Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/28/1981 Meeting e e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber January 28, 1981 11:30 a.m. PRESENT: Betty Smith, Brian Obie, D. W. Hamel, Gretchen Miller, and Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten, Mark Lindberg. Councilor Eric Haws was absent. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. The Mayor welcomed McCornack Elementary School students. I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS A. Emerald Canal-State Water Board Mr. Lindberg explained that January 30, 1981, is the final meeting of the State Water Board on the Emerald Canal issue. He was going to attend, and he wanted to inform the council about what he would say at the meeting. He would like to emphasize at every opportunity the canal developer's and the City Council's obligation to pay attention to potential negative impacts on housing and the commercial area on the canal route, as well as to look for opportunities for solutions in those regards. The Mayor expressed appreciation of Mr. Lindberg's attendance in Salem. B. Renewal Plan Update Advisory Committee Mr. Obie explained that the Renewal Agency, in cooperation with the Planning Department, is considering expanding the boundaries or creating an additional renewal area. For that consideration, a large committee has been developed (15 members). All segments of the City are represented. There has been discussion of council representation on that committee. Mr. Obie preferred not to be involved since he owns property in that area. Mr. Lindberg has expressed an interest in being involved. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to appoint Mr. Lindberg a representative of the City Council on the Renewal Plan Update Advisory Committee. Motion carried unanimously. C. "Urban Vi 11 age" Concept Mr. Obie asked that the "urban village" concept/downtown housing be the subject of the City Council's dinner meeting on February 9, 1981. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 1 e The Mayor explained that the dinner meetings were intended to discuss items not on the agenda, and this would be the kind of presentation that the City Council had in mind. Mr. Obie could ask for staff assistance. Ms. Smith supported the concept and asked for a preliminary staff report. Mr. Gleason said that they would have staff discuss the pros and cons of the urban village concept at the meeting, but would not take a position. D. School Closures - Ms. Wooten explained that the formation of the School Closure Task Force has raised many issues. She asked for a staff report on the role of the City in relation to that decision-making process. There are three schools in her ward that are on the list for potential closure. The City has a substantial invest- ment in those neighborhoods. Mr. Gleason said that the Planning Commission has discussed the issue. Mr. Porter explained the Planning Commission has received a preliminary staff report. The commission asked that staff attend and monitor each meeting of the School Closure Task Force, and report back every two weeks to the Planning Commission. They further asked that staff discuss with 4-J the City's revitalization efforts in the city's core area. Mr. Gleason had met with Mr. Dorland to discuss the subject of school closures. Mr. Gleason said a report could be brought back on what the school board sees as the process, and what the Planning Department and the commission see as its role. Council could then decide what role it wishes staff to play, and what role the various commit- tees, boards, and commissions would play. Ms. Wooten's concern was for the usage of the closed buildings and for the impact on the neighborhoods of the closures. Mr. Gleason agreed with these concerns and felt that they could work with the school board. Ms. Wooten asked that the report discuss the impact on the Community Schools program. E. Appointments 1. Downtown Development Board Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approved ~he appoint- ment of Hugh Prichard, 2671 Emerald; Michael Schwartz, 2390 Lariat Drive; Thomas Slocum, 2125 Fairmount Boulevard; and Chuck Wickizer, 1220 Oakway; to three-year terms ending January 1, 1984, on the Downtown Development Board. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Historic Review Board Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to appoint to the Historic Review Board Carmi Weingrod, 2654 Harris, for a four-year term ending January 1,1985. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Sign Code Board of Appeals Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to appoint to the Sign Code Board of Appeals: William Frye, 1977 Graham; and Helen Mancl, 1770 East 26th for three-year terms ending January 1984 and Sidney Voorhees, 2489 Lincoln, for a term ending January 1, 1983. Motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 2 e e e 4. Cooperative Museum Commission Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to appoint to the Coopera- tive Museum Commission: Thomas Hoyt, 460 Palomino. Motion carried unanimously. F. Announcements It was announced that the Mayor had made the following appointments: Boxing Commission--Stoddard Malarkey, 1131 East 20th Avenue, to an indefinite term. Gambling Committee--Joe Soderberg, 2412 Terrace View Drive, to a two-year term ending 1/1/83. Zoning Board of Appeals--John Ohm, 3276 Strathmore Place, to a five- year term ending 1/1/86. 1. New Public Service Officer Ms. Baker introduced the new public service officer, Grace Stearns. She is a volunteer for 20 hours a week for six months. 2. CETA Open House Mr. Gleason explained there would be an open house February 19, 1981, in the Atrium building, 99 West 10th Avenue, for the Eugene CETA office with presen- tations by staff and advisory council members. There would be a no-host cocktail hour beginning at 5:30 p.m. at the Rodeway Inn, and dinner beginning at 7 p.m. City councilors were invited. II. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL A. Approval of Council Minutes of December 10, 1980; December 17, 1980; and January 12, 1981. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to approve council minutes of December 10, 1980; December 17, 1980; and January 12, 1981. Motion carried unanimously. B. Call for Public Hearings 1. Easement Vacation for Ruth Thorn (EV 80-8) (map distributed) CB 2245--An ordinance calling for a public hearing for March 11, 1981; re: easement vacation for Ruth Thorne for property located between Riverview and Augusta, south of East 26th Avenue. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 3 e e e Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only with the unanimous consent of the council and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. The bill was declared passed and numbered 18754. . 2. Easement Vacation for Spring Construction Company (EV 80-7) (map distributed) CB 2246--An ordinance calling for a public hearing for March 11, 1981; re: easement vacation for Spring Construction Company for property located east of Beltline Road and north and adjacent to the proposed storm channel and Roosevelt Boulevard extension. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, 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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Manager introduced Loren Stubbert to answer questions. Mr. Lindberg pointed out in the memorandum under Exhibit A, Police Operations: liTo reduce appropriations, estimated revenues, because anticipated grant was not acquired." Mr. Lindberg wondered why under revenue they had listed State grant. Mr. Stubbert replied that in 1980-81 they had anticipated receiving the State grant and that it was not approved. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3466--A resolution authorizing the transfer of contingency appropriations within a given fund to official budget categories. Ms. Miller noted that one item listed in Exhibit A was for the Spay/Neuter Clinic. . . acquisition of cages and supplies. She assumed that the clinic was expanding and wondered if it was operating at a break-even point. Mr. Gleason said the clinic was financially stable. There had been a slight dip in the MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 4 . month of December/January. They felt it was on good financial footing. The reserve does not jeopardize the account. Mr. Lindberg said that he was keeping in close touch with the clinic, and also noted that November and December were the first months in which any declining revenue took place. The decline was due to the Christmas holiday and some confusion about public relations which has since been corrected. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3467--A resolution authorizing the transfer of non-contingency appropriations within a given fund between official budget categories. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Street Vacations 1. Street Vacation for Riverside Realty (River's Edge) (SV 80-2) (map distributed) e Manager introduced John Porter, Planning Director, to answer questions. The Manager indicated that there will be some discussion with application relating to the price. Staff appraisal was for $8,000. If the dispute could not be resolved adequately today, then staff would recommend that the council only give first reading at this time and direct staff to proceed with negotiations. If staff can successfully negotiate they will note the difference in the second reading. If there is agreement at this public hearing, they would recommend approval of the vacation. Public hearing was opened. Jeff Seigal, 247 North Grant Street, presented a letter signed by members of the Whiteaker neighborhood and adjacent properties, requesting the vacation not be granted at this time. He said the price of $8,000 is too small for the property in question. Riverside Realty acquired the adjacent property, only slightly larger in size, at a price of $30,000. He suggested the City grossly undervalues its property. As far as the PUD, the question before the council is not approval of a vacation request, but whether to expand the PUD. The Riverside Realty lot and the vacated property would make additions to the River's Edge Apartments possible. He read the distributed letter asking the council not to grant the vaC'at ion. Marlene Nelson, 23 Cedar, said, she lives next to the River's Edge Apartments. She did door-to-door work on the North Jackson Street, and was appalled by the reactions of people in the area to the idea of the vacation and the expansion of the apartment complex. The residents felt they did not have control over the area they lived in and they felt that they did not trust the City. There was nothing they could do about it. She asked the council to consider bringing the issue before the Whiteaker Community Council for discussion before any final 4It action. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 5 e e - David Williams, 975 Oak, #600, representing Riverside Realty, said Mr. Gleason had indlcated their concerns about price. Their preference was to work at staff level on the price. Their basic concern, backed up by the 1979 Attorney General's opinion, was that the assessed value of the lot is not an appropriate measure on a street vacation. If the City decided that it was in the public interest to grant a street vacation, then the administrative costs are an appropriate measure. Since the decision has been made, the land reverts to the abutting property owners. They would like to resolve this issue at staff level. Jeff Seigal pointed out that the City has, in essence, vacated most of the north end of Van Buren Street. Observation would show that Mr. Safley, in the course of development of Riverls Edge Apartments, had occupied, developed, landscaped, and put in driveways and roads, as well as fences, on what constitutes north Van Buren Street. He questioned if there was an agreement between the City and Riverside Realty that would allow development of north Van Buren Street which is occupied by the Riverls Edge Apartments. Public hearing was closed. Ms. Schue asked what the present zoning of the River's Edge Apartments is and whether expansion can take place without going back through the Planning Commis- sion. Mr. Porter replied that the present zoning is R-2, 13A. If the vacated property was not part of the PUD, it would have to go through the application and public hearing processes for a PUD. Mr. Porter said that on June 15, 1980, the City sent notices to th~ neighborhood group; on October 3, 1980, they sent a revision to that notice. Mr. Seigal did notify them on August 7, 1980, that he objected to the vacation. The City had not had a formal, written response from the neighborhood group. There was no adverse testimony at the Planning Commission meeting by Mr. Seigal or by people in the area. Ms. Schue wished to have some forum for the Whiteaker neighborhood concerns. Mr. Obie asked if a 50' x 70' lot was legal lot size for a single-family resi- dence. Mr. Porter replied the PUD is not based on lot size per se; it is based on square footage. A normal residential lot has to have 60 feet of frontage. This lot is not large enough to be developed by itself. It has to be part of the other property to be usable. Mr. Obie ascertained that Riverside Realty owned the surrounding property. Mr. Porter indicated the vacated property would go to the abutting property and RA zoning would be automatically applied to the vacated street. Mr. Gleason said the law requires that they assess benefits. What the City is selling is the value of the benefit of the public easement; strict appraisal values do not always rule. It is not necessary that the City ignore the appraised value. Comparing the easement with the surrounding appraisal is not always legitimate appraisal procedure. Ms. Miller asked what additional density would be allowed for the PUD on the additional 3,500 square feet. Mr. Porter said that he would get that informa- tion. ,She asked if Mr. Long had any opinion as to the sale of the easement or the right-of-way across the piece of property, and whether it would be affected MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 6 e by Mr. Safley's recent legal problems. She wanted to be extremely careful about disposing of public property, and at what price. Mr. Long could not answer since he did not know whether Riverside Realty was a corporation or privately owned. Ms. Miller felt that it is important for the City to be sure of its legal footing. Ms. Wooten asked if Mr. Williams was asking for a delay of this item. Mr. Williams responded that he wanted the council to be aware of the price negotia- tions so that they would not have to come back and undo the council decision at the current recommended price. He would have no objection as long as they realize that he might come and argue the recommendation. Ms. Wooten said given the concerns of Mr. Seigal and Ms. Nelson, and given the recommendation of Mr. Williams, it would be best to hold this item over for additional price negotiations and legal clarification. Manager said that the staff recommendation is to approve the right-of-way and have first reading, and continue the price negotiations, bringing the item back for second reading in two to three weeks. Mr. Obie agreed with the staff recommendation. The decision was to sell or not to sell, and there was no other issue. If the decision is to sell it, then the only question remains--at what price. e Ms. Miller understood Mr. Williams to say that if the parcel were declared surplus, it would then be turned over to the abutting landowner at a price that is different from the price that the City staff recommends. She did not want to declare the parcel surplus and get started on that process. They did not feel they have enough information. Mr. Long said that it did not make a great deal of difference whether they postponed the issue entirely for two weeks or had first reading at this meeting and held over the issue for two weeks. He said that they were vacating a right-of-way. Ms. Wooten wished to accommodate the Whiteaker Community Council and give them time for input. Ms. Schue, however, did not want the Whiteaker Community Council to feel that they could have much of an effect on the decision since it is not large enough for a single-family residence. Mr. Lindberg asked for more discussion and information. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to postpone further discussion and consideration of Council Bill 2247 until three weeks from this day; on that day there will be no public hearing, but council will accept written testimony up to that day. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 2. Street Vacation for Trygve Vik (SV 80-5) (map distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Mr. Porter to answer questions. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were noted. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. The public hearing was opened. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 7 e e e Those testifying were Jake Coleman, 1350 Quaker; Shawn Mohr, 3843 Kevington; Kristi Chedelin, 1905 Hawkins Lane; Cindy Marie Bruns, 3863 Kevington; Andrea Campion, 2018 Todd Street; members of McCornack School Pace Program. Jake, Shawn, Cindy, and Andrea urged the City Council to vote "yes" on the street vacation. They said if the City was not going to use Mr. Vik's land for a street, the City should give it back to him, but leave room for fire engines to back up and turn around. Green Acres Road would be a better traffic pattern. They interviewed people near the street vacation, and these people were against more traffic in the neighborhood and favored the street vacation. They had seen a dirt bike on the land and suggested that Mr. Vik should build a better fence, that dirt bikes would use the area if it were developed, and that Mr. Vik should make a track for dirt bikes and charge a fee to ride on his adjacent land; that way Mr. Vik could make money. Kristi recommended the City Council vote no on the proposed street vacation. She believed the City should build a street for easy access; a non-commercial vehicle road. There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. CB 2248--An ordinance authorizing vacation of a 28-foot-wide street located at the westerly terminus of Holly Street west of Norkenzie Ro ad . Ms. Smith stated she would abstain since Mr. Saul, who is representing the applicant, is in partnership with her husband. Mr. Lindberg said, based on the testimony, he was concerned about the accessi- bility for fire trucks. Mr. Porter replied the ordinance would reserve the easterly 50 feet of right-of-way for a turnaround. This would be adequate for emergency vehicles. Mr. Obie complimented the students of McCornack School on their clear logic. The rest of the council members seconded Mr. Obiels comments. John Porter requested that the council bill be given only first reading now and that the second reading be held over until the payment is deposited. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be read the first time only with second reading reading to be given once the payment had been deposited. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously with Ms. Smith abstaining. B. Supplemental Budget (memo and ordinance distributed) Mr. Gleason said Mr. Stubbert was present to answer questions. Public hearing was held with no testimony. CB 2249--An ordinance adopting a supplemental budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1980 and ending June 30, 1981; and declaring an emergency. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 8 e e e Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr Obie, 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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2249 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18756. C. Consideration of Councilor Schue's Proposal to Draft a Resolution Endorsing the Acquisition of Artworks for Major City Building Con- struction Projects (memo distributed) Mr. Gleason said Ms. Schue would introduce this topic. Ms. Schue said that this was a proposal suggested to her by City art groups. Having art in City buildings is something the City has done. It is part of the construction budget of the Performing Arts Center. However, it has always been on an ad hoc basis; there has never been a City policy. A number of jurisdic- tions have established a permanent policy. She would like to draft a resolution that would establish the policy for Eugene. Ms. Wooten asked when one would know if the resolution covers a certain project. Ms. Schue said that this needs to be determined. Mr. Lindberg wondered if one percent would be allocated for each project or if they could move the funds around and have some buildings get three percent and others none. Public hearing was opened. Karen Johnson" Lane Regional Arts Council, said that they have been involved with public art, most notably in the murals at 5th Street Public Market and several paintings for the West University Neighborhood, 13th and Willamette, and 11th and Pearl. They are in favor of a percent of the construction cost being designated for art for public buildings. In doing research she ascertained that a percent designation for art has been instituted throughout America for the following reasons: 1) Cities and counties have found that these programs add a new dimension to the public environment, and 2) it helps to foster culture and the arts. In 1975, Oregon was the third state to establish a percent for art programs at the one percent level for new construction and major renovations over $100,000. In 1979, 15 states and 34 counties had similar programs. She encouraged council's endorsement. David Bayles, 85060 Spencer Hollow Road, urged that they accept a percentage designation for art. He put this discussion in an economic development context. He pointed out the economic benefits to the City of crafts people. The highly successful stores that started from the crafts movement indicates that there are people making a living in arts and crafts. The support of the arts community MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 9 e comes from a variety of sources, of which this is only one. Artists support themselves by selling a product. For a healthy mix art is important. The healthy art community can attract economic development in general to the area. It is one of the many factors taken into account when companies consider moving to an area. Lotte Streisinger, 32591 Fox Hollow, said that she was a potter and a consultant for the integral crafts for the Performing Arts Center. She supports the percent allocation for art in public buildings. She emphasized that if there was such an ordinance, crafts could be planned and integrated into buildings before they were built. She indicated the stained-glass window in the Library is an example, as well as the County jail facility. The Performing Arts Center set aside money for art. She would like to see more of this and would like this established in time for the Airport expansion project. The public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. All councilors present agreed with the concept. Mr. Obie wished to evaluate this with Room Tax Fund usage, to investigate flexible percentages for different structures, to ensure use of local artist and to carefully determine a method of control and selection of art work. Mr. Smith added that determination of a selection process/group will be difficult and guidelines will be needed. Mr. Lindberg referred to two interesting models of art work in cities: the livable city program, which was done with a grant from HUD and the National Endowment for the Arts. He suggested neighborhood subcommittees or some method by which people with different tastes could control the art in their neighborhood. e Ms. Wooten felt that they should use local artists. Ms. Miller did not want to see art in all buildings. She thought art might be very inappropriate in areas of high vandalism. She saw the definition of "local" as being very difficult. Mr. Hamel felt this must be done on a bid priority. The artist would have to be whoever bids the lowest dollar amount. Mayor Keller had thought that Eugene had such an ordinance. He noted the widespread support for such an ordinance, and asked that it be pursued. Mr. Gleason said he would take the councills ideas and incorporate them into a document. He would work with Ms. Schue and bring it back to the council. Mr. Gleason said he envisioned a contribution process so that there would be a fund to allocate from. It would be part of the design process. The fund of money would not be linked to certain structures; it would be flexible. Mr. Gleason said that for Federal and State buildings in the city, they could work on a pro- gram so that the Federal and State governments would be requested to participate. IV. REPORT FROM LTD ON COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE REDESIGN Mr. Gleason introduced the topic. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 10 - Dan Huibert, representing the LTD Board, introduced Ellen Bevington, member of the LTD Planning staff. He said that they were asking for the council's cooperation and support. The intent of the program was to make the transit more effective and efficient. To this end they have proposed a resolution asking the citizens in the community to a series of meetings about transportation in their neighborhoods. The other part of the request was to ask City Council to attend some of these meetings in order to add weight to the proceedings and to give the councilors the opportunity to learn what is going on in public transit. Ms. Miller believed that it was the council IS tradition that they not pass such a resolution, although she was totally in favor of the LTD program. Ms. Wooten was willing to abide by the council tradition. She wished to raise an issue of reconsideration of the tradition, since there were times and issues when the public deserves a comment from the council. Mr. Lindberg concurred. Mr. Obie said that the resolution before them concerned Eugene and was germane and within their policy. Ms. Miller asked the policy. She felt that if the council passed resolutions supporting the work of community groups and efforts of such groups without there being some direction of action by the council, then the council would be doing a lot of that. Ms. Schue said that it would be appropriate in the interim while they were discussing a new policy, to tell the transit district that the council does like the idea, wishes them well, and is supportive of cooperation between the City of Eugene and the transit district without a formal resolution. The Mayor said that in the past the mayor has sent a strong letter of support in lieu of a resolution, and that is what he would do. e V. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARTER REVISION (memo distributed) Mr. Gleason asked the Neighborhood Liaison staff to comment on the resolutions. Beth Campbell, Neighborhood Liaison, said that throughout the years the charter changes have been brought to the council. In the case of Laurel Hill, it is a minor change in their quorum from 15 to 10; in Crest Drive it is a response to changing boundaries to include west 28th Avenue to 24th Street. Edna Shirey, 3217 Whitten Drive, said that she welcomed the change in boun- daries, and that everyone should belong to a neighborhood group. Res. No. 3468--A resolution approving and accepting an amendment to the Laurel Hill Valley Citizens Association Charter. Mayor Keller left the meeting. Council president Miller presided. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 11 e e e Res. No. 3469--A resolution approving and accepting an amendment to the Crest Drive Citizens Association Charter. Ms. Qbie moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Consideration of Proposal to Process Neighborhood Organization Charter Amendments Administratively (memo distributed) Ms. Miller explained that this was to allow certain charter changes to be handled administratively. In the two cases just before the council, the reso- lution on the quorum would not be submitted to the council because the council has previously approved that quorum in other neighborhood charters and it would be approved administratively. If the quorum were to go below ten, it would come before the City Council. In the case of a boundary change, that resolution would come before the City Council; it would be major change. Any charters that were substantially changed would come before the council by resolution. Ms. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve neighborhood organization charter amendment processes as outlined in the staff memo dated October 7, 1980. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, ~~' . Michea 1 Gl eason City Manager (Recorded by Beth Conant) BC:pm/CM27b1 MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 1981 Page 12