September 24, 2003

1:30 p.m.

Commissionersí Conference Room

APPROVED 10/15/03


Commissioner Peter Sorenson presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bobby Green, Sr., and Anna Morrison present.Assistant County Counsel Dave Garnick, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.




a.ORAL REPORT/Status of Application for Federal Health Clinic.


Steve Manela, Human Services Commission, reported this was a report back that the Board requested in the summer.He said at the time of the request, it wasnít known whether they would be receiving a grant award from the federal government.He stated they were told in August that they were successful in the grant award for a federally qualified health center.He said they are looking at a grant award of $566,000.He stated they received by fax a notice of grant award.He noted that over the course of the next several months he would be reporting to the Board and the Finance and Audit Committee to review the project.He wanted to make sure that this project is successful financially and everyone who is involved agrees to move forward.


Manela explained the notice of grant award gives them 90 days for a start up.He discussed the timeline. (Copy in file.)He stated he would come before the Board next year with the grant award.He added it would be conditional based upon the review of the Finance and Audit Committee in October and November.He explained in order to gear up the clinic by February 2004, they are in need of recruiting good qualified people to manage the clinic and in order to do that they are going to ask the Board to allow them to begin the recruitment process for the management, prior to finishing the process with the Finance and Audit Committee.


Dwyer commented that this was a goal of his.He said he would work to make it a showcase for the federal government program.


Morrison asked if they could get a written commitment for the dollars that the partners would place for the clinic.She asked if Lane County would be purchasing a building.She also asked what would happen if Lane County accepts the grant and the health clinic didnít work out.


Manela noted there was a two-way process.He said they have a notice of grant award from the feds that is conditional.He stated within the next 60 days with the federal government, they have to do due diligence and show Lane County could live up to the commitment.He added if they canít live up to the commitment then they wouldnít enter into an agreement with Lane County.He said they were putting together a three-year plan and the federal government is making a commitment to come up with dollars.He noted what was different with this program and others is that the federal government will continue to grant them dollars into the future.




a.PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 03-9-24-11/In the Matter of Approving a Project Design Concept for the Intersections of Lingo Lane, Noraton Road and Highway 99E Based on the Design Concept in Exhibit B; and Authorizing Staff to Prepare a Right-of-Way Plan Necessary to Construct the Project, Pursue All Necessary Planning Actions, Acquire Right-of-Way and Prepare Plans and Specifications for Improvement of Said Intersections.


Sonny Chickering, Public Works, explained they have had a lot of public input and several meetings with the residents of the area.He said the project initially was to re-align the intersections of Noraton and Lingo Lane.He said during the initial meetings with the community, they didnít want to support a project unless it included a left turn on Highway 99E.He said at the time there werenít funds available to include that in the project.He noted the Roads Advisory Committee recommended their original project and suggested that the turn lane could be added in the next round of the CIP.He said in 2001 the Board approved funds to include the left turn lane on the highway.He noted they had revised the public input phase and the Roads Advisory Committee has considered the project and they elected to recommend to the Board that the project be approved and that it move forward.He said they were concerned about right-of-way acquisition.He said they asked them to explore alternatives.He noted the committee did that and the alternate design changes the alignment of Noraton.He stated the other concern of the Roads Advisory Committee was access to parcels on the Craig property.He said because of ODOTís access control, they limit the number of access points off of their highways.He said they have discussed the Access Management Plan with ODOT and it included a base curbing that would prohibit free access to the properties, which they do now.He noted there were objections to the limitation of access.


Chickering asked the Board to consider the approval of a final design concept and authorize staff to proceed to construction.He recommended the original design.


Jerry Juster, Region 2 Office, ODOT, explained when ODOT works in conjunction with local jurisdictions on a highway, they have been given a department directive to form an access management sub team, a smaller group that develops the project that reviews access issues and comes up with an access management strategy. He said they were trying to match the type of project and classification of the highway.He explained that this highway is supposed to move people to and from in a moderate speed with a limited amount of interruption with the access points.He said the goal of the strategy was to try to reduce conflict points at the highway.He thought the need for the turn lane could be a positive step to eliminate rear-end accidents on the highway.


Commissioner Sorenson opened up the Public Hearing.


Charles Cook, 95347 Highway 99 E, stated he had lived at the same location for 38years and he was one of the first people to come forward asking for something to be done.He said his objective is to never see another accident.He said he was in support of what the county and state had done.He said there used to be problems with overhanging trees and they took the trees out.He noted there had been four people killed in front of his property over the past 38 years.He said the problem with Lingo Lane and Noraton is that people are going through the stop signs.He said people are coming off the highway onto Noraton at 70 to 80 miles per hour.He was in support of the Countyís project.


Lanny Allan, 95331 Highway 99 E, was opposed to the current proposal.He wanted a speed reduction and flashing lights.


Jerry Moser, 95378 Noraton Road, stated he sent a petition to the Board.He was told they need 51 percent of the people to sign the petition.He said he had 12 people sign the petition that did not want the road changed.He noted it had been two years since there had been an accident.He asked the Board to save the taxpayerís money and not change the road.He was against both options.


Arlene Zumwalt, 96520 Highway 99E, stated she represented the Lancaster Commercial Properties.She lived on the property from 1946 to 1955 and from 1996 to the present.She noted the property had been a service station and grocery before Highway 99 was constructed.She added it had been rented out as a service station and grocery store until 15 years ago.She noted they constructed a separate restroom separate from the store in the late 70ís and County permits and codes were all approved at that time.She said the use and structure of the building had been the same for over 90 years.She said they had updated inside and out to meet code.She stated that ODOT wanted to cut out their entrance to the parking lot on the south side of the store.She added that an exit from the north side of the store would mean maximum parking for only three cars and they would have to back out onto Highway 99.She said that ODOT approved an entrance and exit on Highway 99E in December 2002 for an espresso stand and deemed it not a change of use for that land.She noted that Lane County issued a placement permit for the use.She said ODOTís proposal of curbing off the parking lot would ruin the only commercial property in Lancaster.


Mike Farthing, 767 Willamette, stated he represents Arlene Zumwalt and her mother Nora Craig.He noted they have the only commercially zoned parcel in downtown Lancaster.He said there was nothing he saw in the record that documented any accident caused by this intersection.He added there was nothing in the record that documented any projected problems with the current access into the property. He commented the 54 points of conflict donít include the driveway as presently configured.He said in order for ODOT to close their driveway, they have to document a safety problem.He said they would be condemning access to the only commercial piece of property.He said they wanted to maintain the access to the parking lot.He noted the current proposed access north of the commercial building does not work as it creates a safety problem.He also recommended putting this project on hold to see if striping and tree removal really work.He believed this was a land use decision.


Donald Brown, 95796 Noraton Road, said he and his wife had lived on Noraton Road for 28 years.He thought the intersection was efficient.He requested they keep the old configuration.


Greg Mellor, 95664 Howard Lane, explained this started off as a safety improvement project that was designed to prevent accidents.He passed out information about accidents. (Copy in file.)He didnít want to spend $300,000 to make improvements if there are no accidents.He was not in favor of the project.


There being no one else signed up to speak, Commissioner Sorenson closed the Public Hearing.


Dwyer stated he had visited the site and they made a lot of improvements.He thought they could make more improvements without spending more money.He said if there is no support in the community and there are needs elsewhere, they shouldnít put any money into this project.He wanted to take the $300,000 to try programs that might reduce speed or installing a blinking light before they have something that the people in the community donít want.He suggested using a portion of the money and have staff come back with traffic calming and other suggestions.


Green asked if they didnít do the project in the way that staff recommended, what would happen in the interim.


Chickering responded that the Roads Advisory Committee brought up the two issues that they wanted to see addressed and the alternate design was a result of that.He added the alternate design was never taken back to the Roads Advisory Committee for their consideration; it came directly to the Board.He added if they didnít go ahead with this project they would lose matching funds.


Green commented he was torn on this project because he wanted to increase safety but if the neighbors were not in support, he didnít want to go ahead with it.


Morrison was in support of the project.She noted that people came to the Board about the accidents.She stated they spent four years trying to improve things and then the solutions are not acceptable by all parties that are involved.She wasnít opposed to scrapping the project.She appreciated staffís time in addressing a community concern that was directed by the Board because of an outcry.She commented they wasted a lot of money on this project getting to where they are right now.


Sorenson said he wanted a moratorium on this project and in some future point to make a decision to terminate the project if it is not necessary.He commented if the project were more supported by the residents, he would be more inclined to vote for the project to go ahead.


Green asked what the legal exposure was and the risk for safety.


Chickering responded whatever the Board decides, they have to rewrite the findings to either move forward or not for the design concept.He didnít know what the liabilities would be.


Sorenson suggested a middle course: to hold the money in reserve, to set a period in the future and then get a report back from staff on the accident situation.


Morrison was not supportive about holding onto the money instead of putting it to another project, but she would agree to forego the project


Green didnít support putting money into reserves but he did support not going forward.


MOTION:to approve ORDER 03-9-24-11.


Green MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.


Dwyer didnít support the motion because he said the money could be spent more wisely where it is wanted.


VOTE:1-3 (Dwyer, Green, Sorenson dissenting.)MOTION FAILED.


b.FOURTH READING AND CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance PA 1191/In the Matter of Adopting Amendments to the Rural Comprehensive Plan and the Coburg Comprehensive Plan to Enlarge the Coburg Urban Growth Boundary and Redesignate Affected Lands from a Rural Comprehensive Plan Designation of Agricultural Lands to a City Plan Designation of Parks, Recreation and Open Space and Rezone These Affected Lands from a Lane Code Chapter 16 District of EFU-40 to a Lane Code Chapter 10 District of Public Reserve; Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses and Declaring an Emergency (File PA 03-5277; City of Coburg) (NBA & PM 7/16/03, 7/30/03& 8/27/03).


Sorenson recalled that this item came up on August 27, 2003.He said staff informed them that there was a failure of notice and they continued it until today.


Jerry Kendall, Land Management, noted that additional material came in regarding Branch Engineering.


Green asked if the City of Coburg wanted to roll this matter until a fifth commissioner was appointed.


Mike Dean, Mayor of Coburg, responded that the City of Coburg would like to ask for a continuance until there is a full compliment of the Board because this is an East Lane County item.


Sorenson thought there were a series of questions about this and that was the reason for the continuance.


Kendall recalled there was a dual request on the part of the Board.He noted there was concern about including portions of the interstate and the urban growth boundary inclusion for the expansion.He said that Gary Darnielle, Hearings Officer, wanted a continuance until there was a full Board present.He added the Board wanted more information to explain why the interstate was being included.


Dwyer commented there was nothing in the STIP that he was aware of that would include this matter.He asked for information about survey lines and where ODOTís survey points are.He was concerned about the claims of need when he didnít believe that to be the real purpose to include the freeway.He noted there was another application where they also want to expand the urban growth boundary to the east side of the freeway as well as going for another mile north.He was against the process.


Gary Darnielle, Hearing Officer, LCOG, 99 E. Broadway, explained they need to have this approved comp plan change so they can get the land use compatibility statement.He said then they could start on the MPDES permit application that will take six months to get for the design.


Dwyer was going under the assumptions that the City of Coburg didnít need the compatibility statement.He didnít want to grant the extension to the center of the interstate


Sorenson opened up the Public Hearing.


Michael Dean, 32654 W. Dixon St., stated he was locked in a procedural issue.He wanted to bring comments at the point the Board was making the decision.


Richard P. Bolen, 4060 Eddystone Place, Eugene, stated he is the branch manager for Hertz Equipment Rental, 90675 Roberts Road.He said that I-5 patrols via the city of Coburg are crucial to asset protection in the area.He calculated there is a $150 million worth of assets between Coburg Industrial Drive,Roberts Road and I-5 that are outdoors.He noted most of the time access to these businesses is obtained via I-5.


William Hudson, P. O. Box 360, Coburg, stated he had conversations with Mr. Warner of Marathon.He said that Warner was in support of the ordinance.He said Warner noted the importance of the I-5 patrols. Hudson noted there had been many crimes against Warner in the past where people were taking paintball guns, parking on I-5 and shooting the motor coaches, causing significant damages. He added since the time the Coburg patrols had taken a visible role on I-5, those crimes had stopped.He said Warner thinks the presence and high notoriety of the police being there is the cause of protecting the motor coaches.Warner wanted to see continued police protection on I-5.Warner was also in favor of the wastewater treatment facility being built.


Sorenson asked why the city was using the centerline.He asked if the expansion could meet the cityís wastewater treatment facility to have it exclude I-5.


Hudson responded that all of the engineering couldnít be done until land use compatibility studies take place.He said they couldnít jump steps.He said there would be another amendment coming to the Board that would provide piping underneath the freeway.He noted they are working with the Oregon Economic Development Department for grant money to pay for infrastructure costs.He said they brought information because the Board was concerned about the pavement.He stated all other police agencies were supportive of them being on I-5.


Sorenson noted with the cityís request to have the deliberation put off, he suggested combining this with the other matter so the two come up together in the future.


Hudson wanted to confer with their legal counsel and staff to make sure it wouldnít cause any legal problems.


There being no one else signed up to speak, Commissioner Sorenson closed the public hearing.The record was kept open.


Dwyer stated if they had needs in dealing with the urban growth boundary then they had to separate it from sewage versus their reason for public safety.


Sorenson asked if they could get this ordinance put over with the other ordinance so they are on the same timeline.


Vorhes explained they could take action on this ordinance to set it for a reading and deliberation or continued public hearing and try to coordinate the timing with the other action.He didnít know where it was in the process.


Sorenson suggested referring this to the agenda team to find out where the other ordinance is in the process.


MOTION:to move to definitely postpone this hearing until a time certain if and when they get the other ordinance before them.


Dwyer MOVED.


Motion withdrawn.


MOTION:to move a Fourth Reading and Setting a Fifth Reading and Deliberation within six weeks for Ordinance PA 1191. Leaving the record open for 30 days.


Green MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.


VOTE: 3-1 (Dwyer dissenting.)


c.SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. 13-03/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 9 Lane Code to Modify Prohibition Pertaining to Use of Solid Fuel Space Heating Devices. (NBA & PM 9/10/03)


Vorhes explained the matter began in February with a presentation from Brian Jennison and LRAPA on changes to the current County regulations of woodstoves in the areas outside of the cities of Eugene and Springfield.He noted the Board took action directing that the ordinance be prepared with those changes.


Brian Jennison, LRAPA, indicated that this ordinance had been in existence since 1991 and they were asking the Board to update it.He added the Countyís ordinance would be identical to ordnances that were adopted by Eugene and Springfield.


Commissioner Sorenson opened up the Public Hearing.There being no one else signed up to speak, he closed the Public Hearing.


MOTION:to adopt Ordinance13-03.








Dwyer reported he was attending an LCOG meeting in Florence.He stated he would be giving the annual report from the MPO.


Morrison stated she would be going to Washington, D.C. to the National Forest Counties School Board meeting.


Sorenson reported that the Board and County Administration staff would be participating with the Food for Lane County Distribution Center for the Day of Caring.




GSA Letter


Dwyer read the letter into the record.


MOTION:to move to send the letter to the GSA.




VOTE: 4-0.


Sorenson requested that the congressional delegates also receive the letter.


There being no further business, Commissioner Sorenson adjourned the meeting at 4:05 p.m.




Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary