Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/10/1985 Meeting M I NUT E S - Eugene City Council Work Session--Dinner Session Treehouse Restaurant June 10, 1985 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Cynthia Wooten, Richard Hansen, Emily Schue, Freeman Holmer, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Roger Rutan, Jeff Miller. His Honor Mayor Brian B. Obie called the work session to order at 6:00 p.m. I. RIVERFRONT PARK STUDY - Jim Farah of the Planning Department discussed the draft of the Riverfront Park Study and the process used to develop it. He noted the council had commissioned the study. He reviewed the boundaries of the study area which contains about 141 acres. About 62 percent of the study area is owned by the University of Oregon, the Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB), and Agripac. Mr. Farah said the study focuses on the University-owned property. Discussing the policies in the study, he said the land use policies indicate a balance of uses which emphasize University-related research and manufacturing and which do not conflict with other development goals of the City. Some commercial and multi-family housing are included. The transportation policies indicate addi- tional access points to the park will be needed. The environmental policies indicate the protection of the riparian strip by means of a management plan, the movement of the bike path, and the protection of the Millrace. Other policies indicate that the closure of 8th Avenue will be considered in order to permit Agripac to operate as efficiently as possible and that EWEB's head- quarters will continue at its present facility until the EWES Board decides to move the operation. Mr. Farah said the council will consider funding the public improvements to the park separately from the study. The transportation improvements will total about $6 to $7 million. A tax increment district is one possible method of financing. Mr. Farah said the Planning staff has discussed the study at six or seven meetings in the community attended by about 100 people. The Planning Commis- sion held a public hearing on the draft study which was attended by about 75 people. The commission is now considering the issues raised at the hearing and will recommend modifications to the draft to the council. Mr. Farah reviewed the issues raised in the public testimony. People who testified agreed that the concept of the study is important for the City and the University. There was some criticism of the process used to develop and - - review the study, but most of the criticism involved the development of the ground leases by the University. Some testimony indicated that consideration should be given to other sites. Mr. Farah discussed the advantages and dis- advantages of the other sites. Some testimony was concerned with the con- straints of the site, such as the railroad and existing development. Answering questions, Mr. Farah said the area north of the railroad tracks will be phase 1 of the development. It contains 35 acres. The proposed new science building for the University will probably be located south of Franklin Boulevard. Mayor Obie said the cost of the building includes a bike/pedestrian underpass under Franklin Boulevard. Responding to other questions, Mr. Farah said representatives of Southern Pacific Railroad indicated they would sell some land at the market rate, but they do not want development too close to the tracks. Many activites are not affected by vibration from the trains, and there are architectural methods of alleviating the effects of vibration. Railroad representatives have said that any new crossings over the tracks must be separated-grade crossings. Probably permission can be obtained from the Public Utility Commissioner (PUC) for the separated-grade crossings. A connector from Centennial Boulevard was not considered because it would have to go through park land and a new bridge system would be needed. There probably will be "down and Up" problems with the Broadway extension only. The other underpasses will have grades similar to the bike underpass. Mr. Holmer said the existing bike underpass is quite abrupt. e Answering other questions, Mr. Farah said permission for a railroad underpass will be requested from the PUC by the City Public Works Department in the design phase of a street extension. The railroad company will be a partici- pant in the hearings before the PUC. Permission for accesses to Franklin will also have to be received from the Oregon Department of Transportation. The Ferry Street Bridge will not be modified to accommodate the Riverfront Park development, but the development will add an impetus to the reconstruction of the bri dge. Continuing his discussion of the testimony, Mr. Farah said some testimony indicated too many commercial and residential uses and too few University- related research and manufacturing uses might be developed. He said the Planning Commission is considering a limitation on the non-University-related u se s . Ms. Wooten referred to Planning Commission consideration of a 50 percent minimum gross floor area for University-related activities. She did not want future uses to be inhibited by the "University-related" requirement. She said some good industrial development might not be University-related. She dis- cussed phasing and said she did not want a first phase of less than 50 percent University-related activities to be denied if a later phase would contain many University-related uses. e MINUTES-Eugene City Council June 10, 1985 Page 2 e - e Mr. Hansen suggested the University should decide what is "University- related. II He noted some of the property is not owned by the University. He said too much emphasis on a University relationship might be detrimental. He is sure the development will not be a retail one. Mr. Holmer noted that a developer could construct a big, cheap building for University-related activities, and then develop other uses. Ms. Wooten agreed with Mr. Holmer's concern. Ms. Anderson said the Planning Commissioners want the first phase to have enough University-related activities to make the development meet the objectives of the study because of the cost of public improvements. The commissioners do not want the commercial and residential development to be first. Mayor Obie was concerned about the restrictions the commission was con- sidering. He said some industries might not be University related when they locate in the park, but they might develop University relationships later. Ms. Wooten discussed the use percentages in the Riverfront Park Study for the whole development. She said the committee that developed the study dealt with the uses that would be permitted. She noted the concerns of the Planning Commission might be covered in the lease the University gives the master developer. Mr. Holmer wondered about the City's role in the development. Responding, Ms. Wooten said the master developer candidates seem to want to work with the City and seem to be familiar with public planning. They also want market flexibility. The study indicates City concerns without dictating the sequence of development. Answering questions from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Farah said the proposed SD, Special Development District, has a height restriction of 60 feet. There are no density standards. He expects the residential development to be expensive housing. Ms. Wooten said the space for incubator industries might include living space. Continuing the discussion, Mr. Farah said testimony related to the environment concerned the required setback from the river and the disposal of toxic wastes. He said the Planning Commission is considering several setback arrangements. The commission knows that Councilors Wooten and Holmer are working on a city-wide ordinance concerning toxic wastes. Ms. Wooten said an ordinance concerning toxic wastes will be ready for council consideration in September. It will be before development in the Riverfront Park begins. Responding to questions, Mr. Farah said the Parks Department Riverfront Study indicated that the bike path should be moved closer to the river. That study advocated a rural riverfront. The Riverfront Park Study provides for both a rural and urban riverfront. MINUTES-Eugene City Council June 10, 1985 Page 3 e e e Continuing the discussion of the testimony, Mr. Farah said concern was expressed about the 25 to 30 percent modal split goal, the lack of a specific mention of incubator industries as a use, the coordination of the proposed Metro Plan amendment, and an extension of the University's ban on classified research. Mr. Farah said the City cannot determine what is classified research. Much proprietary research is also secret. Ms. Ehrman wondered what the City is obligated to do when it adopts the study. She wondered if the Riverfront projects will have priority over existing Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects. Mr. Gleason responded that all Riverfront projects will have to be in the CIP. Projects are often funded by a loan from the county and/or Bancroft bonds or a tax increment district. The council will have to develop special funding that is needed. Responding to a comment of Mr. Holmer, Ms. Wooten said she is concerned about the lack of a regular way for City representatives to meet with officers of the non-profit corporation who were appointed by the University. She wants the City to know what is going on and be able to take part in dialogues. She would like to have a City representative on the Board of Directors of the non-profit corporation. The City Attorney indicated such an arrangement would be legal. Mr. Hansen wondered why the University, which is the land owner, would want a City representative on the Board of Directors. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. ~ (Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick) 1764C MINUTES-Eugene City Council June 10, 1985 Page 4