Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/14/1978 Meeting , . . M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL June 14, 1978 Adjourned meeting from June 12, 1978, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller, 11:30 a.m., June 14, 1978, at King's Table, Oakway Mall, with the following Councilors present: D. W. Hamel, Ray Bradley (arrived late), Tom Williams, Eric Haws, Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, and Betty Smith. I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL A. Air Quality Maintenance Area Advisory Committee Mr. Delay said the Committee had met last week and developed a long- term work schedule, a copy of which will be distributed to Councilors. The Committee had been reviewing background material regarding the nature of suspended particulates and the role the Committee should e play in dealing with the problem in the future. Meteorological analyses will be used to consider various control strategies to bring the area into containment. He noted the difficulty in establishing a certain level which would allow growth accommodation of new and existing industry. Issues involved such matters as DEQ saying slash burning may be an uncontrolled item. Whether or not the Committee can deal with and address such kinds of questions are still unresolved. He felt it important the City be involved in this process in the early stages. B. Meetings Scheduled Community Development Committee interviews, 4:30, Wednesday, June 14, Me Nu tt Room. Panhandle Committee, 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 14. Joint T-200U Session, 7:30 p.m., Thursday, June 15, Harris Hall. II. STATUS REPORT ON METRO PLAN UPDATE Gary Chenkin introduced Craig Greenleaf, field representative, LCDC. Mr. Bradley arrived. e Mr. Chenkin said seven working papers have been prepared, all of which evolved from MPPC and will serve as a basis for the Planned Text. A 6/14/78 - 1 '-13'1 preliminary draft of the Text will be distributed June 28. The Planned . Text evolved from working papers, meetings, and discussions on the part of MAPAC, MPPC, and various subcommittees of both. The Text will undergo very intensive public hearings and workshops during the summer into October. He said there would be a minimum of 23 meetings before neighbor- hood groups, civic organizations, special interest groups, and any other groups to which they might be invited. The concerns registered with the first draft will go into the second draft to be published later in the fall. He said the Text does not include that portion of the 199U General Plan that has to do with the Planning Diagram. That portion will appear during the summer months and will include such items as land allocation with regard to supply and demand. Alternative recommendations will be suggested for consideration by the governing bodies, with alternatives such as expanding the urban service boundary or not expanding the urban service boundary. Implications of those alternatives will also be included. By October, the second draft will reflect identified concerns. The pro- cess for consideration then would include the second draft and a Planning Diagram to be considered by MAPAC in November, then to be sent to MPPC at the end of the year. Recommendations then will be made to the Planning Commissions of the various, jurisdictions for consideration during the first six months of next year, with adoption by June 1979. Mr. Chenkin said the update is not an entirely new plan, but is based on such premises in the 1990 General Plan as the Urban Service boundary concept and jurisdic- tional cooperation in implementation. New areas have been included such as economy and energy considerations. e In response to a question from Mr. Delay, Mr. Chenkin said there will be three kinds of meetings available: 1) Workshops where it would be assumed that the partiCipants have already read the document; 2) A supplementary report which explains the plans and policies, noting where changes have been made; and 3) an orientation and presentation to work through the document with persons who do not quite understand where to start. He said extensive use of media such as overhead projectors and graphs will be used to further the understanding. The preliminary draft will be a document to which the community will react, leading to the second draft reflecting those concerns. Responding to a question from Ms. Smith, Mr. Chenkin said it was hoped the 28 neighborhood groups could be clustered into eight or nine meetings. If it was felt there had not been enough citizen input, the time frame for review of the first draft could be lengthened. In response to a question from Mr. Lieuallen, Mr. Chenkin said the Text was important as a policy document. It was felt the Planned Diagram should be based on the Text, so the Text had to be prepared first before the Diagram could be addressed. Mr. Delay expressed concern regarding the public becoming involved in the early stages of the update process. Mr. Obie and Mrs. Smith expressed the same concern regarding Council's involvement early in the process, noting the T-20UO process to be a good example of Council getting involved e 6/14/78 - 2 ~~O I I ,~ - too late and thus, only reacting to Planning Commission's suggestions. Mr. Chenkin said the Council had a representative to MPPC, and should share its concerns with that person. The L-COG staff is also available to work with Council at an early date. Mr. Bradley suggested the L-COG staff make a presentation to Council after the draft is distributed June 28. Mr. Delay agreed Council needed a presentation, but was not sure it had to be separate from the public meetings. Mr. Chenkin said staff was available to Council, and suggested perhaps the Council would wish to review and read through the document prior to a staff presentation. Mr. Lieuallen agreed with Mr. Delay's idea of Council attending the public sessions. Mr. Obie suggested perhaps a work session with the Planning Commission would be helpful. Mayor Keller summarized Council's concerns as follows: A need to be involved in the early stages; a desire to look at the preliminary draft and respond to that either individually or as a Council; and a viable alterna- tive to plan an early meeting with the Planning Commission for a response, perhaps a minimum of two weeks and maximum of four after distribution of the first draft of the Text. Mr. Williams noted that perhaps some Councilors felt they were not totally involved in development of T-2UUU, but the previous Council had been very involved. Mr. Chenkin said he felt Council would feel more comfortable with e some strategy after it had reviewed Text to see the magnitude of the changes. Mayor Keller welcomed Mr. Greenleaf to the meeting and extended best wishes on the part of the Council. III. REVISIONS IN FIRE CODE PROVISIONS--MEMOS AND ORDINANCE DISTRIBUTED Manager said Council would consider the proposed amendments updating the currently adopted 1Y73 edition of the uniform Fire Code using the 1976 edition. This would be a discussion session only, with the public hearing scheduled for Monday, June 26. He noted there were a number of important changes in the Code, including providing an alternative to full sprinkler installations for high-rise residential buildings which are now required to be installed by June 23, 198U, with the alternative allowing the com- bined use of smoke detectors and sprinkler systems when certain other con- ditions exist. Effective January 1, 1979, smoke detectors will be required in all private dwellings upon the sale or exchange of the dwelling. Fur- ther, effective July 1, 1979, all multi-unit residential buildings (apart- ment houses, motels, lodging houses, etc.) will be required to install smoke detectors in each unit. He noted Jim Thorpe had distributed a docu- ment that Council could read between now and the public hearing June 26. Wendell Wick, Fire Marshal, explained some of the changes in the proposed ordinance were editorial changes. He reviewed the changes as noted by Manager. Regarding requiring smoke detectors in private dwellings, he said - there may be some problem of enforcement, but it was hoped the City could cooperate with the lending institutions, title companies, and real estate agencies. Regarding sprinkler systems and smoke detectors for high-rise 6/14/78 - 3 , ~~I buildings, he said at present there were four buildings that cannot meet the requirement because of Code deficiencies, and would have to e provide automatic sprinklers throughout, or correct the building defi- ciencies. Those four were: Carson Hall, and University Inn, at the University of Oregon; Eugene Hotel, and Eugene Manner. Presently, two of the four are in the process of providing sprinkler systems. Mr. Wick noted the use of smoke detectors would work well with the Master Satellite System in which ~arly warning would prove to be important to keep fire damage to a minimum and to save more lives. Mr. Obie wondered if there was an alternative to enforcing the smoke detector installation other than at the time of property exchange. Assistant Manager noted for Council that any major remodeling of dwellings requires a smoke detector be installed, and this is presently handled by housing inspectors. A second alternative would be to have fire suppression crews inspect, but this would create a problem of increased cost to the City and the problem of whether or not there was the right to enter individual private dwellings. This ordinance was felt to be the easiest and most effective way to approach the prOblem. Manager noted Council could also mandate it by written intent in a sales contract. Mr. Williams expressed disagreement with the need for the City to introduce stronger enforcement procedures than the Uniform Fire Code criterion. He wondered why City Council had to deal with the problem when the National Code does not require such. Assistant Manager said three firefighters on a ladder would not save any lives unless some forewarning existed. He noted the Fire Chief had said there were six instances in the past several e months where a smoke detector had saved lives; five others where the absence of a smoke detector took lives. The main concern was in high-rise structures, in particular. Mr. Delay suggested the significant point was a manpower problem, with advanced warning for protection of individual lives also important. Mr. Williams still wondered if the National Fire Code did not feel it important to include smoke detector installation within the Code, why it was the city's responsibility to add such. Mr. Obie requested legal staff to provide research regarding apartment owners responsibility/liability after a smoke detector is installed. Mr. Wick said a provision in the code required a renter to notify the owner in writing if a smoke detector were defective; the owner then had 10 days to correct the deficiency. Mr. Delay expressed concern regarding the area he represented in which there were many rentals in older frame houses. He felt there should be sufficient pUblicity to ensure installation of smoke detectors in that area. Mr. Wick said the Fire Department automatically inspects any dwelling that has three or more rental units. HCC inspects all others. He noted there were good quality battery and electric smoke detectors available for as little as $10. Either could be installed in existing buildings, but electric smoke detectors are required in all new buildings. All must be UAL approved. Manager again noted the item would be scheduled for public hearing Monday, June 26. - A short recess was taken. 6/14/78 - 4 *~1 . IV. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUE RE: FORt~TION OF ECONOMIC IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION-- e Memo and proposed bylaws distributed. Manager said the purpose of the Council discussion today was to provide guidance to the Council representative, Eric Haws, to the L-COG Board which is now considering bylaws for the formation of the Economic Improve- ment Commission {EIC}. Issues of concern were identified for council: The one man, one vote rule; financing; staff assistance and creation of the EIC, and appointment of a director. Regarding the voting power, some members of the L-COG Board feel that by invoking the one man, one vote rule, E~ene would have too much potential authority in decision-making process. anager su~gested the Council could use a one vote per 5000 or even one vote per 10,000 population. The effect of using a process by enlarging the number of persons represented would reduce the numerical vote influence of the larger units of government. On the basis of a one vote per 1,UUU population, Eugene and Springfield combined would have 52 percent of the votes cast; on the basis of one vote per 5,OUO population, combined Eugene-Springfield would have 45 percent. Regarding the formation of the EIC, Lane County wants initially to provide the staff work and financing. However, City staff feels L-COG should provide the initial formation of the staff and that all jurisdictions should contribute financially. The information distributed did not address the question as to why some groups are altogether against formation of EIC. However, Eugene is increasingly interested in the formation because it would qualify for EDA grants and the City is seeking a higher level of e commitment for economic planning in the County and more particularly for all governments. One of the roles of the commission would be to annually develop an overall economic plan for the area, which is now being done by LCOG. Regarding EDA grants, Manager said the city is now seeking such for the Civic Center auditorium development. Mr. Delay said he was not encouraged about moving away from the stance of a population-based representation. He said after 1979, the City of Eugene would have about six persons which would give it 30 percent of the vote on a strict membership basis. Springfield would have 10 percent, giving these two jurisdictions 40 percent of the vote representing 60 percent of the population. However, the County would have 6U percent of the vote representing 4U percent of the population. He continued further that the actual control would be by the two rural County Commissioners who would have control over selection of nine members. Regarding the undue power for the City, he felt the concern was the exact opposite: Are Eugene and Springfield adequately represented? He felt the issue was to ensure the jurisdictions are comfortable that actions will not be taken that will be counter-productive to the jurisdictions. He thus felt the one man, one vote was the best assurance. Mayor Keller felt that to be the best approach, noting it was the Council's responsibility to Eugene citizens. He noted also that vote had not been invoked in the seven-year experience with L-COG. Assistant Manager said the one man, one vote had been included in 1971 as part of Federal regula- tions. e 6/14/78 - 5 ~~3 Mr. Bradley askedif the one-man, one-vote position were taken by Eugene and was unacceptable to the other jurisdictions, would Council be prepared e to form the EIC by using the L-COG weighted vote. He felt it more impor- tant to form the commission and have it functioning, noting that perhaps later dialogue could address the voting representation. He noted the parochial concerns on the part of some of the membership and the difficulty in establishing the EIC because of that. Mr. Williams agreed with Mr. Bradley, noting the Teleprompter Commission on which he is working has equally weighted votes and it seemed to be working well. He agreed with Mr. Bradley's statements regarding parochi- alism and the resulting difficulty for cooperation. Mr. Williams moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to instruct the delegate to authorize the equal voting system based on equal representation from each jurisdiction to form the EIC, if it is necessary. Manager noted the existence of a feeling around the county that Eugene somehow wants to corner all the industrial development, and he said that simply was not true. Rather, the City believes economic development in any of the outlying areas of a county, including Springfield, is very desirable in terms of overall county planning. The City is interested in seeing healthy satellite communities and would favor more self-sufficiency. In answer to a question from Mr. Lieuallen regarding the deadline, Tom Jenkinson, L-COG, said the objective was to make some decision at the e regular June meeting next week to get formation of the EIC started. He noted it was an objective, not a deadline. Mr. Lieuallen said he hoped Mr. Haws could attend the meeting without Council having to direct him to take a hardline approach. He felt that might jeopardize Mr. Haws' negotiating power. Mr. Obie was concerned regarding funding aspect, saying it should be proportionately the same in terms of influence of the jurisdictions. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to amend the motion that whatever the City delegate negotiates regarding voting represen- tation, the funding wouJd be apportioned the same. Mr. Williams said he would not accept the amendment to his motion. He said Mr. Bradley's concern for parochialism could not be overstated, as other juriSdictions are simply afraid of Eugene. The fear of abuse of power can paralyze the operation of the overall government which would benefit no one. He said the Teleprompter Commission had been funded on the basis of equal participation, business was conducted on three votes per jurisdiction, and it was working well. He felt it more important that the ErC be formed and functioning, and was in favor of equal pay and unequal votes if that would work better. Mr. Lieuallen expressed concern that some problems of Eugene may not be problems of outlying areas. If Eugene needed to take some kind of action to deal with its own economic problems which could be thwarted by e 6/14/7B - 6 ~~ . . the other jurisdictions, he wondered if Eugene would then be unable to act e in its own interest in dealing with those problems. However, on the other hand, he wondered if actions taken by the EIC for outlying areas may be contrary to Eugene's best interests, what the City could do in that instance. Mr. Williams said he felt it more important to cooperate as an urban area. He did not think common solutions to most problems would be that difficult. He noted Eugene always has the right to withdraw from the EIC, but felt to instruct Mr. Haws to attempt to control action at the start is a guarantee that would ensure the EIC would not function properly. Mr. Bradley was against the amendment, saying Lane County was willing to fund the first year and it would mean a great deal to the smaller municipalities. He felt it would be a mistake to force funding on other jurisdictions, as Lane County was providing an opportunity for free participation. He said that Eugene could fund if it wanted, but others should be allowed to participate freely. Mr. Obie expressed concern regarding the funding in that two years from now Eugene may find itself disproportionately sharing the load. He felt the rules should be set straight at the beginning. He was in favor of accepting Lane County's proposal for funding the first year, and as many years as the County wished to fund. Mr. Haws said he felt it important the City contribute something in the e first year. Mr. Delay said he would not support the amendment as he felt it was not addressing the issue. He felt it more important to represent the City's interest and get agreement with the other jurisdictions rather than taking the option of pulling out later, as he felt that not a responsible direction for Council to take. He suggested perhaps consideration of other mechanisms to protect the economic interests of this area, and noted he felt the City had always acted in good faith with responsibility. Vote was taken on the amendment to the motion, which failed, with Obie and Bradley voting aye; Haws, Hamel, Williams, Delay, Lieuallen, and Smith voting no. Mr. Delay said he would vote no on the main motion because he believed the City's present position was fairly well understood by Mr. Haws and there was no need to further water that down. In clarification of his motion, Mr. Williams said the intent was to not place Mr. Haws in a position of using Eugene's weighted vote for the first time at an L-COG meeting to force Eugene's unequal representation on the EIC. He wanted Mr. Haws to have the opportunity to negotiate and get the EIC formed. Mr. Delay felt the intent of the motion had changed. He was willing to have Mr. Haws represent the majority of the Council favoring one man, one vote. He noted it would not give Eugene majority control. He did not feel it was making unrealistic demands. . 6/14/78 - 7 ~~5 . . Mayor Keller felt the make-up of the membership was a concession and e felt the one man, one vote would be used only in rare cases but it was an important matter to maintain. Vote was taken on the motion which carried with Haws, Hamel, Williams, Bradley, and Obie voting aye; Delay, Lieuallen, and Smith voting no. Mr. Haws requested direction regarding the financing issue. Manager noted it might be possible if Lane County finances the EIC, they would wish to take authority and control. The City staff also felt it important that other communities make a genuine commitment to participate and one way would be to have them contribute financially. Mr. Williams felt it was not important to publiCly instruct Mr. Haws how to negotiate on everything. Mr. Obie concurred. Mr. Bradley felt there might be some way that Lane County could fund the first year but not allow them to maintain the right of control of veto. Mr. Hamel did not like the free money attitude. Mr. Delay , expressed concern the County would have the right to direct the EIC any way it wished if it were to fully finance it. Mr. Bradley felt there could be a requirement made that Lane County, contributions be made to L-COG and if not, then Eugene will participate in the funding. Mayor Keller felt if the program were worthwhile, then the City should pay e accordingly. Mr. Hamel agreed that Eugene should pay its own way. Mr. Williams again reiterated he felt it a mistake to try to instruct Mr. Haws how to negotiate on all issues. Consensus was that Mr. Haws would negotiate as best he could for the City.s interests. Mr. Obie and Mr. Haws left the meeting. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, that Item VI (Public Heari ngs re: Water Withdrawals) be held over to the June 21 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, that according to ORS 192.660(2)(a), the Eugene City Council meet in Executive Session to consult with counsel with regard to authority to negotiate a real property acquisition. Motion ca~ried unanimously. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to return to regular session. Motion carried unanimously. Regular session was reconvened at 1:5U p.m. -e 6/14178 - 8 IofIfCa I - ----- f Resolution No. 2936--Authorizing the City Manager to execute an e agreement to purchase the option on 35.22 acres of real pr,operty known as Southridge, situated in Eugene, from the present holders of the option for the sum of $3u1,Uuu, and exercise the option prior to July 1, 1978. Further, it is the Council's intention and desire to accept any gift or gifts of real property contiguous to the property subject to this option and the Manager is therefore authorized to accept on the City's behalf such gifts should they be offered. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, to adopt the resolution. Assistant noted this motion was offered in lieu of proceeding with emminent domain procedures. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to June 15, 1978. c~nrY~ City Manager e DT: sp/Ctl125a17 . - 6/14/78 - 9 ~'f'