Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/08/1985 Meeting - e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber April 8, 1985 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Cynthia Wooten, Richard Hansen, Emily Schue, Freeman Holmer, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Jeff Miller, Roger Rutan. The regular meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order by Council President Cynthia Wooten in the absence of His Honor Mayor Brian B. Obie. I. PUBLIC FORUM President Wooten said the Public Forum provided an opportunity for citizens to bring issues, concerns, or opinions to the attention of the council. No one wished to speak. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Proposed Opening of Willamette Street from 10th to 11th Avenues to Vehicular Traffic and Removal of the Pedestrian Cover at 10th and Willamette (memo, background information, resolutions, ordinance distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Elaine Stewart of the Eugene Development presented the staff report. She said the Downtown Plan includes implementation strategies for reducing the size of the pedestrian mall and indicates Wi11amette Street between 10th and 11th avenues should be opened for vehicular traffic. The council directed a task team composed of representatives of the Lane Transit District (LTD), Lane Community College (LCC), the Eugene Downtown Association, and the City established design criteria for the project and a developed a design for the block which meets the criteria. The design was reviewed by Don Miles, a public space consultant for the Eugene Development Department, the Downtown Association, LTD, LCC, and downtown businesses. Ms. Stewart suggested the council approve the design of Willamette Street between 10th and 11th avenues and a schedule for the project and modify the urban renewal plan to reduce the size of the mall and open the street. Bert Teitzel, City Engineer, presented a slide show which illustrated the project. The street will be opened to two-way traffic. He reviewed the recommendations of the Downtown Commission and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved a design which included a wide sidewalk which could be described as bulging on the east side at 11th on Willamette. The MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 1 -- street would be eight feet narrower at that point. Two parking spaces would be eliminated. The Downtown Commission approved a design which did not include the wide sidewalk at 11th on Willamette. Answering questions from Councilor Miller, Mr. Teitzel said the new, larger LTD buses in the first stopping area may not be able to turn onto Willamette Street from 10th Avenue if the wide sidewalk is approved. However, the other buses which will be in the traffic lane will be able to make the turn by using part of the bus stopping lane. The lane will be wider than usual so the buses can turn. LTD has approved the turn radius. Ms. Ehrman asked if the wide sidewalks will still be needed if LTD routes change so that buses no longer park on 10th Avenue. Mr. Teitzel replied that LTD changes have not been finalized. The Public Works staff recommended the sidewalks be wide regardless of where the buses park. A narrow sidewalk would only be 11 feet wide which does not provide enough space for pedestrians to congregate. Answering another question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Teitzel said the wide sidewalk is partly for bus passengers, partly for pedestrian congestion, and partly for an esthetic transfer from a street network to a pedestrian mall. - Replying to questions from Councilor Rutan, Mr. Teitzel said the estimated cost of the whole project is $400,000. The cost could vary 25 to 30 percent. The cost of the different sidewalks was not estimated. A suggested turn-out for the Athletic Club on the north side of 10th Avenue has not been approved and is not included in this project. Replying to questions from Councilor Bascom, Mr. Teitzel said the street and sidewalks between 10th and 11th avenues will look very much like the street and sidewalks between 7th and 8th avenues. There are bulges in the sidewalks at 8th Avenue. At 7th Avenue, there is a bulge on the west side. Responding to questions from Councilor Hansen, Mr. Teitzel said the sidewalks are about the same as in the "good old days." There will be 19 parking spaces on both sides of the street. However, LCC would like a drop-off area which might eliminate one or two spaces. Four more parking spaces could be added if the sidewalks are narrow at both 10th and 11th avenues. Councilor Holmer asked about the rationale used by the Planning Commission in its recommendation. He was told Ms. Anderson would testify later. Answering another question from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Teitzel said only schematic designs of the project have been made. The condition of the concrete has not been examined and there have been no discussions with the utility company. Ms. Wooten opened the public hearing. Mike Schwartz, 2390 Lariat Drive, is president of the Downtown Commission and represented the commission. He said the Downtown Plan had received extensive public review and the Planning Commission and Downtown Commission approved the opening of Willamette Street from 10th to 11th avenues in May of 1984. The council approved the opening in October of 1984. The project is to improve '- MINUTES--Eugene City Council Apri 1 8, 1985 Page 2 - traffic circulation and accessibility to the downtown, to stimulate business activity in the downtown, to indicate that Willamette Street is the major entrance to the downtown, to provide access to the Athletic Club, and to enhance Willamette Street's role as the City's main street. The project is to be started in mid-April of this year and finished by the end of the construc- tion season. e Mr. Schwartz said the turn-out space for the Athletic Club and the re-location of the LTD transit stations need additional study. He did not understand why the location of the transit stations is a problem. He said the original plan for the pedestrian mall did not include the block from 10th to 11th. When that block was added, the staff indicated the mall would be too large and that opinion has proven to be true. Mr. Schwartz asked the council to approved the design recommended by the Downtown Commission. The commission indicated that the wide sidewalk will detract from the entrance to the downtown, will make the area look congested, and will make parking difficult. Dorothy Anderson, 939 East 21st, is president of the Planning Commission and represented the Planning Commission. She said the commission voted 4:2 to forward its recommendation to the council. Three commissioners who voted in favor of the recommendation asked her to emphasize their concerns to the council. The commissioners were concerned about timing, the cost of the whole project, the cost of moving the LTD transit stations and how the move will be funded, signalization, and how continued contact between LTD and the City can be assured. She said the concern about signalization included both cost and timing. Buses and cars will be turning and going straight at the intersection of 10th and Willamette and pedestrians will be crossing the streets. The commission was told a computerized signal system will be installed in a year or two, but the interim system will not be as good. The commission had been persuaded that the sidewalk bulges are important to indicate a transition to the pedestrian mall and to increase pedestrian space especially for LCC students. Janet Calvert, 1962 Woodside Drive, is president of the Lane Transit Board of Directors. She represented the Board. She said LTD was concerned about the impact of the street opening on operations and passengers. The concerns involved the conflicts and safety problems of buses, cars, and passengers; possible delays for transferring passengers and continuing schedule and operation disruptions; and projected costs for resolving the conflicts, delays, and disruptions. She pointed out that passengers who miss a bus when transferring usually have to wait 30 minutes. Ms. Calvert said the effect of bisecting the transit station has not been resolved by the recommended design. An alternative must be implemented simultaneously with the street opening to maintain the effectiveness of the transit system and the City and LTD investment in the Mall Transit Station. In a letter, the LTD Board asked the council to approve a joint LTD/City Design Task Team to review the design for moving two bus stations from the south side of 10th east of Willamette to 10th Avenue and Olive Street, to e MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 3 e contribute the $24,000 estimated "local match" funds needed to relocate the two bus stations, and to direct the City staff to expedite the processes so that the street opening and the transit station relocation can be completed by September 1985. Ms. Calvert said the relocation of the transit stations and the street opening are equal components of the project. The disruption of LTC operations and the costs of the project to LTD and the City should be minimized. Mr. Holmer said the council had just heard of the signalization problem for the first time. Answering a question from him, Ms. Calvert said the opening and the relocation should happen simutaneously so that the disruption does not continue for a long time. Ms. Bascom said she did not understand why the opening would cause problems for LTD. Ms. Calvert replied that transferring buses may involve a "sprint" to the second bus even now. Changes will make it more difficult. e Answering questions from Mr. Rutan, Ms. Calvert said the two stations which must be moved are between the alley and Willamette Street. The design has not been finalized. The relocation might cut down the transfer time. Twenty-four thousand dollars from local funds is needed to match federal funds for the relocation of the LTD transit stations. The local "match" is 12 percent of the project cost and the federal funds are 88 percent of the project. Replying to questions from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Calvert said the sidewalk bulges will make the area in front of the customer service center more attractive. They will also make getting across the street easier. Ms. Ehrman said the bulges will provide space for people to congregate. Paul Colvin is Director of Campus Services at Lane Community College. He said the Downtown Center was created to bring college services close to the downtown. LCC supported the Downtown Plan, but it did not support the opening of Willamette Street. After the decision was made however, representatives worked with the Design Team to minimize negative impacts on LCC operations. Mr. Colvin asked the council to approve the design recommended by the Planning Commission with the wide sidewalk at 11th Avenue. Ms. Wooten asked Mr. Teitzel to respond to the testimony. He said the project as proposed would be completed by September 30, 1985. To do that, the design will have to be started next week, April 15, and contracts will have to be completed by the first of July. The computerized signalization will be purchased in FY87. The signals at Olive Street can be changed to mitigate the problem before the computerized system is installed. Replying to questions from Mr. Miller and Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Teitzel said he does not anticipate the cost of the project will be over $400,000. A "cushion" was included in the estimate. Tax increment funds will be used. The traffic lights at 10th and Willamette will be on poles with a mast arm. During construction there will be temporary poles. Mr. Gleason said the local "match" for the LTD relocation would be tax increment funds. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 4 - Answering a Question from Mr. Holmer, Mr. Teitzel said the cost of the computerized signalization system will not be changed by the opening of Willamette Street. Replying to Questions from Ms. Wooten and Mr. Miller, Mr. Teitze1 said the design proposed by LTD for the relocation of the transit stations has not been presented to the task team yet. City and LTD staffs have been working on it. It must be reviewed by several organizations. Ms. Calvert said the LTD Board wants a firm commitment about the relocation from the City when the street opening is approved. Mr. Gleason said the council must approve the project now if it is to be constructed this year because the design work must be started immediately. If the street opening is linked to the local "match" for Federal funds, the process might become tangled. He recommended the construction not be linked to the Federal grant. The council could direct the staff to proceed with the bid process and with negotiations with LTD. In that case, the application for Federal funds could proceed in its own time schedule. Replying to questions from Ms. Schue, Mr. Teitzel said Federal funds for capital construction of transit facilities are allocated annually and are available. Mark Pangborn, director of administrative services for LTD, discussed other LTD uses of federal funds. He said the relocation of the transit stations would be a good use of the funds. The relocation will have an impact on traffic and parking at 10th Avenue and Olive Street. The LTD Board wanted a commitment from the City to resolve the relocation problems. e Ms. Bascom did not think the City should pay for the relocation. She did not think many problems will result for LTD from the project. Replying to Questions from Ms. Ehrmam, Mr. Schwartz said the Downtown Commission indicated that the bulges at lOth Avenue signify the change to a pedestrian mall and the straight curb at 11th Avenue is a good design there. Ms. Anderson said the Planning Commission indicated the bulges at 10th Avenue are important for pedestrians. Ms. Wooten closed the public hearing and reviewed the issues before the council. Beginning the council discussion, Mr. Rutan said much time had been spent on the proposal, but there still seemed to be loose ends. He would have liked to receive proposed time schedules from the public works department and LTD. He would have liked more definite cost estimates. He would have liked a definitive design for the relocation of the transit stations. He did not like receiving different recommendations from the Downtown Commission and the Planning Commission. He thought LTD had some legitimate requests that should be worked out. However, he supported the project and favored proceeding with it. He thought the council should review the progress of the project. Mr. Holmer agreed with Mr. Rutan. Mr. Holmer said the council had not been told previously about the need for Federal funds or continuing LTD collaboration. He suggested action be postponed. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 5 - e - Mr. Miller also agreed with Mr. Rutan. He would like the project cost to have a "cap," he would like a strong commitment to work out the problems, and he would like the council to review progress on the project. He pointed out the council will not meet again until April 17. Mr. Hansen said the delays in resolving the downtown problems were compounding the problem. The opening of Willamette is vital to the revitalization of the downtown, he sai d. The estimate of $400,000 was really a "cap" and the council would be involved in the approval process. He did not think the wide sidewalks are needed for pedestrians. People in automobiles need to be attracted to the area and parking spaces are needed. He hoped the council would approve the project. He did not think the City should help to fund the relocation of the transit stations. The distance between the stations will not be elongated. Ms. Schue said she had never supported the project. She thought it is a waste of pUblic funds. However, she would not delay the project. Ms. Bascom thought the street should be opened because it will improve circulation to the downtown, add vitality to a dismal block, and will give a better southern entrance to the mall. She was glad the overgrown vegetation will be removed. She favored the wide sidewalk at 11th Avenue. She said the City should work with LTD to evaluate the impact of the street opening. Ms. Ehrman said she had voted against the street opening; however, she was concerned about its appearance. Traffic circulation and the provision of parking spaces were reasons given for the street opening, but the sidewalk bulges did not address those concerns. She felt the City should help mitigate the problems the opening causes for LTD and LCC. They have helped revitalize the block. She favored postponing a decision. Ms. Wooten closed the discussion. She said the staff had legitimate concerns about additional delays. The council directed that the project be expedited. She said $400,000 is the "cap" for the project cost and no general funds will be spent on the project. The opening of Willamette Street will mean that greater business and social interaction will take place in a smaller space on the mall. She favored the design with the wide sidewalks recommended by the Planning Commission. She suggested the council commit the City to work with LTD in the relocation of the transit stations. Ms. Wooten recessed the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Board of Directors of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency. Res. No. 9l2--A resolution of the City Council acting as the Urban Renewal Agency recommending modification of the Urban Renewal Plan by opening Wil1amette Street between 10th and 11th avenues to vehicular traffi c. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to adopt the resolution and approve the design of the street recommended by the Planning Commission which includes wide sidewalks on each side at 10th avenue and a wide sidewalk on the east side at 11th Avenue. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 6 e e: ~~ Answering questions from Mr. Miller, Mr. Gleason said he does not expect the bids to be more than $400,000. He discussed the bid and construction process. He said the staff had done a good jOb of coordinating the project through a complicated review process. He said that the council directed that the project be put out to bid this year. Better cost estimates could be made after the project is designed, but it probably could not be constructed this year if it had to be reviewed again by the council. If the estimated costs greatly exceed the budget estimate after the design work is done, the council will be asked to review the project again. Ms. Wooten said the motion indicated the project should be completed in the most cost efficient way and, preferably, for under $400,000. Mr. Hansen would support the project. He thought the wide sidewalks might restrict the turning of the buses. If so, he would like to know it quickly. He hoped the staff would work closely with LTD and LCC. He did not want additional parking spaces eliminated to provide parking for the buses. Mr. Holmer was concerned because there was no "cap" on the cost. He emphasized that the project should be reviewed by the council if the design work indicates the cost will exceed $400,000. Roll call vote; the motion carried 6:2. Ms. Wooten, Mr. Holmer, Mr. Hansen, Ms. Bascom, Mr. Rutan, and Mr. Miller aye; Ms. Schue and Ms. Ehrman voted nay. Ms. Wooten adjourned the meeting of the Board of Directors of the Eugene Urban renewal Agency and reconvened the meeting of the Eugene City Council. Res. No. 3910--A resolution of the City Council modifying the Urban Renewal Plan and the pedestrian mall by opening Willamette Street between 10th and 11 avenues to vehicular traffic. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to adopt the resolu- tion and approve the design of the street recommended by the Planning Commission which includes wide sidewalks on each side at 10th avenue and on the east side at 11th Avenue. Roll call vote; the motion carried 6:2. Ms. Wooten, Mr. Hansen, Mr. Holmer, Ms. Bascom, Mr. Miller, and Mr. Rutan voted aye; Ms. Schue and Ms. Ehrman voted nay. The first vote on the motion was 8:0. During the vote on CB 2816, Ms. Schue and Ms. Ehrman said they had misunderstood what was being voted on and wished to vote against Resolution No. 3910. Ms. Wooten accepted the change. CB 28l6--An ordinance concerning the Eugene pedestrian mall; amending Section 5.010 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. MINUTES--Eugene City Council Apri 1 8, 1985 Page 7 . e -- Council Bill 2816 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion carried 7:1, Councilors Wooten, Hansen, Holmer, Rutan, Bascom, Ehrman, and Miller voting aye and Councilor Schue voting nay, the bill was declared passed (and became Ordinance No. 19318). Ms. Wooten said it was appropriate for the council to secure its relationship with LTD in efforts to resolve the problems east of Willamette Street on 10th Avenue. She said transportation planning is important to the community. Mr. Hansen said the community is committed to a mass transit program. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to instruct the staff to work with LTD and report to the council on working agreements after monitoring and evaluating the changes caused by the opening of Willamette Street. Ms. Ehrman would support the motion, but she did not think it would address the concerns of LTD or LCC. The motion did not have "teeth." Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Wooten asked Mr. Gleason to present information to the council as quickly as possible about how LTD, LCC, and the City will work together, how the problems will be evaluated, and how the problems will be solved. Mr. Gleason said the task force will evaluate possible grants and funding and report to the council. Mr. Hansen hoped the staff will indicate the effects of the Willamette Street opening on the LTD and LCC program. Ms. Wooten recessed the meeting at 9 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 9:05 p.m. B. 1-1 Special Industrial District Revisions (CA 85-2) (memo, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Jim Farah of the Planning Department presented the staff report. He said the 1-1 Special Industrial District was adopted in 1982 in response to the Special Light Industrial Designations in the Metropolitan Area General Plan. After adoption of the 1-1 zoning district, about 700 acres of land was annexed and zoned 1-1. The council directed the staff to review the 1-1 district about two years after its adoption. The proposed revisions resulted from discussions with the BATeam, representatives of the Eugene Chamber of Commerce, and the Metropolitan Public/Private Partnership. Mr. Farah said the council had received a letter from 1000 Friends of Oregon which recommended adoption of the revisions with one change. The change was in Section 9.443(f) of the ordinance and suggested the words "Regional MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 8 - headquarters, including distribution and indoor storage" be changed to "Regional distribution headquarters, including indoor storage." The change would bind the distribution function to the regional headquarters function, clear up some ambiguity, and make the ordinance stronger. Mr. Farah had talked to Jim Saul of the Eugene Chamber of Commerce who had not reviewed the letter from 1000 Friends. Mr. Saul would probably prefer the wording in the draft. Mr. Farah said Mr. Holmer had suggested a change in Section 9.442(c) of the ordinance. He suggested the words "high quality physical environments" be changed to "park-like settings." Mr. Holmer said the term "park-like settings" is in the Metro General Plan and is a good description of the sites. Answering a question from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Farah discussed the change suggested by 1000 Friends. He said general offices are permitted in the 1-1 district. He also said the Planning Commission's recommendation had nothing to do with its consideration of a request from Taco Time. Ms. Wooten opened the public hearing. There were no requests to testify, so she closed the public hearing. e Several councilors commented on the revisions. Ms. Ehrman favored the proposed changes. Answering a question from Mr. Hansen, Mr. Farah recommended the change to Section 9.443(f) in the draft and said it responded to the intent of the Special Light Industrial Designation by maintaining the sites for special uses by large companies. Ms. Wooten also supported the changes. CB 2817--An ordinance concerning the 1-1 Zoning District regulations; amending Sections 9.015, 9.060, 9.442, 9.443, 9.444, 9.445, and 9.702 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill with the proposed changes to Section 9.442(c) and Section 9.443(f) be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Council Bill 2817 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill with the proposed changes to Section 9.442(c) and Section 9.443(f) be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed (and became Ordinance No. 19319). III. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL - A. Consideration of Legislative Subcommittee Minutes of March 8, 1985; March 19, 1985; and April 2, 1985 (minutes distributed) MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 9 e e e Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the Legislative Subcommittee minutes of March 8, 1985; March 19, 1985; and April 2, 1985. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. B. Call for Public Hearing (Booth-Fischer) (A/Z 83-4) (memo distributed) Res. No. 39ll--A resolution calling a public hearing for May 15, 1985, to consider withdrawal of property located on the southeast corner of 19th Avenue and Henderson Street and on the east side of Henderson Street between 21st Avenue and 22nd Avenue from the Glenwood Water District. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 8:0. IV. MAYOR'S TREE AND BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION Ms. Bascom will report to the council on the progress of the Mayor's Tree and Beautification Commission on April 17, 1985. V. COUNCIL QUARTERLY PROCESS SESSION City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Cathy Freedman of the Manager's Office said Mayor Obie and Mr. Miller cannot be present at the council quarterly process session sCheduled for April 17. Ms. Wooten did not want to hold the session from 5:00 to 7:15 p.m. on April 22 because councilors might have to rush through the meeting. After some discussion, councilors decided to hold the session the last of M~. VI. MEETING WITH DIRECTOR OF AVIATION BOB SHELBY Mr. Hansen said he and Mr. Rutan will meet with Mr. Shelby at 4 p.m. on April 9, 1985, in Mr. Hansen's office. He invited other councilors to the meeting. VII. LETTER CONCERNING EARTHWEEK Ms. Wooten said a draft of a letter from her to Janet Harris, Coordinator, Survival Center, concerning Earthweek April 21 to 27 had been distributed to the council. She said she would send the letter if there were no objections from other councilors. There were none. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 8, 1985 Page 10 e. e e Ms. Wooten adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. t'::4..t.fU.l_~...Y. .sU..bmltte~..,:,,",_ //"''<:,~, MiC'~':~~son -'. ,- w, Ci ty Manager (Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick) BLR:je/1695C MINUTES--Eugene City Council Apri 1 8, 1985 Page 11 M E M 0 RAN 0 U M e April 3, 1985 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Departments of Development, Planning, and Public Works SUBJECT: PROPOSED OPENING OF WILLAMETTE STREET FROM 10TH TO 11TH AVENUES TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND REMOVAL OF THE PEDESTRIAN COVER AT 10TH AND WILLAMETTE: PUBLIC HEARING--URBAN RENEWAL PLAN MODIFICATION, REDESIGNATION OF AREA FOR STREET USE, PROJECT DESIGN APPROVAL e The Downtown Plan, adopted by the City Council on October 31, 1985, provided policy direction for the reopening of Willamette Street between 10th and 11th avenues. A staff task team--composed of representatives of several City departments, the Eugene Downtown Association, Lane Community College, and Lane Transit District--studied the proposed improvements, developed design cri- teria, and prepared a preliminary design proposal. That preliminary design was reviewed by the Downtown Commission on February 26 and referred to the boards of EDA, LTD, and LCC for review and comment. Staff presentations to those groups took place on March 7 and 13 (EDA), March 12 (LTD), and March 13 (LCC). The EDA Board of Directors was wholly supportive of the project and the proposed design; the LTD Board continues to express concern over the potentially adverse impact that the opening of Willamette Street could have on efficient passenger transfers between transit loading stations located on either side of Willamette Street along 10th Avenue; and the LCC Board was supportive of the original proposed design. The matter was reviewed by the Planning Commission in a work session format on March 25, and was the subject of a public hearing and further review by the Downtown Commission on March 27. The action taken by the Downtown Commission following its public hearing was to recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council the modification of the Central Eugene Project Urban Renewal Plan to accommodate the reopening of Willamette Street to vehicular traffic between 10th to 11th avenues and the removal of the pedestrian cover in that vicinity; the redesignation of that portion of the pedestrian mall as a street; and the approval of a specific design for the project (a plan view of which is appended to the staff background memorandum, Attachment A, Map A, under separate cover). In terms of specific design modifications, the Downtown Commission recommended the deletion of the widened "sidewalk bulge" along the east side of Willamette Street near 11th Avenue (adjacent to the LCC Downtown Center). The commission felt that the sidewalk widening earlier proposed for that location would serve as a visual and pyschological obstacle to the flow of vehicular traffic onto Willamette Street from 11th Avenue. The Downtown Commission further directed that effort be made to plant additional street trees at appropriate locations in sidewalk areas on each side of the reopened street. - PROPOSED OPENING OF WILLAMETTE STREET FROM 10TH TO 11TH AVENUES TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND REMOVAL OF THE PEDESTRIAN COVER AT 10TH AND WILLAMETTE: PUBLIC HEARING--URBAN RENEWAL PLAN MODIFICATION, REDESIGNATION OF AREA FOR STREET USE, PROJECT DESIGN APPROVAL April 3, 1985 Page 2 -- On April 2, the Planning Commission received the Downtown Commission's recom- mendation and conducted its own public hearing on the project, the proposed modification of the Urban Renewal Plan, and the redesignation of that portion of the Pedestrian Mall for street use. The Planning Commission was also charged with responsibility for certifying that the project conforms to the general plan for the City as a whole. After hearing testimony from representatives of LTD and LCC, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council modify the Urban Renewal Plan to open the street and remove the pedestrian cover, redesignate that portion of the pedestrian mall for street use, reinsert the widened sidewalk "bulge" in the. design near LCC Downtown Center, and direct staff to continue working with the task force to resolve the conflicts created for LTD with the opening of Willamette Street, returning with a proposal which mitigates these concerns. The Planning Commission also certified that the project conforms to the Metropolitan Plan. The Planning Commission recommended reinserting the widened sidewalk at the northeast corner of 11th Avenue and Willamette Street because it helped to ~. identify this block as a transition zone into the mall area (similar to Willamette Street between 7th and 8th avenues), and because it met the objec- tives of the plan by creating a more pleasant environment for pedestrians and LCC students (Attachment A, Map B).. Several of the Planning Commissioners also expressed concern about proceeding with this project at such a rapid pace, feeling that additional time should be taken to develop more comprehen- sive solutions to the operational difficulties anticipated by LTD. Among the issues reviewed by the task force and discussed by both commissions-- but requiring additional analysis and coordination--are alternative locations for LTD transfer stations in the vicinity of the project; and a drop-off location or facility for the Downtown Athletic Club in the area of 10th and Willamette. City staff will continue to work with LTD staff to explore and assess options for the relocation of transfer stations.currently situated on 10th Avenue east of Willamette Street. Staff will continue to meet and work with the developer of the Athletic Club to attempt to identify a design sol uti on to meet the needs of tha tfaci 1 i ty. While these efforts to address the remaining LTD and Athletic Club issues and to identify feasible solutions will continue in the coming months, action by the council granting design approval, mOdifying the renewal plan, and redesignating that area as a street should occur by mid-April if the project is to be undertaken in the coming construction season (e.g., by the fall of 1985). ~ e PROPOSED OPENING OF WILLAMETTE STREET FROM 10TH TO 11TH AVENUES TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND REMOVAL OF THE PEDESTRIAN COVER AT 10TH AND WILLAMETTE: PUBLIC HEARING--URBAN RENEWAL PLAN MODIFICATION, REDESIGNATION OF AREA FOR STREET USE, PROJECT DESIGN APPROVAL Aprll 3, 1985 Page 3 The following materials are provided under separate cover: --Attachment A: Staff background memorandum, dated April 3, 1985, describing the design process and the proposed improvements in greater detail, including two plan view diagrams of the proposed project (Map A reflecting the Downtown Commission's recommendation; Map B reflecting the Planning Commission's recommendation). --Attachment B: A resolution of the City Council, acting as the Eugene Renewal Agency, recommending modification of the Urban Renewal Plan by opening Willamette Street, between 10th and 11th avenues, to vehicular traffic. --Attachment C: A resolution of the City Council modifying the Urban Renewal Plan and the pedestrian mall by opening Willamette Street between 10th and 11th avenues to vehicular traffic. e --Attachment 0: An ordinance concerning the Eugene pedestrian mall; amending Section 5.010 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. This ordinance would delete the subject section of Willa- mette Street from the area currently defined as part of the pedestrian mall. Staff will be present during the council meeting of April 8 to discuss the project in greater detail, to present the recommendations of the Downtown Commission and Planning Commission, .and to respond to questions from councilors. The council will conduct a public hearing on the matters outlined above, and will be asked to act on these matters. Action The actions to be considered by the council (and the council acting as the renewal agency) are as follows: --To conduct a public hearing on the proposed modification to the Central Eugene Project Urban Renewal Plan to allow the opening of Willamette Street between 10th and 11th avenues to vehicular traffic, and the accompanying removal of the pedestrian cover at 10th and Willamette; to redesignate that area of the pedestrian mall for street use; and to approve the project design. e PROPOSED OPENING OF WILLAMETTE STREET FROM 10TH TO 11TH AVENUES TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND REMOVAL OF THE PEDESTRIAN COVER AT 10TH AND WILLAMETTE: PUBLIC HEARING--URBAN RENEWAL PLAN MODIFICATION, REDESIGNATION OF AREA FOR STREET USE, PROJECT DESIGN APPROVAL Aprll 3, 1985 Page 4 --Acting as the Renewal Agency, to recommend to the council the modi- fication of the Urban Renewal Plan by opening Willamette Street between 10th and 11th avenues to vehicular traffic (resolution, Attachment B). --Acting as the City Council, to modify the Urban Renewal Plan to that same effect (resolution, Attachment C). --Acting as the City Council, to amend Section 5.010 of the Eugene Code, 1971, to delete Willamette Street from 10th to 11th avenues from that area defined as the Eugene Pedestrian Mall (ordinance, Attachment D). PL:ky/Ta20 ~ e e e M E M 0 RAN DUM e April 8, 1985 TO: FROM: SUBJ: Mayor And Council Planning Department I-I SPECIAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT REVISIONS - CA 85-2 I. BACKGROUND Issues of economic diversification and the level of inventory of industrial land were major considerations in developing the Eugene-Spingfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. As a result of those concerns, about 1,000 acres of land were identified for "Special Light Industrial" development. Of that total, about 700 acres, contained in five separate sites, are located west of Interstate Highway-5. All of this property is annexed to the City of Eugene, zoned I-I, Special Industrial, and serviced, i.e., all 700 acres are development-ready. The I-I Di stri ct, adopted by the Council in February 1982 after 1 engthy public review and testimony, was intended to implement the Special Light Industrial concept. At the time of the District's adoption, the Council directed that a subsequent review of the I-I District be conducted. e As a result of that direction, in January, 1985 the staff initiated discussions about possible I-I District revisions with representatives of the Chamber's Planning and Land Use Subcommittee, the City.s Business Assistance Team and the Eugene-Springield Metropolitan Partnership. The intent of these discussions was to gain insights into the I-I District's effect on potential business sitings at Light Industrial Sites. As a result of those discussions, the staff proposed to the Planning Commission a series of changes to the I-I, Special Industrial District. II. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On March 12, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on proposed revisions to the I-I District. No oral testimony was presented, but the Commission did receive written testimony from the Chamber Planning and Land Use Subcommittee (included under separate cover). In summary, the testimony: 1. Supported the proposed changes to the I-I District; 2. Suggested further clarification of the provision for "regional headquarters" Section 9.443 (f); and 3. Suggested further review of the I-I District in one or two years, after first determining if there has been sufficient industrial activity in Special Light Industrial Sites to warrant further analysis. e Based on testiomy presented on this issue, and its own deliberations, the Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council changes to the I-I District, as outlined in the proposed changes included under separate "-. cover. As part of its recommendation, the Commission also suggested that the council direct that a future examination of the operation of the I-I Special Industrial District occur after making an initial determination as to whether there has been enough industrial activity to warrant .subsequent review - e possibly in one or two years. Under Separate Cover: Chamber of Commerce Letter Draft Planning Commission Minutes of March 11, 12 and 25, 1985 Proposed changes Adopting Ordinance pljfmem8 e e . PROPOSED CHANGES e The following outlines the proposed reV1S1ons to the I-I District regulations. These revisions are based on experience in using the District since its adoption, and are intended to clarify and simplify its application in Eugene. Sec. 9,442(l)(c). In the Description and Purpose section, replace "non- manufacturing areas" with "high quality physical environments." It has been brought to our attention that some I-I uses may want to be near high performance manufacturing uses in a high quality physical environment. Sec. 9.442(2). Delete this subsection from the Description and Purpose secton because the uses listed there in general terms are now or will be more precisely listed in Sections 9.443 or 9.444. e Sec. 9.443. Replace SIC references in the Permitted Building and Uses section with the following inclusive list to ease administration and improve understanding. All the uses now in the Code will still be permitted except planned unit developments. They can be deleted because their counterpart, the industrial park, is provided for in Sec. 9.444. Items (c)I, (f), and (g) have no precise counterpart in the existing Code. Representatives of the private sector pointed out that these uses should be added because they are similar in character to other uses already permitted in the District. Finally, the building official and the planning director will determine similar uses (item h), not just the building official. The revised proposed list of permitted uses is: e (a) Accessory buildings and uses normal and incidental to permitted buildings and uses. Unless stipulated otherwise in conjunction with a particular use, this includes indoor storage and distribution when integral to a principal use on the site. (b) Day care facilities directly serving uses listed in this section; subject to Section 9.386 development standards. (c) Manufacture and assembly of: 1. Prosthetic devi ces. 2. Communication equipment, including radio and television equipment. 3. Electronic components and accessories. 4. Electronic transmission and distribution equipment. 5. Engineering, laboratory, scientific, and research instruments. 6. Measuring, analyzing, and controlling instruments. 7. Medical, dental, and surgical equipment and supplies. 8. Medicinal chemicals and pharmaceutical products. 9. Musical instruments. 10. Office computing and accounting equipment. 11. Optical instruments, including lenses. 12. Photographic equipment and supplies. 13. Watches, clocks, and related compnents. Cd) Offices, provided at least half the gross floor area of the building is occupied by a single tenant. (e) Printing and publishing. ( f) (g) ( h) Regional headquarters, including distribution and indoor storage. Research and development. Uses the building official and planning director determine are similar in size, bulk, operating character, location needs, external impacts, and employee characteristics to those otherwise listed in this section. Sec. 9.444. This section lists building and uses permitted in industrial parks. Delete SIC references and parentheses consistent with reformatting of the permitted use list above. Retain the descriptive material as the list of permitted uses in industrial parks except delete items (h) and (i) because they will be accounted for in the permitted use list above as items c(l) and (g). Sec. 9.445. No change to this section prescribing general privisions applicable in the I-I district. Sec. 9.060(a)5. This section stipulates mlnlmum lot area. Language needs to be added permitting industrial parks in the I-I District to be divided into less than 10 acre lots through site review approval. That was the original intent. pljfmem8 ,'-.... . e e . e e e M E M 0 RAN DUM April 8, 1985 TO: FROM: SUBJ: Mayor and City Council Planning Department WITHDRAWAL OF PROPERTY FROM THE GLENWOOD WATER DISTRICT On February 13, 1984 the City Council recommended approval to the Boundary Commission of an annexation request by Booth-Fischer for property located on the southeast corner of 19th Avenue and Henderson Street and on the east side of Henderson Street abetween 21st Avenue and 22nd Avenue. On April 26, 1984 the Boundary Commission issued Final Order 816 approving the request. Since the Council's action on this request, the GlenwoodoJurisdictional Study was adopted whi ch ca 11 ed for Eugene as the 1 ogi ca 1 provi der of services to the Glenwood area. At present, all City services are available to the Booth-Fischer site. It is now necessary for the co unci 1 to authorize the withdrawal of the property from the Glenwood Water District. Action Requested Adopt a resolution calling for a public hearing on the withdrawal from the Glenwood Water District of that part of the district annexed to the City of Eugene on April 26, 1984 by Final Order No. 816 of the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission. plhkme8