Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 11/14/05 Mtg M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall November 14, 2005 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor. COUNCILORS ABSENT: George Poling. The Honorable Mayor Kitty Piercy called the November 14, 2005, regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Mayor Piercy presented Larry Perry of the Eugene Public Library Foundation with a plaque recognizing the foundation’s successful capital campaign. Mayor Piercy noted that the foundation recently presented a check for $65,000 to the City, representing the final payment for the Buildings for Generations Campaign. The check represented the culmination of years of dedicated work by hundreds of volunteers and the generosity of more than 2,500 donors. Mr. Perry, president of the foundation, accepted the plaque and introduced other members of the foundation who were present. He reiterated the foundation’s continuing support for the library, and reminded the public and council of the upcoming Arts and Artists fundraising event. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Steve Johnson , 1825 Longview Street, a member of the board of the Eugene Parks Foundation, urged the council to consider placing a parks bond measure on the ballot in one year. He noted the history of the previous bond measure and said the money was all spent successfully and the citizens received more than they hoped for. He noted his membership on former Mayor Jim Torrey’s Parks Planning Committee, and said the Comprehensive Parks Master Plan soon to be considered by the council indicated the City was behind national standards for parks and recreation, as well as behind local standards; the plan identified significant gaps in those areas, and a bond measure would address those gaps. He observed that in 1998, citizens considered three money measures, all of which passed by considerable margins. Eugene citizens expressed willingness to fund public needs, once they were clearly demonstrated. Mr. Johnson suggested that a measure that cost about $10 million more than the past bond would be manageable by present staff. He recommended a committee be formed to identify what made the most sense to offer to the voters. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 1 Regular Meeting Jenny Ulum , 2493 Panorama Drive, a member of the Eugene Parks Foundation Board, agreed with the comments of Mr. Johnson. She said Eugene was proud of its parks but there were improvements that could be made to the system, such as a more equal geographic distribution of parks. Parks were a valuable resource for the entire community. She offered the foundation’s assistance in fundraising for new parks. She acknowledged competing needs but believed the public would support additional parks funding. Mary Otten , 1612 Lincoln Street, expressed her concern about the proposed conversion of the signal- th controlled intersection at 10 Avenue and Olive Street to a four-way stop. She asked the council to stop that from occurring because the bus station was located close to that intersection and the ambient noise from the buses would impede the blind from crossing because they would be unable to hear to safely navigate the intersection in question. She was not opposed to four-way stops in general but thought someone could get injured at the site in question. Ms. Otten said the Human Rights Commission’s Accessibility Committee (HRAC) was not informed about the conversion but only found out about it by accident after the decision was made, and she thought there was a gap in the process that allowed that to occur. She said the committee could not properly advise the City if it was not informed. Zachery Vishanoff , a resident of Patterson Street, noted his interest in having pre-Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) meetings for those who had difficulty crossing Franklin Boulevard. He said that would allow the Lane Transit District (LTD) to make informed decisions. Speaking to the issue of planning for a new city hall, he expressed concern about the discussion he heard at the council’s meeting on the topic, in particular the discussion of public information. He said that citizens would not get a chance for meaningful opportunities to participate if they were spoon-fed information about it. He did not think the input would be used. For example, if someone suggested the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) steam plant could be a new city hall, that idea would not be considered. He advocated for firing the consultants hired for the process, who he averred would merely “mess it up.” Mr. Vishanoff said that citizens should be involved in a design contest for the courthouse neighborhood. He said such processes should be open to all. Becky Riley , 202 Hawthorne Avenue, advocated for the appointment of David Monk as a Eugene representative on the Board of Directors of the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority (LRAPA). She said her neighborhood was affected by the odors emitting from the J.H. Baxter Company and she attended many LRAPA board meetings in an attempt to get the situation remedied. Mr. Monk also attended those meetings and had been working to make LRAPA more responsive to the public. He had many ideas for improving LRAPA and its services. Ms. Riley believed his knowledge would be helpful to LRAPA. For those reasons, she encouraged his application to the board. Ms. Riley maintained that residents were frustrated with LRAPA and needed to know it would enforce the law and help improve air quality. Mr. Monk would help to address that issue. Jon West , 3525 High Street, director of the Lane Independent Living Alliance (LILA), called on the City to partner with its citizens on such things as the intersection signal conversion project planned at Olive Street th and 10 Avenue. He noted the decision was only recently made, and the members of the HRAC, LILA, and Commission for the Blind were only recently informed of the decision, and so had no opportunity to provide meaningful input. Mr. West hoped for a delay to the conversion, which was scheduled to happen the following day. Leslie McGuire , 420 Goodyear Street, also supported the appointment of David Monk to the LRAPA board. She noted her own attendance at LRAPA board meetings and said Mr. Monk had demonstrated excellent problem-solving skills that were much needed on the board. Mr. Monk’s background gave him MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 2 Regular Meeting considerable knowledge of the matters that LRAPA addressed. She perceived Mr. Monk as a person of integrity. She believed he could be trusted to uphold the mission of the agency. Ray Wiley , 2100 Cheadles Avenue, a member of the Board of Directors of the Sheldon-McMurphey- rdth Johnson House, said that a survey of the residents living along the 3/4 Connector indicated an interest in having the name of the connector changed to something more historic, such as McMurphey Way, in honor of the longest term residents of the Shelton-McMurphey-Johnson House, a historic structure on the face of Skinner Butte that was originally constructed in 1888. He provided a brief history of the house and spoke of his involvement in the house’s revitalization. Teresa Damron , 605 Howard Avenue, a representative of the River Road Community Organization, discussed the River Avenue stakeholder process. She thanked the council for referring the road improve- ment design project to the stakeholders. She believed the council’s purpose was to increase trust between the City, the property owners, and the River Road neighborhood. She did not think that was an outcome of the process. Ms. Damron recommended written goals and procedures for any future similar processes. She said that she was very concerned about the stormwater facilities for the project, an issue which would be addressed in the stakeholders’ minority report. She was also concerned about the tree planting associated with the project as some property owners did not want trees but her organization felt they were necessary and believed an opt-out option for the owners of the properties involved set an unwise precedent. Rob Handy , 450-½ River Road, noted the work occurring in the River Road neighborhood with regard to neighborhood preservation and planning as well as natural stormwater treatments. He asserted that such treatments tended to be less costly and he believed they enhanced the neighborhood. He urged the council to revise the recommendations of the majority of the stakeholders who participated in the process and adopt the recommendations of the two representatives of the River Road Community Organization. Mr. Handy agreed with Ms. Damron’s remarks about the tree planting associated with the project. He encouraged councilors to travel along River Road and Maxwell Drive to see why people did not like those streets. David Monk , 3720 Emerald Street, spoke in support of his nomination by the mayor to the board of LRAPA. He spoke of the mission of the agency and said he had demonstrated a commitment to public health and collaboration with others. He noted his past service on Department of Environmental Quality stakeholder groups, LRAPA subcommittees, and the Eugene Toxics Board. He maintained he kept an open mind and respected others. He was an advocate for the public interest and said he was also pragmatic and understanding and was aware that reality dictated what could be accomplished. Mr. Monk noted the many public hearings he attended and testified at and said he understood what businesses needed. He hoped to bring fairness and predictability of the oversight of industry. He said he looked forward to working with other board members to improve the agency. Kevin Matthews , 1192 Lawrence Street, President of the Friends of Eugene, maintained that confusing media coverage of the public hearings regarding Goal 5 mentioned building bans. He said that was an error. He believed the ordinance before the council was too weak to provide sustainable environmental protection. The ordinance was created so that no lot was rendered unbuildable. Mr. Matthews maintained that approach minimized the impact on the residential lands building inventory, which had already taken into account the Goal 5 inventory. He believed the ordinance would have a net positive impact on the buildable lands inventory. Mr. Matthews advocated for the appointment of Mr. Monk to the LRAPA Board. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 3 Regular Meeting Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Drive, thanked the council and mayor for their careful consideration of appointees to citizen committees. He thanked the council for appointing him to the Whilamut Natural Area Citizen Advisory Committee so he could serve with David Sonnichsen, one of the mayor’s nominations to the committee. He joined in the remarks of others speaking in support of Mr. Monk. Mr. Biggs hoped that all public meetings involving Eugene appointments appeared in the City’s Public Meetings Calendar. Mr. Biggs reported that Rob Handy was a new co-chair of the Neighborhood Leaders Council. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum called for council responses to comments made in the forum. Councilor Kelly thanked all those who appeared to testify. He applauded the efforts of the Eugene Library Foundation. He noted that the Authors and Artists Fair was scheduled for December 3 at the Public Library from 7 to 10 p.m. The event was free. th Councilor Kelly asked City Manager Dennis Taylor to follow-up on the conversion of the intersection at 10 Avenue and Olive Street. He expressed disappointment that the HRAC was not notified in advance, and asked that the City work with the committee and LILA on the issue to determine if there was something that satisfied all parties. Speaking to the testimony of Mr. Wiley, Councilor Kelly recalled that the several councilors suggested the connector be named in honor of the Shelton-McMurphey Johnson House. He asked that the manager return with information about the status of that issue. Councilor Ortiz shared Councilor Kelly’s interest in the signal issue. Councilor Papé also shared Councilor Kelly’s interest in the signal issue. Councilor Papé expressed pride in the Eugene Library Foundation and noted that it raised $4 million prior to construction of the library and then realized an additional amount to fill the gap between the estimated and actual construction costs. He noted the contribution to that effort made by the late Tom Wiper. Councilor Papé spoke to the remarks made regarding the River Avenue project and said while the process was not perfect, he thought it would lead to a good outcome that could be implemented soon. Responding to a question from Councilor Papé, City Manager Taylor indicated he would follow up on the question of public notice regarding meetings conducted by other agencies that included Eugene representa- tives. Councilor Bettman also recognized the members of the Eugene Library Foundation for their contributions to the community. th Councilor Bettman requested more information about the conversion of the intersection at 10 Avenue and Olive Street and suggested a process be established for such situations that allowed for comment from the HRAC. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 4 Regular Meeting rdth Councilor Bettman agreed it was a good time to rename the 3/4 Connector, although she preferred to name it after the late civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks. She asked if the City had developed a process for renaming streets, and said a process that involved the community should be used to rename any street. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minutes September 26, 2005, Regular Meeting September 28, 2005, Work Session October 10, 2005, Work Session October 10, 2005, Regular Meeting October 24, 2005, Work Session B. Tentative Working Agenda Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to approve the Consent Calen- dar. Councilor Kelly and Councilor Bettman noted that they offered corrections to the minutes via e-mail. Mayor Piercy deemed them accepted. Roll call vote; the motion to adopt the Consent Calendar passed unanimously, 7:0. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Establishing a Chambers Special Area Zone; Amending Sections 9.0500, 9.1030, 9.8030, and 9.8865 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adding Sections 9.3050 through 9.3065 to that Code; Amending the Effective Zoning Map; Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Allen Lowe of the Planning Division provided the staff report. He said the hearing regarded the proposed amendments to the Eugene Code related to the Chambers Reconsidered planning process. He briefly recalled the history of the project, saying the project focused on resolving development compatibility and pedestrian safety issues in the study area. The proposed code amendments affect certain properties zoned R- 1, Low-Density Residential, R-2, Medium-Density Residential, and C-2, Community Commercial. Mr. Lowe said the majority of the amendments specifically affect certain parcels zoned R-2, and would introduce compatibility standards to be applied to new development in the area. The standards would also reduce the permitted density levels in the study area. A new zone to be known as the Chambers Special Area Zone would be created, and it would include the new standards. Mr. Lowe noted that the staff report included correspondence submitted prior to November 8. Since November 8, approximately 30 additional letters had been received, and he submitted a list of the residents who provided testimony into the public record. Mr. Lowe noted that the council was tentatively scheduled to act on the item on December 12. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Ron Schmaedict , 420 Mar Loop, noted his long-time ownership of two duplexes zoned R-2 in the area of th Taylor Street and 12 Avenue. The properties were a major part of his retirement assets. He said that as a MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 5 Regular Meeting result of the proposed zoning change, he would not be able to redevelop his property to the higher densities permitted by the R-2 zone and was unsure that the duplexes could be rebuilt if destroyed should the rezoning go forward. He said the proposed downzoning would reduce the value of his properties and would likely have a similar impact on other R-2 properties in the area. He asked if that was fair, and questioned if the City would reimburse him and other owners for their lost value if Ballot Measure 37 was upheld by the courts. He said the mayor and many councilors had been very vocal about holding the current urban growth boundary (UGB) and developing to higher densities in the existing boundaries. If that was the goal, he questioned how the council could justify the zoning being proposed for the area in question. He asked the council to consider the message it was sending by approving the downzoning. Mac Curtis , 1391 West Broadway, a member of the Chambers Area Families for a Healthy Neighborhood (CAFHN), thanked the council and mayor for its consideration of the organization’s work. He also thanked Mr. Lowe, consultant Greg Brokaw, other Planning Division staff, as well as Chair John Lawless of the Planning Commission for the leadership he demonstrated. He noted the many pieces of testimony submitted by those in support of the plan. Mr. Curtis acknowledged the applicable criteria in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) related to increasing overall density in the city; however, those policies did not provide for equal density in all neighborhoods. The City’s plans also spoke to preserving existing neighborhoods, such as his. He did not think the City could create plans that overrode those policies. Mr. Curtis said the proposed special area zone preserved the neighborhood while increasing density. th Steve Pringle , 1457 West 10 Avenue, a member of CAFHN, said his organization documented the negative impacts of poor infill developments in the area on adjacent residents and the entire neighborhood. He said that those councilors who had taken a walking tour of the neighborhood were aware of those impacts. The organization determined that limiting the number of dwelling units on each lot was essential to preventing further neighborhood destabilization and was consistent with City plan policies. Mr. Pringle spoke to the issue of density, saying that the result of the zone would be an increase in density that exceeded the council’s target for mixed-use density. He said the City would be able to accommodate anticipated growth as part of its overall growth strategy and the neighborhood would be able to support it. th Carol DeFazio , 1437 West 10 Avenue, a member of CAFHN, suggested the council consider whether its decision about the zone would help Eugene grow wisely and foster a livable community. She said residents already walk the talk about density and support smart growth. However, intelligent planning should not put established neighborhoods at risk while promoting pale, nontraditional replicas of them at the periphery. She said residents welcomed positive change and supported significant increases in density accompanied by standards to ensure it occurred at a proper scale. She said the organization also encouraged diversity by allowing alley access to new affordable housing. Ms. DeFazio said the current approach to density was destabilizing the neighborhood and decreasing values. th Janice Gotchall , 1461 West 10 Avenue, a member of CAFHN, noted the supporting documentation that accompanied the proposed development standards for the special area zone. She said the neighbors opposed previous plans because they failed to address issues of compatibility and scale. They did not address the criteria related to protection of existing neighborhoods. She said the neighborhood organized many meetings, formed an e-mail discussion group, established an e-web site, met with councilors, and conducted walking tours. She said the result was a “win-win” collaboration between the City and residents that was not previously possible. Residents were prepared to help the City move forward with the Chambers mixed- MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 6 Regular Meeting use center when the standards were adopted. She thought the plan represented good citizen involvement. Residents should be given a voice in the area they lived and raised their families. Donald Brunner , 1699 Fairmount Boulevard, noted that he was not a resident of the Chambers Area but he was in support of the efforts of CAFHN. He said that he renovated a house on Adams Street that was negatively affected by an infill development that towered over his house. He and two neighbors lost all privacy and eventually all moved away. His family was no longer able to walk to downtown locations and patronize downtown businesses. He said that the City’s approach to density needed to consider existing assets and preserve owner-occupied housing in the downtown area. He believed the special area zone was a model that should be adopted and applied to other neighborhoods. Rob Handy , 455-½ River Road, spoke in favor of the proposed development standards as key to preserving the neighborhood’s character. He urged the council’s support of the amendments. Carlis Nixon , 1556 Wilson Court, said that the matter before the council was not just a concern for those who lived in the area. She supported the special area zone and urged the council to do so as well. She said the area in question had many charming structures of historic interest. The neighborhood was important to maintaining the livability of the downtown area. She thought the residents of the area had done an excellent job. She believed the development standards would help maintain the quality of the area. Jozef Siekiel-Zolzienicki , 1025 Taylor Street, a member of CAFHN, said the council may be worried about lower density standards but an examination of the report would indicate a willingness to accept a higher degree of density at certain locations, if well-planned. The organization supported a viable commercial area th on West 11 Avenue between Chambers and Garfield streets so that neighbors could take advantage of commercial uses on that street. He requested the council’s support of the proposed amendments. Kevin Matthews , 1192 Lawrence Street, President of the Friends of Eugene, did not perceive any controversy in the matter before the council. The residents of the area had done an excellent job. Mr. Matthews identified several issues. He believed the neighborhood was currently zoned at what he termed excessively high densities, suggesting that had occurred because it was perceived as blighted and planners did not take into account the character of the neighborhood and potential of revitalization. He thought the Chambers node should have been “dead on arrival” as the area’s traffic patterns argued against it. He said the nodal development effort was “off track.” Mr. Matthews said the problem of inappropriate infill was not limited to the neighborhood in question. The code encouraged density without offering anything to mitigate the problems that arose. He appreciated that the council intended to consider that issue. Zachary Vishanoff , a resident of Patterson Street, averred that mixed-use development was being used to subvert neighborhoods. Not every neighborhood had an organization such as CAFHN to work with the City. He said that the City staff needed to be slowed down and the City should not allow mixed-use development to get ahead of the proposed basketball arena. He said that residents should be allowed to discuss what mixed-use development meant to them. There being no further requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Taylor spoke of her admiration for the work of CAFHN and said she looked forward to approving the plan. She thought it an example of excellent citizen involvement leading to a good outcome. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 7 Regular Meeting Councilor Papé agreed with Councilor Taylor and complimented the residents of the neighborhood for their hard work, persistence, and diplomacy. He particularly recognized the work of resident Paul Conte of CAFHN. Councilor Solomon said she had also enjoyed the products put together by the organization. She expressed appreciation to CAFHN for working with staff and to staff for its work with the organization. She determined from Mr. Lowe that all area residents and property owners received notice of the public hearing. Councilor Kelly also thanked the residents for their testimony and hard work. He called attention to the designs guideline document and commended the work, adding he wished the council was considering design guidelines rather than a proscriptive code approach. He hoped the City Council and Planning Commission would consider that work in their discussions of the alternative path. Councilor Kelly interpreted the council’s motion of October 12 as precluding action prior to its considera- tion of a Ballot Measure 37 compensation fund, scheduled for January 25. Councilor Kelly expressed interest in revising the recommendations to provide for a minimum density in the area to be zoned for 15 units per acre. He also wanted to see language for an amendment that respected the height limitation and design standards while allowing for condominiums and row houses. 6. PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Ordinance Vacating a Portion of the Alley th Right-of-Way Located Between 10 Avenue and Broadway, Parallel to Olive and Charnelton Streets, Providing for an Effective Date; and Providing for a Sunset Date Mayor Piercy called for ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. There were none declared. She determined that no councilor had made site visits, although Councilor Papé noted he had visited the site several times. City Attorney Glenn Klein indicated that a casual drive-by did not constitute a site visit. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Bettman determined from Alissa Hansen of the Planning Division that as a result of the vacation, one-quarter of the alley would go to Diamond Parking. Councilor Bettman asked what compensation the City would receive in return. Ms. Hansen clarified that the code allowed for the City Manager to make a determination of the special assessment, which would be approved by the council. The manager was not recommending an assessment in this case because the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency was initiating the vacation. That was consistent with past City actions. Councilor Bettman asserted that if the Oregon Research Institute (ORI) project did not come to fruition, the portion of the alley going to the Urban Renewal Agency would then benefit another private party. However, she supported donating that portion of right-of-way to ORI because she believed there was a large public benefit involved. Councilor Bettman asked how the manager determined there was a public benefit to “giving away” City assets to Diamond Parking. Ms. Hansen clarified that Diamond Parking had not requested the right-of-way in question. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 8 Regular Meeting Councilor Bettman requested an amendment that tied what she termed the alley vacation “giveaway” to the ORI development and an amendment that required remuneration to the City from Diamond Parking for the vacated right-of-way. Councilor Papé asked why the issue was coming to the council at this time. City Manager Taylor said that the meeting was the first time the council’s calendar could accommodate the item. It was also consistent with the time line in the City’s agreement with ORI. Mayor Piercy suggested that action be scheduled for a future meeting. City Manager Taylor concurred. Councilor Solomon asked what happened if Diamond Parking did not want part of the alley in question, and why the entire alley was not dedicated to the Urban Renewal Agency. Mr. Klein clarified that under State law, when the City Council vacated a right-of-way, the property in question went back to the adjacent underlying owners. The council did not have the authority to deed the property to the Urban Renewal Agency. In order to assess Diamond Parking for the vacated right-of-way, the council would have to assess the Urban Renewal Agency as well. The question was whether there was a benefit from this property. Unless the council could find a factual basis for determining that there was no benefit to the Urban Renewal Agency but somehow a benefit to Diamond Parking from the vacation, he believed that Diamond Parking would probably have an equal protection claim against the City. He added that the council could make that determination because the code stipulates that the manager recommends, but the council decides whether to assess a special benefit. He was likely to suggest that if the council were to assess a special benefit, it do so on a square footage basis. Councilor Bettman said she would not oppose paying the assessment for the ORI portion from Urban Renewal Agency funds. She suggested that the City might want to retain the excess right-of-way for a pedestrian walkway to provide additional needed connectivity in downtown. Councilor Bettman recalled that when PeaceHealth had compensated the City for a previous alley vacation the cost was about $87,000. She believed the right-of-way in question was relatively valuable. Mayor Piercy called for a brief meeting break. 7. ACTION: Ordinances Concerning the Goal 5 Natural Resources Study An Ordinance Updating the Goal 5 Inventory Within the Eugene City Limits; Adopting the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan Within the Eugene City Limits; Repealing Ordinance No. 20296; Amending Sections 9.0500, 9.1040, 9.2751, 9.6885, 9.7025, 9.7055, 9.7105, 9.9205, 9.7230, 9.7305, 9.7810, 9.8025, 9.8030, 9.8460, 9.8465, 9.8470, 9.8855, and 9.8865 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adding New Sections 9.8472 and 9.8474; and Adding New Sections 9.4900 through 9.4980 to that Code to Establish a Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone; Amending the Eugene Overlay Zone Map; Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effective Date and An Ordinance Adopting the Goal 5 Inventory With the Eugene Urban Growth Area; Adopting the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan with the Eugene Urban Growth Area; Repealing Ordinance No. 20295; Amending Section 9.7810 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adopting a Severabil- ity Clause; and Providing Effective Dates MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 9 Regular Meeting Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4905, an ordinance updating the Goal 5 inventory within the Eugene city lim- its. Councilor Papé noted that Councilor George Poling requested that the council not take action in his absence and he wished to respect that request. He said that traditionally, the council honored such requests. Councilor Solomon hoped that in the past spirit of trust and cooperation, the council would honor Mr. Poling’s request. She said that City Manager Taylor indicated to her there was time on the council calendar to accommodate the item at a future meeting. Councilor Bettman said the council had not always honored councilors’ requests to postpone action. She maintained that the council’s tradition and protocol related to such requests was that they were based on extenuating circumstances, such as a family illness or travel for other council business. She did not think a hunting trip rose to that standard. She maintained that the community was waiting for the council to take action on the item, which had long been on the council’s agenda. She would have been happy to have considered the request if it were for the reasons she previously mentioned. Councilor Bettman said that scheduling a hunting trip while council was in session should not preclude the council from conducting its business in Councilor Poling’s absence. Councilor Kelly said that the council usually honored such requests, but sometimes did not. It was his recollection that the council honored such requests for the reasons mentioned by Councilor Bettman. He found it troubling that Councilor Poling knew of the schedule for at least a month prior to his vacation, and in fact, in his role as council president, offered the body a motion in late October to schedule the item for action on this date. Had Councilor Poling worked with staff at that time, he was sure staff could have rescheduled the item. That Councilor Poling requested the delay the night before the meeting Councilor Kelly found “troubling, and just a wee bit manipulative.” He believed the council’s upcoming meeting schedule was already full and he was concerned about further delay. He said that he would not have spent as much time as he had on the amendments if he knew the item would be delayed. Councilor Papé disagreed with the Councilor Bettman’s recollection. He could recall only one instance where his request for postponement was not honored. He and others had asked for action to be postponed for reasons other than those mentioned by Councilor Bettman and those requests were honored. He objected to comments casting aspersions on Councilor Poling for his request because of his own, similar past requests. He asked the council to honor its traditions. Mr. Klein noted that given a motion was on the table, a councilor would have to move to postpone the motion to a date certain to honor Mr. Poling’s request. Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to postpone the item. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 4:3; councilors Papé, Solomon, and Pryor voting yes. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to adopt Motion A, which would add a new standard to all provisions in the land use code that allow lots to be divided such that a lot could not be created that would automatically qualify for an adjustment under Eugene Code (EC) 9.8030(21)(a). This adjustment is the adjustment that requires that 33 percent of the lot be either within the /WR setback area, or the area that extends landward beyond the setback. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 10 Regular Meeting Councilor Papé asked if the amendment could prevent the subdivision of a small parcel. Natural Resources Planner Neil Björklund said that there may be certain circumstances where subdivision would be precluded, but he thought that would be unusual. One would have to have a combination of a large setback and a lot big enough to be partitioned. Without further analysis of examples, he was unable to provide a definitive answer; however, it was his sense that would be an unusual situation. Speaking to Councilor Papé’s question, Councilor Bettman said that one would still have the underlying provision allowing for adjustment if one could not avoid creating a lot with more than 33 percent in a conservation area. The amendment would apply only when one was platting a subdivision or planned unit development. The platter could not create lots intentionally to secure the adjustment. Councilor Papé asked if the adjustment was automatically granted or was a discretionary decision. Mr. Björklund indicated that one would have to apply for the adjustment through a Type II application. The motion passed, 4:3; councilors Papé, Solomon, and Pryor voting in opposition. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to adopt Motion B, a motion that would amend two sections that address whether paved roads or pathways would be allowed within the conservation area. The amendment to EC 9.4930(3)(i) would prohibit construc- tion of maintenance access roads within the conservation area, and would limit construction of paved pedestrian pathways to no more than 6 feet in width and only on streams or wet- lands that have a setback of 40 feet or more. The amendment to EC 9.4940 would make that section consistent with the language and intent of EC 9.4930(3)(i). Councilor Bettman said the proposed amendment would allow for up to a six-foot walkway in a setback area. She noted that staff supported the amendment as being consistent with the intent of the conservation area. Councilor Papé asked if the amendment allowed for bicycle paths. Mr. Björklund said that it was pointed out to staff that there were three planned bicycle paths running along waterways that had not been built yet. The standard width for such bicycle paths was 12 feet, so the amendment did represent a conflict with those bicycle paths. If the council wished to allow those paths to go forward, he recommended that staff develop some alternative language. Councilor Papé suggested that the amendment be changed to 12 feet. Councilor Bettman suggested that alternatively, the three bicycle paths be listed as exceptions that could be built to 12 feet. Councilor Bettman withdrew the motion for the time being with the concurrence of her second, Councilor Taylor. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Motion C, a motion that would revise BC 9.8030(21)(b), (c) and (d) and add a new subsection (e). EC 9.8030(21)(b), (c) and (d) provide for adjustments to the conservation area if certain stan- dards are met. The new section (21)(e) would provide standards for demonstrating that en- hancement measures increase the functions and values of the conservation area. Section (21 )(b) provides for a setback reduction of up to 20 percent on setbacks of 40 feet or more, if certain standards are met. This amendment would require an applicant for this adjustment to demonstrate that the new enhancement standards under (21)(e) are met in order to reduce MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 11 Regular Meeting the setback by 20 percent. This amendment would require an applicant for the adjustment under (21)(c) to demonstrate that the new enhancement standards under (21)( e) are met in order to use setback averaging on the site. The amendment would revise (21)(d) so that in order to qualify for the adjustment, the property would have to: (1) be undeveloped, (2) be such that the lot could not be developed without this adjustment, and (3) would have to meet the new standards in (21)(e). Councilor Kelly thanked Mr. Björklund and other staff for their work on the amendment. Councilor Kelly noted that staff supported the amendment as the changes would strengthen the intent of the adjustment provisions. The amendment to the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend Subsection 9.8030(21)(a) to provide as follows: a) for any property containing a /WR conservation area due to a re- source identified as a wetland, upland wildlife habitat, or riparian site in the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan, an adjustment to the provisions of Eugene Code Section 9.4920 may be made if no previous adjustment under this section has been approved for the specific portion of the conservation area and all the following are met: 1. More than 33 percent of the development site is occupied by the combined area of the /WR conservation setback and any portion of the Goal 5 Water Resource Site that ex- tends landward beyond the conservation setback; 2. The proposed reduction in the /WR conservation area will result in the combined area described above constituting at least 33 percent of the developable site; 3. The parcel is not already developed with a building suitable for occupancy; 4. The area of the subject parcel is 10,000 square feet or less; 5. The portion of the development site removed from the /WR conservation area complies with Eugene Code Section 9.4980(2)(a)(4), (4)(b), (5)(a), (8), and (10); 6. The portion of the development site outside the /WR conservation area, including the area removed, complies with Eugene Code Section 9.4980(7); 7. The portion of the development site that remains in a /WR conservation setback area complies with Eugene Code Section 9.4980(1) through (5) 8. The reduction occurs first by reducing the area of any portion of the resource site that extends landyard beyond the conservation setback. If additional reduction in the /WR conservation area is needed to reduce the combined area to 33 percent of the develop- ment site area, the conservation setback described in Eugene Code Section 9.4920(1)(b) may be reduced the minimum necessary to meet the standard in subsection 2; and 9. The proposed adjustment is consistent with Eugene Code Section 9.8030(21)(e). Councilor Kelly said the amendment would primarily affect small parcels. The intent of the amendment was to avoid the creation of an undevelopable lot. The amendment fine-tuned the proposed code language by restricting it to lots of 10,000 feet or less and lots not already developed with a building suitable for occupancy. Councilor Papé noted that staff did not support the amendment. He requested an explanation. Mr. Björklund said the staff response was based on the fact that the 33-percent threshold adjustment was the only mechanism it could develop to address certain lots along the Willamette River that staff was aware of MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 12 Regular Meeting and that the council received testimony regarding. In those cases, the setback consumed more than 33 percent of a lot. Staff examined every option it could think of regarding how to provide relief in such a case. In one case, a property owner would not be able to expand a front porch by a foot because it would result in a violation of the conservation area. There were problems with every alternative staff developed. Mr. Björklund said that staff believed there would be other situations it did not anticipate where the regulations would not make sense, and staff did not want to limit the section to undeveloped parcels. For that reason, staff believed the 33 percent adjustment should be allowed to be applied to developed parcels. Councilor Papé asked if the amendment could result in lawsuits. City Attorney Emily Jerome indicated that such instances were not likely to be common but she believed the City would prevail in the case of a legal challenge. Councilor Kelly said he had indicated in his communication with staff that he did not object to exempting the specific properties along the Willamette River from the natural resource ordinance. The issue for him was that there 2,000 lots and the City was unaware of all the situations that would arise, which was his reason for proposing the amendment. It could be there was a large lot with some development that would receive a substantial reduction in the protected conservation area. Councilor Solomon expressed support for the alternative motion offered by staff. Councilor Pryor asked if the effect of the amendment would be to reduce or increase a property owner’s flexibility in developing their property. Mr. Björklund said the amendment would narrow the number of parcels that would qualify for the exemption by quite a lot. Once applied, the amendment would be the same adjustment but the question was where it would apply and to what universe it would apply. Councilor Bettman said the council was already looking at a diminished level of natural resource protection. Building in the exemption would allow a further reduction in that protection. She did not support the staff- recommended motion because it still allowed for an adjustment to reduce the conservation area even if the lot was still buildable. She supported the amendment. Councilor Papé agreed with the remarks of Councilor Solomon. He said that the City should consider private property rights while balancing the need for protection. Councilor Bettman agreed with Councilor Kelly that known properties could be exempted through a separate ordinance. The amendment to the motion passed, 4:3; councilors Papé, Solomon, and Pryor voting no. Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson identified the bicycle paths that would be affected by the amendment previously offered by Councilor Bettman: 1) Delta Ponds path; 2) two sections of path along the Willamette River; and 3) the section of path along the Q Street Channel. Councilor Bettman indicated she was content to remove the reference to quantity and retain the text prepared by staff. Assistant City Manager Carlson clarified that existing bicycle paths would have a similar problem in the event of a preservation project that resulted in the widening of a bicycle path or removal of a bicycle path. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the motion with Mo- tion B on page 421 to include the text on 3(i) after it says “within the conservation area for MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 13 Regular Meeting category A, B, or C streams or Category A wetlands and no more than 12 feet for bicycle paths identified in TransPlan.” Councilor Papé wanted to ensure that the amendment was sufficiently flexible to allow for the construction of bicycle paths that met federal standards. Mr. Klein indicated that the motion would allow for that. Roll call vote; the amendment to the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Ms. Jerome called attention to the effective date for the ordinances, and recommended January 1, 2006, as the effective date, rather than effective upon acknowledgement by the State. Councilor Kelly asked how long such an acknowledgement would take. Ms. Jerome indicated that staff expected an appeal to be filed and it could be six or eight months before acknowledgement could occur. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the language for Section 25 of the ordinance as suggested by legal counsel. Roll call vote; the motion passed unani- mously, 7:0. Roll call vote; the main motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the council adopt Council Bill 4905, an ordinance updating the Goal 5 inventory within the Eugene city limits. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to extend time for the meeting by ten minutes. Councilor Solomon and Councilor Papé indicated they had to leave the meeting. Councilor Papé reiterated Councilor Poling’s request that action not be taken on the next agenda item. Speaking to earlier comments made by Councilor Kelly about Councilor Poling’s request to delay action on the item, Councilor Papé pointed out that when Councilor Poling made the motion to place the Goal 5 inventory item on the schedule, he did not know of the amendments that would be offered to the body. Councilor Bettman said that the council had applicants for committee positions who had “stepped up to the plate” to provide a valuable community service for no compensation, and Mr. Monk had stayed through the entire proceedings waiting to see if he was going to be appointed. She thought the council should move forward as long as it had a quorum. Mayor Piercy believed that the next item would only take a few minutes. Roll call vote; the motion to extend time passed, 5:2; councilors Solomon and Papé voting no. Councilors Solomon and Papé left the meeting. 8. ACTION: Appointment to Boards, Commissions, and Committees MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 14 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to appoint David Monk to Position 3, as one of the two Eugene at-large representatives on the Lane Regional Air Pollution Agency Board of Directors for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2005, and ending on October 31, 2008. Councilor Pryor said that while he would have supported the reappointment of a candidate who had previously served, he would support the mayor’s nomination. He said the board was a governance board, not an advocacy group, and he encouraged Mr. Monk to serve in a collaborative manner. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 5:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to appoint the mayor’s nominees to the Whilamut Natural Area Citizen Planning Committee (Stephen Cooper, Ed Fredette, El- liot McIntyre, Greg Ringer, David Sonnichsen, Matthew Svobada). Roll call vote; the mo- tion passed unanimously, 5:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to appoint Bobby Lee as a business representative on the Lane Workforce Partnership for a four-year term beginning October 1, 2005, and ending on December 31, 2009. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 5:0. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 15 Regular Meeting