City did not have the staff available to do necessary research nor the mechanism necessary to review all data from every DA application in the City. He felt the OLCe practice of distributing licenses was highly questionable, but City Council was not in any position to replace OLCC. He said if there were a decision between these two restaurants as presented tonight, he would have no problem in supporting the local restaurant. However, he felt it unfair to deny Lyon's application. He felt if Council wanted to deal with the issue, it should do so on a policy basis and how to deal with liquor license applications, but not on a case~by~case basis. Vote was taken on the motion which carried with all Council members present voting aye, except Mr. Bradley voting no. e II-B-2 E. Public Works Bids (Opened November 15, 197)~~tabulation attached Manager said this bid was for the sanitary sewer at Mahlon Sweet Field and was part of an EDA grant of $100,000. Cost to the Ci ty would be $3,165.06. Low bidder was Shurway Contractors with a bid of $103,165.06. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to accept low bid as recommended by staff. Motion carried unanimously. III. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING--None IV. RESOLUTIONS II - B-4 Resolution No. 2791~~Authorizing payment of bills and claims for period November 16 through November 28, 1977 was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. Motion carried unanimously. 11/28/77 - 16 e &gb , . V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES . Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve Council minutes October 24, 1977. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to November 30, 1977. ~n2~ Ci ty Manager DT:ng/CM23a18 e 11/28/77 ~ 17 " . 887 .. .- DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Engineering Division Bid No. 14 Opened: November 15, 1977 1. SANITARY SEtVER: Mah10n Sweet Field, Eugene Airport (Job No. 590) Bidders: Contract Cost 1. Shur-Way Contractors, Inc.--------------------_________$ 103,165.06 2. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.-----------------____________ 103,824.75 3. Wi1dish Construction Company----------------___________ 135,987.36 4. H & J Construction-----------------____________________ 145,922.50 5. James A. Hi11------------------------__________________ 151,914.35 6. Kenneth R. Bostick Construction Company---------------- 154,613.00 Cost to City Economic Development Administration Grant Amounted Budgeted Project #07-51-23279 $100,000.00 $ 3,165.06 - COMPLETION DATE: April 1, 1978 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- e )~ ggg