Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/30/1991 Meeting e e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Hall--McNutt Room January 30, 1991 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Roger Rutan, Shawn Boles, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Bobby Green, Randy MacDonald, Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette. The adjourned meeting of January 28, 1991, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. I. ITEMS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR, AND CITY MANAGER A. Legislative State Mandates Committee Mr. Rutan indicated that council policy supports regular periodic review of land use plans. He asked if members favored Representative Campbell's pro- posed legislation supporting periodic review on an "on-demand" basis instead. After a brief discussion, it was determined that the council needed more information before taking a position. With regard to other legislation, Mr. Rutan reported that the Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) Committee is recom- mending opposition to Representative Dwyer's bill. Mr. Rutan also said that the League of Oregon Cities has taken a position favoring a sales tax. While the topic will be discussed by the IGR Commit- tee, he clarified that the City of Eugene has yet to take a position on the issue. Mr. Rutan said briefings will be held for those interested in prepar- ing for the League of Oregon visits. Mr. Rutan indicated that the City staff's extensive list of obsolete State mandates has become part of the foundation for the Mandate Committee's work load. The committee should produce 5 to 10 major issues and about 24 minor ones for the Legislature to consider. B. Goodpasture Island Access Study With regard to the Goodpasture Island Access Study, Mr. Rutan said he felt the amendment needed full council input. City Manager Mike Gleason agreed that the council needed to sign off on the scope of the study and said it would be brought before the council. Responding to Mr. Green's concern that the scope of the study include discussion on funding, Mr. Gleason said the City would review the issue. Staff indicated that a scope of study including MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 1 e a brief delineation of the assumptions in the TransPlan could be brought to council in two weeks. C. University of Oregon Alluding to the University of Oregon's response to Ballot Measure 5, Mr. Robinette said the citizenry is just beginning to see the measure's impact. Mr. MacDonald echoed Mr. Robinette's concerns regarding the impact of Ballot Measure 5. D. School Bus Parking Problem Ms. Bascom said that the Hult Center draws tours of students from throughout the area, such as the 5,000 children who visited last fall. She felt the City should become involved in solving the school bus parking problem at the center. Mr. Gleason said businesses around the center were unwilling to give up any space to accommodate the buses. E. Appreciation for the Department of Public Safety Mr. MacDonald read a statement of appreciation for the manner in which the Department of Public Safety's staff dispensed their duties during recent community involvement regarding the Persian Gulf situation. He asked the council to support the statement and direct staff to distribute the statement to appropriate staff. Mr. MacDonald also asked staff for the amount of funds spent by the Department of Public Safety on this issue. e F. There was consensus to support the statement. Model Tobacco Ordinance Ms. Ehrman asked that Ms. Bascom and she be allowed to take the model tobacco ordinance to the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC). There was no objection to the request. G. Shelter Inspection Report Ms. Ehrman questioned a report on the Eugene Mission called liThe Homeless Shelter On-site Inspection Report" she had received. She asked staff to research the legitimacy of the report. H. Human Services Funding Ms. Ehrman put the council on notice that as a member of the Intergovernmen- tal Human Services' Basic Needs Subcommittee, she will request funding solu- tions for programs that fall into the category of providing basic needs, such as homeless shelters, emergency housing, and food. Mr. Green echoed Ms. Ehrman's concerns. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 2 e I. Beltline-Barger Overpass Mr. Green shared a newsletter that he received from the Bethel School Dis- trict focusing on community efforts to push the Beltline/Barger overpass project forward. J. Sign Ordinance--Flags Mr. Green also said he received a complaint from a business owner who was told by the City he was in violation of the Sign Code for displaying flag banners in support of U.S. troops. A brief discussion revealed that a dis- tinction cannot be drawn based on the content of the sign; therefore, the Sign Code applies to political, religious, and commercial speech to the same extent. Political signs are covered under the temporary section in the code. II. RETAIL TASK FORCE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS e Jan Bohman, Planning and Development Department, gave a brief history of the Retail Task Force and outlined its charge. The group's July 1990 report included four components: 1) the Tenant Mix Plan; 2) the Property Owners' Program; 3) the Redesign Principles; and 4) Recommendations for Public Policy to Support Downtown Development. The council adopted an ordinance concerning the Tenant Mix Plan, directed staff to work with Downtown Eugene, Inc., on implementation of the Property Owners' Program, and approved the Redesign Principles as the basis for the downtown design process. With regard to the fourth component, the council decided to consider the policy proposals at this work session. At Mr. Boles request, Ms. Bohman provided the following points addressed by the Planning Commission in the Commercial Lands Study: 1) providing design review of commercial properties; 2) designating downtown as the service area for South Eugene; and 3) several suggestions to upgrade parking and to dis- courage certain kinds of commercial use in outlying areas. Mr. Rutan suggested the fourth section of the report be set aside as a source for ideas that may be used and/or integrated into existing plans. He added that the City was already doing a tremendous amount to encourage downtown development and that policy directives already exist. He said approving the section undermines current policies. Mr. Nicholson said that except for the fourth component, he felt the report was totally devoid of substantive evidence that implementing the costly rec- ommendations would be effective. He felt the fourth section presented struc- tural changes with regard to taxing-and allocating land use that supported compact urban growth. Mr. Boles said that part of the reason it has been difficult to maintain a viable downtown is an "unlevel playing field" which section four of the re- e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 3 v e port attempts to address. He noted that current policies had failed down- town. Mr. MacDonald said that if compact urban growth is the goal, existing poli- cies need to be examined and policies that support compact urban growth need to be developed so that "the community we come out with is the community we want, not one we end up with." Mr. MacDonald also spoke in favor of neigh- borhood commercial centers. Reviewing the section, he felt that Item E under Section III was irrelevant, and he found Items C and D contradictory. He also felt that the idea of the incubator facility for fledgling businesses should be revisited. Ms. Ehrman felt some of the policies were interrelated with the City's trans- portation issue. She favors pursuing an inventory of present development to enhance future transportation decisions. Ms. Ehrman said she favors the section. Mr. Green expressed support for.the document. e Mr. Boles said the major reason for the difference in business between down- town and the periphery is parking. He favors charging businesses for the amount of parking they require. He noted that the recommendations in the report are sound public policy. Mr. Nicholson felt that many things recommended by the report could be done without revisiting existing plans. He also said that commercial development downtown would be driven by demand and that he thought that the City's goal was compact urban growth. Mr. Nicholson said he felt the library should be supported with tax increment funds. Ms. Bascom pointed out that the geographic center of the Eugene/Springfield area is Valley River Center, and not to forget other important parts of the central area; for instance, the University. She also questioned why the council was discussing this section of the report at this level. Mayor Miller said it was important that the council be in agreement before proceeding with the plan. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, that council direct staff to develop a work plan that would focus on both policy implementation and an ordinance recommendation associated with Item A under I; Items B, C, and D under III; all the items under IV; all the items under V; and III-A with the first sentence deleted. Mr. Gleason suggested that the division in perspectives has to do with philo- sophical issues. He said it was a practical problem, one that required dis- cussion about such things as square footage. He noted that the Urban Land Institute has found that successful cities have 60 to 70 percent of their class A space in their core area, Eugene has approximately 40 percent. He recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council analyze the docu- e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 4 e ment for its content to facilitate a practical application for an ordinance. Mr. Gleason said he wants to bring back a concrete, focused discussion about the practical applications as opposed to philosophical position. Mr. Nicholson said that if the City continued to tax everyone for downtown business development, community divisiveness was unavoidable. Referring to the items on the last page of the report, Mr. Boles said that his motion would produce for the council specific information within the larger context. Mr. Gleason said that the council needs to be cognizant ~f the fact that there is a portion of the community that believes that the City, using the task force's report as a vehicle, is trying to sabotage urban development. In order to be successful in carrying out what the clear mandates of the General Plan are, he said the discussion needs to include the taxpayers. Mr. MacDonald agreed with Mr. Gleason and spoke in favor of the motion. He also suggested that public forums for constructive dialogue be held. Mr. Boles noted that the task force that produced these recommendations is a broad-based group. He felt the report framed the debate and it was appropri- ate to be having this discussion. Mr. Rutan pointed out that Item I-A was a philosophical statement, around which a work plan could not be produced. e Mr. Nicholson said that the work plan would clarify for people if their in- terests are being addressed; and those who object will come forward. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Robinette, to amend the motion to include the specific Items A through G and A and B under V. The amendment failed, 6:2. The main motion passed, 5:3. Saying that the council needs to recognize that there is concern that the public is being excluded from meaningful, critical dialogue on important issues, Mr. MacDonald asked for council consensus on the following: That council direct staff to provide a forum for the council and interested parties to have constructive dialogue about the issue, rather than limiting it to a public hearing. Mr. Boles noted that a public forum is scheduled February 15 at the Hilton. Mayor Miller adjourned the City Council meeting at 1:15 p.m. and convened the Urban Renewal Agency. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 5 ~ III. 8TH AND WILLAMETTE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Scott Luell, Planning and Development Department, gave a brief review of the project's background and indicated that John Brown, Downtown Commission, ;s available for questions. Mr. luell reported that on January 3, 1991, Lor;g and Associates of Seattle, Washington, submitted a proposal to construct an 80,000- to 100,000-square-foot office building on one half of the development site. Lorig competed successfully for U.S. Bancorp's commitment to lease 40,000 square feet of space in the building. He said both the Development Proposal Review Group and the Downtown Commission had unanimously accepted the proposal and forwarded it to the Urban Renewal Agency. He indicated that staff had reviewed confidential financial information of the investors as well as lorig and Associates, and financial projections for the project. Staff has determined that the projections and assumptions of the project seem both reasonable and accurate. Mr. Brown noted that the review group had four areas of concern: 1. The necessity and equity of the exchange; 2. Whether or not the equity contribution by the developer would be sufficient to meet mortgage requirements; e 3. That the site be developed to the maximum feasible density; and 4. The process for dealing with the remaining portion of the site. Mr. Brown said that the Downtown Commission, also felt that the pose in nego- tiation should also address what the City is receiving in the proposed ex- change and how the City would use the property. The commission encouraged the City to include the public review process in the process for development of the property. Mr. Luell said that the proposal is scheduled for a public hearing on Febru- ary 11, with a decision due on February 13 to direct the City Manager's Of- fice to negotiate an exclusive agreement with Lorig Associates. He said the other direction that staff would also be interested in recelvlng at that point is the public siting issue of the surrounding property and public space. Responding to Mr. MacDonald's question regarding the council's involvement in the process, Mr. Gleason said that the owner of the property, the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency, directed the City Manager's Office to develop a negoti- ated agreement on the land transaction. In that land transaction, the coun- cil as the Urban Renewal Agency, has to ensure that the transaction is con- sistent with policies adopted in the plan and the City's Metropolitan Area General Plan. The City will interface with the developer in structuring the relationship in a formal document, which is then brought back to the Urban Renewal Agency. At some point, the land is actually transferred. Mr. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 6 e Gleason said the process will take about six months and staff typically works with a committee through that process. Responding to a question from Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Gleason said that the City would not structure an agreement that would require it (the City) to provide parking for the project. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Gleason said it was premature to say that a land transaction would occur--it is just one of the options. Lew Bowers, Planning and Development Department, said that the Downtown De- sign Committee had reviewed the proposal and felt that none of the alterna- tives proposed were in contradiction to the basic downtown design it is rec- ommending. The committee felt the project, in general, would help an urban environment, which was consistent with what it has tried to do with the down- town design. Mr. MacDonald expressed his frustration at not being up to date on the project; however, he offered what he felt was the major advantage and the major disadvantage of the proposal. He felt that having a significant pres- ence in the downtown area was most advantageous, but parking require- ments/demand created a major problem. Mayor Miller suggested he outline his ideas in a memo addressed to council. Mayor Miller adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency. ~ Mayor Miller reconvened the City Council meeting. Mr. Gleason distributed copies of Chris Andersen's response to the council's motion regarding alternative transportation for council input. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~?'~..-7 Micheal Gleason, City Manager (Recorded by Yolanda Paule) MNCC 013091 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 30, 1991 Page 7