Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 11/14/01 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room-Eugene City Hall November 14, 2001 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner Pat Farr, Gary Rayor, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman. Mayor James D. Torrey called the work session of the Eugene City Council to order. I.WORK SESSION: Nodal Development Planning Director Jan Childs provided the staff report. She said that the Planning Commission was requesting additional time for completion of its work. She stressed that the project was a work-in-progress and referred to a"working map" posted on the wall of progress that had been made to date. She noted that it would not be the final product. She went on to say that there are four areas that would be planned separately: the Royal area, the Chase Gardens area, the Downtown area, and the South Bank area. She said that these areas were projected in addition to the eight areas being planned through the overlay process. Ms. Childs said there was an additional area included on the Planning Commission's list. She said that this was a new area proposed to be created around the Walnut Bus Rapid Transit Station near Walnut and Franklin Boulevard. Planning Commissioner Jon Belcher stressed that, for nodal development to work, cooperation was needed by both neighbors and developers. He noted that there had been input from both groups but not enough to move forward with the task. He said that it was not an easy thing to get both neighbors and developers on board when planning a node and said the requested extra time would be used to have another public input session and garner more support from those groups. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding the definition of developers, Mr. Belcher said that developers included land owners and builders. Ms. Bettman expressed her willingness to extend the process timeline and welcomed the idea of gathering more public input. She stressed the importance of providing clear outreach to citizens about the impacts of nodal development. She suggested articles, maps, and newsletters as examples of outreach. Ms. Bettman said nodes needed to reduce vehicle miles traveled. She stressed the importance of access to public transit within one-quarter mile of established nodes. She added that limiting nodes to areas where Bus Rapid Transit existed would limit locations where nodes could be developed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2001 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Kelly expressed his thanks for the work done by the staff and the Planning Commission. He said he would support an extension of time but raised concern over too many delays beyond that extension. He commented that nodes were needed both in the city center and near the periphery. Ms. Taylor stressed the importance of public awareness around nodal development. She expressed her desire to see nodes developed around the city center. Regarding the selection of priority nodal areas, Mr. Farr commented that areas that were about to be developed should be a high priority for identification by staff so that development that did not favor nodes could be limited. Mr. Farr specifically referred to the Royal and Danebo area. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding Bus Rapid Transit corridors, Ms. Childs said the corridors were retained as something to consider but added that feeder routes in the transit system were also being considered. Ms. Nathanson commented that maintaining a quarter-mile rule regarding transit access for nodes would be difficult since some areas of the City were without transit access of any kind. Ms. Childs stressed the importance of providing good transit access to nodal core areas. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding whether any area had been dropped from the list or suggested for addition to the list since the last discussion on nodal development, Ms. Childs said no areas had been discussed for deletion. She noted two areas under consideration as additions to the list: the Royal and Danebo and the Chad Drive residential areas. Mr. Pap8 supported the extension of time for the Planning Commission. He stressed the importance of making sure that the first proposed nodes were developed in a practical manner that would serve as a model for future nodes. Mayor Torrey stressed the importance of explaining the importance of nodal development to the public in an understandable manner. He raised concern that the majority of residents did not know why they should be interested in the topic. Mr. Rayor observed that transit would be a key element in any nodal development. Ms. Bettman commented that city demographics were changing and suggested including diverse housing in implementing nodal development. She encouraged the nodal sites at Crescent/Coburg, 29th Avenue and Willamette Street, and 11th Avenue and Chambers Street. Mr. Meisner supported the extension of time for the Planning Commission. He reiterated the importance of public education on the topic of nodal development and added that areas of regular transit routes should be considered as well as Bus Rapid Transit routes. He went on to say that nodes were needed at the perimeter of the urban growth boundary as well as near the center of the City. Mr. Kelly suggested a guideline of 1/2 mile diameter for nodes. He reiterated Mr. Meisner's comments regarding developing nodes near the urban growth boundary as well as in the city MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2001 Page 2 Work Session center. Regarding public education, he suggested showing pictures of nodal style development as much as possible. Mr. Kelly stressed the need to apply the nodal development overlay zone as much as possible to protect at-risk areas from incompatible development. Ms. Taylor suggested changing the criteria language from Bus Rapid Transit to transit in general. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to approve the Planning Commission request for an extension through January 2002 to complete its recommendation to the City Council on high-priority nodal development areas. Mr. Meisner urged staff to develop names for nodes that related to their local neighborhoods. The motion passed unanimously. II.WORK SESSION: Ward Redistricting Keli Osborne of the Planning and Development Department provided corrected data on redistricting options. She noted that the update did not affect basic ward percentages. Ms. Osborn said that the Violet scenarios all kept councilors in the wards from which they were elected. She added that the Violet scenarios also included a smoother boundary for Ward 4 south of the river. The new Indigo scenarios (A, B, C) treated the River Road/Santa Clara differently than the original Indigo plan. She said Indigo D Scenario flipped the ward boundary between wards 4 and 5, so there was a north/south boundary. Ms. Nathanson suggested using the river or other major landmarks as ward boundaries. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding the reasoning behind splitting the Santa Clara/River Road area, Ms. Osborn said because of the large amount of growth in the north Eugene area it would be difficult to easily absorb Santa Clara into wards 5 or 6. She noted that staff had looked as splits north of Beltline and east and west of River Road. Mr. Meisner said there was more of a community of interest in the older areas of north Eugene and added that the new development in the area had a significant connection with the Bethel area. Mayor Torrey said he would rather see the River Road/Santa Clara areas stay together. He added that, if the area needed to be divided, the commonality of interest was around North Eugene High School and its feeder schools. Mr. Rayor stressed the importance of keeping good representation in the South Hills area. Mr. Kelly stressed the importance of ensuring whatever plan was chosen was as simple as possible. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2001 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Fart said that Bethel School District needed to have at least one councilor solely representing it. Ms. ©sborn noted that Bethel School District was in Ward 6 as well as pads of wards 7 and 8 in the scenarios. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman regarding what would happen if a districting option was chosen that placed her out of her ward, City Attorney Glenn Klein said she would be assigned to represent the voters in a vacant ward. He noted that, after redistricting, every councilor would be representing some voters who did not vote for her or him. Mr. Pap~ noted that there would be many disenfranchised voters after the redistricting process was completed. He said that a simple solution to that problem would be to hold elections for all wards every time there was a redistricting process. Mr. Pap~ said it would be good to keep the River Road/Santa Clara areas in one ward or district. He said that if it was not possible to do, then Beltline was the natural divider. He said the Indigo scenarios meet the criteria better than any of the other scenarios. Ms. Taylor expressed her preference for the Violet A scenario. She said this plan would keep the most voters with their councilors. She believed that voters deserved to be represented by the person they elected. Mr. Meisner said he did not favor any of the maps but noted that the Indigo scenarios appeared to meet the criteria best. Mayor Torrey expressed his preference for the Indigo D scenario. He termed the Violet scenario a blatant effort to keep incumbent councilors in their wards and allow them to continue to serve. He suggested narrowing the choice to two maps and soliciting more public involvement before making a choice. Ms. Nathanson believed that the Green scenario was still worth discussion. She noted that it kept the University of Oregon and downtown linked, linked the industrial areas, and ensure three council members represented the South Hills. She raised concern that long-term interests for appropriate districts were being sacrificed for shod-term considerations. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution realigning Eugene City ward boundaries with a map using scenario Violet A. Mr. Fart, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to amend the motion by narrowing the maps down to two scenarios (Violet A and Indigo D) and letting the public provide more input before making a decision. Mr. Kelly commented that the amendment was just postponing a hard decision yet again. He said he would not support the amendment. Mr. Meisner said he would support the amendment and would support the Indigo D plan in the final decision. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2001 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Farr said the amendment was putting a very specific question to the public regarding whether the City was going to realign wards specifically to keep councilors in their districts. Ms. Taylor said the question was also whether to realign ward boundaries to redistrict some councilors out of their current districts. Ms. Bettman raised concern over postponing the decision. She noted that the modification process had already been completed. The vote on the amendment to the motion was a 4:4 tie; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Rayor, and Ms. Bettman voting no, and Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Meisner, Mr. Fart, and Mr. Pap~ voting yes. Mayor Torrey voted yes, and the final vote was 5:4 in favor of the amendment. Ms. Bettman said that any of the redistricting plans would equalize the population in wards. She added that the criterion stated that incumbents would not be specifically protected, and it should also say that incumbents should not be targeted. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend the motion by adopting the modified State of Oregon Legislative District criteria for assigning councilors and Eugene Water & Electric Board commissioners as necessary. Mr. Kelly stressed the importance of making a decision by November 26, 2001. He expressed a desire to see councilor reassignments by that meeting. Ms. Bettman stressed that the public needed to know more about councilor reassignments. The amendment to the motion passed, 5:3; Mr. Pap~, Mr. Fart, and Ms. Bettman voting in opposition. The vote on the main motion was a 4:4 tie; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Rayor, and Ms. Bettman voting no, and Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Meisner, Mr. Fart, and Mr. Pap~ voting yes. Mayor Torrey voted yes, and the final vote was 5:4 in favor of the motion. The meeting adjourned at 1:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Joe Sams) MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2001 Page 5 Work Session