Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes - 10/25/04 WS MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall October 25, 2004 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Gary Papd, Jennifer Solomon. Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. ITEMS FROM MAYOR, COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER Mayor Torrey solicited items from the council. Mr. Meisner said he attended Eugene Library Foundation member Tom Wiper's funeral service earlier that day at First United Methodist Church. It had been a moving service. He thanked Council Coordinator Lynda Rose for drafting a sympathy letter to Mr. Wiper's family on behalf of the council, and thanked the councilors for signing the letter. Ms. Nathanson had no items. Mr. Poling reported that he and Mr. Pap~ attended the recent dedication of Bertha Holt Elementary School. He commended the good behavior of the children in attendance, who sat on the floor attentively throughout the entire ceremony, and noted that several members of the Holt family had been in attendance. He thanked School District 4J for inviting him to the dedication. Ms. Bettman said she consistently raised concerns about money available for preservation and maintenance being spent on other transportation projects, and she recalled that the council agreed to focus its metropoli- tan planning organization dollars on preservation and maintenance. She had opposed the Friendly-Monroe bicycle project at the Metropolitan Policy Committee because of that policy; the mayor supported it. The project, which was in her ward, appeared to consist of little more than signage. Ms. Bettman asked about the source of the local match, and why the project, which was originally allocated $240,000, now was allocated $175,000. She asked what happened to the rest of the money, and questioned the use of funds at a time the council was discussing creating a new transportation maintenance fee. Ms. Bettman asked when the new Community Task Force would receive the racial profiling task force report. She also asked about the date of the Human Rights Commission (HRC) meeting when the homelessness update would be presented, or if the council could receive a similar update. City Manager Dennis Taylor indicated he would follow up. Ms. Taylor had no items. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 1 Work Session Speaking to Ms. Bettman's information request, Mr. Kelly said the HRC had, as part of its work plan development, discussed the issue of homelessness but he was unaware of any presentation being planned. He reported that there was an HRC work group looking at the intersection between mental health issues and homelessness. Mr. Kelly reminded the council that the Human Rights Commissioners had established council contacts, and asked the councilors to return phone calls from their commission contacts because they were often seeking council input on particular human rights topics. City Manager Dennis Taylor had no items. Mayor Torrey noted the controversy surrounding the proposed Santa Clara Park, and said if the public did not want a regional park in that area he wanted to ensure that the council had a sense of that soon so that planning could begin for a park in another location to serve the neighborhood. City Manager Taylor indicated he would follow up. Mayor Torrey said he attended a Local Officials' Advisory Committee meeting and it was made clear to participants that Governor Ted Kulongoski's office would not request new taxes for operations, mainte- nance, and preservation from the State legislature. He said the council should be prepared to act on its own to maintain local roads. B. WORK SESSION: An Ordinance Amending the November 1999 Street Classification Map Adopted by Ordinance No. 20181 to Designate Collector Streets in the Crest Drive Neighborhood City Manager Taylor recalled that when the council last discussed the item, it directed staff to do further outreach to the neighborhood residents potentially affected by the designation of collector streets in the Crest Drive neighborhood. He said Public Works staff was present to discuss that outreach and the recommenda- tions of the Planning Commission. City Engineer Mark Schoening was present for the item. He introduced Gary McNeel of the Transportation Division and Rick Satre of Satre & Associates, who was retained by the City to assist with a public outreach effort to neighbors of the Crest Drive area because of his firm's expertise and independent status. Mr. Schoening reviewed the history of the issue, recalling that in 1999 the Planning Commission forwarded a Street Classification Map to the council. That map classified all streets in the city with the exception of the Crest Drive area. The commission recommended the council direct staff to conduct a transportation study in the area before further action was taken. That study had been done. In April 2004, the commission reviewed the results of the study and recommended that portions of Friendly and Crest streets, and Storey and McLean boulevards be classified as neighborhood collectors. Mr. Schoening reminded the council that in April 2004, it directed staff to perform additional public outreach to the neighborhood regarding the recommendation. Mr. Schoening briefly discussed why the City had classifications, saying a hierarchy of streets provided a framework for the comprehensive transportation system serving all modes of travel. The City employed a matrix based on five criteria to classify streets. Those criteria were quantifiable, measurable criteria, including such things as average daily traffic, modes of travel on a street and whether existing or planned, the length of a street, the spacing between parallel streets of like classification, and the connectivity to streets MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 2 Work Session with similar or higher classification. He acknowledged that judgment was involved in applying the criteria, particularly in situations where streets had yet to be constructed. Mr. Schoening reviewed the formats of the two public meetings held with area residents. Mr. McNeel discussed the informal meetings held with residents, during which residents asked City staff to review their traffic study. Staff met with a neighborhood subcommittee and reviewed the study, which was well-done and used sound methodology. Staff had done a walkabout of the area with residents to discuss improvements and how they fit with the landscape. Mr. McNeel said the residents' traffic study provided good data on only a few of the items the City's matrix considered. The study examined traffic volumes, peak periods, and included some intense origin/destination studies. He said some of the entry points used in the study were not considered entry points into the neighborhood by staff because they were mid-point entrances to part of the neighborhood. Ms. Solomon arrived at the meeting. Continuing, Mr. McNeel said that the study's conclusions were not significantly different from those reached by the City's study, and in fact reinforced that study. However, the neighborhood's analysis of the results differed from staff's. The residents believed there was a lot of through traffic using neighborhood streets. However, through traffic uses any interconnected street network, and through traffic was a large component of many areas in the community, particularly at the urban fringe. He said the residents concluded that if they could eliminate through traffic, the streets would not need to be classified as collectors. However, it was very difficult to change drivers' behaviors; if they were using the streets through the neighborhood, there was a good reason for that, and that could not be easily changed. In regard to the future street designs, Mr. McNeel said that like the residents, staff also wished to preserve the trees and open drainages in the area and to retain the narrow streets to calm traffic. The Crest Drive Transportation Study, included in the agenda packet, discussed context sensitive design, which was intended to accomplish those goals. Staff proposed to take a context-sensitive approach to the area in question. Mr. McNeel acknowledged that the City continued to receive feedback that it had not responded to all the residents' issues, and he said he would like to know what the City failed to respond to. Mr. Schoening discussed what happened if the streets were classified as local streets rather than as collector streets. He said the streets under consideration now serve as the primary access routes for emergency response to the area and would continue to do so regardless of classification. Traffic calming options were affected by those emergency services. The streets would be the primary routes for snow removal and ice sanding and Lane Transit District buses would still travel down Crest Drive and Storey Boulevard. The streets would continue to collect traffic from the neighborhood and carry it Willamette Street, 28th Avenue, and Chambers Street. Future street improvements for either classification would be initiated by either property owner petition or council action. The street design process would be context- sensitive regardless of the classification. Mr. Schoening said the street design was likely to be the same in either case; the difference between classifications was the City's assessment policies and the funding sources. Mr. Pap6 arrived at the meeting. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Schoening agreed with Mr. McNeel that public input did not result in a change to the scoring on the City's street classification matrix. He said the design workshop was the first step in the context-sensitive design process. Staff would use that work when it began to work on any street design. Mr. Schoening said that those residents who provided input to the City generally wanted the streets classified as local streets. He called the council's attention to a summary of the common ground reached between the City and residents, which was included in the agenda packet. Mayor Torrey solicited council comments and questions. Ms. Taylor said for many residents, cost was not their major concern about the classification of the streets. She asked about the difference in the cost to abutting properties between making the same improvements to a local street as to a collector street. Mr. Schoening said the entire cost of a local street was assessed to the adjoining properties; in the case of a neighborhood collector, the first ten feet of pavement width was assessed to adjoining properties. In the case of a 20-foot street, the amount would be the same. Ms. Taylor suggested residents would not save any money by having the streets designated as a collector. Mr. Schoening said not necessarily. Ms. Taylor noted residents' interest in more stop signs, which she supported. She asked if the streets' designation as collector streets would preclude the potential of a path rather than a sidewalk, and ditches rather than gutters. Mr. Schoening said no. Ms. Taylor asked what the City gained by designating the streets as collector streets. Mr. Schoening said there were more viable funding sources for collector streets, such as federal funding. Ms. Taylor asked what good the other funding did if the property owners paid for the pavement. Mr. Schoening said the funding could pay for the City's share of the cost of the project, including the cost of intersections and street improvements along comer lots and undeveloped frontages greater than 100 feet. Ms. Taylor asked if stop signs placed every three blocks would discourage drivers who lived outside the neighborhood from using the streets. Mr. Schoening said that was not what was found in actual practice. When stop signs were not warranted, drivers simply roll through them and they have no effect. Mr. Meisner said residents appeared to be less concerned about assessments and more about the design and classification of the street and what the future holds in terms of the consequences of the classification. He said the City spent considerable money improving 6th and 7th avenues and the Chambers Connectors so that residents will use those roads to reach the River Road/Santa Clara area, and installed stop signs at various locations in his neighborhood to discourage through traffic. That had not stopped traffic from going through the neighborhood. He averred that 1st Avenue was not accessible to neighbors ~at all" during early morning and evening hours. Mr. Meisner said he had talked about the problem with the Public Works Department but it had not been interested in slowing methods such as traffic calming, stop signs, or signals because 1st Avenue was a major collector. The classification did make a difference over time. Mr. Meisner understood the concerns of the neighborhood. He indicated he was not satisfied with any of the three options before the council. He did not think any of the options satisfied the needs of either the City or the neighborhood. In response to the questions of Ms. Taylor, Mr. McNeel said that the City had spent a lot of money on traffic calming, and much of that was retrofitted to an existing situation. The retrofits were expensive and difficult to do. He said that traffic calming was eligible for systems development charge revenues, but only MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 4 Work Session on neighborhood collectors. Any traffic calming on local streets was paid for through assessments to adjoining property owners. Mr. Pap6 commended the staff materials and applauded the City and neighborhood residents for trying to get together on a solution. Mr. Pap6 asked for more information about the traffic study conducted by the neighborhood. Mr. McNeel said the neighborhood study focused on several access points to the streets in question and analyzed the destination and origin of those trips using a license plate survey. However, the problem was that the study area was smaller than the actual neighborhood itself, meaning there were internal trips that were counted as external trips. However, that was not a major issue for the City. Mr. McNeel noted that the hourly peak period volumes in the neighborhood study were almost identical to the City's, suggesting the two studies were quite similar. Mr. Pap6 asked about comparative travel times. Mr. McNeel said the residents picked a destination that may or may not be the appropriate destination. In terms of travel demand and where vehicles were likely to be going, he believed a vehicle at the Chambers Drive and Lorane Highway intersection with the option of going down 28th Avenue to the east or south through the neighborhood was likely to use 28th Avenue because it was recently repaved and there was no impediment to movement. In the case of those residents who chose to drive over a heavily potholed street, it was likely they were going to the South Willamette Post Office and Albertsons, and all of those trips would realize significant distance and time savings by using roads through the neighborhood. Mr. Pap6 recalled his request for information about other neighborhoods on the periphery of the community that lacked collector designations. Mr. McNeel said there were no others. He noted other areas at the periphery of the community where streets had been designated as collectors for future purposes. Mr. Pap6 agreed with Mr. Meisner that the residents did not seem concerned about assessments at this time, but suggested that could change when assessments were actually under consideration. Mr. Poling referred to the study, which indicated the need for collector status is ;;at the margin." He asked what that meant. Mr. McNeel said the ranking in the City's matrix came out to be split between a 5 or 6 depending on travel demand assumed for the link. He emphasized that the reference was to a missing link. Mr. Poling referred to an article in that days' edition of The Register-Guard and asked if the City Engineer could determine design standards for unclassified streets. Mr. Schoening said the code allowed the City Engineer to determine the street classification for an unclassified street for assessment purposes. Mr. Poling asked if there was a significant difference in design of the street if designated a collector versus a local street. Mr. Schoening said no. He believed the design could be worked out with the residents. Mr. Poling asked if there was a standard blueprint for a neighborhood collector dictating the elements of the street. Mr. Schoening said yes, but through the context-sensitive design process, those elements could be changed. Mr. Poling said that the label of the street appeared to be the sticking point as the designs for either a local street or a neighborhood collector street in this area would essentially be the same. Mr. Schoening concurred. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 5 Work Session City Manager Dennis Taylor noted that due to the funding sources available, street improvements could also be done more quickly if the streets were classified as collectors rather than classified as local streets. He said that the neighborhood had trust issues, and he thought it would be best if the design could be established soon and the project funded and implemented to ensure that subsequent staff and councils did not try to change it. Ms. Bettman thought the context-sensitive design standards were a good idea and she hoped the Crest Drive neighborhood could be a test case. Ms. Bettman said that in spite of all the work the neighborhood has done, the staff recommendation regarding the street classifications remained unchanged. She understood why the neighborhood was skeptical about the City's future intent because she had a bad experience working on a transportation project with the City herself while serving as a neighborhood organization chair. She preferred to focus on how the City could get to a level of comfort for the affected property owners. Ms. Bettman thought the City could move traffic and emergency vehicles through the neighborhood and accommodate pedestrians and bicycle safety while protecting property values. Ms. Bettman asked about the percentage of through traffic using the streets in question as opposed to internal neighborhood traffic. Mr. Schoening responded that like in other areas of the community, the City did not consider through traffic, but rather considered average daily traffic. A study of the through traffic would be a much more extensive and expensive process. Mr. Kelly thought there was an ultimate value from a system and funding standpoint to designating some streets in the neighborhood as collectors, but he shared Mr. Meisner's discontent with the three options before the council. He was not ready to designate the streets as collectors at this point because of the trust issue. He found Ms. Bettman's comments about her experience to be instructive. Mr. Kelly said staff stated the street design would be the same whether local or collector, but given the atmosphere in the neighborhood he did not blame the neighbors for saying ~prove it." The City had not reached the point of classifying the streets yet. Mr. Kelly noted the draft administrative rules associated with the design standards were yet to be provided to the council. He suggested that it would be more practical and appropriate for the City to first get the context-sensitive design standards to the public for review and comment and then for the council to adopt them. That would create an official approach to street improvements. Ms. Nathanson believed that the neighborhood in question represented an aberration, not the rule. She pointed out that the City had completed its Street Classification Map with the exception of this area. She believed a street classification was an acknowledgement of reality. Ms. Nathanson asked if the City had ever ~turned back the clock" and decided a street that was functioning by objective criteria as a collector street should be reclassified as a local street. Mr. Schoening could not recall such an instance. Mr. McNeel noted that during the 1999 study, staff had decided against identifying a collector in the vicinity of Orchard, Villard, and Walnut streets because of the peculiar street configuration of the three streets directly parallel to each other. In another case, the matrix values for Garden Way indicated a designation of minor arterial, but the street was deliberately classified as a major collector to deemphasize the route for large traffic volumes, and the City did so by designating Commons Drive and Kinsrow Street as neighborhood collectors and included design options to give residents a choice of routes to use. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 6 Work Session Ms. Nathanson did not think the City had alternatives in this area as it did in the Garden Way area given the neighborhood topography. She did not think the City had the ability to change reality in this case. Motorists had no other routes to take. Ms. Nathanson agreed with Mr. Poling that the council was discussing labels rather than actual street improvement projects. Mayor Torrey agreed with Mr. Kelly that the City was not ready to go forward. He wanted the council to consider the issue in terms of what it wanted to achieve in the neighborhood. The City should design what it wished to achieve, and find a solution that allowed for that. If the City did not currently have the rules and regulations to achieve the design, it could change them, and the council could change the assessment criteria in a way that allowed the City to take access to different sources of funding. Mayor Torrey said such changes should not be pursued frivolously, but the neighborhood was unique and the issues worthy of further review. He commended staff for its work with the neighborhood. Mayor Torrey solicited a second round of council comments and questions. Ms. Bettman maintained that the streets in question met all the standards for exemption in the Arterial and Collector Street Plan. She believed the council could already affect the street design, and could choose not to pursue the plan amendments. Given the neighbors were willing to be assessed for a local street, the City could then move easily move forward with a local street design that met the criteria for safety and mobility. She thought that would be the best approach. Ms. Bettman asked Mr. McNeel to discuss the other criteria on the matrix and their significance. Mr. McNeel said that connectivity was one of the most important criteria. Each road in question carried a significant amount of traffic from small local streets and placed it out onto the arterials. He noted that McLean Boulevard was not raised as a topic of concern, and he suspected that was because it was fully improved to City standards already; all that was changing was the classification. Mr. McNeel said that McLean Boulevard gathered a considerable amount of traffic from the area between Lorane Highway and McLean Boulevard because most of those streets did not connect to Lorane Highway and tended to shed traffic downhill. Those streets that collected to Lorane Highway tended to carry traffic down the hill rather than up the hill because that way was more out-of direction. The road also carried considerable traffic to Chambers Street and 28th Avenue, but it was not much different from the other streets in question. Other criteria include spacing between similarly designated streets and the length of the segment. Speaking to the issue of the length of the segment, Mr. McNeel said that could be more than the street segment in question, and really needed to be considered as the route. In regard to spacing between similarly designated streets, Mr. McNeel pointed out a perfect grid would have equally spaced collector streets, but there was no perfect grid in the south hills. For that reason, one has to do some meandering, and staff concentrated on the segments that people actually used, which made the issue of average daily traffic important. Travel demand would seek the least line of resistance. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to extend time for the item by six minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kelly agreed with the remarks of Mayor Torrey. He said the City should design what the council wanted to achieve for the neighborhood. For that reason, he did not think the council needed to amend the map now. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Kelly asked staff to respond to the following questions when the council next considered the item: 1) when could the City Council expect to see the context-sensitive street design standards to be added to the Arterial and Collector Street Plan; 2) how the streets under consideration scored against the matrix; 3) why Crest Drive and Storey Boulevard were being proposed for reclassification; and 4) a citation on why stop signs would not change driver behavior. Mr. Pap6 asked if traffic studies had been done for Garden Way following the improvements. Mr. Schoening said no, as the improvements were only recently completed. Staff usually waited for a couple of months to pass before doing such a study. Mr. Pap6 suggested that the City produce design standards for the neighborhood in question and then the council could address the trust issue by passing an ordinance specific to the area and referencing the neighborhood association. He questioned if that would have an effect on financing. Mr. Schoening questioned why the City would want to limit an ordinance to the area in question as there may other neighborhoods where such an approach may be appropriate. Mr. Pap6 said that perhaps it would be the start of a new paradigm for how the City addressed such issues. Mr. Pap6 said that trust was achieved through consistency. He believed the council needed to proceed with the caution. Although he did not think the council needed to amend the plan at this time, it needed to do so at some time because the rest of the community was following the issue. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor regarding the types of traffic calming that could be used on steep collector streets, Mr. McNeel said the City could use speed tables in the form of raised intersections or raised crosswalk and bulb-outs and chicanes to shift traffic horizontally. He said that the City would not be able to use all the options contained in the Arterial and Collector Street Plan, such as diverters and speed bumps, because it was unlikely they would be supported by the emergency services providers. Ms. Taylor suggested the council could shift the priority of any local street improvements in the area to ensure that improvements were done earlier than otherwise. Mr. Schoening concurred. Ms. Taylor indicated her concurrence with the remarks of Mayor Torrey. C. WORK SESSION: Information Technology Strategies and Issues Information Services Director Randy Kolb provided a presentation on key strategies and issues related to information technology at the City of Eugene. Among the key strategies that Mr. Kolb emphasized were the City's information technology partnerships with other agencies, its investments in e-government, its investments in automated business systems, document production and distribution services, the AIRS (Area Information Records System) public safety and justice record system, and various projects funded by the City's telecommunications tax. Mr. Kolb noted the challenges facing the division in the form of adequate funding, the AIRS conversion to newer technology, the expanded access to data but increased risk created by less secure wireless technologies, the potential of additional legal challenges to the City's telecommunica- tions tax, and the anticipated Congressional review of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Mayor Torrey solicited council comments and questions. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Kelly commended the increasing number of City applications that were now available on line and the progress that had been made toward e-government. Regarding the list of proposed telecommunications projects, Mr. Kelly noted the development of criteria guiding expenditures in 1997, and said while the list of projects was good, he proposed that the council revisit the criteria soon given the amount of money in the Telecommunications Fund and the time that has passed. He asked when that discussion could occur. City Attorney Glenn Klein recommended that the council await the outcome of the petition for reconsideration made to the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the Qwest v. Portland case. That could happen in the next two or three months. If that happens, the case would be returned to the courts. He recommended the council discuss the criteria in the spring. Mr. Kolb noted that staff supported a council review of the criteria. Mr. Kelly asked if the criteria were adopted by the council. Mr. Klein recalled that the criteria were staff- proposed and reviewed and approved by the Council Committee on Telecommunications. Ms. Nathanson concurred. Mr. Klein said the criteria were developed in conjunction with the telecommunications ordinance because of a need to create a nexus between the funding and the projects, as required by Ballot Measure 47/50. Mr. Kelly said he had heard a constituent complaint that different areas on the web site have different designs and navigation styles. He asked if there was a project underway to change that. Mr. Kolb said yes, the City was conducting a Portal Project to achieve a more uniform look and feel. Ms. Solomon suggested the potential of having bi-weekly polls on various City issues on the City's web site, noting there were mechanisms to prevent double-voting. Mr. Kolb said that the City's portal would be capable of hosting such polls, and agreed there were ways of guaranteeing people only voted once. He said he would follow up on the suggestion with staff. Ms. Taylor asked if the telecommunications tax revenues could be transferred to the General Fund. Mr. Klein indicated there were restrictions on the funds, but he would have to do more research to answer fully. Ms. Taylor asked about the relationship of the telecommunications project list to the Capital Improvement Program, which was listed on page 33 of the agenda packet as an origin for projects on the list. Mr. Kolb said staff reviewed various plans to determine where needs might exist, and that included the Capital Improvement Program. He cited undergrounding of utilities as an example of such a project. Ms. Taylor wanted to transfer some of the revenues from the Telecommunications Fund to the General Fund so they could be used where most needed. Ms. Taylor asked if the Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department voice response system would mean the elimination of all human contact. Mr. Kolb said no, it would merely serve as another avenue for patron access. Patrons would have an option as to how they wished to reach services, whether in person, on the web, or over the telephone. The choice was the patron's. Ms. Taylor said it appeared to be another way of irritating people. Ms. Bettman agreed with Mr. Kelly about the need for the council to reconsider the criteria. She said the project list contained many valuable projects, but she believed there were one or two projects on the list that did not meet the criteria, such as the selective undergrounding of utilities. She also opposed the City's new cable program, ;~Working City," which she termed an ;;unentertaining commercial" for the City of Eugene, MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 9 Work Session and suggested that more advisory committee meetings, town hall meetings, and neighborhood organization meetings be cablecast instead. She wanted the projects to reflect the council's priorities. Ms. Bettman encouraged staff to revise the mission statement or operating principles to reflect the overriding objective that all public information should be easily accessible to the public. Mr. Kolb concurred. Mr. Pap6 determined from Mr. Kolb that the telecommunications revenues were to be spent on new telecommunications-related projects. Mr. Pap6 asked if that could be changed before spring. Mr. Klein said he would have to get back to him on that question. Mr. Pap6 endorsed staff's work on the portal project. He determined from Mr. Kolb that work on enhancing access to council meeting packets was in progress. Ms. Nathanson said e-government was difficult to accomplish, and she was very interested in what staff was doing. She said that more demands were being placed on local government and people wanted access to information more often and they wanted to have more choices about how to do so. That left the question of how to provide more choices and services in a time of limited revenue. Given population growth, the City had to do more with the same amount of money. She shared Ms. Taylor's concern about the lack of human contact, but was more comfortable it was one of many options as the City tried to be responsive to growing service demand. Ms. Nathanson said she was eager to see more progress in getting important and informative staff reports placed on the web. She believed that would assist in reducing the amount of time staff had to spend in responding to questions. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 10 Work Session