April 28, 2004

1:30 p.m.

Commissionersí Conference Room

APPROVED 1/19/05


Commissioner Bobby Green presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer; Don Hampton, Anna Morrison and Peter Sorenson present.County Administrator Bill Van Vactor; County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.




a. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. 8-04/In the Matter of Authorizing the Transfer of Surplus County Owned Real Property Located at 651 East 32nd Street, Eugene to the Neighborhood Economic Development Corporation for the Purpose of Providing Affordable Housing (Map No. 18-03-03-22-10100)(NBA & PM 4/14/04).


Jeff Turk, Management Services, explained this would transfer County owned surplus property to the Neighborhood Economic Development Corporation for affordable housing.He noted the County acquired the property in 1986 and at that time there were several liens and judgments against the property as the foreclosure was done at a time when actual notice wasnít sent.He said the County tried to clear those liens over the years and they were successful with some.†† He noted that time has finally cured all of the liens and judgments that were on the property at the time.He indicated that during that time the County used the property as rental property housing and was involved with the Section 8 program.It was used that way until 1998.


Turk reported when the liens expired he contacted the Housing Policy Board to see if there was any interest by any of the non profit entities to use the property for affordable housing.NEDCO and St. Vincent de Paul initially showed interest in the property, but St. Vincent de Paul decided later that they did not want it and the Housing Policy Board recommended that the property be transferred to NEDCO.


Turk said that NEDCO plans to raise the existing structure, as it is in poor condition and outdated.They plan to build a new structure.He added that NEDCO will pay for all the costs associated with the transfer and they want the transfer without consideration, other than paying for the publication cost for the notice of the hearing and administrative fees for transfer from the County.He recommended that the deed include a provision that the property be used for affordable housing purposes for a minimum of ten years.He added that is not required by statute but included to ensure the property gets the use for the intended purpose.He noted there was another restriction that if the property is not used for that purpose within three years of the transfer that it be returned to the County.He noted the Public Hearing was published in The Register Guard on April 13 and April 20.


Morrison asked if they were to sell the property on the open market under a clear title where the money would go.


Turk responded that funds received from the sale of the property is first paid to the County to pay for the cost of managing those properties, including program costs for the tax foreclosure program.He added that anything remaining after those costs gets disbursed to the taxing districts and the County would get its share of the property tax dollar.


Commissioner Green opened up the Public Hearing.


Sandy Halloren, NEDCO, 775 Monroe St., Eugene, stated she is the Executive Director of Nedco. She said the property they are looking at on E. 32nd is in poor condition and doesnít have a foundation.She said it wasnít a rehab possibility. She said they want to do the demo this year and begin the construction work in early next spring and be done by next summer.


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


Sorenson wanted to approve this, but he thought it was an opportunity to provide guidance on the pros and cons of designating properties.He said they want to pursue this.


Dwyer said Lane County only gets nine cents on the dollar and they would have to distribute it to the districts.He said parks was another option.He thought they needed that option to be available.


Morrison said they have given direction to the departments to be as creative as possible in trying to generate additional revenue because they have decreasing revenues and increasing expenses.She said it is hard for her to give this away when they have such a financial situation of their own.


Sorenson thought they should make a policy on this particular project.He thought affordable housing was a worthwhile goal of the Board of Commissioners.He thought in this situation they were getting something for the community.He thought they should approve this today, but have Turk come back to work with the Parks Division to find out how other counties in Oregon are doing and what their experience has been.


MOTION:to move to adopt Ordinance No. 8-04.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


Dwyer wanted an ordinance that allows them to do that.He said if they see a piece of property that might enable them to help Parks then he would rather keep it in the County.


ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-1 (Morrison dissenting).


b. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance PA 1200/In the Matter of Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan and the Coburg Comprehensive Plan to Enlarge the Coburg Urban Growth Boundary; Redesignate Affected Lands From a Rural Comprehensive Plan Designation of Commercial and Park and Recreation to a City Plan Designation of Highway Commercial; Rezone These Affected Lands From a Lane Code Chapter 16 District of CR Rural Commercial and PR Park & Recreation to a Lane Code Chapter 10 District of CT Tourist Commercial; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (File PA 03-5883; City of Coburg) (NBA & PM 4/14/04).


Dwyer said he had concerns before and he worked with the mayor and the city manager regarding the expansion. He said they worked with him.He said they are expanding the interchange and the change in the plan allows them the opportunity to do that because they consider the interchange as part of this whole plan. His concern is the police force collecting traffic fines.


Sorenson asked what they were proposing to do and how it was different from what they discussed before.


Stephanie Schulz, Land Management, explained the urban growth boundary expansion would go on the north side of Van Duyn Road and follow the property line for the developed and committed properties on the east side of the freeway.


Sorenson asked what the impact on this decision is on the larger freeway interchange.


Schulz responded that based on the amount of traffic that is generated from the site, the transportation planner from the state and the County have worked to develop trip generation statistics.She noted that any future development on these properties would have to generate a traffic impact analysis and statement to show whether or not they were going to increase traffic on the interchange.


Sorenson asked what the effect was of having a large cloverleaf that is three-quarters inside the urban growth boundary and one-quarter outside.He asked if ODOT differentiates between monies that are allocated for projects within the urban growth boundaries.


Schulz said the project funding would cover the entire project.She noted the number of the pages on one of the attachments is misnumbered and there is no page 10.


Dwyer thought it was beneficial to be brought into future protection of the groundwater and provide treatment to the area.


Commissioner Green opened up the Public Hearing.


Gary Darnielle, LCOG, explained they are before the Board to address a major policy change.He said the City of Coburg is situated in a groundwater problem area recognized by DEQ.He noted the Environmental Quality Commission is scheduled to take action on Friday, designating the area, going north as a groundwater management area.He said it is a reflection that the city is acknowledging their responsibility in the area by going forward with development of a sewage treatment plant.He said the Coburg Drinking Water Protection Plan recognizes that there is at least two areas of the subject property that pose potential hazards for pollution.He commented that currently the lagoon system is operating within DEQís standards.He said that had not been the case previously, there were serious violations.He noted the application and the changes they are proposing are to address the policy changes that the City of Coburg is embracing.He added they were looking for siting a water reservoir in the area.


Sorenson asked if there was any opposition to the proposal.


Darnielle responded not to his knowledge.He said they talked to 1000 Friends of Oregon and they had concerns about the original proposal and the way they were proposing the application.He said they agreed to modify the proposal.


Paul Williams, Owner of Premier R.V., 33022 Van Duyn Road, he supported the application.He noted the critical issue is looking to the future and having reliable water and reliable sewage treatment in the area.


Judy Volta, Mayor of Coburg, supports this. She added the City Council supports this unanimously.She noted it was a recognition that it happened like the urban growth boundary.


Commissioner Green closed the Public Hearing.


MOTION:to move to adopt Ordinance PA 1200


Hampton MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.


Hampton said they didnít address the fact they are hoping there isnít development so close that when the interchange is expanded that some development has to be destroyed.


Williams indicated that the state has taken land along the front of the park and they cooperated in redesigning so they didnít have to destroy any sites.


Dwyer said he was comfortable about this because they had taken those considerations into account.




c. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance PA 1201/In the Matter of Adopting Amendments to the Rural Comprehensive Plan and the Creswell Comprehensive Plan to Enlarge the Creswell Urban Growth Boundary and Redesignate Affected Lands From a Rural Comprehensive Plan Designation of Airport Operations to a City Plan Designation of Public Facilities/Government and Rezone These Affected Lands From a Lane Code Chapter 16 District of (AO) a Lane Code Chapter 10 District of Airport Operations District; Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses; and Declaring an Emergency (File PA 02-6010; City of Creswell) (NBA & PM 4/7/04).


Dwyer asked what the effect of the emergency clause was.


Vorhes responded that the ordinance in the packet does not have an emergency clause on it.He noted what got to the agenda was a title from an earlier version of an ordinance before the ordinance that was prepared and finally presented to the Board.Vorhes read the ordinance into the record.


Schulz reported the City of Creswell wants to expand their urban growth boundary to include the airport.The driver for that is providing water service for fire suppression.She said the city has a limited amount of time, according to the fire marshal to provide a certain level of storage capability for providing fire suppression in case of fire.


Ron Petiti, Mayor of Creswell, requested this because they [Creswell] provide a water flow of 2500 gallons per minute to the airport.He stated they had researched all options of how to do that to extend city water.He noted that the Creswell Comp plan restricts water service to within the city limits.He said the Creswell Resolution 9216 dated November 1992 states that only property within the Creswell UGB will be considered for water service.He said water service outside the UGB will not be considered.He noted in June 2001 the fire marshal required that they get water to the airport within a five year period.He reported the airport was established in 1963 and has been a part ofthe Creswell community for a long time.He noted the County Commissioners in August 1983 endorsed and supported the expansion plan of the Creswell Airport and the Creswell Airport Layout Plan was approved in 1992.He said the request for expansion of the UGB has no affect on the approved plans for the airport. He asked for the Boardís approval so they could supply water to the airport in a timely matter.


Shelly Humble, Creswell Airport Manager, said the Creswell Hobbyfield Airport is located on the east side of I-5 adjacent to Creswell.She stated the airport consists of 102 acres.She stated in the late 1970ís the airport was renamed to Creswell Hobby Field.She noted they are an approved FAA airport and their airfield is designated for small light single and multi-engine aircraft weighing 12,500 poundsor less.She said that the Creswell Airport is listed in the Oregon core system of airports.She added to be listed in the core system, the airport must have a significant role in the statewide aviation system.She reported they currently have 108 aircraft hangered at the air field.She added of the 108 aircraft, only four are multi-engine.She noted according to the most recent Oregon Department of Aviation aircraft monitoring program studies completed in September 2001, the average operations per day at the airport were 61.She indicated in the early 1980ís the Creswell Airport accepted federal funding for improvement.She said at that time, in accordance with the terms of the funding, the city agreed to follow the assurance outlined by the FAA.She said the rules state they cannot discriminate against any operator of an aircraft, they cannot tell an operator of an aircraft that they cannot take off or land from their airfield and it will remain an airport for 20 years from the date of signing.


Jim Johnson, City of Creswell, commented that this application is not the best place or time to resolve the issues that face the Creswell Airport.He said because they were eligible under federal money, they submitted a grant request to the FAA and they have secured approval of about $50,000 to do an update to the Airport Master Plan.He passed out a summary of that proposal. (Copy in file.)He said the overall objective of the plan is to provide guidelines for the logical, timely and economically viable development and operation of the airport for the next five, ten and twenty year periods.†† He noted some of the key tasks include collecting data on the operation of the airport, inventory of the facility, forecasts of what is likely to occur with aeronautical activity forecast and demand capacity analysis over the years.He said they are going to review a summary of the environmental status of the airport.He said they will produce a new airport land use plan.He added they will be developing a Capital Improvement Plan for five, ten and twenty years for the airport.He said they required the consultant to coordinate with any federal, state and local planning organizations.He added there would be a significant amount of public information and community involvement in the airport plan.He said they hired a planning firm out of Portland.He noted in 1982 the Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the City of Creswell and it called water service an urban level of service.He stated that Lane County adopted that Master Plan and it was approved by the State of Oregon.He said they are asking for an amendment to that plan to approve the provision of water to the airport.


Milo Mecham, LCOG, reiterated that this request is to deal with a potentially inadequate fire suppression system. He noted the fire marshal determined that at the time the last hanger was built at the Creswell Airport, no additionalhangers could be built until there was a fire suppression system put in place because the hangers would be too close together and create a fire danger.He said this caused the City of Creswell to initiate this activity.He noted the City of Creswell is only asking to bring in the airport property into the UGB in order to meet the requirements of the Creswell Comprehensive Plan.He added the zoning that would be changed is going from airport zoning to airport zoning within the Lane Code.He said when it is annexed by the City of Creswell, it will have a different zoning designation because Creswell doesnít have an airport zoning, it would become a public use zoning.He added that no new uses are anticipated for the airport because it is not large enough for additional uses.


Mecham indicated there are seven requirements under Goal 14 that need to be studied in order to become approved under the expansion of the UGB.He noted the first three requirements deals with identifying a particular need that causesthe UGB to expand.He said the most important criteria is orderly and economic provision for public facilities and services.He said the public facility and service that is necessary is city water to the airport and it could only be met by extending city water services.He added another important aspect of the need is the existing Creswell Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City of Creswell and by Lane County and acknowledged by the state, which defines urban services in a particular way and includes city water.He noted in order to meet the need criteria of Goal 14 for an orderly and economic provision for public facility, the urban service is city water and it needs to be inside the UGB.He said the need for Goal 14 is to have city water inside the city limits, inside the UGB.He noted the other factors of Goal 14 have to do that when they do bring something inside the UGB, it complies with basic criteria that reflect the rest of the state land use goals.He said they have to look at the maximum efficiency of the land in the area.He said the Creswell Airport had already been accepted under the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan because it is not a rural use, it is an airport that is an urban use.He said maintaining this as an airport is the economic way to maximize the efficiency. He noted if there is a fire and there is inadequate fire suppression, it could have a serious economic affect.He added the other Goal 14 goals deal with protecting agricultural land and they donít apply because it had already been accepted out, it is not agricultural lands.


Mecham explained that the City of Creswell has demonstrated it complies with Goal 14, the Lane Code requirements for expanding the UGB.He said they have a situation where the Comprehensive Plan should determine the UGB instead of the UGB determining the Comprehensive Plan.He said Creswell has chosen the appropriate course of expanding the UGB.He noted some of the opposition deals with people who are concerned about the uses at the airport.He said that testimony is not relevant to the question in front of the Board.He noted that is governed by the FAA.He added questions about how the airport is being used are not relevant.He said the city has set up a process to deal with those concerns.He indicated there were discussions in the past about urban sprawl and expanding the UGB, but that wasnít an appropriate concern here because they are talking about what is already recognized as an urban use and an airport and bringing it inside a UGB.He noted the City of Creswell was urged by some parties to bring in more than the airport into the UGB.†† He said the City of Creswell decided not to do that because they wanted to focus on service to the airport.


Robert Emmons, 40093 Little Fall Creek Road, Fall Creek, commented it was unnecessary to expand the UGB to extend city water to the airport.He said the city has the authority to provide water for airport uses without expanding the UGB and without taking exception to Goals 11 and 14.He stated that Goal 11 is to plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development.He said that Goal 11 provides in relative part for land that is outside the UGB and unincorporated community boundaries.He said County land use regulations shall not rely upon the establishment or extension of a water system to authorize a higher residential density than would be authorized without a water system.He said Goal 11 and the administrative rules allow for the provision and extension of water service to non residential users so long as the water service does not enable or increase residential density.He thought that city water could be provided to the Creswell Airport in compliance with Goal 11.He said that Goal 14 prohibits urban uses on rural land.He commented that unless the Creswell Airport as a use is urban, provision of water service to the airport would not violate Goal 14 and no Goal 14 exception is necessary to allow for water service to the airport.He thought that provision of water service to Creswell Airport would do nothing more than allow for development of use that is already acknowledged to comply with Goal 14, therefore the provision of water service does not require a Goal 14 exception.He thought the airport should remain under County jurisdiction.For those reasons he asked the Board to deny the application.


Jim Just, Goal One Coalition, 39625 Almond Dr., Lebanon, stated the purpose of the UGB expansion is to enable for provision of water for fire suppression purposes at the airport.He noted that Resolution 92-16 (City of Creswell) states that its purpose is to avoid overburdening the cityís water system.He didnít think the cityís water system would be overburdened by providing water to the airport for fire suppression purposes.He added the resolution specifically listed a number of extra territorial areas to which the city currently supplies water.He thought that resolution could be amended to include the airport.He said the Countyís concurrence would not be necessary to accomplish that.He added the Creswell Comprehensive Plan does not preclude provisions of water outside of the city limits.He thought the city could amend its plan to allow for the provision of water outside the UGB for non-residential purposes consistent with Goal 11 and 12.He reported the argument had been made that city water is an urban service.He noted that Goal 11 specifically allows for the provision of city water outside of the UGB if it would not allow for increase residential densities.He commented that the suggested argument would result in Goal 11 being inconsistent with Goal 14, which is not the case.He said in order to approve the suggested UGB expansion, the criteria of OARís need to be addressed.He noted that one of the criteria in that the exceptions process requires that potential impacts be assessed and that would be determined that those impacts would not adversely affect adjacent uses.He commented that the UGB could not be approved until those potential impacts are identified and their impacts on surrounding and adjacent uses are determined.He added if those impacts are adverse, that mitigation measures are to be adopted to make the airport compatible with those uses.


Laurie Segel, 120 W. Broadway, spoke on behalf of 1000 Friends of Oregon.She asked for a continuance of one week for written comments as they didnít have the opportunity to review the applicantís rebuttal.She noted that 1000 Friends of Oregon agrees that water for fire suppression is necessary but they disagree that a UGB expansion is necessary to provide the service.She stated that Goal 11 expressly allows for extension of water services for uses that will not increase residential density.She said Goal 14 expects compliance with the need factors.She commented that Factor 3 was not a need factor but a locational factor.She added that once need has been established, location is the next criteria to address where to do the expansion.She thought there should be ample opportunity for people to comment and for master planning to progress before the addition of hangers or other uses at the existing site are implemented.She commented the existing level of use at the airport is accommodated by the existing availability of water and additional uses would require additional availability of water. She believed the applicant misstated five elements.She didnít think their comments were considered in the findings.She noted that Goal 11 expressly allows for extension of water services.She said the only provision she could find that was relevant to water in Lane Code was in 16.247(4)(b)(ii) addressing only locations sites, design and operating characteristics of the proposed use.She said there was no provision pursuant to Lane Code that could be read to prohibit extension of city water to an airport outside of the UGB. She noted that comprehensive plans could be amended and it is an acceptable mechanism for addressing planning process.She said the resolution could be changed.She said they would prefer that the Board defer a decision on expansion of the urban growth boundary until the Master Planning Process has established a need and uses on the other sites through the provision that is allowed through Goal 11.


Robert Meyers, 82701 S. Bradford Road, stated he had heard about expansion plans.He commented that the airport is in compliance with the amount of water required for what they have.He said if they are going to expand the airport or add more buildings and lengthen the runway, and bring in heavy cargo airplanes then they would have to up their water supply.He noted that Creswell operates under the authority of Lane County and is subject to the voters of Lane County.He didnít think they should be granted their UGB.He commented if they are granted the UGB, the balance of airport cost and benefit distribution would be dramatically shifted.He added the Board would be giving up their rights as Lane County residents to be involved and have representation in all airport affairs and development.He noted that County residents outside of the Creswell city limits would be taxed without representation.He asked the Board to preserve their right to representation by voting against the UGB expansion.He commented that most affected Lane County residents are not aware of what is taking place today.He said this affects hundreds of square miles of Lane County and thousands of residences outside the city limits of Creswell.He asked the Board to review the testimony that was given.


Mecham stated he objected to the request to keep the record open.He noted that all of the materials that had been submitted by Creswell had been in the record for over a month.He noted there was no additional material submitted at the last minute.He didnít think there was any reason to leave the record open for additional comments.He said most of the discussions had to do with whether they could run water to the airport under the statewide goals without bringing it inside the UGB.He said if Creswell and Lane County were to go back to the beginning and adopt a different comprehensive plan for Creswell, it was possible they could decide that water was not an urban service in Creswell.He said that Creswell and Lane County decided that water for Creswell is an urban service.He noted under current circumstances they are bound by the Creswell Comprehensive Plan.He thought the easiest and most straightforward option for Lane County and Creswell is to amend the UGB.He said it requires less exception under the current plan.He thought alternate processes would be more difficult and involve different choices that might not be subject to the same type of challenges.He thought they should follow the procedures set up in the state wide goal and amend the UGB.He said they are talking about expanding the UGB to include the airport.He said Creswell needs to solve the immediate problem of getting fire suppression to the airport.He said then they could discuss the future of the airport and Lane County would be involved in those discussions. He said there will be public comment.He said they are not going to change the currentairport but bring fire suppression to the current airport.


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


Green asked Schulz that, based upon her role and the application, if she believed the City of Creswell had met the test with the application.


Schulz stated they did meet the test with the application.


Dwyer wanted to see a list of the articles that came out.He was opposed to how this was mapped out.


Hampton wanted more answers.He wanted to know what the overall plan chronology is for development.He asked who had the decision making ability to expand the airport.He noted there was property to the south that says it is park recreation and open space.He wanted to know what the plan would be for that.


Dwyer thought they should extend the time for them to respond.


Sorenson said the request is to expand the UGB of Creswell so that city water could be provided to the airport.He said they heard from the opponents that they believe the city water could be provided to the airport for fire suppression needs.He wanted to know if they could undertake the expansion of the UGB knowing there is an existing planning process or more planning going on that would lead to another expansion of the UGB.He wanted to see something on what the Cityís position is on the incremental decision making.


Dwyer stated the city owns the airport and doesnít know why their city council couldnít provide water to their own facility whether it is in or out of an UGB.He wanted a legal opinion on that issue.


Green said if they were ready to vote on this he would have voted in favor.


Vorhes noted Dwyer had qualifiers included in this question that might mitigate against going that route and that was the position the city had taken.He said the city has authority to take action and deal with the resolution the way it needs to, assuming they do not run counter to applicable goals.


Green requested Mecham to reconvene with his group and come back at another time.


MOTION:for a Second Reading and Setting a Third Reading and Deliberation and leaving the record open for a period of time to allow for the information that would address the questions he raised for Ordinance PA 1201 on May 19.


Dwyer MOVED, Hampton SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.


Vorhes asked if there had been any ex parte contacts.


There were no ex parte contacts.




Sorenson indicated he spoke with Max Williams, Department of Corrections, about Senate Bill 1145, Measure 11 and the Junction City prison.He said the Oregon Department of Corrections has 12,000 inmates and they are projecting 13,000 by July 2005 and 17,000 by January 2014.He said they have a $1 billion budget and it will proportionately expand to match the increased inmates as a result of Measure 11.He noted there was an effort to look at the impacts of Measure 11.With regard to the Junction City prison, he stated that they would be reviewing the process around 2010.He said the Emergency Board decision for SB 1145 requires the repayment of money that was used to build any structures that were constructed with CCA facilities.He said because of the notices coming in from Douglas, Linn and Curry counties, he is consulting with the attorney general to figure out for those counties that want to opt out how the state recoups the funds. Williams indicated the drop in state funding overall was significant because there had only been two times in Oregon history where the state budget went down and one was in 2003 and in 1935.


Green noted there is a joint meeting with the cities regarding the road finance meeting and Hampton is excused.


Van Vactor indicated there would be a series of posters for tonightís meetings to show some of Lane Countyís reductions and the services they provide cities.He said they wanted to educate the intergovernmental partners about what Lane County government is going through and to open up a dialogue for the cities to assist them.










There being no further business, Commissioner Greenrecessed the meeting at 3:35 p.m.



Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary