HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/09/1981 Meeting
-
e
e
M I NUT E S
Eugene City Council
City Council Chamber
March 9, 1981
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Smith, Mark Lindberg, D. W. Hamel, Gretchen Miller,
Brian Obie, Eric Haws, Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten.
The meeting of the City Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon, was called to
order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller.
I. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Concurrent Annexation/Rezoning
1. Property located within the area bounded by West 18th Avenue,
Bertelsen Road, Bailey Hill Road, and Four Oaks Grange Road from
County RA Suburban Residential District to City RA Suburban
Residential District (City of Eugene: Bertelsen Road Area Island
Annexation) (A/Z 80-5) (map distributed).
Manager introduced Jim Croteau, Planning Department. Mr. Croteau explained that
the City of Eugene is initiating island annexation and concurrent rezoning in
the area of Four Oaks Granqe Road and Bertelsen Road. Over the last several
years, the City has annexed considerable property in this area. In October
1980, in conjunction with the annexation in this area, the Planning Commission
initiated the rezoninq and annexation of the remaining island properties. The
Planning Commission considered this item on January 5, 1981, and recommended
approval by the City Council by unanimous vote. There are seven tax lots, six
of which are occupied by single-family and duplex development. The remaining
lot, Tax Lot 1700, is currently vacant. The request had been evaluated under
the criteria for annexation and rezoning in response to the administrative rule
required in all annexations. The property owners have been notified individually
by letter, by notice of the Planning Commission meeting, and by notice of the
City Council's meeting, March 9, 1981. The only correspondence from the
property owners was a letter from Helen Davies, owner of Tax Lot 1700, who
submitted a letter subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing asking that her
property not be annexed to the city. In conjunction with the annexation and
rezoning, it is recommended that a residential sign district be applied to these
properties.
Ms. Wooten asked why the residential sign district was being requested for that
area. Mr. Croteau answered that property within the city is subject to the sign
code. Property outside the city limits is not. Last fall, in reviewing some
of the annexations, they found that they had not been applying the sign district
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
March 9, 1981
Page 1
e
when property was annexed to the city. The code requires that they do so.
From now on, they will be applying an appropriate sign code district. Ms.
Wooten asked what that would be for. Mr. Croteau explained that every property
within the city is covered by a particular sign district. The residential sign
district is the most restrictive sign district in the city. The only signing
allowed for a residence is in conjunction with a home occupation: a one-square-
foot sign for the name of a person with the business there.
Mayor asked those testifying to fill out a questionnaire for the Citizen
Involvement Committee. These questionnaires are passed out in order to seek
the public's feelings about the hearing process that the council goes through
for land-use issues.
No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared. Staff notes and
minutes were entered into the record.
Public hearing was opened.
Helen Davies, owner of Tax Lots 1500 and 1700, said she had written a letter to
the City explaining why she did not want her property to be annexed.
Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony.
e
3482--A resolution forwarding recommendations to the Boundary
Commission for annexation of property located within the
area bounded by West 18th Avenue, Bertelsen Road, Bailey
Hill Road, and Four Oaks Grange Road to the City of Eugene
and Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District.
Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the findings support-
ing the annexation as set forth in the Planning Commission staff
notes and minutes of January 6, 1981, be adopted by reference
thereto, and that the resolution be adopted.
Ms. Wooten asked Ms. Davies to explain her reasons for not wanting to have her
property annexed to the city. Ms. Davies said that she was very satisfied with
the way it was. They had a good septic tank and good water. They have animals
that they want to keep. Ms. Wooten asked if the two lots together were a little
over an acre. Ms. Davies said that they were.
Res. No.
Ms. Wooten asked Mr. Croteau if, under Goal 3, Agricultural Lands, the soils
classification was in the range of I through IV. Mr. Croteau did not have that
information. He said the parcel was relatively small and is surrounded by highly
urban development. Due to low density in the development that has occurred, the
burden of proof was not particularly heavy so they did not do a detailed soils
analysis.
Ms. Wooten asked Ms. Davies if she and her husband intended to develop any of
their property in the near future. Ms. Davies said they did not.
e
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
March 9, 1981
Page 2
Motion carried unanimously.
e
CB 2254--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from County RA Suburban Resi-
dential District to City RA Suburban Residential District for
property located within the area bounded by West 18th Avenue,
Bertelsen Road, Bailey Hill Road, and Four Oaks Grange Road.
Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that findings supporting
the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and
minutes of January 6, 1981, 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.
Mr. Obie explained to Ms. Davies that this is one of the problem areas council
has in the various plans, starting with the 1990 Plan. These plans declare this
area will ultimately be urban with sewers and other City services. The City has
been annexing property in this area for several years. This is a continued
implementation of those plans the City has relied on. It is very difficult for
the council to change that direction. The plans have taken many years to develop.
Because of the plans and the goals of the council, the council is committed to
urban development in the area. The City will have services that go beyond the
Davies' property and those urban services will be needed.
Mr. Gleason asked that Mr. Croteau or the Planning staff discuss the consequences
and details of the processes with Ms. Davies.
e
Ms. Miller asked if the council bill they were voting on included the Residen-
tial Sign District. Mr. Gleason said that it did.
Motion for second reading carried unanimously.
Council Bill 2254 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 18761.
II. CONDEMNATION AUTHORIZATION--SOUTH HILLS RIDGELINE ACQUISITION (memo and
map distributed)
Manager introduced Walt Haniuk. Mr. Haniuk said this item comes to the council
because of a difficult purchase situation. It is a project that the City and
the Parks Department have had on schedule for six to eight months. It is an
acquisition project in the ridgeline which is part of the continuing ridgeline
program established in 1974. The request was prompted by the fact that the
voluntary negotiations have come to a stalemate by pending litigation on the
property, and it appears that this pending litigation may not be resolved for
e
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
March 9, 1981
Page 3
e
e
e
one or more years. The City Attorney's Office has been assisting the department
with the negotiations toward a voluntary purchase. It appears that this cannot
be expected for some time. As a result, Mr. Wood, a previous owner, his attor-
ney, and the City Attorney have recommended that in order to initiate some
progressive action to ultimately culminate the purchase of the property, the
City initiate condemnation proceedings. The purchase price is not the issue.
The project is consistent with the community goals established in the South
Hills Study and adopted by the council. They are consistent with the State Land
Use Goals established by LCDC, the applicable goals being: Goal 5, Open Spaces,
to preserve and to protect scenic areas and to promote a healthy, visually
attractive environment; Goal 4, the protection of forest lands; Goal 6, for air,
water, and land resources; and Goal 8, the recreational needs goal. The housing
goal is not impaired since there is an adequate inventory of buildable land for
residential use in this area.
Mr. Obie asked if this was the property that is the subject of a controversy
between the property owners Coleman and Mr. Wood, relative to a septic tank
field.
Mr. Haniuk said that this was not the issue in litigation. They were aware
of the controversy. They have addressed the issue and have informed Mr. Coleman
that they are aware of the problem and do want to see the easement removed. Mr.
Haniuk said Mr. Coleman had an implied easement on Mr. Wood's property for a
septic tank field. Mr. Obie was concerned for the man who would lose his septic
tank field to the City. Mr. Haniuk indicated that Mr. Coleman would not be
evicted from the former site. He said that it was not the subject of litigation.
The litigation was between Mr. Wood and Mr. Green over a land sales contract.
Mr. Sercombe told Mr. Obie that Mr. Coleman would be paid by the City if he had
an interest in the condemnation act or some other reasonable agreement with the
City would be made. Mr. Gleason said that if there is a right, it will be
determined by the court and the compensation will be paid for that right.
Mr. Gleason told Mr. Obie that when the City goes into condemnation, if they
have not adequately resolved the issue of the septic tank field, they will
notify the councilors, bring the issue back, and hold a public hearing on
the subject, as long as it did not jeopardize the court proceedings.
Ms. Miller urged that the council allow the attorney flexibility for proceeding.
Ms. Miller asked for clarification of the pending litigation about the land
sales contract which is governing the current sale of land to the current owner.
The previous owner, the underlying seller in the contract, has been cooperating
with the City in this manner. Is the City dealing with an unwilling seller or
with an unclear title?
Mr. Haniuk gave more background. Mr. Wood, the previous owner, had sold the
parcel to American-Nepal Education Foundation. They sold it to Joe Green. As a
result of difficulties in developing the land as Mr. Green has intended, Mr.
Green sued to rescind his contract. That was where the suit started. Then the
City indicated an interest in buying the property from the American-Nepal
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
March 9, 1981
Page 4
e
Foundation or Joe Green. Mr. Green then decided he did not want to rescind the
contract and wanted to be the principal owner in the program. No progress
has been evident in getting the suit settled. The City could wait or initiate
condemnation proceedings.
Ms. Miller asked if this action would not speed up the proceedings or inevitably
freeze the market value. Mr. Gleason said it was the latter, and that was all
the action really meant.
Mr. Lindberg asked if the parties would testify if this were a public hearing.
Mr. Gleason asked Mr. Haniuk if both parties were agreeable to this action.
Mr. Haniuk did not know. He thought Mr. Wood would be in agreement; about Mr.
Green he did not know.
Mayor Keller noted the key issue before the council was that the City has a
policy of ridgeline acquisition. This process has been used in the past. It is
the City's intent to acquire as much of the ridgeline as they set out to do
years ago. If this is allowed to go to litigation, the City will lose 18 months
and it will be an additional cost to the City. If this procedure is followed,
the price is locked in immediately upon the filing of the complaint.
Ms. Smith said that she did not like the condemnation procedure; however, a plan
had been developed. If they do not follow the plan, the City will not have the
open spaces that council feels are important to the City. Most people buying in
an area should be aware of the future plans of the City. The City must use the
condemnation procedures in this case.
e
Mr. Lindberg and Mr. Gleason pointed out that this was not a case of different
land use. It is a case of who gets the fee. This is authorization for initia-
ting the proceedings. Mr. Gleason said that they will probably continue to
negotiate. This will lock in the market value.
CB 2255--An ordinance authorizing the institution of proceedings in
eminent domain for the acquisition by condemnation of property
for the preservation of the South Hills Ridgeline and declaring
an emergency.
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.
Motion carried unanimously.
Council Bill 2255 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 18762.
e
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
March 9, 1981
Page 5
.
e
e
Mayor thanked members of the council for participating in the trip to Washington,
DC. He was extremely proud that they spoke not only for Eugene but for Oregon
as well.
Meeting was adjourned to March 11, 1981.
Respectfully submitted,
~
- M~~D. Gl son
City Manager
(Recorded by Beth Conant)
MDG:BC:pm/CM7a24
MINUTES--Eugene City Council
March 9, 1981
Page 6