Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/22/01 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall January 22, 2001 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Pat Fart, Scott Meisner, Gary Rayor, Bonny Bettman. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Gary Pap~ CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION A.Work Session: The DowntownNVillamette River/Franklin Boulevard Visioning Project Planning and Development Department Director Paul Farmer introduced the topic, reminding the council of previous work sessions on the report of the Ad hoc Committee on Greater Downtown Visioning and its agreement to hold more work sessions to discuss next steps in the visioning project. This was the first of three work sessions. He suggested that the council attempt to get through the first two elements of the vision at this meeting. Mr. Farmer noted that the ultimate goal of the process was a new Downtown Plan to replace the Downtown Plan initially adopted in 1984. Mr. Farmer reviewed the proposed public involvement process associated with the project, which included the use of the First Friday Artwalks and two more all-day public workshops scheduled to allow the largest number of people to attend. He hoped the workshops would occur in mid- February. Mr. Farmer referred the council to a schedule mounted on the wall for the planning process as well as for other concurrent processes. Those processes included the General Services Administration federal courthouse site selection process, Bus Rapid Transit, and the Riverfront Urban Renewal Plan Update. Mr. Farmer noted the inclusion of some planning steps in the visioning process, and indicated staff was in the process of responding to councilors' questions related to budget. He hoped to have more comprehensive numbers at the final work session as well as sources of funds and possible uses competing for those funds. Mr. Farmer invited questions. Ms. Nathanson asked to what extent the committee's recommendations would affect ongoing City activities. Mr. Farmer believed that policies important to the council were reflected in the committee's recommendations. He said that as the council discussed the themes, staff would get a better idea of where the council had strong feelings, and would be mindful of that direction as it MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 1 Work Session worked on a day-to-day basis. Ms. Nathanson hoped the City Manager was able to coordinate that reaction through the departments. Ms. Taylor wanted public involvement before the council approved the plan for action. She remarked on how similar the committee's recommendations were to the 1984 Downtown Plan, and hoped that information was shared with the public. She hoped the public workshops would be extended meeting time, with people being able to see the results of previous public workshops as well as the plan. Mr. Farmer discussed the tentative plans for the workshop and said that staff would share information from the prior meetings at that time. Ms. Taylor endorsed the First Friday Artwalk approach. She also endorsed outreach to neighborhood associations, and hoped staff would go to all the neighborhood groups, not just those near downtown, because downtown was everyone's neighborhood. She acknowledged the work involved. Mr. Kelly provided general feedback on the plan. He suggested the ultimate goal was a thriving downtown rather than a plan. He did not want the timing of the process to get in the way of implementing the recommendations of the plan. He suggested that the plan be marked as a rough draft more clearly. Mr. Kelly said he was comfortable with the process proposed, but wanted the workshops to include some sort of way for the public to get its comments back to the council. He wanted the comments gathered and organized prior to the third work session, adding he was not opposed to holding a public hearing. Mr. Kelly suggested the ultimate prioritization of action items would be dependent on funds available. Ms. Bettman endorsed the First Friday Artwalk and outreach to the neighborhood organizations. She suggested the council consider holding a public forum and give the public an opportunity to give feedback on the vision and to give the council an opportunity to hear new ideas. She suggested that occur during the third week of February. Mr. Farmer described the proposed public workshop format, noting written comments would be solicited. He said that the staff could use that opportunity to inform the public of the council public forum proposed by Ms. Bettman. Mr. Farmer suggested that at the last work session, staff would have a better sense of the council's priorities. Mr. Rayor thought that overall, the vision was a good one. He was mostly concerned with the public process as he thought there were several contentious recommendations in the report. He asked what reason there was for the proposed vote. Mr. Farmer said that the mall was specifically addressed in the charter and for that reason a vote was needed. Mr. Rayor wanted to move cautiously on the most controversial proposals in the visioning report. He did not think the public process seemed adequate or fleshed out, particularly as the time line was so aggressive. Mr. Rayor asked if there would be a public process for the remainder of the Chiquita site that might not be occupied by the courthouse. Mr. Farmer said that staff understood the council wanted a public process around Phase 1, focused on downtown. He said that the phase involving the Chiquita site would be addressed in the future, and any street reopening would be accompanied by a public process. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Meisner emphasized the importance of acting on the comments received and implementing the plan. He believed the 1984 plan failed because the City never did anything with it. He said he would be looking carefully at the Broadway reopening issue in context of the other processes. Mr. Fart said the downtown was not working well and some seemed to have acquiesced to that. For those living in west Eugene, there was little to come downtown for, and the City had to overcome that and make downtown an attractive place for people to visit. He thought the study took the City a long way in that direction and expressed appreciation for Mr. Farmer's assistance in realizing the vision. He said the council must consider the input it received in context of the benefit those offering the testimony would receive. He thought those who stood the most to lose or win should be talked to first. He said that the neighborhoods adjacent to downtown were important, but if they were not using downtown that should be weighed against those using downtown. Mr. Fart concluded by saying that people should be asked to give input where they are, rather than where the City is. Mayor Torrey wanted West Broadway opened and wanted the entire vision to work. Some items were a higher priority for him than others, such as the federal courthouse. He said that Eugene did not have a lock on the courthouse, and he thought it would be a mistake if the council did not put a priority on the Chiquita site acquisition. He thought the council was familiar with the positions and representative of the citizens on the topics involved. Mayor Torrey wanted to hear about the fiscal impacts of downtown and the effect of downtown on rents as compared to previous years. He also wanted information about public safety downtown. He agreed with Ms. Taylor that downtown was everyone's neighborhood. Mayor Torrey thought the West Broadway area was a priority because of the loss of Symantec. He emphasized the importance of redeveloping the train station and changing one-way streets to become two-way streets. He stressed the need for the council to set priorities. Mayor Torrey was prepared to go to the voters in May to ask them if they wanted to open West Broadway. Ms. Taylor said the council already decided it wanted to rehabilitate the train station. She liked Ms. Bettman's idea of having a council public forum. She thought there should be time between the workshops and the forum to give people time to think and read about the topic. She said that did not mean the council could not do the things it already decided made sense. Ms. Taylor agreed with Mr. Rayor about the controversial elements of the plan and the need for a public process. She said the council should be clear it cost money to open the street. Ms. Nathanson acknowledged the contribution of members of the Council Ad hoc Committee on Greater Downtown Visioning present at the meeting: Russ Brink, David Hinkley, and Ray Wolfe. Ms. Nathanson said that downtown was everyone's neighborhood or should be. For that reason she thought downtown was special and the emphasis the council placed on it should be different. Ms. Nathanson asked if the City could consider a process similar to that used by the federal government in taking comments on the courthouse. It involved an official recorder and staff but not a full council meeting. Time was made available for people to attend and offer testimony. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 3 Work Session Testimony was recorded. She said that the council had heard previously from several members of the public on the topic repeatedly, and would increase time for public and council. Ms. Nathanson advocated for using Metro TV to show the public information about the visioning process. She thought that would reach people who did not attend public meetings. Mr. Kelly did not think councilors were envisioning a public forum similar to the 7:30 p.m. public forum. He endorsed Ms. Nathanson's suggestion for public involvement and said it was all about convenience to him. He said another approach was to have a session at Valley River Center or Barger Crossing, close to where residents live. Mr. Kelly said that reality was often perception, and because downtown was so fragile he thought it important to not over-broaden perceptions. He agreed with Mr. Fart that there was a perception that downtown was not largely working, but said it would be unfair not to acknowledge some things were working well. However, things could be much better. Mr. Kelly said that the other side of fiscal impact was fiscal benefit to the property owners downtown, which could result in additional property tax revenues to the City. Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Kelly's remarks regarding the perception of downtown. He said that downtown was an office center and that function was highly successful. Government and restaurants were downtown. He also concurred with the mayor's comments regarding other processes, particularly the train station. Responding to Ms. Taylor's remarks, Mr. Meisner said he had yet to find an approach or decision that made sense to everyone. Responding to Ms. Nathanson's remarks about the use of Metro TV, Mr. Meisner did not want to rely on one method of communication alone and pointed out that not all citizens had access to cable television. He wanted to use all the tools possible to communicate with the public. Ms. Bettman said that a public forum or hearing would not slow the process. She still wanted to have such a hearing to hear new ideas and the community's reaction to the plan. Ms. Bettman did not want to move forward with elements of the plan without knowing the fiscal impact of the action or the source of funding for the project. She suggested a parking tax on lots outside downtown would offset the costs of opening West Broadway, for example. Ms. Bettman said that the housing restoration element should preserve existing housing around downtown rather than let it convert to other uses. She believed the council should take time to decide if there are a few high priority issues it should look at. She requested information about the implications of Ballot Measure 7 on the City's ability to implement the vision in the plan. Mr. Farmer said that where there were regulations impacting property, those would have to be looked at. He anticipated that more would be known from the courts by the end of the month. Mr. Rayor agreed with the mayor regarding public input. He wanted an aggressive process that allowed the public to comment on the plan while allowing the council to maintain the time line. He wanted to be able to tell the public enough about the design of a reopened Broadway to be able to give the public a sense of the cost and impact. He wanted the timeline formalized and the public MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 4 Work Session given an opportunity to comment on the time line, which he believed would elicit project-specific input. Mr. Fart agreed that there were things that worked downtown and some were very exciting. He said that as a government the City must facilitate downtown working better. For him, the bottom line was to give people a reason to come downtown. When he first arrived in Eugene downtown had been a "cool" place to be, and he had spent time downtown. Downtown was characterized at the time by the destruction of old buildings, and he had not understood why the buildings were destroyed and not renovated. Mr. Fart felt it was important to share with the public why downtown was the way it was, how it got there, and how it could be changed. Downtown needed more people at more hours of the day for longer periods. Housing downtown was critical to realizing that goal. Mr. Fart thought the City's successes on Willamette and Olive streets could be translated to West Broadway if the street were opened. Mayor Torrey wanted to make it convenient for the public to communicate with the council. He though Ms. Nathanson's idea about public input was a good one. Some people did not feel comfortable standing in front of an audience. Mayor Torrey wanted the council to come to a decision on the plan to give certainty to downtown property owners. Responding to Ms. Bettman's remarks regarding housing, Mayor Torrey believed there was money available from federal programs to assist with housing rehabilitation. Mr. Farmer summarized the council's input to public involvement plan. Ms. Bettman did not want to miss an opportunity to hear ideas not included in the plan. Even full funding of the plan might not help the downtown if other critical issues, such as parking outside the core, were ignored. Mr. Meisner suggested staff consider holding the forum outside the downtown. Mr. Fart agreed, saying that people outside downtown should be asked why they do not come downtown. Mayor Torrey advocated for Mr. Farmer to appear on KUGN radio program to discuss the visioning project. The council discussed key themes in the plan. Great Neighborhoods/Great Streets Mr. Farmer briefly reviewed the committee's discussions related to the topic and noted its near unanimous support for the reopening of West Broadway. Mr. Kelly was generally supportive of the first theme. He said that he had changed his position on the street reopening, as he thought the overwhelming public perception about west Broadway was so strong something must be done. He was comfortable with the concept and the process but the financing strategy must be in place before the council asked the public to approve the reopening. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 5 Work Session He wanted to explore Ms. Bettman's idea regarding the impact of parking outside downtown. Mr. Kelly suggested that the last thing the City wanted was redevelopment on the street incompatible with its vision, so he felt that an overlay zone and multi-structure design review should be tied to the street reopening. He acknowledged the code language might not be ready prior to the reopening, but he wanted the code language in place prior to redevelopment. In response, Mr. Farmer said that it would not take any time to secure code language from other cities, and the council might wish to model its code language on the text used by those cities. Ms. Nathanson did not disagree with anything in the section and noted her support for a celebration plaza, connection of great streets, and 8th Avenue as prime connection to the river. Transforming Broadway and relationship of overlay zone and create new zoning district were also important to her. Ms. Nathanson said that the emphasis was on ensuring people want to go downtown and use the streets for that purpose. While it was not specifically mentioned, Ms. Nathanson was interested in seeing in a further phase: discussion by a Planning Commission subcommittee on what would give great streets a distinctive and consistent appearance in the short- and long-term. She also wanted to form a group to discuss the overload and visual clutter of street signs, and whether signs were in the right number in the right places. Ms. Bettman agreed with the overall theme of the section. She thought there were areas where the plan could be clearer about the goal. She wanted to strengthen the statement related to the connection of 8th Avenue to the riverfront and Willamette Street to the train station. She agreed with Ms. Nathanson that the plan was lacking specific reference to the street scape concept, or the way the street functions as public realm or open space. Ms. Bettman said that when talking about creating great neighborhoods, one had to consider housing. She liked the zoning district idea and envisioned residential streets in downtown with different feel because they were residential. She suggested the council consider other activities, such as loud noises, that will work against housing downtown and how to mitigate those impacts through some kind of housing code. Ms. Bettman wanted staff to return with a council decision item on boundaries for downtown. Mr. Farr did not think great streets were one-way streets. He wanted to convert the one-way streets downtown to two-way streets. Mr. Meisner noted his concurrence. Mr. Meisner wanted the city to open Broadway in the context of everything else it planned to do downtown. He did not want to open the road so that it became a through corridor from Franklin to Washington. He endorsed Ms. Betttman's suggestion regarding downtown boundaries, suggesting some sort of boundary landmark might be appropriate. Mr. Meisner said the theme title did not initially address all the elements that made a street great. He said that opening Broadway in isolation would accomplish nothing without having the zoning district in place. He wanted to open the street with a vision to the future and in context of the whole plan. He was not enthusiastic about implementing elements separately without knowing more about the whole plan. Mayor Torrey said he supported being able to close the street for special events and wanted to be able to close it off with something better than sawhorses. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Rayor suggested the plan was an attempt to go back to solid practices that had been in place prior to the construction of the mall. He said that the City had disconnected the views between the buttes with concrete monoliths and obliterated the view of those disembarking from the train. He said the council was attempting to go back and undo everything that City planners had done in 1974. He agreed with Mr. Meisner about the nature of the street and said he did not want to see traffic traveling down the street from Franklin Boulevard. He wanted to see great street standards developed, and for staff to develop a plan to implement the plan as efficiently as possible with current resources. Ms. Taylor thought it important to go slow to avoid making mistakes. She thought Willamette Street had been beautiful before the mall was opened. She did not think its reopening was an improvement or opening the street a "magic" thing. She asked if the City could try streets that did not look like streets but carried shuttle buses. Ms. Taylor thought two-way streets were better and the downtown was difficult to walk around because of the barrier created by 6th/7th avenues. Mr. Kelly underscored the importance of a consistent appearing street scape. He cited planters, street lights, and flower baskets as elements that could help tie the street together. Mr. Kelly expressed concern about the reference to a visual connection to Skinner Butte. He wanted to include in the final report the need for a pedestrian and bicycle connection as discussed by the North End Scoping Group to move people across or under the railroad tracks to the butte. Mr. Farmer noted that the committee agreed at its last meeting to take out the references to those connections and he would have recommended its retention. He did not think it was impossible to find a way to run a shuttle, for example, through that area. Mr. Meisner clarified it was not his intent that all the streets looked alike, but he would like to see that individual streets have some internal consistency. He hoped the City would learn from the lessons of East Broadway to maintain a sense of streets downtown. Ms. Bettman noted her discussions with the Lane Transit District (LTD) Board about a shuttle bus that traveled through downtown and served major destinations in downtown. She said that her vision of downtown included placing a downtown street car down Willamette Street, which would connect special places in downtown on fixed rails. She said that would be the unique element that helped create a place people wanted to be. The advantage of a fixed rail system would be once the community made the investment in infrastructure, the business community would know the fixed rail system would provide major access and the areas adjacent would become more attractive for redevelopment. Ms. Bettman suggested that if the council had the will to pursue the elements in the vision, it would pursue the funding. Mr. Rayor said he would prefer designating a one-lane alternative corridor and let LTD determine if it would be a fixed rail system. Mr. Farmer suggested that the City needed to create some relative permanence in downtown and for that reason he supported a street car system or something similar, which would signal to the investment community that the infrastructure was permanent. Mayor Torrey said that Joseph, Oregon, had a main street that had been a disaster a few years ago, but had improved by both resurfacing and brass monuments that the City had commissioned. He advocated for a similar approach in Eugene. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 7 Work Session Create and Connect Special Places Ms. Nathanson highlighted the following elements of this section of special interest to her: 1) a restored, daylighted millrace; 2) connection of special places, not just streets; 3) green street treatments on more downtown streets; and 4) enhancing downtown alleys. Mr. Kelly endorsed this element of the plan and said he had no disagreements. He agreed with Ms. Nathanson's summary of key points. He did not want to neglect the millrace east of downtown. Mr. Kelly noted the recommendations for two-way streets and angled parking, which he endorsed. Mr. Kelly liked the street car idea suggested by Ms. Bettman, and said it was being tried in smaller communities. He suggested the downtown shuttle starting in fall 2001 could evolve into the street car. Mr. Fart said the council should bear in mind there were some pretty special places already downtown, and the City should do what it can to facilitate Saturday Market and the Farmers Market to ensure they happen. Mr. Meisner agreed with the remarks of other speakers, saying all the key next steps were important to him. He suggested that a streetcar system could start small and grow, and would provide an impetus for other neighborhoods to connect to the system. He was enthusiastic about daylighting the Millrace. Ms. Bettman objected to angled parking as it looked like a parking lot on the street, and to make room for angled parking it was necessary to use part of the right-of-way in some cases. She thought it problematic unless located on an alley or someplace where it did not have the same visual impact. She would object to losing pedestrian travel area. Mayor Torrey advocated for a park-and-ride facility somewhere near downtown. The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 8 Work Session