HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Approval of City Council Minutes
Meeting Date: May 22, 2006 Agenda Item Number: 2A
Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017
ISSUE STATEMENT
This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve the minutes of the April 10, 2006, City Council Meeting, April 19, 2006, Work
Session, and April 26, 2006, Workshop.
ATTACHMENTS
A.April 10, 2006 City Council Meeting
B.April 19, 2006, Work Session
C.April 26, 2006, Workshop
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Lynda Rose
Telephone: 682-5017
Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose@ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060522\S0605222A.doc
NAME OF MEETING: Eugene City Council
DATE OF MEETING: April 10, 2006—Regular Meeting
TO: Beth Forrest
RECORDED BY: Ruth Atcherson
MINUTES FILE NAME: M:\2006Central Services Department\City Council\cc060410m2.doc
BACKUP STORAGE: Ruth #33
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
=
R O U T I N G I N F O R M A T I O N
4/26/06rma Draft to Staff
(Date & Initials)
Reviewed/Returned by Staff
Returned to Minutes Recording
Proofed/Revised by Minutes Recording
Returned to Staff
______ Council Amendments Incorporated
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
=
ATTACHMENT A
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
City Council Meeting
Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall
April 10, 2006
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Gary Papé, George
Poling, Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman, Betty Taylor.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order and welcomed
everyone to the meeting.
1. PUBLIC FORUM
Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. She noted that 24 people had signed up to speak and
requested a motion to extend the time for the Public Forum.
Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Papé, moved to allow two minutes per speaker.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Anthony Losco
, 350 Pearl Street, suggested that the former Sears site be transformed into a European-
style plaza or square. He stated that every town in Europe had a piazza. He noted that Portland had such a
square. Using Japan as an example, he shared his vision for a themed plaza with everything in the area
such as food and retail items relating to that theme during a specified period of time. He thought local
small businesses would recognize a benefit by participating as thematic elements. He also suggested that
the piazza should be combined with the theater so that when people came, they would have an all-day event
to attend. He averred that in looking through history, the piazza had been the most successful business
measure ever undertaken. He submitted his testimony in writing.
Charles Warren
, 86260 Lorane Highway, urged the council to include money in the bond dedicated to all-
weather fields in partnership with School District 4J. He thought the four current fields were the best
investment the City had ever made in athletic fields. He said the 1998 Parks and Open Space Bond
Measure was a success, with a 67 percent approval rating, the highest approval rating of any bond measure
in the state that year. He averred that the reason it had been so successful was that there was something in
it for everyone. He recommended that the council structure the upcoming bond measure in the same way in
order to garner the largest amount of support. He agreed that the acquisition of land for future parks was a
worthy goal, but it was also very important to meet the other needs of the community as well.
Patti Hansen
, 3943 Cornell Way, Board President for the Leadership Education Adventure Direction
(LEAD) group, believed LEAD’s mission filled a niche in the community that was critically important.
She stated that LEAD intervened with teens in a way that addressed key risk factors for juvenile delin-
quency: academic achievement, substance abuse, peer association, and use of time. She said LEAD
provided teens with a second family and a place where they were supported and accepted unconditionally.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 1
Regular Meeting
She averred that LEAD gave teens a reason to go to school and to not use drugs, to envision a positive
future for themselves and motivation to work toward that future. She stated that many of the young people
she encountered in the juvenile justice system had gotten into trouble because they had no guidance or
because they were bored. She said the proposed teen center would meet a critical need in the community.
She underscored that the at-risk and low-income teens in the city were asking for the City’s help to be safe,
healthy, and productive individuals. She believed that LEAD could make the teen center happen because
they were a dedicated and highly organized group of young people and staff. She felt that LEAD would
develop a cadre of young community leaders in the process. She respectfully requested the City’s support
for the Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center.
Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Papé, moved to allow 45 minutes for the Pub-
lic Forum and to place a two-minute limit on testimony. Roll call vote; the motion passed,
6:2; councilors Taylor and Solomon voting in opposition.
Marilyn Kalstad
, 263 Sunshine Acres Drive, a founding board member for LEAD, recalled that LEAD
started as a partnership between the City of Eugene Outdoor Program, Lane County Juvenile Services, and
the Housing Authority in service to low-income young people. She said its success was based on
strengthening and expanding those partnerships to include the schools, Centro LatinoAmericano, and other
youth-focused organizations. She related that LEAD had been searching for the appropriate housing for its
teen center for a long time. LEAD members were excited about the possibility of accessing former Fire
Station #1 for use as a teen center. She declared that Eugene needed a safe and chemical-free facility
where teens had access to services and social activities that they themselves determined were important.
She felt it was important that the teens in the community take ownership of the project and were sharehold-
ers in its success. She related that current studies showed a strong relationship between having poor grades
and exhibiting problem behavior. She said statistics also showed that students involved in co-curricular
activities had higher grade point averages, better rates of attendance in school and fewer disciplinary
problems. She added that no one would dispute that parents were the foremost influence on kids, but it was
important to remember that the formula for raising healthy teens was the responsibility of the whole
community. She also supported the proposed canoe canal restoration and the whitewater recreation
development.
Maya Rios
, 882 Almaden Street, co-coordinator for Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center, a teen center
LEAD was working toward creating in the downtown area, wished to provide an update on the center’s
progress. She reported that Dr. Dan Close, director of the University of Oregon Family and Human
Services program, introduced a business plan to the group. She said they were working to have the
business plan completed by spring. She related that LEAD also formed a partnership with the Youth
Action Board. She stated that LEAD members met with downtown business owner John Brown and
Downtown Eugene Incorporated (DEI) director Russ Brink, and that they participated on a youth activist
panel for the Lane County Social Forum. She said they attended Downtown Safety Council meetings.
LEAD teens also applied for a $5,000 grant from the McKenzie River Gathering (MRG). She reported
that LEAD representatives attended the annual Northwest Human Services Association conference and was
awarded the Outstanding Human Services Agency of the Year award. She said LEAD was looking
forward to meeting with City staff on April 28. She added that the Lane County Positive Youth Develop-
ment asked LEAD to do a training on facilitation. She thanked the council for its support.
Teresa Montes
, 501 Sandstone Way, spoke on behalf of Juventud FACETA. She said Juventud FACETA
was working in partnership with LEAD to provide an alternative and safe space for youth, where they
could develop culture, family and social values in a “solidarity environment.” She explained that FACETA
was an acronym standing for Familia, Amistad, Communidad, Enthusiasmos, Triumph, Apendizaje;
translated: family, friendship, community, enthusiasm, triumph, and learning. She shared the principles
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 2
Regular Meeting
behind Javentud FACETA: to create youth leadership, strong families, to promote social changes, a strong
community, and maintain Latino cultures and traditions. She listed the values that the members brought to
the group which included love, respect, honesty, friendship, among others. She said the group undertook
various activities and had just undergone the Northwest Immigration Training.
Danny Lemmon
, 1687 Kelly Boulevard, vice president of the LEAD Board, indicated that he had been
involved with LEAD for five years. He said working with teens was a great experience and allowed him to
show them what it was like to be disabled. He taught the teens to be responsible and not to use drugs
and/or alcohol. He supported the opening of the teen center because it would provide a safe environment
for teens to have a great time and make friends. He felt LEAD helped teens learn to respect each other’s
differences.
Skye Rios
, 882 Almaden Street, reiterated that a teen center would provide a safe place for teens to ground
themselves and work through issues they might be having at school or in family life. He related that since
joining LEAD, his grade point average jumped from 1.9 to 4.0. He said it was remarkable to him how
rapidly young people who were used to putting other people down for fear of being put down themselves
would transform when confronted by a group of peers who treat each other like family as LEAD members
do. He stated that a teen center would provide a place for teens to play ping pong, pool, to gain access to a
computer lab, to learn to cook, as well as to provide counseling services. He said it would also provide
teen-to-teen and adult-to-teen mentoring and a place to escape negative peer pressure. He asked “on behalf
of approximately 12,000 teens who lived in this city” for the opportunity to use the former fire station at
City Hall as a teen center. He averred that this center could be maintained at little or no cost to taxpayers.
He thought if approved this would put to use a public asset that would most likely not be used otherwise.
Ruth Duemler
, 1745 Fircrest Drive, supported maintaining the way the priorities were currently listed in
the parks project list. She felt the land must be acquired now because it would not be available in ten
years.
Additionally, Ms. Duemler opined that a police auditor should be able to choose who would work under
him or her. She underscored that the citizens voted to keep it separate from the City organization.
Janet Marshall
, 85 North Madison Street, reminded the council of her previous visits regarding the need
for a quiet zone on the west side of Eugene. She reported that the Federal Railroad Administration recently
increased the allowable volume of train whistles to 110 decibels. She noted that prior readings were 85 to
90 decibels. She said this presented area residents with issues of community livability and that documented
research existed supporting health concerns associated with increased decibel levels. She wished to
forward to the council a letter she wrote requesting that rail traffic consultants undertake a feasibility study.
She felt such a study would “get this conversation off the floor and onto the table.” She added that the bid
proposal was under $50,000 to initiate such a study.
Ronald Bryant
, 295 Maple Street, said the State of California installed call boxes for emergency uses
along its freeways. He said he would like to see such boxes installed along the bicycle trails of Eugene.
Mr. Bryant stated that he was a chess instructor at Emerald Park. He explained that tables with chess
board insets were scattered along the bicycle trail and they could only be used two at a time because they
wished to keep the chess-playing group together. He proposed a centralized cluster of tables with chess
boards so that larger groups of people could meet and play. He further suggested that tables be placed in
the Park Blocks or at Alton Baker Park. He noted that New York City had a large area with chess tables,
as did a cabana on the Waikiki Beach. He declared that the city of Eugene was a “powerhouse” in the
game of chess and many of the State champions at many different levels were local residents.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 3
Regular Meeting
Mary Monette
, 3261 Richard Avenue, co-chair of Friends of Golden Gardens Park, explained that the
group had been founded one month earlier at a meeting of the Active Bethel Citizens (ABC). She related
that three mothers whose boys drowned in the northeast pond spoke to ABC about the unsafe conditions at
the park and their determination to prevent more deaths. She previously assumed that the boys were not
supervised or could not swim, but learned that because of the inaccessibility of the park it was not
frequented by many adults and was an unregulated haven for kids. She stated that the Friends of Golden
Gardens Park made progress and had as a goal the prevention of even one more drowning in those ponds as
well as to make the park into a site both the Bethel area and the City could be proud of. She reported that
the group met with Johnny Medlin, director of the Parks and Open Spaces Division. She said the
inaccessibility of the park for rescuers and adults was a huge factor in the previous drownings. She noted
that the one-lane bridge was slated to be rebuilt by the end of the summer. Because one of the main goals
being sought is to increase adult traffic Mr. Medlin agreed to have a temporary foot bridge built over the
canal and to install picnic tables and garbage cans. She related that with the help of parks and recreation
staff, Councilor Solomon, City firefighters, and neighborhood organizers, the group developed a strong
plan including funding for a feasibility study, purchase of significant acreage in order to slope the banks of
the ponds to enhance safety, and a public education campaign to increase awareness of the ponds and their
dangers. She urged the council to move the development of the park to a much higher priority on the
project list. She stated that the group was willing to help with the work. Copies of the plan were provided
to the council.
Diane Shock
, 5509 Barger Drive, echoed Ms. Monette’s request. She averred that making the park more
attractive would help eliminate unsupervised activities. She said that to attract more citizens to the park,
more access and positive recreational opportunities were needed. She related that the Friends of Golden
Gardens Park envisioned the park to include recreation, both individual and organized group activities such
as fishing, picnicking, wildlife viewing, jogging, and other activities compatible with the quiet, natural
setting. She stated that swimming would be discouraged and redirected to supervised facilities such as the
Echo Hollow Pool. The group also envisioned educational opportunities at the park, such as environmental
awareness, stewardship, and an appreciation for wildlife. She thought individual and family participation
would be encouraged in addition to its use in programs by organizations such as the West Eugene Wetlands
Education Center. She said Shasta Middle School and Clear Lake Elementary School were within walking
distance of the ponds and would enhance the ability to plan and execute field trips. She remarked that the
park was uniquely 90 percent water and water movement in and out of the ponds provided fresh water
habitat and year-round water levels necessary for encouraging the reproduction and sustenance of fish and
significant aquatic insects. She stressed that the Active Bethel Citizens believed that safety comes first and
that the park needed to be developed for increased use by area citizens.
Carrol Dower
, 1000 Welcome Way, commented that the Golden Gardens Park area was known locally as
“The Pits.” She stated that the neighborhood had lost a total of five teenage boys to drowning at this site,
all in the same pond. She said all of the boys were responsible adolescent boys who knew how to swim.
She reported that the park was almost exclusively frequented by teens for fishing, swimming, and riding
dirt bikes. She noted that the community was growing and a large portion of the population in that area
was comprised of adolescents and children, 6,000 of whom were enrolled in Bethel area schools. She
stressed the importance of the development of the park to the community. She said the rescue effort in June
2005 was greatly hampered by the lack of a bridge to access the pond. She related that the Emergency
Medical Services (EMS) personnel had to leave their vehicles and run on foot with heavy gear in order to
reach the boys in trouble. She conveyed the neighborhood’s gratitude to Mr. Medlin for helping to move
the construction of the access bridge to completion. She reiterated the group’s request for the City to
undertake a feasibility study. She urged the City to put up signs advising of the danger and signs
delineating the geography. She asked that the ponds be named and that an access bridge over the slough to
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 4
Regular Meeting
the ponds be constructed, noting that the latter was forthcoming. She stressed the importance of providing
EMS personnel with a key to the gate, as well as at neighboring houses, and personal flotation devices.
Brenda Hansen
, 979 Laurelhurst Drive, spoke as a member of the Friends of Golden Gardens Park and as
a grieving family member. She related that she had gone to the ponds for the first time in the past week and
she could now see why the area was so attractive to kids. She said looks could be deceiving as the ponds
had been and continued to be very dangerous. She stated that the ponds were originally dug as gravel pits
and claimed four young lives in 12 years. She said Lane County owned the ponds until 1974 at which time
they were deeded to the City of Eugene; nothing had been done since then. She averred that the pits had
been left for decades to fill with water and for nature to reclaim. She cited Eugene Code Chapter 6 Section
6.010, Item B(4), which defined an attractive nuisance as “an open pit, quarry, cistern, or other excavation
without safeguards or barriers to prevent such places from being use by children.” She felt the ponds fit
into that category and, as such, the City of Eugene was violating its own ordinance. She thought the park-
like setting could become a park that the Bethel community could enjoy and be proud of.
th
Anthony Johnson Jr.
, 1291 Delores Court, said he was an 8 grader at Prairie Mountain School. He
related that one of his best friends drowned in the pond at Golden Gardens Park. He asked the City to do
what it takes to make the area safe. He stated that the parks were currently filled with trash, high
vegetation, and “nasty, disgusting water.” He felt it was important to make the area safe because days,
months, and years were going by and more lives could and would ultimately be taken. He declared the
ponds to be a threat to the community.
Shauna Davis
, 2350 North Terry Street, #11, shared the story of the loss of her son and nephew. She
pleaded with the council to put an end to the range of safety hazards at Golden Gardens Park. She related
that the kids originally went to the pond to go fishing and had decided to take a swim to cool off. The
vegetation and debris in the water overtook the boys. She said their brothers had run to a nearby fisherman
in hopes that he had a cell phone. The EMS personnel lacked the ability to reach the boys because of the
failure of access into and around the park. She related that it took Lane County Search and Rescue nearly
eight hours to recover the boys’ bodies from the murky water. She told the stories of the two boys who
drowned in the ponds in 1994 and 2000. Their rescues were also hampered by access issues. She stressed
that nothing had been done in the park after 12 years and the loss of four young lives. She asked the City
to address the conditions there, fund the repairs needed, and make the park safe and accessible. She urged
the council to make this a priority on the City’s agenda. She noted that the group sent emails with their
request to councilors.
Zachary Vishanoff
, Patterson Street, objected to the two-minute limit placed on Public Forum testimony.
He felt the Region 2050 group should hold a public hearing. He thought this was why the parking garage
project was approved. He wanted to know more about the associated costs.
Mr. Vishanoff expressed concern regarding nine trees that might be cut down. He thought there might be a
legal need for a public hearing regarding the trees. He suggested that the new courthouse was having a
negative impact on the area.
Mr. Vishanoff reiterated his desire for a public hearing on the University of Oregon’s plan to build a new
basketball arena. He asked the Mayor to “recommit” to having a discussion on the siting of the arena and
whether the community needed it.
st
Tom Halferty
, 1120 East 41 Avenue, supported the expenditure of $18.5 million for parks acquisition
and $1.5 million for matching grants. He felt the acquisition money was needed as parks land would be
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 5
Regular Meeting
bought up for development. He said more land was the key element in development of parks. Additionally,
he wished to voice his support for increased safety measures at the Golden Gardens Park.
Bob Chandler
, 2467 University Street, advocated for the development of a covered skateboard park at the
Washington/Jefferson Street Park, calling it one of the most underused local park assets and felt the
proposed project was the most appropriate to include in a bond measure. He noted that the final Parks,
Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) plan listed providing a centrally located skate park as a level one
priority for the City’s central sub-area. He stressed that the decision was arrived at with a great deal of
input and support from the community. Mr. Chandler asserted that the Washington/Jefferson Street Park
corridor area was perfectly situated to support a large covered skate park. He averred that skateboarding
was “huge” in its popularity, with participation estimated at 11 million nationally, roughly the same level
as baseball. He said preliminary research indicated a need to budget at least $400,000 to build the park
“right.” He stated that he, along with other skateboard enthusiasts, formed a 501(c)(3) non-profit called
the Eugene Skate Parks Fund that was committed to helping Eugene and resident skateboarders get the
park they deserved.
David Hinkley
, 1350 Lawrence Street, #1, supported “front-loading” land acquisition in the bond issue as
it “made great fiscal sense,” but pointed out that if the bond measure did not pass, the City would not get
anything. He recommended finding out through polling how much the public was willing to spend on
parks. He thought the City might end up with a 60:40 or a 70:30 split between acquisition and other
projects. He said people needed to realize a benefit from their tax dollars in a more immediate way than
land acquisition alone would provide. He was worried that the measure would fail otherwise.
Lisa Warnes
, 5020 Nectar Way, asserted that “special interest groups” were lobbying for their own
projects. She asked the council to stand by its original motion for the proposed PROS bond measure. She
averred that it was the last chance to acquire land. She alleged that the Home Builders Association would
“have us believe” that the land inventory was being robbed by the bond measure. She felt this would likely
be the only opportunity to pass a bond that embraced acquisition alone as land was “disappearing quickly
with development.” She said the community owed it to itself to create a livable, attractive, and safe city.
She thought there might be grants available for the projects that some people proposed if the projects were
not included in the bond. She submitted her testimony in writing.
Mike Dials
, 2395 Palmer Avenue, owner of a bicycle shop and an avid bicyclist, said most of the different
aspects of cycling were represented in Eugene. He wanted to include a project to build a mountain bike
trail system, hopefully somewhere close to the City. He said it would be similar to a BMX bicycling park
or a skateboard park. He hoped to see the presence of mountain biking grow in the city of Eugene.
Anthony Beck
, 309 Clark Street, thanked the Mayor for providing an opening speech at the inaugural
meeting of the Bike Summit, which sought to make Oregon the state “bicyclists dream of.” He opined that
Eugene was a gateway city to the Pacific Northwest, further asserting that Eugene’s geographic location
was well-suited for attracting visitors, as it was located approximately 10 hours from the California Bay
Area. He said that every year thousands of mountain bikers pass through Eugene on their way to British
Columbia to cycle in Whistler’s Bike Park. He felt the park was largely responsible for the boom in bike
tourism that British Columbia experienced over the last decade. He thought if Eugene had such a trail
network it would bring some of that tourism to the area. He declared that the concept would support the
Mayor’s vision of Eugene as the ‘World’s Greatest City for the Arts and Outdoors,’ noting that mountain
biking was a great way to get local youth into the outdoors. He added that the local mountain bikers were a
volunteer resource pool who were highly motivated and had a proven track record in trail development and
maintenance.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 6
Regular Meeting
Chris Murray
, 1958 Potter Street, said he coached soccer for the American Youth Soccer Organization
(AYSO) and he also worked as a bicycle mechanic. He stated that the next generation needed to be
provided opportunities to be pulled away from their X-Boxes and Play Station 2s and into the outdoors.
He felt that the improvement of all-season fields was a necessity, and related that currently, many fields
were “mud pits.’ He said with implementation of trail networks, people would have more stewardship over
the land. He commented that if one was not “in it and active in it,” one would not know the parks existed
and while acquisition was nice, if the acquired land was not used, it defeated the point. He believed a more
connected trail network was needed.
Scott A. Taylor
, 1689 Charnelton Street, stated that he was the recipient of a national volunteer service
award from the United States Forest Service (USFS) in 2003 from Youth and Volunteer Services,
presented at the Middle Fork Ranger District in Oakridge. He created the Cascade Creampuff 100
mountain bike race held in Oakridge and the event drew people from all over the nation. He noted that
th
2006 was the 11 year of the race, which was a boon to the local economy of Oakridge. He supported the
bond measure to acquire new land, but he hoped to see money earmarked for a continuation of the trail
network for mountain bike use as well as hikers, dog walkers, and other people. He thought an extended
mountain bike trail network would be an economic benefit to the community at large. He commented that it
seemed to be a low priority issue in comparison of safety issues at other parks. He added that the Oregon
Bike Summit had been held at the Hilton Hotel on April 6 and was attended by 140 people, and that every
dollar spent promoting cycling brought in nine additional dollars to the community.
nd
Matthew Patton
, 63 West 22 Avenue, supported inclusion of a centrally located covered skate park,
noting that he thought it might help pass the proposed bond measure. He said skateboarding featured
diverse support and was financially accessible to all kids. He commented that the only limit to the athletic
progress an individual could make was how much time and effort he or she wished to put into it. He stated
that many towns in Oregon recognized the benefits of building a well-designed large skate park, even in
fiscally constrained times. He said cities such as Lincoln City, Newberg, Medford, and Redmond made the
commitment to support their youth and built large skate parks that were in constant use. He believed that it
was time for Eugene to build a large, flagship skate park as well, and that Washington/Jefferson Park
would be a perfect location. He asked that it be a Level 1 priority for the bond measure.
Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and asked for comments from the council.
Councilor Pryor thanked everyone for coming. He said his heart went out to the families of the drowning
victims in the Golden Gardens Park area. He stated that the City “absolutely, positively” had to do
something immediate about the situation. He felt that if a feasibility study would help, it should be
undertaken, along with any other actions that were needed in order to ensure safety. He emphasized his
“prejudice” for kids. He said if it had to do with kids, he was supportive of it. He wanted to find balance
in what the council sought to do and find something that would be passable. He thought the kinds of
proposals that would be beneficial for kids were what the community supported.
Councilor Ortiz echoed Councilor Pryor’s comments. She wished to thank the families from the Golden
Gardens Park area for sharing their stories with the council.
Councilor Papé concurred with the preceding comments, indicating that he had not been aware of the
particularly dangerous nature of the area at Golden Gardens Park. He said the council obviously needed to
address the situation.
Councilor Papé asked City Manager Taylor for further information regarding the railroad and quiet zones.
City Manager Taylor recalled that the council asked staff to come back with what it would cost to create
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 7
Regular Meeting
different kinds of barriers that were required in order to have a quiet zone. He said as part of the budget
process, staff intended to present a study about two different types of barriers and those choices would be
part of the budget presented.
Councilor Papé said he heard that the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) potentially had
grants to help in the area of railroad quiet zones. He asked staff to look into this and get back to council in
a memorandum as to what might be available through such grants. He also wondered if a feasibility study
could be part of the budget.
Additionally, Councilor Papé conveyed his support for the LEAD teens. He applauded the young man who
raised his grade point average from 1.9 to 4.0.
Councilor Solomon thanked the Friends of Golden Gardens Park for coming to the council meeting and
sharing with the councilors their tragic stories and the safety hazards at the ponds. She stated that the
council would be hearing more from the group. She conveyed her intention to bring a request for $50,000
to conduct a feasibility study forward through the budget process. She believed that Ms. Hansen had a
point about the City owning an “attractive nuisance.” She wondered if the City was also in violation of a
1971 State statute regarding mining reclamation. She asked staff to look into this and provide her with a
memorandum.
Councilor Kelly thanked everyone for taking the time to attend the meeting and testify. He asked for a
memorandum from the Parks staff on how to work on the Golden Gardens Park situation.
Councilor Bettman echoed councilors’ appreciation for the Friends of Golden Gardens Park for alerting the
council to the safety issues at the park. She asked why the park had to wait for a feasibility study from the
budget process. She wanted a memorandum on how the money could be channeled to move forward with
the project.
Councilor Bettman commented that she was very impressed by the LEAD teens.
Mayor Piercy thanked everyone for the “high quality” Public Forum.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 8
Regular Meeting
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- February 8, 2006, Work Session
- February 13, 2006, City Council Meeting
- February 15, 2006, Work Session
- February 22, 2006, Work Session
- February 27, 2006, Work Session
- February 27, 2006, City Council Meeting
- March 8, 2006, Workshop
- March 13, 2006, Work Session
- March 15, 2006, Work Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Adoption of Resolution 4866 Calling a City Election on November 7, 2006, for the Purpose of
Referring to the Legal Electors of the City of Eugene a Measure Authorizing the Issuance of a
Maximum of $20,410,000 of General Obligation Bonds for Parks, Recreation, and Open
Space Projects
D. Adoption of Resolution 4867 Approving a Low-Income Rental Housing Property Tax
th
Exemption for the Property Located at 951 West 7 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Assessor’s
Property Account Number 0266211) (St. Vincent DePaul Society of Lane County, Inc.)
E. Adoption of Resolution 4864 Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Electric Utility System
Revenue and Refunding Bonds in the Aggregate Principal Amount of Not to Exceed Twenty-
Six Million Three Hundred Fifty-Four Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Dollars ($26,354,280)
for the Purposes of Financing and Refinancing Capital Improvements to the Electric Utility
System and Providing for Related Matters
Councilor Ortiz asked the Mayor to share some news.
Mayor Piercy announced that Eugene was selected by The Green Guide as the #1 city of its top ten cities
for green living.
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to adopt the Consent Calendar.
Councilor Kelly stated that he had submitted corrections to the minutes electronically.
Mayor Piercy deemed them, without objection, approved.
Councilor Poling pulled Item C.
Councilor Taylor pulled Item E.
Councilor Papé indicated that he intended to pull both of the previously mentioned items.
Councilor Bettman said she had previously submitted minutes corrections.
Mayor Piercy deemed them, without objections, approved.
Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items C
and E passed unanimously, 8:0.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 9
Regular Meeting
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to amend Item C, a resolution
placing the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space bond measure on the November 2006, bal-
lot, by:
1) Adding a new recital D to read: “Development of artificial playing fields in con-
junction with the school districts also presents another opportunity to partner with
other public entities. This opportunity is one that may not exist in the future;”
2) Re-letter “D” to “E” in the recitals;
3) Amend Section 1 to change “$20,410,000” to “25,490,000” and to change “parks
projects” to “parks, recreation, and open space projects,” and
4) Amend the title of the resolution by changing $20,410,000 to $25,490,000.
Councilor Poling proposed that this be included in the bond measure for the purpose of adding synthetic
playing surfaces to five schools: Cal Young Middle School, Madison Middle School, Jefferson Middle
School, either Roosevelt or Spencer Butte Middle School, and Willamette High School, the only high
school that does not have a synthetic playing field. He stressed the importance of the synthetic fields in this
area as they were the only fields that could be used in any weather and for multiple games. He related that
the organizations that used the fields included AYSO, KidSports, the schools themselves, lacrosse leagues,
and City leagues. He said scheduling was arranged by a users committee, with the School District 4J
reserving its fields during school hours and the hours immediately after school and the City reserved the
fields the rest of the time. He stated that fees for using the fields were paid to offset the operational costs,
with some of the money being sent to booster programs at the schools. Maintenance, though conducted by
a school employee, was paid for in a 50/50 arrangement with the school district. He added that it was
difficult to charge a non-resident user fee to people living outside of the city limits, given that the school
districts had students who were from outside of the city.
Councilor Kelly conveyed his concern with the form of the resolution. He felt it did not hold a guarantee
that the money would be used for buying synthetic fields. He wished to place the list of sites that such
fields would be installed at into the resolution language.
City Attorney Jerry Lidz said the kind of change Councilor Kelly was proposing would require the City to
consult with bond counsel. He suggested that one approach would be to take Councilor Poling’s
amendment first and then direct the City Manager to go to the bond counsel to change the language to
include athletic fields in the project list with some specificity.
Councilor Papé appreciated Councilor Poling’s amendment but he thought it was premature. He
commented that one of the things that helped the bond measure of 1998 to pass was the informational piece
sent to the voters that specified what the money would be spent on. He understood some of the fields
needed to be rebuilt.
City Manager Taylor clarified that the fields needed some repair and maintenance but he was not aware of
a need to rebuild. He offered to get a specific estimate about the work that was needed and the associated
costs.
Councilor Papé said the City should be sure it was maintaining the existing fields. He favored tabling the
amendment and coming back for more discussion on this item. He asked how long the council had before it
would jeopardize the timeline for the ballot. City Manager Taylor replied that from a legal perspective, the
council had the opportunity to wait until the last meeting before the council break scheduled in August.
From a practical sense, he said one of the reasons this had been considered early on was to allow the people
who wished to advocate for the bond to organize to do some of the work it would take to pass the bond
measure.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 10
Regular Meeting
Councilor Papé believed the City should do more than conduct land acquisition for parks in order to gain
broad support for the bond measure.
Councilor Bettman asked if Councilor Poling’s answers to her questions were his own answers or if they
had come from staff. Councilor Poling responded that staff had advised him. He related that he made
some phone calls to garner additional information to the information he already had.
Councilor Bettman wanted some formal answers because taxpayers were paying for the field. She
wondered who was going to have the highest priority for using those fields and how the financing was
broken down. She also had some security issues. She said the other piece she needed “to get to yes” was a
more specific list of soccer field projects. She expressed concern that without specifically tying the fields
to school district property “one could turn up at Alton Baker Park.” She indicated she would support the
installation of synthetic soccer fields to support the amendment.
Councilor Pryor supported an increase in athletic fields, but he was leaning toward tabling the item for
further discussion. He said the total amount of money in the bond should be kept small and the council
should not keep adding to it for little projects. He indicated he would vote against the amendment at this
point in the interest of tabling. He advocated for a conversation in terms of what would be the best balance
of acquisition and recreation, open space, and parks projects.
Councilor Kelly did not doubt there were needs for a wide variety of facilities, as indicated in the Public
Forum testimony. He thought this conversation would be part of the project list. He was concerned that
the council would stray from its original intention of focusing the bond measure on acquisition and would
end up with a large omnibus measure that was too big to pass or it would end up with no measure at all. If
the bond measure became too big, he would vote against placing it on the ballot.
Councilor Taylor called the need for land acquisition urgent, as the land would not wait. She was willing
to consider adding to the bond but would not consider reducing the amount dedicated for acquisition. She
asked if there was anything to prevent the council from discussing additions to the bond at a later date.
City Manager Taylor responded that he did not believe there would be anything wrong with the council
indicating its desire to conclude with a list of a certain size. He said the decision would not address what
would be placed on the ballot. He thought that all that was necessary to further the bond measure could be
done and the motion could be tabled at the present meeting.
Councilor Taylor asked if the council could add to a more specific list of projects later in the process. Mr.
Lidz replied that it would not present a legal problem until the public information campaign had been
begun.
Councilor Taylor indicated she would oppose the amendment.
Councilor Bettman agreed with Councilor Kelly. She offered a friendly amendment to include specific
direction on the number of fields involved and that the synthetic fields would be constructed on school
district property only. Councilor Poling accepted the friendly amendment.
Councilor Pryor voiced his support for the amendment with the changes that had been agreed upon. He
called it the best way to accomplish what the council was seeking to do.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 11
Regular Meeting
Councilor Papé commented that it was known that more parks of all kinds were needed and that more land
should be acquired but, he said, what was needed more was to get the bond measure passed. He did not
believe that the measure could pass at this time.
Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to table the motion to a date cer-
tain two weeks prior to the council break.
Councilor Ortiz said she would not support tabling the motion. She supported Councilor Poling’s
amendment. She thought the inclusion of playing fields would increase the support for the bond measure,
which would further the potential for land acquisition. She commented that natural fields were often too
wet to use and synthetic fields allowed players continuous access.
Councilor Kelly voiced his support for Councilor Poling’s amendment as changed by Councilor Bettman’s
friendly amendment. He opposed tabling the motion.
Councilor Bettman concurred. She supported pursuing an opportunity to partner with the school districts.
Roll call vote; the motion to table failed, 6:2; councilors Papé and Pryor voting in favor.
Councilor Papé wished to offer a friendly amendment to include some money to resurface the four existing
fields. This friendly amendment was not addressed by Councilor Poling.
City Manager Taylor reported, based on a letter to the council from School District 4J Superintendent
George Russell, and a conversation with Parks and Open Space Director Johnny Medlin, that the two
middle school fields would be put in on the current School District 4J budget and a portion of the $5
million in the resolution as amended could be used to resurface those fields.
Mr. Medlin, stated that $5 million did not include School District 4J participation in this project. He
believed that passing that amount of money for five new fields would allow sufficient money to resurface
the synthetic fields.
Councilor Papé asked how that would pass through the bond counsel. Mr. Lidz replied that this question
would have to be taken to the bond counsel.
Councilor Taylor asked if passing the motion would delay the placement of the bond on the ballot. City
Manager Taylor affirmed that it would. Councilor Taylor said she did not wish to wait.
Roll call vote; the motion to amend passed unanimously, 8:0.
Roll call vote; the motion as amended passed unanimously, 8:0.
Mayor Piercy called for discussion on Item E.
Councilor Taylor wondered if Item E could be split so that the part for refinancing could be passed but the
part for financing the capital improvements could be put to a vote. She felt the reason the City Council
was passing the bond was so that the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) did not have to ask for a
vote of the citizens of Eugene.
City Manager Taylor asked Financial Analysis Manager for the Central Services Department Finance
Division Sue Cutsogeorge to respond to the question.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 12
Regular Meeting
Ms. Cutsogeorge explained that if the council was interested in splitting the item into two parts, one that
would be for $8 million related to planning and design for the new facility in west Eugene and the other for
the refunding and electric system improvements, it could not do so at the present meeting. She said the
resolution was “very well combined” and would require a return to EWEB’s bond counsel in order to turn
it into two resolutions.
Councilor Taylor asked if the refinancing portion of the resolution was time-sensitive. Ms. Cutsogeorge
affirmed that it was, given the importance of capturing a favorable interest rate environment. She
underscored that the longer it was delayed, the greater the uncertainty there would be in terms of whether
EWEB would be able to capture those refunding savings or not.
Councilor Taylor expressed concern that this was being done without a vote of the people.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Papé, moved to postpone the item until the reso-
lution could be split as described above.
Councilor Papé expressed concern that the resolution was mixing “apples with oranges.” He said the City
was on the same charter as EWEB but the last time the two bodies convened a joint meeting was during
Councilor Solomon’s predecessor’s tenure on the council, prior to 2002. He thought it was an item of
some magnitude and that it had been rushed to the Consent Calendar. He agreed that the resolution should
be split.
Councilor Bettman expressed some shock that it would cost $8 million to plan and design a building. She
also wondered why the word ‘surplus’ had been stricken from before the words ‘EWEB property located at
the downtown Riverfront Site’ in the resolution. She wondered if this would affect how the property could
be treated or sold.
Treasurer and Finance Director for EWEB Jim Origliosso clarified that ‘surplus’ had been removed from
the resolution because the board was not prepared to declare the property surplus at this point. He said the
commissioners were reserving that decision for a later point at which the property would actually be put up
for sale. Councilor Bettman asked what rationale lay behind not wanting to declare the land to be surplus.
Mr. Origliosso replied that it was not surplus at this moment and would not be surplus until the new West
Eugene site was completed and the operations facilities had been moved to that location.
Councilor Bettman asked what was involved in $8 million of planning and design. Mr. Origliosso
responded that the board wrestled with these issues and held similar concerns in terms of how to go forward
with this project and how to approach the voters with it. He recalled that EWEB had come before the
council the previous year asking for approval to move forward with the land purchase and time had been of
the essence in that purchase. He said EWEB was successful in its acquisition and a general design process
had been completed. He related that the commissioners also wrestled with whether to bring the bond before
the voters and determined that they needed more answers first. He stated that the $8 million sought through
the Uniform Revenue Bond Act (URBA) process would fund the planning project intended to provide the
board with the information needed to approach the City Council about the larger project, roughly estimated
at $85 million.
In response to a follow-up question from Councilor Bettman, Mr. Origliosso explained that the URBA
process provided an option in State law that allowed for bonds to be issued with the option for voters to call
for an election within 60 days.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 13
Regular Meeting
Councilor Kelly commented that he was “leaning towards support” for the postponement. He called the
relationship with EWEB “unusual” in that it had an elected board, yet that board did not have the power to
do certain things without City Council approval. He thought EWEB presented a resolution that the EWEB
Commissioners wrestled with “in great detail,” but the council had not had the opportunity to review it. He
was hesitant to take a significant funding step with a rate impact. He wanted to understand the resolution
better.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Mayor Piercy called for a break at 9:32 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:38 p.m.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT:
Police Auditor Candidate Profile
This item was postponed due to time constraints.
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
An Ordinance Concerning Stormwater Provisions; Amending Sections 9.0500, 9.6420, 9.8030,
9.8055. 9.8090, 9.8100, 9.8215, 9.8220, 9.8320, 9.8325, 9.8440, 9.8445, 9.8515, and 9.8520 of the
Eugene Code, 1971; Repealing Section 9.6520 of that Code; Adding Sections 9.6790, 9.6791,
9.6792, 9.6793, 9.6794, 9.6795, and 9.6796 to that Code; and Providing an Effective Date
This item was postponed due to time constraints.
5. PUBLIC HEARING:
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Project and Priority Plan
City Manager Taylor asked Parks Planning Manager Carolyn Weiss to introduce the project and plan.
Ms. Weiss stated that the project and priority plan contained specific project information related to
Eugene’s parks, recreation, and open space for the next 20 years. She said it included specific projects,
timeframes for implementation, cost information, and associated maps showing existing and proposed
resources. She stressed that the plan was a direct outgrowth of the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
(PROS) Comprehensive Plan, which was passed by the City Council in February 2006. She said the list
was intended to be a living document and it would likely be modified in the future. She reiterated that the
plan and project had come as a direct result of the input from thousands of Eugene residents.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
Bruce Mulligan
, 3056 Hendricks Hill Drive, vice president of the Hendricks Hill Homeowners Associa-
tion, supported acquisition of the 120-acre McDougal parcel, also known as the Ridgeline section, which
would connect Moon Mountain with the back side of the Laurelwood Golf Course. He passed out a copy
of the resolution unanimously approved by the Hendricks Hill Homeowners Association that supported the
acquisition, passed in 2005. He said they believed the acquisition of this parcel was critical as it was a
very time-sensitive parcel and contained prime riparian habitat. He urged the council to include the parcel
on the list for acquisition.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 14
Regular Meeting
Joel Andersen
, 1327 Andersen Lane, coach and regional co-coordinator for AYSO, explained that AYSO
was an all volunteer-driven organization that provided soccer for anyone between the ages of 5 and 19,
regardless of skill or ability to pay. He related that four years ago, 400 kids were registered, but over the
past two seasons over 1,400 kids registered for AYSO soccer. He stressed that AYSO was the only soccer
organization that had no paid personnel. He stated that AYSO was one of three Class 1 youth sports clubs
that the City had directed to provide after-school sports through 4J schools. Though AYSO received no
funding from the City or the schools, it was still held responsible for helping to provide these programs. He
said this was a mandate that AYSO readily and willingly accepted. He reported that it was becoming more
difficult to find adequate soccer fields that were in good repair and not a danger to young soccer players.
He urged the council to add funding to the PROS project list to upgrade athletic fields throughout Eugene.
He stressed that no acquisition was being requested.
David Monk
, 3720 Emerald Street, spoke on behalf of the South Eugene Neighbors. He conveyed their
long-standing support for acquisition for open space. While he acknowledged the importance of seeking
balance in the project list, he asked that the council not add too many special projects. He called land
acquisition critical as the cost of land was increasing drastically. He noted that he played soccer, adding
that many adult soccer players prefer to play on natural grass. He asked that the council ensure that
School District 4J come up with its share of money for resurfacing.
Ed Fredette
, 2635 Moon Mountain Drive, asked that the Alton Baker Park canoe canal renovation include
a whitewater park in addition to the aquatic habitat restoration. He said the canoe canal had originally been
constructed for canoe and kayak recreation and concrete weirs were put into place that cut it off from the
main river channel. He noted that prior to the turn of the century it was part of the river channel. He stated
that the intake structure for the canoe canal was unsafe as it posed a threat to young people who chose to
swim near it. He explained that water was sucked in and then transported 300 feet underground to the
canoe canal. He said the main weir in the Willamette River no longer diverted water into the Millrace and
it posed a serious hazard to river travelers. Every summer, search and rescue staff was called out to rescue
people who were caught in the hydraulics created by the weir. He thought it would be possible to create
water features in a whitewater park that would meet the needs of a broad spectrum of participants. He
averred that such a project could garner funding from a number of sources, including the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), the department that was responsible for stocking the area with
fish.
David Sonnichsen
, 2435 Skyline Boulevard, chair of the Citizens Planning Committee for the Whilamut
Natural Area of Alton Baker Park, indicated his support for a whitewater park, especially the habitat
features of it. He noted that the canoe canal was shared by Eugene and Springfield and he thought it would
make a good shared project. He said that part of the proposal involved daylighting some of the canoe canal
that was now underground in the Springfield portion of the park. He was concerned about one notion that
would involve the conversion of the concrete weir to a “standing wave.” He pointed out that the weir was
actually on the Springfield side of the freeway and under the jurisdiction of the Willamalane Recreation
District. He did not know of any jurisdiction that would be willing to take on the potential liability of
luring people into the middle of the river to surf into waves. He felt it was dangerous.
Anna Houpt
, 32496 Camas Swale Road, Creswell, said she visited a whitewater park in Kernville,
California, that had been in existence for 30 years. She explained that kayakers and canoeists wear helmets
and flotation devices. She stated that she was 51 and had been kayaking for 25 years. She hoped the
council would support building a whitewater park as it provided a family activity in which people of all
ages could participate.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 15
Regular Meeting
Scott Bridgham
, 2221 Bristol Street, professor at the University of Oregon College of Environmental
Science, spoke in favor of the restoration of the Alton Baker Park canal and the whitewater recreation
facilities. He felt the restoration and whitewater projects a lot of “win-win” potential, such as addressing
safety issues. He said he had jumped off the intake for the canal and he agreed that it was an extremely
dangerous feature. He witnessed young children jumping off the intake facility. He was amazed that there
had been no fatalities to date. He observed that the canal was in horrible shape and could be improved
immensely, both in terms of habitat and the elimination of concrete structures that inhibit the ability of fish
to swim upstream. He also enjoyed whitewater recreation. He said he had lived in South Bend, Indiana,
and a whitewater park was located in the downtown area there. He thought such a park would put Eugene
“on the map” and benefit it economically.
Roxie Cuellar
, 2053 Laura Street, Springfield, Home Builders Association (HBA), requested that the
record be held open for seven days. She explained that the HBA was interested in one column on the
project list and that was the growth allocation column. She said one type of project was neighborhood
acquisition. The HBA opposed the requirement for new homes to pay 100 percent of the cost of acquiring
the land for neighborhood parks. She attributed this to the use of a level-of-service approach. She had
Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) prepare a map and she had drawn circles where the proposed
neighborhood acquisitions would be. She determined that the sites were located in existing neighborhoods.
She said if there was an existing deficiency, home builders should not have to pay 100 percent of the cost.
Charles Biggs
, 540 Antelope Way, asked the City Council to direct staff to get more public input on the
revised PROS project list and plan because it had only been posted on the internet since April 6. He
asserted that the general public had not had a chance to comprehend the design or the changes made since
the City Council’s decision to adopt the plan. He advocated for an allocation of $1.8 million for riverfront
land acquisition in the Willakenzie area to complete the 1970s Willamette Greenway Plan which sought to
provide safe bicycle access to Armitage State Park and the future hospital. He observed that most of the
land acquisition was directed at the establishment of neighborhood parks and did not provide interconnected
habitat. He noted that one Priority 1 land acquisition was the Gillespie Butte access and natural area. He
did not believe that this was needed as it was called out in the Willakenzie Area Refinement Plan. He also
requested that Stryker Field Sports Complex in the Willakenzie area be removed from the list as he did not
believe the project was supported by the data received during public comments on the draft PROS plan.
He alleged that staff was able to redesignate a neighborhood park to a community park without due public
process and registered his disapproval. He thought the Stryker Field facility would add to traffic
difficulties in that area. He submitted his testimony in writing.
th
Rob McKenzie
, 4998 West 44 Avenue, president of the Whitewater Club at South Eugene High School
(SEHS), averred that river sports were a great interest for kids. He stated that the Riverhouse was offering
kayaking lessons for young people. He related that the Whitewater Club collected 114 signatures in favor
of the creation of a whitewater park and canal restoration. He presented the petition to the council.
Scott Taylor
, 1689 Charnelton Street, voiced his support for the acquisition of park lands. He wanted the
Ridgeline Trail to be extended. He supported the development of a mountain bike skills park. He felt that
most park needs were being met, but this one was not. He said the City was “missing the boat” on this
issue.
Mike Dials
, 2395 Palmer Avenue, spoke in support of the acquisition of land for mountain bike trails. He
noted BMX biking and skateboarding started with little public acceptance and now was widespread. He
said mountain bikers should have their “place to play.” He underscored that they were a viable part of the
community.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 16
Regular Meeting
Anthony Beck
, 309 Clark Street, commented that British Columbia was the “Mecca” and birthplace of the
Free Ride mountain bike movement. He said some of the school systems in the Vancouver area had
mountain biking as part of their curriculum. He listed two areas in Oregon that offered the opportunity to
participate in this type of sport. He averred that the creators of those areas modeled cooperation with land
managers and worked to understand liability issues and how to build structures properly so that the work
would result in trails that were environmentally sustainable. He related that he and others presented a
proposal to do this type of work to the Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Division a week earlier. He
reiterated that there were “plenty of mountain bikers” who were willing to help with the design and building
of such a facility. He noted that two years earlier, a Free Ride competition had been held at the Lane
County Fair and it drew over 100 riders representing a wide range of ages and abilities and from both the
local area and other places, including Washington and California.
Diane Shock
, 5509 Barger Drive, thanked the City Council for acknowledging the need to make the
Golden Gardens Park safe and for considering an allocation of money toward that end. She urged the
council to include in the bond measure acquisition of additional land around the ponds to allow the ponds
edges to be sloped. She said additional acreage needed to be secured while the surrounding land was
undeveloped and still available. She asked that an emergency call box be installed there. She stressed the
importance of moving the project to a Priority 1 and of fast-tracking the process. She added that the
development of Golden Gardens Park would also offer a “delightful mix” of the high priority attributes that
fit within the Rivers to Ridges study principles of recreation, education, habitat and wetlands, as well as
matching the objectives of the PROS plan for the expansion of outdoor activities, the promotion of
environmental awareness, and education and stewardship. She said it would encourage exercise as well.
Julia Pommert
, 2740 Almaden Street, supported adding more recreation into the PROS measure. She
recognized that the original focus was on acquiring open space, but she felt in talking to people in the
community they indicated concern that the space would be purchased and not developed. She averred that
if people felt there was something in the bond measure for them, they were more likely to support it.
David Hinkley
, 1340 Lawrence Street, #1, supported development of the Jefferson Area Greenway south
of the Amazon Canal into a park. He said thanks to the assistance and support of the Lane County
Fairgrounds, the neighborhood, fairgrounds, and a number of other stakeholders had come up with a
conceptual plan for the park. He related that the plan had been pitched to the City five years earlier but the
City, minority property owner in that area, wanted to go through a prioritization process and had no
funding at the time. He was happy that it was on the priority list, but unhappy that it was listed as a
Priority 3. He felt opportunities for funding were being lost, given that it was not likely to be developed for
10 to 15 years. He observed that it was an atypical park as it was a joint operation between Lane County
and the City. He asked that the project be moved up to Priority 1, or if not, that it be split into two pieces:
the planning piece as a Priority 1 project, and the development piece as a project with a lower priority.
Azra Khalidi
, 4023-K Donald Street, averred that the City of Eugene had not had strong enough land use
laws when it annexed south Eugene in the 1960s and 1970s. She noted that the construction business had
become a booming industry. She was afraid that the Amazon Headwaters would be lost along with
surrounding riparian areas and trees if it was not protected. She strongly recommended that the existing
Amazon Headwaters land and its environs be designated as park land. She thought this should be achieved
by working with Lane County. She urged the council to think regionally and act locally.
Debbie Jeffries
, 3800 North Delta Highway, asserted that the existing inventory the project list was based
upon did not include private sector park land and also did not include land owned by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC). She said the latter totaled 1,500 acres. She had
not thought to participate in the process, given that her property was under the County’s jurisdiction. She
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 17
Regular Meeting
related that in her case, as well as Eugene Sand & Gravel, there had been no participation and she had been
assured that the comprehensive plan did not include her property. She said the linear park total was
referenced with partner funded acres on page 5 of the memorandum, but the people who owned the
property along the McKenzie and Willamette rivers were all County residents and none of them had
participated. She indicated that she did not know who of the property owners intended to partner with
funding as no one she had spoken to had agreed to this. She asked that the council take a hard look at the
overall comprehensive plan and list and remove the people who were under County jurisdiction.
Nancy Pollard
, 4671 Spring Meadow, Principal of Madison Middle School, stated that the School District
4J greatly valued partnering with the City. She reiterated that the synthetic surfaces added hours of service
to athletic fields. She stated that Madison Middle School just opened a new building and had been without
a field for a number of years. She hoped that field development would begin this spring. She thanked the
council for supporting the community’s young people.
Mary Monette
, 3261 Richard Avenue, co-chair of the Friends of Golden Gardens Park, stated that the
group developed a 50-point proposal for step-by-step improvement of the park. She stressed the necessity
of moving the park up from a Priority 5 to a Priority 1. She expressed appreciation for the council’s
willingness to undertake the feasibility study. She related that the group wished to work with Eugene Fire
and Emergency Medical Services immediately to develop safety measures for the park before the summer.
She reiterated that the group wanted to purchase the land around the ponds in order to slope the sides. She
said the first rough cost estimate they had was $400,000. She commented that the purchase of another 100
acres around the Golden Gardens Park could be used for more ball parks. She felt the location was the
perfect setting for a wonderful park. She conveyed her appreciation for all of the help the group received
from staff and the council.
th
Jon Belcher
, 1240 West 15 Avenue, #4, on behalf of the Jefferson Greenway Committee, wanted to keep
alive the Jefferson Amazon Greenway. He related that in 1998, a group of Jefferson/Westside neighbors
developed a vision to naturalize the Amazon Canal along the Fairgrounds and maintain the passive uses of
the south side of the Fairgrounds, including the City park plan that was once the Jefferson Pool site. The
neighborhood group worked with the Fair Board to develop a conceptual plan (copies of which were
provided to the council) that met the Fairgrounds’ needs and the vision of the neighbors who approved the
plan. He said they then took the plan to the City, but had been told to wait through the PROS process to be
put into the “pipeline.” Initially, the plan had been made a Priority 1, and then moved to a Priority 2, but
now with the shifting of acquisition before development, it had dropped to Priority 3. Meanwhile, the
group worked with the Eugene Stream Team to complete plantings along the north bank for the past three
years. He stated that the BLM was moving toward planning the area for stream enhancement. He thought
the process might take as long as five years. He asked the City to reprioritize the project to “capture the
synergy” of the BLM and act before the neighborhood advocates had “all become senile.”
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. She called for council questions and comments.
Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to keep the record open for
seven days. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Councilor Pryor thanked everyone for staying for the hearing. He commented that the process needed to be
deliberate. He noted that there were some jurisdictional issues to work through, but it was important to
continue working on projects. He related that the Lane Board of County Commissioners adopted a
resolution asking the City Council to slow down and work more actively with them. He thought the council
should take that into consideration. He said his support for the PROS Plan list would be dependent on
getting through some of the collaborative aspects of it.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 18
Regular Meeting
Councilor Kelly thanked everyone for their testimony. He noted that explicit language was added to the
PROS plan that pointed out that the City of Eugene did not have jurisdiction outside of city limits. He
asked staff for a response regarding the proposed split of the Jefferson Amazon Greenway into two phases.
He also wanted a better understanding of testimony regarding the Willakenzie acquisition and the
McDougal parcel.
Councilor Kelly asked that explicit language be included at the beginning of the PROS plan explaining the
priorities and acknowledging that challenges and opportunities would arise down the line and the council
would have the ability to alter priorities and add or delete projects as circumstances warrant.
Councilor Poling asked staff to provide information at a later time regarding whether there were, as one
person alleged, no existing deficiencies in land for neighborhood parks. He noted that the project list on the
Web site from April 4 contained three new columns, one of which was labeled preliminary growth share
and preliminary growth costs. He wanted to know what that meant. He asked which list the council would
be expected to adopt. Additionally, he wished to know if systems development charges (SDCs) were being
charged outside of the City limits and whether this was legal or permissible. He asked if the City was
charging SDCs for land being acquired to complete additional legs of the Ridgeline Trail.
Councilor Bettman averred that the neighborhood park deficiencies were not on a block-by-block basis.
She said staff addressed alleged deficiencies on page 228. She did not think that there was much to work
out and she favored moving forward.
Councilor Papé expressed appreciation for the comments from the people who spoke in support of a
whitewater park. He asked if the City could remove the weir in the Willamette River. Mr. Lidz clarified
that the City lacked jurisdiction over the middle of the river.
Councilor Bettman thought it was possible to place an emergency call box at Golden Gardens Park in the
interim as a safety measure.
In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Mr. Medlin explained that at the time the quarry was
closed, the County had only acquired that portion that was not being farmed. He said the only that had
been transferred to the City, it only received what was owned and the portion on the west side and north
side of the pond was very close to the edge of the pond.
Councilor Bettman noted that the Friendly Park Plan had been in the Capital Improvement Program five
years earlier and it never had been implemented, though it had money allocated to it. Ms. Weiss clarified
that Phase 1 of the park would be implemented in the upcoming summer with funds from the 1998 bond
measure. She said the money allocated was not going to be enough and it appeared that there would be a
Phase 2 in that park.
Councilor Bettman asked staff to provide her with information on how much would be spent to implement
the plan and to document for her how much had been allocated to the plan and what the funding sources
were in the old CIP.
Mayor Piercy thanked everyone for staying.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 19
Regular Meeting
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 10, 2006 Page 20
Regular Meeting
NAME OF MEETING: Eugene City Council
DATE OF MEETING: April 19, 2006—Work Session
TO: Beth Forrest
RECORDED BY: Lynn Taylor
MINUTES FILE NAME: M:\2006\Central Services Department\City Manager's Office\City
Council\cc060419m1.doc
BACKUP STORAGE: Lynn #25
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
R O U T I N G I N F O R M A T I O N
04/28 ___ Draft to Staff
(Date & Initials)
__ Reviewed/Returned by Staff
__ Returned to Minutes Recording
__ Proofed/Revised by Minutes Recording
_5/17 ky Returned to Staff
______ Council Amendments Incorporated
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
ATTACHMENT B
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall
April 19, 2006
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor,
Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor.
The Honorable Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to
order.
A. WORK SESSION: Downtown Development Update
City Manager Dennis Taylor introduced Community Development Division Manager Mike
Sullivan and Associate Planner Nan Laurence to present an update on downtown development.
He noted that the agenda item was scheduled at the request of the City Council.
Mr. Sullivan used a slide presentation to review development opportunity areas as originally
described in the Downtown Plan. He said the sites were key elements of ongoing work in
downtown and included the following projects and their investment values:
?
Wayne Morse Federal Courthouse - $72 million
?
The Tate Condominiums - $16 million
?
Whole Foods - $24 million
?th
WestTown on 8 - $16 million
Mr. Sullivan described two projects that were more speculative in nature, including the West
Broadway proposal, which was a mixed-use development that included retail, housing, office and
theater space and represented a potential investment of $165 million. He said the other project
was the former Sears site owned by the City, for which a Request for Proposals (RFP) would be
developed in conjunction with the Planning Commission.
Continuing, Mr. Sullivan listed other sites that were highlighted in the Downtown Plan but where
there currently was less City activity:
?
AgriPac remainder property – approximately two acres of developable property
owned by the City, zoned I-3, Heavy Industrial, desirable location at the heart of the
th
courthouse district, redevelopment would emphasize 8 Avenue as a Great Street
?
Eugene Clinic site – 2.65 acres owned by PeaceHealth, 1.6 acres surface parking,
zoned C-3, Major Commercial, available dependent on the hospital’s future plans
?th
5 Street Market – public and private ownership, zoned C-2, Community
Commercial and Special Area, redevelopment potential,
?
State Motor pool – 1.7 acres, property possibly in transition, much redevelopment
potential
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
1
?
Eugene Water & Electric (EWEB) site – 27 acres owned by EWEB. EWEB working
on relocation plans; with relocation the site would become one of the most important
sites in downtown with a mix of development and open space values, zoned
Industrial and Public Land, master plan required for rezoning,
Ms. Laurence said that staff was trying to capitalize on development opportunities based on
direction in the Downtown Plan, which was adopted two years ago as a policy document with a
specific vision of downtown but flexibility about how that vision would be achieved. She said
the plan was organized around nine themes and included 116 implementation strategies and
project examples. She highlighted some of the themes and associated activities:
?
Strong regional center and building a downtown – less progress on a strong regional
center that would involve a downtown hospital or large regional facility, but much
progress toward building a downtown as illustrated by the projects described earlier
in the presentation
?
Great Streets and special places – two most strongly supported themes during
development of the downtown vision, most current development opportunities on
the Great Streets, theme addressed by the City Hall complex master planning
process, Park Blocks investments, actions to support The Shedd, more work needed
?
Living downtown – supported by the residential projects discussed earlier, The Tate
th
Condominiums, WestTown on 8, West Broadway proposal as well as a full-service
grocery store in downtown
?
Downtown riverfront and cultural center – preliminary discussions with EWEB on
th
master planning the riverfront site, improving the connection along 8 Avenue from
the Park Blocks to the river, support for Downtown Eugene Inc. (DEI), more work
needed
?
Safe civic center and getting around downtown – discussion of new police station as
part of the City Hall complex, implementation of two-way streets downtown, road
improvements surrounding courthouse district to connect commercial core to the
east end of downtown and the river
Ms. Laurence said that while plan implementation progress was being made, there were many
elements yet to be addressed, such as developing a design complex for the Great Streets as urban
open spaces, completing an open space plan for downtown, focusing on connections to nearby
nature areas, coordinating arts and culture with the theme of Arts and the Outdoors, and specific
projects such as redeveloping the Butterfly Lot as potentially part of the Park Blocks. She said
that staff recommended continued implementation of the Downtown Plan with four areas of
priority:
?
Continue work on development opportunities,
?
Work to refine an open space plan for downtown, specifically focusing on
connections to nearby nature areas,
?
Develop concepts for the Great Streets, creating inviting paths to special places
downtown, and
?
Work closely with EWEB on the master plan for the riverfront.
Ms. Laurence concluded her presentation with a request for direction from the council regarding
whether to prioritize certain projects, maintain staff’s focus on development opportunity work, or
identify projects that needed additional staff work or needed to be initiated.
Mr. Kelly commented that a thriving downtown was critical to a thriving Eugene. He asked what
work was being done on the site adjacent to the federal courthouse site. Ms. Laurence replied
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
2
that staff initiated work to rezone the property from industrial to commercial and was discussing
the nature and timing of an RFP process.
Mr. Kelly asked that RFP criteria be provided to the Planning Commission and City Council for
review. He asked if the strategy related to helping employers remain and expand downtown by
targeted use was supported by existing tools, such as urban renewal, rather than specific
initiatives. Mr. Sullivan agreed that the strategy was being implemented with existing tools, such
as assisting businesses with financing options.
Mr. Kelly said he was least enamored with the Great Street theme as it seemed too grandiose for
streets in Eugene and seemed to imply extra fancy street amenities that were not the best use of
funds. He said there was community support for doing something significant for the Farmers
Market, such as expansion or indoor space, and the council should assist those types of efforts.
He urged staff to be aware of any opportunities.
Mr. Papé agreed with Mr. Kelly’s remarks about the impact of a thriving downtown on the rest of
Eugene. He asked if rezoning the remaining AgriPac land and EWEB site would be considered
by the Planning Commission, then referred to the City Council. Ms. Laurence said the land use
actions would be zone changes, which typically did not go through the City Council. Mr.
Sullivan noted that the RFP process to dispose of the Agripac property would go through the
council and could include a discussion of the underlying zoning and other aspects.
Mr. Papé emphasized the importance of staying ahead of the curve on redevelopment of
opportunity sites, including the Eugene Clinic property. He asked what uses were permitted
under C-3 zoning. Ms. Laurence replied that a full range of commercial uses as well as
residential were permitted.
Mr. Papé asked if the Eugene Clinic site could be included in the urban renewal district. Mr.
Sullivan said there was some expansion capacity in the district but it would not take in the entire
footprint of the site.
Mr. Papé asked about the timing of RFPs. City Manager Taylor said there would be an
opportunity during the work session on City Hall to discuss timing as well as criteria.
Mr. Papé concurred with Mr. Kelly’s comments regarding the Farmers Market.
Ms. Taylor said the priority should be on doing things that were important and focusing on
something particular rather than on the enormous list of implementation strategies, some of which
she was apprehensive about. She said the Farmers Market was important to downtown and the
City should immediately cease charging the market for parking spaces. She wanted a focus on
helping the Farmers Market and referred to recommendations from an earlier task force. She
asked how the City was attempting to facilitate the Conner-Woolley Opus West Broadway
development project and whether staff had authorization from the council for its activities. Mr.
Sullivan replied that the council had expressed a general interest in trying to assist the project to
move forward and staff was doing nothing more than meet periodically with property owners in
the West Broadway area to discuss concerns and issues and determine if staff could help address
those.
Ms. Taylor asked if staff was trying to push owners to sell their property. Mr. Sullivan assured
her that staff was not attempting to influence owners.
Ms. Taylor, referring to the strategy related to working with medical providers, asked if it was too
late to have a medical facility downtown. Mr. Sullivan said the issue was addressed and much
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
3
work was done but there was currently no hospital site identified downtown. Planning Director
Susan Muir clarified that the strategy referred to a physicians’ group that had contacted the
council several years ago about locating in downtown but the project had subsequently located
outside of the downtown core. She said the strategy was still viable and staff would be willing to
work with medical or other offices interested in the downtown area.
th
Ms. Taylor asked if the concept of a pedestrian overpass at 8 Avenue and Mill Street had been
abandoned. Mr. Sullivan said a design for a grade level crossing was part of the street
improvement package for the courthouse area. City Manager Taylor said the concept was not
ruled out, although the current focus was on a grade level crossing.
Ms. Bettman stated she hoped to have the opportunity to vote against a motion to direct staff to
continue work on development opportunities and implementation of the Downtown Plan as she
thought the plan had morphed from a vision to a plan. She thought the plan was too broad and
was being used to justify projects. She said the council approved the plan conceptually, but now
she no longer supported it as it lacked benchmarks, such as specific targets for housing units,
commercial and retail. She was opposed to subsidizing retail because it put existing retail at a
disadvantage. She said the plan was a concept but not a real blueprint for action; a real plan had a
financial aspect that constrained actions to a budget. She said the strategies in the plan were not
prioritized, not constrained, and not specific.
Ms. Solomon commended the Downtown Plan and was pleased to see the fruits of its
implementation in the staff presentation. She asked if the State motor pool site was going to be
sold and whether it could be land banked for affordable housing. Mr. Sullivan said that there had
been some interest in surplusing the site, but it would be offered first to State agencies, then to
local jurisdictions, and finally to the open market. He said there were many potential uses for the
site, but it was immediately adjacent to the railroad tracks.
th
Ms. Solomon expressed dismay that a grade level crossing was being planned for the 8 Avenue
and Mill Street intersection, as she thought an overpass was critical. She said that Lane County
Commissioner Faye Stewart was also interested in efforts to support the Farmers Market and
there might be an opportunity to partner with the County.
Mayor Piercy stated her interest in and support for the Farmers Market. She asked how staff
interpreted the Downtown Plan in terms of whether it was a plan with specific implementation or
applied in a broader sense. Ms. Laurence said that staff tried to ensure that their work was related
specifically to the policies in the plan; the implementation strategies and project examples
illustrated the plan but the policies were its heart. She said because downtown was so high
profile and there were financial implications involved, most of what staff was doing in downtown
came before the council for specific direction on specific activities. She said the plan went
through a full range of public hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council levels and
was approved by the council as an aspirational document. She said there was language in the
plan that specifically stated that conditions and circumstances would change and the plan was not
meant to be so rigid it could not be reinterpreted as necessary. She said it was the intent of the
plan to be flexible while remaining true to the vision. She said the plan technically had the status
of a refinement plan and some policies had been adopted into the land use but most the
Downtown Plan’s policies were too aspirational to be adopted as evaluative criteria in the land
use plan, with the exception of the requirement of a master plan for the EWEB site.
Mayor Piercy said her understanding of the implementation strategies was that they were
examples of ways to achieve those aspirations and as each opportunity was presented, the council
had the opportunity to say it was consistent or inconsistent with the plan. Ms. Laurence agreed
that Mayor Piercy’s understanding was consistent with staff interpretation.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
4
Mr. Kelly pointed out that the adopting ordinance was in the back of the Downtown Plan and
pointed out that the policies were adopted as a refinement plan and the implementation strategies
were essentially examples.
Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct staff to undertake a
broad, high-level planning exercise to consider potential locations for
downtown green space. This exercise should also examine (at a very
rough level) potential costs and timelines. The results of this exercise
should be brought back to the City Council within four months for
further deliberation and direction.
Mr. Kelly said it was difficult during discussion of a specific project to step back and have a
broader, proactive discussion. He said the plan was mostly silent on the subject of green space
and his intent was to generate ideas and potential sites for further discussion.
Mr. Papé said he supported the motion generally and asked if a plaza or piazza would be included
in the concept of green space. Mr. Kelly replied it was not included but he did not object to a
plaza being included in the context of a larger open space study, but the focus was on green
space.
Ms. Ortiz supported the motion as green space would encourage people to live downtown.
The motion carried unanimously, 8:0.
Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager
to pursue, hopefully in collaboration with the Board of County
Commissioners, interim projects to accommodate the needs of the
farmers participating in the Farmers Market downtown.
Mr. Kelly questioned the restriction to interim projects and suggested that the term “and longer
term” be included. Ms. Bettman accepted the friendly amendment.
Ms. Solomon said she was not opposed to the idea but felt the motion was premature and the
issue should be discussed in a separate work session that included consideration of
recommendations from a previous task force. She recognized the value of the Farmers Market
but wanted to be better informed about options before taking action.
Ms. Bettman said the downtown area was “dead” on days when there was no Farmers Market and
supporting the market was a key and immediate step to helping downtown.
Mr. Kelly encouraged support of the motion which initiated focused work, consistent with the
staff’s request for direction. He said it was consistent with community interest in support for the
market and strategies in the Downtown Plan.
Mr. Pryor was supportive of the Farmers Market but concerned having only a few minutes to
make a decision about on-the-fly motions. He asked for examples of projects that could support
the market. Ms. Bettman cited electricity, wastewater and infrastructure issues that could be
assigned a cost and considered in the next fiscal year. She said a longer-term project such as a
semi-permanent structure could be scoped and brought back to the council.
Ms. Solomon, seconded by Mr. Papé, moved to extend discussion time
by ten minutes. The motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Ortiz voting in opposition.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
5
The amended motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Solomon voting in opposition.
Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct staff to continue
work on development opportunities and implementation of the
Downtown Plan.
Ms. Taylor said the plan was supposed to be conceptual but she believed it was used as a
“weapon.” She said the plan worried her; there were many things in it she did not think were
good ideas and she would vote against the motion.
th
Mr. Papé concurred with earlier remarks about the need for an overpass at 8 Avenue and Mill
Street and urged that the option remain open with the design of the parking garage. He
encouraged the council to continue to have regular discussions on downtown. He hoped that
locations downtown could help with opportunity siting and asked if the Central Area
Transportation Study (CATS) discussed a north side parking structure. Mr. Sullivan replied that
the north end scoping project addressed the issue of parking in association with the train station
and he would research whether north end parking was considered in CATS.
Mr. Kelly commented that there were some implementation strategies and example projects in the
plan with which he did not agree but did not think the council’s action in 2004 or currently bound
it to those strategies as anything significant had to come to the council for discretionary action.
He used the parking garage as an example and pointed out that it was consistent with one of the
implementation strategies but any member of the council was free to oppose it. He supported the
motion on the floor.
Mayor Piercy noted that sustainability was not specifically mentioned in the plan but hoped that it
would be a factor in consideration of downtown projects.
Ms. Taylor said that fixed rail transit and a walkability assessment were implementation strategies
that should be worked on.
Ms. Bettman said she would vote against the motion because the community perceived it as a
plan and, in order to have a plan and move in a responsible way towards objectives, there had to
be specifics, benchmarks, a blueprint, and financial constraints. She said when a project was
presented to the council, the community and the media expected it to be supported because the
plan was adopted unanimously and any project was consistent with the so-called plan. She said
downtown deserved a real plan with benchmarks. She mentioned that a main theme of the plan
th
was connecting downtown to the river and putting 6 Avenue along the river was counter to that
objective.
The motion passed, 6:1; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting in
opposition.
Mayor Piercy asked if there could be a discussion of incorporating benchmarks in the plan. City
Manager Taylor replied that in response to the council’s motions today, staff would illustrate that
the plan was visionary but also dynamic, and elements could be added as they were refined and
adopted by the council. He said the specific approach recommended by Ms. Bettman would be
consistent with direction from the council to give priority to development of a two-year action
plan with specific steps and a decision package as part of a budget building process for the fiscal
year (FY) 2007 or FY08 budget.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
6
B. WORK SESSION: Parks and Open Space for River Road/Santa Clara
City Manager Taylor introduced Parks Planning Manager Carolyn Weiss to present a progress
report on the River Road/Santa Clara parks issue, particularly the Santa Clara community park.
Ms. Weiss used a slide presentation to present an overview and describe future plans for parks
and open space in River Road/Santa Clara and maps to illustrate potential acquisition areas for a
Santa Clara community park and projects identified for the River Road area. Ms. Weiss said that
significant progress had been made in acquiring neighborhood park sites, including Loan Oak
Park, Filbert Park, Rosetta Place, Wendover Park, Terra Linda Park, and Ferndale Park. She said
that neighborhood park service areas were those within a one-half mile walking distance of a
neighborhood park or playground without crossing a major barrier. She used a map to illustrate
service areas and pointed out that even with the new acquisitions, there was still a significant
amount of unserved areas within River Road/Santa Clara. She said there were plans to acquire
additional neighborhood park sites and improve access to existing parks as well as complete the
development of acquisitions.
Ms. Weiss used a map to illustrate service areas for community and metropolitan parks
throughout the community. She said a community park service area was a two-mile distance to
the park site and there was currently no community park service in the River Road/Santa Clara
area, particularly north of Beltline. She said that criteria to identify and evaluate potential park
sites had been developed in conjunction with Santa Clara citizens. She said the criteria included
the size of the parcel, cost, transportation infrastructure, flood zone, inside or outside of the urban
growth boundary (UGB), ownership of adjacent properties, existence of natural resources, and
willing seller. She reviewed a map that identified a number of potential community park sites
and described each site, including whether the owner was willing to sell. She said securing a
community park site was the first priority.
Continuing, Ms. Weiss stated that the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan
identified the following Priority 1 projects for the River Road/Santa Clara area:
?
Acquire three neighborhood park sites
?
Acquire a community park site
?
Stormwater corridors that linked with existing parks
?
Acquire additional Willamette River frontage
?
Development of two neighborhood park sites
?
Development of a synthetic surface playing field
Ms. Weiss also noted that within the 20-year planning window were acquisition of an urban
plaza, development of the community park site, development of six additional neighborhood park
sites, implementation of the Rasor Park master plan, construction of an additional boat launch on
the Willamette River and access improvements to all park sites.
Mayor Piercy called for council questions and comments.
Mr. Papé said he asked for the work session because while most of the 52 projects in the 2003
parks and open space measure had been completed or were in progress, the exception was a
community park in the Santa Clara area. He noted that staff had been working on the issue and
hoped that the council would provide additional impetus, perhaps through consideration of
eminent domain to assemble the parcels necessary for a park site if other approaches failed. He
was willing to consider eminent domain to assemble the necessary the 30 to 40 contiguous acres.
He said north Eugene was the only area still lacking a community park. He asked if sites outside
of the UGB could be used for parks and if that would require an expansion of the UGB to
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
7
incorporate that area. Ms. Weiss said that land outside the UGB could be purchased and
developed as long as the City followed the County’s land use regulations. She said that
permitting would be dependent on the type of facilities constructed and expansion of the UGB
would not be necessary.
Mr. Papé asked if Property C on the potential park sites map would meet the criteria for a
community park. Ms. Weiss said it would be a challenging site because of its long, narrow
character but the criteria for a park had been broadened because so few sites were still available
in the area. She said that the property did present some options.
Mayor Piercy said that neighbors in the area asked the City to “look outside the box” and
approach assemblage of park land in a different way.
Mr. Pryor thanked staff for their efforts to respond to Santa Clara residents. He noted that the
conversations around neighborhood and community parks were very distinct and the one of
greatest immediacy related to a community park because property suitable for a community park
was rapidly disappearing. He agreed that the many challenges of creating a community park in
the area required innovative thinking in order to meet the City’s obligation.
Mr. Kelly said he was not an advocate of the use of eminent domain but agreed with Mr. Papé
and Mr. Pryor’s comments about the need for a community park and the rapidly decreasing
availability of land for that project. He preferred a willing seller but the land would be used for a
public purpose and urged staff to bring eminent domain to the council if it was deemed necessary
to acquire a suitable site. He reminded the public that eminent domain did not mean the City
would take the property; a fair market value as determined through an appraisal would be paid.
He asked staff to inform the council about the extent to which sites outside the UGB were
currently exclusive farm use and not exception land.
Ms. Bettman asked if sites outside of the UGB would be outside of the two-mile community park
service area, as there would be population only along a portion of the park. Ms. Weiss replied
that the park would be on the edge of the service area for Santa Clara.
Ms. Bettman encouraged flexibility and looking at a combination of uses such as linear park land
and partnership with the school district. She agreed with Mr. Kelly and Mr. Papé about the
possibility of using eminent domain while there were still viable options available. She
questioned how a community park had grown from a 40- to an 80-acre purchase and felt that only
the amount necessary for a park should be acquired, particularly if eminent domain was used.
Ms. Ortiz thanked everyone who supported providing a community park for River Road/Santa
Clara and said she would support extreme measures for assembling the necessary property. She
also agreed that a 40-acre park would fulfill the City’s obligation.
Ms. Taylor asked if there was an urban plaza in the community. Ms. Weiss replied that the Park
Blocks were good examples and the City would like to provide smaller versions in other areas of
the community.
Ms. Taylor asked why an urban plaza would be planned for River Road/Santa Clara. Ms. Weiss
replied that the Project and Priority Plan called for an urban plaza in the Santa Clara and
Bethel/Danebo areas.
Ms. Taylor asked if there were other community parks besides Amazon Park in south Eugene.
Ms. Weiss clarified that the map illustrated community and metropolitan parks and included the
Ridgeline Trail and Hendricks Park.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
8
Ms. Taylor said she was not certain about eminent domain and would not support it to acquire
farmland.
Mr. Papé noted that Churchill High School and Sheldon High School represented two successful
examples of community/metropolitan parks. He asked if the school district had been contacted
about partnering on a community park in the area. Ms. Weiss said there had been conversations
with 4J School District and more were scheduled. She said one option being discussed was
Madison Middle School.
City Manager Taylor summarized that staff’s priority was to obtain a 40-acre community park
and be more aggressive in conversations with property owners, continue the dialogue with
neighbors on park specifics, consider how connections along the riparian corridor might influence
community park decisions and work with the school district, particularly on opportunities related
to Madison Middle School.
Mr. Kelly added that staff should also consider that a community park, instead of one large
property, might be two smaller parcels that collectively provided the same services.
The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
Respectively submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
(Recorded by Lynn Taylor)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page
9
NAME OF MEETING: Eugene City Council
DATE OF MEETING: April 26, 2006–Work Session
TO: Beth Forrest
RECORDED BY: Kimberly Young
MINUTES FILE NAME: M:\2005\Central Services Department\City Manager’s Office\City
Council\cc060424m1.doc
BACKUP STORAGE: KYApril2006
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
=
R O U T I N G I N F O R M A T I O N
5/9 Draft to Staff
(Date & Initials)
Reviewed/Returned by Staff
Returned to Minutes Recording
Proofed/Revised by Minutes Recording
5/17 ky Returned to Staff
Council Amendments Incorporated
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
=
ATTACHMENT C
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall
April 26, 2006
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Betty
Taylor, Gary Papé, George Poling, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor.
A. WORK SESSION: City Hall Complex Strategic Issues
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order.
The council was joined for the item by Thomas Hacker, Jonah Cohen, and Dana Ing Crawford of Thomas
Hacker Architects; Ellen Teninty of T’N T Consultants; Doug Macy and Ken Pirie of Walker Macy; Dave
Wilson and Rick Rehfeldt of McClaren, Wilson & Lawrie; and Kyle Brown of J. D. White Company.
Police Chief Robert Lehner, and Glen Svendsen and Mike Penwell of the Facilities Division were also
present.
Ms. Crawford reviewed the agenda for the meeting. She indicated one deviation from the action proposed in
the Agenda Item Summary (AIS), which was that the council delay action on the staff-recommended motion
related to space needs until the council meeting of May 10. That would allow for more discussion of the
consolidation option.
Ms. Teninty facilitated the workshop portion of the meeting.
Mr. Papé arrived.
Mr. Hacker expressed enthusiasm for the project, saying he believed the City of Eugene had an extraordi-
nary opportunity to revitalize City Hall. He said the project was quite complex, and could be implemented
using many different approaches. Those different approaches presented challenges. Mr. Hacker said the
public indicated a desire to see the council unified in support of the project. To reach that consensus, he
proposed some changes in the process. First, staff would not be asking the council to take action on the
space needs issue today. He recommended that at this time, the council narrow the police consolidation
options to two or three, which would allow the project team to put together better information on the
remaining options. Mr. Hacker asked the councilors to make themselves more available as individuals to the
project team so the team could create criteria and be better prepared for the upcoming work shops with the
council. Ms. Teninty recalled that some councilors indicated hesitation about meeting individually with the
project team.
Ms. Bettman said that councilors were elected officials who needed to express their preferences in public.
She criticized the way the information from the first round of council interviews was processed, saying it
represented a form of quasi-balloting. She said that given the importance of the process, the community
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 26, 2006 Page 1
Work Session
needed to be able to see what the council was thinking and what the issues were. Ms. Bettman said council
decisions needed to be made in open public session.
Mr. Kelly believed that the way information was previously synthesized had been a problem. However, he
acknowledged the challenges faced by the project team, and suggested a way to have a pre-meeting check-in
was via e-mail, which was information to be found in the public realm. Councilors briefly discussed what
approach they should take to the suggestion proffered by the project team and accepted Mr. Kelly’s
suggestion.
Ms. Teninty called the council’s attention to the input from the public forum, contained in Attachment A,
“Community Forum Summary Report.” She said that the forum report could be found at
www.cityeugenehall.com. She noted that as a result of outreach, 20 percent of the participants were
neighborhood association members. The project team would attempt to use that connection to do more
outreach beyond the associations. Ms. Teninty emphasized that the results of the public forum were not
scientific. All comments received were provided to the council in an unedited form.
Ms. Teninty overviewed the process used to solicit input on the police consolidation options at the forum.
She said the results the council saw reflected the small group discussions rather than full group discussions,
and did not reflect if the larger discussion changed anyone’s mind.
Ms. Taylor suggested the project team reconsider the use of the dot exercise for the remaining community
forums.
Ms. Teninty reviewed the results of the public input related to police consolidation, noting the lack of
emphasis participants placed on the police function being housed at City Hall, and the suggestion that the
solution was community policing. Participants wanted the police in their neighborhood, not at City Hall.
Ms. Teninty recommended that the council focus its discussion about the criteria on the topics of functional
efficiency, civic integration of the police function into the community and “structure of democracy,” cost,
and the impact of how the police function issue affected the overall success of funding for the project.
Ms. Bettman questioned the utility of the information collected at the forum as opposed to using a more
scientific approach, particularly given the many unknowns surrounding the project. Ms. Teninty suggested
that the forum served the function of allowing for face-to-face communication about the purpose of the
project and the need for a new city hall. She anticipated a need for more scientific data in the future.
Mr. Kelly thought the forum had value for the reasons cited by Ms. Teninty. He expressed appreciation for
the comments from the attendees, which was more than the council might have otherwise received.
Mr. Kelly thought Ms. Bettman had a good point, and some polling before the council came to a final
decision about Phase 2 could be worthwhile. He did not know what questions would be asked, and
suggested that the project team and City staff give the idea some thought.
Mayor Piercy recalled the reason for the process was to engage the public more broadly and successfully.
She anticipated the council would learn from the process and it would inform future council decisions.
Ms. Bettman suggested that the community dialogue needed to be informed by the research the council was
waiting to see, and once that research was available, the council might consider a mailing to the public and
forums, followed by a scientific survey. Mr. Kelly endorsed the suggestion. Ms. Taylor suggested the
mailing could be in the neighborhood newsletters, which many people read.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 26, 2006 Page 2
Work Session
Mr. Hacker briefly discussed the space needs analysis, calling it a work in progress. The analysis had
changed by a percentage or so and he expected further change. However, the basic numbers remained the
same, and the relative area numbers for the different City functions were similar. He anticipated more
discussion on May 10.
With regard to questions for a future response, Mr. Kelly said he could not find the Council Chamber or
meeting rooms on the chart. He recalled that earlier discussion indicated that City Hall would include office
space for the councilors. That was not included. Speaking to the analysis for the Police Department, he
said that it lacked information about current net square feet for the department. He wanted that information.
Mr. Kelly said if one added up all the 2006 net square feet, that should roughly equal the net square feet of
the Atrium Building, 858 Pearl Street, and City Hall, and he wanted that double-checked.
Ms. Bettman asked where the police auditor’s office was proposed to be located. Ms. Teninty said the
function was housed with the City Council and Mayor or the City Manager's Office (CMO).
Mr. Hacker referred the council to Attachment B of the AIS, “Police Consolidation Options A-E.” He
briefly reviewed the options.
Ms. Teninty invited questions.
Ms. Taylor asked whether the reason less parking was needed downtown was because the project team
assumed greater use of mass transit. Mr. Hacker said yes. Ms. Taylor asked if police officers taking
automobiles home reduced the need for parking. Mr. Hacker said the project team used information
provided by a consultant. A member of the project team clarified that the parking numbers did not assume
a full take-home car program. The majority of officers do not take their automobiles home. If that
approach was adopted, the numbers could be adjusted. Ms. Taylor suggested that such a program reduced
the need for spaces. Chief Lehner acknowledged there were a number of police agencies that had such
programs. He said that the department would evaluate the cost effectiveness of that approach against the
cost of secured downtown parking. Mr. Hacker indicated that in all downtown options, the project team
assumed only patrol cars and administrative cars. City Manager Dennis Taylor pointed out the management
ramifications of a take-home automobile program, which would require a vehicle to be provided to every
officer.
Mr. Kelly suggested Option A, One Building - Full Consolidation, should be revised with regard to the
existing space diagram, which implied much of the space for civic functions was being tripled.
With regard to the consolidation options, Mr. Kelly thought it was worthwhile to note that regardless of the
option preferred, the community’s goal was to better integrate the police with the community.
Mr. Kelly suggested that Option A was negative for many community members who felt uncomfortable with
a significant police presence at City Hall, which would discourage them from coming to City Hall to do
business. He thought that those concerns could be mitigated through design, but he was comfortable
dropping options A and E. He wanted to keep Option D alive, with patrol functions separate but not
necessarily downtown.
Mr. Papé was unprepared to make a decision on the options because he thought more public input was
warranted than could be provided through a single forum. He asked for information about the location of
the front door of City Hall. Mr. Hacker clarified that the schematics were not building designs, but he
thought City Hall needed multiple entrances and needed to accept people from the street in more than one
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 26, 2006 Page 3
Work Session
location. There also needed to be a main entrance, such as at a public plaza. A visible information area
would be immediately inside the door. He envisioned a very active space and said that could occur in an
atrium-type space or in a mall-like setting.
Mr. Papé requested information on the square footage required for secured parking.
Ms. Bettman referred to the public comment and suggested it demonstrated a diversity of opinion that
reflected to a degree the diversity of opinion among councilors. She thought that was a challenge but also a
good thing.
Ms. Bettman noted the Police Commission outreach indicated a similar conclusion with regard to police
visibility in neighborhoods.
Ms. Bettman asked why options C and D were combined. Mr. Hacker said they were combined because
they were graphically the same and it reduced the number of sheets needed for the presentation. Ms.
Bettman thought the public might find the presentation confusing as there were differences between the
options.
With regard to the options, Ms. Bettman agreed with the public that the council needed to be as unanimous
as possible as it moved the project forward. Any option selected needed to be supported by the community.
Ms. Bettman said that at this time, she was in support of Option B. She said the option realized much of the
criteria.
Mr. Poling agreed with the remarks of Mr. Kelly with regard to Option C. He said the process was a
combination of public input and the chief’s vision for the future. He thought Mr. Papé right in that one
forum did not constitute complete public input, and suggested the possibility that the four options could be
taken back to the public. However, Mr. Poling did not think the public was very enthusiastic about either
option A or E. While he personally favored Option B, he was in favor of moving forward with options B, C,
and D and gathering more public input.
Ms. Ortiz expressed concern about the proposed approaches to police consolidation. She had hoped to see
something along the lines of a precinct model. She saw the rationality of Option B as it regarded cost.
Chief Lehner said that the option of precincts was not offered to the council as it was not affordable at this
time. He acknowledged the public’s interest in police visibility in neighborhoods. With regard to the
options before the council, none of the options precluded that visibility as the police left the police
headquarters and go to different areas for deployment. Chief Lehner acknowledged the symbolism of the
police’s location in a neighborhood, which could be realized through a very traditional and expensive
community policing model.
Ms. Ortiz said that many of her constituents never went downtown. She acknowledged that the precinct
model was expensive, but said the council needed to address the concerns of those who lived in the outlying
areas who depended on City services and who voted.
Chief Lehner pointed out the public safety stations were a big part of community policing in Eugene that
was an attempt to get at Ms. Ortiz’s concerns.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 26, 2006 Page 4
Work Session
Mr. Pryor said he did not think Option A was financially feasible. He said he also could drop Option E
from consideration as he did not think it fulfilled the criteria. He thought it reasonable to continue
discussion of the remaining options.
Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to adopt police consolidation options B, C,
and D for use in future planning studies until the council is prepared to adopt a single op-
tion in relation to an overall Development Plan.
Mayor Piercy called for council discussion.
Ms. Bettman was not able to support the motion because of the inclusion of Option D. She thought that
Option B came closest to fulfilling the criteria. She agreed with Chief Lehner that the substations were a
way of reaching out to the neighborhoods in an affordable manner. Ms. Bettman preferred Option B
because she thought it important that the police function be downtown. She said that options C and D were
very close to proposals the voters had rejected three times in the past.
With regard to a precinct model, Ms. Bettman said she understood that was planned for the future. Option
B did not preclude future adoption of a precinct model or location of a precinct in north Eugene, and was the
only option she was willing to support.
Mayor Piercy clarified that passage of the motion merely meant that all the options were on the table for
future discussion.
Mr. Papé pointed out that the page 15 of the packet did not indicate a clear public message regarding the
location of the police function. He did not want to take Option E off the table due to its low cost.
Mr. Papé asked if a second precinct facility located across the river would decrease the need for square
footage in downtown. Chief Lehner said it did in the out-years of the project planning. None of the options
precluded the development of a future second precinct. He agreed that such a precinct should be in north
Eugene, which was under consideration for a public safety station.
Mr. Papé, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to amend the motion by adding Option E. The
motion failed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Papé voting yes.
Mr. Poling said he was comfortable with dropping Option A because the public input did not support it. He
did not want to narrow the options to one because the other options could be used to generate input from the
public. Then the council could eliminate the other options. He thought it was premature to eliminate
options now.
Mr. Kelly also supported the motion because he wanted a balance in moving forward. He was least
supportive of Option D but lacked information about the cost differential. He supported the motion to get
more cost information about Option D.
Ms. Bettman indicated if Option D was removed from the motion, she could support it.
Mr. Papé called for a vote.
The motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Bettman voting no.
The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 26, 2006 Page 5
Work Session
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 26, 2006 Page 6
Work Session