Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCAgenda-4/14/04WS City Council City of Eugene 777 Pearl Street, Room 105 Eugene, Oregon 97401-2793 (541) 682-5010 (541) 682-5414 FAX (541) 682-5045 TTY www. ci.eugene.or, us EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA April 14, 2004 Noon CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION McNutt Room, City Hall 777 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon 97401 Meeting of April 14, 2004; His Honor James D. Torrey Presiding. Councilors Bonny Bettman, President George Poling, Vice President David Kelly Scott Meisner Nancy Nathanson Gary Pap~ Jennifer Solomon Betty Taylor Noon CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Noon A. WORK SESSION: Continued Discussion on Priorities for the Planning Division Work Program 12:45 p.m.* B. WORK SESSION: Cell Tower Siting Eugene City Council Agenda: March 10, 2004 L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\A040414P.doc The Eugene City Council welcomes your interest in these agenda items. This meeting location is wheelchair- accessible. For the hearing impaired, FM assistive-listening devices are available or an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours' notice prior to the meeting. Spanish-language interpretation will also be provided with 48 hours' notice. To arrange for these services, contact the receptionist at 682-5010. Telecommunications device for the deaf assistance is available at 682-5045. All council meetings are telecast live on Metro Television, Comcast channel 21, and rebroadcast later in the week. E1 Consejo de la Ciudad de Eugene aprecia su inter6s en estos asuntos de la agenda. E1 sitio de la reuni6n tiene acceso para sillas de ruedas. Hay accesorios disponibles para personas con afecciones del oido, o se les puede proveer tm interprete avisando con 48 horas de anticipaci6n. Tambi6n se provee el servicio de interpretes en idioma espa [] ol avisando con 48 horas de anticipaci6n. Para reservar estos servicios llame a la recepcionista al 682-5010. Hay aparatos de telecomunicaci6n disponibles para ayudar a personas con obstrucciones del oido permanentes al tel6fono 682-5045. Todas las reumones del consejo estan gravados en vivo en Metro Television, canal 21 de Comcast, y despues en la semana se pasan de nuevo. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT THE COUNCIL COORDINATOR AT (541)682-5010. I~SIT US ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB AT WWVK. CI. EUGENE. OR. US Eugene City Council Agenda: March 10, 2004 L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\A040414P.doc EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Work Session: Continued Discussion on Priorities for the Planning Division Work Program Meeting Date: April 14, 2004 Agenda Item Number: A Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Tom Coyle www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-6077 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY The purpose of this work session is to continue the discussion from the January 21 and February 9, 2004, work sessions on the Planning Division work program. BACKGROUND Council Action History The council discussed this item in January and February 2004. The council initially agreed this prioritization was needed and voiced appreciation for the overview of the work occurring in the Planning Division. On February 9, 2004, a motion was passed by the council to affirm the Planning Division Work Program and much discussion ensued. Some councilors voiced their continued frustration with a lack of detailed information about each work program. There was also discussion about proposing supplemental budget actions for individual work program items as well as a continuation of the discussion on medical facilities. On February 9, 2004, the following motions passed and are reflected in the revised Attachment A: 1. The issue of cell towers was moved to the high priority list with a provision for staff to come back with a supplemental budget request, if necessary to keep it on the high priority list. 2. The City Manager was directed to prepare a scope of work on housing standards by no later than June 1 and to have a work session on the matter. 3. Item #42, medical facilities, was merged into Item #2, minor land use code updates. On March 29, 2004, the Planning Commission requested, as the result of a difficult quasi-judicial appeal hearing, that an additional item be added to the work program. The item appears on the list as #42 and is an item designed to facilitate a short review and update of all refinement plans to look for and fix obvious discrepancies or problems. Policy Issues This continued discussion regarding focusing priorities will assist staff in bringing forth priority policy discussions. L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\S040414A. doc At the meeting on February 9, 2004, some councilors identified a frustration with staff's inability to scope the entire 42 items listed in Attachment A. In response to that question, staff now offers that, for the purpose of resource allocation, a .25 to .50 FTE could be used for production of project deliverables. This does not include public meetings or public hearings. That would indicate that a draft for policy discussion could be forwarded to the Planning Commission or City Council for between $25,000 and $40,000. In utilizing consultants, the public hearings are done on a time and material basis. It is done this way for an obvious reason; that is, it is impossible for a consultant to assess the number, length, or outputs associated with public discussion. Staff faces the same issue associated with public meetings. In the City's current environment of policy resolution, issues are often debated at great length, and subsequent to resolution, are re-crafted again in the context of more policy debate. To accommodate this process resolution, subsequent work items are delayed with staff' s hope that the next process can accommodate a more brief discussion. The value of planning is that it provides a tool for realizing the vision of the community. Through policy direction, staff can implement the means to achieve that goal. When previous policies are readdressed, staff stops implementation of affected work items. By their very nature, very few planning issues are going to have universal support. This results in a direct impact on workload and budget. Illustrative of the City's public process is the Downtown Plan. The Downtown Plan is currently scheduled for its fifth appearance on the City Council agenda subsequent to six Planning Commission +3 meetings, and five Planning Commission sessions. A responsibility of staff is to manage these items through policy resolution, but the resources necessary to complete the project are often indeterminable when they are rediscussed prior to resolution. Council Goal Action Priority The Council Goal regarding effective, accountable municipal government is applicable to help the Planning Division work openly, clearly communicate expectations with the goal of accountability and improved service provision. Financial and/or Resource Considerations As mentioned in the previous Agenda Item Summary, the purpose of this discussion is twofold: 1. To prioritize and focus the work of the Planning Division; and 2. To align expectations with resources. This continued discussion will give an opportunity to prioritize the work program within the Planning Division and allow resources to then be aligned with City Council expectations. If there are particular items on Attachment A that the council agrees need more detail to scope for additional funding, the department can respond. Other Background Information Additional background information can be found in the January 21 and February 9, 2004, agenda item summaries. Timing Implementation of a prioritized and focused work program will be immediate. L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\S040414A. doc OPTIONS This item is scheduled for discussion and there continue to be many options that could be taken, including no action, the staff recommendation, or others. Staff is suggesting that the discussion and recommendation will help improve the quality and direction of the planning program. Direction would be helpful, but no action is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff has updated Attachment A and would recommend the council direct the Planning Division to use the list to guide its work for the remainder of FY 04 and FY 05 and return, as necessary, to prioritize other tasks as needed. To be strategic, it is important to remain flexible in prioritizing and balancing resources. Often times Metro Planning (or long range planning) staff assigned to perform most of the duties listed above must shift when application levels increase, and staff must remain flexible in order to address mandated timelines. In addition, emerging issues can change quickly as well, and PDD must remain flexible to adjust and shift resources when required (one such issue looming on the horizon is the so-called 'Son of Measure 7' discussion growing around the state). Management in PDD will respond as needed to changing priorities and will brief the council as necessary. Staff has met with the development representative of the medical facilities group and is searching for ways outside of a code amendment to get the facility sited in the group's most desired location. Should a compromise be made outside of a code amendment, this item will be taken off the work program by staff. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to affirm the work program in Attachment A. ATTACHMENTS A. Work Program Items FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Tom Coyle Telephone: 682-6077 Staff E-Mail: tom.g.coyle~ci.eugene.or.us or Staff Contact: Susan Muir Telephone: 682-5208 Staff E-Mail: susan.l.muir~ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\S040414A. doc UPDATED 4.1.04 ATTACHMENT A Planning Division Work Program Discussion Document HIGH PRIORITY 1 Nodal Program · Council funded site specific planning through FY05 for priority nodes. · Review and amend nodal development strategy. · Advise staff, public, and prospective developers regarding previously master planned nodes (Royal, Chase). 2 Minor amendments to Land Use Code Since adoption of LUCU (Land Use Code Update), many major and minor amendments have been identified by numerous stakeholders. Task includes gathering all comments, prioritizing, and processing those that are considered to be 'minor'. Include review of medical facilities provisions. 3 Downtown & Courthouse associated projects Some, · Downtown Area Housing Policy Analysis (DAHPA) not all · Complete Downtown Plan Update · Preparing preservation plan (which will explore relocation and demolition) for historically significant structure on the Federal Courthouse site. Mandated by MOA with GSA. Lead is Development Division. · Follow-up/implementation from the Courthouse District Concept Plan. Work includes coordination with GSA and courthouse architect, meetings with developers interested in area development, and technical expertise to other staff (e.g., street improvements). · Downtown Zone - Phase 1 involves research and outreach to determine if new or modified zone is appropriate for downtown area. Phase 2 will include code adoption and rezoning of properties. · Great Streets: Implement Downtown plan provisions by adopting special design · Central Area Transportation Study (CATS) 4 Goal 5 (Natural Resources) associated projects · Eugene Goal 5 Process o adoption of G5 inventory o local wetland inventory © ESEE analysis ~ protection program · Metro Goal 5 Policy Update ~ Draft policies reviewed by PC on November 3, 2003. Council hearing scheduled for February 10, 2004. · West Eugene Wetlands Zoning Implementation of Natural Resource Zone UPDATED 4.1.04 ATTACHMENT A and Wetland Buffer/Waterside Protection Overlays · ESA/Salmon Strategy Implementation Includes development of strategies and adoption of implementation measures, oversight of several staff teams and multiple products. · West Eugene Wetlands Plan policy issues (WEWP is complete, but requires periodic updates and review) 5 Emerging Issues Some, a) River Road/Santa Clara Transition Project (PDD staff advisor for report to not all explore financial feasibility, service provision, and possible transition of River Road/Santa Clara area and potentially update existing Refinement Plan); b) Buildable Lands Supply issue; c) Service provision/special districts issue (Lead by Central Services and CMO. Investigate effects of shifting City services to county-wide special districts. Fire district discussion leading the way on this); d) Economic Development, Hospital & other major projects; and e) Civic Center (could also be included under 'downtown associated projects' - #3). 6 Cell Tower Ordinance Update ONGOING 67 Implement LUC Process applications ~8 Provide public information Public Information Center staffing from 1:00-5:00 daily. 89 Vision Implementation Tools: Urban Renewal Plan Review 910 Implement Zucker Report (General Admin.) · Develop overall strategy for Planning/Clarify approach to planning (mission statement) · Training for staff · Develop email file to distribute code interpretations · Perform detailed analysis of planner case loads · Improve PIC service time to 15 minutes 44311 TransPlan implementation report Provide report to state on TransPlan implementation. 44-12 Periodic Review: Policies Part of Metro work program shared with Spfld and Lane Co. Policies scheduled for CC hearing February 10, 2004. 4g13 Periodic Review: Diagram Part of Metro work program shared with Spfld and Lane Co. Diagram scheduled for CC hearing February 10, 2004. 4~14 GIS evaluation and coordination Coordination with other divisions, PW and LCOG 4415 Historic Program · Administer SHPO Grant - Eugene is Certified Local Government. 2 UPDATED 4.1.04 ATTACHMENT A · Staff Historic Review Board - HRB is a subcommittee of Planning Commission. · Process applications for all new historic properties and alterations. County adoption of Land use Code allows review of historic resources in RR/SC area for first time. &516 Annexations All annexations must be approved by City before Boundary Commission will accept. 4:617 University and community outreach Includes subcommittee of Planning Commission, meets quarterly ,!-7-18 Bus Rapid Transit - Phase 1 - Coburg Corridor Two projects underway: Phase 1 (downtown Eugene to Downtown Springfield) and Coburg Road Corridor. Member of technical staff working with 15 member citizen advisory committee to develop conceptual plan to introduce BRT to Coburg Rd. corridor. Scheduled reporting to Council on 2.23.04. 4819 Census Respond to state and federal data needs, census, and population estimates. 4~920 Neighborhood Meetings Attend neighborhood meetings upon request and available time to facilitate discussion about Metro/Community Planning issues. g021 Stormwater Development Stds. gt-22 South Hills Study: Update South Hills refinement plan to clarify regulations and strengthen environmental protections. 23 Big Box 24 Modern Context Statement Final Release (print, web, outreach). Next steps include determining the significance of the modern era resources. 25 College Hill Update survey of historic features. 26 South University Historic District 27 Housing Standards 28 Millrace Work has focused on framing the possible Millrace options and ensuring that the Millrace implications are considered in planning and transportation concepts 29 EWEB Master Plan Exploring grants and other funding opportunities to create master plan for EWEB properties. May require joint applications. 30 EWEB Service Extensions Advise EWEB re future growth areas, facilities needs, land use coordination. UPDATED 4.1.04 ATTACHMENT A 31 2050 Plan Member of technical advisory team that supports Policy Team. Exploration of regional growth strategy. Draft scenarios recently released for public review. 32 University East Campus Plan University application, if approved, will allow UO to expand development into the East Campus area. Involves Metro and refinement plan amendments, zone change and creation of a new overlay zone, code text amendments to reflect new policies. 33 Santa Clara parks acquisition and UGB swap proposal Planning advisor to PW/Parks for opportunity to exchange UGB area: Santa Clara vs Laurel Hill ridgeline. On November 24, 2003, the CC authorized further study. 34 Park and Open Space Master Plan Member of technical staff group charged with drafting comprehensive Parks, Recreation, Open Space Plan. Project updates the 1989 plan. One year into project, draft plan still 8 months +/- away. 35 Willamette Greenway Updates Staff advisor to LCOG. Has been removed from Periodic Review Task List per SB 920. 36 Willamette Water Company Planning representative to respond to legal actions attempting to extend city water supplies outside UGB. Coordinate with EWEB and Boundary Commission. 37 Wellhead protection Advisor when Springfield created regulations for wellhead protection. EWEB now testing Willakenzie area for similar use of groundwater for back-up supply. Could have large land use implications if groundwater pursued. 38 Annexation Policy revisions Respond to CMO directives regarding annexation policy, coordinate with other staff, PWE, Lane county, Boundary Commission 39 Investigate an alternate path review process parallel to the prescriptive code 40 Conduct comprehensive review of the city's zoning map in conjunction with asset mapping. 41 Deal with LUCU LUBA remand concerning Goal 9, Goal 10, and the Chapter 6 tree provisions 42 Refinement Plan Review & update - check for inconsistencies and obvious problems in existing refinement plans 4 EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Work Session: Cell Tower Siting Meeting Date: April 14, 2004 Agenda Item Number: B Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Tom Coyle www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-6077 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY This item is a work session on the issues associated with cell tower siting. BACKGROUND Council Action History Following adoption of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, the City Council established a Council Committee to work with staff and the City Attorney in developing a draft telecommunication ordinance. That ordinance was reviewed by the Planning Commission and ultimately adopted by the City Council on February 24, 1997. On October 14, 2002, the City Council held a work session on cell towers to evaluate the status of the telecommunications ordinance and to determine whether further amendments were warranted. Although the council directed staff to pursue amendments to the ordinance, no additional funding was provided. Policy Issues The key policy issue for the City Council to consider is whether amendments to the Telecommunication Ordinance are necessary and if so, whether this should be one of the top priority work program items, as discussed at the council' s recent work session. Staff offers the following information for City Council consideration: Effectiveness of the Current Ordinance As noted in the work session on October 14, 2002, the number of telecommunication applications has continued to decrease. This is particularly true for new tower proposals, especially in more sensitive areas. Of the requests made since the adoption of the ordinance, the vast majority of proposals have been to co-locate facilities on existing towers or other structures. Of the new towers proposed, most have been placed in areas of higher impact, such as the industrial zones. As of this date, no applications have been processed for a tower within a residential zone. Such information helps validate the effectiveness of the ordinance which emphasizes co-location of facilities and discourages placement of towers in more sensitive areas of the city. Balance of Community Concerns and Legal Constraints When the original ordinance was drafted, substantial effort was given to minimizing community impacts while meeting the legal mandates established in the Federal Communications Act. Since the adoption of L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\S040414B.doc these provisions, the City has experienced a fairly low level of controversy associated with new facilities. Over the past seven years, there have been three land use decisions appealed (two by neighborhood groups and one by a telecommunication provider). In addition, the City continues to be recognized for having a model ordinance which has withstood legal challenge from the telecommunication industry, while providing an incentive-based approach to minimize impacts to neighborhoods. Council Goals The issue of cell tower siting falls under the 2003 -2004 Council Goal of Sustainable Community Growth and Change, specifically the section that refers to managing growth and change in the urban environment. Financial and/or Resource Considerations Due to limited resources, any staff work on this issue should be prioritized along with the other items noted on the Planning and Development Department Workplan that was considered by the council on February 9, 2004. Other Background Information None. Timing There are no timing issues associated with this item. OPTIONS None; this is a work session only. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. SUGGESTED MOTION Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS None. FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Tom Coyle Telephone: 541-682-8817 Staff E-Mail: tom.g.coyle~ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040414\S040414B.doc