Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/14/1981 Meeting M I NUT E S . Eugene City Council City Council Chamber ':> December 14, 1981 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Gretchen Miller, Brian Obie, Betty Smith, Mark Lindberg, D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, Cynthia Wooten, and Emily Schue. Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Concurrent Annexation/Rezoning of Property Located East of Capitol Drive and West of Floral Hill Drive from County RA Suburban Residential District to City RA/PD Residential District with Planned Unit Develop- ment proced ures (Alpert, et al.) (A/Z 81-3) (map and background information distributed) Ms. Smith noted that she would be leaving the council meeting about 8 or 8:15 to conduct some other City business and would then return to the meeting. e David Whitlow, Assistant City Manager, introduced Jim Croteau, Planning. Mr. Croteau stated that this item is a proposed concurrent annexation/rezoning for Alpert, et al. This is Tax Lot 300 at the top of Capitol Drive. The parcel is approximately one-and-one-half acres and is virtually surrounded by the City of Eugene. The north-south ridgeline crosses through Tax Lot 100. The west tax lot contains a house. The City can provide gravity-flow sewers to the west portion of Tax Lot 100. All of the surrounding area is zoned for low- density residential use. This property abuts Hendricks Park with no access. This area is governed by the South Hills Study. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this request with a 6:0 vote. Adrienne Lannom, Planning Commissioner, is present if questions arise from councilors. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were noted. St aff note sand minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Speaking against: Michael McCarthy, 2855 Capitol Drive, stated that he is speaking for the Fair- mount Nelghbors Association. They have distributed a letter to the council. They have held two meetings regarding this annexation request. Fairmount , MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 1 opposes the rezoning because there is no access and it would cause a severe traffic problem. The roads are substandard. Spring Boulevard is 16 feet wide e with no room for sidewalks and it has a steep grade. Studies indicate it is impossible to improve this road. They are requesting that more planning be done to look at another means of access. There are already 27 houses on Capitol Drive with eight to nine more lots that could be developed. They would like the Planning Commission to consider all 67 acres at one time. These are all the acres that were noted for development in the ridgeline and they feel that they should not be considered in a random manner. Some mistakes have been made in the past, but that is no reason to continue making them. Excess runoff increases as more houses are built. He asked if the sewer would prove to be inadequate for the area over time. The neighborhood association can find no w~ys to improve traffic flow over time. The association also understands that the project under development will consider access and traffic on Capitol Drive, but he does not know if that is an accurate statement. The total land owned by Alpert is about 4.3 acres. Some of this land is not being considered for rezoning. There is land on the east side of the ridge that has been developed where the sewage is being pumped uphill. Dorothy Dougher, 2840 Alta Vista Court, said that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this request and they apparently feel that those who live in the area should expect to live with the hazards of hillside living. There needs to be mutual consideration. Capitol Drive is a substandard road. One large vehicle would block access for a fire truck, creating an unsafe situation. Robert Grodin, 2830 Capitol Drive, noted agreement with the previous speakers. He asked when, in the process, traffic considerations are reviewed by the e City. Speaking in favor: Peter Thompson, 840 Lawrence, stated that he had submitted information previ- ously to the Planning Commission. The original request before the council in the past was for annexing the total property. This request is only for property to the ridgeline. The applicants met with neighborhood people at the time of the original application and withdrew their application to look for other access, as is indicated in the staff notes. No other way was found for access, except through Hendricks Park. There are only two parcels remaining that are b u il dab 1 e . Roads, sewers, water, and utilities are already serviced from the west. Any remaining property will have to be served from the east. There is a problem with traffic, but there is no way out of it. The traffic situation will be reviewed during the PUD process. Page II-A-19 of the staff notes shows that the existing streets will provide access with no other options available. It is part of Eugene's policy to infill, and they would appreciate approval of this request. On the map, a number of ways are shown as possible road routes. There are a number of loop systems for emergency vehicle access. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Croteau stated that there had been some testimony regarding the maximum amount of land that could be annexed. There are two lots to the south of this property which could be annexed, tax lots 400 and 200. There is a possibility e of perhaps 30 additional units in the future. The South Hills Study governs MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 2 the density which is a maximum of six units per acre. The Traffic Engineer could report on the traffic situation. Ms. Smith stated that she would like to hear - from Mr. Hanks since traffic is a major consideration. Jim Hanks, Traffic Engineer, stated that the situation cannot be sUbstantially ch anged . Capitol Drive is narrow at 18 to 20 feet wide and there are places with blind corners as well as steep driveways. There are 480 cars per day at the intersection with Spring Boulevard. Only three accidents have been reported to the Police Department since 1976. Ms. Smith asked about parking. Mr. Hanks stated that in the past five years, staff has attempted to remove part or all of the parking, but that creates extreme hardships for some residents. Ms. Smith asked if off-street parking should have been required at the time the properties were developed. Mr. Hanks stated that some of the properties were developed prior to the passage of the ordinance and in some cases, there is no way to provide off-street parking. Ms. Smith encouraged Public Works to limit street parking to whatever extent possible to help the traffic problem. Mr. Lindberg asked if the recommendation from the South Hills Study is for five units per acre, which would generate 50 additional trips per day. Mr. Hank s responded that that is correct. Mr. Lindberg stated that the remaining build- able lots could produce 19 units, which is four times as many as currently exist. He asked if that would be 680 trips per day at full capacity. Mr. Hanks responded that it would be 680 to 720. Mr. Lindberg asked if this includes land identified as that to be potentially annexed. He did not feel that that seems like a lot. Mr. Hanks responded that that is correct the figure includes all land that could be annexed. e Ms. Schue asked how the City got into a situation where there are houses where there is no off-street parking and the streets are unsafe to park on. Mr. Hanks stated that individual plans are not reviewed; the PUD requirements regarding off-street parking are reviewed, and some of the individual housing predates the 1948 requirement for off-street parking. Don Allen, Public Works, stated that in some cases, parking is there but it is not usable because of the grade. This plat has existed a long time. To deny development would have been inverse condemnation of the property. Ms. Miller stated that traffic seems to be the big question. It must be deter- mined whether Capitol Drive is an adequate public facility. The only two choices are to determine that the street is adequate for a minimum level of transporta- tion services or to have an island of vacant land surrounded by City property. She will support the resolution. Mr. Haws asked if there was time for rebuttal. Les Swanson, City Attorney, stated that this would be up to the discretion of the chair. A procedural discussion followed. Ms. Smith stated that she shares some of Ms. Miller's concerns, but she supports the resolution based upon City policy. Ms. Smith left the meeting. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 3 Mr. Thompson waived rebuttal. e Res. No. 3612--A resolution forwarding recommendation to the Boundary Commission for annexation of property east of Capitol Drive and west of Floral Hill Drive to the City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that findings supporting the annexation as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of November 3, 1981, be adopted by reference thereto; and that the resolution be adopted. Roll call vote; motion carried 6:1 with Councilor Wooten voting no. Ms. Smith was absent for the vote. CB 2401--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from County RA Subur- ban Residential to City RA/PD Residential District with Planned Unit Development procedures for property located east of Capitol Drive and west of Floral Hill Drive. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of November 3, 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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2401 was read the second time by council bill number only. e Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; motion carried 6:1, with Councilor Wooten voting no. Ms. Smith was absent for the vote. The bill was declared passed and numbered 18900. B. Rezoning of Property Located on the North Side of West 11th Avenue, West of Seneca from M-1/SR Limited Industrial District with Site Review procedures (portion of Tax Lots 1111 and 1201) and M-2 Light Industrial District (portion of Tax Lots 1108, 1109, and 1200) to C-2/SR Community Commercial District with Site Review procedures (Fred Meyer Properties, Inc.) (Z 81-15) (map and background infor- mation distributed) Mr. Whitlow introduced Jerry Jacobson, Planning. Mr. Jacobson stated that the property involved in this zone change request is located along the north side of West 11th Avenue and the west side of Seneca Road. It consists of approximately 17 acres of land. A portion of the site is presently used for the West 11th Drive-In Theater. The remainder is vacant. The drive-in theater is operating as a conditional use of the existing zone, M-2 Light Industrial District. Abutting properties are industrially zoned and developed with a variety of industrial and commercial uses, or they are vacant. To the north is property zoned M-2 developed with the West 11th Walk-In Cinema. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 4 To the east, across Seneca, is the Monsanto Company on land zoned M-3 Heavy . Industrial District. At the northwest corner of 11th and Seneca is a retail and wholesale painting equipment store on property zoned M-2. On the south side of West 11th across the street are mini-warehouses, Cowboy Country Western Apparel and Supplies, Taco John's, Pietro's Pizza Parlor, and some vacant property with an M-2 zoning designation. To the west is vacant property zoned M-1/SR. The Planning Commission voted 6:1 to recommend approval of this rezoning request to C-2/SR. The site review suffix is included in order to evaluate traffic impacts. Mayor Keller called for ex parte contacts and conflicts of interest. Mr. Obie stated that he has a document showing that he has an outstanding financial transaction causing a conflict of interest. He also has had extensive ex parte contacts. Mr. Obie left the meeting. Ms. Miller stated that she has feinted off many ex parte contacts on this item. Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Speaking in favor: Don Powell, 1789 Orchard, indicated that he is a consultant for Fred Meyer. He lntroduced Steve Gale, Real Estate and Properties Manager, Fred Meyer Properties; Cheryl Perrin, Assistant to Chairman of the Board, Director of Governmental Relations, Fred Meyer Properties; and Richard Miller, attorney. Mr. Powell stated that as the Planning Commission found, this request is consistent with e the Metropolitan Plan and City zoning ordinances. This property is in the commercial category. M-2 zoning is not consistent and this rezoning would bring the property into conformance. The Planning Commission determined the public need. The rezoning request promotes the Metro Plan. Approval would allow Fred Meyer to begin construction. As soon as a building permit is issued, they can begin their $8.1 million project. This will provide opportunity for 115-130 construction workers over a nine-month period. Nearly 150 permanent. employees and 250 seasonal employees will be hired with a $2.6 million annual payroll. Comprehensive use is needed for this site and would help eliminate strip develop- ment. Residents in the area must now travel quite a distance to obtain services they could get at Fred Meyer which would save energy and time. This would be a non-polluting business. Richard Miller, 260 East 11th, stated that there was one Planning Commission member who felt the West Eugene Industrial Study should be the prevailing plan for this area and, therefore, voted no on the request. That plan would have caused down-zoning of this property from M-3. This request is an interim matter until the Metro Plan is adopted. The time for conformance is now, since the need is now. Donald Smith, 2221 East Irwin Way, stated that he is a representative of the Carpenters' Union. The building trades are in full support of this $8.1 million retail center, and the jObs are needed. Suppliers of materials would also benefit. The construction industry has the second highest unemployment rate in Lane County. They urge approval of this request. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 5 --- Philip Marvin, 89133 Conrad Road, Veneta, is the owner of Cowboy Country which 1S located south of Fred Meyer's proposed project. Their zone change request e has been tabled. They have been before the Hearings Official and the Planning Commission. They submitted a plan for their own project three years ago and were denied, based upon the zoning. They were three blocks east of the area where they are now. They submitted a bid to buy the Nielsen building and it took almost two years to get the conditional use permit to occupy that building. The place where they located is currently zoned C-2. Their rezoning request should be approved just the same as Fred Meyer's. They are a little store and have been working three years to try to get this through. They feel they were harassed by the City Building Division. If their project is to continue to be tabled, then this one should be too. However, he supports the rezoning request. Dave Pederson, 540 Oak, stated that he is a member of the Planning and Land Use Committee of the Chamber of Commerce. They support this application. The Planning and Land Use Committee evaluated this project with regard to the Metro Plan and found that it conforms. There is no timing problem and no potential conflict with the neighborhood association. They evaluated this request twice and it meets the standards for City performance regulations. They support the application and urge a speedy approval. Speaking against: George Kennar, 189 Brae Burn Drive, stated that he is manager of the Monsanto reS1n plant. Their site abuts the proposed rezoning. Their site is about nine acres. Their plant was built in 1964. Both parcels on the site are zoned e M-3. A zoning designation of C-2/SR abutting an M-3 zone is not particularly good since the buffering aspect would be lost. The long-range effect of dis- similar zoning designations abutting each other should be considered. The types of businesses to be allowed should be examined. He asked if the circumstances were reversed (if Fred Meyer already existed), if Monsanto would be allowed to build. He would expect that it would not be. Mr. Jacobson stated that when the Metro Plan was reviewed and adopted, there was consideration given as to whether or not commercial property should be adjacent to industrial uses. This situation does exist in this plan, but in this case, it is across the street. Monsanto's use should pose no problem, since it does not pose a problem for the movie theater that is there now. The Planning Commission did stress that this is a rezoning issue, not approval of any particular development. Mr. Powell waived the right to rebuttal. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Lindberg stated that in the staff notes, it states that an advantage to locating Fred Meyer here would be to prevent further strip commercial develop- ment. He asked if rezoning would preclude businesses such as Cowboy Country. Mr. Jacobson responded that that is not necessarily the case. Consolidation will hopefully prevent more of the existing situation of strip commercial. Mr. Lindberg asked if one of the reasons for the delay in considering Cowboy e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 6 Country's request is its small size. Jim Croteau, Planning, stated that that item probably will be heard on appeal, so discussion, at this time, should be e kept to a minimum. It was felt that this would stop strip development on the north side of West 11th. The south side is developed in smaller parcels and there is a desire to end strip development on the south side also, but it is not as easy to decide where. Mr. Lindberg stated that in regard to job creation as a public benefit, he appreciates the need for construction jobs. He asked if a market analysis has shown that this development will not, however, eliminate jobs in other areas because of the competition with other small businesses in other locations. Mr. Jacobson responded that staff does not have the answer to that question. There has been no market analysis done regarding creation of jobs since this was not a finding from the Planning Commission. Mr. Lindberg noted that this would then be a weak argument. Ms. Miller asked to what extent site review conditions could be used to address Monsanto's concerns regarding buffer zones, traffic, etc. Mr. Jacobson responded that the compatibility criteria is not currently attached to this rezoning request. Usually this criteria is reviewed as part of the process when the abutting properties are residential. This criteria could, however, be added to the site review requirements. The recommended criteria are located in the staff notes on page I-5. Ms. Schue noted agreement with Ms. Miller that it would be good to include the compatibility criteria with the other site review criteria. The relationship to existing businesses such as Monsanto should be examined. Impact should be reduced as much as possible. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to amend the site review e requirements by adding criteria 5: "compatibility with the sur- roundings" to the site review procedures listed in the November 16, 1981, staff notes. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. CB 2402--An ordinance authorizing rezoning from M-1/SR Limited Industrial District with Site Review procedures (portion of Tax Lots 1111 and 1201) and M-2 Light Industrial District (portion of Tax Lots 1108, 1109, and 1200) to C-2/SR Community Commercial District with Site Review procedures for property located on the north side of West 11th Avenue, west of Seneca, as amended. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission staff notes and minutes of November 16, 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. Haws stated that he feels the south and north sides of this property should be considered separately, since the north side does not abut residential property. This is more in line with what the council wants to do with West 11th. He urged the council to vote in favor of this proposal. He will vote in favor of it because of the land use planning issues. He feel s that perhaps some other areas further out West 11th should be down-zoned. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 7 Mr. Lindberg stated that he would disagree with the argument which proposes that this center meets the needs of the expanded population. He feels that if it is e to draw from the central area, it should be located in the central Eugene area to better meet the needs. Ms. Miller indicated agreement with Mr. Haws. She feels more work should be done to rationalize the land use on West 11th. Some pieces of the area can still be saved. She will vote in favor of the proposal. Mr. Hamel stated that he favors this development. He hopes the employment picture and the general economic conditions will improve so that this develop- ment will be able to attract paying customers. Roll call vote; motion carried 5:1, with Councilor Lindberg voting no. Ms. Smith was absent for this vote. Councilor Lindberg changed his vote from nay to aye; the motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2402 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; motion carried 5:1, with Councilor Lindberg voting no. Ms Smith was absent for this vote. The bill was declared passed and numbered 18901. The Mayor recessed the meeting for a break. e Councilor Obie returned to the meeting. C. Sign District Boundary Change from Outlying Commercial Sign District to Highway Oriented Sign District for Property Located on the East and West Sides of Goodpasture Island Road north of Valley River Drive (Dunham/Eugene Dodge/Kendall) (SDBC 81-1) (map and background infor- mation distributed) Mr. Whitlow introduced Jim Croteau, Planning. Mr. Croteau stated that this request is for a sign district boundary change. The properties involved are three automobile dealerships on Goodpasture Island Road: Dunham Olds-Cadillac, Kendall Ford, and Eugene Dodge. In 1979, Kendall Ford and Dunham Olds-Cadillac were annexed to the city and in 1976, Eugene Dodge was annexed. At the time of annexation, in addition to applying City zoning, the properties became subject to the appropriate sign district. All three properties are designated Outlying Commercial Sign District. Other sign districts in the area are Outlying Commercial or Integrated Shopping District. North of the auto dealerships is a mobile home park and the Goodpasture Island gravel ponds. When the property is annexed, the City Sign Code gives five years in which all signing must conform to City sign standards. Eugene Dodge is nearing the end of their amortization period and Kendall Ford and Dunham Olds- Cadillac must amortize in 1984. The Planning Commission recommended denial of this request with a 5:1 vote. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 8 . Adrienne Lannom, Planning Commissioner, is present to answer questions. Most surrounding land is zoned Community Commercial. He outlined the procedures for e the heari ng. Additionally, Allen Gardner submitted a letter with new information and it was included in the council packets and will be discussed during the public hearing. Mr. Haws asked about the future development of the street. Mr. Croteau responded that it will be a city arterial. Mr. Haws asked if it will include curbs and gutters. Mr. Croteau responded that curbs and gutters are already in place from Valley River Drive north to approximately the mobile home park. No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were noted. St aff notes and minutes were entered into the record. Public hearing was opened. Speaking in favor: Allen Gardner, 915 Oak, presented a slide presentation. He represents all three of the petitioners located on Goodpasture Island Road. These are large businesses and each is several businesses in one. They all have existing signs which are of national design and are tasteful. There is no pedestrian traffic in this area. When these areas were first developed, they were outside the city limits and were in accordance with Lane County rules and signs regulations. Then they were annexed, and they do not feel it is appropriate to impose these regulations when the signs were acceptable to Lane County. The Outlying Commercial District allowed 40 square feet per side for signs and 80 square feet of incidental signing. Each business currently has larger amounts of signing than permitted. e The Highway designation would allow 100 square feet of signs. A speed survey was done when construction was occurring. The speed of the traffic is the primary criteria set up by the code in determining signs. The faster the traffic, the greater the need for larger signs. The results of the speed survey in the councilors' packets showed that cars were traveling an average of over 40 miles per hour. The Outlying Commercial designation is for areas with speeds at 30 miles per hour. The Highway designation is for areas with speeds above 30 miles per hour. The slowest car in the survey was going 32 miles per hour. Existing signs cause no interference with traffic signals. Franklin Boulevard and Coburg Road have Highway Oriented designations. They feel this type of development should be encouraged. A change in the designation would be an encouragement to businesses. Roger Korstad, 1421 Oakway Road, stated that he was the owner of the sign company WhlCh installed the signs. Although he is no longer with that sign company, he is proud of the work he did. The City's Sign Code is unique when compared to other cities. Eugene's Sign Code is an overlay of the zoning map and does not necessarily apply to existing businesses. This is a strip of businesses that was developed under County regulations and built beautifully. He has heard no complaints and wonders why they must downgrade the nicest looking area in town. Economically, the area is struggling and now the City is asking these dealers to remove what may be keeping them in business--their signs. Forty square feet is not enough to identify the dealerships and the services offered by the dealerships. The Willamette River is on one side of e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 9 these businesses and a freeway is on the other side, so there is not the need for a buffer zone as there would be if this area were residential. This is an e automotive shopping center. Larrf Anderson, 2150 Wood Acres Drive, stated that he represents Dunham Olds- Cadi lac. The size of the properties on which these businesses are located is unique. They have six businesses on over five acres of land: parts, a body shop, new car sales, used car sales, leasing, financing, and they have added a new line of cars. When the ordinance refers to a Highway Oriented District, it is for speeds over 30 miles per hour. This is the only objective standard in the ordinance. The speed survey done by the Public Works Department took place near Kingsley by K-Mart. There were 100 vehicles in the survey averaging 33 miles per hour. They feel the survey was done in the wrong place and, therefore, it is not applicable. Seventy-two percent of the vehicles in the area of concern surveyed by the applicants were traveling at speeds in excess of 40 miles per hour. Ms. Smith returned to the meeting. Mr. Croteau stated that Jim Hanks, Traffic Engineering, would address the current proposed status of Goodpasture Island Road. The amortization period has been previously discussed. The Sign Code has the basic purposes of regulating signing and providing a degree of equality for businesses. The amortization process is to provide a reasonable period of time to bring signing into confor- mance. Since 1971, a considerable number of businesses have had to follow that amortization process. There is an equity that must be considered on a city-wide basis. In regard to the speed of vehicles, speed is not the only factor to e consider for the designations. Outlying Commercial is the designation for businesses along city arterials. It is not a highway unless there is through traffic. The daily traffic volume is 6,100 cars. All other businesses which have Highway Oriented designations are on designated highways. The traffic volume at 6th Avenue is 21,000; at 7th Avenue it is 19,000; on Highway 99N, it is 29,000; and on Coburg Road, it is 44,000. So, they are not dealing with the same number of vehicles. The three businesses do have large areas of business. The current designation of Community Commercial is good because of their size. The City Sign Inspector has done a survey to determine the necessary notifica- tion. The three main identity signs are too tall and too large for either district. Separate smaller identification signs are permitted for each function. Direction signing is also allowed, but smaller than in the Highway Oriented District. Mr. Hanks stated that at present, Goodpasture Island Road is a County-maintained road. These facilities are within the city limits, but they are not City streets. There are five lanes, two going each direction, plus a center turn lane. It looks as though the recommendation will be that it continue as such with widening at Delta Highway, plus bike lanes. This could happen as soon as next summer, but probably it will occur at least a year later. In rebuttal, Mr. Gardner stated that the volume data quoted by staff was from a 1980 survey, as was the speed data and both volume and speeds have changed dramatically. Volume is not a criterion established in the Sign Code. He noted the criteria of both districts. The code only allows separating signs if the e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 10 businesses are under separate management, and that would not ~ply to this situation. Most other auto dealerships in the city have the benefits of the e Highway Oriented District designation. The expenses for changing these signs would be tremendous. It is important to consider that these firms employ others and this could be a hardship on the employees. Coburg Road is not a highway, yet parts are Highway Oriented Sign District. He has talked with a number of other people about the signs today and gave examples. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Hamel stated that Goodpasture Island Road is a connector to I-105 from Beltline and Delta. Franklin Boulevard has a 35-mile-per-hour speed limit. He asked about the designation for Joe Romania Chevrolet. Mr. Obie asked if Hannum Datsun has a Highway Oriented designation on Coburg Road. Mr. Croteau st ated that I-I05 crosses Coburg within 200 feet of both sides and they do have a Highway Oriented District. Mr. Obie asked if the Highway Oriented designation goes all the way to Harlow Road. Mr. Croteau stated that he could not answer that quest ion. He believes that could be the case on the east side, but not on the west side. Mr. Obie suggested that staff look at that, since Coburg Road is designated Highway Oriented. He asked for the estimated value of the signs that would have to be demolished. He asked if they were less valuable today than five years ago. Mr. Gardner responded that they are more valuable now than previously. Ms. Wooten asked if the Highway Oriented District would be the district applied if the appl icant would be allowed to erect signs of equal size for all businesses involved. Mr. Croteau responded that they would not. There could be a main identity sign of 100 square feet, that would be 30 feet high. Ms. Wooten asked e if different business activities are under the same management, if they cannot have more than one sign. Mr. Croteau responded that they cannot have more than one main identity sign for each business. Auxiliary businesses would be allowed smaller signs identifying other parts of the business. Ms. Wooten asked if there is no other business in this area with the same problems that would have interest in Highway designation. Mr. Croteau responded that most of these businesses have already amortized their signs or developed signs in conformance with the Eugene Sign Code. There have been some businesses similarly affected, such as the Moyer Theater properties. Ms. Wooten indicated that there has been discussion of the Sign Code previously and indicated that council had expressed a desire for an update/review. She asked when that might be possible. Mr. Croteau responded there has been no planning done for a comprehensive update. The code amendments have come before the council, i.e., LTD bus sign amendments. Ms. Wooten asked if the Highway Oriented District were approved, what the process would be for expanding the boundaries of that district as properties develop to the north of these dealerships. Mr. Croteau stated that the process would be a sign district boundary change. The mobile home park could develop, but the gravel ponds could not. Ms. Wooten asked if there are other potential sites for businesses between there and the I-5 cut-off. Mr. Croteau responded that there are not. Ms. Miller asked Les Swanson, City Attorney, if the Outlying Commercial District were used as a provision for additional signs if the Highway Oriented District would allow other signing for other businesses. Mr. Croteau stated that both e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 11 allow other incidental signing. Mr. Obie asked what the ability is of the council to extend the amortization period. Mr. Swanson responded that it would e require amending the ordinance. Mr. Gardner stated that the estimated value of all three large signs is $90,000. Mr. Haws stated that he previously served on the Sign Code Board of Appeals. It would be most unfair to the hundreds of people who have complied with the requirements and taken their signs down since the ordinance was adopted if this request were approved. If people are driving 40 miles per hour there, they are going too fast. He feels sorry for the applicant, but feels that it would be unjust to others if this exception were allowed. Mr. Lindberg agreed that this is a policy question. The signs are not causing blight. Council is talking about a series of auto dealerships and a County-maintained road. Two of the three businesses do not come up for amortization until 1984. He asked if a temporary variance could be provided to table Eugene Dodge's situation until 1984, when perhaps a different economic climate would be in existence. Perhaps by then, it will be determined whether or not this will be a highway. Mr. Obie added that the Planning Commission dealt with the same problems. They acknow- ledged confusion and said that it might be appropriate to change the ordinance. Perhaps neither designation is appropriate. The Outlying Commercial designation allowed individual signing for various businesses. The applicant has shown the appropriateness of the present identification. Extension of the amortization would give the council time to deal with the code revision and changes in circumstances. Otherwise, he feels this should be changed to Highway Oriented designation, since this would require removal of $90,000 worth of signs. e Ms. Wooten asked Mr. Gardner if he is trying to prevent the cost of sign removal, or if they feel that the existing signs could be increased with a new designation. Mr. Gardner stated that incidental signs would be cut back to very small ones, and many would have to be eliminated. They have big signs out front. Kendall Ford's sign is within the Highway Oriented District size, but would have to be shortened. The other signs would all have to be modified, but there would be some savings. Their primary purpose is to correct the wrong designation. Ms. Wooten asked Mr. Croteau about the secondary signing permitted with the existing designation. She also asked what would occur with the multiple businesses if it were Highway Oriented Designation. Mr. Croteau clarified the code requirements. Mr. Swanson stated that in Section 4 of the Sign Code, the total surface areas for signs are stated. Ms. Wooten agreed with Mr. Lindberg that it is a policy question. Ms. Miller added that the amortization period was to allow conditions to be corrected. Annexations will continue. Traffic speed cannot be beyond the consideration. If a street starts out with sparse traffic at high speeds, that can change the sign designation to a lower designation. This is more like Centennial Boulevard. It is not a Highway Oriented District either. She agrees with Mr. Haws that it is a policy question, and it is fair to continue with existing policies until policies are changed. Decisions should not be made on a case-by-case basis. Ms. Schue indicated agreement with Ms. Miller. However, she is bothered because other spots in town seem very similar and have the Highway Oriented designation. For example, Hannum Datsun faces Centennial Boulevard. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 12 Mr. Croteau added that Mr. Obie was correct. Portions of Coburg Road are not designated highways, but are Highway Oriented Sign District designation. Ms. e Schue asked if there is a provision for Mr. Lindberg's suggestion. Mr. Swanson responded that the applicants could appeal the designation before the Sign Code Board of Appeals, but the criteria for variances is when the situation would cause hardships. The code is clear in this situation. The only option the applicant has is to apply for the change in designation. Mr. Hamel stated that Kendall Ford was burned out of its previous location and the other two were forced out by growth. He feels this should be given some consideration. Ms. Smith stated that she had arrived during the public hearing and has read the information but did not hear Mr. Croteau's report. Mr. Swanson stated that she would be permitted to vote. Ms. Smith stated that the council is dealing with inconsistencies. She is not comfortable upholding the Planning Commission's action. Either this item should be held over or the applicant's request should be considered. Mr. Haws stated that the item could be tabled. Mr. Obie stated that he would like council to vote on the applicant's request. The Highway Oriented district is at least as appropriate as the Outlying Commercial designation. Mr. Lindberg added that the Highway Oriented designation should be the basis for the decision. Mr. Swanson added that in regard to the appeal, Section 8.840(4) provides that if the council takes action different than the Planning Commission, it shall request the differences be considered at a joint meeting of the council and Planning Commission. e Ms. Wooten stated that if the council approves the Highway Oriented designation, the businesses would be allowed to expand the size of their signs for other business activities. Mayor Keller stated that the real issue is, if this is changed to Highway Oriented, there will be signs in violation of the code. Mr. Croteau stated that Kendall Ford has five pole-mounted identity signs. They will have to remove them. They could have larger identity signs than with Outlying Commercial designation. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to deny the appeal. Mayor Keller stated that this appeal should be denied because the firms will be in violation either way. There is a sign code to follow. Almost every business has had to conform. The owners did not like it, but the City, as a whole, benefits. What applies to one, applies to all. Roll call vote; motion carried 5:3 with Councilors Smith, Hamel, and Obie voting no. Mr. Hamel indicated that he had previously asked the CIC to look into the area of signing requirements and he would encourage them to pursue that. D. CITY WARD BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS Mr. Whitlow introduced Jim Carlson, Planning. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 13 Mr. Carlson stated that the population in the City wards varied from the average based on the census data. Proposed maps which were distributed to the councilors e are the results of studying the data. There is one proposed modification to the map: that the block between Agate and Columbia between 26th and 27th be in Ward 4 rather than Ward 2. The maps will be reprinted with the precinct numbers in January. Public hearing was opened; there being no testimony, public hearing was closed. Res. No. 3613--A resolution establishing eight wards in the city for purposes of City elections, and repealing Resolution No. 2276. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned to December 16, 1981. ~~~~~_1{~~ / f~ <'. .I? ~';g . ,.. .\~.r. .,"" . V . MiC~~;."~'~"~le ~.r City Manager (Recorded by Lynda Nelson) MDG:LN:cm/CM8b22 e e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 14, 1981 Page 14