Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/14/1985 Meeting M I NUT E S - Eugene City Counci1--Dinner/Work Session Studio B, C--Eugene Hilton October 14, 1985 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Cynthia Wooten, Richard Hansen, Jeff Miller, Debra Ehrman, Freeman Holmer, Emily Schue, Roger Rutan, councilors; City Manager Mike Gleason, Assistant City Manager Dave Whitlow, ASD Director Gary Long, Public Information Director Barb Bellamy, Finance Director Warren Wong; Elaine Stewart, Scott Lue11 , Eric Jungjohann, Jim McCoy, EDD; Dean Owens, Ann Bennett; Jim Boyd, The Register-Guard; Tracy Berry, KEZI. Ms. Wooten opened the meeting and reviewed the agenda items. She asked members to hold questions until after the presentations. I. PARKING PROGRAM A. Presentation e Ms. Stewart described the packet of background information distributed to councilors and to the Downtown Commission. She sai d a copy of the Downtown Plan implementation priorities also would be distributed, and she added that the parking program redesign and capital improvements to the Overpark were two of the priorities approved by the Downtown Commission, the Planning Commis- sion, and the City Council. She said the Downtown Commission had looked at parking in the area of policy direction, which was being forwarded to the council as the Urban Renewal Agency, and in the area of administrative recommendations, which were being implemented by staff. She said administrative changes included moving parking management closer to the management of downtown development and the commis- sion, increasing the employee permits available, and examining bulk permit sales for companies and organizations. Long-term permits to leasing agents also were being considered. Ms. Stewart said the Downtown Commission and staff had focused on the need for the parking program to work as a development tool for downtown as a retail and office center and to be financially self-sustaining. She said the commission was ready to forward a recommendation to the council and Mr. McCoy would describe that recommendation. B. Process Description Mr. McCoy said the process of gathering public input on parking had begun in - March or April, and a policy group made up of members of the commission, the MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 1 l( Downtown Association, and others had met and worked on the material. He said e information was gathered about finances and from other cities as well as from people downtown. He said the scenario developed was that of restricted free parking, in which the initial two hours of parking would be free and a fee would be charged after that. He said that plan appeared to make sense and to solve both the financial and enforcement problems. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. McCoy said the two-hour limit would apply to one spot, so motorists could conceivably move their cars every two hours to avoid paying. He added that enforcement would not be completely successful but he knew of no system that would be entirely enforceable. Mr. McCoy said the parking program policy had been adopted by a vote of 8-2, with the two representatives of the Eugene Downtown Association opposing it. He said those members had strongly favored free parking and had submitted a proposal for increasing taxes in order to maintain free parking. He also said a majority of the committee had been convinced that retailers would favor the increased tax and continuation of free parking. Mr. McCoy described member- ship of the committee, and he said it had agreed that if enough retailers were willing to support the tax increase, unlimited free parking could be continued. Mr. Miller asked whether all property owners would pay the same amount, regardless of proximity to parking lots. Mr. McCoy said they did within the ODD, although the tax scheme was fairly complex and had to do with gross receipts and ad valorem. e Ms. Wooten asked about the amount of increase required to make the program self-sustaining, and Mr. McCoy said it ranged from $2.41 to $3.41 per $1,000 gross receipts, making it about a 40 percent increase. Ms. Wooten asked whether retailers had agreed to that. Mr. McCoy said EDA had done a survey of its mailing list, and retailers who support the increase had been listed as part of the testimony at the DTC public hearing. He also said another survey had been done, and those results were not available yet, but most of the major retailers, including The Bon, had supported continuation of the free parking program and the tax increase. Responding to a question from Mr. Holmer, Mr. McCoy said professional offices did not pay on gross receipts at present because the professional tax had been eliminated in order to increase development. Mr. McCoy said the Downtown Commission had not reached any decision yet, but he expected it to recommend continuation of the free program, but with a definite time limit. He explained that if site development were to occur on any sites actively marketed by the City, the free parking program would become obsolete. Responding to questions from Ms. Wooten, Mr. Luell said EDA had done one survey of 28 members. Later it had done a second survey of the entire member- ship, and that was the list submitted at the DTC hearing, but that information was not included in the council packet. He said the options had been presented neutrally and the "noes" on the list could be interpreted as e favoring the restricted parking program. MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 2 Ms. Bennett said she thought about 40 percent had responded to the final e survey, and about 70 percent of those had favored the increase in the gross receipts tax. She also said some concern had been expressed by the commission that the survey be redone to include those not responding previously. Mr. McCoy said he thought the commission was sensitive to the importance of free parking downtown but also understood that free parking was not a good long-term solution. Mr. Miller asked whether the marketing of downtown lots was a policy shift. Mr. Gleason said the lots originally had been purchased as interim parking lots and were not intended for long-term use. Mr. Miller said he would like to see a comprehensive scenario of what was being pursued. Mr. Gleason said all of the properties assembled by the Urban Renewal Authority had a pros- pectus for development, and the retail proposal had been included for eight or nine years. He added that he thought parking structures eventually would be created to compensate for parking losses because of development. Mr. Miller said he still would like to see the options. Ms. Wooten said she did not think it was known exactly what was being pursued, but the property was being actively marketed. Ms. Stewart said staff were following the Urban Renewal Plans which called for development of all sites, and she added that the commission would be amending and updating the plan in the next six months to bring it into compliance with State regulations and the Downtown Plan. She said no policy shift was expected, but the type of development, along with the process and tools to be used, might be clarified. Mr. Gleason said the plan had been adopted eight or nine years ago and a formal readoption of the Urban Renewal Plan would be brought back to City Council. Mr. Miller said he would e like to see a specific plan. Mr. Hansen asked whether the survey had included the option of a two-hour free period followed by validation thereafter. Mr. Luell said two options had been presented--continuation of the free program by increasing the gross receipts tax by $1 and a two-hour free system with payment required thereafter. He also said some discussions had been held concerning validation. Ms. Schue said the original Urban Renewal Plan had intended that parking eventually be in garages, and that undeveloped property be used as an interim solution until it was gradually sold off. She said development had been slower than expected, and the lots were now becoming fixed in people1s minds as parking lots. Ms. Ehrman said a broad spectrum of participants had been included in the forum, and she agreed that EDA's proposal did not address the problems of downtown parking. Mr. McCoy said some differences to the existing system were planned, including metering parking on streets and in the lot at the corner of 10th and Olive near the Atrium and Sears, and he added that there appeared to be good support for meters. Mr. Holmer asked whether the increase to $3.41 would eliminate all concern about deficits in maintenance and operation. Mr. McCoy said projections were included for revenue from metered on-street parking, and the increase appeared e to take care of the financial problem for a year or two. He said he thought MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 3 it was difficult to imagine the continuation of the program beyond two years e because of the pressure expected on the system. He also said he saw the program as an interim solution moving toward a paid program and added that he thought some of the downtown businesses understood that. Mr. Hansen asked whether any difference could be seen in turnover with meters and without them. Mr. McCoy said he did not know what the figures were, but he thought a large percentage of shoppers would stay for less than two hours. Ms. Wooten asked about other cities' programs and asked for examples of mid- -size cities in which a limited parking program worked well and was cost- -effective. Staff said Santa Barbara, California, and Yakima, Washington, had similar programs. Ms. Bennett said she thought the commission probably would recommend another survey and a closer evaluation of the financial affects of both proposals, including a sum for replacement and maintenance of parking garages. Ms. Wooten asked how much enforcement capability would be needed to enforce on-street meters. Ms. Stewart said enforcement costs of the present program were high and the program was unenforceable. She sa i done f1 aw of the sys tern would be that demand would be higher than supply and the tax increase did not deal wi th that. Ms. Stewart also said the survey had indicated that those retailers closest to the lots were the most willing to pay the increase, and the commission had identified no parking for the retailers on the south end of the lot at 11th and Willamette. e Mr. Rutan asked whether the financial implications included everything. Mr. McCoy said the EPAC garage was not included, but the Overpark was. Mr. Holmer asked what type of property tax would be needed to spread the tax among all citizens. Mr. Wong said probably about lot per thousand would be required. Mr. Holmer said he thought parking was a city-wide responsibility, not just a downtown merchant responsibility. Mr. Hansen noted that some businesses already were required to provide parking, and they should not have to provide it for others. He also said it appeared the downtown merchants were trying to make a sound decision and he suggested doing a customer survey. Ms. Wooten said that was why she had asked about other cities and about the effect on retail sales. Responding to Mr. Miller1s question, Mr. McCoy said he expected businesses to explore some type of validation system beyond the two hours. Mr. Mill er suggested that that might help to alleviate some of the inequities of paying for the lots. Mr. Luell said a study of turnover had shown about 90 percent leaving before two hours. Mr. McCoy said today's presentation was only for information and he expected a recommendation to come back later for action. He added that he understood another survey of retailers was being done. Ms. Ehrman asked whether all businesses were included in EDA, and Ms. Stewart said EDA considered all businesses members and had attempted to include all businesses in the survey. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 4 Ms. Wooten asked whether councilors had any requests in addition to that for a e customer survey. Ms. Ehrman suggested a survey of employees, adding that much of the problem at present was caused by employees using the free spots. Mr. McCoy said two lots were being considered as inexpensive employee parking to help address that problem. Mr. Gleason agreed that employees accounted for a tremendous amount of use at present and that the current program was unenforceable. Mr. Hansen said he did not think the employee plan would solve the problem. Ms. Ehrman suggested doing the employee survey to find out whether the employee lots would be used. Mr. Miller asked whether survey information would be available from all of those who would be subject to the tax, and he suggested examining whether those favoring continuation of the free program were located nearer the lots than those opposing it. Mr. McCoy said as much information as possible would be sought. Mr. Miller said he was concerned about losing dissatisfied down- town merchants and he wanted to be sensitive to people who might not benefit. Ms. Wooten said she would like information on how long it would take for the program cash outflow to be balanced, and also on how the transition to a limited parking program would be accomplished. Mr. Rutan thanked staff and the committee for their time on the project. Ms. Stewart reiterated that the $100,000 the tax increase would make available was not a replacement reserve. She said the commission could choose to have a date for ending the parking program or end it when development occurs, but no e revenues would be available for parking replacement when development occurred. She said revenues would go for operating and maintenance of the system. Ms. Stewart also said the Downtown Commission would act on the parking program in the next month to six weeks, and it would come to the City Council after that. She said a survey could be done in the meantime, and she expected it to come before the council in late November or early December. Mr. Holmer said he would like to see the commission come back with a two-part program, including a date for the limited parking option, in order to deal with the issue in the longer term. II. IMPROVEMENTS TO OVER PARK BUILDING Ms. Stewart said staff had prepared information on the Overpark improvements, and she suggested that any action or decisions be deferred to the next meeting. Ms. Stewart said the Overpark was an asset in the parking program and the policy decision had been that the City would manage the program within a taxing system. She said the value of the building was estimated at about $5 million, and no improvements had been made in the 15 years of its existence. Ms. Stewart said that the Overpark improvements were included in the Downtown Plan and were priorities for implementation. She also said the options for lease or sale had been examined. Assessments of e the purchase price suggest that the principal and interest would make it MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 5 profitably unfeasible. Ms. Stewart added that if a paid program were imple- e mented, an investor might be found to purchase the building, but no revenue stream currently existed to support the sale. She said staff had checked with brokers, and the square footage prices were equal to or better than many properties of equivalent value downtown. She added, however, that improve- ments would be required to lease the space and for the building to be used. Ms. Stewart said staff had spoken with the owner of the Downtown Athletic Club, and he had felt the improvements were important to the club for parking and for nearby tenants to complement the club. She also said he had been concerned that the improvements might not be done. Ms. Stewart showed visuals of the suggested improvements and said they had been reviewed by the public space consultant. She said staff had agreed that the cuts to the north and south walls of the garage could be omitted without affecting the function as a retail space and parking structure. She said if the council wanted to reduce the funding further, staff suggested going back to meet with the designers. One suggested improvement was to remove the board across the front so that the storefronts would be visible from the street. Mr. Jungjohann said the cost for that was about $60,000, mainly for lighting the pedestrian way and the storefronts. Other improvements included lighting on the back, a bridge to the Ax Billy Building, an external stairway, removing the planters, and opening part of the e area to diagonal parking. Ms. Ehrman said the bridge would be paid for by developers of the Ax Billy Building. Mr. Jungjohann said the external stair- way had been part of the initial design. Ms. Stewart said improvements to the elevator were designed to give a sense of arrival and departure. She said one problem was that people tended to wander in the building with poor sense of direction. She also said the building had been designed with two elevator shafts, but only one was operational, and improvements would include blocking off the unused shaft. Ms. Stewart said if another elevator were installed, it probably would be put on the outside of the building. She also said the breezeway would not be secured at night. Mr. Jungjohann said the floor texture would be made lighter. Ms. Stewart said the building had an internal circulation system, and she added that designers were encouraging that the building be given a safer feeling in order to attract more use, which was expected with the development of the Athletic Club and the Schafer Building. Ms. Ehrman asked why the parking sign was being taken down, adding that she thought it would be better to publicize the parking function. Ms. Stewart said the designs were preliminary and had been used for the cost estimates, but none of them had been initiated. She also said Mr. Owens was present to talk about the commission's decision on which items to fund. Mr. Hansen said he thought the public rest rooms in the Overpark should be closed. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 6 Mr. Jungjohann reviewed the current vacancies in the building and noted that a e few spaces had been leased, and letters of intent had been obtained on several more. He said he expected to be able to lease 100 percent of the space, but the improvements were essential. Mr. Miller asked whether the rest rooms were unsafe. Mr. Jungjohann said the merchant near the rest rooms had talked about policing them, but the security concerns had not been entirely solved yet. He added that the lights and improvements were expected to help with that problem. Mr. OWens said the commission had arrived at a strong request for the council to authorize improvements as outlined because no improvements have been made in the last 15 years. He said the construction costs of the building today would be about $8 million, and he added that the $413,000 cost of improvements was a small amount to pay for an asset of that size over a 15-year period. He said the tenant improvements might be negotiable, but members of the commission had felt that the alley improvements were a natural tie-in to the Athletic Club. He said the short-term parking was needed by tenants, and the City already had realized some cost savings in the removal of the cover at 10th and Willamette, so the same public-private cooperation might be used to reduce the cost estimate on alley improvements. Mr. Owens said the area was undergoing general improvement, and development would require attractive parking. He added that the opening of windows on the ends had been an issue of discussion, but the commission had felt that safety would be enhanced and the maintenance would be easier. Mr. Owens also noted that expert advice had e been given as to the necessity of doing the improvements in order to attract tenants. Mr. Miller said some money was in the fund from the opening of Willamette Street, but he asked where the rest of it would come from. Mr. Owens said he understood from staff that it was in the tax increment fund. Ms. Stewart said half of the funds were in the current appropriations, and the remainder would require the council to approve a supplemental budget to take funds from the tax increment reserve fund and move them to capital improvements. Mr. Owens said plans were for windows to be opened up on all levels of the garage. Ms. Schue asked whether glass would be put in to keep the rain out. Staff said no glass was planned. Mr. Hansen noted that the Parcade had 438 stalls, and the Overpark had 607, and he asked about the patterns of use. Mr. Lue11 said 260 monthly permits were sold at the Overpark, and about 190 were sold for the Parcade, and he said about an equal number of motorists used both structures. Mr. Owens said the Parcade was much better off financially because of the the large amount of commercial space generating income. Ms. Wooten asked councilors for their comments. Ms. Ehrman said she was not convinced of the need for the opening on the north and south ends. She noted that some of the signs should be kept, and the costs saved, and she said she favored the rest of the improvements. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 7 Mr. Rutan said he would like to see a financial summary of the project, so e that some commitments could be seen before expenses were assumed, and he suggested including figures for leasing various percentages of the space. He also said he would like to look at the recommendations for a $250,000 project instead of a $400,000 project. Ms. Wooten said she agreed that ways to cut costs of the project should be examined. She said she approved of leasehold improvements for the purpose of attracting and keeping tenants, but more specific concept numbers were needed, with the goal of reducing costs. . Mr. Hansen said he thought the external stairway and the internal elevator improvements were redundant. He said he was pleased that the entries would not be enclosed, but he said he thought improvement of entries and of the stairways up might be more advantageous than doing another external stairway. Mr. Miller said he thought opening up the end walls would allow light in and give a safer feeling. Mr. Hansen said he thought the Overpark felt safer than the Parcade, except possibly for the stairways, and he added that he thought the openings would be a waste of money. Mr. Miller said that could be done 1 ast. Mr. Holmer said he favored the openings, along with the outside stairway, and said he felt the costs would be pSYChologically worthwhile. He added that he hoped some ways could be found to economize, but said he favored everything on the list. Ms. Schue said she did not favor the openings, but she agreed with Mr. Holmer e about the outside stairway. She also said she felt the inside stairways were the worst feature of the building. Ms. Wooten asked staff to consult with the designers and to examine costs. She said the council appeared to be interested in lease space repair and improvements, storefront and ground-level renovation--perhaps with a modi- fication of cost, alley improvements and short-term parking, exterior stairway, savings in parking signing and lighting, and stairwell and upper entry renovation. She said cutting of the concrete walls was a toss-up, and ground-floor entries and the lobby area also needed to be considered further. Ms. Stewart said the estimate for the design was $20,000, and she said the designers could be given direction from the council. Ms. Wooten said she thought the costs were too high. Mr. Hansen said he would like to see the economics of the leases and the level of commitment from potential tenants. Mr. Jungjohann said some of the improvements were specific to tenants. Ms. Wooten asked how soon revised estimates or concepts could be returned and said full drawings were not necessary. Mr. Jungjohann said he could have the information within a month and he would proceed under the assumption that some of the improvements would be done. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 8 III. OTHER e Ms. Wooten said applications for Planning Commission and Downtown Commission members had not been received in the packet, and she suggested postponing balloting. Members agreed. Ms. Wooten said that item would be eliminated from the agenda and held over until the meeting a week from Wednesday. Mr. Rutan asked for a clarification of positions available. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~. . Micheal D. Glea on City Manager (Recorded by Leslie Scales) LS:je/1893C -- e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session October 14, 1985 Page 9