HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/08/1976 Meeting
.
M I NUT E S
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
e July 8,1976
Special meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon was called to order
by His Honor Mayor Lester E.Anderson at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber for the purpose
of presentation and first public hearing with regard to Downtown Eugene Retail Analysis
(Keyser Marston Associates) and Downtown Westside Study (John Blayney Associates).
Council members present were: Gus Keller, Eric Haws, Wickes Beal, Neil Murray, Ray
Bradley, D. W. Hamel, and Edna Shirey. Councilman Tom Williams was absent.
Mayor Anderson noted the presence of members of the Downtown Development
Board, Eugene Renewal Agency, Downtown Westside Neighborhood Association,
and Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce.
Manager said the presentations related to consideration of issues and proposal for con-
tinuing redevelopment of downtown Eugene - commercial areas by Jerry Keyser, and land
use and transportation patterns west of the downtown business area by John Blayney.
Jim Saul, planner, reviewed background of the two studies - the Keyser study authorized
by the Renewal Agency, the Blayney study authorized by the Council, both distributed to
Council members. Both studies resulted from the major central Eugene project, the
Keyser study being the first major study of retail sales activity in the downtown area
since completion of the renewal project. The Blayney report, he said, deals with the
area immediately west of the business district - between Charnel ton and Jefferson,
7th and 13th - an area having a history of conversion to commercial zoning but indicated
for high-density residential use in the present General Plan. Mr. Saul said that two
e recommendations coming from a previous study conducted by Blayney called for expanding
the renewal project to the west by development of a downtown mall between Charnel ton
- and Lincoln, and to give consideration to developing high-density apartments immediately
to the west of that development. Because of those recommendations, a refinement study
of that area was initiated after which, through the Housing and Community Development
Commission, the current study was authorized. Mr.Saul noted Council direction for study
of alternatives between retention of existing zoning pattern and continuation of
present development trends, or maximum commercial or maximum residential development.
Also, an evaluation and assessment of the impacts of those alternatives. That study
is the subject of Blayney's presentation at this meeting, he said, noting that the
Keyser and Blayney reports each complimented the other.
Jerry Keyser said his study covered an analysis of the downtown retail market, one
that covered familiar ground. The goals established early in the downtown project were
to attract major retailers. However, that type of expansion has occurred outside the
downtown area in the Valley River Center which now has four major department stores.
As a result, he said, the downtown area has fallen behind in retail sales in this
market area, this in spite of overall market growth. Mr. Keyser said that one major
conclusion of the analysis was that, in this market, by 1980 or shortly thereafter
another store can be attracted into this area, also more small shop space can be sup-
ported. This conclusion was also reached in the Blayney study, given the expiration
of the J. C. Penney lease downtown in the next year or so, with the expectation that
pressure will start about 1980 for an additional shopping center to develop with at
least two and maybe three additional department stores, depending upon the size.
In terms of the downtown area, he said, that was an important conclusion, because it
- brings the question of where such a shopping center will develop.
Mr. Keyser continued that the alternatives then are to identify conditions that will
-
bring major retailers to the downtown area by expanding current facilities to provide
assurance that the downtown area will be competitive with a major regional shopping
3~ 7/8/76 - 1
-'
center and Valley River. This will require at least three department stores includ-
ing at least. one already in the downtown area, with the advantage of an enclosed air e
conditioned mall and space available for parking. He felt the market will support
such expansion downtown as well as maintain existing retail outlets there to which ~
commitment has been made to this point. He added that there are potential tenants for
such expansion. Financing a center and parking would have to be evaluated, he said,
as well as a study of a development that could be accomplished in a compact manner
with existing facilities and compatible to the westside neighborhood. He was confident .
it could be accomplished and noted his conclusions were reinforced by the Blayney report.
Turning to timing, Mr. Keyser said generally it takes about five to six years from
initiation of, planning to opening a store for a regional shopping center. Because of
Valley River's recent expansion, market analyses suggest it will be the early 1980s
before pressures begin to develop for further retail expansion. And given the expira-
tion of Sears downtown lease in 1983, planning started now could lead to a store's
opening in 1981/82, which would appear to be good timing so far as attempting to secure
Sears as a tenant. Beginning now would also assist in retaining Penney's in the downtown
area, he said. Summarizing, Mr. Keyser said he was very optimistic that the ingredients
were present for an in-town shopping center, developed in such a way that it would
reinforce what is already downtown, and he recommended that the next step be taken now
if the community was desirous of pursuing this opportunity.
John Blayney summarized alternatives in the Downtown Westside Study, an attempt to re-
solve the existing conflict between the Council's adopted General Plan and existing
zoning without prejudging which should have priority - maximum residential, maximum
commercial, or mixed. He noted decisions were needed on what to do about an in-town
shopping center, land use in the westside area, and traffic patterns, depending upon
the ESATS update. He reviewed present conditions in the westside area - C-2 and R-2 e
zoning - and character of the area, predominently residential, except on the thorough- .-.-
fares, with more than half the residential use on land zoned for commercial use. He
noted surveys taken in the area which revealed condition of housing and type of
occupancy, including number of persons per unit, rental or owner, income, preference
for residence location in Eugene, etc. Mr. Blayney noted the high regard people living
in that area had for it. Also the amount of land sales activity and that the resi-
dential assessed value was increasing in the westside area faster than that on commercial
properties.
Mr. Blayney said an attempt was made to determine the amount of housing that might be
attracted to the area. Projections indicate that the Eugene/Springfield area will add
about lOOO, apartments per year, which could mean 85 to 130 added on the average per
year should central Eugene maintain the average it has been attracting. He cited
statistics for projections for .new housing in Eugene and financial possibilities for
new housing, including use of Community Development Act funds, on which he based the
projection of perhaps 20 to 25 per year in the westside area.
With regard to study of commercial uses, Mr. Blayney's report indicated the potential
for increasing the existing 17 acres was in accord with that of Mr. Keyser. It was
quite obvious, he said, that Eugene was overbuilt when looking at extension of office
space along Willamette, Oak, and Pearl. So that expansion to the west for about two
blocks appeared potentially proportionate to the overall commercial land available
in the central area. He noted too the construction of offices was the most profitable _
ahead of residential - taking into account parking requirements. Retail was the
least profitable because of the substantial amount of land required for parking. e
Turning to traffic patterns, Mr. Blayney referred to the alternatives illustrated on --
maps, saying that obviously Washington and Jefferson, like the rest of the streets in
the westside area, were never meant to carry the number of autos they do in a day.
7/8/76 - 2 3~1
.
He strongly recommended making Lincoln a four-lane boulevard, becoming a divider be-
tween the commercial and residential areas. He reviewed the alternatives listed in
. the report, advantages and disadvantages of each, and problems encountered in connect-
ing to other routes. Also, the zoning patterns detailed in the report, detailing the
views of those people in the area - residents, businesses, property owners, neighbor-
hood association, downtown business community, and taxpayers and residents of Eugene
as a whole. Al of which led to the recommendation to develop the area immediately
west of the downtown to maximum residential use, and that a decision with regard to
handling traffic be withheld.
Manager suggested that the Keyser report be referred to the Eugene Renewal Agency,
since it was commissioned by that Agency, with the request to proceed quickly on its
review and appropriate action. Also, that the Blayney report, commissioned by the
Council, be referred to the Planning Commission for public hearings and subsequent
recommendation to the Council, including a recommendation with regard to refinement
study on the wests ide area.
Public hearing was opened.
Jon Pincus, Westside neighborhood group, asked whether there had been studies in con-
nection with these studies regarding the aesthetic preservation and total effect of
growth and traffic patterns on the entire area. Mr. Blayney answered that no specific
studies were made other than to note some handsome examples of older housing in Eugene,
With regard to traffic patterns, he said, there is no way to make any determinations
until the ESATS update is completed,
Betty Niven, member of HCDC, asked if any costs had been calculated for rebuilding
e housing that would be displaced by the Lincoln Boulevard. Mr. Blayney answered that
the cost estimates did include that of excess property that would be displaced, plus
$15,000 relocation allowance for owners~ $12,000 for renters, but did not calculate
cost of housing formerly occupied by subsidized rentals.
Alan Maxwell, Planning Commissioner, asked if construction of the Amazon route was
contemplated concurrently with the proposed Lincoln Boulevard. Mr. Blayney said that
alternative was beyond the scope of this study, but that that decision must be handled
before a commitment is made to Lincoln. This study simply went to the point of handling
traffic in this neighborhood, he said.
Councilman Keller asked what area was defined as the "southwest quadrant." Mr. Keyser
answered that there were no specific boundaries so far as future development of another
shopping center, that would have to come out of the steps take- with regard to recom-
mendations in these studies. In his own mind, he said, there should be examination
in the Charnel ton/Lincoln corridor, going somewhat beyond the boundaries of the exist-
ing renewal project. He thought it wise for that to come as part of the planning ef-
fort, extending probably to Lincoln north of 11th.
William Carlstrom, chairman of the traffic committee of the Westside Quality Project,
asked if the depth and scope of these studies were considered adequate for pinpointing
the location of a regional shopping center and how that might correspond with the
recent directive for 30% mass transit use. Mr. Saul answered that the 30% mass transit
use was applied to all figures used in the study and in different alternatives. He
granted it was still a problem to be addressed, recognizing the 20,000 vehicles per
day coming off Washington/Jefferson corridor. He added that although the site of
- another future shopping center had not been pinpointed at this time, the text of
Blayney's report had pointed out, regarding the relationship between that center and
- the transportation network, that the proposed Lincoln Boulevard was the best possible
way of bringing traffic directly into the downtown area from 1-5.
3~ 7/8/76 - 3
!
Navarre Davis, member of the Downtown Development Board, asked Mr. Keyser's recommenqa- ;
tion with regard to implementation of his concept of the shopping center - what would
have to happen, what priorities placed, to execute that recommendation. Recognizing .
that an in-town center would occur only through a partnership between the private and
public sectors, Mr. Keyser said it would be necessary to come up with a site plan that ---'
best reinforce what is already downtown, something that would offer an incentive attract-
ing developers, something that would enhance what is already there. So the next step,
he thought, would be to work on a plan that would deal with site, traffic questions,
financial questions, perhaps talking with possible tenants with regard to interests, etc.
After that, he thought it would be appropriate then to seek a developer experienced in
putting this type of complex project together to carry out the necessary negotiations
and identify opportunities in terms of additional development or physical attributes
complimentary to what is in the existing mall and existing retail space.
Gary Bond, member of the Housing and Community Development Commission, asked what
factors led B1ayney in his report to the conclusion that the westside area would be
occupied by adults only. Mr. Blayney replied that the area covered was only that
east of Jefferson Street, not the entire westside. He said he realized that viability
of the westside neighborhood would depend on maintenance of a neighborhood school,
so he wanted to see if changes in the study area would affect whether the neighborhood
school should be maintained. He didn't think there would be an impact - that the
school (Lincoln) was secure for the time being. With regard to the kind of population
that would live east of Jefferson, Mr. Blayney expected no new single-family structures
to be constructed in that area. New construction would be apartment houses, so not many
children of school age would be expected to live there.
Councilman Bradley questioned future commercial development further to the west in
view of the city's urban growth containment policy and the assumption concerning invest- -
ment and slow growth of commercial development over the next twenty years. Mr. Blayney
responded that the scheme of mixed use was a way of exploring the idea of letting --
the boundary between residential and commercial set itself. He thought that because
of the existing commercial uses in the area there would be very little new residential
investment, HCDC will not approve rehabilitation loans in the area. He said specifics
were difficult to provide but, he said, public policy is contributing to deterioration
of the neighborhood so long as no firm decisions are made with regard to the area.
Mr. Carlstrom ~ondered whether more thought should be given to locating another shopping
center near the midtown - on undeveloped land along the Southern Pacific tracks or on
Franklin Boulevard - given the housing situation on the westside and housing problems
in general. Mr. Blayney said he was satisfied that any location east of Lincoln would
rot have a deletorious effect on the neighborhood west of Lincoln. He said the rela-
tionship of a center to the downtown mall and downtown stores was all important and
taking a center out to Franklin Boulevard, he thought, would be entirely detrimental
to downto~. He added that the fact that the downtown is now behind Valley River Center
in retail sales is an indication of what occurs when new shopping center developments
occur, and because of the major investment made by the community in the downtown area
an attempt should be made to keep that downtown retail activity going and enhance it
as part of overall community revitalization.
Greg Lipton, member of HCDC, asked why the recommendation was made to route traffic on
Lincoln which has residential use on both sides of the street - why not on Charnel ton?
Mr. Blayney answered that Charnelton functions as part of the downtown loop, it doesn't
have the capacity for additional traffic that probably has no downtown destination.
The conslusion after study was that Lincoln was as far east as the route could be moved. -
-
Councilman Murray asked if there were comparative figures on the percentage of existing
residential use along Jefferson, Lawrence, Lincoln, and Washington. Mr. Blayney said
they could be obtained, they were not available separately at this time, but he re-
ferred to the land use map showing Lincoln as having the least abutting land in
residential use. J~3
7/8/76 - 4
,
. Barbara Trojan of the Westside advisory group asked if there was any way of ensuring
quality of construction in new apartments. Mr. Blayney said the zoning ordinance
e could specify more in the way of standards than it now does. Architectural reviews
and other regulations could help, he said; it depended on the extent to which the
-- city wished to regulate the quality of construction.
Neal Sande, member of the Downtown Development Board, asked Mr. Keyser if the city in
retaining his firm for the study gave instructions for evaluation of a certain area
as the most likely place for a shopping center - was there a leaning toward the west-
side area? Mr. Keyser answered that the primary thrust of the effort was with regard
to retail space that would exist in the parking facility now under construction.
However, the Renewal Agency felt it best to put forth recommendations that would pro-
mote the best possible total downtown retailing situation. To do that, the Agency re-
quested a comprehensive analysis of the market and identification of any other oppor-
tunities that might exist. The determination of potential for an in~town shopping
center, where that might possibly best be located, and how best to meet the criteria
outlined, he said, was totally that of his firm.
Betty Niven, member of HCDC, wondered about the significance of proportionate share
of the tax base represented by downtown and Valley River. She asked whether that was
calculated under the recommendations made in the study. Mr. Blayney said not, but
he didn't think those numbers in themselves were s~gnificant. He said downtown could
probably wind up in five or six years with no department stores, and he thought that
would be disastrous.
Councilman Bradley wondered if the recommendations contemplated demolition of resi-
dential properties and rebuilding for retail or office space, or whether it would in-
e volve converting residences to commercial use. Mr. Blayney said the study did not
address the types of buildings. He added that it would probably depend upon lot sizes
.. since parking requirements for commercial uses would leave very little residential
character if a residence was taken for commercial use.
Scott Lieuallen, Westside advisory group, asked what provision woul~ be made for bi-
cyclists and pedestrians to cross Lincoln. Mr. Blayney thought it would be handled
about the same as the Washington/Jefferson traffic is now handled - a median strip,
or more signalization for traffic control.
Mr. Lipton wondered if there was any validity to the point that siting of another large
store on the west side would have the effect of not drawing people through the down-
town commercial area, whereas a large store built on the east side would tend to draw
people through. Mr. Keyser suggested the best way to answer that would be to authorize,
in the next ste~ exploration of some other alternative which would give the opportunity
to review such a suggestion.
Councilwoman Beal said she had the impression there would be no further urban renewal
funds, yet clearly the recommendation is to go ahead with downtown expansion. Mr. Keyser
noted funds available from tax increment funding under Oregon law. Charles Kupper,
Housing and Community Conservation director, added that about $850,000 of surplus
funds would be extended to the ERA under the project closeout agreement, some of
which could be used for additional work in the downtown area.
An unidentified member of the Westside advisory group said she understood that about a
third of the housing in the westside area was in need of major repairs, and she asked
- the cost of this study and the funding source. John Porter, planning director, answered
that the estimated one-third figure was a rough planning department estimate which was
- updated by the consultants. The maximum charge for the study, he said, was $60,000
funded through the planning department budget.
3tflf 7/8/76 - 5
J
Mr. Sande, .with regard to tax increment funding, noted that those funds were now tied .
up in the parking structures. Mr, Keyser was optimistic that funding could be worked
out for the recommended program, so much so that he said he would recommend proceed- e
ing with the necessary action to implement such a program.
,~
Counclman M~rray asked for a comparison between dealing with a developer on commercial
. expansion and the approach of establishing some kind of local development corporation,
a combination of public and private interests. Me. Keyser answered that to make a
center competitive it would. be necessary to have at least three major department stores _
some of which may already be in Eugene. It would also be necessary, to be competitive,
he said, that those three stores be put into a center~type configuration a very ex-
pensive and complex project. Because of that, he said, there were a limited number of
developers, nationwide, with the ability and expertise to accomplish that type of project.
It would still be a public/private partnership, but the odds were that a developer would
have to be brought in.
Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented.
Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Hamel to refer to the Planning Commission for
hearing and subsequent recommendation to the Council the westside refine-
ment studies, with referral also to the public for input from-those who
testified at this hearing.
Councilman Murray asked if there was a time element involved. Mr. Saul noted a meeting
scheduled with property owners and tenants in the Lincoln School area on July 28 with
regard to the westside refinement plan. He thought the first major public hearing would
be at a special meeting of the Planning Commission in mid- or late August.
Councilman Haws asked whether there would be public hearings before the Renewal Board e
with regard to the Keyser study (commissioned by the Agency). Mr. Kupper explained '>...
that there was no need for hearing before the Agency Board unless the plan was
changed. If staff recommended expansion of the renewal project area, constituting
amendment, he said, there would be a public hearing; if staff recommendation says
expansion of the retail area is not to be pursued, there would be no amendment and no
need for public hearing. In further response to Mr. Haws, Mr. Kupper said that if
there was amendment and a public hearing before the Agency Board, then the issue would
come back to the Council, as well as to the Planning Commission, for review of that
amendment.
Rollcall. vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, all
Council members present voting aye.
Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned.
~.
Charles T. Henry) ~
City Manager
-
.--
7/8/76 - 6 3l.f S