HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/16/1981 Meeting (2)
'-, /--;=--'4 --- -,,--~
; 'f.';~.!'f:~----"
~ ~ _I~ AI ~.:\~~n '
~'l___ ___ ___ ~-~,. _ _~_ -.., ~~_;
M I NUT E S
Eugene City Council
Special Meeting
December 16, 1931
tkNutt Room
Terri Vanderpool (Planning Staff), Brian Obie, Gretchen Miller,
Eric Haws, Bill Hamel, Cynthia Wooten, Emily Schue, Betty Smith,
Mark Lindberg, and Mayor Gus Keller.
The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon,
was called to order by Mayor Gus Keller.
I. INTERVIEWS AND BALLOTING FOR EUGENE PLANNING COMMISSION
Interviews for the two positions on the Eugene Planning
Commission were conducted at the following times:
1:00 p.m. Dorothy Anderson
1 :15 p.m. Tom Andersen
1 :30 p.m. Randy Thwing
Ballots were cast as follows for the two positions on the
., Commission:
Position #1 Position #2
Brian Obie Randy Thwing Dorothy Anderson
Gretchen Miller Tom Andersen Dorothy Anderson
Eric Haws Randy Thwing Dorothy Anderson
Bill Hamel Randy Thwing Dorothy Anderson
Cindy Wooten Randy Thwing Dorothy Anderson
Betty Smith Randy Thwing Dorothy Anderson
Emily Schue Randy Thwing Dorothy Anderson
r~ark Li ndberg Randy Th~Ji ng Dorothy Anderson
.' Per the balloting, Council President Gretchen Miller moved to
appoint Randy Thwing and Dorothy Anderson to the Eugene Plan-
ning Commission. It was seconded by Council Vice-President
Brian Obie.
II. BALLOTING FOR JOINT HOUSING COMMITTEE
By unanimous decision the Council voted to appoint Thomas
Andersen to the Joint Housing Committee.
t..",<i"', ~ .----,. ~ (?
":--,,.,. ..... - ~_~,$___y_ tdt!'!..
,;, ~~.,.!iiHii ......,....,) ,-, .~~7' --~
::';~i':;' ~ /' ~,,/" ~w I'~~
,','!'fi' 7'"""~7 ~ '"61"..... .~,
.....--.--.
~
. .. ,,~: ' ~"
.'
I ntrod uction
..
ill..'.', Summary Minutes~
.. Written Testimony"
!~
.' 'q
,,' .:
. '"'
~ ' - "
" ,
"
..
""":'. ".~' T ";.~ .'
, 'Ii
\ i.
,
~,
;!"
II. SUMMARY MINUTES, DECEMBER 15, 1981 JOINT -PUBLIC HEARING
,,;~-" JOINT PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
I'.
'~~i ' METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN
t~
of the Eugene and Springfield City Councils and the
Lane County Board of Commissioners
Tuesday, December 15, 1981
Springfield Council Chambers, 225 N. 5th St, Springfield, OR
Council and Commissioners Present:
Lane County Springfield Eugene
Otto t 'Hooft Gene Hulett Emily Schue
Scott Lieuallen Sandra Rennie Brian Obie
Harold Rutherford Chris Larson Gretchen Miller
Vance Freeman John Lively Gus Ke ller
Jerry Rust Don Carter Bill Hamel
Ken Eilers
Duane Herr ing
Councilors Absent:
Eric Haws Cynthia Wooten Betty Smith
(. Staff Present:
Lane County Springfield Eugene L-COG
Joe Hudzikiewicz Dick Johnson Teresa Bishow Steve Gordon
Lee Miller Rob Lilley Jim Farah Deborah Bittle
Dick Briggs
Approximately 90 members of the public were present.
I. INTRODUCTION
Chairperson, John Lively, opened the hearing at 7:35 p.m. by
introducing Lane County Commissioners and Eugene and Springfield
City Council members.
II. OPEN ING REMARKS
John Lively gave an overview of the Netropolitan Plan Update process
stating the purpose of this hearing is to receive public testimony and
make corrections to the Plan in order to meet LCDC goal requirements
and to obtain acknowledgment with statewide planning goals.
. 11-1
"
i~
L 'I
He stated copies of the draft working papers of: Agricultural LaUdt"
Forest Lands, Exceptions, Noise, Groundwater, Economic, Riv 4
I Road/Santa Clara, Sanitary Sewer Facility Plan, Emergency Medic >
Services and Willamette River Greenway were available at the L-COG
offices.
Working papers, planning commission recommendations, citizen
testimony from the Joint Planning Commission Hearing, Elected Official
Coordinating Committee recommendations, staff recommendations and
tonight's testimony and subsequent written testimony will be
considered when taking action on proposed amendments.
Mayor Lively stated oral testimony will be taken in the order of sign
up and limited to 5 minutes. Written testimony deadline was
announced as 5:00 p.m. December 22, 1981 in the L-COG offices.
Summary meeting notes and all written testimony will be provided to
elected officials. A letter of notification will be sent to those who
testified announcing the official hearing record is available for
review.
Springfield's m'eeting for consideration of amendments will be January
4, 1981 ; . , meeting January 11, 1981; and Lane County's
Eugene s
January 11, 1981.
There will be a joint meeting of the two Councils and the Board of
Commission on January 12, 1981 in Harris Hall and, at this time, that
meeting is not scheduled as a public hearing. ct
Steve Gordon, L-COG Metropolitan Plan Coordinator, announced a few
housekeeping notes: (1) John Mehringer turned in written record
which should have been include in the November 17, 1981 written
testimony manual. Copies of Mr. Mehringer's testimony were
distributed to all elected officials; (2) Eugene Planning Commission
agreed with request of Eugene Sand and Gravel on page I II -G of the
Planning Commission Hearing testimony; (3) staff has been meeting
with Nature Conservancy and property OIvners regarding Goal 5 and
is working to comlete papers on the last two of the seven natural
resource sites.
Harold Rutherford, Lane County Commissioner, made first reading of
ordinance ff856 of Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan Area and Plan fOJ
Lane County.
MOTION:, Otto t'Hooft MOVED to have second reading at a January 6
1981, 1:30 p.m. meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
III PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED METROPOLITAN PLAN AMENDMENTS
Oral Testimony:
1. Randy Twing, Eugene Planning Commission, the Planninl
Commission approved adoption of Elected Officials CoordinatinL
Committee recommendations with the modifications distribut~d in ill
'",
11-2
j
c~ ,
~
. !..
~,,' . ~ writing. They supported prompt acknowledgment of the Plan by
1>" ...:'~~ LCDC and by the Councils and Commission.
.
~>. , 2.
'G Dennis Cuddeback, 3470 McKenzie View Drive, Lane County
Planning Commission. He indicated three, areas of concern: 1)
private property near the airport; 2) Plan policies for River
Road/Santa Clara, and 3) interim services for industrial and
m
11 commercial firms outside the two cities.
Id
3. Tom Bowerman, 33707 McKenzie View Drive, Eugene. He
>e
expressed concern about the North Gateway area, east of
Deadmonds Ferry and Baldyview Lane. He contended the area is
gn in the flood plain, \\lith rich soil which allows steady input into
as our economy through farming. Occasional floods would possibly
s. threaten new businesses. The owner is not in agreement to sell.
to 4. Richard Miller, (see also written testimony, page III -F-1,
ho III-T-l _..
and III-W-1) 2460 Malabar, Eugene, OR 97403, he represented
or
Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce in supporting current draft
of Metropolitan Plan and the amendments recommended by the
.ry Elected Officials Coordinating Committee and the Eugene Planning
, Commission. The Chamber still has concerns about Eugene's
. s
proposed Special Light Industrial Zoning Ordinance, but the
Chamber is optimistic that the ordinance will finally include
of provisions which will allow flexibility for development.
lat
(. As attorney for Delta Sand and Gravel, Mr. ~1iller expressed
concern for restrictions ,to sand and gravel operations at the
few confluence heronry. The owners are protective of the heronry.
~rd The 300 foot buffer may be a little more than necessary and the
ten public is largest threat to the heronry.
ere Otto t'Hooft asked the
ion if ~1r. ~1i ller had a position on Planning
the Commissions' industrial concerns and Hr. Miller stated he was not
ing authorized to make any statement on that issue on behalf of the Chamber
and at this time.
lral Scott Lieuallen asked about the English Study on the heronry.
of 5. Dav id \H lliarns , 975 Oak 1160, Eugene, OR 97405, felt special light
fOl industrial site, part icu larly West Park, should allow compatible
other commercial and industrial uses and set aside part of each
site for special light industrial use. \vithout that flexibility,
r 6 private property m>lners are required to land-bank those sites
for special light use - which may or may not happen within a
reasonable time period.
.
) 6. John
Mehringer, (see also written testimony, page I II -G-1 and
III-If-I) 165 W. Hilliard, Eugene, Or 97404. He expressed
concern over several apparent vio lat ions of newly enacted Oregon
nin, Statutes found both in LCDC acknowledgement document of June
't_ 12, 1981 and the proposed amendments to the Metropolitan Plan,
as found in document Summary of Proposed Hetropolitan Plan
Amendments, dated November 1981 and prepared by L-COG. In
11-3
I j ~.'"
\~: . J
\ '
\ ,.'
I . '
this light, he discouraged mandatory sewage systems, ~""
promoted continued use of septic tanks in the River Road/Sa '
Clara area. He brought attention to the flow report prepared .,~
CH2M-Hill for the City of Eugene and requested Council andl
Commission to review figures, "Sewer System of Agricultural!
Survey". He felt it defies logic to take the premise that thel
groundwater is contaminated, that it is most contaminated in a'
sewered area, and arrive at the conclusion that the resolution is!
still more sewers. He felt while a procedure for pUblic!
involvement exists, the content and substantive result of th{
public involvement is ignored. ;
I,'
7. Marie Gray, (see also written testimony III-A-l and 1II-J-l), 3~
Knoop Lane, Eugene, OR 97404. She felt there are deaf ears td
Goal 1 requirements as the wording still remains "City of Eugene:
to provide Urban Services" for River Road/Santa Clara area,
She felt sanitary sewers were possible only if and.-when the
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant is completed; however the'
City of Eugene can and will annex through extra-territorial'
extension with individual property annexation agr~ements
(black-mail) with only a promise of sewers in the futtire: and
maybe not within this century with full city taxes after five
years. She requested omission of the words "City of Eugene!
regarding River Road/Santa Clara.
8.Wanda Simmons, (see also written testimony III-I-I), llRI.,
Skipper, Eugene, OR 97404. She opposed annexation of Ri~1
Road/Santa Clara area. She brought attention to House Bill 2~
amending Section 1 ORS 199.410 to read "Local ComprehensivE
plans define local land uses but may not specifically define whicl
units of local government are to provide public services whey
those services are required". Page IV-A-19 of the Proposec
Metropolitan Plan amendments document proposes that the City oj
Eugene will construct and own the main sanitary sewage systeD
necessary to serve the River Road and Santa Clara area. ShE
felt this should be deleted. She requested adoption oj
amendment (C) of Lane County Planning Commission proposal.
9. Michael Chellis, (see also written testimony, pg. 1II-F-l anI
1I1-L-l), Attorney representing KEZI, 101 E. Broadway, Suitl
200, Eugene, OR 97401, requested a comprehensive plm
amendment in the form of a plan diagram change to show th(
KEZI station site as a permitted commercial use in thE
appropriate color. Station site is 2225 Coburg Road, Eugene,
Oregon and the business has been in acutal operation at thaI
site for several years.
10. Phil Rose, 4026 W. 11th, Eugene, Or 97402, referred to page
1V-A-21 of proposed amendments to the Plan, il7, which reads:
"No particular section of the Metropolitan Plan shall bE
interpreted as prohibiting the process of incorporation of a n~
J city in River Road/Santa Clara in accordance with ore~('1
I Revised Statues, Chapter 221." He requested removal o{ the d;,
l . '\\J
II-4
-,.-.
:l~
.
~
i(lf : words "the process of" be replaced with "formation or
incorporation "
Uj II. Jim Greer, representing Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
and
Iral (see also written testimony, p. III-EE-l) , 3150 Main,
thE Springfield, OR 97477 . He felt more specific requirements
should be adopted to protect riparian areas in gener a 1 and areas
n c
1 is near, waten.rays such as Bertelson Slough, Willow Creek, Pudding
jli( Creek, Confluence Heronry and Greenway lands as provided in
thl Goal 5 and Goal 15 requirements.
12. Ed Ramsey, 665 City View Blvd. , Springfield, OR 97477 ,
35: supported amended change of light industrial on Piece Property.
t( He expressed concern over North Gateway site being unserviced
s
realizing city services were available to the Pierce property.
genl He requested a task force be formed to work out resolution of
irea
thl neighborhood concerns and to formulate a plan for industrial
thl development which would be compatible with resident1al use.
>ria: 13. Tom Heintz, 1038 Jayne Drive, Eugene, Or 97404, contended
lent:
River Road/Santa Clara poses no health hazard and objected to
an
fivl treatment. plant on flood plain. He opposed all wording
regarding annexation of River Road/Santa Clara area. He also
sene requested Council Members and Commissioners read House Bill
2759.
R~' 14. John C. Neely, Jr. , (see also written testimony, pg. III -K-l and
2' III-U-l); objected to the whole Metropolitan Plan because it is,
,nsiv able to adversely affect the River Road/Santa Clara area, its
whic people, and their health. He strongly opposed annexation of
whe River Road/Santa Clara.
>pose 15. Esther Loy, League of Women Voters, (see also written
ty 0
iyste testimony, pg. III-O-l) 2603 Elinor, Eugene, OR 97403,
Sb supported the Plan and amendments with a few additions. She
c supported policies regarding River Road/Santa Clara; supported
)n
Audubon on Objective In, p. III -C-6 of the 11etropolitan Plan,
(p. III-V-l of Planning Commission Testimony) for. buffer zones
1 ar: in urban development areas; supported the use of " s'hall" instead
of " " the policy Chapter II I -C, "Environmental
Suit may in new to
Resources " Metropolitan Plan which reads: "Prior the
pIt , to next
update, a study may be initiated to examine ways, of buffering
)w tl
tl and protecting agricultural lands on the urban fringe from the
:l effects of urban development." She expressed the need for
:ugenl strong directives regarding wildlife impacts. She felt
c thl compromises are fair and is proud of Plan.
pal 16. Randall Hledik, Wildish Land Company, (see also written
0 testimony, III-N-l) P.O. Box 7428, Eugene, OR 9740 I. He
read: pg.
ill 1 suggested inclusion of certain properties in the vicinity of Clear
Lake Road within the Urban Growth Boundary, contending there
a nl
ore, is full range of key public services and facilities immediately
available to this area. The nature of the area could accomodate
low cost construction. No significant wildlife -habitat would be
II-5
r
,
i'
'.
;
I
lost by developing the area. Proximity to actual or deSignat-:-
industrial areas (employment opportunities) is an advantage "4
the site. And the area is outside the outer-most noise fringe OC
Mahlon Sweet Airport. He felt, at the very least, the area
should be recognized as "Urban Reserve" in the Plan.
17. Melva Barnes, 29143 Awbrey Lane, Eugene, OR 97402 (see also
written testimony, pg. III-P-1) . She strongly opposed sewerage
sludge in area near River Road/Santa Clara. She cited Goals S,
6 and 7 as reasons Sludge Site C should not be developed.
John Lively announced a 10 minute break at 8:50 p.m.
Hearing reopened at 9: 03 p.m.
18. Fred Simmons, 312 E. 52nd Place, Springfield, OR 97477 . He
felt North Gate\Vay, S. 28th and Natron industrial areas should
have further study. He suggested Mt. June and surrounding
hills as a possible site for special light industrial use. He had
objections to Pierce Property as an industrial site.
19. Ralph E. Metz, 341 Learthage Avenue, Eugene, OR. He
supported view of River Road/Santa Clara group and opposed
wording, references, or action causing annexation to Eugene.
20. Gay Metz, 341 Learthage Avenue, Eugene, OR. She support~~
River Road/Santa Clara group opposing forced annexation. ~ I
felt best possible area for sewage disposal was through the 01"
gravely river bed using septic tanks.
21. Vora Heintz, 1038 Jayne Drive, Eugene, OR 97404, Board
member of Neighborhood Group, Lane County Citizen Involvement
Committee, River Road/Santa Clara Task Force GroundwateI
Study. She opposed annexation, questioned groundwater report
findings, and opposed regional sanitary sewers for the Ri vel
Road-Santa Clara areas. She requested removal of languagE
from Plan requiring annexation.
22. Nancy Falk, 2567 Mohawk Road, Springfield, OR 97477 , Shl
opposed Pierce property designation of special light industrial
due to power lines and pollution in the area. She suggestei
leaving the area as low density residential or agricultural a!
proposed for the South 28th Street site, if possible.
23. Sydney Herbert, Lane County Audubon Society, (see als(
written testimony, pg. III-E-l and III-AA-l) 2750 Onyx
Eugene, Or 97403. She agreed with need for buffer zone arounl
henronry rookery as proposed by staff ; but questioned size oj
buffer. She requested the heronry be protected from sand ani,
gravel operations and designation and from powerlifil
construction. She stated the island is in floodplain anyway afil
suggested agricultural designation. She felt Bertelson Slough ~
acre designation was too small ,and felt the proposal to move
I', ' II-6
, , ,.-;
~ : i '-,,;
j
..
".~ ' "
. ~
. .;.;.'
.
t'~' .',. natural habitat such as plants in Willow Creek should be
~~ reworded to possible propagation.
0...' After questionning by Jerry Rust of Willow Creek acreage needed, Mrs.
rea ,
Herbert felt the Nature Conservancy suggestion of 105 acres was proper.
She also expressed removal of diking or structure change would be only
1 way to protect trees in the Confluence Heronry from erosion damage.
so
a~e 24. Jon Silvermoon, 47! West 25th, Eugene, Or 97405, felt Goal 1
, was not observed in that materials for Goal 5 were not available
prior to the public hearing and another public hearing might be
appropriate.
Referred to Proposed Amendments document p. IV-A-16, policy
24 which reads: "In order to provide locational choice to attract
H new special light industrial firms to the metropolitan area,
l~ Eugene and Springfield shall place as a high priority service
~~ extension, annexation ana-proper zoning of all designated special
~n~ light industrial sites" He felt "high priority" should be
a removed in that other economic policies are just as import~nt or
more so.
H~ Mr. Silvermoon referred to the December 10, 1981 memorandum of
ose additional proposed Metropolitan Plan amendments 1F1 new policy
to Chapter III -C, "Environmental Resources" , which reads:
~, "Prior to the next update, a study may be initiated to examine
Jrt.~ ' ways of buffering and protecting agricultural lands on th,e urban
I fringe from the effects of urban development". Felt the word
o '. should or shall should replace "may".
The proposed "Urban Reserve" plan amendment in Enid-Awbrey
3oar: area, 1F11 on page 4, is only area of prime agricultural lands
cmen taken out of the Plan. He felt it should be kept agricultural
Nate] , h 11 b - II . .
1 W1t out the Ur an Reserve des1gnat1on.
epor
R~ffi .
He agreed w1th Confluence Heronry to allow sand and gravel
guagl designation to occur in area only if agreement between property
owners and Fish and Wildlife that operations wOl,lld shut down
Shl when necessary and the natural resource area should be more
. than what is designated currently.
tr1a ,
'estel J R t t d h . . . h bl' h .
~l a: erry us sate e was not 1n Oppos1t10n to anot er pu 1C ear1ng.
25. George Grier, 134~ N. 66th Street, Springfield, OR 97477,
alsl' farmer, stated respect for people and time spent in update
o process with the plan. He stated inclusion of sand and gravel
nyx des ignation of 25 acres at north end of 66th Street was done
lroun . th t b 1 . t' . d .. f' d H f I
W1 ou pu 1C est1mony on 1t an was not jUst1 1e. e e t
zde 0 agricultural and sand and gravel areas do not co-exist well.
I an
erlin .
He suggested urban growth boundary 1n East Thurston be
:~h ~ further withdrawn to be adjacent to Thurston Middle School,
II-1
\ I;: i
..
"'"
, \
j .
I , otherwise it would irradicate a, dairy and put more urb,
c
pressure on agricultural land. - {
"
,'"
'J>
Mr., Grier felt need for developing area north of Thurston Roc
into a viable agricultural area in the flood plain and request(
more concise definition of agriculture/residential lireas wit
consideration given to better buffering. .
26. Jim Hale, 4064 Meredith Ct. , Eugene, OR 97404. He strong]
objected to River Road/Santa Clara sanitary sewer t:r;eatment ,
proposed amendments.
He opposed Elected Officials Coordinating Committees compromi~
that no ~ingle policy shall be used to oppose formation of a n(
city.
He felt the only reason for annexation would be if the"'City cou]
provide-services with cost savings and more efficiency, and t
intimated construction and engineering costs would be ' the san
with annexation or with a new city and that police protectic
would be less efficient for Eugene than through contract wit
L~ne County by a new City. He questioned what would happE
to the Sheriff's Department with the loss of one-third staff.
He stated if Eugene is to succeed in annexing River Road/Sant
Clara, Eugene must realize existing residential n,eighborhoc
policy and mus t meet with neighbors with an explanation of wh,
vii 11 happen in advance to annexation. This process must ocd
before Eugene's program has any chance' of being accepted 1
voters in River Road/Santa Clara.
Scott Lieuallen asked Jim Hale if he wished to limit ability of City to u~
Plan documents. Mr. Hale stated no single policy in any document ar
nothing in the Metropolitan Plan should preclude formation of a new city.
27. Mike Hennessey, 375 Carthage, Eugene, Oregon 97404. 1
opposed reference in the Plan that River Road/Santa Clara t
annexed to Eugene. He felt annexation to Eugene is not mOf
cost-effective alternative for service provision. He opposed ]
IV-A-1B, policies /11-3, and 115 of proposed amendments whic
read:
l. Land supply in the River Road and Santa Clara areas is c
~} metropolitan-wide significance.
2. In order to achieve urban dens ities, urban service~
including public sanitary sewers, must be provided.
3. For a long period of time, officials of Lane County an
Eugene have made great efforts to resolve the servic
i delivery problems for both River Road and Santa Clara.
, 5. The most cost-effective method of service delivery (
through annexation. Given current constraints, these
II-8
Ii
f
>-'
J' ~,
~.
"
~
lrbaIl annexations must incrementally the next 20
(~. occur over
years.
\;,
Road 28. Gordon Elli<;>tt, 938 Jefferson Street, Eugene, OR 97402,
~sted
with requested reinstatement of his property within the urban growth
boundary allowing a "socia logical adult village" to be built.
mgly John Lively announced closure of public hearing at 10:15 p.m.
,t in Council members and Commissioners will discuss further, their individual
desires for future public hearings on Goal 5 issues with a possible limited
)mise hearing on January 12, 1981.
1 new Meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
:ou ld db/METROl
,d he ---'-.-
same
: t ion
with
lppen
3anta
!:'hood
Wh_
,)cc
d b
J' use
and
He
a be
most
ad p.
which
,5 of
ices,
and
rvice
I .
I I -9,
.'
"