Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 03/05/01 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber--City Hall March 5, 2001 8p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Pat Fart, Gary Rayor, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman. CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND MEETING OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF THE CITY OF EUGENE Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Mayor Torrey read into the record a proclamation recognizing the National Association of Women in Construction, Chapter 77, and its many dedicated volunteers for its steadfast work on behalf of women in construction, and proclaimed the week of March 4 through 10 as "Women in Construction Week." Mayor Torrey read into the record a proclamation recognizing the month of March as American Red Cross Month. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Bruce Miller, PO Box 50968, Eugene, complimented Councilor Gary Rayor for his opinion piece about the WISTEC situation in that day's edition of The Register-Guard. He invited WISTEC to submit a rebuttal. He wanted WISTEC to become a Eugene attraction and noted its connection to programs for youth. Mr. Miller opposed the City's sale of the current library building and called on the City to hire a consulting engineer to investigate whether the building could have an additional story added to it. Mr. Miller questioned whether the federal courthouse would be funded and located in Eugene or Springfield with the change in federal administration. He questioned the City's interest in enhancing the connection between downtown and the river, terming the Willamette River a "dull, boring, drab piece of water" and questioned how many people wanted to visit it. William Ivanoff, 1209 Garfield Street, was saddened by the council's vote on the West Eugene Parkway when the community already had a street he believed was serving the same function, Roosevelt Boulevard. He suggested that Roosevelt Boulevard be extended instead. He questioned why 7th Avenue was needed to MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 1 Regular Session connect to the parkway. He suggested that 7th Avenue was being connected to facilitate private development. Mr. Ivanoff acknowledged he had not heard the reasons for the councilors' votes in support of the parkway, and asked the councilors voting in support to comment now. He also hoped the City would suggest, through a future TransPlan, that there be adequate crossings over railroad tracks. Misha Seymour, 1313 Lincoln Street, criticized the council for moving its regular meetings to 8 p.m., suggesting that it was intended to reduce the number of people speaking at the public forum. Annie Odean, 125 North Polk Street, lived near a railroad crossing and was concerned about the chemicals Union Pacific Railroad proposed to use to control vegetation on and near the tracks. She had experienced symptoms she believed were associated with the railroad's use of spray. She thought it was wrong the City had no jurisdiction over the situation and was very upset and concerned about children living near the tracks as she believed the chemicals in question were more harmful to children than to adults. Ms. Odean called upon the council to "do something." She said the railroad's use of spray was a crime, and it should be treated that way. Councilor Papd asked if the City had any jurisdiction over the railroad track beds. City Attorney Jerome Lidz responded that the City's authority over pesticide use in general was preempted by State statute, and the City's authority over the railroad was limited to its intersections with railroad tracks. Responding to Mr. Ivanof?s question, Councilor Rayor said he had visited the area in the vicinity of the proposed parking by bicycle. Most of the traffic he viewed was eastbound trying to reach downtown, and Roosevelt Boulevard was quite far out of direction to the north for traffic going downtown. Then, when one was on Highway 99, one would still be required to drive back out of direction going to 7th Avenue. The Oregon Department of Transportation proposal did not include any out-of-direction traffic. The proposal the council expressed support for was somewhat out of direction but would have the capacity Roosevelt Boulevard did not have; further, the boulevard could not be widened to increase capacity because of physical restrictions. 3. DISCUSSION OF CHARTER REVIEW ISSUES City Manager Jim Johnson indicated the Citizen Charter Review Committee had no issues to raise this week. He reported the committee was scheduled to hold a town hall seeking input from the public on the issue of how the mayor and council were elected at the Amazon Community Center on March 8 at 7 p.m. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Council Minutes February 12, 2001 City Council Meeting February 14, 2001 Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 2 Regular Session Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Councilor Kelly had a minutes correction and pulled Item C for discussion. Councilor Kelly offered a correction to page 2 of the February 14, 2001 work session minutes. He asked that the second sentence in the first paragraph be revised as follows (struck text deleted; italicized text added): "He said that the County had some interest in purchasing the site and constructing a new building and suggested that the City might work in cooperation with the County to purchase construct the building jointly." Mayor Torrey determined there were no objections to the changes proposed by Councilor Kelly. Councilor Nathanson also had a correction to the minutes of the February 14 work session. Referring to paragraph 9 on page 3, she asked that the paragraph be revised as follows: "She noted that there had been a large effort to redo the neighborhood organization program and various other programs and the council ld gi effe c~.~ ~;.~ ,~.~, ~. .... ~ ~.~.~ r. ......... ~;~.~.~ ,, shou ve the new programs time to be ctive Referring to page 4 of the February 14 minutes, Councilor Nathanson proposed the following change to paragraph 11: "Ms. Nathanson suggested adding language to address street safety, including red-light running and speeding." Mayor Torrey determined there were no objections to the changes proposed by Councilor Nathanson. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Referring to Item C, Councilor Kelly referred to House Bill 2887, Requires Police Officer When Making Stop to Provide Person with Business Card Listing Officer's Information and Process for Filing Complaint, which was listed as Priority 2 Oppose. He said that the bill on its face sounded like good police relations but Captain Elvia Williams of the Eugene Police Department had provided some comments on the bill that persuaded him, that, rather than the council debating the merits of the bill now, the bill should be referred back to the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations to take into account the comments of the Eugene Police Department and Greg Rikhoff of the Human Rights Program. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to send back House Bill 2887 to the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations for further consideration. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Rayor identified a typographic error in the spreadsheet provided to the council regarding House Bill 0142. He suggested it was sufficiently unclear to refer the bill back to the committee. Councilor Rayor, seconded by Councilor Fart, moved to amend the motion by referring the bill back to the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Farr, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve Item C as amended. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 3 Regular Session Councilor Taylor expressed concern that the council was taking positions on bills for which it had no policy position. Roll call vote; the amended motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency. MEETING OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF THE CITY OF EUGENE 5. ACTION: A Resolution of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene Authorizing its Director to Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Eugene to Borrow $3.5 Million from the City of Eugene for Purchase of the Chiquita Site Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to authorize the Agency Director to implement the purchase of the Chiquita property and perform all actions necessary to fulfill the property purchase agreement with Chiquita. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the motion by adding the phrase "Contingent upon General Services Administration selection of the site for courthouse" following the words "Chiquita property" in the resolution. Responding to a question from Councilor Nathanson, City Manager Johnson indicated he believed he had the authority to return to the council with a proposal to purchase the site for other purposes if the General Services Administration decided not to buy it. Roll call vote; the motion to amend passed, 6:2; councilors Papd and Bettman voting no. Roll call vote; the motion as amended passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve Resolution 1013, a resolution of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene authorizing its director to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the City to borrow $3.5 million from the City of Eugene for purchase of the Chiquita property. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to direct the Agency Director to include the acquisition budget and the loan for purchase of the Chiquita property in the next supplemental budget. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. 6. PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION: A Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2000, and Ending June 30, 2001 Lew Bowers of the Planning and Development Department was present to answer questions. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 4 Regular Session Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no one present wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and called for questions from the council. There were none. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve Resolution 1014 adopting a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2000, and ending June 30, 2001. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. 7. ACTION: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene to Lend $3.5 Million to the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the Purchase of the Chiquita Property Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve Resolution 4665, a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene to lend $3.5 million to the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the purchase of the Chiquita property. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to direct the City Manager to include the loan in the next supplemental budget. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. 8. PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION: A Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the City of Eugene for Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2000, and Ending June 30, 2001 Mr. Johnson introduced the item. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no one present wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and called for questions from the council. Councilor Kelly noted his distribution of an e-mail message regarding the topic earlier that day and expressed appreciation for the staff answer to his first question. He referred to the potential distribution of funds for the council ward redistricting analysis, and indicated he would amend the motion to change the $25,000 to $8,500, the previously proposed amount in fiscal year 2001, as he thought the expenditure premature and anticipated staff could return for more funding in the future. In addition, he thought that the work of the Citizen Charter Review Committee could have an effect on the redistricting issue. He asked if staff had concerns about lowering the amount. Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson indicated he had no concerns. Referring to the information provided the council, Councilor Meisner questioned the hiring of a project manager, given the lack of budget authority, and why an extra position was warranted. Mr. Carlson clarified that the position was a temporary position overseeing specific projects; the request was backed by revenue from the projects. He was unsure of the projects involved, saying it could be parks and open space projects or MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 5 Regular Session other general fund projects. Mr. Carlson noted that the position backfilled the position held by Brad Black while Mr. Black was dedicated to the library project. Councilor Nathanson asked for information about the donation revenue for the ridgeline trail and asked if it represented money or property. Mr. Johnson clarified it was a donation of stock to the City of Eugene. Councilor Pap~ asked for information about the capital project increase for the library mentioned on page 83 of the packet. Mr. Carlson said that the money included in the amount was carryover. Mr. Johnson clarified that the amount budgeted for the library had not changed. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve Resolution 4666 adopting a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2000, and ending June 30, 2001. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the motion by changing the funding request for redistricting data analysis to $8,500. Roll call vote; the motion to amend passed unanimously, 8:0. Roll call vote; the motion as amended passed unanimously, 8:0. 9. ACTION: An Ordinance Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metro Area General Plan Diagram to Redesignate Property Identified as Assessor's Map 17-04-30, Tax Lots 200 and 300 From "Agricultural/Urban Reserve" to "Rural Residential/urban Reserve"; Adopting an Exception Pursuant to Statewide Planning Goal 2, Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Mr. Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4762, An Ordinance Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram to Redesignate Property Identified as Assessor's Map 17-04-30, Tax Lots 200 and 300 From "Agricultural/urban Reserve" to "Rural Residential/urban Reserve"; Adopting an Exception Pursuant to Statewide Planning Goal 2; Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effective Date. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Johnson said that the council would consider Council Bill 4762 by number only. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Councilor Nathanson said that she had initially feared that the proposal was another example of the conversion of agricultural land to a residential use, which she did not generally support. However, she believed that the case was special enough and had sufficient documentation to warrant the action requested of the council and to overcome her usual doubts about the conversion of such property. She did not want her vote to be interpreted as an invitation to more partitions of land in the urbanizable area. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 6 Regular Session Councilor Kelly expressed sympathy to the property owner for the process he had to go through. However, he said that while the proposal might not represent a wholesale conversion of farm land to residential land, such conversions usually happened just one or two acres at a time. He said that if the land in question had been well outside the urban growth boundary he would defer to the Lane County Board of County Commissioners. He noted in this case, however, the County board had been split on the issue, the final vote being a 3:2 tie. The property was immediately adjacent to Eugene and its conversion affected Eugene. It also had the potential to conflict with the discussion the elected officials had about establishing a metropolitan greenbelt immediately outside the urban growth boundary. He thought the proposal represented the first step toward urbanization ahead of any demonstrated need. Councilor Kelly noted that the staff notes, while indicating the soils on the property were not good agricultural soils, also stated they were also ill-suited for home sites. The property was also in the 100-year flood plain, which concerned him. Councilor Kelly said he was not sympathetic to the proposed amendment as he believed it contradicted the Metro Plan and Eugene's community goals. He noted there was no problem building a new house on Tax Lot 100 in the short-term. Councilor Bettman said that on its face, the proposal sounded reasonable. She also sympathized with the property owner. However, Councilor Bettman did not think the agricultural land in question was special as there was similar soils throughout the area, and if the criteria cited in support of the proposal were interpreted in a similar manner for other agricultural land it would lead to more conversion of agricultural land. She did not think it was the best agricultural land, but it was the only agricultural land available in the valley. Councilor Bettman thought that there were pitfalls to increasing densities on the edge of the urban growth boundary that involve transportation. She felt that subdividing land outside the urban growth boundary was counterproductive to many other strategies and policies the City was trying to pursue, most notably densifying within the urban growth boundary. It was also more economically feasible to provide services inside the boundary. She did not support the motion. Councilor Taylor also opposed the amendment for the reasons cited by councilors Kelly and Bettman. She was concerned about the incremental destruction of agricultural land, noting the loss of other agricultural land near the site. She was also concerned the proposal would lead to more urban sprawl. Councilor Fart observed he could view the property in question from his son's window. He would be concerned if the land was to be removed from agricultural use; however, it was not viable as a farm, and the addition of one house would have a minimal impact and would put the property into a use it was better suited to. Councilor Meisner noted that he had the opportunity to view the site in question. He said that rarely did such "wholesale applications for conversion" come before the council; most were individual, and had a human face. He was very concerned about the incremental conversion of farm land to other uses. He recollected the council discussion about and decision to end the concept of urban reserves, in part because such lands were too easily converted to residential use and were generally resource lands. He said that redesignating the land would eventually lead to its annexation. He said that while the land was not good for agriculture, it was not good for housing either. At this point, Councilor Meisner did not support the proposal because it was inconsistent with the Metro Plan and community values, and he could not find the requested exception to Statewide Goal 2 warranted. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 7 Regular Session Mayor Torrey thought the request before the council was reasonable. He thought it provided needed balance, and pointed out that the City was already moving toward the acquisition of green spaces in the urbanizable area. He indicated if called upon to vote in the case of a tie, he would vote to support the proposal. Councilor Nathanson reiterated that her vote should not be interpreted as blanket willingness to entertain such proposals for the sake of development. She was persuaded of the merits of the case by the information related to Statewide Goal 3 provided the council. That information indicated that the soils were not productive, the land could not be farmed economically, and there were no water rights associated with the property so it could not be irrigated in the summer, limiting its use to winter, when it could not be drained. Councilor Papd concurred with Councilor Nathanson. He believed the property owner had attempted to comply with all applicable codes and laws. He believed the application had a human face, and much effort had been put into the application process. Councilor Papd noted the information in the board findings related to the unsuitability of the site for agricultural purposes, the lack of water rights, lack of adequate depth of a drainage outlet, parcel size and shape, and lack of connection to commercial farm enterprises. Councilor Kelly said that maps produced by Lane Council of Governments indicated that there were hundreds of acres of such "middling" agricultural land outside the urban growth boundary. He asked if Councilor Nathanson favored allowing rural residential on all such lands, or if there was something that distinguished the site from other sites. Councilor Rayor and Mayor Torrey advised Councilor Nathanson not to answer the question if she did not wish to. Councilor Rayor said he agreed with Councilor Nathanson in that support of the proposal did not indicate support for not holding the line at the urban growth boundary. He felt Councilor Kelly's question rhetorical and perhaps out of order. He said the issue before the council was a true judgment call. He said that each councilor must make his or her own judgment. Councilor Rayor said the land surrounding the property in question was already developed as rural residential. He did not expect to support a request for redesignation of agricultural land outside of the urban growth boundary if it merely represented conversion of agricultural land for speculative development purposes. Roll call vote; the vote on the motion was a 4:4 tie; councilors Meisner, Bettman, Taylor, and Kelly voting no; councilors Nathanson, Farr, Rayor, and Pap~ voting yes. Mayor Torrey cast a vote in support of the motion, and the final vote was 5:4. 10. ACTION: Approval of HOME Funds to Acquire Affordable Housing Councilor Kelly, a member of the Housing Policy Board, provided background on the item and encouraged the council's support for the motion to be placed on the floor. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to approve the housing development activities recommended by the Housing Policy Board and described in this briefing statement. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 8 Regular Session Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 5, 2001 Page 9 Regular Session