Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 09/11/02 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall September 11, 2002 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: David Kelly, Gary Pap~, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Gary Rayor, Bonny Bettman. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. At the request of Mayor Torrey, the council observed the events of September 11, 2001, with a minute of silence. A.WORK SESSION: Ordinances Adopting Chase Gardens Nodal Development Area Implementing Measures Kurt Yeiter, Principal Planner with the Planning and Development Department, was present for the item. He noted the involvement of local consultants Satre and Associates in the project. He said that part of the study area in question was unincorporated and part of it included historic residences owned by citizens concerned about encroaching development and the potential of a change in area character. Mr. Yeiter said that the neighborhood had several advantages in terms of nodal planning in that it was already designated in the Willakenzie Refinement Plan for high- density residential, infrastructure improvements in the area were budgeted in the City's Capital Improvement Program, and the City already owned a four-acre park site in the vicinity. Mr. Yeiter said that there was strong interest in development of the area on the part of two of the property owners, and those owners had participated throughout the planning process and worked with the City on the document. Mr. Yeiter noted that the Chase Gardens node would be the subject of the first public hearing the following week. He reviewed the three proposed ordinances associated with the node, noting that two of the ordinances must also be adopted by Lane County: Ordinance 1 would amend the Metro Plan and Willakenzie Area Plan. Amendments to the Metro Plan include adding the "ND-Nodal Development" symbol on the Metro Plan diagram to depict the larger Chase Gardens area as a Nodal Development Area, and shifting the designation for Commercial to the intersection of Garden Way and Centennial Boulevard. Amendments to the Willakenzie Area Plan update the refinement plan text and land use diagram for the Chase Gardens Subarea. Ordinance 2 would amend the Eugene Code to clarify that use of the Special Area zone is appropriate for nodal development areas. This amendment, and an amendment to the MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 1 Work Session PRO zone which is also included in this ordinance, are needed for both the Chase Gardens and Royal Avenue nodal development areas. Ordinance 3 would amend the Eugene Land Use Code to create a new Special Area Zone for the Chase Gardens node and rezone a portion of the Chase Gardens area to this new zone. Only property within the incorporated City limits will be rezoned. Existing apartment complexes are not proposed for rezoning. Mr. Yeiter highlighted the major zoning elements of the node, pointing out the mixed use and residential zones. He noted that the area was previously designated for high-intensity development, and staff was not proposing a reduction in the yield. He noted that the area contained the first City parks site that was subject to the new Parks and Open Space (POS) standards, and those were included in the plan. Mr. Yeiter previewed anticipated testimony, noting a major focus of comments was likely to be on the change of character in the residential historic neighborhood along Garden Way. It was designated for high-intensity residential development. The residents were also concerned about the alignment of Garden Way. He asked the council to indicate its position on a new proposed collector alternative following the hearing so that the Public Works Department did not continue to expend resources on the alignment initially proposed. Mr. Yeiter noted that staff was not proposing to create new tree protections for this area. The node would be subject to the same tree and vegetation protections as any other development in the community. Staff did not want to discourage or penalize development in a nodal area through the development of special tree standards. Mr. Yeiter noted that, as in the case of the Royal node, property owners may propose that street assessments not occur until after annexation. Mr. Yeiter said that prospective developers had expressed several concerns about the proposed zoning code, in particular the requirement for two-story commercial buildings, primarily along Garden Way where the City was attempting to create a pedestrian-oriented hub. The developers were also concerned about a proposed prohibition on drive-up facilities. Mr. Yeiter reported that the Eugene Planning Commission recommended that each business with a wall facing Garden Street or March Chase Street have an entry facing that street. The developers preferred that the main business entrances face the parking lot to the rear of the building. Mr. Yeiter anticipated that the council would also hear testimony regarding the recently adopted land use code provisions as this was one of the first developments submitted under the new code. Mr. Yeiter noted that the Planning Commission had considerable discussion about the fact that the firm of Satre & Associates, formerly the City's consultant on the project, was now acting as consultants for the developers. The commission had questioned whether Satre, when testifying, was speaking as the City's consultant or developers' consultant. He said that Satre was now acting as consultant for the developers. Mayor Torrey called for council comments and questions. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Kelly believed if the council could adopt the plan before it, it would have a desirable plan that fit the principles of pedestrian and bicycle friendliness, local commercial, mix of uses. He thought the plan exciting for the people living in the area as it was badly under-served at the current time, with no commercial uses located within easy walking or biking distance. The maintenance of the historic character was a difficult issue for him, but he liked the ultimate resolution, which allowed the historic structures to remain in place in their current use for as long as the owners liked, and created additional compatibility by design standards for the commercial across the street. He termed the plan a compromise but did not think that the principles of nodal development could be further compromised. He believed that the council needed to retain the two-story commercial as a trade-off for the one-story grocery store. Mr. Meisner said that the node in question already contained a great deal of development, and those concerned about character were living in the area before much of the development that has already occurred. Many of those concerns were focused on what had already happened. The area had already changed substantially over time. Mr. Meisner said that in this case, he wished the City had focused on nodal development many years ago so the result was a more integrated node. Mr. Meisner said he hoped that someday the City could find another term for "node" as he thought it implied a level of sterility that was not the case. Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Kelly that the plan represented a compromise and said he did not know how much more compromise could occur without violating the principles of nodal development. Mr. Pap~ said the plan before the council was more complex than the Royal Specific Plan because of the existing development. He determined from Mr. Yeiter that there was currently no grocery store in the area. Mr. Pap~ said he liked the plan but he questioned the economic analysis performed by Satre & Associates. He asked if the City had done an economic analysis of what it wished to see on the site. Mr. Yeiter said yes, Hobson-Faraini, a market firm from Portland, had performed an economic analysis, and had recommended that a larger grocery store be built. The firm of Gramor Development had been studying the site, and that firm believed it was an excellent site for a neighborhood shopping center. Mr. Pap~ determined from Mr. Yeiter that the firms had examined the area and not the plan. Mr. Yeiter said that they agreed that the shift in the location of the commercial was vital to its success. Both firms agreed on the acreage and size of the grocery, which was larger than C-1 zoning (Neighborhood Commercial) would allow. The development concerns were not in sync with such recommendations as the two-story commercial and front entrances. The firms shared the concern earlier noted by Mr. Yeiter regarding the prohibition on drive-through facilities. Ms. Bettman also perceived the document as a compromise in terms of the objectives the City was attempting to achieve. The City had spent millions in planning to come up with a definition of nodal development that fit what was required in the TransPlan model to decrease vehicle miles traveled (VMT). She asked if the City's intent not to decrease the residential density would be codified. She hoped that the City Council would demonstrate some backbone when it came to standing up for those principles. They were not arbitrary commercial development standards but were part of a complex interrelated approach that was intended to result in a pedestrian-friendly, livable environment where people could access services and transit. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 3 Work Session Ms. Bettman was concerned about the size of the commercial development, saying the developers were not looking to the future but rather to the past. She asked if what was being proposed increased VMTs or increased the use of transit as the latter was the whole reason for nodal development. She called for that analysis to be done so the City could determine how far it could go to compromise its standards before the resulting development was just another subdivision. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to extending the item for the item to 12:45 p.m. Mr. Fart commended the plan. He said that 50,000 square feet was not a lot of room for a grocery store. Many slightly larger stores were closing because they were undersized in comparison to the current retail market. He asked about the viability of a 50,000-square-foot grocery. Mr. Fart also asked staff to describe a typical two-story retail development. Mr. Yeiter said that the commercial center at 40th and Donald was mentioned frequently by the Planning Commission as a model. The commission recommended two functional floors rather than one floor and a mezzanine, for example. Mr. Farr expressed concern about the proposed ban on drive-through services in the node. He said that an integral part of a bank's business was drive-through service, and further noted the popularity of drive-through coffee establishments. He suggested that more compromises were in order, and hoped they were made to ensure the commercial uses in the node were functional. Responding to a question from Mr. Rayor regarding the differences and similarities between the proposed development plans and the composite Satre-Simpson diagram, Mr. Yeiter said there were many ways a developer could arrange the building on site and meet the intent of the code staff would ask the council to adopt. Staff attempted to ensure the critical components related to pedestrian orientation were included in that code. Mr. Yeiter said that the two development plans were "what if" scenarios, or ways the developers think they might meet the code requirements. He said that the developers' plans for the commercial area continued to evolve. He added that neither the composite diagram nor the plans show two-story commercial on the site. Mr. Rayor said that it appeared that the January 23, 2002, Simpson Concept Plan, showed a 50,000-square-foot grocery store and two-story commercial development east of Garden Way. Mr. Yeiter believed that the focus of those plans was on the building height rather than on two functional floors. Mr. Rayor asked if there was less connectivity in the developers' plans than was envisioned in the nodal plan. Mr. Yeiter said the developers' plans met the City's standards for connectivity. Mr. Rayor thought it interesting the developers' plans were not too divergent from the City's plans. Mr. Yeiter indicated that the City's planning effort had an impact on the plans, and the plans had evolved to meet City objectives as work proceeded. There were a few code requirements that the developers objected to as being financially infeasible. He noted that, just in case, the developers had applied for a land partition and planned unit development to ensure that their plans were reviewed under the old code. However, the developers preferred to see a nodal special area zone that worked for them financially. Mr. Rayor asked where the developers were in their planning. Mr. Yeiter did not know and suggested Mr. Rayor ask the developers that question at the hearing. However, it was Mr. Yeiter's understanding that the developers would like to sort out the land ownership and begin commercial construction in summer 2003. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Rayor called for a better summary of the issue points. For example, what size grocery store did the developers want? He also asked for more information about street connectivity, saying he did not see how the pedestrian-bicycle system worked. Mr. Rayor said he would like to see the bicycle system in the node connected to the Autzen Bicycle Footbridge. Ms. Nathanson said her concerns about the plan focused on the commercial element. While the development form in question was not brand new, it was not commonly used in Eugene. She noted that she had visited a grocery store in Salem that was a two-story construction, with the second story being a type of mezzanine. She asked for more information regarding the commission's recommendation as it related to the mezzanine/second floor issue. Mr. Yeiter said that the commission originally considered a staff recommendation to consider the height of the building and leave the interior space up to the developers; in other words, there could be a mezzanine. The commission recommended to the council two full functional floors to achieve the desired height and density of the commercial development the commission thought the node needed. Ms. Nathanson questioned the requirement for entrances facing the street. She assumed there would be many pedestrian and bicycle visits to the commercial area, and asked Mr. Yeiter to use the map to describe how access would work. Mr. Yeiter used the map of the study area to demonstrate access. He emphasized that Centennial Boulevard was not intended to be a pedestrian-oriented street. There was insufficient building mass to line the streets. There would be customers from the residential area south of Centennial and bicycle trails from Springfield to bring people in. There would be bicycles lanes along Garden Way. However, Mr. Yeiter said, the developers envisioned that the majority of customers would drive to the commercial development and did not expect many of the retail establishments to want two entrance ways. The developers believed that, as a practical matter, the entrance should face the parking area. The commission believed that if there was only one single entrance, that entrance should face the street. The code required each building, rather than each business, to face the street, not necessarily each business. The commission was saying each one should. Ms. Nathanson said she wanted to ensure the City designed something that was viable because she wanted to ensure development occurred in the node. She hoped that the commission would offer testimony to persuade the council and the public that the proposed commercial design was sensible, useful, not too unusual, and that were there local examples that worked. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to extending the time for the item to 1 p.m. Ms. Taylor was also concerned about the amount of compromise over nodal planning principles that had occurred. She determined from Mr. Yeiter that the grocery store was intended to serve the immediate existing under-served neighborhood. Mr. Yeiter said that residents wanted a viable grocery store. He said, however, that the store could not be so large it became a regional attraction. The proposed grocery size was sufficiently large to accommodate a bakery and pharmacy, for example. It was the size of an older Albertsons or Safeway. He noted that most of the local PC Markets of Choice and Wild Oaks stores were closer to 35,000 square feet. Staff was cautioned by knowledgeable parties that a much smaller store would likely have higher priced merchandise and not serve the neighborhood well, or the site would attract a specialty tenant like a Trader Joe's, which attracted people from throughout the community. Ms. Taylor suggested that the council consider a main arterial other than Garden Way. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 5 Work Session Ms. Taylor believed that the ban on drive-throughs should be retained. She did not want to make compromises that further encouraged development. She thought the council had already made considerable compromises when it developed the characteristics for nodes. She asked what a nine-acre space could accommodate, as that size sounded large to her. Mr. Yeiter said that parcel size was the size of a neighborhood shopping center. He noted that the Willakenzie Plan designated ten acres east of Garden Way for commercial use, and that commercial acreage had only been shifted to a more visible location. Ms. Taylor wanted the entrances for commercial uses to remain on the street. She did not want to encourage more commercial use than could serve the immediate area. She wanted to encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. Anticipating he would hear answers to his questions at the public hearing, Mayor Torrey asked about the local market for two-story development, and how expensive two-story development would be given the need to satisfy the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Mayor Torrey noted that a grocery store in Springfield similar to the size of the one being discussed had failed. He was concerned about the practical reality of what the council was attempting to do and was not opposed to further compromises. Mayor Torrey questioned whether the ban on drive-through uses precluded access to such uses as drive-through banking. He said that people were accustomed to drive-through banking, and in the absence of that service, motorists would instead drive to already congested Coburg Road. He questioned whether the impact of the code requirements would mean no development would occur at all in the shod-term. He also asked if the area was intended to have any fast-food restaurants. Mayor Torrey said that nearby businesses were struggling financially, and he questioned whether the added development would result in over-commercialization of the area. Ms. Bettman said that mayor's comments about avoiding over-commercialization were good points. She thought that a 50,000-square-foot grocery store constituted a regional attractor. She wanted to see the modeling and wanted to know how a regional attractor or auto-oriented development such as drive-throughs would affect the modeling for the immediate area, Coburg Road, and the other nodes. Ms. Bettman asked what percentage of the node was ultimately impervious surface. It did not appear to be minimized as called for in nodal planning. Mr. Kelly noted that the PC Market of Choice in his neighborhood was under 25,000 square feet. He did not object to the proposed size as it was supported by the market study. He referred to the nearby extensive apartment developments, saying there already many customers for such a use. He pointed out that the code required two-story construction along Garden Way only. Mr. Kelly thanked staff for its responsiveness to his testimony. Mr. Meisner requested information about the size of local area grocery stores. Mr. Meisner spoke to second-story development as opposed to mezzanine development, saying either could work. He thought the additional height was needed and suggested it was consistent with the nature of the development surrounding the commercial area. Regarding the size of the proposed grocery store, he said that service was needed by the thousands of students living to the west so they did not drive someplace else. He suggested that working closely with the MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 6 Work Session developers gave the City the chance to see something actually happen on the ground rather than on paper. Mr. Pap~ said that many principles were at work in the node, including land use principles, design principles, and transportation principles, and those could be dictated by the City, but the City could not dictate the economic principles. He hoped the council received answers to its concerns regarding how the standards will work from the testimony it received. Mr. Rayor pointed out to Ms. Bettman that a degree of impervious surface was required, particularly in a high-density neighborhood. B. WORK SESSION: Boards, Committees, and Commissions Nomination and Appointment Process The council was joined for the item by Mary Walston of the City Manager's Office. Ms. Walston reported that the council had requested a discussion of ward-based representation on the Budget Committee and Planning Commission. She noted that several changes had been made to the ordinances governing the membership of boards and commissions over the last 15 years. Ms. Walston reviewed some of those changes. Ms. Walston briefly noted the Oregon statutory requirements for the Budget Committee and the Planning Commission. She reminded the council that the City was in the midst of recruiting for boards and commissions, and the recruitment period ended September 25. Mayor Torrey solicited a round of council comments on the topic. Speaking to the issue of Budget Committee membership, Ms. Taylor differentiated between the committee and other City advisory groups because the committee helped to set policy by its task of reviewing the budget with the council. She thought a change to ward-based representation for that committee would be a good change. Otherwise, if a majority of councilors with a similar political persuasion appointed the committee, it meant that the minority opinion was lost. She suggested that each councilor could select a committee member. Ms. Taylor did not favor a similar change for the Planning Commission or other standing committees. Ms. Bettman saw nothing in the materials before the council to warrant a change in the process. She thought the council should be consistent and fair whatever it did. She suggested that the subject came up because some councilors were dissatisfied with certain Planning Commissioners, and she did not think that a good basis for making policy. Ms. Bettman said that the councilors could solicit qualified people to apply for committees and boards and she thought there was considerable flexibility in the existing process. Mr. Fart said that his problem with the current makeup of the Planning Commission was the lack of representation of north Eugene residents on the commission. He had been unable to get north Eugene residents to apply. Mr. Fart said that if the council could not be assured of geographic representation on the commission it should make a change. He said the system was not working to geographically represent the community. Regarding the Budget Committee, Mr. Fart said that he had struggled to get a representative from northwest Eugene; one of his suggested candidates had been opposed by some as representing business. He noted the difficulty of getting another northwest resident, Jennifer Solomon, MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 7 Work Session reappointed to the Budget Committee because of her political philosophy. He advocated for geographic representation. Mr. Rayor did not think changes to the appointment process were warranted. He believed that the council was better qualified to appoint committee members as a body than he was as an individual. He said that current committee and board members were qualified by virtue of their background and experience. He did not want to change that. Mr. Meisner did not see a need to change the system. He commended staff for making improvements to the recruiting process. He agreed with Mr. Fart that geographic representation on City boards and commissions was important. He wanted to appoint qualified and informed people and said that he thought each of the councilors should work to recruit individuals to City boards and commissions. Mr. Meisner recalled his past efforts to recruit Planning Commission candidates from north and northeast Eugene and said that he was unsuccessful because people were unwilling to take the time to serve. He said he would actively oppose a process that involved individual appointments. He preferred the current, open process, as opposed to what he characterized as a closed process. Mr. Pap~ said that the City should be consistent in its approach no matter what it did. He too had recruited candidates for various committees but noted that only one of his candidates was appointed. He said that he was willing to use consider a different approach. He too wanted more geographic representation on City boards and commissions. Mayor Torrey suggested that generally, the councilors supported those applicants who supported their positions. He asked the council to consider whether this council or the next council should make the upcoming committee appointments given that two current members were going off and two new members were coming on. Mayor Torrey noted that the Eugene Water & Electric Board position boundaries were based on multiple wards that corresponded to the local high schools. He suggested that the council consider an approach that meant no more than two Planning Commissioners could be from being from any one of those areas. He believed that would result in geographic distribution of commissioners. Mr. Kelly also did not see a compelling reason to change the current system. He was initially attracted to the idea but was worried about unintended consequences. He referred to the minutes of past council meetings and said they showed that arguments being made to support such a change were used in the past to argue against it. Mr. Kelly expressed concern about diversity, saying that under a councilor-appoints scenario there was no way to get an aggregate picture of the diversity on a committee. In addition, Planning Commissioners have four-year terms, and unless each councilor ran for a second term, the councilor would have the opportunity to appoint one commissioner during their time on the council but would not be able to weigh in on the remainder of the commission's composition. That seemed limited to him. He added that if a change was made, councilors should not be restricted to candidates within their ward. Ms. Nathanson's shared the concerns expressed by others about diversity, saying she looked at many, many factors in making her decisions about candidates. She was not interested in having a Planning Commission of seven people who felt just like she did. She wanted to have advisory MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 8 Work Session bodies with a balance of membership that represented the entire city of Eugene. She thought it was the council's responsibility to ensure that occurred. Ms. Nathanson said that if any further discussion occurred, she would be interested in options 4 and 5 as a means to prevent over- representation from one area. Mayor Torrey called for additional council comments. Ms. Bettman appreciated Mr. Meisner's comments about the closed nature of a councilor-appoints process. She also appreciated Ms. Nathanson's remarks about finding a balance that reflected the community, but suggested that the council should have the same diversity goals for all its committees and commissions, otherwise anything the council adopted would be inconsistent and unfair. Speaking to the mayor's remarks, Ms. Bettman questioned waiting until the next council was seated and asked about the precedent for that. She said that the process worked satisfactorily in the past. She said the council should stick with precedent and not change the rules. Mr. Fart said he was not interested in wholesale system changes as he thought the system largely worked. However, he continued to be concerned about the under-representation of north Eugene residents on the Planning Commission. He suggested that the council consider Mayor Torrey's suggestion regarding Eugene Water & Electric Board district boundaries. Ms. Nathanson requested an additional work session to discuss Option 4. She said that adoption of some form of that option would prevent one area of the community from being over- represented on City groups. Mr. Meisner was not interested in having another work session. He thought the council should use its discipline and judgment in making appointments. Speaking to the mayor's concerns, Mr. Meisner did not favor a change in the appointment process, and suggested that the new councilors be invited to sit in on the interviews and share their opinions with the sitting council, even if they could not vote on candidates. The council briefly discussed next steps and acknowledged that five councilors could request a work session if desired. Mr. Meisner suggested that Ms. Nathanson request staff to poll the council for a work session on Option 4. In regard to Ms. Bettman's concerns, Ms. Walston clarified that two years ago, the termination date for standing committee and board membership was changed to October 31, and the council had previously not been in a situation when it was considering committee appointments before a change in the council membership. Regarding the issue of polling the council, Ms. Bettman asked that the results of the polling for new agenda items be included in the meeting packet. Mr. Pap~ recommended that the council retain its current appointment process schedule and check in at the end of the process. Mr. Rayor asked that the new councilors receive all the applications the City received for boards and commissions. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 9 Work Session The meeting adjourned at 1:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Carlson City Manager pro rem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 11, 2002 Page 10 Work Session