Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/1979 Meeting . . M I NUT E S tit EUGENE CITY COUNCIL October 17, 1979 Adjourned meeting from October 10, 1979, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller October 17, 1979, at 11:45 a.m., Council Chamber, with the following Councilors present: Betty Smith, D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, Gretchen Miller, and Jack Delay. 1. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS A. Citizen Involvement Committee Meeting Ms. Schue stated that at their meeting last week, the Citizen Involvement, Committee discussed distributing information on the Metro Plan Update Report by requesting EWEB to include material with its monthly billings which would inform citizens about scheduled meetings and additional information regarding the update process. Staff advises it would be appropriate for Council to request that action of EWEB. e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that Council request the Board of Directors of EWEB to include information in their mailouts on the Metro Plan Update. Motion carried unanimously. B. Parks Advisory Board Mr. Obie mentioned that, some time ago, the Council talked about the creation of a public Parks Advisory Board. The Council requested that a report be brought back by the Joint Parks Committee on the possible function of this committee to include more citizen participation. He has seen no obvious momentum to date on that project, and would like to encourage an effort to move that issue, as well as the issue of the Emerald Canal, from the back burner to a higher priority. He sa i d a written report some time down the road would be fine. Assistant Manager said staff is not prepared to give a report on either item at present. He added that there have been proposals indicating that the Emerald Canal project be discussed through the budget process. C. Small Business Administration Loans Mr. Lieuallen noted receipt of a copy of a memo to Human Rights Specialist Kent Gorham from the City Manager commending him for his leadership in bringing SBA dollars to minority businesses in the e community in the amount of $1,114,400. It is one example of very positive results due to the human rights commissions' activities. 10/17/79--1 5'b . D. Herbicides in Watersheds Mr. Lieuallen mentioned there is a two-county effort being organized e by Jerry Rust and a commissioner from Lincoln County to increase public awareness regarding the presence of herbicides in watersheds. A letter from Jerry Rust was distributed to Councilors which discusses this issue, and requests a statement of support from the Council. Mr. Lieuallen reminded Councilors that they had taken a position earlier, expressing concern to State and Federal agencies on the use of herbicides. Commissioner Rustls letter indicates that in coastal counties there is a problem. There is particular concern that coastal watersheds have been repeatedly sprayed with phenoxy herbicides. Commissioner Rust is asking the Council to join in the effort to formally request the Regional Forester to declare the Eugene muni- cipal watershed as a no-spray area. Mr. Lieuallen hoped the Council would continue to support the cost of studying the matter; up to now, there has been study but nothing conclusive. He also added that the letter speaks of genetic damage from use of these herbicides. He hoped Council would pass a resolution asking the State Health Division to further research the matter. Ms. Smith wondered if Mr. Lieuallen's intent was to ask to have further study on the issue, but not take particular action at this time. Mr. Lieuallen said that would be okay, but he would also favor a formal request to the Regional Forester to declare the watershed a no-spray area. Ms. Smith felt further study would be good, but she would have problems supporting a formal request at this point. Mr. Delay did not have any problems with asking staff to direct a e letter to the State Health Division raising Council IS concern. Any other resolution should be further discussed and considered before action is taken. Council needs to look at any objections others might have before taking a stand. Assistant Manager noted that both Corvallis and Portland have arrived at some written understanding protecting their watersheds from such sprays. Mr. Lieuallen requested that staff forward Council IS position regarding concern over the use of herbicides to Commissioner Rust and Lincoln County Commissioner Zedwick, as well as the appropriate State and Federal agencies, and make some effort to substantiate the agreements other municipalities in Western Oregon have regarding no spray in their watersheds. E. Bike Path Connection Ms. Miller wondered about the status of connecting the bike path to the Willie Knickerbocker Bridge, as well as status of County efforts in that regard. She also asked if there were plans to continue it to the Glenwood area. It was understood that a status report would be brought back to Council October 24. e 10/17/79--2 ~7 F. Energy Mobilization Board e Ms. Miller asked staff to bring back information on the Energy Mobilization Board. A law establishing this Board is in the Senate at present, and moving quite rapidly. It is possible that by next week decisions will have been reached. The Senate has acted to set up a board which apparently would override Federal, State, and local regulations regarding energy facility development. They have exten- sive powers and are a threat to State and local governments. She felt that perhaps Council caul d take a positi on next week whi ch coul d at least be forwarded to the Oregon Congressional Delegation. Ms. Smith said that since the timing is critical, she felt immediate action might be appropr1ate. Ms. Schue reported that the Executive Committee of L-COG met IIthis morningll and discussed this very issue. They agreed to send a letter stating their position, which'is the same as Ms. Miller outlined. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to go on record in opposition to the proposed Energy Mobilization Board as it has been constituted by the Senate, and forward a statement to the Oregon Congressional Delegation outlining their objections to the Board, the impact it would have on local control, and emphasizing the importance of local laws. Motion carried unanimously. G. Hughes Airwest Settlement e Mayor Keller noted receipt of a telegram outlining the provisions of the Hughes Airwest airplane strike settlement. I I. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL A. Approve Council Minutes of October 3, 1979 Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve the Council minutes of October 3, 1979. Mot ion carried unanimously. B. Call For Public Hearings 1- Vacation for Spencer's Crest Partnership (SV 79-6) (Map Distributed) CB 2010--Call for public hearing for November 21, 1979, re: st reet vacation of a public right-of-way for property located between Willamette Street and Donald Street south of Marlboro Lane was read by number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. e 10/17/79--3 568 Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, e with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18521. 2. Easement Vacation for City of Eugene (EV 79-3) (Map Distributed) CB 2011--Call for public hearing for November 21, 1979, re: easement vacation of public utility easements for property located between Chambers Street and Garfield Street north of 27th Place was read by number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill e be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18522. 3. Easement Vacation for John Becker (EV 79-10) (Map Distributed) CB 2012--Call for public hearing for November 21, 1979, re: easement vacation for John Becker for property located at the northwest corner of Martin Way and Center way was read by number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full . Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18523. e 10/17/79--4 5b~ 4. Easement Vacation for Schaudt, St~mm, and Walter, Inc. (EV 79-11) e (Map Distributed) CB 2013--Call for public hearing for November 21, 1979, re: easement vacation of a public utility easement for property located at the northeast corner of Centennial Loop and a cul-de-sac extending north of this street was read by number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered at this time. Mot i on ca rri ed unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18524. C. EWEB Resolutions (Maps Distributed) Assistant Manager noted that Resolution No. 3261 does not appear to be in order and will not be considered at this time. e Res. No. 3259--Authorizing vacation of unused portion of transmission line right-of-way easement for property located between "Q" Street and Centenni al Boul evard just east of Centenni al Loop was read by number and title only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. Motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3260--Authorizing vacation of transmission line easement for property located in south Eugene on the north side of Larch Street between West Amazon Drive and West Hillside Drive was read by number and title only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimoulsy. D. Resolution (Memo and Map Distributed) Assistant Manager noted that acquisition involves only the right-of- way of 12 parcels for the storm system at this time, which needs to be completed this winter. , e 10/17/79--5 570 Res. No. 3262--Authorizing the institution of proceedings in eminent domain for the acquisition by condemnation of right-of- e way for a bicycle/pedestrian path and the right-of-way for construction of a storm drainage system from Roosevelt Boulevard and Maple Street to Beltline Road west was read by number and title only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Delay commented that, because of an unappealed ruling of a judge, the City was previously required to adhere to an ORS statute requiring the adoption of an ordinance, rather than a resolution, in order to exercise the right of condemnation. He noted that this was a resolu- tion and wondered if this was the correct format. Assistant Manager said that the ruling dealt with acquisition of parkland only. Ms. Miller wondered when the issue of design of the facility will come up. Don Allen, Public Works Director, said it is in the design phase and staff will have it ready to appear before Council in a bid call this fall. He is aware of the problems of bike paths by drainage ways and was interested in Council IS comment on any specific concerns. Ms. Miller referred to the Amazon Channel development and said the Emerald and Amazon Channel people felt that it could have been designed to be more attractive. Public Works Director said that, due to federal funding requirements, many criteria were responsible for its design, i.e., Cyclone fences, etc. Mr. Keller added that perhaps Cyclone fences provide safety for folks using a bike path. Ms. Miller e reiterated her hope that criteria are being considered to afford the best aesthetic design possible. Vote was taken on the motion, which passed unanimously. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinance Approving Fogelson Application for Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption Program for Lawrence Apartments (Ordinance Distributed) Assistant Manager noted the proposal has approval of the Review Committee and the Joint Housing Committee. Robin Johnson, HCC, said the 51-unit low-income elderly project specifies that development be subject to certain conditions: 1. That the project be completed by 1/1/81. e 511 10/17/79--6 ~ 2. That it address design and facility elements as a benefit and e include provision for low-income housing as a benefit. The applicant and Project Advisory Committee perceive that benefit as lower-income housing for the elderly. 3. That the building be accessible physically and visually. 4. That ten percent of the units be designed for the physically handicapped. 5. That a meeting room on the fourth floor be used as community space,and as a neighborhood gathering spot, in ad~ition to the tenants' use. 6. That there be an area provided to allow out-of-doors use by means of an interior courtyard. 7. That two exterior decks be provided on the fourth floor in combination with the recreation room. 8. That there be private outdoor balconies. 9. That the applicant use good faith efforts to convince Lane Transit District to provide bus shelters on West 8th. 10. That the building shall provide for privacy and security, including two entrances electronically locked at night e with an emergency call system in bedrooms and bath to notify the manager in the event of emergency in an apartment. 11. That the landscape design shall provide for neighborhood continuity of plant materials and seeding areas. 12. That parking be accessible from the alley and shall be screened by landscaping from the street. Mr. Fogelson pointed out that the tax lot numbers, as shown in the ordinance, should be adjusted to 12000, 12100, 12200, and 12300. Mr. Obie wondered about the total value of the exemption. Ms. Johnson said that, based on the building permit value, not including the land, the structure is valued at $1,177,245; based on the current rate, that would be a $28,000 per year exemption. She said the developer and architect are present and prepared to answer questions. e 10/17/79--7 57~ Public hearing was opened. Mr. Delay asked for views from the developer on the process of working . with the subcommittee. Mr. Fogelson commented that HCC has been most helpful and the meetings were very constructive. He felt it wa s a workable process generally. Mr. Lieuallen wondered if there would be an on-site staff person to coordinate community room activities. Mr. Fogelson said there would be an on-site manager. Mr. Lieuallen hoped that, over the years, there would be enough money available to maintain the structure. Mr. Fogelson said that they are interested in keeping it a good building. Due to State loan requirements, it was designed and budgeted to be better than average for this type of building. Also, the State requires that money be set aside for maintenance. He added that rentals are $329 per month for a one-bedroom apartment, and Ms. Johnson clarified that that is the fair market rent. Tenants wi 11 have to pay only 25 percent of their income, the rest is subsidized by the Federal government. Mr. Fogelson also said that there would be no increase for at least one year. Public hearing was closed. CB 2014--An ordinance concerning the Jeremiah and Susan S. Fogelson application for multiple-unit property tax exemption, and approving application MEP 79-1 was read by number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill, as e amended to show the tax lot numbers as 12000, 12100, 12200, and 12300, be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Mot ion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 ca 11 vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18525. Mr. Delay commented that, in the past, Council has struggled with the question of whether, for the public subsidy provided, the city was getting enough public benefit. He personally has no better feel for whether the right balance has been struck, but feels good that the process has worked and comfortable supporting this project. Ms. Schue said she has shared Mr. Delay's concerns and feels that they have finally gotten the problem on the way to resolution. Mr. Obie wondered if an analysis was ever done on developer profit projections as compared to the public benefit. Ms. Johnson responded that they looked at public benefits such as design and facilities elements; they did not do a cost analysis to determine how the tax abatement directly correlated with these elements. Mr. Obie felt it is necessary to look . 10/17/79--8 513 . at the impact and trade offs, the return to the City for the benefit e given. Mr. Lieuallen added that it would be desirable to have an assessment of the costs, in terms of tax abatement compared to the profit generated by the project. Mr. Kupper responded that there are many ways to calculate a developer's profit. Ms. Miller's understanding is that in the exemption process, since much of the downtown housing is marginal anyway and needs an extra boost, perhaps the detailed analysis is not being done so as not to determine how marginal it really is. She has no way of knowing whether the $28,000 exemption is worthwhile, but felt that an overall notion could be obtained on whether the project is financially very dubious or even impossible without the property tax exemption. She feels it is necessary to look at all different levels. If, for example, it is possible to have a more expensive building and the Federal government makes up a large portion of the rents, the tax burden could be shifted to another area, and it would be necessary to look at that. Mr. Delay said the topic is a general topic which will be useful as projects come up. These projects involve a partnership between the private and public sectors, where the public is contri- buting to the value. To the extent that there is involvement in these joint ventures and values created, then it is important to try to find mechanisms of recapturing and sharing that value. That question will have to be addressed philosophically. Assistant Manager noted that the discussion was helpful, particularly since this 1S the first application that has been processed. Ms. e Schue commented that the issue is complex because the other partner actually is the Federal government, with HUD setting the rents. There is a whole series of complexities involving the fact that the devel- oper does not control the situation in this kind of project as a private developer of another project. Mayor Keller said the basic point is that there is a need to determine the benefits of such projects. This is a question that needs to be addressed by both staff and any new developers engaged in these projects. B. New Liquor License Outlet: Frontier Airlines, Incorporated (Railroad, Public Passenger Carrier, or Boat), Located at Mahlon Sweet Airport Assistant Manager noted that all papers are in order and staff has no objection to recommending approval. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to forward to OLCC with recommendation for approval, subject to con- ditions, if any. Motion carried unanimously. e 10/17/79--9 57~ . IV. GROWTH MANAGEMENT (INFORMATION DISTRIBUTED) It was noted that review would begin with Proposal 7 on page 6 of e Attachment B. Any changes made at this meeting would be added to the changes already suggested. Proposal 7: Thi s proposal states that the Limited Access Charter Amend- ment should be repealed as it is depriving the City of state highway , funds. Jim Carlson said that during the public hearing several people suggested that it should not be repealed. Staff said the intent of the statement was to request further investigation. Mr. Obie felt it was quite a bold statement and it seemed to him that the Council does not know whether it is true or not. To say it should be repealed would not be, perhaps, in the best interests of Eugene, but to say it should be left alone might not be best either. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to change Proposal 7 to read: liThe City should consider the merits of the Limited Access Charter Amendment as it relates to planning, transportation, and finance.1I Mr. Delay said his own opinion is that it has probably been good for the community to not move ahead rapidly with limited access routes. Ms. Miller said she had not seen evidence to support the original language. She favored determining if, in fact, the Limited Access Charter Amendment is having a substantial adverse effect. Council could then take the appropriate action. Ms. Schue said her understanding of the present amendment is not that a limited access route would never be built, but e that it would not be built without receiving public discussion first. Ms. Smith feels it is necessary to have more thorough documentation in terms of funding. Any other information staff could provide would be very benefi ci a 1 . Mayor Keller said perhaps the Department of Transportation could come to a meeting and share their concerns. In a meeting he attended recently at which the Department of Transportation was represented, he learned that the freeway issue in Eugene is an obstacle to the DOT because a regional highway project is a ten-year project; and since there has been no public testimony to date, the Department is reluctant to commit itself that far in advance. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. Mr. Haws left the meeting. Proposal 8: This proposal says that the City should explore the concept of a land tax which would exclude tax on improvements. Mr. Lieuallen is not sure what the words IIshould explorell mean and hopes that staff will provide some analysis of that. Assistant Manager said there are members e 515 10/17/79--10 . e of the public who have long advocated this concept and such proposals have come before Council from time to time. The general sense of Council has been that the question of property tax reform is a major statewide issue and, until more momentum comes from the State at large, Eugene was not going to act on this issue. Mayor Keller mentioned that Congressman Ullman is exploring the proposal at a federal level. Mr. Delay said it assumes there is a totally properly zoned, planned city. Proposa 1 10: Mr. Lieuallen said that the middle sentence should be deleted. That sentence says: "The City should determine the cost of various amenities, however, and not establish requirements that cannot be just ifi ed by demand." Jim Carlson, L-COG, said this proposal had comments at the public hearing. It had been suggested by the League of Women Voters that the middle sentence be deleted. Staff's only comment was that the requirement of amenities has to be balanced with other City requirements. Mr. Delay wondered if the Community Goals Document contained a statement about the balance between amenities and City requirements. Assistant Manager said he thought the Planning staff would like that inclusion because they have problems with people demanding certain proposals without taking into account the balance that has been described. Ms. Miller commented that this discussion was held repeatedly during the Metro Plan Update process. It is not possible to qualify every statement with reference to every other goal. This should be explained in a paragraph at the beginning of the document. Assistant Manager clarified this proposal by saying that a study was done of PUD's in the past to determine what amenities made it attractive to remain. The concerns - regarding noise and reasonable privacy were the two most commented-upon issues affecting tenancy. He suggested that Proposal 10 read: "Certain amenities should be required in multi-family housing to encourage stable tenancies, such as pri vacy and soundproofi ng." Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the wording as suggested by Assistant Manager. Motion carried unanimously. Proposal 11: This proposal says that more attention should be paid to increasing the application of mixed-use zoning. Mr. Obie wondered if it meant increasing the number of acres or the effectiveness of the applica- t ion. Mr. Carlson responded that it meant increasing the acreage. Mr. Obie wondered about trying to increase the effectiveness as well. He also noted that the item had an asterisk by it, and Mr. Delay presumed it means that the Planning Commission had identified it as a top priority item. Mr. Carlson said the Planning Commission felt it was an area which they wanted to pursue. He clarified that it is not intended that a mixed-use zone must be applied, but that the idea of mixed-use zoning be considered. Mr. Saul commented that he believes both the Council and the Planning Commission are confronted with issues dealing with multiplicity e 576 10/17 /79--11 ~ of uses. Presently, there is conflict with a more rigid segregation of uses. The existing mix with the designation in the ordinance is limited e to existing developments and does not take into account new development situations, which has been of concern to the Planning Commission. There is an update process available that is an immediate way to deal with the situation. Proposal 16: This proposal says that the Planning Commission should study the possibility of requiring larger residential developments to provide a mix of housing units that address the needs of lower-income families. Ms. Miller wondered if that will ever happen. She feels it is a noble goal. Mr. Saul responded that to a certain extent it falls in the category of a notable objective. This type of notion is called "inclusionary zoning" and it has been 'tried on the West Coast, Los Angeles being a prime example. To date, the ones he has seen have many exceptions, and he has not been able to see where they have been remarkably successful. Another problem is the definition of the word "large." Information on what has been tried in other communities can be reviewed if Council so desires. Assistant Manager mentioned that Victoria, BC, has allowed developers to add multiple units to the density factor when providing low-income housing on the basis that the per-unit cost will be lower since the building is a substantial structure to begin with. Robin Johnson, HCC, said this proposal is also in the Housing Dispersal Policy and that the Joint Housing Committee will be working on it in the coming year. Mr. Carlson noted that at the public hearing there was talk of a modification which would say that the City should IIrequire" rather than "study." Staff felt the present wording is more appropriate. Mr. Carlson also mentioned that, on a previously discussed proposal, e namely Policy III-D-3, staff is suggesting that the words "newly con- structed" be omitted. There was general consensus on that idea. Res. No. 3235--Authorizing modifications to Chapter 3, "Growth," for the 1974 Community Goals and Policies Document was read by number and title. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. V. CETA APPEALS PROCESS--STAFF PRESENTATION (MEMO DISTRIBUTED) Assistant Manager said that part of the City's role is to review the recommendations made by the Program Agent Advisory Council. He drew attention to Proposal 4 that states the Council will not receive public testimony on appeals, but will move to reaffirm the Program Agent Advisory Council recommendations or return the recommendations to them for further consideration. It was felt that Council should review the record, but not debate the decision at the Council level. In appeal cases of the Advisory Council IS recommendation, the matter could be referred back to e 511 10/17/79--12 them with Council directives rather than conducting a public hearing at e the Council level. Mr. Delay wondered about funding possibilities if the Advisory.Council decided it did not take a certain factor into account, and approves the position. Ms. Smith said that there is enough money to provide for emergency contingencies. Assistant Manager said it is also a question of timing-- when the appeal comes up versus the availability of grant dollars. Mr. Delay also corrected a date in Proposal 4 from October 30 to October 31. Ms. Smith noted that appeals meetings will be held on October 22 and October 23. Mr. Delay said he is comfortable with Council not receiving public testimony, principally because the Council lacks the necessary knowledge about the entire procedure. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve the detailed process and time line to hear the CETA public service employment appeals. Mr. Lieuallen said that, in the last part of Proposal 4, it says that the City Council will not receive further public testimony on the appeals and will move to adopt the Program Agent Advisory Council recommendations or return the recommendations for further consideration. He would dub that the "Gary Long proposal," as he feels Mr. Long seems to have protected the Council successfully from controversy as it relates to the CETA program. He will support the motion, but he has felt discontent with the process for some time. He thinks Council needs to understand what is happening e with the CETA program. The Council is not as familiar as it should be and he hopes a process will be developed in the future that will bring Council more up to date. Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to October 24, 1979. ~) Charl es T. Henry City Manager (Recorded by Diane Price) DP: so/CM23b12 e 578 10/17 /79--13