Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: November 27, 2006 Agenda Item Number: 2A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the October 11, 2006, Work Session, October 18, 2006, Workshop, and October 23, 2006, Work Session. ATTACHMENTS A. October 11, 2006, Work Session B. October 18, 2006, Workshop C. October 23, 2006, Work Session FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Lynda Rose Telephone: 682-5017 Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M061127\S0611272A.doc ATTACHMENT A M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall October 11, 2006 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Gary Papé, George Poling, Betty Taylor. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor, Andrea Ortiz. Mayor Piercy convened the City Council work session. She noted that Ms. Ortiz, Mr. Pryor, and Ms. Solomon had conflicts that prevented them from being able to participate in the meeting. A. ACTION: A Resolution Expressing the City Council’s Opposition to Ballot Measure 48 and Encouraging Eugene Voters to Oppose the Measure Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved the following resolution: Whereas Measure 48 would amend the constitution to limit the biennial percentage of in- crease in State spending to the percentage increase in the state population, plus inflation. Whereas the passage of Measure 48 would seriously impact State funding for important community services such as education, law enforcement and corrections, housing, health care, senior services, infrastructure, veterans programs, and economic development. Whereas Measure 48 could cause cities to take up the gap, resulting in pressure on local budgets. Be it resolved by the City Council of Eugene that the Council goes on record in opposi- tion to Measure 48 and encourages voters to oppose this measure. Mayor Piercy stressed that the resolution was drafted by the City Council; such a resolution could not be generated by staff. Ms. Taylor related that the League of Oregon Cities opposed the ballot measure with a straw vote. Mr. Papé asked if the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) reviewed the ballot measures, adding that this was the normal process. Mayor Piercy replied that she had contacted the CCIGR and had heard only from Ms. Taylor. She said the ballots would be mailed on October 20 and the issue was time-sensitive. Mr. Papé stated that he appreciated the time-sensitivity of the issue, but pointed out that the MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 1 Work Session measure had not been placed on the ballot “yesterday.” He felt the council should follow its normal process rather than bringing it up for “an eleventh hour decision” with only five councilors present. Ms. Bettman disagreed. She believed that for this particular measure a council resolution was appropriate. She likened Ballot Measure 48 to ballot measures 5, 47, and 50 from past elections, which she said were measures aimed at “asphyxiating local governments.” Mr. Kelly echoed Ms. Bettman’s comments. He said people who wish to reduce the services of government should come forward and select the services they did not want anymore rather than taking such a broad move. He noted that Ballot Measure 48 was similar to a measure passed in Colorado some years earlier; the results of the ballot measure had been so devastating that the people of Colorado had since voted to put the measure in abeyance. The motion passed unanimously, 5:0. B. WORK SESSION: Implementation Strategies for Sustainable Business Initiative City Manager Taylor asked Council, Public, and Government Affairs Manager Mary Walston to introduce the topic. Ms. Walston stated that this was intended to be an initial conversation to start the implementation process of the recommendations in the Sustainable Business Initiative (SBI) report. She underscored that the report contained broad ideas and admittedly lacked in detail. She said the work session would provide the council with a chance to fill in the details. She related that at every meeting of the SBI Task Force the Mayor asked what the City could do to support sustainable business, what it could do to encourage sustainable business practices, and what the City could do to educate the public. To that end, six recommendations had been prepared by staff for the council’s consideration. Ms. Walston noted that Councilor Ortiz requested no action be taken in her absence. Ms. Walston reviewed the recommendations, listed in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS): ? Reaffirm the commitment to sustainability through the adoption of a resolution; ? Accept the SBI report as a basis for future actions; ? Consider making the recommendations in the report a council priority action item in 2007; ? Prepare an ordinance to establish a sustainability commission as a standing committee advisory to the council; ? Develop a budget package within the framework of the FY08 budget process ? Assign a staff person to more fully develop the ideas and recommendations. Ms. Walston also noted that a draft resolution in support of the first SBI recommendation was in the packet Mayor Piercy asked representatives of the SBI Task Force to speak about the proposed resolution. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 2 Work Session Rusty Rexius, a member of the task force, stated that the goal of the process was for the council to take the report and create a mechanism to “put it into play.” He acknowledged that it was not specific; it was intended to be a framework. He felt the report was a great start. Bob Doppelt, coordinator for the SBI Task Force, said the he hoped the resolution would let the business community know that growing sustainable practices and adopting sustainable purchasing was a City priority. Mr. Kelly thanked the task force for the work. He related that Rabbi Husbands-Hankin made global warming the topic of his Yom Kippur sermon. He said there was an interfaith effort to educate people about global warming nationwide entitled Interfaith Power and Light. He thought the SBI work was a good place to start. Mr. Papé asked if there was any idea what the cost of staff time for the commission would be. City Manager Taylor replied that staff had come up with a ballpark estimate based on experience with other commissions. He recalled that in the last budget cycle $100,000 had been set aside for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 to implement the ideas that might come forward from the SBI Task Force. He said anything ongoing would be something that the City would have to anticipate and consider as part of all of the other demands on the budget. He added that he had asked City Attorney Glenn Klein to prepare an administrative order to help move forward staffing an interim office wherein existing staff would work on temporary assignment to provide support for moving the action plans and budget planning forward. Mr. Papé wanted the City to lead by example. He added that he could feel comfortable with the second staff-prepared motion as it moved to “consider” the recommendations of the report as a new council priority rather than to use the word “make,” for instance. He said the SBI report would be in competition with other “huge” demands on the community. Mayor Piercy commented that she wanted to encourage the support of businesses that produced sustainable products and the support of any businesses that wished to take on sustainable business practices. She said neither one determined a “perfection level” of sustainability. Mr. Papé thought there should be more specificity in the language. Ms. Bettman asserted that the resolution did not seem different from the motion to accept the SBI report. She wanted to see stronger language in the resolution, perhaps embracing the first three recommendations. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Ms. Walston affirmed that the SBI Task Force had made suggestions as to who would be on the commission. Ms. Bettman asked how the council would go about making decisions about who would serve so that it would be in the ordinance. Ms. Walston replied that she assumed the council would review the draft ordinance in a work session or at the actual public hearing and, like other ordinances, the council could comment on it and make changes. Ms. Bettman asked if staff would pick options “out of a hat.” Ms. Walston responded that staff would check the report and consult with members of the task force to get their ideas, not unlike the Police Commission at its formation. Ms. Bettman was uncertain how to read the fifth staff-prepared motion, which sought to direct the City Manager to prepare a budget proposal for the SBI recommendations. She asked if it meant the budget proposal for implementing the full time equivalent (FTE) employee for staffing the commission plus the MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 3 Work Session meetings would come back within the City Manager’s proposed budget. She wanted clarification as to what the motion indicated. City Manager Taylor replied that the motion ensured that a decision package would be formulated that listed exactly what it would cost to create the capacity within the City organization. He reminded the councilors that when anticipating the Police Auditor’s Office, the decision package had been included in his recommendations and as part of the proposed budget, though it was developed as a stand- alone decision package. Regarding the sixth motion, which directed the City Manager to assign staff to develop a plan to implement the ideas and recommendations in the report, Ms. Bettman asked if this was not redundant, given that the direction would be to move forward with the top three recommendations. She asked why staff would be taken from working on other issues when the $100,000 could be allocated toward setting up the position, a commission, and the support of those efforts. City Manager Taylor replied that he thought the recommenda- tions and the implementation strategies should be pursued sooner rather than later. He felt that waiting until it was a budget item would delay the start of the process until July 1, 2007. He said he would propose bringing someone from the environmental policy team with the current funding and then see if the council would support ongoing funding in the FY08 budget. He sought to speed up implementation activities and the staffing of the office so that it would be put into place this year and not next year. Ms. Bettman asserted that it made more sense to move forward with implementing the first three recommen- dations with the existing $100,000. Ms. Taylor thanked the task force for the hard work. She expressed her enthusiasm for the work. She had hoped to adopt all of the recommendations at the present meeting. She wanted the council to decide to provide ongoing funding. She averred that the “end of life itself could happen” as a result of global warming. She would like the business community to strive for perfection in its sustainable business endeavors so that everything done was sustainable. Regarding the funding, Ms. Taylor averred that the SBI work was more important than many of the other things the City was doing. She suggested that the Police Commission could go out of existence. She felt it had served its purpose; the council could take over policy discussions about the police and the funding for the Police Commission could be reallocated to the proposed SBI commission. Mr. Poling supported the SBI recommendations and he supported getting a “jump start” on it. He stressed the importance of being fair and equitable to all businesses whether they were local businesses that had been established for a long time or new businesses to the area. He averred that there were “dynamite young businesses” in the city. He did not want to give one an advantage over another. Mr. Kelly agreed that it was important to work with all businesses at whatever level they were working toward sustainability in order to “help them up the ramp.” Mr. Kelly asserted that if the work was not funded in the budget, 90 percent of it would be “dead.” He said one of the ways the City expressed its priorities was how it set its funds. He noted that the office of sustainable development would not be “some giant organization”; rather, it would have no more than 1.5 FTE. He averred it was eminently doable. He wanted to get things started, but he thought it was inefficient to take someone who was doing other work now and reassign them. He suggested that the motion combine the intent of staff’s final motion and the issue of budget package. He wanted to use the $100,000 to post the position as soon as possible and, in the same motion, state the intent of council that the ongoing funding for the office would be in the draft budget for FY08. Additionally, he hoped the next work session on this topic would be soon. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 4 Work Session City Manager Taylor did not anticipate having another work session on the SBI report. He thought, instead, it would be considered as an action item on October 23. Mr. Papé expressed appreciation to Ms. Walston for all of the work she had been doing. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, City Manager Taylor said the SBI effort was comparable to the other important items that were funded through the budget process. He likened it to the City’s commitment to diversity and human rights as it was a core value and deserved that kind of attention. He averred that making it a council priority would mean that the council would receive a multi-year action plan that the council would then track; the council would receive quarterly reports. He said it would be on the Web site. Mr. Papé was concerned that the council was “putting the cart before the horse.” He did not want to preempt the session that would happen in January with the “new” council. Mr. Kelly recommended the following: ? That the council appoint the SBI commission; ? That the term length be three years, with terms staggered initially so the commission would not have 100 percent turnover; ? A 12-member commission seemed large to him, but if the council moved forward with that number, he suggested that each councilor nominate one person and the other four positions be “at large” po- sitions. Ms. Taylor liked Mr. Kelly’s ideas. She hoped that some of the people who had served on the task force would consider being on the commission. City Manager Taylor observed that two of the recommendations were to be carbon-neutral as a community by 2020 and also to generate zero waste. He called those big and worthy goals. He thought this was why the City should get the resources together and the teamwork to be able to talk about how the City would begin to engage in providing the leadership to address it and also to engage the City’s partners in the community in the discussion. Mayor Piercy noted that part of the work was comprised of meeting with other parts of local government. She said it seemed there was a lot of interest in partnership. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 12:47 p.m. C: WORK SESSION th Review of Responses to the 10 & Charnelton Request for Proposals Mr. Papé asked why this issue was being discussed at this session. He asked if the council could adjourn to an executive session. City Manager Taylor replied that staff intended to explain why it recommended a specific proposal. City Attorney Klein clarified that this was a subject that could be go into an executive session, but at this level it was not necessary to do so. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 5 Work Session Denny Braud, Senior Development Analyst from the Planning and Development Department, reviewed the three proposals that had come in response to the Request for Proposals (RFP) the City issued for the site on th the corner of 10 Avenue and Charnelton Street. He noted that the RFPs had gone through two levels of review: a staff review and a review conducted by the Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee (ERAC). He noted that the ERAC had been expanded by three people for this specific purpose, in order to bring in additional expertise in the areas of financing, sustainability, and multi-unit housing development. Regarding the Beam Development proposal, Mr. Braud stated that it was contingent upon acquisition of the adjacent privately owned property as the proposal was for a full-block development. Mr. Braud said the Sockeye Development proposal responded to the RFP objectives well, but included a $3.36 million funding shortfall. He commented that given Sockeye’s previous development projects, the City would expect a project done by them to be of very high quality. Nonetheless, the level of subsidy requested was high. Mr. Braud highlighted the proposal from the TK Partners (Tom Kemper group). He averred that the proposed housing density could support the Great Street vision for Broadway. Mr. Braud conveyed staff’s support for the TK Partners proposal. He reported that the proposal had also garnered nearly unanimous support from the ERAC. He noted that staff conducted due diligence on the proposal and had spoken with other cities in which Kemper has worked, who gave favorable feedback regarding Kemper’s work. Additionally, he said Kemper’s connection with Scanlan Kemper Bard, a major real estate investment firm in Portland, brought a lot of credibility to Kemper’s financing plan. Staff sought direction to enter into an exclusive negotiating period of approximately 90 days with Kemper, after which terms would come back before the council for approval. Those terms included purchase price, timeliness, and additional detail regarding the overall development concept. Mr. Klein clarified that if a council discussion was related to giving specific direction as to what the negotiations should be with an entity, the council could choose to go into an executive session, but if the question was related to gaining more information about each of the proposals and/or choosing which one to pursue, an executive session should not be called. Mr. Papé expressed his preference for holding an executive session for a discussion of strategy with the City Manager. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Braud stated that the original offer for the property from Oregon Research Institute (ORI) was $400,000. Ms. Taylor observed that the current offer, $192,000, was much less than that. Mr. Braud cautioned the council that initiating negotiations did not indicate an acceptance of that purchase price. He stressed that this was one of the “deal points” that would be negotiated over the 90-day period. Ms. Taylor agreed that the proposal from TK Partners was the best of the three received, though she was not prepared to act on it at the present meeting. She did not believe the downtown area needed any more retail space. She opined that if the City gave a subsidy it should get something in return. She suggested that some of the space could be used for a theater, noting that one of the small local theaters was looking for a new space. Mr. Kelly called the proposals exciting. He commented that ‘subsidy’ had become a dirty and political word. He pointed out that no one called the money spent on road projects that access a new development a MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 6 Work Session subsidy. He said in this case government would be spending money for the community good, but the vehicle for the community good might be private development. He felt the fundamental community good would be that more people would live downtown, more high-quality development would be located downtown, and this development would go on the tax rolls. He said while the land sale price was of interest to him, the ultimate potential benefit to the community, both psychological and economic, were of a greater order of magnitude for him. Mr. Kelly liked the Sockeye proposal because of the low-income housing but could not support it because of the funding gap. He agreed that the TK Partners proposal was the best. He suggested the council pass the motion in the AIS and then plan for an executive session to discuss terms and conditions. Mr. Papé called the proposals exciting. He believed all three of the firms to be quality firms. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Braud clarified that the City paid $900,000 for the site, including the site where the present library was located. He added that one could roughly estimate that the cost of the site was $300,000, given that the purchase was for three quarter-blocks and the site in question was one quarter-block portion of it. Mr. Papé pointed out that the City spent $200,000 on the demolition. He surmised that approximately $600,000 had been invested in the property. He supported getting private investment in the downtown area. He wanted to try to accommodate private development as well as the City could. Nonetheless, he preferred to discuss the finer points of this negotiation in an executive session. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Braud clarified that the Beam proposal envisioned the City contributing the land to the project, and loaning it between $2 million and $2.7 million, and the repayment of the loan would be contingent on how well the project performed financially. Ms. Bettman said she appreciated that the ERAC had been expanded. She felt it added to the credibility of the plan. She felt the council could proceed with the motion in the AIS and then hold an executive session to iron out the details. Ms. Bettman indicated her support for the TK Partners proposal. She commented that the ultimate objective in the downtown area was to get more people there. She said the creation of housing downtown would further this objective and agreed that some subsidy would likely be required. She did like the Beam proposal except for the level of public subsidy it included. She did not believe the City should subsidize retail space in the downtown area. She noted that there was a small amount of commercial space in the TK Partners proposal and she felt it was an appropriate level to include in the development. She wanted to see the City move forward with it. Ms. Taylor wanted more time for the public to comment and for councilors to consider those comments. She did not believe executive sessions should be held unless they were absolutely required by law. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to direct the Agency Director to enter into a 90-day exclusive negotiation period with TK Partners for the sale and development of th the 10 Avenue & Charnelton Street development site, based on their proposal, and to return to the City Council, acting as the Urban Renewal Agency, with the proposed terms of the sale and development following the negotiation period. Ms. Taylor indicated her opposition for the motion, noting that she was not ready to support it at this time. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Papé reiterated that three councilors were missing. He felt this proposal was too large to vote on without the three councilors who were unable to attend. Mr. Papé, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to table the motion to October 16. The mo- tion passed, 4:1; Ms. Bettman voting in opposition. Mr. Braud noted that Tom Kemper and Ron Skov from TK Partners, were in attendance. He thanked them for coming. Ms. Taylor suggested the council meet at 5:30 p.m. prior to the public hearings on October 16. City Manager Taylor recommended a 6:30 p.m. timeframe. He said he and the Mayor would poll the councilors to determine the meeting time. The meeting adjourned at 1:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 8 Work Session ATTACHMENT B M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Workshop Bascom-Tykeson Room—Eugene Public Library th 100 West 10 Avenue October 18, 2006 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Mayor Kitty Piercy, Jennifer Solomon, Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Andrea Ortiz, Gary Papé, George Poling, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy convened the City Council Workshop meeting. A. WORKSHOP: City Council Priority Issues – City Hall Complex City Manager Dennis Taylor introduced Jonah Cohen, member of the design team from Thomas Hacker Architects, Incorporated. Mr. Cohen stated that the main objective of the workshop was to finally begin the design process for the City Hall Complex. He sought to introduce the council to conceptual design, which was the process of laying out and testing how the different departments and divisions of the building fit together on a specific site. He said the design team would take into account sustainable design opportunities, planning for open space, public and service access, expansion potential, security issues, and the implication of the police patrol being integral with a city hall or in a separate facility. He explained that the team had used computer- generated massing programs to delineate design ideas for the City Hall complex on either the existing City Hall site or the “Butterfly/Rock N’ Rodeo” site. He noted that the council was still open to another site, should one become viable. Mr. Cohen said the design team would be convening the fourth community forum at the United Methodist Church on November 2. He stated that the council would then meet on November 22 to narrow its focus to one site and possibly one design. He suggested that the council give feedback as to what kind of input was desired from the next forum. Mr. Cohen noted that the architects held three focus groups, meeting with a group on accessibility, representatives of the communities of color, and youth groups. He said the design team would be distribut- ing summaries of what the design team had learned from those focus groups. Design team member, Thomas Hacker, using a PowerPoint presentation, discussed the stylistic elements of th public architecture both past and present. He said at the beginning of the 20 century, there was a common architectural language for civic buildings that moved into more of a plain design toward the middle of the century. MINUTES—City Council October 18, 2006 Page 1 Workshop Doug Macy, also on the design team, said there was an opportunity in this project to add to the “richness” of the open space in Eugene. He commented that the open space would have to be thoughtfully done as the building would not be a “24-hour building.” He related that the Park Blocks master plan committee suggested that there be an active “programmable” space for all of the events and activities of the community and that this might possibly be associated with City Hall. Mr. Hacker showed conceptual design sketches of the building footprint and mass. He commented that the circular structure of the Council Chamber appealed to the design team as a symbolic element that denoted a sense of the importance of democracy in the City. Design team member Ellen Teninty facilitated the discussion. Mr. Papé asked if the drawings incorporated the concepts that the team brought up before. Mr. Hacker affirmed that the team had done so, including the sun and wind angles that were discussed. He said the design team was seeking the council’s feedback on the relationship of the buildings. Mr. Hacker reviewed the options for whole block and half-block designs and designs that included or excluded the police patrol. He noted that the ground floor square footage needs for the Eugene Police Department (EPD) for a combined design would be 30,000 and without the patrol it was 10,000 square feet. Mr. Hacker said one assumption was that one of the main drivers for the designs was sustainability. He explained that the designs attempted to increase the amount of façade that faced north or south and to decrease the façade that faced west or east. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Hacker stated that the overall volume for the half-block and full-block designs was essentially the same. Suggesting the potential that police/essential services portions were sandwiched together with the rest of the building, Mr. Pape asked whether more of the building must be designed to a different seismic requirement than if police was side-by-side with the other functions. Mr. Hacker said that design team found it was essentially impossible to stack police in a separate block and still meet the goals of efficiency, public access, and sustainability. Mr. Papé liked the Park Blocks option the design team discussed previously because it provided access to that park and because of its proximity to the open area by the Hult Center for the Performing Arts (HCPA) and the convention center. He asked if there was a scheme that would have an open area running diagonally through the site to the open area by the HCPA. Mr. Hacker said it was possible. He noted that he had just visited a new public library in Minneapolis that featured this design element. Ms. Taylor thought the Police Department should be separate from the rest of the City Hall function. She wondered, if there was a separate station, why the court could not be with it. Principle Facility Project Manager Mike Penwell replied that it was possible, but the process on which the council and design team embarked led to this point in the design work. Regarding the half-block option that included patrol, Ms. Taylor felt it would seem more like one was going into a “police state” rather than a city hall. Mr. Kelly said he thought one of the main goals of the project was to combine all of the downtown City services with the possible exception of the patrol function of the EPD. He wanted to receive something in MINUTES—City Council October 18, 2006 Page 2 Workshop writing about why the police patrol would need to be on the ground floor if it did share the City Hall complex. He recommended discussing with the Human Rights Commission (HRC) whether the police patrol function should be consolidated or not. Mr. Pryor preferred one of the whole-block designs because it gave more flexibility in design. He also thought a symmetrical design would have a longer-lasting appeal. He expressed a preference for the Whole Block 2 designs. If he had to choose a half-block option, he would pick Half Block 2. Mayor Piercy liked the idea of the Park Blocks feeding into the building as well as the design element of having light going through the space. She related that she had reviewed the feedback from the focus groups and one thing that had come up was that having the police “front and center” was a problem. She said the focus groups wanted the building to be inviting and for it to be “not just another building.” Mayor Piercy also noted that the Rock N’ Rodeo site had allegedly been the former site of the Ku Klux Klan headquarters. She felt it would be good to “reclaim it.” Ms. Bettman asserted that one key issue was the site to locate the facility on. She agreed that some people did not feel comfortable with a police presence. However, she did not think the answer to that was to relegate the police to another location; rather, she wanted to integrate the police into the City Hall. She liked the idea of symmetry because it would help people easily understand where to go to access services they needed. The issue of whether it was a half-block or whole block was not paramount to her. She was more concerned with the proposal to utilize the current City Hall site because of the added expense of demolition. She supported using any of the half-block designs as long as patrol was included. Mr. Penwell said one of the problems lay in finding the balance between the police presence with police functionality. He agreed that one solution would be to place patrol on the third floor, but with the cars on a lower level, it would require moving back and forth with equipment which could require a separate elevator. He acknowledged that having too much police presence could be an issue. Mr. Hacker said the designs the design team presented looked at the future building from the “pure functionality aspects.” He indicated there would be some compromises. Mr. Cohen added that the compromises would go in both directions because compromising efficiency could compromise accessibility, as an example. Mr. Poling indicated his preference for the Whole Block 2 and 3 designs. He believed that the police patrol should be in the same location. He predicted that the same people who would complain about the police in the City Hall would complain about the police having “their own little kingdom” in a different area. He said the current police station location was “just another office entrance” and did not have a huge impact on the City Hall. He liked the Whole Block 3B because of the open space around the facility. Ms. Ortiz preferred the whole block designs. Her first choice was Whole Block 3C/D. She wanted some continued police presence, but she did not think the patrol arm of the EPD needed to be there. She questioned why the bulk of patrol should be downtown when it could have a facility that would meet its needs elsewhere. She did not like the half-block designs because she felt the buildings were too imposing. She commented that she liked the idea of a building that was connected to the future and to the past. Mr. Kelly remarked that he liked all five designs. The asymmetry of the Whole Block 1 appealed to him. He thought it would be interesting to consider the cost of moving twice and razing the existing City Hall. As MINUTES—City Council October 18, 2006 Page 3 Workshop for the location of the police patrol, he thought having dedicated elevators could facilitate a shift change and other movement needs. Ms. Taylor preferred the half-block design. She thought the least inviting aspect of the present City Hall was the Municipal Court and the people who sat outside of it. She also did not understand why the police were different from the fire personnel. She felt that having stations located in the different areas of the City would facilitate EPD’s ability to meet public safety needs. Mr. Papé was undecided about the police issue, but he thought there should be some police presence downtown. Regarding the verticality of the building, he said while it might increase costs it would also help people to easily find the services in the building. He added that he was uncertain that the Permit Information Center (PIC) needed a whole floor. Mr. Hacker remarked that the design team considered the dilemma regarding the Municipal Court. He related that one idea was to provide a separate entrance for “them.” Mr. Papé said a lot of the traffic into the court area was due to people paying fines. Mr. Pryor was disturbed by comments about the courts that referred to the people waiting for municipal court as “them.” He reminded everyone that “them” is really us. Mr. Pryor averred that form must follow function. He was dependent on the input from the experts, such as Police Chief Robert Lehner and others, for the recommendation about the best configuration. He added that it was conceivable that the building will ultimately need more space. He recommended considering which building design could most easily be added to. Mr. Hacker responded that the half-block site would be more difficult to add on to. He said there was always the option that the expansion would happen on another site. Mr. Poling said the Council Chamber should be the main focus, architecturally. He commented that one of the reasons he liked the Whole Block 3 design was that there was some area to expand into. Regarding the issue of a police presence at city hall, Mr. Poling favored having it. He noted that the Chief had spoken of changing to a precinct concept of public safety. He echoed Mr. Pryor’s suggestion that the Chief be consulted on the design. Mr. Poling noted that the half-block site under consideration was under private and County ownership. He asked if the private owners had been contacted. Mr. Penwell replied that he had contacted two out of the three; one said to let him know when the City was interested in talking to him and the other merely said it was an interesting idea. He said the County indicated that whatever the City and County did had to be mutually beneficial. Ms. Bettman favored the half-block designs because of the density and the implications for sustainability. She bemoaned the fact that fire administration could not be included in a central city hall. In terms of the patrol issue, she wished to point out that three ballot measures for a separate police station had failed. Ms. Bettman felt the public entrance should be the central focal point of the structure. She thought the Council Chamber should be visible and accessible. Additionally, she believed that all of the floors could be designed to be accessible. MINUTES—City Council October 18, 2006 Page 4 Workshop Mr. Hacker stated that the Half Block B had the public entrance as the focal point, possibly with escalators. Mayor Piercy was amenable to a police presence in the City Hall. She was not opposed to placing the patrol arm of the EPD elsewhere, but acknowledged that this would make two buildings instead of one. She noted that the City’s desire to build a green building might preclude being able to afford to build two structures. She also did not have a preference of one site over the other. She did like having the Council Chamber “up.” She said she would like a cultural space. She hoped there could be a conversation about using space in that way. Mr. Kelly asked that costs for a potential second building for police patrol be included in cost estimates. Mr. Kelly agreed that the public entrance should be a focal point, but thought the Council Chamber should be made architecturally distinctive. He suggested the team bring back a design “not unlike” the Half Block B with the police patrol on the second floor. Ms. Taylor wanted the Council Chamber to be central and inviting. She felt that people who wanted to speak were intimidated by the idea, so it should be easy to find. She did not believe that planning for expansion worked. She also was not certain that there was a need to expand because she thought “more and more people were working at home.” Ms. Ortiz also liked the design that featured an elevated Council Chamber. Mr. Papé indicated his preference for the half-block design utilizing the Butterfly Lot. He said it just felt right for the community. He agreed that the Council Chamber should be architecturally distinctive. He observed that the current Council Chamber was the least-used space in the City. He noted that he had recently visited Boise, Idaho and the council chamber there included sound walls that could be pulled in front of the dais so that it could be utilized for other functions. Councilor Solomon preferred the Whole Block 3 C/D design, but said she could be persuaded to keep the patrol arm of the EPD “in the mix.” She liked how the Council Chamber had been treated in that design. Ms. Teninty summarized the input from the council. Mr. Penwell commented that one of the most difficult costs to capture for the half-block site would be the purchase price. Mr. Papé suggested getting the property appraised. Mr. Kelly remarked that it might be cheaper to replace the Parcade. Mayor Piercy said one option would be to utilize the half-block design with the existing city hall location. She recommended asking the public what would excite it about this building and what it would take to make it a symbol of local democracy. Ms. Teninty asked how the council would want to ascertain from the public which site should be chosen. Ms. Taylor recommended providing information on the financial implications of moving and demolishing the existing building. She added that when discussing how the Chief envisioned the police facilities in the new MINUTES—City Council October 18, 2006 Page 5 Workshop building people should remember that “he is not Chief of Police for life” and what he wanted in it was “not a crucial thing.” Mr. Papé wanted to hear from the public about which site it would choose and whether the patrol division should be located there. Ms. Teninty reiterated that the next public forum would be held on November 2 from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the First United Methodist Church. The Web site for information was www.eugenecityhall.com, or people could call 682-5222 (TTY 984-3135). She said the design team was also offering tours of the existing City Hall in order to show people why the council was moving forward with the process. Mayor Piercy conveyed her appreciation for the work of the design team. The meeting adjourned at 1:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—City Council October 18, 2006 Page 6 Workshop ATTACHMENT C M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall October 23, 2006 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER th Mayor Piercy reported that the Holt International Children's Services 50 anniversary conference was attended by representatives from 33 countries. She noted the Bioneers Conference at Lane Community College and commended the Human Rights Commission and other community partners for the conference on mental health. She said the Southwestern Oregon Chapter of the American Institute of Architects presented the City of Eugene with a certificate of appreciation for leadership in sustainability for adoption of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification for City buildings. She shared an expression of appreciation and admiration for the performance of Eugene police officers during the recent incident at North Eugene High School. Ms. Ortiz stated she recently attended a leadership conference at Kah-Nee-Ta and would submit a written report. She felt the conference was very worthwhile and encouraged others to attend if they had the opportunity. She participated in an event at Golden Gardens Park over the weekend and was pleased to see a lot of people there, including many from outside of the neighborhood. She commended the efforts of Parks and Open Space Director Johnny Medlin. She also visited a local business involved with theater arts, Upstart Crow. Mr. Poling reminded everyone that November 7 was Election Day and ballots needed to be dropped off by 8 p.m. He was discouraged by an interview with someone who said he was not going to vote because he was not informed about issues. He noted that the deadline for Budget Committee applications was October 31. Mr. Kelly commended the Human Rights Commission for the recent Mental Health and Human Rights Conference at the University of Oregon. He said the event capacity of 300 attendees was filled by advance registrations. He said there was a rich discussion with local and nationally recognized speakers and consumer advocates and a report on next steps would be presented to the commission and the council. He said the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) held a joint meeting with the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) to review the draft Public Participation Plan and address the CAC’s concern with lack of clarity on its role and the MPC’s expectations. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 1 Work Session Ms. Bettman commended the Eugene Police Department for its prompt and effective action in response to an incident at North Eugene High School. She announced that Intergovernmental Relations Manager Jason Heuser was leaving City employment for a position with Eugene Water & Electric Board as its legislative liaison. She thanked Mr. Heuser for his effective and knowledgeable service. Mr. Pryor reported that the Human Services Commission met on October 16 and continued its discussion of restructuring the commission to achieve efficiency and provide better service. He said a consultant would assist in streamlining a very complicated system and the commission agreed that changes would be brought back to their respective elected bodies. He noted that Eugene staff was given national recognition at a recent parks conference in Seattle and many employees were teaching classes based on some of the City’s unique programs. Mr. Papé urged citizens to vote for the parks and open space ballot measure. He reminded the public that he and Mayor Piercy would be at the Market of Choice at Delta Oaks on the evening of October 24 for a conversation with citizens but would be unable to discuss issues related to hospital siting because of the land use application likely to come before the council fairly soon. He said he intended to ask for an update or work session on the River Road/Santa Clara area community park to discuss progress. City Manager Taylor reported that he spent the afternoon helping the City of Florence interview candidates for a new city manager. He was pleased with the quality of candidates. He related that he was recently certified as a credentialed city manager by the International City/County Manager Association and noted that Oregon had the most credentialed city managers per capita. B. WORK SESSION: Alternative Mobility Standards City Engineer Mark Schoening stated that the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) included alternative mobility standards (AMS) to address congestion in areas that did not meet adopted mobility standards. He introduced Lane Council of Governments Transportation Planner Tom Schwetz to explain the process for developing and adopting AMS. Mr. Schwetz presented an overview of AMS with a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Balancing Regional Mobility with a Vibrant Local Economy. He said development of AMS required local commitment to specific actions and many of those were included in the Central Lane MPO Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). He said congestion related to an excess of vehicles on a portion of roadway that resulted in speeds that were slower than normal at certain times and could be characterized as both “good” and “bad” congestion. He reviewed the positive and negative effects of congestion and said that congestion was a consequence of growth in the economy and resulting increases in dwelling units and employment and growth in urban levels of development and surrounding areas. Mr. Schwetz identified a number of variables that contributed to daily congestion such as special events, poor signal timing, bad weather, work zones and traffic incidents. He used a series of maps to illustrate geographic, population, employment, dwelling unit density and vehicle trip growth in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. He also illustrated the mobility dependence of area roadways, both state and local, and the locations of congestion currently and in 20 years. He said the next phase would be to discuss ways in which congestion could be addressed. Mr. Schwetz presented a comparison of mobility among Portland, Salem, and the Eugene-Springfield area. He said that the Eugene-Springfield area had half the congestion of most cities of comparable size, and MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 2 Work Session Portland, which was seven times larger, had 33 times the congestion of the Eugene-Springfield area. He identified congestion implications as set forth in the Statewide Congestion Overview for Oregon. He said that next steps included: ? Compile results from assessment of alternative solutions ? Develop proposal for possible changes to State’s mobility standards ? Identify possible local commitments to include in proposal In response to a question from Mr. Pryor, Mr. Schwetz said that projections would be revised within the next two months to reflect elimination of the West Eugene Parkway. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Schwetz said the rating system meant from a volume over capacity ratio standpoint that standards were established at a point where traffic could still move and the State’s standards assumed that 80 percent or less was meeting standards on a facility like Beltline. He said the State used a different measurement system than the local regional transportation plan, which used an A through F rating system. th Mr. Papé remarked how the council’s identification of the West 11 Avenue corridor as a priority related to other mobility needs that might be higher. Mr. Schoening said there were two approaches: capital th infrastructure such as improvements to Beltline and the corridor study of West 11 Avenue to consider alternative transportation modes such as EmX. He said options included adding more capacity to the system for all modes of travel and a different focus on the existing transportation system to achieve more capacity such as access management. He felt there was the right mix of strategies. Mr. Papé asked what the consequences would be if the City’s priorities were inconsistent with the OHP. Mr. Schwetz said that the region was working with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to ensure the consistency of any proposal presented to the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC), although if the OTC determined a proposal was not consistent, it could decline to approve and require certain mitigation for those facilities out of compliance with mobility standards. Mr. Papé asked how managing land use to limit vehicular demand on State highways could be accomplished since the passage of Ballot Measure 37. Mr. Schwetz said that balancing the interests of the State and property owners would require negotiation among all of the interested parties. City Manager Taylor said Ballot Measure 37 would have an impact, which was why local solutions were being considered from a land use and transportation perspective and the legislature had commissioned the “big look” at the issue. Ms. Bettman commented that when congestion reached the point that it negatively affected the economic viability of property people would be willing to negotiate in order to decrease congestion. She was pleased that the AMS proposal would come to the council for approval before it went to the MPC. She said Eugene’s lower congestion compared to similarly sized jurisdiction was also good news. She asked how “peak” hour was defined with respect to congestion. Mr. Schwetz replied that the morning peak hour was 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and the evening peak hour was 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Ms. Bettman noted that much investment and infrastructure was predicated on peak hour congestion and asked if all jurisdictions used the same standard. Mr. Schwetz replied that the peak hour definition was a standard measure of congestion although jurisdictions varied in their responses. He said in some cases, such as Portland, used a two-hour peak period on some key facilities. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 3 Work Session Ms. Bettman asked whether expanded, free bus services could be factored into the mobility standards model to determine its impact on congestion. Mr. Schwetz said that a methodology requirement was to consider a wide range of options and some analysis had been completed of the impact of expanding transit far beyond the current system. Staff would be returning with a summary of those results. Ms. Bettman asked if it was possible to specifically analyze the impact of free expanded transit. Mr. Schwetz stated that staff could perform that analysis. LOCG staff Susan Payne indicated that the challenge of analyzing the impact of free transit was lack of baseline data and a reference point to help predict people’s reaction. Mr. Schwetz added there were likely caveats staff would place around such an analysis. Ms. Bettman said she would be eager to see that analysis. Mr. Kelly said the key to developing AMS was following State statutes and administrative rules. He underscored Ms. Bettman’s point that rush hour congestion was frustrating but should be put in perspective with traffic flow during the remainder of a 24-hour period. He was nervous about using terms such as “failure” at a specific level of service as it generally meant that traffic was still proceeding but drivers might wait through a second cycle of lights at an intersection. He said that failure could connote something more devastating to the public. Ms. Bettman asked why residential was not included as a component under congestion tolerant land use th facility in the comparison of congestion table. She also asked if the State had opted out of West 11 Avenue th east of Beltline since the agenda material only referred to West 11 Avenue west of Beltline. Mr. Schwetz said the facility east of Beltline was the City’s and the State would be willing to discuss the entire corridor but the State’s section where the standards would apply was west of Beltline. He said omission of residential uses in the table was an oversight as congestion-tolerant actually referred to a mixed-use area that would include different types of residential. Mr. Schwetz said that engineers analyzing congestion data had observed that at the point of levels of service E and F the system became unstable and the models were not useful in predicting what might happen. Mr. Papé asked if there were safety indices on the various levels of service. Mr. Schwetz said there was no standard related to safety but generally speaking the more congestion the greater the opportunity for accidents. Mayor Piercy noted that the community would gain some experience with free transit when EmX service began. C. WORK SESSION: Programming of Surface Transportation Program-Urban (STP-U) Funds City Manager Taylor said that Mr. Schoening would discuss resources available to address the backlog of preservation projects. Mr. Schoening stated that consistent with the council’s previous direction, pavement preservation projects were before it for review and approval before applications were submitted to the MPC. He said Attachment B to the agenda item summary was an outline of the STP-U funds programming process and timeline. He reviewed the list of pavement preservation projects set forth in Attachment A and explained how projects were selected. He said the list totaled approximately $20 million worth of work and the council was provided with the entire list instead of selected projects so that when the STP-U criteria was established by the MPC staff would have the flexibility to pick those projects that best matched those criteria. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 4 Work Session In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening said that staff would select projects that best met identified criteria in order to maximize the success of project funding applications. Ms. Bettman indicated she would be happy to approve the list. Mr. Kelly commended Eugene’s staff for being steadfast in supporting the council’s adopted priorities during TPC discussions. He said that the criteria recommended by the TPC would come before the MPC for adoption and he and Mayor Piercy would continue to support council priorities. He noted that the metropolitan area received between $1 and $2 million in STP-U funds annually. Mr. Pryor, referring to the $20 million in projects on the list, asked approximately how much in STP-U funds would be available to the City in any year. Mr. Schoening said that Eugene might receive between 40 and 60 percent of total funds available. Mr. Pryor reinforced the point that the funds would make little progress in reducing the backlog of projects, which was growing faster than the STP-U funds available each year, and other options for addressing the backlog were required. Mr. Papé asked if Eugene typically received 50 percent of the available funds. Mr. Schoening said that when the funds were allocated by population Eugene received 42 percent. Mr. Papé asked if the council had a role in defining priorities by appointing people to the TPC or approving priorities annually or bi-annually. Mr. Schoening said the process was very complex and involved not only the TPC but required project coordination with EWEB and other entities as well as internally with a wide range of Public Works projects. He said that one of the factors in determining project priority was the practice of distributing both the inconvenience of construction and the benefits across the community. Ms. Taylor said she was pleased with the progress to obtain funding and agreed with the practice of distributing projects geographically. Ms. Bettman pointed out that while the STP-U funds were limited there was also the gas tax and dedicated system development charge transportation reimbursement and every bit helped. She said in the past the policy was to prioritize maintenance and preservation but the practice was not consistent with that. Mr. Kelly agreed that the council should not be involved in prioritization as the City’s engineering and financial model did an excellent job of monitoring projects and identifying the most urgent needs. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to approve the attached list of pave- ment preservation projects as the basis for applications for federal Surface Trans- portation Program-Urban funds for FY07-FY09 to be programmed by the Metro- politan Policy Committee. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 5 Work Session City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 6 Work Session