Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/03/1997 Work Session . City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3,1997 The City of Springfield Council met in Work Session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, February 3, 1997, at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Morrisette presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Morrisette, Councilors Ballew (6:03 p.m.), Beyer, Burge, Dahlquist (6:02 p.m.), Maine and Shaver. Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Tim Harold, Administrative Aide Julie Wilson and members of the staff. 1. Chronic Disorderly Crime Ordinance. . Police Chief Bill DeForrest presented the staff report on this issue. The proposed ordinance' was developed to provide the city with an effective means for responding to the increasing number of complaints from citizens regarding chronic disorderly crime activity in their neighborhoods. The Ordinance puts in place a procedure for the city to protect residential neighborhoods from chronic disorderly activity on properties where such activity has occurred four or more times in 60 days. After receiving notice from the Chief of Police that the property has a history of four or more prohibited activities in the 60 day period, if the owner fails to respond to correct the problem, the ordinance authorizes the Chief of Police to refer the matter to the City Attorney's Office. The ordinance authorizes an action in Circuit Court to close the property for three months in one year to abate the disorderly activity. Chief DeF orrest answered questions from Council. Councilor Burge discussed the Tenant and Landlord Law. He also questioned Section 15, asking if the word "use" needed to be inserted. Chief DeForrest responded that the word "possession" would cover this concern. Councilor Burge also discussed Section 7-11-3, Procedures, the phrase "the Chief of Police may." Chief DeForrest explained the definitions contained were appropriate and that was how the law was written. . In response to a question by Councilor Burge, City Attorney Tim Harold explained the ..wont, "residential" referred to residential use of the property. . . . . . Mayor Morrisette discussed OLCC regulations. Mr. Harold answered questions about constitutionality issues. Chief DeForrest explained that Portland and Medford both had similar ordinances. Councilor Maine discussed the importance of the quality oflife in our community. Councilor Shaver said this ordinance would assist in dealing with chronic problems. Chief DeForrest defined criminal trespassing and provided an example. Chief DeF orrest was not aware of any specific issue regarding chronic nuisance at this time. He did explain that due to problems over the past few years this issue has come forth. Chief DeForrest said the ordinance would be brought forth at the February 18, 1997 regular meeting. 2. Discussion of Proposed Ordinance Regulating Wireless Telecommunications Systems. Planning Manager Gregory Mott presented the staff report on this.issue. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 resulted in the deregulation of the wireless communications industry. In direct response to. this Act, cities and counties across the country are preparing and adopting "Telecommunications Plans." City staff completed a draft ordinance in cooperation with the providers to address the various applicable provisions of the Act. The Planning Commission conducted a work session on this proposal on January 22, 1997. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the draft ordinance on Tuesday, February 4, 1997. The council is scheduled to conduct their hearing on the ordinance on Tuesday, February 18, 1997. Any changes to the draft ordinance directed by council will be included in the public hearing on February 18, 1997. Mr. Mott provided a definition of attached and detached structures. Mr. Mott eXplained it would be easy to include the definition in the ordinance. He explained that general providers are supportive of the proposal. He also discussed the provisions of the lease and abandonment issues. Councilor Ballew questioned if some sort of financial statement would be required. Mr. Mott explained that abandoned structures normally go back to the property owner. Mr. Mott discussed co-location issues in response to comments made by Councilor Maine. He explained that co-location is encouraged. He said that to a certain extent it is required and referenced page seven, item c, four. The council further discussed co-location issues. Mr. Mott discussed the height requirements for towers. . . . .., ~ Councilor Shaver referenced page seven, item c, four. He discussed the referenced 1,000 feet and if that was adequate. Mr. Mott explained the reasons behind this distance and that he did not receive objections from potential service providers. Mr. Mott discussed a detached, single user structure. He explained this would require a higher level of review. Council discussed single users, detached single use structures, 50-foot requirements, and criteria required. They discussed encouragement of multiple users. Councilor Maine discussed the issues of abandonment and the reduction of wattage. Councilor Burge asked if it was possible to initiate an annual operating permit. This would address the issue of abandonment and reduction of watts. City Manager Mike Kelly said the relationship with Springfield Utility Board was very unique. Staff is trying to create some sort of partnership/parent agreement with SUB. He felt this would come back to council in about two months. Mr. Mott would be bringing the Planning Commission recommendation forth on February 18, 1997. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson Attest: ( W(]A(AA