HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A: Joint Work Session with EWEB Board
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Joint Work Session with EWEB Board of Commissioners:
Discussion of Planning Process for Eugene Water & Electric Board Riverfront Property
Meeting Date: May 30, 2007 Agenda Item Number: A
City of Eugene Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Nan Laurence
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5340
Eugene Water & Electric Board: Staff Contact: Mark Oberle
www.eweb.org Contact Telephone Number: 484-2411, ext. 3230
ISSUE STATEMENT
During a joint work session of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) Commissioners and City
Council on February 12, 2007, elected officials met to discuss possible approaches to plan for the future
of the EWEB riverfront. Since that time, EWEB Commissioners met to discuss options in more detail.
The agenda item summary provides information on their discussion and on opportunities to partner in
the preparation of a master plan for the EWEB riverfront property. (See Attachment A for a map of
EWEB riverfront property holdings.) The AIS has been prepared by staff from the City of Eugene and
EWEB.
The desired outcomes for this joint work session are as follows:
To get the City's perspective on EWEB’s, “Revised Collaborative Approach to the Riverfront Master
?
Planning Process, May 10, 2007” (see Attachment B).
To hear any recommended changes to EWEB’s approach or alternative proposals that City Council
?
members may wish to put on the table.
To identify the need for additional information in order for both organizations to agree on a process.
?
To continue to develop a constructive and collaborative relationship between the City and EWEB,
?
leading to the development of an outline for a memorandum of understanding (MOU) regarding the
disposition and redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property.
BACKGROUND
Discussions concerning the redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront site have been ongoing for many
years. The most recent round of discussions began during a joint meeting of EWEB Commissioners and
City Council on November 15, 2006. At that time, elected officials from the City and EWEB identified
the need for additional opportunities to discuss current and emerging issues, such as the future of the
EWEB riverfront site. As a follow-up to that meeting, councilors and commissioners met on February
12, 2007, to discuss the disposition and planning requirements for the riverfront property. The focus of
the meeting was to identify areas of agreement and disagreement and to further a collaborative dialogue
in the planning work for the site.
At that meeting, the City Council directed the City Manager to bring back to a work session a proposal
that negotiates City acquisition of the property, in the event that it is declared surplus, and provide
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
options for a City-managed master plan process and a co-managed master plan process, both of which
are collaborative with EWEB. Each of the issues is considered separately below. Although EWEB
Commissioners did not take formal action on February 12, they expressed support for a collaborative
process completed in a timely way but expressed concern with a City led or co-managed process.
EWEB Commissioners met subsequent to the February 12 meeting, both in executive session and at a
special board meeting on May 8, 2007, to discuss possible elements and opportunities for collaboration
on a master planning process. An outline of a proposed process was unanimously approved at that
meeting and is included as Attachment B. The outline includes edits made by EWEB staff based on
board comments.
The policy issues surrounding the redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property are complex. Staff
has focused on three of the most critical issues that require policy direction and resolution. These are:
1.Declaration of surplus and decision to sell (EWEB);
2.Acquisition of EWEB Property (City); and
3.Master planning process (City and EWEB).
The issues are discussed below. Based on City Council and EWEB Board direction, EWEB and City
staff will draft a detailed MOU to outline the steps involved in the disposition and redevelopment of the
riverfront property. The outline would be the basis of a subsequent joint meeting between the board and
council. While EWEB and the City serve much of the same constituencies, the goals of the two
organizations in relation to the EWEB riverfront property are not likely to be completely aligned. The
MOU will need to clarify the issues and provide options for resolution.
1. Declaration of Surplus and Decision to Sell
EWEB has sole authority to determine whether to sell, the portions of property to sell, and the timing for
declaring the property surplus. A declaration of surplus can be made by a majority vote of the board to
approve a resolution declaring a parcel surplus and to authorize the General Manager to begin disposal
of the property. EWEB must then offer the City the first opportunity to acquire the property for “other
municipal purposes.”
The price for the property will be determined by EWEB. The price could be based on an appraisal of
the property using assumptions about the future use and value. EWEB has stated that the purpose of
selling the property is to generate funds for the relocation of utility operations to the Roosevelt site, and
is not likely to declare that any of the property is for sale until after financing for relocation is secured.
EWEB Commissioners and staff have also expressed concern that a master plan may not result in land
use and development scenarios of adequate property value to cover relocation. EWEB can decide not to
sell, establish a different price, or qualify the master plan prior to submitting it for City approval.
2. City Acquisition of EWEB Property
After EWEB declares the property available for sale and establishes a price for the property, the City has
two main options: to request negotiations or to not request negotiations. If the City wants to acquire the
property, the City Manager must request negotiations within 30 days of initial notification from EWEB.
The City Manager and the EWEB General Manager could then negotiate an agreement to compensate
EWEB for the property. The City would need to undertake a good faith effort towards negotiating a
price for the actual purchase of the property. The master planning process could also begin at that time,
if it is not already underway. Unless the language in the Downtown Plan and the Land Use Code is
revised, the City could not close on the purchase prior to the approval of a master plan, since the lot line
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
adjustments required to legally separate the parcels for sale are land use applications and cannot be
approved until the master plan is approved.
If the City chooses to acquire all or a portion of the property, currently available urban renewal revenues
would be insufficient. In all likelihood, general obligation bonds, requiring a public vote for approval,
would need to be issued to generate adequate funds to purchase the property. The timing of any
purchase would need to be related to the availability of funds.
If the City Manager does not request negotiations, or a purchase and sale agreement is not signed
between the City and EWEB within five years, EWEB may dispose of the property in any manner it
deems appropriate. The City may also choose to waive its right to purchase the site prior to the end of
the option period. In that case, EWEB could proceed with master planning and land use applications,
while determining a price for the property and marketing it to a private purchaser.
3. Master Planning Process
There are a number of alternatives for the master planning process. Working together, City and EWEB
staff developed three possibilities, including a City-managed process (Path A), a co-managed process
(Path B), and an EWEB-managed process (Path C), as discussed below. Paths A and B were developed
at the direction of City Council on February 12, 2007, in consultation with EWEB staff; Path C was
developed by EWEB staff, in consultation with City staff. Path C is supported by the EWEB Board and
recommended by staff from both organizations.
Path A - City Managed Process
Prior to the sale and re-use of the riverfront property, a number of land use applications must be
approved in addition to the master plan, including a metro plan amendment and rezoning of the property.
Based on the City Attorney’s interpretation, since the Metro Plan amendment must be approved by City
Council, City Council should not be involved in developing a plan that will later come before the
council in a quasi-judicial land use process. While City staff could manage the master plan process, the
role that City Councilors can play in the development of the master plan is constrained.
Path B - Co-managed Process
The opportunity for a jointly-led master plan process is similarly limited by City Council’s quasi-judicial
role. Elected officials could not participate in the development, and later the review, of a master plan
and the related Metro Plan amendment. However, the City could partner in the hiring of a consultant
and the appointing of citizen members to an advisory committee. The advisory committee would
consider master plan concepts and make recommendations about the other required land use
applications. The advisory committee would be advisory to staff and the EWEB Board, but not to the
City Council. While Path B has drawbacks due to the lack of council participation, the City could work
with EWEB to design a thoughtful public involvement process.
Path C - EWEB-managed Collaborative Process (see Attachment B)
An EWEB-managed process would be very similar to a co-managed process, with the caveat that the
citizen committee would be advisory to the EWEB Board. The advisory committee would consider
tasks such as consultant selection, master plan concepts, and public involvement workshops and would
make recommendations to the EWEB Board. The EWEB Board would therefore remain the decision-
making body on the draft master plan presented to City Council for review and approval. Path C could
provide significant community involvement opportunities. EWEB would retain the ability to authorize
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
the master plan concept prior to submitting it for City approval or making the ultimate decision to sell
the property.
At an EWEB Board meeting on May 8, 2007, EWEB commissioners unanimously supported Path C to
create a master plan for the riverfront property. Based on the legal constraints on City Councilor
participation, City staff also support Path C. EWEB staff envisions that this process could include four
general public meetings in addition to advisory team meetings. As indicated in the attached memo,
EWEB has proposed that the master planning process be outlined in an MOU between the City and
EWEB.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
Downtown, which includes the EWEB riverfront property, is one of the council’s 10 priority areas.
Numerous City policies also reference the potential and community value of the EWEB riverfront
property. The most relevant and recent are the four policies in the Downtown Riverfront section of the
Downtown Plan (page 29):
1.Incorporate the Willamette River as an integral element to downtown planning and development.
2.Collaborate with EWEB to encourage relocation of its utility facilities.
3.A master plan for the EWEB riverfront property must be approved by the City before any
redevelopment, land use application, rezoning, Metro Plan or refinement plan diagram
amendments are approved for uses not associated with EWEB functions. The master plan shall
be evaluated based on the master plan's consistency with principles A through D below:
A.Create a “people place” that is active, vibrant, accessible and multi-use.
B.Provide appropriate setbacks, deeper where environmental or habitat issues are more
critical, shallower in other areas.
C.Incorporate appropriate building and site design techniques that address environmental
concerns.
D.Incorporate an educational aspect, so that the riverfront improvements teach us about our
river, our history and our city.
The master plan shall be considered using the City's Type II application procedures, unless the
applicant elects to have the master plan reviewed concurrently with a Type III, Type IV or Type
V application.
4.Facilitate dense development in the courthouse area and other sites between the core of
downtown and the river.
COUNCIL/BOARD OPTIONS
1.Support an EWEB-managed collaborative master planning process, and provide direction to the City
Manager and EWEB General Manager to draft a memorandum of understanding outlining the steps
leading to the disposition and redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property.
2.Support an alternative master planning process, and provide direction to the City Manager and
EWEB General Manager to draft a memorandum of understanding outlining the steps leading to the
disposition and redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property.
3.Provide other direction to the City Manager and EWEB General Manager regarding the next steps
for the disposition and redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property.
4.Take no action.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
CITY MANAGER’S AND EWEB GENERAL MANAGER’SRECOMMENDATION
The City Manager and the EWEB General Manager recommend an EWEB-managed, collaborative
master planning process, and that the City Council and the EWEB Board provide direction to the City
Manager and the EWEB General Manager to draft a memorandum of understanding with an outline of
the steps leading to the disposition and redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property and to bring the
outline back for discussion at a subsequent joint meeting between the council and the board.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to support an EWEB-managed, collaborative master planning process, and to provide direction to
the City Manager and the EWEB General Manager to draft a memorandum of understanding to outline
the steps leading to the disposition and redevelopment of the EWEB riverfront property and to bring the
outline back for discussion at a subsequent joint meeting between the council and the board.
ATTACHMENTS
A. EWEB Riverfront Property holdings
B. EWEB-Endorsed Revised Collaborative Approach
FOR MORE INFORMATION
City of Eugene Staff Contact: Nan Laurence
Telephone: 682-5340
Staff E-Mail: nan.laurence@ci.eugene.or.us
EWEB Project Manger: Mark Oberle
Telephone: 484-2411, ext. 3230
Staff E-Mail: Mark.D.Oberle@eweb.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
Attachment B: Revised Collaborative Approach
Eugene Water & Electric Board
th
500 East 4 Avenue / Post Office Box 10148
Eugene, Oregon 97440-2148
541-484-2411 Fax 541-484-3762
(Revised May 10, 2007 from
the Draft Collaborative Approach)
REVISED COLLABORATIVE APPROACH
1. The TO THE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS
a. Determine Preferred Option – Board
b. Define which property will be for sale - Board
c. Draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – Staff
Determine time limit for reaching agreement on the MOU
Detail the Master Plan Process
Define the Public Involvement Process
Clarify the Nature of “Mixed-Use” Development
Determine Minimum & Maximum Open Space Ratio
*
Exempt property sale from future City Real Property Value-Added Charge
Agree that Process Milestones are Decision Points and Exit Ramps
Board/Council Majority Consent behind City Manager/General Manager signatures
d. Approve MOU – Board/Council
e. Sign MOU – City Manager/General Manager
f. Declaration of Property’s Availability – Board
This step includes establishing an initial value for the property. EWEB will delay this step until the URBA
process is complete and the Roosevelt Project financing is in place.
g. City Declares interest/no interest – City Manager
If the City Manager does express interest in the property, the City Manager and EWEB’s General Manager
will begin negotiations as soon as possible. EWEB and the City will have six months to agree on a price.
When a price is agreed to, the City will have six months to submit a payment plan for EWEB’s approval. The
payment plan will have to support the provision of City Code 2.196 that requires the transaction to be
completed within five years of the City Manager expressing interest in the property. If EWEB and the City are
successful with this step, the City will take control of the remaining process steps including the Metro Plan
Amendment and Land Use Actions so the property can be transferred. If the City and EWEB are unsuccessful
in this step, EWEB will proceed to step 2a.
2. Develop criteria for Advisory Team positions – assure cross-section of community. – EWEB Staff with help
from City Staff.
a. Advertise for Advisory Team – EWEB Staff
b. Appoint Advisory Team Members - Board
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
c. Draft Request for Qualifications (RFQ) criteria for Consultant – EWEB with help from City Staff and
Advisory Team.
d. Approval of RFQ Criteria for Consultant – Board
(No. 2 continued)
e. Advertise RFQ for Consultant - EWEB Staff
f. Select and Hire Consultant - Board
g. Kick-off meeting with Consultant, Advisory Team, Board, Council, and Staffs
Show the site with its constraints. Seek redevelopment ideas/concerns. Consultant leaves kick-off meeting
ready to develop draft concepts for each element described in the Downtown Plan/City Code.
h. Create multiple options for each Plan Element - Consultant
i. Show Element Options to Board - Consultant
The Board could throw out any option that did not support EWEB objectives.
j. EWEB Host Open House #1 – In addition to the Consultant, Advisory Team, and Board, all elected officials
and the general public will be invited to attend. Share concepts with public. Seek redevelopment
ideas/concerns from the public.
k. Combining the best ideas - Consultant, Advisory Team, City and EWEB Staffs
After gathering the ideas offered by the public and others at Open House #1, the best idea of each element
requirement will be combined into a draft Conceptual Story Board. The Consultant will then present the Story
Board to the Utility Board for review and discussion.
l. EWEB Hosts Open House #2 - In addition to the Consultant, Advisory Team, and Board, all elected officials
and the general public will be invited to attend. Seek input from the public on the Story Board concepts.
m. Selection of Concept Elements - Board
With comments from the second Open House taken into consideration, the Consultant will present the
Concept Elements to the Board for approval.
n. With the elements approved by the Board the Consultant will prepare the draft Concept Plan – Consultant,
Advisory Team, City and EWEB Staffs
o. EWEB Hosts Open House #3 - In addition to the Consultant, Advisory Team, and Board, all elected officials
and the general public will be invited to attend. Seek public input on the Draft Concept Plan.
p. Based on input from Open House #3, the draft plan is revised and presented to the Board for approval –
Consultant/Board
q. Write full Master Plan – Consultant
r. Review of full Master Plan Document – Consultant, Advisory Team, Board, EWEB Staff
s. EWEB Hosts Open House #4 - In addition to the Consultant, Advisory Team, and Board, all elected officials
and the general public will be invited to attend. Seek public input of full Master Plan Document.
t. Final revision to full Master Plan Document - Consultant, Advisory Team, EWEB Staff
(No. 2 continued)
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc
u. EWEB approval of full Master Plan Document – Board
3. Metro Plan Amendment and other Land Use Actions. – Consultant/EWEB
a. At the same time as the Master Plan is being written (2f), Work will start on the Metro Plan Amendment and
other Land Use Actions. They can be presented at Open House #4 for public input – Consultant, Advisory
Team, City & EWEB Staff
b, Board Approval of Metro Plan Amendment application and other Land Use Action applications.
c. City approval of Metro Plan Amendment and other Land Use Action applications – City Council
d. Final Property value is established and the property marketed (when EWEB has vacated the portions of the site
declared available).
Advantages And Disadvantages Of This Option Relative To Other Options
Advantages
.
This approach creates an opportunity for City and Community input while recognizing EWEB’s role as property
owner and financial steward of the ratepayer’s assets.
Disadvantages
By creating the Advisory Team and seeking input from City Staff at the front end of the process, this could take more
time than the EWEB Only Option.
However, this process, because of this additional input, has a better chance of gaining Council approval and therefore
could be faster overall.
*
City of Eugene Real Property Value-Added Charge.
In December 2006, City Staff prepared a Draft Ordinance establishing a Real Property Value Added Charge to Section 2.100 of the
Eugene Code amending Section 8.005 of that Code. According to the proposed ordinance the City would impose a charge equal to
25% of the increase in real market value resulting in any City action that increased the value of property. These actions could be a
zone change, an amendment to the Metro Plan or refinement plan or amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary. A final staff
recommendation to the Eugene City Council is expected soon. The MOU between the City and EWEB should address this as it relates
to the Master Plan process for the riverfront site.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070530\S070530A.doc