Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/10/1984 Meeting ,. ~ . M I NUT E S Eugene City Council/Downtown Commission Dinner/Work Session Rogue Room, Valley River Inn September 10, 1984 5:00 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor "Gus" Keller, Brian Obie, Freeman Holmer, Richard Hansen, Debra Ehrman, John Ball, Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten, Ruth Bascom, City Council; James McCoy, Donald Genasci, Roger Neustadter, Michael Schwartz, Anne Bennett, Hugh Pritchard, A. Dean Owens, Downtown Commission; Micheal Gleason, City Manager; Dave Whitlow, Assistant City Manager; John Porter, Elaine Stewart, Pat Lynch, Bob Hibschman, Eugene Development Department; Ron Sanetel, Design Consultant; Russ Brink, Downtown Manager; Tim Birr, City staff. Mayor Keller opened the joint City Council/Downtown Commission meeting at 5:35 p.m. He introduced Elaine Stewart, Community Development Manager. . . I. JOINT CITY COUNCIL/DOWNTOWN COMMISSION Ms. Stewart explained the downtown retail development process. She showed a e chart listing the steps that would lead to the appraisal of properties in the development area. Under the Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement, the first step requires that the Price Development Company contract with "anchor" stores. The developer would then do a market analysis. (The market analysis showed that the downtown area can support retail development.) The developer would then do desi gn analysi s. This step was completed in conjunction with Wurster, Bernardi, and Emmons, the developer's selected firm, and Lutes, Sanetel, the Development Department's design consultant. The fourth step was to do an economic analysis. This was completed by LeBanc and Co. The fifth step was to develop design guidelines. Ms. Stewart described the work of the subcommittee that formulated the design guidelines. The guidelines were to be presented to the council members for their approval at this meeting. The sixth step, after approval, would be for the architects to develop a conceptual plan. Thi~ conceptual plan would be reviewed by the Design Guideline subcommittee and referred for adoption to the Downtown Commission. The commission would then recommend the conceptual plan to the City Council as Eugene Renewal Agency. If the council approved the plan, they would authorize an appraisal of property in the affected area. The appraisal would be carried out by the Eugene Development Department. Ms. Stewart told members that according to the agreement with the developer there could be a gO-day extension of the agreement. The contract provides for such an extension if the developer is performing, and this developer is performing. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session September 10, 1984 Page 1 't 1 '"" '. II. DESIGN GUIDELINES--Ron Sanetel e Mr. Sanetel explained the process that the subcommittee went through to develop the guidelines being presented to the council for approval. Mr. Sanetel read the Statement of Intent from the distributed "Downtown Retail Development Design Guidelines." He explained and read the points listed in the guidelines. He explained how the guidelines would help the architects to develop a conceptual plan. He said it is a continuing process. The conceptual plan will be compared with the guidelines. The meeting was. opened for discussion and comment. Ms. Ehrman asked what was meant by "Make downtown more 'businesslike' than 'parklike.'" Mr. Sanetel said the guidelines do not address the issue of removing what is presently there. They are intended to direct new development and direct how the new development will interface with what is there. Mr. Genasci added that they would try to make downtown more pedestrian-oriented by having fewer trees and making it more like a street. Ms. Wooten asked what was the size of the area the developers were considering. Ms. Stewart said sh~ would not know until the plan was presented in October. The area under consideration is between Willamette and Charnelton streets and 8th and 10th avenues. Ms. Wooten asked how much demolition would occur. Ms. Stewart replied they had no specific information but that it would be a sub- stanti al amount. Staff had done a survey of the area looking for buildings of historical significance. Ms. Wooten asked if this would not require at least two parking structures. Ms. Stewart said it would. Ms. Wooten asked if the City would have to provide the parking structures. Ms. Stewart said not neces- sarily. The ratio is negotiable. e Mr. Obie asked if the public gathering space would conflict with-the present gathering space at Broadway and Willamette. Mr. Sanetel said this was a valid concern. He said the developer would most likely improve the present area. Ms. Stewart added that in the next two months staff will be looking at the design plan and reviewing the internal circulation and more importantly, the external circulation. Staff wanted to review how this project would fit into downtown. Mr. Sanetel said the developer knows there is opposition to an enclosed public space. He said the developer did not want to stop the project but did want to have input in the form of guidelines. Mr. Obie said they could not have a center without environmental control. If the council members had different thoughts they voice them now. ~ls. Wooten was unsure but did not think the downtown merchants would like an environmen- tally controlled mall. Mr. Neustadter cited the market study. He said an enclosed mall was necessary to recover the area's share of the market. He would not discourage the developer. Mr. Genasci said the developer was not going to present an enclosed suburban mall. He was going to consider all aspects of downtown and consider the external pedestrian flow. Mr. Pritchard added the subcommittee reflected the same concerns. The developer was told what is needed to produce a design that is acceptable. The developer did not see internal or external circulation as a problem; he was willing to go ahead. Mr. Owen cautioned members that merchants will want to be included in the mall. It was important that the project not be too large. They must not ,make the mistake of the present too-large mall. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session September 10, 1984 Page 2 Mr. Holmer thanked the subcommittee and praised their work. He said he had e concerns about underground parking as a requirement. He hoped they were not tying the hands of the developer with the guidelines. Mr. Sanetel said they hoped for the same. The development will be an ongoing process. Mr. Genasci saw the guidelines as the architect's "best friend" because limitations can be helpful. Ms. Wooten did not like the economic analysis and market analysis to be presented after the conceptual design. She wanted to know how much demolition would occur and how much rent write-downs and displacement costs would be. How much of the parking structure cost would be assumed by the City. She said they had a right to a credible framework of cost. Ms. Stewart said they would bring the cost figures to council after the site is identified and the concept plan is presented. Mr. Gleason added that the conceptual design allows everyone to figure out what it will cost. Ms. Ehrman wanted to know what stores were the anchor stores. She asked for an effort to get a retailer without the enclosed mall. Ms. Stewart told her the developer says he cannot get a retailer without an enclosed mall. Mr. Obie replied they had been down that road. He reviewed the history of trying to get just such a store. Mr. Obie asked City staff if there was some way they could streamline the governmental process and still have public input. Ms. Stewart agreed. She recognized that the developer needed approval from three committees or groups. At the staff level the department is trying to streamline the process. Ms. Ehrman questioned if the downtown merchants would want to pay for another e parking structure. Mr. Schwartz was sure with immediate development and proper anchors a parking structure would make sense. The parking structure would be cost-effective. Ms. Schue asked about public participation in the planning. Ms. Stewart said staff is working on this issue. The concept plan is four years away from construction. She did not want to raise public expectations. Staff is working on relocation. They are working to bringing the retail merchants together. Mr. Gleason asked members if they wanted major retail as a component in the downtown program. It was a policy decision. Acquiring a major retailer will be controversial and require tenacity. Members expressed their concerns about the design, about the cost-effectiveness, and about a major retailer being picked by an outside party. All members agreed that if the project was not commercially viable, they would not favor the project. However, they did not want to obstruct the continuing process. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the guidelines as presented by staff. Seven members voted aye. Mr. Hansen abstain . Motion carried. Beth Conant, Minutes Recorder - BC:jw/bcCM7a24 MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session September 10, 1984 Page 3