Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/28/1980 Meeting - e e M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL April 28, 1980 Adjourned meeting from April 23, 1980, 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., April 28, 1980, in the Council Chamber, with the following councilors present: Betty Smith, Scott Lieuallen, Eric Haws, Gretchen Miller, Emily Schue, and Jack Delay. Coun- cllors Brian Obie and D. W. Hamel were absent. I. ADDITION TO AGENDA Ms. Miller asked that the amendment to the trespass ordinance that the council had previously considered and discussed, be given first reading as the last item of business on this agenda. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to add to the end of the council agenda the am~ndment to trespass ordinance for first reading. Ms. Smith said she would vote against the motion since it was agreed, at a previous council meeting, to place it on the .May 12th agenda and there has not been notice to the public about the first reading of the item at this meeting. Ms. Miller replied the second reading and public hearing would be on Wednesday, April 30. Ms. Smith asked for review of the previous meeting minutes. Manager read the minutes of April 2, 1980, which said final action on the amendment would be held over to May 12, 1980; public hearing held and notice sent out. Mr. Haws felt the public should be given some notice that council was changing its mind. He suggested first reading on the upcoming Wednesday. Ms. Miller explained this item had dragged along while less-important items had been placed on agendas. She feare~ there would not be final action until June. Manager reminded council that next Wednesday's meeting would only be an hour long so they could adjourn to consider the Metro Plan Update. Mr. Delay had thought the amendment to the trespass ordinance would be on this evening's agenda and was surprised it was not. Mayor asked for defeat of the motion so public notice could be given before a public hearing. Motion carried 4:2, with Mr. Haws and Ms. Smith voting no. 4/28/80--1 I I. 'PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Annexation e 1. Property located east of River Road north of Division Avenue to be annexed to the city of Eugene and Lane County Metro- politan Wastewater Service District (Aird/Mace/Miller/ Hutchinson) (AZ 79-11) (Map distributed) Manager explained this was only an annexation hearing and did not include rezoning. That rezoning would be considered May 6, 1980, before the Planning Commission. The request was for annexation to the City of Eugene and to the Metropolitan Wastewater Service District. Initially, the staff had recommended against the annexation. The Planning Commission, by a vote of 3 to 2, recommended approval of the annexation and requested staff to come back with positive findings. These new findings received a split vote of 2 to 2 by the commission. He said Mary Briggs and Jim Farah of the Planning Department would make the staff presentation on this issue. Mr. Farah referred to the supplemental staff notes and explained since the court's ruling on the Cone-Breeden issue, staff and the Planning Commission will be required to go through a rigorous evaluation of Statewide Goals in dealing with an annexation request. This supple- mental material will be provided for all upcoming annexations until there is a clarification of the Land Conservation and Development Commission goals or until a comprehensive plan for Eugene has received compliance. e Ms. Briggs explained the request is for 10.53 acres north of Division and east of Beltline for annexation to the city of Eugene and the Metropolitan Wastewater District. She said the matter is before council without the recommendation of the Planning Commission (2:2 vote). Staff recommendation is to deny the request based upon the availability of urban services. As a result of the court of appeals' decision in the Cone/Breeden case, supplemental staff notes have been prepared on Statewide Goal compliance. Should positive findings be made, those findings under Statewide Goals could be adopted. In response to Councilor Delay's comments, Ms. Briggs said that one must consider this annexation with regard to present adopted goals for the county, not future goals or policies to update the Metropolitan Plan that may be adopted in the update process. 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 4/28/80--2 e Dick Danielson~ One East Broadway Mall Walk, referred to an informa- tional booklet which had been distributed to council o~ the property. He presented slides showing the location of the 10.5 acres north of Division off River Road near Beltline and Fred Meyers. He showed a slide of the anticipated pressure line for sewage. He said there were a number of options that could be used in connecting to the sewers. He said they were preparing to pay the cost of sewer connection and construction with the advice of City engineers. He concluded that urban services were available to the property. He showed a slide indicating the present zoning in the area and said there was a need for commercial property. The alternative is to continue with strip commercial areas which would not allow for proper design. They would request C-2 zoning if this request were successful. e Jim Hinman, One East Broadway Mall Walk, said services were available to the site. Tom Poage and Bert Teitzel said it is technically possible to provide a hook-up to the pressure line. He asked council to adopt findings dated February 18 prepared at the direction of the Planning Commission. He said the private sewer line could be dedi- cated to serve a small group of people. If, at a later date, a more comprehensive line is installed, the property owners are willing to sign an agreement saying they will participate in the construction should such a system be built. There is presently no schedule for construction of such a sewer. A West Coast market study shows a need for additional commercial load now. He questioned whether it was better to concentrate the commercial development or to have it strung out along River Road. The City of Eugene taxpayers have already paid to provide service to this property. All services go past the pro- perty. Expansion of the sewage plant is under way. The City is already providing service to Fred Meyer's and Valley River Center. The report on zoning shows this as the best site. He pointed out the Land Conservation and Development Commission goal in the submitted material and explained how they were in conformance. The soil desig- nation was "urban land complex," not rural land and, therefore, Goal 3 does not apply. e Speaking against the annexation: Harry Whitson, 3715 River Road, Chairman of the Santa Clara Advisory Organization and a realtor, said the SCAO is opposed to the annexation of this property. He said the Environmental Quality Commission has given the County Commissioners four months to have a plan to solve the pollution problem in the area. This commercial development will bring more traffic. He asked the council to delay, until the County provides a plan to the Environmental Quality Commission. Jim Hale, 3729 Banner Street, said this development was not in conformance with the Santa Clara Plan. He asked that denial be given at this time. He urged an overall plan for the Santa Clara-River Road area as well as a trunk line down River Road. He did not favor gerrymandered private sewer lines. He advocated a County service district providing a key level of urban services. 4/28/80--3 Ms. Briggs summarized the position of the majority of the Planning Commission members on February 5, 1980. The extension of sanitary ~ sewer system by the applicant did meet the criteria of minimum level of urban services and, therefore, was a logical extension of the city limits. They noted that the city limits had been exteDded with Fred Meyer's. The question was whether this was the appropriate time for annexation. The illogic of the boundary, over the years, would become more logical. The Planning Commission vote was 2 to 2. According to the City Engineer, the 1,100-foot extension would require a holding tank and pumping system. The City is not interested in maintaining such .a system. Fred Meyer's sewer system cannot be extended by agreement with the City. Staff did have questions about the zone change which will be considered later. Jim Hinman rebutted the previous testimony. He said on February 5 the Planning Commission did determine that sewer service could be pro- vided to this site. The problem of low flow and holding tanks had been addressed. The benefit of this annexation to the city would be a bet- ter pattern of commercial ,usage on River Road and tax revenues for the City. The County (Stan Slles County Administrator) has said that the County could not bring service to the area; therefore, the City is the only logical provider. The annexation east of the property was sup- ported by the River Road-Santa Clara residents. They supported having commercial zoning on Division Avenue. The traffic problem will be solved with the widening of River Road. The need for development is now. Public hearing was closed. e Mr. Haws asked if private sewers were a good idea and if property to the north would be able to hook up to such a system. Mr. Gilman replied this would be similar to the Fred Meyer system. It is an interim solution and would serve only one property. Mr. Haws asked how many private systems there were. Mr. Gilman said Fred Meyer's was privately built, owned, and maintained. Valley River Center is City-owned and serves more than one property. The area of the Laurel Hill interchange is also private. Mr. Gilman said these property owners would need to agree to participate in a new system were it to be built. Mr. Haws commented the River Road problem was one the County had created for the City. He would help anyone who wanted to annex to the city. If piecemeal annexation was the only solution available, and a private sewer seemed to be acceptable, he would vote for it. Ms. Miller saw the problem as one of channeling urban development. She felt ~nnexation made a lot of sense in the context of compact urban growth. Mr. Delay was concerned that this was a grant of special privilege. It was an illogical extension of sewer service. He wondered why the land was so special that the council would create a precedent. Mr. Farah replied the request focuses on a particular solution to one problem and ignores the other problems, such as traffic. It is not the only property in the area with a unique problem. e 4/28/80--4 - Ms. Schue noted that the applicant had been waiting a long time. She thought the traffic problem would be solved in the near future. Mr. Farah pointed out the traffic solution was in County control so there was no guarantee. Ms. Schue observed that it was not an ideal solu- tion, but she would go along with the interim solution as long as the applicant was willing to participate in the River Road trunk line when it was built. Res. No. 3346--A resolution forwarding recommendation to the Boundary Commission for annexation of property located east of River Road, north of Division Avenue to the city of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District. e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that findings sup- porting the annexation as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of February 18, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Mr. Lieuallen observed that they were creating an oddball boundary. This was not infilling--it was leap-frogging. He was opposed to it. Mr. Delay was concerned that other property owners would come to them with the same request. He wondered what the consequences would be and whether they could be accommodated. He supported the original finding of fact and was opposed to the motion before the council. Mr. Lieuallen indicated that he has suspected that special service districts are being formed to provide sewers for Santa Clara while ignoring the problem in River Rd. and this annexation confirms his suspicion. He feels the council should be kept informed about special service districts that include River Road for the purpose of sewering Santa Clara and be made aware of whether or not what is happening is simply a financing mechanism supported by River Road for sewering Santa Clara. - Mr. Delay clarified his position by explaining that the trunk line was designed to serve the other (south) side of Beltline. He asked Mr. Gilman if it were true that if the area north of Beltline were to be connected to the sewer, it would not be through that trunk line. Mr. Gilman agreed yes, the pressure line there was to serve the Danebo area and was anticipated to serve most of River Road to Beltline. The system north of Beltline becomes difficult because the ground slopes to the north so the gravity system flow north has to be pumped south to get to the plant. There is a question of whether it would be better to have it go north in a gravity system. The final design has not been worked out. The existing area could use the capacity of the trunk line by designing a pumping station and pumping at off-peak hours. It could be made to work. This sewer trunk line was not designed to serve that area. Mr. Delay said if it was logical for this property it would be logical for other properties and then there would be a deterioration of the designed capacity. He could not support this proposal. 4/28/80--5 Mayor asked how sewage was handled at Fred Meyer's and pointed out .... this would be no different from what was being done currently. .~ Motion was defeated, 4:2. Mr. Haws and Ms. Miller voted aye. Mayor indicated it would be necessary for staff to prepare findings on the denial and bring them back to a subsequent council meeting. .B. Rezonings 1. Property located north of Cal Young Road and east of Willakenzie Road from R-2/PD Limited Multiple-Family Residential District with Planned Unit Development procedures to RG/PD Garden Apartment District with Planned Unit Development procedures. (Capital Management Co., LTD) (Z 79-35) (map distributed) Manager introduced the item and noted the request was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission on March 4, 1980. He introduced Bill Sloat of the Planning Department. Mr. Sloat explained the request is in an area of medium density between Coburg Road and Willakenzie. The difference in the existing zone and the requested zoning is that the existing zoning is R-2/PD; 14 units per acre would be allowed to be developed and under the requested zoning, RG, 24 two-bedroom units be developed. The property is uniquely situated so as not to affect single-family residential neighborhoods. It is close to transit and shopping. Under the 1990 ~ Plan and the Metro Plan Update, it is designated for medium-density. ~ The Planning Commission recommends approval. 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. Peter Thompson, 2000 Cal Young Road, urban planner and landscape architect, was in favor of the request. He referred to staff notes and offered to answer questions. There being no further testimony presented, Public hearing was closed. CB 2109--Authorizing rezoning from R-2/PD Limited Multiple-Family Residen- tial District with Planned Unit Development procedures to RG/PD Garden Apartment District with Planned Unit Development proce- dures for property located north of Cal Young Road and east of Willakenzie Road. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that findings sup- porting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of March 4, 1980 be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill ~ 4/28/80--6 . number only, with unanimous consent of the council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All coun- cilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18613. 2. Property located west of Coburg Road, north of Willakenzie Road, and east of Sheldon Parkside Development from RA Suburban Residen- tial District to RP/SR Residential Professional District with Site Review procedures. (Harold Olson) (Z 80-5) (Map distributed) e Manager noted the Planning Commission unanimously approved this at the March 4 meeting. He introduced Mr. Bill Sloat. Mr. Sloat explained the request for Residential Professional District zoning on this parcel. There are five tax lots involved on 2.56 acres. It is currently primarily vacant with two dwelling units. The requested RP zoning would provide graduated extension from the commer- cial area at the corner of Coburg Road and Cal Young Road. In August 1979 the applicant was turned down by the Planning Commission for a C-2 zoning request. They had felt less-intensive zoning was more appropriate. 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. Mr. Giustina, 888 West Park, representing the petitioners, concurred with the record on this item. He said he was available to answer questions. There being no further testimony presented, public hearing was closed. CB 2110--Authorizing rezoning from RA Suburban Residential District to RP/SR Residential Professional District with Site Review procedures for property located west of Coburg Road, north of Willakenzie Road, and east of Sheldon Parkside Development. e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that findings sup- porting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of March 4, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. 4/28/80--7 Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors 4i' presented voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18614. 3. Property located on the south side of 5th Avenue between Pearl and Oak streets from M-2 Light Industrial District to SD Special District and a change of sign district from Industrial to Pedes- trian-Auto. (Loretta Day) (Z 80-6) (Map distributed) Manager noted that this item was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission. He introduced Greg Byrne of the Planning Department. Mr. Byrne observed that this was the first request for expansion of the 5th Avenue Special District since its creation in 1973. The applicant had originally requested C-2 zoning, but the Planning staff recommended the special district and the applicant concurred. There are several conditional uses within the district. The district has developed well and it is a logical extension of the 5th Avenue Special District. Mr. Delay asked about the parking in the area. Mr. Byrne said there is a parking problem created by having the special district. However, he said the subject property does have parking for its own needs. 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. Patrick Leonard, 444 Lincoln Street, represented the petitioner and said they were in agreement with the Planning Commission. He would answer questions. There being no further testimony presented, pUblic hearing was closed. CB 2111--Authorizing rezoning from M-2 Light Industrial Distri~t to SD Special District and a change of sign district from Industrial to Pedestrian-Auto for property located on the south side of 5th Avenue between Pearl and Oak streets. Ms. Smith movedt seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that findings sup- porting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of March 4t 1980, 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. The motion carried unani- mously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. e 4/28/80--8 e e e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18615. c. Open Space Designation Property located between Mill and High streets north of 46th Avenue to be designated as Open Space Land for a special tax assessment as provided by ORS 308.745 to 348.790 (Edgewood Homes Association) (OS 80-1) (Map distributed) Manager explained that the tax assessment could be reduced on this property because of its use as open land. This item was approved unanimously by the Planning Commission. Mr. Byrne explained the request meets the requirements of ORS for open space designation. The homeowners I association previously offered it to the City. The Parks Department did not feel it filled the need as a park and declined the offer. 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. John Sihler, 4235 Brae Burn Drive, Edgewood Homeowners' Association, said the area is 1.1 acres with a small pool. The pool is open to anyone who pays $75 per family for summer. The pool is inspected by the County Health Department. The association hires Red Cross life- guards. Lessons are on a fee basis. He reviewed the many public uses of the pool by other organizations. Although it is run on a fee basis, the tax reduction is needed. Glenn Campbell, 4103 Brae Burn Drive, explained the pool was only seven feet deep and was a young persons' pool. It is unique but fiannces continue to be a problem. Steve Horvath, 4215 Pearl Street, said this park children who cannot go 18 blocks to Amazon Pool. have had financial problems and this reduced tax solve these problems. Rocky Johnson, 1145 Mill Street, was responsible for keeping the pool in an operative condition. The maintenance costs for the pool are high and increasing each year. He indicated the pool needs to be cleaned, patched, and repainted this year. is unique for small In the past, they assessment would help Public hearing was closed. Councilor Schue indicated her support for the designation. 4/28/80--9 Res. No. 3347--A resolution designating certain property within the city of Eugene as "0pen Space Land. II e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that findings supporting the Open Space designation as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of March 4, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. D. Appeal of Zone Change Request Denied by Planning Commission for Property Located at the Northwest Corner of Emerald Street and East 22nd Avenue from R-1 Low-Density Residential District to C-1 Neighbor- hood Commercial District (Willamette People's Cooperative) (Z 80-4) (Map distributed) Manager explained the zone change request was denied by the Planning Commission and was being appealed to the council. He introduced Jim Farah and Mary Briggs of the Planning Department. He said a lot of letters had come to the City and are in the councilors' packets. Ms. Briggs explained the appeal of the Planning Commission denial by a vote of 4 to 2, referred to the staff notes and indicated the South University Neighborhood Association was the relevant neighbor- hood association. Ms. Miller explained that she did not have financial interest in the Willamette Peoples' Co-op, but she stated she was a member at ~ one time. She did use the facility. She had talked to people on .., the street and had tried to explain to them that this a quasi- judicial matter. In that respect, she had ex parte contacts but did not consider it a conflict of interest. Ms. Smith said she had been contacted but did consider it a conflict of interest. Mr. Delay said he had received letters from several persons the subject of which had been distributed to the council and had not prejudiced his views in any way. Mayor indicated he had received numerous letters also. They had not influenced his position. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Speaking if favor of the rezoning: Terri Jones, Secretary of Willamette People's Co-op, asked those in the audience to stand up if they supported the request. She said the Willamette Peoples' Co-op had no intention of expanding. They were given a choice of reverting back to the original sales room--two- thirds of the present sales area--or to seek C-1 zoning. She said e 4/28/80--10 e they were a small neighborhood grocery meeting neighborhood needs. The Planning Commission has recognized the need for "ma-and-pa" grocery stores in the plan update. In the Westside Neighborhood, the Planning Commission has legitimized nelghborhood groceries. The Willamette People's Co-op is a grocery stores that has been in contin- uous operation for 35 years. She asked to have the c-i zoning, but would accept any solution that would permit them to operate in the neighborhood. She explained that this was a city-wide problem. The store could not be improved when the zoning was tenuous. Small neighborhood groceries should be encouraged rather than put out of business. e Sidney Herbert, 2750 Onyx Street, said she and her neighbor, Jean Johnson, 2795 Emerald, just came to support their favorite store. They walk to the store six blocks. At one time,. she lived one-half block from the store and is an original member of the co-op. The store is a benefit to the community. She suggested that there was a selective zone enforcement here. She said there were a number of zone violations in the neighborhood. She was nervous about a C-1 zone change, but wished a flexible way to deal with the problem of keeping stores within walking distance of homes. Eric Ackerson, 339 West 22nd Avenue, Vice President of Willamette People's Co-op Council, said they tried to be unobtrusive in the neighborhood. They have improved the outside appearance of the store by removing unsightly clothing boxes and other recycling materials from the front. They plan to stay in their present space. They have not expanded the business volume. He asked the council, if C-1 was not acceptable, to find some way for the store to exist. Bess Noble, 2577 Emerald Street, lives four blocks from the co-op and feeds a family of three on $120 month and could not do it if the co-op were not close to her home as 90 percent of her food dollars are spent at the co-op. Speaking against the zone change: Gary Gillespie, 914 East 18th Avenue, President of South University Neighborhood Association, referred to a letter to the council and to . the Planning Commission from SUNA, which objects to the C-1 zone. The neighborhood association does not object to the co-op store, but it does not want uses allowed in a C-1 zone to occur in the neighbor- hood. SUNA recommended an extension be granted to the Willamette People's Co-op to remain in the portion of the premises they now occupy. They would like to see it allowed to stay as a conditional use in an R-1 zone. Julie Johnson, 1375 East 22nd Avenue, lives next door to the co-op. She was not opposed to the co-op, but opposed the zone change. She spoke on the many benefits of the co-op. e Sue Girking, 1375 East 22nd Avenue, reiterated her support for the co-op as a next-door neighbor. She asked the council to seek another alternative besides the zone change. 4/28/80--11 Jessie Waldstein, 1270 East 22nd Avenue, questioned whether the people ~ who stood up lived in the neighborhood. At the SUNA meeting, she had ~ not seen them. She objected to legitimizing an illegal use. She questioned whether the store did have,lower prices. The store became clean and tidy after the non-conforming use was discovered. At the SUNA meeting, many people were opposed to the store. Richard Tyler, 1748 High Street, teacher at East Side School, said he had seen the co-op serve young people good, wholesome food. The co-op has given young people apprenticeship opportunities. Ben Occuz, 825 West 4th Avenue, said he bikes to the co-op and was a member of the co-op. It is the best place to buy natural foods. Terri Jones indicated that they would support any compromise. They have tried to minimize the impact of the store and if they knew they could stay at this location, would be inclined to fix the building up further. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Ms. Briggs referred to the March 4, 1980, staff notes. She noted expansion was determined by square footage, not sales volume. She noted this was not in conformance with,the 1990 Plan for neighborhood commercial centers. There were five existing stores in the area between 19th and 25th, and Hilyard and Agate, which has a population of 4,000 to 5,000. Two of these stores are conforming and three are ~ non-conforming. The 1990 Plan Update leaves neighborhood commercial centers up to individual neighborhoods. Staff has not done a compre- hensive city-wide study to answer questions about the disperse- ment of neighborhood commercial centers and whether it should be done with conditional use or code amendment. Mr. Haws said he would not support a zone change to C-1 because it could be sold to another business. He would like the staff to come up with an alternative the council could adopt. Mr. Farah replied the only way to accommodate ma-and-pa groceries was by code amendment. The City would need to take a comprehensive look at the code. Mr. Delay noted this has been a concern since 1976 in regard to the Westside neighborhood. Mr. Porter had promised at that time to bring the council another option. The Planning Staff was to prepare some- thing in 18 months and they had missed that time frame. Mr. Farah explained there were short-term solutions available for the store. Westside had taken care of this problem in an adopted refinement plan. It is an item that has plagued the staff, the Planning Commission, and the council. He suggested that they deal with a code amendment in the next six to seven months. He suggested that council direct staff not to proceed with abatement. Stan Long, City Attorney, said the council could not request that an ordinance not be obeyed. Ms. Miller asked about a moratorium. Mr. Long said that was possible; however, he did not believe that codes were enforced when they were under study. If ~ something came up later, then a moratorium could be applied. ,.., 4/28/80--12 e Mayor instructed that they make a motion to deny the zone change and direct the staff to do the appropriate study. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. L i euallen, that the appeal be denied and staff be directed to immediately begin work on a code amendment to be brought'back for consideration prior the end of the calendar year; that staff also be directed in its normal process to monitor the activities of the co-op in terms of the nuisance ordinance. Mr. Delay, Ms. Miller, and Mr. Lieuallen were not sure that the latter part of the mot ion did not canst itute harassment. . They were assured by Mr. Farah that staff will continue to act as usual, answering complaints from citizens and carrying on normal field work. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Miller, to extend the meeting to 11 p.m. Motion carried 4:1, with Ms. Smith voting no. E. Proposals for Repair, Maintenance, or Restoration of Historic Landmarks (Memo distributed) Manager referred to the memorandum and said $21,000 was involved. He introduced Judy Rees, Historic Preservation Specialist. e Ms. Rees said the Historic Review Board's March 27 meeting reviewed the eight requests and are recommending six proposals. Only one proposal has received previous money. The majority are within the Skinner Butte historic area. Res. No. 3348--A resolution authorizing a contract for restoration of the Hope Abbey Mausoleum. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the findings supporting the recommendations as set forth in the Historic Review Board staff notes and minutes of March 27, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously 5:0. (Mr. Haws left the meeting.) Res. No. 3349--A resolution authorizing a contract for repainting the Ankeny House. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the findings supporting the recommendations as set forth in the Historic Review Board staff notes and minutes of March 27, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously 5:0. Res. No. 3350--A resolution authorizing a contract for restoration of the Bennett House. - 4/28/80--13 Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the findings ~ supporting the recommendations as set forth in the Historic Review ~ Board staff notes and minutes of March 27, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously 5:0. Res. No. 3351--A resolution authorizing a contract for restoration of-the Wheeler House Garden. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the findings supporting the recommendations as set forth in the Historic Review Board staff notes and minutes of March 27, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously 5:0. Res. No. 3352--A resolution authorizing a contract for restoration of the First Congregational Church. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the findings supporting the recommendations as set forth in the Historic Review Board staff notes and minutes of March 27, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously 5:0. Res. No. 3353--A resolution authorizing a contract for restoration of the Shelton-McMurphy House. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the findings supporting the recommendations as set forth in the Historic Review Board staff notes and minutes of March 27, 1980, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolutions be adopted. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously 5:0. e II. PAYMENT OF BILLS AND CLAIMS .Res. No. 3354--A resolution authorizing payment of bills and claims for the period April 14, 1980, through April 28, 1980. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the resolu- tion. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. III. AMENDMENT TO TRESPASS ORDINANCE Ms. Smith left the meeting, which resulted in a lack of a quorum. \ e 4/28/80--14 . e e Mr. Lieuallen requested Mr. Long to explain the council's authority to compel attendance. Mr. Long read Section 10 of the charter which said that a majority of the members of the council constitutes a quorum, except that a lesser number may compel the attendance of absent members. The process by which it is done is not described, Mr. Long commented. Ms. Miller thought there was a precedent. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and approved, the meeting was adjourned to April 30, 1980. Respectfully submitted, c~~/h City Manager (Recorded by Beth Conant) BC:ky:so/CM7aI5 4/28/80--15