Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/10/1988 Meeting e e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room/City Hall February 10, 1988 11:30 a.m. PRESENT: Freeman Holmer, Ruth Bascom, Robert Bennett, Debra Ehrman, Jeff Miller, Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten (11:55 a.m. - 1:25 p.m.). ABSENT: Mayor Brian B. Obie, Roger Rutan. President Freeman Holmer called the meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene to order at 11:40 a.m. I. ITEMS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR, AND CITY MANAGER A. Meeting Change Ms. Schue asked if the February 15 City Council meeting can be rescheduled to a time when more council members will be present. Mr. Holmer instructed staff to schedule the meeting for another time. B. Eugene Urban Forest Draft Report Ms. Bascom said Ed Smith raised the issue of an additional 1,600 acres to the Eugene Urban Forest draft report that was recently completed. C. River Road Water District Ms. Ehrman asked if there has been an official City reponse to a letter from the Board of Commissioners of the River Road Water District. D. Skateboarders Ms. Ehrman said she received a telephone call from a resident whose property is being damaged by skateboarders. She said the resident suggested that regulations be distributed by retailers to individuals purchasing skateboards. Ms. Ehrman said she will refer the matter to the Commission on the Rights of Youth. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 1 - E. Urban Renewal Position Mr. Bennett brought up an article by Mr. Holmer that appeared in The Register-Guard addressing the issue of downtown urban renewal districts. He said he does not agree with Mr. Holmerls position, and asked if the council has taken a formal stance on what role the downtown area should play in economic development. Ms. Schue said the council has regarded the downtown area as a priority over the past several years. She said differences have arisen over the method to strengthen the downtown area. She noted that Mr. Holmer1s article was not inappropriate because he was not speaking on behalf of the council. Ms. Bascom said it is important that an article representing the other side of the issue be written. Mr. Miller suggested that the council explore the issue in more detail at another meeting. Ms. Ehrman said she agrees with Mr. Bennett on what role downtown should play in economic development. She said she disagrees with Mr. Holmer's view of having the public vote on issues such as tax increment financing. - Mr. Bennett said tax increment financing is an important part of downtown development, although it is not the only method of fostering development. He said the council needs to restate its focus for the benefit of council members and staff. Ms. Bascom said the council has taken two votes reaffirming its commitment to downtown. Mr. Holmer said both votes occurred during work sessions and were never repeated during a formal session. Mr. Miller suggested scheduling a work session to further discuss the matter. Ms. Ehrman said it was her impression when she asked that Willamette Street be put on the agenda that the council was ready to take a formal vote. She said the vote should be scheduled for a date when everybody can be present. Mr. Holmer said he has no objection to tax increment financing. However, because of the large amount of money involved, the public ought to be included in the decision-making. He said he would like the council to affirm its commitment to downtown. He said the council should also take formal action if it decides to sell bonds with only council authorization. Ms. Wooten said she is willing to discuss the issue again. e Mr. Gleason said staff will investigate scheduling a work session at the February 22 dinner meeting. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 2 e F. Parking Rates Ms. Wooten said she is interested in learning more about the proposed parking fee structure, in particular the meter rate increase. She said she would also like to know how important parking revenue is to the overall City budget. G. Council Committees Mr. Holmer asked that committees composed of only City Councilors be referred to as council committees and not council subcommittees. II. COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING LINCOLN SCHOOL SITE City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Mr. Miller reported that the committee met and discussed a range of options. He said Mr. Bennett suggested gutting just the inside of the building instead of razing the entire structure. In addition, he said the subcommittee is investigating whether the facility for the head-injured can be located at another location on the site. e Ms. Wooten said the subcommittee consulted Eugene Emergency Housing (EEH) about relocating on the site. She said EEH does not object to using about one-third of the western portion of the site. She said she is unsure about the necessity of gutting the building and would like the council to appoint a task team to look at public and private use options for the building. Mr. Bennett said he suggested gutting the interior of the building because he does not want to see the entire structure demolished. He said opening up the interior of the building would make it more marketable for development. Gutting just the inside of the building would also save the City money with regard to heating and cooling systems. Mr. Bennett said gutting the interior rather than razing the structure would also give the community more time to explore how the entire building might be put to use. Ms. Schue said she is still concerned about how much money the City can afford to put into the vacant school. She asked about plans for a playground on the western portion of the site. Ms. Wooten said the playground improvements that were completed several years ago have lost much of their value since the school was closed to students. She said there are playing fields at the southern portion of the site along 13th Avenue. She said Monroe Street Park is two blocks away. Ms. Wooten said the school grounds are moderately used by local children and people tending the community garden site. e Ms. Wooten said she also is unsure about the funding, although the City MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 3 e is obligated to investigate other funding sources at the State and Federal levels. She also suggested the City could enter in a joint venture agreement with private financers. Ms. Ehrman asked about input from the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department about the specialized recreation program. Ms. Wooten said the committee was told that the specialized recreation program will probably not be located at the site. Ms. Ehrman said she would like to hear more about the gutting proposal, although she said she is not interested in having a gutted building sitting idle for a long period of time. She said she is willing to put off any final decisions for up to a year. Ms. Bascom said she is concerned about how EEH's facility will fit on the site. Ms. Wooten said EEH is comfortable with the new site proposal and is having an architect draft more specific plans. Mr. Miller said the key to the issue is the financing. He said the council needs to look at the cost of gutting the building and waiting for a final solution versus proceeding with demolition procedures now. Mr. Bennett noted that one year is not long enough to wait for a final decision. City Manager Mike Gleason said it would take two weeks to re-evaluate the school for gutting costs. He said he agrees that the council should ~ eliminate the possibility of short-term use of the school. Mr. Gleason predicted that Federal funding attitudes toward housing will change in the next year. He said it is realistic to assume that in one to five years there will more funds available for projects such as Lincoln School. He suggested the council earmark some money for external rehabilitation of the building. Ms. Ehrman said the committee should continue its work on the issue. Mr. Bennett said the committee has finished its task, and said he would like more information from staff about gutting costs and future housing funds. He said it would not take too much money to rework the exterior of the building. Ms. Schue said she would like to support the project to save the exterior. She said, however, the project still does not have funding. Ms. Wooten said she supports the proposal to save the structure and would like staff to bring back information about interior demolition costs. She said she would like either the councills Lincoln School Committee or a task team to pursue the question of funding. She said she does not want biased information from staff in support of razing the entire building. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 4 e Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Eugene Emergency Housing for siting of housing project for head-injured individuals on Lincoln School property. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0:1, with Mr. Holmer abstaining. Mr. Holmer said he abstained because the City does not currently have title to the building. Mr. Gleason said he understands the intent of the council's action is that he should secure title to the property from Eugene School District 4-J. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to ask staff for information on gutting expenses and various options for Lincoln School, and that that information be susequently reviewed by the existing council committee. Mr. Miller said he is primarily concerned with the cost of gutting the building and how it can be safeguarded from vandalism. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. III. UNITED FRONT REQUEST CONCERNING HIGHWAY PROJECTS e City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Dave Reinhard, Transportation Engineer, gave the staff report. Mr. Reinhard said the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has issued a draft report of the 1989-94 Highway Improvement Program (HIP). He said ODOT will be conducting hearings on the plan February 25 at Harris Hall. Mr. Reinhard said staff members from Lane County and the Cities of Eugene and Springfield have been working to develop a comprehensive Lane County priority list for presentation to ODOT. The Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) has endorsed the draft list and is scheduled to act on a final version February 11. Mr. Reinhard said one proposal in the draft HIP is to retain $150 million over a six-year period to continue the State modernization program. Modernization funds will be targeted primarily for Access Oregon Routes. Mr. Reinhard said the Access Oregon Program is an effort to improve selected highways to promote tourism and trucking business. Mr. Reinhard said City staff and MPC members are proposing that US Highway 126 from the coast to the Cascade Mountains be included as an Access Oregon Route. He said Eugene/Springfield needs a main east/west highway connection for several reasons including its place as the second largest population base and airport in the state, its location near Interstate 5, and its importance as a regional service center. e Mr. Reinhard highlighted several other projects nominated for inclusion MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 5 e in the HIP. They include improvements to Franklin Boulevard in conjunction with the Riverfront Research Park; improvements to Highway 99N from Garfield to Beltline; improvements to the Harlow Overpass and approaches to 1-5; completion of improvements to Highway 126 from Walton to Noti; widening projects on Beltline from the West Eugene Parkway to 1-5; improvements to the McVay Highway from 30th Avenue to Franklin; and interchange improvements along Beltline at Roosevelt, Barger, and Royal streets. Mr. Reinhard noted that several of the projects include provisions for local matching dollars that demonstrate a high local priority. He said Lane Countyls total request for State and Federal highway construction money is $65 million for the six-year period, or about 7.5 percent of the total statewide requests. He added Lane County has approximately 10 percent of the State1s population and registered vehicles. Ms. Ehrman said inclusion of the Riverfront Research Park improvements in the HIP is raising concerns from other Lane County residents that they will lose projects because of it. She said the City needs to show its good faith in supporting other projects. She said there might also be a backlash that gas tax revenue is being used for the Access Oregon Program instead of preservation issues. e Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to request that the Metropolitan Policy Committee include the metro area highway projects in its list of projects to be recommended to the Oregon Transportation Commission at its February 25, 1988, hearing as the unified request for Lane County. Ms. Bascom asked where the Reconnaissance Project improvements east of Springfield on Highway 126 are located. Mr. Reinhard said the improvements are sited near milepost 29. Ms. Bascom asked what the outlook is for having Highway 126 included in the Access Oregon Program. Mr. Reinhard estimated it will be difficult to accomplish through a presentation at the hearing. He said the crucial step will be bringing pressure through the legislative process. Mr. Miller asked if there was any rationale for leaving Highway 126 off the original Access Oregon Program. Mr. Reinhard said it is unclear why any of the highways were either included or excluded. He said State staff has said the route proposals are not final and still subject to change. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Mr. Holmer noted that there is already preliminary design money designated for the Ferry Street Bridge project. He said he hoped that project would eventually be included for construction funding. e M1NUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 6 e IV. WORK SESSION: FUTURE LIBRARY PROJECT City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Pat Decker, Planning Department, presented the staff report. She said the council is scheduled to take formal action on the report at its February 22 meeting. Ms. Decker reviewed a four-step process staff has outlined for the council to address the scope, financing, public review, and design of the library process over the next ten months. The four-step process calls for the entire council to first discuss the scope from March through May. A council subcommittee will address the financing question during the second step from June through September. Public input is the third step and has been scheduled for sometime in September and October. Project design, step four, will take place from October through December. It will incoporate decisions reached in the scope and financing discussions and will set forth components for the future library design. March 1989 has been scheduled for a public vote on financing issues if one is required. Ms. Decker cautioned that the council should not be too specific about design matters so the public does not find itself voting on the actual design of the library. Ms. Bascom said it is a good idea to establish a subcommittee to handle the specific items of the processls second stage (financing). Ms. Schue e and Ms. Ehrman said they also approve of the subcommittee proposal. Mr. Holmer said the project scope is not as comprehensive as he thought it was going to be, and does not include the question of site location. He asked if the site issue should be included as part of the scope discussions. Ms. Decker said the scope discussions are the appropriate place to address the site question. She said council has not formally indicated to staff any questions on the site recommendation. Mr. Holmer asked council members for their opinion on whether the council should consider the question of site. Ms. Ehrman said she does not want to consider it again because of her tenure on The Future of Our Library Committee. Mr. Miller said it is important for the council to come to a conclusion on the site as part of its discussions on the scope of the library. Mr. Holmer asked if other people should be added to the process. Ms. Decker said the process is already set up to incorporate comments from groups such as the Downtown Commission and Library Board. Ms. Ehrman suggested the process should include input from the Eugene Downtown Association. Ms. Schue said she hopes the Broadway vacation discussions will include representatives from the Public Works Department. Ms. Decker added the scope discussions will include the Broadway vacation issue. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 7 e Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the council process for continued work on the Future Library Project as presented. In response to a question from Mr. Miller, Ms. Decker said the scope discussions will include reviewing the basic assumptions of the report. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Ms. Decker asked the council to submit questions, opinions, and direction to staff so it can provide more information. Mr. Miller said the council will encounter future problems if it does not examine the basic assumptions underlying the new library proposal. Ms. Bascom said at some point the council will have to trust the direction and work of The Future of Our Library Committee. Mr. Bennett said it is appropriate for the council to examine the entire issue because of the amount of money involved, and for the councills own credibility. He said he does not want any review by the council to take away from the work already done by the committee. Mr. Bennett said he would like to review phasing, site criteria, and parking issues. He said he was not impressed with the consultant report. He said the consultant lobbied for library expansion in such a way that he questioned the consultant's objectivity. e Mr. Bennett said he is approaching the new library project as he would approach any building project where there is not enough money. He said the community does not have $20 to $25 million to spend on a new library, and he is asking himself what compromises should be made. Ms. Wooten said her main concerns will be construction and operation financing, the size of the library, and the recommended parking structure. She said she supports separating the cost of the parking structure from the costs of the library itself. She said she is also fearful about creating too many expectations in the community about when the library can be constructed. Ms. Ehrman said she views the new library as a long-term project. She said she is optimistic about the new library, although she is not sure when it will be completed. Ms. Decker said staff is still researching the question of how much property will have to be acquired if parking is restricted to only surface spaces. Ms. Schue said the new library's parking structure should also serve the broader downtown area. Ms. Bascom added she has heard more criticism of the parking aspect than any other part of the report. Ms. Bascom said she would like to review the access issues of the site. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 8 e e e Mr. Miller said the council appreciates the work that has been done by staff and The Future of Our Library Committee. Mr. Gleason noted that the focus of the library project is on new construction. He asked if the council wants additional analysis of other existing structures. Ms. Ehrman said the council should wait until the scope discussions to decide that question. Ms. Decker said she assumed the City is not interested in exploring other existing structures for the new library. Ms. Ehrman added the library committee did investigate and eventually ruled out other structures already in public ownership. Mr. Gleason said he will provide the council with a general analysis of existing structures, such as the Sears building. Ms. Wooten suggested that staff explore the feasibility of applying for Oregon Lottery funds. The meeting was adjourned at 1:25 p.m. to February 17, 1988. Respectfully submitted, .. . """'"" ~~~a~l Micheal Gleason, City Manager (Recorded by Todd Nissen) mncc021088 MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 1988 Page 9