Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 07/09/01 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall July 9, 2001 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman, Par Fart. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Gary Rayor. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Torrey called the meeting to order. A.Joint Work Session with the Planning Commission The council was joined by Planning Commission members Jon Belcher, Adell McMillan, Charles Rush, Anne Mad Levis, and Art Farley. Mr. Belcher reviewed the commission's proposed work plan for the upcoming fiscal year and reported on the progress of items on the commission's current work plan. He invited questions. Ms. McMillan called attention to the work plan of the Historic Review Board, also included with the commission's work plan. Mr. Pap~ asked if the commission intended to work on the Agripac site over the upcoming year. Mr. Belcher said yes. Ms. Childs said that the council approved six key next steps to implementing the Greater Downtown Visioning project, one of which involved examination of the Chiquita site and surrounding area. Mr. Pap~ asked if that work was occurring in conjunction with the federal courthouse project. Ms. Childs said yes, noting that a recent meeting included General Service Administration (GSA) representatives. There would be three public meetings in the next few months coordinated with the GSA and GSA Design Team. Mr. Fart arrived at the meeting. Ms. Levis noted the commission's heavy work load. She expressed pleasure in the implementation of the Greater Downtown Visioning project as an exciting, proactive project and thanked the council for funding it. She noted the commission's interest in revising the South Hills Study. She acknowledged the commission had more work to do on the Land Use Code Update(LUCU). Ms. Levis said that the Bus Rapid Transit project was proceeding and was also exciting. She envisioned an interesting year to come. Ms. McMillan agreed with Ms. Levis, particularly with regard to the South Hills Study. She was pleased the commission was going to complete work on several periodic review items soon. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Rush noted his recent appointment to the commission. He said he was fascinated by the work done by the commission. He had hoped the commission's work was to be more proactive and observed that no one had solicited the commission's input on the PeaceHealth issue. Mr. Rush said he enjoyed being a part of the commission. Ms. Nathanson arrived at the meeting. Mr. Farley was glad that work on the Land Use Code Update was complete and an effective date was in place. He said that the next big issue for the commission was nodal development and selecting key sites for nodes. He said that was an opportunity for the commission to be proactive. He wanted to move the nodes beyond the suburban scale that was so prevalent now. He thought that would be a challenge, noting that the nodes contemplated to date were not proposed at the densities envisioned. Mr. Farley said that the State was following the City's progress in part because of the importance of the nodes to TransPlan. Mr. Belcher thought Eugene was at a crossroads, transitioning from a big town to a small city. He said that the commission recognized Eugene was having some problems accommodating that growth. Portland can do some things Eugene was not doing because it had more density. That was the challenge he saw for the future. Mr. Meisner thanked the commission for its work. He said it was nice that the commission was able to get some of its work program items completed. Referring to the work plan, Mr. Meisner was excited about several items, particularly the work plan item regarding nodal development. Mr. Meisner asked if the department's recent grant applications would underwrite some of the work done by the commission. Ms. Childs anticipated that some State Transportation Growth Management grant dollars would be received, and if those dollars were received in time they could be used in the development of Broadway area design standards. If not, they would be used to develop the new downtown zoning district, an implementation action for the Greater Downtown Visioning project. Mr. Meisner asked if the City envisioned infill and redevelopment occurring as quickly as envisioned at the Chambers node. Ms. Childs said yes, a modest amount; she envisioned incremental rather than sweeping changes would occur. Mr. Meisner suggested that ten years could pass before major changes happened. Ms. Childs agreed. Mr. Meisner noted the adoption of the LUCU and its implementation date. He also noted the County's refusal to implement the code within the urban transition area pending a Supreme Court decision on Ballot Measure 7. Mr. Meisner said that meant the City would be maintaining two codes. Ms. Childs concurred. She said that the impact of having two different codes may be greater on the Building and Permit Services Division than on the Planning Division. Mr. Meisner solicited input from the commission on how to proceed. City Manager Jim Johnson reported that the issue raised by Mr. Meisner was a subject that the mayor and he had hoped to discuss with the Springfield mayor and manager and the Lane County administrator and Board of County Commissioners chair at a series of upcoming meetings. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 2 Work Session Ms. Bettman expressed appreciation to the commission for its flexibility in accepting new assignments. She reminded the commission of the Land Use Measures Task Force and the focus on transit-oriented development, and stressed that frequent transit service was the mainstay of nodal development. She said that the nodes must be served frequently with transit for nodal success. Mr. Kelly also thanked the commission for its hard work and its willingness to be flexible. He agreed about the importance of nodal development. He regretted that little progress had been made on nodal implementation, although he recognized and acknowledged the challenges facing the City in that task. He said the City had to make the progress of nodal development more efficient and work to avoid lost opportunities for nodal development. Mr. Kelly was happy that the Land Use Code Update was complete but said that it would need to be refined, and there was an extensive post-adoption work plan. He invited commission input on that issue. Mr. Kelly asked if the Historic Review Board intended to attempt to preserve some of the buildings on the Agripac site. Ms. Childs discussed the Section 106 Mitigation and noted that documentation of the historic use of the site was envisioned in conjunction with that. Mr. Johnson said that the federal government and City were discussing who would pay for that effort. Ms. McMillan said that the Historic Review Board had a brief discussion of the nature of the buildings on the Agripac site. Ms. Childs clarified that buildings were not in the area of interest to the federal government, but were located in the context area. Mr. Kelly referred to page 23 of the meeting packet, which referred to the Historic Plaque Program. He asked when plaques would be installed. Ms. McMillan did not know, saying that the board would see final plans for the plaque designs in the fall, as well as suggestions on how to pay for them. Mr. Kelly suggested that the plaques could be funded with public contributions, and offered to make a donation. Mr. Farr questioned whether the public understood the contribution made by the commission, saying he truly appreciated the visionary work that the commission did. Mayor Torrey thanked the commission for its efforts. Ms. Childs said the work program in the packet was developed before the council gave the commission two more assignments, which would be added to the work program if it was approved by the council. She noted that the additions would cause the remainder of the schedule to slip, and suggested that staff update the council on that subject later in the year. She indicated staff would also need to check in regarding the funding situation. Regarding the post-LUCU work program, she reminded the council that the position proposed to assist in that effort was not funded in the last budget, which would also affect the implementation of the work program. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to approve the FY02 Planning Commission work program, with the council's gratitude. Ms. Taylor acknowledged the time shifts created by the additions, but suggested that the additions were of major importance. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 3 Work Session The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. B. Work Session: Neighborhood Matching Grants Program Beth Bridges of the Planning and Development Department provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Neighborhood Matching Grants Program, highlighting successful projects. Mr. Fart commended the program as key to the Neighborhood Program in general. It helped neighbors to feel a sense of accomplishment and empowerment. He thought that funding for advertising the program was needed to reach more citizens, pointing out that the map of Eugene provided by staff indicated that about half the projects occurred in south Eugene. He wanted to ensure that all parts of the city participated, and asked if staff had thoughts on how to reach citizens in west Eugene. Ms. Bridges responded that the City had two strategies: one was to issue news releases on projects to local media, who could decide whether to use the information; the other was to go to neighborhood associations with a presentation on the program. She agreed an advertising budget would be useful, and conceded she had not considered the use of Metro TV. Mr. Johnson indicated staff would follow-up. Mr. Fart thanked Ms. Bridges and Richie Weinman for their work. Ms. Nathanson asked what performance measures would demonstrate whether the program helped to build community. Ms. Bridges said that currently, volunteer hours were tracked as a performance measure. She had not yet developed additional outcome performance measure on the neighborhood building element of the program. Ms. Nathanson encouraged staff to give the issue more thought. Ms. Nathanson asked if staff kept track of who applied for grants. Ms. Bridges thought half of the applicants were ad hoc groups formed around a project. The other applicants included neighborhood groups, parent advisory groups, and business associations. Ms. Nathanson suggested that the staff track that information over time. Ms. Nathanson asked if staff had coordinated with the school districts on the program. Ms. Bridges said yes. One of the members of the department advisory committee was from the Bethel School District, and the Request for Proposals were sent to school administrators and school site councils. Mr. Meisner shared Ms. Nathanson's interest in community-building. He also expressed pleasure that non- neighborhood associations were involved. He confirmed the program budget for the first two years and asked if some of the budget carryover funds could be used for advertising. Ms. Bridges noted that the carryover funds were not general funds but dedicated funds, such as Community Development Block Grant funds. Mr. Johnson reminded Mr. Meisner that the council had wanted the funds to be spent on projects. Mr. Kelly endorsed the program, saying it brought people together to make positive changes for their neighborhoods. He said that the Seattle program had started on the same level in terms of funding and the program budget had grown to more than $4 million annually. He wanted the manager to consider how to escalate program funding to a greater amount. He shared the concern about advertising mentioned by other councilors and acknowledged staf?s reluctance to spend the funding in that manner given the project-focus of the program. He suggested that given the funding cycle, perhaps some dollars could be expended before the next Request for Proposals was issued on provocative display advertising in The Register-Guard. He suggested that a separate advertising line item for outreach be contemplated. Mr. Johnson said that staff MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 4 Work Session would examine the administrative costs of the program, including that potential. Mr. Kelly suggested that the program could make use of a University intern. Ms. Bettman thanked staff for the presentation. She thought the program had leveraged both volunteer hours as well as fostered a sense of community. She liked the idea of putting the program presentation on Metro TV, but did not want to spend money that could go to grants on advertising, and suggested other avenues for putting out the word regarding the program be explored. Ms. Bettman thought the map was great but suggested it be revised to indicate the percentage of grant funds expended on each neighborhood rather than the number of grants. Ms. Bettman asked for information regarding project liability. Ms. Bridges said that the City received legal counsel that it needed to write the grant contracts with a legal entity, and the ad hoc groups being formed around projects were not legal entities; neither were neighborhood groups in most cases. Subsequently, people were offered choices as to how to proceed. Different groups choose different approaches. She said that the issue was one she hoped to be able to work through to develop a more satisfying approach that might involve more City risk but the relative size of the risk may be worth assuming. Ms. Bettman did not want a situation where funding was not available for creative grass- roots initiatives and community-building, and asked if Eugene Neighborhood, Inc., could be an avenue for neighborhood associations to use. Ms. Bridges said she would follow-up. Mr. Pap~ commended the program and thanked staff. He said that the program provided results beyond the dollars involved and created a sense of community involvement. He hoped the program could be continued and grown. He endorsed the remarks of other councilors regarding advertising. He suggested staff explore the use of other funds for that purpose. He asked where the number regarding in-kind dollars was derived. Ms. Bridges said the number was taken from Seattle. Mr. Pap~ said the number seemed low and suggested that staff explore the City's own experience. While exploring why a project proposal for sidewalks had been rejected, Mr. Pap~ determined from Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson that the City only paid for the portion of the sidewalks that could not be assessed to property owners. Ms. Taylor said that the historic survey work had galvanized the South University neighborhood. Regarding advertising, she thought the program was very well-known already and it was a subject of discussion by neighborhood groups whose meetings she attended. Mayor Torrey expressed appreciation for the program, saying he thought the best part was the sense of accomplishment on the part of the sponsoring group. He suggested that the City develop some public service announcements to take to radio stations to reach different demographic groups in the community. He congratulated staff on the program. Mr. Fart determined from Ms. Bridges that five funding requests had been turned down, generally because the department advisory committee did not think the projects in question were ready. Responding to a question from Mr. Fart regarding whether a fence next to a newly installed bicycle path was an appropriate project for a grant application, Ms. Bridges suggested that Mr. Fart have the constituent concerned about the situation contact her. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 5 Work Session Ms. Bridges thanked the council and mayor for their willingness to attend project dedications. C. Items from the Council, Mayor, and City Manager Mr. Meisner indicated he would be gone the week of July 22-28. He referred to the charter provision stipulating that a council seat would be vacant in the absence of council permission. Ms. Bettman called the council's attention to an article in the most recent edition of the National Geographic regarding the impacts and costs of sprawl. She had copies to share. She said that the Railvolution Conference, which regarded transit-oriented development, would be held in San Francisco September 13-16, and she encouraged the council's attendance at the conference and suggested the Planning Commission be encouraged to attend as well. Ms. Bettman referred to the Community Incentive Fund and said it was entering a new budget cycle. She asked about the status of funding, what was available, and how it could be used to facilitate the hospital remaining downtown. She requested a staff memorandum on the subject and suggested the City apply early for the funding. Ms. Taylor asked why the City did not assist the public with trapping and removing racoons. She said that people ask her why Animal Control did nothing about racoons. She reminded the council it had discussed having a work session on Animal Control, what it did, and what it should do. Some of her constituents believed the racoons were very dangerous because of the potential of destruction and rabies. She noted the City had no provisions for removing dead deer from the roads. Ms. Taylor said that the City needed another swimming pool, judging by the response to the new Amazon Pool. People were complaining there was too much traffic and too many people. Mr. Kelly thought a session on Animal Control could be interesting because of a series of issues raised by his constituents over time, including what could be done regarding feral cats and the current City Code regarding problem dogs. He recognized the limitations created by the fact the City contracted with Lane County for animal control. Mr. Pap~ regretted being unable to attend the Amazon Pool opening and suggested that, given enough taxpayer support, the City might be able to open another pool. Mr. Papd noted his recent visit to a city without planning or an effective bus system, saying it gave him a new appreciation of Eugene. He was glad the City was looking at ways to balance bicycle, pedestrian, and automobile use. Mr. Farr noted the pressure for sprawl created by development outside the community. Regarding racoons, Mr. Farr said that the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife had a program through which it provided traps for their capture. He said that it appeared to be quite a problem this year. Mr. Farr said he had the chance to go to the fireworks display at Alton Baker Park held by the Active 20-30 Club. He said that the event went well, although he was concerned about how the parking worked and crowd MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 6 Work Session control after the event. He apologized for being somewhat terse to some of those attempting to provide crowd control. Ms. Nathanson said that Ward 8 had a fabulous youth sports park but no developed neighborhood park. She asked for an update on Sky View Park. Regarding animal control, Ms. Nathanson preferred a comprehensive staff memorandum about the subject prior to scheduling a work session. She noted that the council heard from people who wanted to decrease as well as increase the number of animals citizens were allowed to have. Ms. Nathanson referred to public improvements on private property and said that the purpose of paths and common areas was often not clear. Ms. Nathanson questioned how soon the City Council would receive a report on the outcome of the recent State Legislature and its impact on Eugene. Mr. Meisner, chair of the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations, indicated that, while Governor John Kitzhaber had 60 days to sign approved bills, he thought the committee could provide an update on those issues about which there was certainty. Mr. Johnson acknowledged the complaints about the lines at Amazon Pool and said staff was working to alleviate the situation. Mayor Torrey said that Amazon Pool needed to be made available to all citizens for longer than 2-1/2 hours on the 4th of July. Mayor Torrey challenged all grandfathers to buy a shelf at the library for their grandchildren. Mayor Torrey recommended that the councilors write a letter to the governor thanking him for upholding the City's ban on smoking in work places. Mr. Meisner left the meeting. Mr. Johnson solicited comments from the council on its interest in proceeding with an update regarding the East Bank Bicycle Path prior to the executive session scheduled for later in the evening. The council agreed to hear the update. Mayor Torrey asked for any changes to the minutes. Ms. Taylor noted a change to the June 11 minutes, which incorrectly indicated that she had voted against the motion to approve the funding for the Child Advocacy Center. Mayor Torrey reported that the council would hold a work session on the subject of eating meals in the Council Chamber as opposed to eating meals in the McNutt Room on July 18. Mr. Johnson used a wall map of Phase III of the East Bank Multi-Use Path to provide an update to the council on the progress of the project. He noted problems related to the aligmnent of the path near the Willamette Oaks development, including the placement of a fence that the owner desired to be located on the inside of the easement area, the City's preference that the path be located on a filled area rather than on a retaining wall, as desired by Willamette Oaks, and the location of vegetation, which the property owner preferred to locate on MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 7 Work Session the outside of the easement. In addition, the engineer working on the causeway was also employed by Willamette Oaks and was working to resolve those issues. He thought it would be very difficult to build the path during the current construction season for those reasons. Mr. Johnson said that the City considered the potential of constructing elements of the project in isolation. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Johnson said that the City and property owners had come to conceptual agreement about the path, but the negotiations had bogged down over some of the details. Mr. Kelly was concerned about the public expectations that had been created by the issuance of the press release in February. Mr. Johnson said he had been a bit disappointed by the private parties engaged in the negotiations. Mr. Papd noted that he represented one of the property owners, and he shared Mr. Kelly's disappointment because he expected the path to be built this summer. He noted that the ill health of the City's lead staff person on the project had delayed the process. He wanted the council to know that the Papd Group and its adjacent neighbors wanted the bicycle path to be constructed. He indicated he would recuse himself from the executive session. The meeting adjourned at 7:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 2001 Page 8 Work Session