Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/23/1992 Meeting , ,..l . M I NUT E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall November 23, 1992 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Ruth Bascom, Shawn Boles, Bobby Green, Randy HacDonaldt Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette, Roger Rutan. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Debra Ehnnan. I. CITY COUNCIL DINNER WORK SESSION A. Community DeveloDment Committee City Manager Mike Gleason explained that Community Development Committee (CDC) Chair John Van Landingham was present to answer questions about the CDC's 1992-93 work plan. Mr. MacDonald commended the work plan. He added that as the council reviews the City's boards and commissions, it should ensure the CDC's stability so . that the committee can continue its effective service. Mr. Robinette viewed the work plan in the context of the council's agenda item concerning agenda control, adding that the CDC's work requires significant staff time. Mr. Boles agreed with Mr. MacDonald, feeling that regardless of the possible reorganization of boards and commissions, the CDC's role will continue and may expand. He noted that the committee recovers staff costs connected with its work plan from Federal funds. Hr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to accept the Community Development Committee's 1992-93 work plan as presented. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Mayor Jeff Hiller adjourned the meeting of the City Council and convened a meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency. B. Lane Transit District Station Siting and land Sale Issues Mr. Gleason introduced Jack Billings and Janet Calvert of the lane Transit District (lTD) Board of Commissioners. Mr. Robinette stated that he had a conflict of interest and would not participate in the siting portion of the discussion. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 1 5:30 p.m. , , Bob Hibschman, Planning and Development Department, stated that the Downtown Commission strongly recommended that the City Council address downtown parking . needs through structured parking. The commission also recommended that staff work on a potential design for the lOth Avenue Corridor, enter into an option agr'eement with LTD for two parcels of land, and mitigate the loss of parking caused by LTD's new downtown transit station with the construction of struc- tured parking. The commission expressed no preference on the alternatives for structured parking. Mr. MacDonald inquired about an pption D that the Downtown Commission did not favor. Scott Lue11, Planning and Development Department, responded that it would not provide structured parking, instead absorbing the changes within the existing system. In response to Mr. Boles, Mr. Hibschman stated that when buses move to an off- street location, 10th Avenue would need pedestrian improvements complementing the new transit station and recent improvements to Olive Street. Stefano Viggiano, Lane Transit District staff, provided an update on LTD's feasibility study of a downtown shuttle. He said the study would be completed in February. Shuttles in approximately 30 similar-sized communities have been surveyed, about 12 of them like that proposed for Eugene. LTD staff has created a potential design for the shuttle route and will survey potential downtown users, identify the appropriate vehicle, and investigate cost, funding opportunities, and demand. Mr. Viggi~no displayed the proposed route, which connects the University of . Oregon with the downtown, 5th Street Public Market, and the Library in a loop taking about 20 minutes. He pointed out that the route does not cover the midtown area between 11th and 18th avenues. It is not conceived as a park- and-ride shuttle, although that model will also be investigated and a combined system is possible. In response to Mr. Miller, Mr. Viggiano said that the shuttle, if it proves feasible, will probably not alleviate the need for further structured parking downtown. ~e said the most important factor in encouraging use of alternative modes is a high density of development and employment downtown. Mr. Miller said that a park-and-ride facility at Autzen Stadium or on River Road would do more to reduce the demand for downtown parking than the shuttle by itself. Mr. Viggiano added that the market for the shuttle is not current bus riders. Mr. Nicholson suggested that a policy of high downtown parking rates combined with low- or no-cost park-and-ride facilities would reduce demand. Mr. Viggiano responded that it might cause developers to relocate, reducing downtown density. He said at least 20 park-and-ride facilities are already in place along regular bus routes, many making use of church or restaurant parking lots. Mr. Nicholson said the parking policy would have to be accompa- nied by appropriate land use policies. He added it is likely that adequate downtown density would require shifting some parking outside the core. Mr. Boles agreed that only comprehensive policies to increase utilization of MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 2 . 5:30 p.m. -~--- , . alternative modes would diminish the demand for downtown parking. He stated that if the shuttle forms a core circulation loop with good connections at peak times, it can help alleviate the demand. Ms. Bascom stated that a goal of the shuttle would be to increase the exchange between the university and the downtown, since both places host many events and have parking shortages. Mr. Green noted the concern of midtown merchants that on-street parking there is inadequate and the proposed s~uttle route would not address their custom- ers' needs. Mr. Viggiano responded that a route south to approximately 18th Avenue would entail both a cost disadvantage and a circuitous trip for passengers traveling between the university and downtown. Mr. Nicholson stated that it is important to address the university's parking problems, especially at Autzen Stadium, and the current shuttle proposal would not do so. He asked whether the shuttle could include a loop over the Ferry Street Bridge, perhaps including Valley River Center, if the bridge is widened or supplemented with another bridge. Mr. Viggiano said the suggestion could be reviewed. In response to Ms. Bascom's question, Mr. Viggiano said that the shuttle would cost between $100,000 and $400,000 per year to operate, with the higher costs for service about every seven minutes. Buses cost approximately S200,000. Mr. Billings said that lTD is interested in purchasing a new type of less- polluting bus by 199B. The shuttle vehicle would be distingUishable from . regular lTD buses. Mr. luell stated that the approaches to mitigating loss of downtown parking to the new transit station assume a substantial increase in use of alternative modes. He said that a supply-and-demand study--assuming a new library, renovation of the Atrium Building, and full build-out downtown--has projected a deficit of 670-770 parking stalls within a nine-block radius of the new transit station site. The deficit is projected to develop during the coming five to ten years. The three pOSSible approaches to the problem are I} structured parking only; Z) alternative modes and structured parking; or 3) alternative modes only. The second approach appears most consistent with council policy and the needs of large-scale parking consumers such as lane Community College's (LCC's) Downtown Center. Mr. Luell presented three options to implement the second approach: * Option A, a freestanding parking structure that would create a net of 225 spaces at an estimated cost of $6-B million. Advantages: would support the proposed library and future west-end development. Disad- vantages: a projected operating shortfall for at least five years. * Option B, expansion of the Overpark, that would create a net of 135 spaces at an estimated cost of $4.5-5.5 million. Advantages: would support existing demand; responsive to LCC's needs; and has positive . MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 3 5:30 p.m. I ; initial operating projections. Disadvantage: would require the . purchase and demolition of the bank building at 11th and Oak (the cost estimate includes purchase and relocation expenses). * Option C, parking above the LTD station, which would create a net of 250 spaces at an estimated cost of $12-13 million. Advantage: responsive to area needs. Disadvantages: costly; counter to previous decisions of the LTD board; and a joint project would involve diffi- culties with technical issues and the public decision-making process. Mr. Boles clarified that the second approach was intended to include parking demand management, so that long-term employee parking is shifted over time from downtown to the periphery through measures such as the shuttle, thus accommodating demand for customer parking downtown. Mr. MacDonald felt that a disadvantage of Option A is its distance from the LCC Downtown Center. He also asked why the estimated cost for Option Chad risen substantially since August 1992. Mr. Luel1 responded that the need for ramping across Olive Street, together with LTD's design speci'fications for first-floor height, accounted for the increased costs of Option C. Also, the least expensive first-floor spaces would not be available to help offset the higher costs of upper-floor stalls. Ms. Calvert said that under Option C, the structural need to enclose the building would create safety concerns and add expenses for ventilation. In response to Mr. Green's concern about parking in the midtown area, Mr. Gleason explained that the City is obligated by ordinance to provide co11ec- . tive parking facilities downtown in order to maximize development densities. In all other commercial zones, businesses must supply their own parking. Mr. Nicholson noted that the City just sold the equivalent of approximately 250 parking stalls at 8th and Wil1amette to Lorig. Mr. Gleason replied that the City had held vacant land intended for development, and the deal would probably not occasion a net loss of parking. Mr. Luel1 said that the project- ed downtown deficit does not include parking that Lorig might build, because it is not within a nine-block radius of the transit station. Mr. Boles requested clarification of LCC's concern that Option A would be' too distant. Larry Warford, LCC, explained that the college was asked whether Option A would mitigate the loss of parking directly across from it, and responded that it would not. In response to Ms. Bascom, Mr~ Luell said that the McDonald site for the transit station would preempt 176 surface spaces currently used by LCC, and that LCC is quite concerned about safety. Mr. Gleason pointed out that the City cannot stipulate who shall take part in lease arrangements for long-term parking. Downtown investors already pay a substantial premium by subsidizing parking, and failure to add structured parking will make downtown investments less feasible. A significant downtown parking deficit would exist even without loss of existing parking to a transit station. Use of alternative modes should be actively promoted, although it MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 4 . 5:30 p.m. . will at best slow the widening of the gap between parking demand and parking availability. Mr. Boles stated that the solution lies in the integration of I} a commitment to alternative modes, including a shuttle with expanded park-and-ride; 2} demand management to shift downtown parking from low- to high-turnover use; 3) expanded structured parking; and 4) a policy to address development outside the core. He said the net numbers of stalls projected for each structure option may not be as important as whether the stalls are used for short- or long-term parking. He favored a~ding new spaces incrementally while imple- menting the other components of integrated demand management. Mr. Nicholson agreed that few other cities have as much downtown parking as Eugene, and the projected parking deficit is highly sensitive to other policy constraints. Mr. Rutan stated that the issue for discussion was meeting downtown parking needs, not other policy questions. Mr. Miller asked whether LTD would pay the costs of replacing the parking lost in constructing the new station. Mr. Billings responded that LTD will pay the fair market value of the lost spaces, estimated at $650,000, and will also provide at least $865,000 in Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) funds for the City's construction of a facility to mitigate the parking loss. He said an increase in bus ridership can be expected as the perception of safety grows and transfer times diminish. Mr. Gleason stated that a joint approach is needed from both parties in order . to maximize the funding to be obtained from the County, State, and Federal governments, and to mitigate downtown parking demand as much as possible. He said the $865,000 ;s the limit of LTD's capacity. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Nicholson, that the City Council adopt the approach of alternative transportation modes, parking demand mitigation, and structured parking to mitigate parking demand. Mr. Boles said that the council's overall approach to parking mitigation should shape specifics such as its relationship to LTD with regard to the shuttle, demand management strategies, and parking for the new library. Mr. Gleason stated that the City's request to the Federal government is to finance a land transaction for direct .itigation of parking loss, and should include provision for replacing the spaces lost. The motion passed 4:2, with Councilors Green and Rutan opposed and Councilor Robinette abstaining. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Miller, to affirm the commitment that structured parking in conjunction with alternative modes and parking demand management is necessary to promote density and mitigate the impact of the loss of parking spaces, and instruct . MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 5 5:30 p.m. staff to do further site analysis on Option A (freestanding . parking structure). The motion passed 4:2, with Councilors Green and MacDonald opposed and Councilor Robinette abstaining. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to affirm the commitment that structured parking in conjunction with alternative modes and parking demand management is necessary to promote density and mitigate the impact of the loss of parking spaces, and instruct staff to do further site analysis on Option B (overpark expan- sion). The motion failed 4:3, with Councilors Boles, Bascom, and Nicholson voting in favor; Councilors MacDonald, Green, and Rutan, and Mayor Miller, voting opposed; and Councilor Robinette ab- staining. Mr. MacDonald commented that Option B can support itself more readily, is adjacent to LCC, and is near the proposed LTD site. It replaces fewer spaces but may be wiser in light of the City's fiscal position. Lew Bowers, Planning and Development Department, noted that the site acquisi- tion option includes a provision that the City and LTD together seek funds for the redevelopment of the lOth Avenue corridor. Mr. Boles suggested adding a condition to the option that LTD and the City commit to jointly seek funding for development of a shuttle service in conjunction with the downtown station. Mr. Billings replied that LTD is committed to continuing the feasibility study on the shuttle, which will include review of both the downtown design and the possibility of park-and- . ride routes from Autzen Stadium and the Fairgrounds. Mr. Gleason discouraged excessively narrow conditions in the option agreement. Mr. Nicholson agreed with not binding LTD to a particular alternative modes strategy, but wanted assurance that LTD would adopt the necessary strategies to accomplish parking demand mitigation equal to the loss of parking spaces. He suggested specifying a process to evaluate the success of this effort. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to approve the conditions of the site acquisition option negotiated with the Lane Transit District (LTD) as follows: a. LTD agrees to build a transit station on the site. b. The purchase 1s contingent upon LTD securing all necessary permits and approvals to construct a transit station on the site. c. LTD to provide at least $865,000, in addition to the proceeds from the sale of the site, for the City's construction of a faCility to mitigate the loss of parking and to promote increased density. LTD also commits to provide, if available, other transportation funding for the construction of parking MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 6 . 5:30 p.m. . facilities. d. The City and LTD to identify resources and actively seek funds for the redevelopment of the 10th Avenue corridor between Charnel ton and Oak streets. e. The City and LTD agree to identify resources and actively work together to seek funding for the possible development of a shuttle system in conjunction with the downtown station. The motion passed 5:i, with Mr. Nicholson opposed and Mr. Robin- ette abstaining. The council postponed until January its consideration of whether to direct staff to scope the redevelopment of the 10th Avenue corridor. The meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency was recessed from 7:25 p.m. until 7:40 p.m. Mr. Nicholson was not present when the meeting reconvened. Mr. Rutan moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to reconsider the motion directing staff to carry out further site analysis on parking Option B. Mr. Rutan stated that he had received information from the City Manager warranting further study of Option B. . Mr. Boles moved to table Mr. Rutan's motion until the first council meeting in 1993. The motion died for lack of a second. The motion to reconsider passed 5:1, with Mr. Boles opposed and Mr. Robinette abstaining. Mr. Gleason explained that discussions with the owners of the building involved in Option B have touched on the possibility of relocating the existing offices to the ground floor. The facility could be constructed with revenue bonds, while Option A would require a separate funding stream. Mr. MacDonald said that Option B could minimize City revenues required for a parking structure. He was unenthusiastic about analyzing a structure (Option A) that might remain empty to a significant degree for some time. Mr. Rutan's motion passed 5:1, with Mr. Boles opposed and Mr. Robinette abstaining. Mayor Miller adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency and reconvened a meeting of the City Council. C. Restaurant Tax Issues Warren Wong, Administrative Services Department, requested council direction . MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 7 5:30 p.m. or confirmation on a series of issues related to the proposed restaurant tax. . Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to confirm the following definition of restaurant in the current version of the ordinance: "Establishments where prepared food or beverages are sold to the public in a form consumable without additional preparation. Includes, but not limited to, cafes, lunch counters, private and social clubs, bars, taverns, diners, cafeterias, delicatessens, sandwich shops, carry-out restaurants, mobile units, and push- carts, and all sites of athletic contests. Restaurant does not include: grocery stores; caterers; temporary establishments which sell food for seven days or less in any calendar year; vending machines; or movie theaters." The motion passed 6:1, with Ms. Bascom opposed. Ms. Bascom said the tax should be confined to traditional restaurants, including carry-out restaurants, and should not apply to cafeterias, delica- tessens, and other categories. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to define prepared meals, within the definition of restaurants, as follows: "All food and beverages sold, except for alcoholic beverages, and whole pies, cakes, and loaves of bread sold for consumption off the premises. Items taxed in grocery stores include: salads from salad bars; dispensed soft drinks; and hot prepared foods ready for immediate consumption." Mr. Green proposed to delete from the definition the phrase "salads from salad . bars; dispensed soft drinks." Mr. Rutan supported the language as fair to fast food restaurants, which experience competition from sales of salads and dispensed soft drinks by grocery stores. He felt the two types of business should be taxed equally. Glenn Klein, City Attorney's Office, clarified that the first sentence of the definition referred to items to be taxed in a restaurant, and the second sentence to items to be taxed in a grocery store. The motion passed 4:3, with Councilors Boles, Green, and Bascom opposed. Mr. Wong explained that the current ordinance would tax all caterers, based within or outside the City, as well as events occurring within the City. The council agreed to maintain that provision. Regarding exemptions to the tax, Mr. Nicholson suggested adding "or required as a condition of renting the room" to the exemption of food and beverages served in connection with overnight or residential facilities where the food "is included as part of the cost of the room." Mr. MacDonald clarified that the exemption includes bed-and-breakfast establishments because they already MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 8 . 5:30 p.m. pay a hotel and motel room tax. . Mr. Wong stated that the City has received a letter from the Lane Council of Governments (L-COG) requesting that the Senior Nutrition Program be exempted from the tax. Mr. Boles moved to exempt the L-COG Senior Nutrition Program from the restaurant tax. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Mr. Klein explained two options for referring the tax to the voters. One consists of a charter amendment imposing a five-percent limit on any excise tax on restaurant sales, and a separate ordinance imposing a tax of three percent, defining a restaurant, etc. The ordinance could be adopted at the time the council refers the charter amendment, becoming effective only if the charter amendment passes. The second option is the charter amendment with two parts, the first imposing the five-percent limit and the second levying the three-percent tax for up to ten years, with the same definition of restaurants. The administration of the restaurant tax would be delegated to the City Manager through administrative rule-making; the council would retain the authority to oversee and change the rules. The council would put to a vote whether there should be a limitation of five percent and a restaurant tax of three percent. No subsequent ordi- nance would be referred. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to refer the charter . amendment with two parts. Mr. MacDonald asked whether the two-part charter amendment would violate the two-subject rule, and Mr. Klein answered that it would not. Mr. Rutan favored the motion, saying that separation of the charter amendment and ordinance might be confusing to voters. Mr. Klein clarified that the amendment would add approximately a page and.,a half to the City's charter, including the definition of restaurant and the exemptions. Mr. Nicholson asked whether incorporating both the limitation and the tax in the charter amendment would make it more difficult to enact changes, such as modifications of the definition of restaurant. Mr. MacDonald said that the advantage of voters having the full question before them outweighs that drawback, and a serious problem could be referred to the voters later. The motion passed 5:2, with Councilors Bascom and Nicholson opposed. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, that the council set the election date on the tax as March 23, 1993, and take final action on the resolution calling for the election on December 7, 1992. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 9 5:30 p.m. Mr. Rutan expressed appreciation for the views of the councilors-elect and the . Chamber of COtmlerce, and stated that the council must place the tax proposal before the voters as the culmination of a long decision-making process. He feared that if the March 1993 date is not set, a substantial delay in voting could occur. Ms. Bascom felt that if both the definition and the uses of the tax were more narrowly defined, as she believed appropriate, a longer lead time before the election date would be preferable. As it was, she found the March 23 date acceptable. Mr. Boles stated that the public vote is the linchpin of the entire Eugene Decisions process, although it is only one part of a package that the council has crafted. The community should have the opportunity to support it as soon as possible. Mr. Nicholson supported the motion as the only choice, although he felt that the vote should occur considerably earlier. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. D. Ad Hoc Council Committee on Implementation Issues, Recommendations on AQenda Control The item was postponed until the next council meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. . Respectfully submitted, .~~, Michea1 Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Christina Cowger) cc53023.112 MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1992 Page 10 . 5:30 p.m.