HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/10/1979 Meeting
--
,
.
M I NUT E S
e EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
September 10, 1979
Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to
order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 7:30 p.m., Council Chamber, September 10,
1979, with the following Councilors present: Jack Delay, Betty Smith, D. W.
Hamel, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, Gretchen Miller, and Emily Schue. Eri c Haws
was absent.
I. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Rezonings
1. Property located south of East 19th Avenue, east of Willamette
Street, from R-1 Single-Family Residential District to R-3 Multiple-
Family Residential District (Anderson) (Z 79-13)
Manager introduced topic. Mr. Saul said the property contains 7,000
square feet and is presently developed with one residence. If the
zone is changed to R-3, a total of five residential units could be
bu i It . Property to the north is zoned R-3, mainly apartment buildings
e and parking lots; to the south and east R-1; and to the west RG,
mainly single-family dwellings. The Planning Commission recommended
the zone change. Principal issues discussed were public need and how
consistent the change was with the General Plan. The Commission found
that high density is appropriate, that the property is adjacent to a
major commercial area, and that there is immediate proximity to parks
and schools. Mr. Saul noted that Dr. MacKinnon, President of the
Planning Commission, was present and available for questions.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Counc il ors.
Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearing was opened.
Testifying in favor of the zone change:
Jim Anderson, 1491 Jefferson, owner of the property, said he had not
been aware of the neighborhood opposition when he asked for the zone
change. However, he feels that the higher density designation is
appropriate and needed in that area.
e
9/10/79--1
If '1 /
,
Testifying against the zone change: .
Peter Sorrenson, 38 East 19th Avenue, lives across the alley from the e
property. He presented a petition, signed by over 85 percent of the
neighbors, which asked the City to: 1) block the alley so only local
traffic could use it as an unimproved access; 2) allow multiple-family
residences in approved Garden Apartment areas only; and 3) prevent
commercial or professional businesses from locating in the neighbor-
hood. He said that currently one-half of the block is zoned for
multiple-family residences, but is not being used that way. He noted
the split (4:3) vote of the Planning Commission on the matter and said
the neighbors would like to be involved in a refinement plan for the
area before any zone changes are made.
Elwyn Larson, Seven East 19th Avenue, said she understood that a two-
story dwelling would be built on the lot, thus reducing privacy for
the surrounding one-story homes. At present, there are student
renters across the street who have several cars which adds further
congestion to the alley, and who hold loud parties.
Ludwig Pfiefer, 1955 Willamette Street, said the apartment would look
into his back yard. The problems of cars and noise would be increased.
Mr. Saul said he would respond to questions. Ms. Schue asked how many
units would be built, and was told there could be a maximum of five.
Mr. Anderson informed the Council of his intention to build a duplex
on the property. It is not his intent to rent to a highly-transient e
populace, such as the students referred to by the neighbors, but added
he is not able to discriminate with regard to student renters.
Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony.
Mr. Keller asked if the zone change would mean a change in the residen-
tial nature of the area. Mr. Saul responded that an R-3 designation
was residential, but of a higher density.
CB 1985--Authorizing rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Residential District
to R-3 Multiple-Family Residential District for property located
south of East 19th Avenue, east of Willamette Street.
Mr. Delay expressed concern about piecemeal rezoning of the area.
He felt approval of the request could set in motion other conversions
without an overview for the area. In response to questions from Mr.
Lieuallen, Mr. Saul said that there were no pending requests for zone
changes in the area and that he did not know what the ownership
patterns were. Ms. Miller thought the intrusion of a different
density into the neighborhood appeared to be anomalous unless there is
some further overall plan. Mr. Obie suggested that the General Plan
almost requires that the property be rezoned. The Council should not
e
9/10/79--2
1~2.
-
back away from a difficult decision, but should act in light of the
- goals they have set. Ms. Smith agreed, and said she supported the
request, although she realized the neighbors might be uncomfortable.
Mr. Lieuallen asked if another zone beside R-3 would accommodate a
duplex, and was told that the square-foot requirements prohibited an
R-2 zone. There is some question whether an RG zone would permit a
duplex. Mr. Delay remarked that this case illustrates the problems
with the existing code. He said that in addition to the goal of
infilling, there are other goals, such as preserving the quality of
the neighborhood. This is not a building permit, but a zone change,
and preserving the character of the neighborhood is important.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that findings supporting
the rezoning, as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and
minutes of July 10, 1979, 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 passed unanimously.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion passed 4:3.
Councilors Miller, Lieuallen and Delay voting no. The bill was
declared passed and numbered 18494.
2. Property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of
Bailey Hill Road and Westleigh Street from RA Suburban Residential
e District to RP Residential Professional District for Tax Lot 400,
and from RP/SR Residential Professional District with Site Review
Procedures to C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District for Tax Lots
600 and 601, including Sign District boundary designation change
from Residential to Integrated Shopping District (Landress)
(Z 79-14)
Manager presented topic. Mr. Saul said the zone change involves 2.8
acres; of that, 1.72 acres would be rezoned from RP/SR to C-1, and
the remaining area would be rezoned from RA to RP/SR. The property
is located south of the Westleigh Shopping Center. The purpose of
the change is to allow expansion of the center which is recognized as
a relatively small one, given the size and population of the area it
serves. It is the only vacant property contiguous with the center
which could be considered for expansion of the commercial area.
Property to the south is developed in single-family residences;
property to the east is part of an approved PUD; property to the west
is the site of Churchill High School. The principal item of discus-
sion of the Planning Commission concerned public need. The Commission
recommended approval of the zone change request as did the staff.
e
9/10/79--3
~93
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Councilors. e
Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearings was opened.
Mr. S. Russ Landress, 42141 Fish Hatchery Road, Scio, developer
of the property, said he was there with his architect to answer any
questions.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
CB 1986--Authorizing rezoning from RA Suburban Residential District to
RP Residential Professional District for Tax Lot 400, and from
RP/SR Residential Professional District with Site Review Proce-
dures to C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District for Tax Lots 600
and 601, including a change of Sign District boundary designa-
tion from Residential to Integrated Shopping District for
property located at the northwest corner of the intersection
of Bailey Hill Road and Westleigh Street.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that findings supporting
the rezoning, as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and
minutes of July 10, 1979, be adopted by reference thereto; that
the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with
unanimous consent of the touncil; and that enactment be considered
at this time. Motion passed unanimously. e
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion passed unanimously.
The bill was declared passed and numbered 18495.
3. Property located on the block between Chambers and Grant streets,
and 12th to 13th avenues, from R-l Single-Family Residential
District to R-2 Limited Multiple-Family Residential District
(Berean Baptist Church) (Z 79-17)
Manager presented topic. Mr. Saul said the property contains 1.94
acres. A portion of the site, located between the alley and Chambers,
is developed with the Baptist Church and related parking. The remaining
half is presently developed with three residences. The church has
requested zoning to allow development of the site with additional
residential units.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Councilors.
Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearing was opened.
e
~1q 9/10/79--4
e There being no testimony for or against, the public hearing was
closed.
CB 1987--Authorizing rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Residential District
to R-2 Limited Multiple-Family Residential District for property
located between Chambers and Grant streets, and 12th and 13th
avenues
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that findings supporting
the rezoning, as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and
minutes of July 10, 1979, 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 passed unanimously.
Mr. Lieuallen asked Mr. Drapela if the City considers school grounds
as open space, and was told that the City works closely with the
school districts so the school yards can be used for public as well
as school uses. Mr. Lieuallen then asked if the staff knew the size
of the units of the proposed development, and was told it did not.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion passed unanimously.
The bill was declared passed and numbered 18496.
B. Street Name Change: Goodpasture Island Road (SC 79-7)
e Manager said the street involved is Goodpasture Island Road extending
north from its intersection with Valley River Drive to Delta Highway,
then east to its intersection with Norkenzie Road. The Planning
Commission made the following recommendations concerning the proposed
street name change for Goodpasture Island Road:
1- That the name "Goodpasture Island Road" be retained
for the entire street extending from Valley River
Drive to Norkenzie Road.
2. That address numbers be modified only on, that portion
of Goodpasture Island Road between Valley River Drive
and Delta Highway.
3. That the modification of address numbers retain the
number 450 for the mobile home park and renumber
other properties accordingly.
Mr. Saul said the problem arose because the City (which had numbered
that portion of the road in the city) and the County (which had
numbered that portion which had been in the county) had assigned
conflicting numbers. The Post Office, Police Department, Fire
e
9/10/79--5
Jf95
Department, and ambulance service requested the City to resolve the
problem. Although the staff had presented another solution to the e
Planning Commission, it had no difficulty with the Planning Commis-
sion's recommendation to retain the name "Goodpasture Island Road"
and modify the addresses. However, it did recommend that the Council
delete the third recommendation of the Planning Commission--retaining
the number 450 for the mobile home park--because that even number is
on the odd-number side of the street.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Councilors.
Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearing was opened.
Testifying for the street name change:
Harold Greer, 1280 Goodpasture Island Road, expressed support for the
Planning Commission recommendation. He said the neighborhood group
and all residents that could be reached also support the recommenda-
tion. Since Goodpasture Island Road has several turns (thus changing
the direction for numbering purposes), he saw no need to change the
address of the mobile home park.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
CB 1988--An ordinance retaining the name IIGoodpasture Island Road" for the e
entire street extending from Valley River Drive to Norkenzie
Road; that address numbers be modified only on that portion of
Goodpasture Island Road between Valley River Drive and Delta
Highway; and that the modification of address numbers retain the
number 450 for the mobile home park and renumber other properties
accordingly.
Mr. Delay asked if retaining the 450 address would present a major
problem. Manager responded that perhaps emergency vehicles would go
to the wrong side of the street when called as the entire city is
numbered with odd numbers on the east side of the street. Mr. Keller
asked if the staff saw the address change as a problem for residents.
He noted that the Post Office delivers mail sent to both old and new
addresses for a year. Mr. Saul replied that the staff felt that a
year was enough time not to cause problems. Mr. Obie felt that a year
for change was reasonable; therefore, all addresses should be put in
order.
Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to amend the motion deleting
that portion of the ordinance which states, II . . . and that the
modification of address numbers retain the number 450 for the
mobile home park and renumber other properties accordinglY.1I
Motion passed 6:1. Councilor Hamel voted no.
e
tf96 9/10/79--6
Mr. Delay moved) seconded by Ms. Smith) that the bill be read the
e second time by council bill number only) with unanimous consent of
the Council) and that enactment be consiqered at this time. The
motion) as amended) passed unanimously.
Mr. Delay moved) seconded by Ms. Smith) that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion, as amended,
passed unanimously. The bill was declared passed and numbered
18497.
C. Appeal of zone change request denied by the Planning Commission for
property located west of Coburg Road and north of Willakenzie Road
from RA Suburban Residential District to C-2 Community Commercial
District, including a Sign District boundary change from Residential
District to Outlying Commercial District (Olson/Brazier/Knutson}(Z 79-12)
Manager introduced topic. Mr. Saul said the property involved is
2.56 acres. It is presently designed RA, but had been given first
reading for RP designation in 1969. However, the final reading of the
ordinance never occurred. The requested change would allow for more
intensive development of the property. It was denied by the Planning
Commission. The principal area of discussion involved public need.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Councilors.
e Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearing was opened.
Testifying for the zone change:
Mr. James Giustina) 888 West Park) representing the petitioners
Olson/Brazier/Knutson, noted that the staff notes recommend approval
of the request. Those opposing felt there was insufficient buffer
for the residential properties and insufficient public need. With
respect to the latter) there is, at present, no available C-2 space in
Sheldon Plaza (at the hearing the petitioners stated that there was).
The petitioners have had numerous unsolicited requests for spaces.
There is adequate public need. The proposal would not mean the
extending of a linear development, but the infilling of a commercial
node already established. If there is concern about compatibility of
the development) the staff has recommended criteria for a site review
to harmonize the development with the surrounding area.
There being no further testimony) the public hearing was closed.
e
9/10/79--7
i97
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to deny the appeal.
Motion passed 5:2, with Councilors Smith and Schue voting no. e
D. Growth Management Study
Manager presented topic. The Growth Management Study is the result
of two large public meetings at which community goals and growth
management were discussed. Suggestions received at these meetings
were reviewed by the Planning Commission and incorporated as modifi-
cations to Chapter 3, "Growth," of the 1974 Community Goals and
Policies Document.
Mr. Farah asked the Council to note that the recommended modifications
are consistent with City goals and policies and those of the Land Con-
servation and Development Commission. The recommended changes are
the result of a process which included extensive technical analysis
found in the Growth Management Study Phase 2 Report; deliberation by
the Planning Commission and the Community Goals Committee; and public
review and testimony. They are intended to provide for continued
emphasis on geographic management of growth--the traditional method
by which Eugene has dealt with the issues of growth. As such, these
proposed changes are evolutionary in nature and do not dramatically
depart from strategies which have been established in the past.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Council ors.
Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. e
Public hearings was opened.
Those testifying in favor of the document changes are listed below:
Mary Sheriffs, 137 West 37th, speaking for the League of Women Voters,
of Central Lane County, said the League's position is in complete
agreement with Policy 3, which deals with the means to increase the
efficiency of the use of land. The desirability of increased density,
however, must not overshadow the human need for privacy; therefore she
called the Council's attention to Proposal 10. The League requests
that the Council el imi nate the sentence, liThe City shoul d determi ne
the cost of various amenities, however, and not establish requirements
that cannot be justified by demand." It is making the request because
it believes the sentence is vague, at best, and provides an easy
excuse for doing nothing, at worst. In Proposal 4, under the categdry
in the core area, the League questions the inclusion of the statement,
"Incentives should be explored to encourage development at the full
density for which the land is zoned." Residential zones are applied
throughout the city at a level thought to be appropriate to the area.
e
'198 9/10/79--8
The City cannot accomplish its goals of compact urban growth, avoid-
e ance of sprawl onto farm land, and establishment of a viable public
transport system unless incentives are found for encouraging develop-
ment at full density for which the land is zoned throughout the city.
Finally, the League endorses Policy 2 for study of the experiences of
other cities and the identification of growth management techniques
which the City can and should use independently. These amended
policies, together with the new goals, should be adopted by the
Council with the firm commitment to the community to work together
to implement them.
Maureen Good, 47 Monroe Street, said she supports the resolution in
general. Policy 6 should be more specific. Ms. Good supports Poli-
cies 8 and 10. She would like to see a clarification of Policy
4a2--the Urban Renewal Agency's role in assembling land parcels for
development in the core area. She supports the idea of addressing
the needs of lower-income residents.
Darcy Marentette, 1533 Fairmount, speaking for the Fairmount Neigh-
bors, stated that many participants in the community conference,
including herself, were very disgruntled by the way the conference
was organized. There was no give and take, no real conversation which
the word "conference" seems to intend. Regarding Policy 2, in the
year since the growth conference, Ms. Marentette said her observation
is that growth rate management sentiment is increasing. She asked
that the City study growth rate management tools along with other
- growth management measures so that the community can begin to under-
stand how these techniques can or cannot be used in Eugene. Regarding
Policy 12, the suggestion of the Fairmount Neighbors, in testimony to
the Planning Commission, was to add a sentence to the first paragraph
so that it would read, "Eugene should establish a schedule of continous
reports to the Planning Commission and City Council aimed at providing
public officials with information and/or recommendations for action
directed at continuous public growth management efforts. These reports
should include identification of any legislation and/or administrative
procedures which have been adopted which affect the concerns set forth
in this chapter." The Fairmount Neighbors were particularly disturbed
by Proposal 4. This proposal deals with encouraging development in
the core area at full density. There is no reason why the core area
should be singled out for this attention. Areas of R-1 zoning all
over the city have as much responsibility to accept the density which
that zoning allows as do areas of R-2 and R-3 zoning. They feel that
Proposal 7 should be deleted. Several members of the group who have
followed the history of the limited access charter amendment see that
this amendment is even more necessary now than when it was adopted.
Finally, they feel that the middle sentence of Proposal 10 should be
deleted. The proposal should simply read, "Certain amenities should
be required in multi-family housing to encourage stable tenancies.
Privacy and soundproofing are considered high-priority items."
e
9/10/79--9
~"
Steve Wood, 971 West 10th Avenue, Joint Housing Committee member, said
the goal of having a mix of structure types is encouraging, but does e
not address the cost issue. Just having various kinds of housing does
not mean that people can afford them. He proposed that the Growth
Management Study include the policy that, all projects requiring City
approval provide a mixture of structure types.
Christie Coffin, 1362 West 10th Avenue, architect, spoke in favor of
the proposal in general and, in particular, supported the mix of unit
sizes, public open space, zero lot lines, and energy conservation
measures. She questioned the limited access charter amendment, and
said she would like clarification of Policy 4a2, which broadens urban
renewal powers.
Testifying against a portion of the study:
Ray Wiley, 2100 Shields Avenue, representing the Crest Drive Neighbor-
hood Association, spoke in opposition to Policy 3b1, which would allow
duplexes and triplexes on out-size lots. He expressed the following
concerns: 1) The policy deprives existing homeowners of the right to
a single-family neighborhood; 2) it plays into the hands of specula-
tors; 3) it would affect the property value of the homes; 4) overcrowd
existing'schools; and 5) burden the streets and sewer system. The
Crest Drive area has 16.5 percent of the out-size lots in the city,
but only five percent of the city land area. The lots are large
because the land is steep and wooded. Mr. Wiley questioned the
policy's appearance in the document, since the Council had referred e
the issue to the Joint Housing Committee for further study in 1976.
No study has since then been undertaken.
\
There being no further testimony for or against, the public
hearing was closed.
Mr. Farah responded to the questions raised.
Re: Deleting sentence 2, Proposal 10--the City must balance a variety
of goals, one of which is not to increase the cost of housing.
'Re: Proposal 6, transit corridor needs being too broad--the intent of
the proposal was to be broad so the City could use a variety of
techniques as suggested in the T-2000 Plan.
Re: Expansion of renewal powers--ownership patterns are fragmented in
many areas where the City wants to encourage higher density. The
intent is for the Renewal Agency to buy separate parcels and sell them
in one package for development.
Re: Repeal of the limited access charter amendment--this was intended
to reflect that when dealing with the State, that if the State puts up
front money for a project, the City can make assurances that the
project will be completed.
e
600 9/10/79--10
.
Re: Growth rate issue--there is concern that the City not erode the
e established direction of successfully controlling geographic growth.
The study also suggests that the City, by itself, investigate growth
rate management. The City must also address the issue of statewide
goals and guidelines. City action with regional impact would not be
looked favorably upon by the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
Re: Recommendations of Joint Housing Committee--Mr. Wood recommended
requiring a housing mix; the Housing Dispersal Plan recommends studying
whether to require a housing mix.
~: Concerns of Crest Drive Neighborhood Association--If the Council
enacts the document, hearings will begin on whether to allow duplexes
and triplexes on out-sized lots. The staff would like to present new
data.
Ms. Smith asked for and received assurance that if the Council approved
the study, it is thereby adopting a concept, not making definitive
decisions. Mr. Obie asked if the Joint Housing Committee can begin
hearings without this document and was told that it could. Mr. Obie
asked for clarification of "averaging densities." Mr. Farah responded
that this is another way of calculating densities requiring so many
units per acre rather than a certain density per lot. Ms. Schue
expressed concern that the two sections from the Community Goals
concerning inexpensive standard housing were not included in the study
and was told that the sections are included in Chapter 8, and are
e referred to in Chapter 3 under Proposal 4a.
In regard to Policy 3a2, Ms. Miller asked what kind of incentives
would be given. Mr. Carlson responded that an increase in the number
of density points allowed in a PUD would be one kind of incentive.
Ms. Miller noted that a sentence had been dropped from Policy 9, the
effect of which was to place more emphasis on efforts to use the
manpower of existing (rather than new and existing) residents. She
wondered if the omission was intentional and was told it was. In
regard to Policy 12b1, Ms. Miller asked how the suitable ratio of
available land to demand might be achieved. Mr. Carlson replied that
the City might actively annex, by their choice rather than by request,
to maintain a suitable inventory. Ms. Miller also asked in what case
could the parking requirements be lowered. Mr. Farah responded that
downtown this may be possible, but cautioned that in some cases, for
example the West University area, the parking requirements were
underestimated.
Mr. Obie asked for clarification of the change in Renewal Agency
powers, and Mr. Farah replied that staff thought the Renewal Agency
could act as a conduit, acquiring land from several owners and then
selling it in large parcels. Mr. Obie commented that this would
require checks and balances, and Mr. Farah agreed. Ms. Smith added
that she would not want to give the Renewal Agency complete autonomy.
e
501 9/10/79--11
As a member of the Community Goals Committee, Mr. Delay reported that
there was unanimous consensus on about 70 percent of the report. The e
Committee made an honest attempt to represent the ideas presented to
them.
During the discussion that followed, Councilors expressed the desire
for more time to discuss the resolution. Mr. Delay asked staff to
summarize proposals made during the public hearing that night, and Ms.
Miller praised the quality of the testimony.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to postpone voting on the
resolution until Wednesday, September 12, 1979, when there could
be further discussion. Motion passed unanimously.
E. Public Works Bid Awards (Tabulation attached)
Manager presented topic. Mr. Allen noted corrections on Item 2. The
44-foot paving should read "$52.30." Storm sewer cost to City should
read "$27,300." Amount budgeted should read "$49,300." He also noted
that the first two projects were initiated by the City Council. Mr.
Delay asked if Project 2 would clear up the congestion at the inter-
section of Seneca and 1st Avenue, and was assured that it would.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by
Counc i1 ors.
Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearing was opened. e
There being no testimony for or against, public hearing was
closed.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to award the bids as
recommended by staff. Motion passed unanimously, with Mr. Obie
abstaining on Nos. 1 and 7.
II. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING
CB 1978--Authorizing rezoning from AG Agricultural District to R-1
Single-Family Residential District for property located south
of Royal Avenue, east of Terry Street
Mr. Delay noted that since he had been absent and was unfamiliar with the
two proposed ordinances, he would abstain.
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion carried 5:1,
with Ms. Miller voting no and Mr. Delay abstaining. The bill was
declared passed and numbered 18498.
e
502.. 9/10/79--12
CB 1979--Authorizing rezoning from RA Suburban Residential District to
e C-2/SR Community Commercial District With Site Review Proce-
dures for property located on the south side of West 10th
Avenue between Chambers and Grant streets
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved
and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion carried 5:1 with
Ms. Miller voting no and Mr. Delay abstaining. The bill was
declared passed and numbered 18499.
III. RESOLUTIONS
A. Land Use Application Fee Schedule Revision
Res. No. 3236--Establishing fees for applications for hearing requests
in connection with the processing of petitions for changes
of zone; conditional use permits; site reviews; zoning
variances; planned unit developments; vacations of streets,
easements, and alleys; administration of the Sign Code; and
repealing Res. No. 2892
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution.
Roll call vote. Motion passed unanimously.
B. Payment of Bills and Claims
- Res. No. 3237--Authorizing the payment of bills, claims, and progress pay-
ments for the period August 27, 1979, through September 10,
1979
Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution.
Roll call vote. Motion passed unanimously.
Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to
September 12, 1979.
~ )
Charles T. Henry
City Manager
(Recorded by Hillary Kittleson)
HK:so/CM7a10
e
9/10/79--13
~3
:"1 '.
. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
.- Engineering Division
e Bi d No. 9
Opened: _ September 6, 1979
l. PAVING AND SANITARY SEWER on Stewart Road from
Bertelsen Road to approximately 2400 feet east.
(Job No. 1703)
I Contract Cost .
Bidders: Basic Alternate
AHARD- 1. Wildish Construction Co.----------------$ 205,551.82 $ -0-
2. f10rse Bros. Contractors, Inc.-----------$ 211,609.45 $ 222,236.00
3. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.----------$ 214,403.40 $ -0-
4. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.--------------$ 221,984.66 $ -O-
S. Shur-Way Contractors, Inc.--------------$ 223,850.77 $ -0-
Cost to Abuttinq Property: Cost-to City Amount Budgeted
281 Paving $ 21.50/FF Paving ----- $ 2,100.00 --- $ 34,000.00
44' Paving $ 36.00/FF Storm SevIer -- $ 57,000.00 --- $ 46,000.00
5" Concrete $ 1. 86/Sq. Ft.
A.C. Drive $ 0.35/Sq.Ft.
San.Lateral $ 0.8l/Sq.Ft.
San. Service $ 520.00/Each
.' Cm'lPLETION DATE: July 1, 1980
- -
----------------------------------------------------------------~--------_._-----------------------_.
2. PAVING AND SANITARY SD~ER on Seneca Road from
Roosevelt Boulevard to 1st Avenue. (Job No. 1747)
Bidders: Contract Cost
A~~ARD l. Morse Bros. Contractors, Inc.-------------$ 195,292.89
2. Wildish Construction Co.-----~------------$ 198,260.34
3. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.~--------------~$ 209,833.24
Cost to Abutting,P~~erty: Cost to City Amount Budgeted
441 Paving $ ~eO/FF Storm Sewer --- $ 30,000.00 --- $ 38,500.00 -
5" Concrete $ 2.10/Sq.Ft. CAlI 300- i.-jC/ I 300 -DO
7" Concrete $ 2.25/Sq.Ft.
A.C. Drive $ 0.76/Sq.Ft.
COMPLETION DATE: July 15, 1980
.J~~-------------~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
,;;.. "
S ()'f
Page 1 of 3
. .
3. PAVING alley between 10th Avenue and 11th Avenue .
.
from Pearl Street to High Street. (Job No. 1753) ,
e Bidders: -Contract Cost ~
~-
AltJARD 1. Eugene Sand & Gravel) Inc.--------~---------$ 17,912.15
2. Walt's Concrete---------~-------------------$ 18,264.25
3. Morse Bros. Contractors, Inc.---------------$ 23,747.74
Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City. Amount Budgeted
Northwest Natural Gas Company $ 14,412.15 $ 11 ,000.00
$ 3,500.00
COMPLETION DATE: October 15) 1979
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
4. SANITARY SEWER in Arcadia Street from 400 feet
north of Harlo'l/ Road to 1500 feet north of.
Harlow Road. (Job No. 1687)
Bidders: Contract Cost
At-lARD 1. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.------------------$ 24,203.00
2. Dan D. Allsup,Cbntractor, Inc.--------------$ 24)676.60
3. Shur-Way Contractors, Inc.------------------$ 27,708.00
e 4. Ui1dish Construction Co.--------------------$ 32)573.40
I Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City Amount Budgeted(
.
San. Lateral $ 0.09/Sq.Ft. -0- -0-
San. Service $ 425.00jEach
COMPLETION DATE: November 16, 1979
-------------------------------------------------------~----~-------------------------------------
5. SANITARY SEWER between Moss Street and Villard Street
from 15th Avenue to 17th Avenue. (Job No. 1768) ,
Bidders: Contract Cost
At~ARD L Eugene Sand &Gravel~ Inc.------------------$ 44)504.30
2. Shur-Way Contractors, Inc.------------------$ 46,485.85
3. Wildish Construction Co.-----~--------------$ 55,354.00
4. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.--------------$102,065.00
Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City Amount Budgeted
- -0- $ 44,504.30 Engineers Estimate
S 42,340.QO t
COMPLETION DATE: October 26, 1979 S05
~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------
... - - -
--
-" ,
,
.
6. STORM SEWER in Jeppesen Avenue from Coburg Road
to ApproximatelY 230 feet west. (Job No. 1769)
. .
() Bidders: Contract Cost e
A\'IARD l. Shur-Way Contractors, Inc.------------------$ 7,081.00
2. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.------------------$ 7,621. 20
3. Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.--------------$ 8,049.50
4. Hildish Construction Co.--------------------$ 8,695.00
Cost to Abutting Property Cost to City Amount Budgeted
-O- S 7,081.00 Eogineers Estimate
$ 5,402.00
COMPLETION DATE: October 12, 1979
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
7. STORM SEWER in Bonnie View Drive from Cheryl
Street to 120 feet east of Sarah Lane. (Job No. 1177)
Bidders: Contract Cost
AWARD l. Shur-Hay Contractors, Inc.------------------$ 22,095.00
2. Eugene Sand & Gravel, Inc.------------------$ 22,395.50
3. Wildish Construction Company----------------$ 24,086.32
4. -Dan D. Allsup Contractor, Inc.--------------$ 24,518.50
I," Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City Amount Budget~
Storm Sewer $ 21. OO/FF $ 12,800.00 Engineers Estimate
- $ 11,000.00
COMPLETION DATE: November 16, 1979
---------------~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. PARKING LOT Mahlon Sweet Airport - 1979 Addition
to Terminal Parking Lot. (Job No. 1763)
Bidders: Contract Cost
A\~ARD l. Eugene Sand & Gravel) Inc.---~--------------$ 97,969.00
2. Wildish Construction Co.____________________$105)657.55
3. Morse Bros. Contractors) Inc.---------------$108,196.80
4. Benge Paving________________________________$109~515.15
Cost to Abutting Property: Cost to City Amount Budgeted
-O- S 97)969.00 Engineers Estimate
$ 105,875.00
'(~ - -
Cm:lPLETION O.~TE: November 9, 1979
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
50b
Page 3 of 3