Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/26/1979 Meeting e e - M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL March 26, 1979 Adjourned meeting from March 14, 1979, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by Council President Jack Delay at 7:30 p.m., March 26, 1979, in the Council Chamber, with the following Councilors present: Betty Smith, Eric Haws, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, Gretchen Miller, and Emily Schue. Mayor Gus Keller and Councilor D. W. Hamel were absent. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Eugene Master Bike Plan Update - Materials and Map distributed. Recommended by Planning Commission January 8, 1979, with a 4:1 vote. Assistant City Manager noted the recommendations had come from the Bicycle Committee to the Planning Commission. Jim Hanks, Traffic Engineer, outlined the proposed amendments to the bike plan: 1. Route 104-A-2 Channel Bike Path would follow the channel in a 120-foot wide easement between Ohio Street and Beltline Road; with expanding development in the area, the path will meet recreational and commuting needs. 2. Route 181--Terry Street bike lanes: Path will be striped on this street from West 11th to its northern terminus. 3. Route 285--Coburg Road bike lanes: New on-street bike lanes between Cal Young and Adkins Street will be used, rather than the existing "sidewalk bikeway." 4. Route 292--Willie Knickerbocker Bridge: Should be completed soon by EWEB and is being included as part of the master plan. 5. Route 367--Westmoreland Park Path: Will connect 20th Avenue with the north and south Westmoreland path from Fillmore to Taylor. 6. Route 460--Fern Ridge Bike Path: Path will create a short-cut to 16th Avenue from the Fern Ridge Bike Path, just south of the Jefferson Pool. Mr. Hanks noted items 5 and 6 had been additions made subsequent to the initial material Council received. These additions came as a result of the West 18th bicycle/traffic plan recently approved by Council. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. 3/26/79--1 /5'1 Resolution 3103--Amending the Eugene Master Bikeway Plan was read by number and title. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. - Mr. Haws was not opposed to the building of bike lanes, but did not see any justification for the Terry Street north-south bike path. Mr. Hanks replied the path would be built in conjunction with road improvements to provide a north-south path. It is anticipated that area will expand and develop, and this would be a mode of transporta- tion for residents. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. B. Hest Eugene I ndustri a 1 Study (WElA) Study and Pl an Draft--materi al s distributed. Pat Decker, Planning Department, said the West Eugene Industrial Study and Plan Draft represents a refinement of the 1990 General Plan for primarily the industrial section of West Eugene. Adoption of the plan will complete Phase II of the Bethel-Danebo Neighborhood Refinement Plan. In September, 1977, Council adopted pOlicies addressing the alignment of drainage and transportation facilities serving the northern portion of this area, and separating it from adjacent residential portions of Bethel/Danebo. Thus, the northern boundary of the area was defined. The first Phase addressed the residential area. She said Economics Consultants Oregon had done studies regarding the e industrial sector of Eugene. Two major issues had been addressed: 1) Eugene's industrial economy; 2) the need for industrial land and other factor,s assessed with attracting industry, which would include parcel size and access. She noted in the materials distributed, Appendix A and B showed the results of the surveys done, and a listing of the parcels of land over ten acres in size. Recommendations made were as follows: 1) the need for industrial land in the city and ability of WEIA to serve that need; 2) whether there is an excess of industrial land and whether the West Eugene area is the appropriate extension of residential land (industrial versus residential land); 3) the need for improved access; 4) the need for preservation of the Bertelsen Marsh; 5) the need for coor- dinating economic improvement efforts. Regarding the issue of industrial versus residential needs, the study began by identifying parcels for industrial land and parcels for residential land, if the parcels were not needed for industrial development. Major input at public hearings held to date regarding residential expansion had raised some issues. As a result, the Planning Commission requested the staff to look at revising the plan regarding the residential use of land in this area. In that light, the draft recommends that residential development be considered on or adjacent to only two large parcels in the area. Also, the area . 3/26/79--2 lbO e has experienced a great deal of economic activity which may give . it an advantage over other areas in the City for industrial develop- ment. Third, it would be difficult for residential development to be provided with the necessary services, particularly north of West 11th Avenue (i.e., schools and parks). Regarding coordination with the Metro Plan Update, she noted the staff had been working very closely on the drafts and plans regarding accommodating residential development within this area. Mr. Obie noted, because of land ownership in the area, he would not discuss or vote on this issue. Mr. Delay requested an explanation regarding a recommendation on page 5 of the draft that firms engaged in similar or related activi- ties tend to locate near one another or agglomerate. He wondered if this was saying the City is to encourage similar kinds of firms locating in that area, and whether the assumption is that this would be good for the city. Ed Whitelaw, Economic Consultants Oregon, replied yes. He said this would attempt to concentrate the same firms in the area, and would be specific to the West Eugene area. He said especially in the area north of West 11th and east of Bertelsen, it would be prohibi- tively costly to try to get a concentration of very diverse firms. It would make more sense to try to encourage like firms, those with similar characteristics. e Mr. Delay then questioned the reference regarding Bertelsen/Seneca industrial area and the storm drainage. He wondered if there were going to be a need for major construction, such as Coburg Road storm sewers. Ms. Decker replied there was no plan for major construction. The reference in the draft was an attempt to identify the various drainage channels that do serve the area now. The concern expressed is with the quality, rather than quantity. Public hearing was opened. George Arabian, 2405 West 14th, represented his family who owned 15 acres in the area. They were requesting the Council delay the decision to rezone this property and refer it back to staff for reconsideration of medium- to high-density residential re- zoning. He agreed with the concept that large parcels should be retained for industrial growth. However, he referred to the 1990 Plan, which suggests or recommends residential use of the subject property in the immediate area. He felt Eugene has an adequate and perhaps excess supply of vacant land zoned for industrial use. He felt the size and unimproved condition of the subject property did not make it suitable for industrial use. The subject property was the only piece of land within the WEIA that is sealed off from the neighbors. This would create a buffer from incompatible uses. He noted the subject property would be close to developing employment centers in the area. He recognized the need for e 3/26/79--3 Ibl multi-family housing for low- and moderate-income households, and felt the subject property was better suited for this use. He con- cluded the medium- to high-density residential zoning could better ~ serve the needs of the neighborhood and total community. .., Dave Van Fossen, 2300 Oakmont Way, referred to a survey he had compiled. Since 1965, he had been keeping track of every piece of industrially zoned property in the Eugene-Springfield area by unit price and exact location. Also, he had kept track of every piece of industrially zoned property that had been sold. He noted the largest number of acres ever sold in 1974 was 93.15 acres. In 1977, 266.11 acres were sold; 1978, 358.32 acres; and to date in 1979, 90.45 acres. He noted there are not 360 acres of industrial land in the West Eugene area. He felt this was no time to downzone industrial property to residential property. It would tend to lock in the industries, create leap-frogging, and make expansion difficult. He supported leaving the recommendations in the draft as they are proposed for industrially zoned land. He noted he had copies of his survey available for any Councilors interested. Dan Desler, 4675 West 11th, introduced a letter into the record requesting a delay in the decision in support of the revised plan, as it specifically relates to two tax lots bordering Beltline, West 11th, Danebo Avenue, and the Amazon Channel. His concerns included: insufficient consideration given in the time allowed to accurately coordinate the MAPAC and WEIA plans; support data are still being considered by the staff with regard to the adequacy or inadequacy of current industrially zoned land in Eugene; and no recommendation or comprehensive analysis has reflected those uses and required ~ zoning needed in the West Eugene area to support major industrial development. Immediate concerns expressed were that the WEIA plan dealt more specifically with large area considerations, and he requested the same fine job of analysis and consideration be extended to smaller tracts. He was concerned about the 6th-7th corridor not being specific as to desiqn, location, size, access, ingress, etc. He felt the corridor would have a significant effect on the logical zoning consideration for his parcels. He felt there was a need for area community-commercial and residential-professional zoning to support and complement the industrial zoning. He requested Council refer these parcels back to staff for reconsideration. He wanted to determine the highest and best use for this property. Ernie Unger, 3830 Stewart Road, spoke on behalf of the homeowners on that road. They felt the street in front of their homes was adequate to serve their needs. He asked whether or not the homeowners would be expected to pay the costs of a new street for industrial expansion. Russ Svingen, 1400 High, real estate broker, said he had several clients interested in 9 to 9-1/2 acres located on the northwest corner of Beltline and West 11th. He felt it would be a better and higher use if it were zoned commercial. The clients who are interested 3/26/79--4 ~ \bL were also concerned about getting into a hassle of rezoning. He noted the 1990 Plan designates this area as an opportunity area. - Bart Walsh, 1865 Charnel ton, represented Hal Broughton, who owned land in the area near Bailey Hill and 11th. He said development plans are underway for these 15 acres. He spoke in support of the zone change from residential to more intensive industrial use. He expressed concern that a decision to rezone the area to M-1 is somewhat premature. - Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Ms. Decker, responding to Mr. Arabian's request, said Danebo from West 11th to north of the Coos Bay Railroad is going to be primarily industrial arterial. It did not seem to be justified to provide residential zoning in a primarily industrial area. Regarding the amount of excess industrial land, she said the question was the location of the land. After public hearings, the Planning Commis- sion concluded the West Eugene was best left for industrial use, with residential use in the Bethel-Danebo to the north, and West Eugene to the south. There will be proximity for residents without the concomitant problems of being located immediately next to industrial areas. Regarding a commercial need for land in this area, the Planning Commission did spend considerable time discussing the issue. The recent rezoning at West 11th and Beltline to commer- cial use seemed to be sufficient at this time. Under the 1990 Update, residential development will be to the south, and it seemed best to have the commercial and residential uses on the same side of West 11th. There was a good deal of concern on the part of the Planning Commission about strip commercial zoning along West 11th. Therefore, they did recommend not to provide any more commercial zoning along that area, but to await the 1990 Update to see if there is a need. Responding to a question from Mr. Delay, Jim Farah said the first map showing the alignment of the 6th-7th corridor was correct. He noted the discrepancy in the maps showed just how ambiguous plans for the corridor are at this time. However, staff and State are working together to look at various alternatives. Ms. Smith wondered how much coordination had been done between the 1990 Update and the West Eugene Industrial Area Study. She wondered if it were premature to consider adoption at this time. Ms. Decker replied the staff had been coordinating very closely with the Metro Plan Update staff on both the original and revised drafts. As a result of that coordination, some revisions had been made. However, it had been concluded that a more efficient land use would result with concentration of industrial land use north of West 11th and residen- tial land use south of West 11th. . 3/26/79--5 I b3 Assistant Manager noted for Council the adoption of the Metro Plan . Update may be at 1 east a year away. He fel t there was a need for .... proceeding with the normal refinement plan process. Adjustments ~ could be made later as necessary. Mr. Delay requested a response from staff regarding the need for all the M-3 zoned land retained north of the railroad. Ms. Decker replied it had been staff's feeling that the property located along the railroad is more appropriate for primarily heavy industrial use. Vacant land in the area is owned by heavy manufacturing firms. The study indicated that parcels of vacant land owned by heavy manufac- turing firms should be retained with that same zoning, so that the firms do not have to relocate. Res. No. 3104--Concerning the West Eugene Industrial Area; completing the Bethel Oanebo Refinement Plan Phase II, and supple- menting Res. Nos. 2468 and 2749 was read by number and titl e. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously, with Mr. Obie abstaining. C. Historic Landmark Areas: General Guidelines and Procedures Materials distributed. Assistant Manager said the procedures and guidelines have been reviewed by the Planning Commission. They have been developed in cooperation with the Historic Review Board (HRB). Jan Muller and ~ other members of the HRB were in attendance and available to answer ~ questions. Ms. Decker noted when Council, in May, 1978, adopted the Whiteaker Refinement Plan, it designated the East Skinner Butte area as the first priority for implementation of the Plan. The revisions to the Historic Preservation ordinance adopted in January 1978 included historic landmark areas. However, there were no specific directions as to how to designate an historic landmark area, as opposed to individual historic structures. Thus, the general guidelines were developed. Judy Rees, HCC, reviewed for Council the guidelines for determining appropriateness of an historic landmark area designation; criteria for designation; guidelines for determining boundaries of an historic landmark area; classifications of structures within that area, development standards for the area; procedures for area desig- nation, for review of alterations, new construction, and moved-in structures; procedures for moving and demolition. Public hearing was opened. . IbY ~It '1', 3126179--6 ..., .. - Karen Lansdowne, 10 Donovan Drive, owned property at 205 East 3rd Street. She said she had not been able to review the guidelines and procedures. She did have the standards for alterations, but had seen nothing regarding demolition or removal of structures. Her concern was that, in general, when property is affected by the City, if it is not at the initiation of a property owner or for the owner's benefit, some compensation is considered, or the property owners are involved in development of plans. She had been notified of the various meetings on this issue, but had not felt that she was part of developing the ideas and plans. She had concern regarding the alterations being subject to review by the Historic Review Board. She also noted there was no appeal process provided. She felt more study needed to be made regarding some standards for historic preservation that seemed to be incompatible with the present City building codes. She said it was important not to take over the rights of individual property owners without providing appeal rights. Marsha Medler, 769-1/2 Lawrence, questioned how the guidelines and procedures relate specifically to existing buildings that have historical value to the City. Ms. Rees replied the guidelines were developed for investigating proposals for historical landmark areas. The only area that has been proposed at this time is the East Skinner Butte area. e Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Assistant Manager noted for Council the introduction of these guide- lines represent the first instance for the City to begin to consider area-wide design review. He noted in the process, there would be notice to the public, with attendant time delays and costs for those involved. He said these conditions probably would produce some appeals before the Council in the future. The normal appeal process would come from the Historic Review Board to the City Council if there were a difference of opinion between the Board and the indivi- duals involved. Mr. Obie understood the appeal procedure regarding the area-wide issue, but was concerned about the appeal procedure regarding modifi- cation, alteration, moving, or new development. Ms. Rees referred Mr. Obie to Appendix A, page 47, in which the attachment indicates the parts of the Code that are currently in force (pages 59 and 60). Under development standards that are being proposed (predominant number of stories or height), Mr. Obie wondered if it were predomi- nantly single-family and someone wanted to build a two-story building, whether or not the two-story would be allowed. Ms. Rees said in most lower residential zones, there is a maximum height of two stories or 35 feet. It would appear that maximum would be allowed. She noted in the East Skinner Butte area, the predominant height is one-and-a-half to two stori es. - 3/26/79--7 Ib5 Ms. Mifler said in a review for alterations, she had a concern that there is no distinction made between alterations to primary and other non-conforming structures. Ms. Rees said the alteration ~ and design would be major changes to the exterior, not inner repairs ~ or maintenance items. The Historic Review Board felt alterations of all structures should be reviewed based on the premise those alterations could result in an incompatible structure becoming more incompatible with major alterations. Res. No. 3105--Adopting guidelines and procedures with respect to historic landmark area designations was read by number and title. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. D. Proposed East Butte Historic Landmark Area--Materials Distributed Ms. Decker said the historic investigation for the East Butte area began when the Historic Review Board adopted its guidelines and procedures for historic landmark areas. This East Butte area was found to merit a recommendation for historic designation based on its antiquity, the identification of people contributing to the City's history, and the architectural styles. It contains eight structures which would merit individual historic landmarks. There is a sense of visual continuity from a number of points of view: topography, natural features separating it from other areas, and a major transpor- tation corridor. Regarding the boundaries, she said one area of ~ concern regarded east of High Street. She noted that area was not ~ included because it has a different land use, it is east of the major transportation corridor, and the Ham House is not visually connected to the area. An area of the recommended boundaries on 3rd was not included because it was not tied visually to the area and was vacant. The area north of 2nd Avenue was included because of visual continuity. However, she noted a number of concerns regarding the vacant status of this property located north of 2nd in a vacated alley. The Historic Review Board's recommendation recognizes the lack of significant structures but felt the area should be included. The Board did make a recommendation as to the density, saying the major portion of the area be retained for medium-density residential use. For the area north of the vacated alley, the medium-high density residential use was being recommended because there are no significant contri- buting structures in that area. She noted medium density was up to 20 units per acre; medium-high density was 20-to-40 units per acre. Ms. Rees noted all four classifications of historic structures were found in the East Butte area. She gave a slide presentation which showed the primary and contributing structures now located in the area. Slides were also used to show structures built within the city within the last ten years that would be compatible for new construction in the East Butte area, for both residential and commercial uses. - 3/26/79--8 Ibb e She said the standards being proposed for the East Butte area would be the same ones that are proposed for individual landmarks. One modification noted was a recommendation that the sun-exposure plane may be exceeded if new construction is compatible with the existing structures. Another modification reduced required off-street parking to one space per unit as there are other modes for transportation in this area and it is close to down town. Guidelines for new or moved- in structures were also being proposed, as it is recognized that changes will occur in the area over time. Design elements which will help to make the new construction compatible need to be addressed. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by Councilors. e Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Mr. Lieuallen wondered why this was a Fasano or quasi-judicial proceeding. Assistant Manager said because the Council is effecting the rights of property owners by the land-use designation. Public hearing was opened. Martha Filer, 235 East 3rd, spoke in favor of the designation with qualifications. She appreciated the staff work in drafting all of the materials and thanked the Whiteaker residents who had helped do the inventory. She noted other cities have adopted the same type of area designation. She supported the designation in general for the East Butte area as being not only good for the neighborhood, but good for the homeowners, and for the rest of the city. She did oppose the recommendation to amend the Whiteaker Refinement Plan to allow higher density north of the alley on 2nd Avenue. She felt the high density was not necessary. A lot of the Whiteaker neighborhood already has high density and she felt this area was too important for that designation. She noted the proposal was not just for an architectural district but the historical impor- tance needed to be emphasized. She felt the educational factor of the neighborhood to be very important to the city. She expressed appreciation for Councilor Hamel's support last May on the Refinement Plan. e Karen Lansdowne, 10 Donovan Drive, owned property at 205 East 3rd Street, and spoke against the proposal. She did not feel the present recommendations to be reasonable and was opposed to the boundaries. She said visually the area north of 2nd Street is not compatible. Most of the land is vacant and the boundaries should be drawn at 2nd Avenue. The houses would be much more compatible for historic designation. She said many residences on High Street are not economi- cally feasible to make livable. She said there was incompatiblity with the present building code and indication needed to be given to property owners if there were a conflict as to which would take precedence. She noted the expense of repairing some of the older two-story homes. 167 3/26/79--9 Grant Seder, 2385 McLean Boulevard, said he was fairly sympathetic to the goals of the project. However, he did have differences of opinion regarding the density. He noted the need for new residential ~ construction as outlined in the 1990 Plan Update. He felt an attitude ~ that would allow this neighborhood to ignore the rest of the city, i.e., not allowing higher density in the area, would encourage other neighborhoods close in to the city to follow suit. That would lead to urban sprawl and be very irresponsible on the part of the neighborhood. He felt the medium-high density designation was appropriate. Second, he said 40 percent of the structures in the block north of 2nd Street are incompatible. He was in the process of a development which probably will be incompatible also. He said 2/3 of a block thus would be incompatible and felt it should not be included. He questioned the recommendations for remodeling or alteration of incompatible struc- tures to make them compatible. He also questioned site consideration, i.e., fencing. He noted there are already some high fences in the area and he felt the high fencing along sidewalks might help set out the old buildings better. He emphasized the fact that this is not a particularly unified historic area, but rather a scatterization of valuable and invaluable objects. To bring that together as an historic area, he felt the City needed to participate by taking care of its pUblic spaces. He felt by addressing paving, planning, street furni- ture, street signs, fire plugs, benches, etc., the City could contri- bute a great deal of historic value to this area. Otto Poticha, 1820 Kona, also spoke against the designation. He felt the City needed to address itself to distinguishing the differ- ence between historical objects and an historical district. He felt this area to be an historical district and it required a partnership ~ between the City and those in the neighborhood to develop the histor- ical district. The Council should be concerned enough to invest public money to make it truly a IIdistrict.1I Jan Mueller, Chairman of the Historic Review Board, emphasized the Council was dealing with general guidelines for the area, and felt it important to understand it is not the intention to create a little Disneyland. He said the Board would review individual structures. The guidelines were purposely left.flexibile to deal with each situa- tion. Regarding the boundaries, he noted the area north of 2nd Avenue has visual continuity with the Willamette River and was included also because that area was in the original city plat. He realized there would be problems, but said after 2-1/2 years of working with the developers and various property owners, he felt confident with the proposal. Public Hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. e 3/26/79--10 \b& ~.~ '.. .. - Ms. Rees said the sun-exposure plane was being amended at the minimum level, not the maximum level. In general, structures in the East Skinner Butte area could not be taller than 40 feet. Regarding conflicts with the Building Code, she said none of the recommendations would violate the current building codes. The guidelines deal with fences, and not railings on porches. She said there is flexibility within the Uniform Building Code to allow changes in existing building requirements for historical buildings. Regarding demolition or moving structures, this would not be precluded by the designation of the area. Those acts would be reviewed by the Historic Review Board however. She said financial programs available for the area included (CD) Community Development rehab loans, primarily for historic land- marks; and CD restoration funds primarily for secondary structures. If historic designation is given to this area, there are a number of structures which would be available for financing programs through the CD, State, and Federal government. e In response to a question from Mr. Lieuallen, Ms. Rees said the sun-exposure plane would not allow a shadow to be cast up to a certain amount on adjoining property. She said many of the existing struc- tures already violate that regulation. The recommendation is made so that structures that would be one-and-one-half to two-stories high would not be precluded from being built in the area. In response to another question from Mr. Lieuallen regarding density, Ms. Decker said the Planning Commission did not take a separate position on the density for the northern portion of 2nd Avenue. When the Council adopted the Whiteaker Refinement Plan, medium density was adopted subject to the East Skinner Butte Historical Designation. The density issue came up primarily because of a concern of the primarily vacant area north of 2nd. It was felt the owners should be able to develop the land and be subject to historical landmark designations~ Mr. Lieuallen wondered why the Historic Review Board was in a position to recommend any density designation for the area. He felt that was within the purview of the Planning Commission. Mr. Farah said the Board was responding to the Council's direction to develop guidelines regarding historical landmark areas and the question of whether high density would violate or destroy that landmark. The Historic Review Board presented the guidelines and said, yes, higher density could be handled without violating historical qualities of the area. C.B. 1853--Designating a portion of the East Skinners Butte area as an Historic Landmark area, and declaring an emergency was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. e 3/26/79--11 /69 ., .. 1 -,. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. abie, that findings supporting the Historic designation, as set forth in Historic Review Board staff notes and minutes of February 8, 1979, be adopted by refer- ence 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. - Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to amend the motion under Standards Recommendation; Standards for Alteration of Existing Structures--lIwhi1e maintaining the integrity of the structure II be inserted in the last sentence following the word lIincompatibile" . Ms. Miller said some structures do not look like historical structures. There should be flexibility to allow a building to remain compatible with its own style and architecture. Vote was taken on the amendment to the motion which carried unanimously. Mr. abie noted he, and Councilors Delay and Schue had toured the area north of 2nd. It was difficult for him to understand how that area could be designated historic when there is nothing historic there. He had difficulty comprehending what would be achieved by creating an historic district out of a vacant ground and incompatible buildings. Mr. abie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to delete the area north ~ of 2nd from this historical designation proposal. ,., Ms. Miller had taken a walking tour of the area. She felt the area north of 2nd to be essential as a connection to the river and the park. She felt it essential to the overall character of the area. She recognized the importance of the entire concept of the historical zone and the impetuous that might be given to the downtown area as well as the 5th Street commercial area by providing that strip down to the ri ver. Mr. Lieual1en said the area north of 2nd was in the original city plat and, thus, does have historical significance. He noted the testimony tonight indicating the area should treated as a district and he felt there was a need to tie that area to the park and downtown area. Ms. Schue agreed. She said the Historic Review Board attempted to compromise by allowing a higher density for that particular area. She felt the higher density was compatible with being close to the downtown area and close to the park. Vote was taken on motion to amend, which failed with Councilors abie and Smith voting aye; all other Councilors present voting no. . 3/26/79--12 \10 e It was consensus of Council that amendments could be offered to the proposed council bill, with staff bringing back a draft for first reading at the April 9 Council meeting. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to amend the draft under Modification Section: Sun-Exposure Plane Regulations--to allow waiver of the sun-exposure plane regulations for buildings up to 2-1/2 stories; after that height, buildings would be subject to the regulations. Ms. Miller said the intent of her motion was the sun-exposure plane waiver should have a height limitation for buildings up to 2-1/2 stories. Above 2-1/2 stories, the buildings would have to meet the sun-exposure plane regulations. Vote was taken on the amendment to the motion which carried with all Councilors present voting aye, except Mr. Obie voting no. - Mr. Obie requested information from staff as to what City public improvements could be made to help develop an historical district. Assitant Manager noted the first consideration would be dollars, and whether or not the money could be budgeted. He said many of the projects suggested would be expensive. The City has historically avoided getting involved in improvements such as sidewalk benches that would result in high maintenance costs for the City. He noted a possibility could be that the public cost might be assessed back to abutting property owners. Another possibility would be for the Whiteaker neighborhood area to use some of its CD funds for investing in public projects. It was consensus of Council that staff should pursue and keep Council apprised of how the City might maintain a role in develop- ing public improvements to retain compatibility with the historic di stri ct. Mr. Lieuallen noted a variety of possibilities for funding such as the Historic Review Board applying for federal grants or the possible use of room-tax dollars. Mr. Delay noted for Council the motion before it was to direct staff to come back with changes and amendments as outlined in the discussion, with first reading of the council bill April 9. Ms. Miller felt this to be an exciting prospect with many opportuni- ties for this city. She felt Eugene was taking a big step in this kind of area designation and hoped it would work and help keep Eugene as a desirable place to live. Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. - 3/26/79--13 III There was consensus to hold over to April 9 the resolution regarding amending the Whiteaker Refinement Plan until first .... reading of the council bill designating East Skinner Butte as a ~ Historic Landmark area. II. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING A. Hearings Panel Report March 19, 1979--Minutes attached Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approve the report as noted. Motion carried unanimously. B. Levying Assessments The following council bills, read the first time March 12, 1979, and referred to Hearings Panel for hearing March 19, 1979, were brought back for Council consideration and final passage, with Hearings Panel recommendation to levy assessments as proposed: C.B. 1844--Levying assessments for sanitary sewer between Emerald Street and Nixon Street from 24th Avenue to 25th Avenue (1491) (77-62) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present ~ voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18354. ~ C.B. 1845--Levying assessments for paving Corydon Lane from between Forrester Way and Tandy Turn to Tandy Turn (1040)(78-03) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18355. C.B. 1846--Levying assessments for storm sewer within Coraly Park First Addition (78-14) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18356. C.B. 1847--Levying assessments for sanitary sewer to serve Tax Lots 18-03-16-30-2900 and 3000 on Skyline Park Loop (1586)(78-31) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved ~ and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present ~ votirig aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18357. 112.. 3/26/79--14 'e C.B. 1848--Levying assessments for paving Crescent Avenue from Gilham Road to 800 feet west (1490)(78-15) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18358. C.B. 1849--Levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way to serve Dorella Park Subdivision (1420)(78-18) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18359. C.B. 1850--Levying assessments for paving Western Drive from Calvin Street to 70 feet west and paving Calvin Street from Western Drive to Harlow Road; and paving and sanitary sewer on Calvin Street from Harlow Road to 200 feet north of Dulles (872 & 1564)(77-48)(78-25) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18360. III. ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING--None IV. RESOLUTIONS Res. No. 3107--Authorizing payment of bills and claims for period March 12 through March 26, 1979, was read by number and title. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3108--Authorizing execution of contract with State of Oregon Department of Transportation concerning construction of Amazon Channel Bridge section of Acorn Park Street was read by number and title. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. ~ 113 3/26/79--15 Res. No. 3109--Authorizing execution of contract with State of Oregon Department of Transportation concerning construction of Elanco Lane-Donovan Drive section of Norkenzie Drive was read by number and title. - Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resoluton. Mr. and Mrs. Russell Donovan, 2293 Norkenzie Road, asked where the funds for the project would be obtained. Don Allen, Public Works Director, said the Federal Government would provide 88 percent, with the City providing the remaining 12 percent. Mr. Allen explained the project was not completely designed but would be similar to the one on Gilham Road. The Donovans' expressed concern regarding the 130 feet of frontage taken up with Beltlne ramp overcross and concern about keeping it beautified. They wondered who is responsible for the upkeep. Mr. Allen said the jurisdictional dispute has moved from between the County and City, to between the State and City. The dispute has not been settled. However, he said funds were not avail- able to do landscaping at this time. In responding to another concern, he said under the present Code, right-of-way adjoining private land is the responsibility of the property owner. The City does not mow public rights-of-way without charging the property owners. He noted also the City is not assured of funding for the project and would be in competition with other cities for these funds. Mr. and Mrs. Donovan will have access to the appropriate Public Works staff to seek answers to some of the concerns they have regard- ~ ing this project. Mr. Lieuallen left the meeting. Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve Council minutes March 12, 1979. Motion carried unanimously. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to Mar.ch ~~~~:. /lI~/~ A. Keith Mart in Assistant City Manager AKM:jm/CM12b3 - 114 3/26/79--16