Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/24/1991 Meeting e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Dinner Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall June 24, 1991 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Shawn Boles, Roger Rutan, Bobby Green, Randy MacDonald, Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette, Debra Ehrman (at 6 p.m.) COUNCILORS ABSENT: Ruth Bascom. Members of the council and the Downtown Commission introduced themselves. Members of the Downtown Commission include Sue Prichard, Larry Hedberg, Joy Morrow, Jon Stafford, Peter Bartel, Cordy Jensen, John Brown, and Julie Aspinwall-Lamberts. The June 24, 1991, joint work session of the City Council and the Downtown Commission was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. After calling attention to charts posted on the walls, Ms. Prichard reviewed e background information concerning the Downtown Development District (ODD). She noted that 18 months ago, the City Council requested that the Downtown Commission make improvements to the ODD. In response, the commission estab- lished the Downtown Development District Task Force, which worked on the issue for a year, after which the commission worked on the issue for six months. Ms. Prichard explained that the Downtown Development District was established in 1973 to provide free customer parking, economic promotion, and security. It was originally paid for by an ad valorem tax, a professional tax, and a gross receipts tax; however, the first two taxes have since been eliminated. The loss of several large stores has also reduced ODD Gross Receipts Tax revenue. As the situation exists, the ODD will be out of funds by January 1992. Ms. Prichard reviewed assumptions underlying the most important points about the ODD as explained in the agenda packet. After presenting one pro- posal to the public at its forum, the commission felt compelled to expand the number of proposals from one to four. She said the commission was concerned that it had not gained a broad enough base of input from the public and that having more options might garner more feedback. The commission put its greatest effort in and was most committed to Option A, the one presented at the forum. Members still disagreed on three issues, one of which involves the idea of a stepped rate. Ms. Prichard then reviewed the four options. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1991 Page 1 e Mr. Miller said he felt that the commission was meeting with the council prematurely and that the options needed further refinement. He said the council expected the commission to present a definite option. Mr. Bartel noted that poor survey returns and diverse comments at forums, make it clear that the public does not know how downtown parking is financed. Mr. Boles agreed that the survey was excellent, but commented that Options B, C, and D misrepresented ideas presented at the commission's forum and that he was surprised that the commission created the options. Mr. Rutan said he was pleased with the commission's work, that the DDD Task Force had considered the issues thoroughly, that both groups had worked with the public, and that it was time to make a decision. It would be impossible to resolve every issue. He said he believed that it was time to privatize DDD services and was glad that the council was being forced to make a deci- sion, as had many other cities. He supported Option A. Mr. Nicholson felt that the City infrastructure favored businesses located on the city's periphery and that these businesses should be taxed to pay for the extra cost of having to stretch services to reach them. Ms. Ehrman responded that that idea has been considered but that doing so without short-term al- ternatives would not rescue the DDD in time. Mr. Miller raised the idea of the "urban village" concept. e Mr. MacDonald supported Mr. Nicholson's idea, but felt that the "periphery" issue should remain separate from the ODD issue. He said he believed it was appropriate to have attendants at the Parcade. Mr. Boles agreed that a peripheral business tax could not be implemented quickly enough to help the ODD. He supported implementing Option A to en- sure the ODD's immediate survival and then addressing the inequities raised by Mr. Nicholson as soon as possible. Mr. Rutan supported the idea of not combining the two issues. Mr. Nicholson said he was concerned about providing continuity, stating that the system should not be modified for a year and then modified again. Mr. MacDonald agreed, adding that free parking should not be entirely eliminated. Mr. Bartel commented that parking garages are "way of the future" and that there should be incentives to use them. Ms. Ehrman noted that the parking program needs to be simple and consistent throughout the city. Mr. Green said he favored a validation program, provided that there not be requirements on how businesses distribute the validation tickets. In response to a question from Mr. Brown, Larry Summers (of Diamond Parking) said the cost of a validation program ranges from $8.58 to $13.15 per parking e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1991 Page 2 e space each month. He noted that few attending the commission's forum owned downtown businesses and added that "Saturday Market" day is one of the most profitable days of the week. ODD Task Force Chair Mike Schwartz said some businesses are using the validated parking system already and that it is working well. He noted that the system is also working well in Portland, Seattle, and other cities. In response to a question from Mr. Ehrman, Mr. Jensen said the key issue is that customers not have to pay for parking. He said the three-hour monitored system used by the Fifth Street Market works well. The average stay at the market lasts about one hour and fifteen minutes. In response to a concern from Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Schwartz said downtown mer- chants need free parking, whereas non-downtown merchants need validated park- ing. Mr. Jensen commented that one of the greatest difficulties at the Fifth Street Market was enforcing parking regulations. Once enforcement was pro- vided, parking spaces became more available. Mr. MacDonald felt that $300 per parking space per year seemed high and won- dered if it was realistic to expect enough revenue from a contract with Down- town Eugene, Incorporated. Mr. Schwartz responded that the $300 figure was developed by City staff. In response to a question from Mr. Nicholson, staff member Scott Luell said that 7880 bonds would not affect the ODD's reserve. e Ms. Ehrman wondered how the City would address businesses experiencing high customer turnovers, such as Nautilus, which claimed that it would be put out of business by a validated parking system. Mr. Boles said there were only two people at the forum advocating the ad valorem tax. He felt that Option A supports safety and avoids the "punish- ment" of parking tickets. In response to a request from Mr. Miller that the council concentrate on Option A, Mr. Luell explained that Option A assumes that the program would experience a net loss the first year but break even after that. He said another issue was that of money versus public relations. Mr. Rutan said there is no perfect solution. He said he wanted to encourage "turnover," and felt that cheaper rates for staying longer would compromise this. He recommended a flat rate and free Saturday and Sunday parking. Mr. Stafford said it was his understanding that turnover was not imperative because there is generally parking available at the Parcade. Ms. Aspinwall- Lamberts said the issue of parking space turnover involved a delicate balanc- ing. She said the commission wanted people to be able to do a number of things downtown during the same visit. Ms. Ehrman said she appreciated the point that Saturday is a good revenue day, but she also wanted to provide for those coming from out of town; thus, e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1991 Page 3 e she felt that Sunday should remain free. Mr. MacDonald said that the same system should then be used for the other downtown parking lots, with $.50 per hour and Sunday and holidays free. Mr. Schwartz said this would not work. Ms. Prichard raised the issue of public perception and marketing and said she felt that the validation system would need to be presented in a way that the public would support it, with a marketing plan, advertising, and workshops. She explained that the idea of free Saturday parking was included for pos- itive publiC relations. Mr. Green said he favored validation, Saturday revenue, flat rates, and free Sunday parking. Mr. Boles said he supported Monday through Saturday pay parking at $.75 per hour everywhere, although he felt that this could not be implemented all at once. He suggested charging $.75 per hour with Saturday and Sunday free for a year and then changing it later. Mr. Nicholson said he supported Mr. Green and Mr. Rutan. Ms. Morrow said she felt that it was important to have commitment from the retailers. Planning and Development staff member Russ Brink said the ODD currently has a $175,000 service contract, but that it would like to raise a total of $225,000 to expand services geographically and qualitatively. In response to a question from Mr. MacDonald, Mr. Brink said the ODD has letters of commit- e ment from 60 percent of the retailers involved, although he acknowledged that the letters of intent need to be translated into contracts. He explained that, in general, professional offices do not need ODD services and don't care about free parking, but they might like validated parking. Ms. Ehrman felt that the City should not have to pay for this expansion. She also disagreed with the idea of beginning conservatively, stating that she would prefer to charge for Saturday parking now and be able to make it free in the future. Mr. Miller summarized his understanding that the council generally supported a flat rate of $.75 and the current $.50 per hour on Monday through Saturday for metered parking. He also suggested having a public hearing and using some parking reserve money to help start the program. Mr. Rutan concurred. He added that there should also be a suggested time line in the discussion at the public hearing and that the winter holiday season was a good time to phase in the program. Planning and Development Director, Abe Farkas, said there would be funds available if the transition takes place at the end of October or later. Mr. Brink noted that Downtown Eugene, Incorporated supported implementing the new parking program after the holiday season. Mr. Miller noted that there would be no funds after January and that the program could be implemented with creative marketing. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1991 Page 4 ",-:~:' ---.. ..-..:.... ~--..- e Mr. Luell said that if a decision were made July 8, the program could not be implemented until late October at the earliest. The council agreed to support Option A, to implement the program as soon as possible, to hold a public hearing on the subject, and to support the pro- gram's implementation with matching funds. In response to a concern from Mr. MacDonald, Ms. Ehrman said the peripheral business issue could be included in Eugene Decisions. Mr. Miller felt that there were many ways to carry out that idea. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. R~~ ~~ Micheal Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Jacqueline Woge) mncc 062491-530 e - MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1991 Page 5