Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 04/13/98 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council Council Chamber--City Hall April 13, 1998 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Farr, Ken Tollenaar, Nancy Nathanson, Tim Laue, Scott Meisner, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Bobby Lee, Betty Taylor. Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. i. PUBLIC FORUM Max Ansola, 8016 Pacific Highway, East Tacoma, Washington, distributed a letter to the council. He said that when I-5 was built, Lane County and the State agreed to build a temporary road in the vicinity of Motel 6 and Denny's, and when he purchased his property in 1996 he assumed that the two jurisdictions had an easement for a road. Mr. Ansola said that he had been working with the City for two years to get the two jurisdictions to do something about the situation. His attorney had indicated to him that he could be sued by people using the road. He wanted the road closed but said he had been told it could not be closed. Patricia Binder, 10 Crest Drive, expressed disappointment at the mayor's selection of Jim Johnson for Acting City Manager. Lyle Harris, St. Vincent de Paul, said that there was a need for more parking downtown to serve affordable housing. He said that his agency was considering a new development at 11th Avenue and Oak Street, which would add 60 to 80 affordable units downtown and increase the pressure on downtown parking. Mr. Harris suggested that more levels be added to the Pearl Street garage, and urged the council to consider the expenditure during its upcoming discussion of urban renewal. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Council Minutes of February 16, 1998, Dinner Work Session; February 16, 1998, Meeting; February 18, 1998, Dinner Work Session with Lane County; and February 18, 1998, Public Hearing with Lane County B. 1998-99 Funding Allocations for Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs C. Amendments to the 199 HUD Consolidated Plan MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 1 7:30 p.m. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, to approve the consent calendar. Ms. Taylor asked that the meeting minutes of February 16 be pulled so she could review the meeting tapes and make a correction. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. II1. PUBLIC HEARING: URBAN RENEWAL Bob Hibschman, Planning and Development Department, said that the passage of Ballot Measure 50 impacted urban renewal by reducing tax revenues by 40 percent or more for the 39 renewal agencies in Oregon. He said that the change was a result of fundamental revisions to Oregon's property tax system. Mr. Hibschman said since urban renewal districts had entered into commitments through their existing plans, the State legislature allowed for property tax revenues to be sustained, or "grandfathered." The State legislation provided for three grandfathering options, one of which the City must select within seven weeks. Mr. Hibschman said that there were three basic choices: 1) termination; 2) collecting the base; or 3) grandfathering existing revenues. Mr. Hibschman said that there were six options related to the City's urban renewal districts developed by the council for the public hearing: Downtown District A. Build no Projects B. Preserve Option for Library Only C. Preserve Option for Library and Downtown Projects D. Preserve Option for Downtown Projects Only Riverfront District E. Discontinue City Participation F. Reduce City Participation Mr. Hibschman referred the audience to the handout distributed at the meeting, which included the options above and a list of possible projects for the downtown urban renewal district. He noted that the council would select an option at its work session on April 15. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. John Lawless, 90 East 26th Avenue, said that he represented the American Institute of Architect's Local Affairs Committee. His organization supported urban renewal as a tool to keep Eugene growing in the right direction. He said that the visions had been formulated for downtown and the riverfront. Mr. Lawless said his organization looked at the potential of downtown projects and perceived several that made sense in strengthening downtown. He MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 2 7:30 p.m. encouraged the council to support urban renewal after careful examination of all its aspects, including the addition of new projects such as the library and a review of administrative costs. Russ Brink, 132 East Broadway, DEl, supported Option C. He discussed the results of a voters' survey sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, saying that a majority of respondents gave downtown a rating of only fair when asked if downtown was in good shape. He noted that 68 percent of respondents were "somewhat" or "very" dissatisfied with the current state of downtown. Mr. Brink said that a majority of respondents indicated downtown was a unique neighborhood that should be supported by the entire community. He said that 64 percent of respondents supported urban renewal as a tool to open streets and improve downtown transportation. Approximately 68 percent supported use of urban renewal to improve downtown housing and renovate existing older buildings. Approximately 56 percent support using urban renewal to build a new library. Mr. Brink questioned why the City Council would choose to eliminate urban renewal or use it only for a downtown library. He encouraged the council to be visionary about downtown projects, and consider where the funding would come from if urban renewal was not in place. Douglas Beauchamp, 164 West Broadway, Lane County Arts Council, asked the council to continue to support the downtown urban renewal. He said that it was a catalyst for investment that had made downtown Eugene a regional cultural center second only to Portland in the state. He said that devoting a substantial amount of available dollars to the library was consistent with past direction. Mr. Beauchamp suggested that the council include the library as part of a cultural and investment fund to ensure that a portion of district funds support a broad range of development and investment in infrastructure. He regretted loss of the former Downtown Commission and Cultural Affairs Commission, groups he believed could have contributed to the discussion. He suggested the formation of a short-term task force to determine "what this means." Mr. Beauchamp supported Option C. He suggested a library, rehabilitation loans, street and alley improvements, the use of the Sears building as a cultural center, and parks expansion as possible projects. Joyce Berman, 2440 Charnelton Street, identified herself as a library user and ABLE (A Better Library for Everyone) member. She asked the council to make urban renewal funds for a library that would be an improvement on the current facility and would enliven downtown. She supported Option B and asked the council to take leadership and avoid referring the matter to the public for a vote. Ms. Berman noted the many uses of the library, particularly for children, and stressed the importance of a new library to the community. Charlie Magee, 2679 University Street, supported Option B for the downtown district. Regarding the riverfront district, he advocated for its preservation for recreation. Mr. McGee believed that the majority of research done by scientists at the University of Oregon was conducted over the telephone or via e-mail. He termed the research park "an industrial solution in an information era." He supported Option E for the riverfront district. Tom Hoyt, 460 Palomino Drive, introduced himself as a trustee of the University of Oregon Foundation and vice chair of its Research and Technology Transfer Committee. He supported Option F for the riverfront district. He said that the research park enabled the University to leverage and transfer its discoveries and innovations into new technologies and start-up companies. Mr. Hoyt said that professors and students at the University were making world class discoveries for which patents were being issued. The Office of Technology Transfer at the MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 3 7:30 p.m. University licensed the use of such inventions to existing and newly formed companies. Mr. Hoyt said that such companies needed to be in close proximity to the inventors, a reason for the research park. He said that Eugene benefitted from the addition of clean local businesses, and the residents benefit from the new technology-based jobs. The University benefitted because royalties earned at the park fund future research. Tom Slocum, 1950 Graham Drive, said that he had traditionally supported urban renewal but did not think it was appropriately applied in Eugene. He said that the base had not kept pace with the Consumer Price Index. Mr. Slocum supported the continuation of urban renewal, but asked that the council avoid spending money on administrative overhead or unnecessary staff. He also asked the council not to commit to a library in the downtown at this point in time as he believed there was no certainty that was where it should be. Don Tucker, 4738 Brookwood Street, supported Option F for the riverfront district. He said that he worked in the park and had believed that a controlled, Iow-impact development could be compatible with the ecology of the riverfront. He said that an integration between industry and the University was important as it gave businesses a chance to build on the excellent research occurring at the University. The result was jobs for Eugeneans and clean high-tech industry. Robin Carol, 2440 Charnelton Street, identified herself as a fourth grader who frequently used the library and believed Eugene could use a better library. She said that she liked to read and often found that books she wanted were not available. Sometimes she needed facts for school but could not find enough information because of a lack of selection. Ms. Carol said that Eugene could use a new place for events and studying. There was little space for studying now, and it was always in use, often for activities. Leo Airman, 1627 Lawrence Street, said that often when he tried to find a particular book on a particular subject, the library did not have the book or its selection on a subject was small. He said that many of the library's books were in storage, and if a new library was built most of those books could be put on the shelf, benefitting Eugene residents. Mr. Airman said that Eugene could really use a new library. Molly Stafford, 437 East 11th Avenue, supported Option B for the downtown district. She thanked the council for the steps it had taken to get the community a new library. Ms. Stafford noted her membership in ABLE, and said that her group was talking to local service and neighborhood groups about the current facility and some of the expansion alternatives used by other Oregon cities. Her group found much interest and enthusiasm for expanding library services. A new downtown library and branches were both popular options. Ms. Stafford asked the council to retain the possibility of funding a library downtown through urban renewal so the public could discuss the subject and make a decision. Tom Wiper, 3772 Pine Canyon Drive, supported Option B for the downtown district. He said that it was time for the community to make a decision about building a new library. Dan Carol, 2440 Charnelton Street, supported Option B. He said that a library was a winner for downtown and would give the community a place to have programs for at-risk youth. Regarding the riverfront district, Mr. Carol said that there was considerable space available in the research park, so perhaps it was not as high a priority. He asked the council to give residents a serious, single choice about the library, because he believed that Eugene would support a new library. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 4 7:30 p.m. Gregory McLaughlan, 2401 West 22nd Avenue, identified himself as president of Friends of Eugene and a member of the Sociology and Environmental Studies faculty at the University. He urged the council to terminate the riverfront district, Option E. Mr. McLaughlan said that the riverfront did not need renewal. He asked the council to consider the results of the Growth Management Study surveys, which indicated a lack of support for public subsidies and support for additional open space, particularly natural habitat. Mr. McLaughlan did not think it was appropriate public policy for the City to allocate dollars to a project over which it had no control. He noted that more than 150 students and faculty recently signed a petition calling for no new development north of the railroad tracks while preserving the park south of the tracks. Mr. McLaughlan called for a new approach to the research park that preserved the open space north of the tracks for future livability and allowed the use of land south of the tracks to serve the needs of an expanding research university. Peter Barrel, 2240 Agate Street, said that he was a downtown business owner and former Downtown Commission member. He asked the council to support urban renewal. He said that the community could not achieve compact urban growth without providing the tools necessary to make it occur. Land values to develop land in downtown Eugene were higher than in the periphery. As a current Planning Commissioner, he had recently considered an application for the expansion of a surface parking lot and had been told by the applicant that land prices in the periphery were sufficiently cheap to preclude consideration of structured parking. Mr. Barrel said that downtown was Eugene's neighborhood, the heart of the city. It would not be successful without commitment and vision. He did not think the urban growth boundary would be able to remain in its current location if downtown was not vital and larger than it currently was. Linda Fuller, 2401 West 22nd Avenue, asked the council to support Option E and to terminate the riverfront district. She said that tax dollars were being diverted to the district without any public control; the council could not preclude development north of the tracks and unique open space would be lost to development; the park, like many other parks in the country, had achieved few of its goals after a decade of existence; and University faculty and staff had opposed the park since its inception. Michael Roberts, 1919 Myers Road, identified himself as the current president of the Chamber of Commerce. He said that the chamber strongly supported urban renewal as the last remaining tool to complete the projects that remained to be accomplished in downtown. He said that money collected in the district should be kept in Eugene, and dissolution of the district would result in too few dollars to restore lost City services. Mr. Roberts noted strong support for urban renewal on the part of respondents to a recent survey sponsored in part by the chamber. He said that urban renewal needed to be preserved for all the projects the community might wish to implement in downtown. Bill Sullivan, 1958 Onyx Street, ABLE member, said that his organization unanimously recommended that the City use urban renewal to construct a new library and offer residents a chance to vote on the operating costs while saving tax dollars. He said that surveys conducted by his organization indicated support for a downtown library. Mr. Sullivan asked the council to avoid a series of votes or a complicated measure tied to other projects or issues. John J. Naleway, 3247 Lincoln Street, said that he was president of Marker Gene Technologies, located in the Riverfront Research Park. He urged the council to select Option F for the district. He described the background of his company and its mission and said that it currently had nine MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 5 7:30 p.m. employees, all former or present University students. Mr. Naleway believed that although some faculty were opposed to the park, many other faculty members were supportive of it, such as himself. He believed that the members of the Riverfront Research Park Commission were dedicated to developing the park in a manner that maintained the setting it was in. Robert Nardo, 85590 Svarverud Road, represented Youth Voice, a local youth advocacy organization. He attributed much of the current youth delinquency to the fact there were insufficient activities for youth in Eugene. He said that a major resource of youth was the library, but its operational abilities were greatly restricted by a lack of space. He said that the library needed space for more activities and resources, such as nonprint resources. Mr. Nardo indicated support for either Option B or Option O Melissa Barkin, also represented Youth Voice. She said that the library was inadequate for a community the size of Eugene, and it did not reinforce the message to youth that education was important. She said that a new library would be a great asset and the attitude of taxpayers toward funding a new library was "sad." Ms. Barkin asked the council to encourage education by supporting the use of funds for a new library. Neale Hyatt, 740 Madison Street, said that a new library was needed. However, he said that the City could have used urban renewal to build a new library ten years ago, and asserted that staff was only offering the option now. He suggested it was only to save urban renewal so that staff could return in future years and ask the agency to fund more downtown projects. Mr. Hyatt said that while surveys indicated people were dissatisfied with downtown, he believed that the condition of downtown today could be attributed to 30 years of urban renewal. Mr. Hyatt said that associating the library with urban renewal was "an absolutely disgusting tactic" to save a program that should be terminated. He said that no tax dollars would be saved by any option offered to the public except termination. Mr. Hyatt favored Option A, pointing out it would realize $650,000 annually. He said that people could still be asked to vote for a bond issue for a new library. He said that he would vote against any library proposal tied to urban renewal. Mr. Hyatt did not support the riverfront district and did not perceive it was producing any research. He said that it was not large enough to be effective but could be large enough to destroy a unique area that residents used a great deal. He supported Option E. John Brown, 1260 Charnelton Street, said that he was a former member of the Downtown Commission. He said that he had tracked downtown vacancies for the past ten years and believed he was qualified to address trends in that period. Mr. Brown said that urban renewal had not been a failure; the job was just not complete. He asked the council to retain its commitment to the downtown district to ensure that end. Mr. Brown believed the council would have the support of a majority of residents. W. Douglas Serrill, 1858-1/2 High Street, spoke in favor of Option E for the riverfront district. He said that the University not only offered its students excellent faculty and facilities, but a peace of mind and atmosphere that many other urban colleges lacked. That atmosphere was attached to the green space north of the campus. Mr. Serrill said that the riverfront gave students a place to study, a place to ride bicycles away from traffic, and a place to value and enjoy. He said that the University had a comparative recruitment advantage offered by the benefits of the current MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 6 7:30 p.m. research park in its current location, and the benefits it would receive by preserving the valuable open green space to the north of the tracks. David Kelly, 2988 Chandler Drive, supported Option E for the riverfront district. He said that he was supportive of start-up companies and continued economic diversification, but did not think that the research park had accomplished the goals established for it. He said that the community should stop putting aside money for infrastructure that might not be needed. Mr. Kelly said that the research park sent the wrong message by sending City funds to support a few businesses. He said that times had changed since the park was created. He said that the district should be terminated, and the City and University should then rethink the best use of the property for all. Kappy Eaton, 1631 East 24th Avenue, identified herself as the president of the League of Women's Voter and indicated the league's support for a centrally located library and improved library services. She asked the council to preserve the option of urban renewal for capital costs for a new library. Ms. Eaton indicated the league's support for Option O She said that a central library would be consistent with the City's and league's goals of encouraging alternatives to automobile usage as it would more accessible to bus transportation options than anywhere else in the City. Ms. Eaton said that the league had consistently supported a strong downtown, and it was the league's position that tax increment financing of capital improvements provides benefits to all citizens of Eugene, and not just those in the district. Eleanor Mulder, 2775 Emerald, indicated her agreement with the remarks of Molly Stafford and Kappy Eaton. She asked the council to keep its options open if a decision was reached by the Mayor's Library Committee that a new library should be located downtown. Gerry Gaydos, 2820 Emerald Street, supported the downtown district and riverfront district. He perceived a relationship between the districts and Eugene's attempt to densify and keep the urban growth boundary in place. He said that the community voted to accept the downtown plan in 1989, and he believed residents understood that it was a 20-year plan that was now only partially completed. Mr. Gaydos supported Option C for the downtown district, saying that urban renewal was a tool that could be used in ways that would aid the growth and the success of downtown. He believed the library could contribute to that success, but there were also many other projects that were important. Regarding the riverfront district, Mr. Gaydos indicated support for Option F. Howard Wade, 735 East 21st Avenue, said that he had participated in several ABLE meetings. He said that although the issues were complex, the options made it clear what could be done. He endorsed Option B and offered the councilors "Library Now" buttons to wear at the new library's grand opening. Leslie Glasser, 390 Dellwood Drive, said she was a long-time resident, parent, and volunteer in the schools. She spoke of the importance of libraries and said that she was appalled by the lack of community support for a new library. Ms. Glasser said that libraries provide materials that were not available from other sources. She said that libraries were key to a community's perception of itself. Ms. Glasser supported Option B to preserve urban renewal for a library only. Al Urquart, 1045 East 20th Avenue, asked the council to terminate the riverfront district, Option E, saying that the district had not attained the goals established for it. He said that the district MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 7 7:30 p.m. was formed at a time when population was being lost and a recession was occurring. He said the goals of proximity to downtown, job creation, and revenue generation had not been realized. Industries locating in the park were already in Eugene. Mr. Urquart said that Eugene had lost valuable historic assets in the form of the EWEB pole yard and an old mill. He said that the University currently has the fewest athletic fields of any school in the PAC 10, and further development north of the tracks would exacerbate that situation. Hillary Johnson, 1290 East 25th Avenue, advocated for Option E, termination of the riverfront district. She said that the termination would free up funds for other City services such as the Eugene Celebration and recreation programs. She said that the City should not be spending money on what she asserted was an "unnecessary and unpopular plan" to develop one of the last remaining open spaces on the Willamette River for commercial development. She said that it should be developed as a real park that people can use. Ms. Johnson suggested that to preserve the area the City must terminate its financial assistance and amend the University's conditional use permit. Arthur Shapiro, 2742 Bowmont Drive, said that the hearing was not about the library but was about urban renewal. He said that the majority of people were unaware of the nature of tax increment financing. He said that the City was asking the council to approve a program that spent $34.3 million in the downtown district to this point and the area was still "decrepit." Mr. Shapiro said that the City paid $850,000 for the Sears building using urban renewal and $200,000 to determine what it could be used for, as well as money for options that had not been recovered. The City was now valuing the building at $500,000. He said that was not good administration of taxpayers' funds, and he did not think he could trust the City. Mr. Shapiro said that the City could put the library where residents wished for an additional $4. He said that he could not support a library constructed with urban renewal dollars. Ray Wolfe, 1473 Luella Street, concurred with Hillary Johnson, David Kelly, Gregory McLaughlan, and Linda Fuller and indicated his support for Option E. He said that regarding the downtown district, he hoped a library could be built without siting restrictions. He supported Option B because he believed an operating levy would be supported by the voters if they believed there would be a reduction in expenditures in the downtown urban renewal fund. Mr. Wolfe said that no more tax revenues should be directed toward speculative and unevaluated cosmetic changes in the district. He said that there were more important uses for such funds. William Eaton, 2311 Willamette Street, stated that he supported Option A. He asserted that the Urban Renewal Agency had been terminated as a distinct body from the council to allow the council to manipulate revenues from the district. He said that the library should be decided on an up or down vote of the people. He asked the council to pay off the district debt without delay. Pat John, 85114 Kensington Road, Pleasant Hill, said that she was director of the library at Lane Community College. She said that access to libraries and librarians was essential to sorting out all the data people received in the information age. Ms. John said that the current library was becoming a barrier to information. The current library does not provide free and open access to information. Ms. John urged the council to build a new library. The council recessed briefly from 9 p.m. to 9:10 p.m. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 8 7:30 p.m. Jennifer Gleason, 1031 West 10th Avenue, asked the City Council to adopt Option E relative to the riverfront district. She said that arguments that might apply to downtown were not relevant to the riverfront. She believed it made sense to retain funds that might otherwise go to the State and County to build a new library. However, Ms. Gleason said that the community needed more open spaces, particularly along the Willamette River. She did not think it was a community goal to cover the riverfront with development. She said that many people used the riverfront for recreation and want to protect it. Ms. Gleason referred to Oregon Revised Statute 390.330, and said it allowed local governments to apply to the State for matching funds to purchase land within the greenway. She asked that the council terminate the district and use the funds freed up as matching funds to purchase the land from the University for a park. Doug Quirk, 212 Pearl Street, said that the library was a high priority for residents and he supported Option B. Regarding the riverfront district, Mr. Quirk supported Option E, and said that the funds should be directed to restore lost recreation services. He acknowledged the loss of tax dollars to the State and County but said that if the funding was retained, it would go toward developing an area many did not want to see developed. He believed that the General Fund would realize $2 million over time if the riverfront district was terminated. Mr. Quirk said that the Eugene Celebration could be funded in part with those revenues. Paul Holbo, 2090 Broadview Street, termed urban renewal a "political incubus" for the City of Eugene and suggested that its association with past ballot measures had doomed them to failure. He favored Option B for downtown. Julie Aspinwall-Lamberts, read a motion adopted by the Mayor's Library Committee regarding urban renewal: "Ms. Aspinwall-Lamberts moved, seconded by Ms. Donahue, that since the objective of the Mayor's Library Improvement Committee is to develop a plan and funding mechanism for improved library services and facilities, which may include a new library in the Downtown Urban Renewal District or outside the district, the committee recommends to the City Council that an option to fund such a facility using urban renewal revenue be maintained. The motion was adopted unanimously, 9:0." Dan Tucci, 251 Spyglass Drive, termed downtown the heart of the city and said it had the highest density and highest concentration of tax revenues in the community. He said that he had developed several downtown properties and had found several challenges to development in downtown. Mr. Tucci said that projects such as the Tiffany Building had been made possible through urban renewal loan programs, and the loan was nearly repaid. He said that many projects downtown were made possible by urban renewal. Mr. Tucci supported Option O Mary Ann Holser, 2620 Crest de Ruta, supported Option E for the riverfront district. She said she did not think the riverfront district was meeting the goals established for it. She said that much of the research being done in the park was not applied research but was basic and so the park was not attracting new companies. Ms. Holser asked the council to preserve the last open space in the area for public use. Regarding the downtown district, Ms. Holser indicated support for using urban renewal funds to construct a new library as outlined in Option B. She believed that residents would support a subsequent operating levy. Frank Drysdale, 912 Van Buren Street, asked the council to terminate the riverfront district, or Option E. He said that the district was formed using a political, not environmental process. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 9 7:30 p.m. Regarding the downtown district, Mr. Drysdale agreed with Arthur Shapiro and William Eaton about tax increment financing and maintained that the district was diverting dollars away from other public priorities to fund things that "the public does not generally support." He also agreed with Molly Stafford and others who argued for a new library using tax increment financing as envisioned in Option B. While he agreed with those who said that urban renewal was a valuable tool, Mr. Drysdale maintained that it had been misused in 30 years of practice. The heart of the City had been decimated by urban renewal David Hauser, 2161 Elk Horn Drive, represented the Chamber of Commerce. The chamber supported continuation of both urban renewal districts. He said that contrary to the testimony offered to the council, there was considerable public support for urban renewal as demonstrated by a random sample survey conducted by the chamber. He said that additionally, residents care deeply about the downtown; when polled, 79 percent of respondents agreed downtown was a unique neighborhood that should be supported by the entire community. Residents indicated that they supported a downtown library, transportation projects such as opening streets, housing, and the renovation of older properties. Mr. Hauser said that with respect to community development, every discussion he had participated in had included the concepts of compact urban growth, transit-oriented development, and vital commercial districts. He said that urban renewal could be an effective tool in realizing those planning objectives. For instance, the City could be an effective player in shaping the development of downtown using urban renewal. Mr. Hauser said that urban renewal should be changed in terms of administration, oversight, and application to make it more effective as a tool in the future. Regarding the riverfront district, Mr. Hauser noted the chamber's support for Option F. Regarding the downtown district, Mr. Hauser noted the chamber's support for Option O Mike Schwartz, 2390 Lariat Drive, identified himself as a former member of the Downtown Commission, Eugene Renewal Agency, and Eugene Downtown Association and urged the council to support Option O He agreed with those who said that there was much remaining to be done downtown. Mr. Schwartz said that the initial intent of the district was to strengthen economic conditions downtown, and to improve its importance to the region and enhance its role as a central location for public and private development and investment. He said that many improvements downtown were still needed and urban renewal was the most appropriate tool to fund those costs. Mr. Schwartz suggested that urban renewal could be used to enhance downtown to attract a large retailer or locate a convention center downtown. He asked the council to retain urban renewal. Mr. Schwartz said that a furniture store should not be the largest retailer in downtown Eugene. Ellen Maddox, 2570 Van Ness Street, asked the council to adopt Option O She supported the use of urban renewal to fund a new library and encouraged the council to take leadership and avoid referring a measure to the voters. She said that downtown was the heart of the city and Eugene needed effective tools such as urban renewal to preserve downtown as a vital place. She said that she was working on a committee to locate more Iow-income housing downtown, and that might require more levels on the Pearl Street garage, a cost that could be defrayed by urban renewal funds. Paul Prensky, 933 East 29th Avenue, said that while he believed that urban renewal was anti- democratic and its use dictated by commissions and private interests, he wanted a new library to MINUTES-Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 10 7:30 p.m. be built and so supported Option B. He agreed with those who called for the termination of the riverfront district, Option E, and said that the greenway was a valuable asset that had persuaded him Eugene was an environmentally friendly city when he first moved here. Mr. Prensky said that the research park was a good idea gone wrong, and as implemented, it would result in pollution reaching the Willamette River. Diane Wiley, 451 Brookside Drive, identified herself as the manager of the Riverfront Research Park and said she was representing the University of Oregon. Ms. Wiley said that the Riverfront Research Park Commission had recommended the adoption of Option F, a recommendation that was endorsed by University President David Frohnmeyer. She said that the commission evaluated the district's urban renewal plan and each goal and objective and how the project was achieving those goals, and found that in all cases the district was positively addressing each one. Ms. Wiley reminded the council that the planning process had not envisioned a six-year appeal process to the Land Use Board of Appeals and Court of Appeals. It was not until 1992 that the appeal process was exhausted and the development begun. She described progress in the park since that time and said the University was very proud of the park, its tenants, and the connections they had to research activities and faculties on campus. Ms. Wiley invited those in the audience to take a tour of the park. She asked the council to maintain the working relationship that had been established between the University and City. John Hibbird, 888 West 8th Avenue, Neighborhood Economic Development Corporation, asserted that the public trust had been completely lost over the riverfront district and it should be terminated. He endorsed Option B for the downtown district. He said that the projects included in the district should have a direct connection with people's lives and address a public benefit. Mr. Hibbird said that urban renewal should address social issues, such as affordable housing and social service agencies that were continually short of funds. He said that it was unacceptable that people should be sleeping under bridges in Eugene. He said that the disparity between that type of experience and the use of public funds for projects where there was no direct connection to people's lives and they cannot identify a benefit should be examined. Mr. Hibbird cited parking for Iow-income housing as an example of a project he believed had a direct connection to people's lives. He said that the library should be the first priority and other projects should be prioritized in terms of how they facilitated progress on social problems; otherwise, the district should be terminated. Howie Bonnett, 1835 East 28th Avenue, asserted that the Budget Committee had decision- making authority over the urban renewal district and it was premature for the council to take action on the districts. He suggested that the action was "prejudging" the role of the committee. He asked the council to delay its action until the committee had time to make a recommendation given what he perceived as the General Fund implications of the action. He noted his own personal interest in using the money freed by dissolution of the riverfront district to restore library services to seven days weekly, restore pre-Ballot Measure 50 support to the Citizen Involvement Committee, restore the urban forestry budget to levels sufficient to administer the tree preservation ordinance, restore specialized neighborhood traffic enforcement, restore maintenance to the City's walking and jogging trails, and restore many recreation cuts, including those to Westmoreland and Amazon community centers and Kaufman and Campbell senior centers. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 11 7:30 p.m. Evelyn McConneaughy, 1653 Fairmount Boulevard, said she represented the Eugene Natural Historic Society, which strongly favored Option E for the riverfront district because of the unique character of the area. She said that it should be maintained for its recreation and scenic values. Regarding the downtown district, she said that she almost favored retaining urban renewal for building a library but feared that the decision would not bind future councils. She called on the council to adopt Option A, terminate the district, because she believed the district had not worked. Bayard McConneaughy, 1653 Fairmount Boulevard, said that there was considerab;e University faculty opposition to the riverfront district and the research park. The majority of scientists he was acquainted with opposed the district, and he believed the same was true for the majority of the University community. He opposed tax increment districts, saying that the result was "slush funds" used for the interest of particular businesses or projects without a vote. Mr. McConneaughy said that large projects in Eugene should always be voted on by the people. Marcus Coffman, 1071 East 19th Avenue, said that he supported Option C for the downtown because he supported compact urban form. However, Mr. Coffman opposed the riverfront district, saying it had been created during a recession and economic conditions had changed since its inception. He supported Option E, terminate the district. He said that firms were attracted to Eugene for many reasons and it did not need the park to research new companies. New residents were drawn to Eugene for what he termed "the second paycheck," in the form of mountains, clean rivers, bicycle paths, and cultural amenities. He said that the riverfront was part of that second paycheck, and developing the riverfront in the name of attracting investment negated it. Mr. Coffman said that additionally, because Eugene lacked residents who were qualified to fill high-tech jobs, those jobs were being filled from out of state. Derritt Hodgekiss, William Middleton, and Alex Rook, spoke on behalf of the Men's and Women's rugby clubs regarding the lack of athletic fields at the University and asked the council for its support for a rapidly growing sport. Calan Taylor, 2000 Sylvan Street, said that the University lacked sufficient playing fields and those available to the general student body were comparable to those available to students at South Eugene High School. He said that currently, eight club sports teams use the south bank field for practices and games. That resulted in much conflict. He said that before the district, the area was designated to be developed as playing fields. He asked the council to reconsider the need for playing fields as he did not believe the district lived up to its expectations. Mr. Taylor said that any plan involving the University should be based on what would benefit students the most. Playing fields promoted a healthy life style and would be heavily used by students. He said it would be tragic if the last remaining open land on campus was used for private businesses such as restaurants and non-research related businesses. Kevin Aaron, 534 West 11th Avenue, said that he was opposed to development in the Willamette greenway except for restoration and education activities. He asked the council to "read between the lines" of statements coming from somebody claiming to speak on behalf of the University. He claimed that it had been difficult for citizens to obtain information about plans for the research park, and asserted that the planning committees appointed by University President David Frohnmeyer were "stocked with members who were known to be in agreement with development interests" and "off limits" to concerned students and faculty. Mr. Aaron said that the natural open MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 12 7:30 p.m. space would be lost forever if the research park was expanded. He was willing, however, to accept a compromise that would allow the research park to remain south of the tracks while preserving the area north of the tracks. Mr. Aaron asked the council to adopt Option E. Sylvia Hart, 256 North Grand Street, agreed with previous speakers supporting Option B for the downtown district, particularly the two children who spoke, Robin Carol and Leo Airman. She said that ideally, Eugene would have branch libraries within walking distance of children, rather than attempting to serve them from a main library. She said that historically, half the circulation in libraries is to children under 18 years of age. Ms. Hart encouraged the establishment of branch libraries. Rachelle Depher, 2839 Kincaid Street, said she was the captain of Women's Ultimate Frisbee at the University and supported Option E for the riverfront district. She said that sports fields at the University were inadequate and overused. She said that no other areas on campus were available, so she preferred to see development plans for the area north of the tracks abandoned so new fields could be built. She said that she used the fields every week and the area was heavily in use as an open space by Eugene area residents. Laurel Fisher, 2555 Highland Oaks Drive, supported Option C for the downtown district. She said that the library and Hult Center were the two great stakeholders downtown, and the space between them was what was under consideration tonight as she believed the council was committed to the library. Ms. Fisher said that the area between the two facilities was key to making the community's vision regarding downtown come alive. She said that people needed to see an entire picture of what was envisioned to garner their support. Ms. Fisher called for a development of a comprehensive plan for the area in question. Jan Spencer, 283 North Polk Street, advocated for Option E for the riverfront district, saying that it did not fulfill the definition of blight and was a wonderful resource as an open space. He said that the Growth Management Study results indicated that Eugene residents valued open space and wanted more. He was opposed to the subsidy of private businesses. Mr. Spencer described his own experience viewing wildlife in the area and asked the council to adopt the option so that the area could be preserved for wildlife. Ben Ross, 1366 Lawrence Street, #1, said that the riverfront should be dissolved because the City needed the money for other purposes. In addition, he believed the riverfront was a fragile ecosystem that would be threatened by the expansion of the research park. He supported Option E for the riverfront. Regarding the downtown district, Mr. Ross advocated for Option B to construct a new library. He encouraged the council to keep any proposal for the library simple and to avoid tying the library to the fate of urban renewal, which he believed could kill the proposal. He said that the council should educate the public about the benefits of the proposal in a proactive fashion. Kevin Hornbuckle, 375 Adams Street, addressed statements made by Mr. Tucci regarding The Register-Guard's investment in downtown, noting that the company was receiving a $500,000 tax exemption over ten years for its housing development on High Street. He had been the only member of the City Council to vote against the exemption. He said that downtown developers such as Mr. Tucci have a financial interest in the district. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 13 7:30 p.m. Mr. Hornbuckle maintained that the library could have been built many years ago if the council had wished to defease the agency and direct the money toward a new library. He said that the options presented to the public were not all the options available, so the discussion was accordingly constrained. He said that other financing mechanisms, such as an income tax to increase the available General Funds for programs such as a library and recreation, had been rejected by the council and "killed the library." He said that the library would once against fail if it was attached to urban renewal. He said he would like to see a guarantee that the library would be the only project funded by urban renewal. Mr. Hornbuckle concluded by saying that an operating levy for the library based on property taxes was a bad idea. Mr. Torrey closed the public hearing. In preparation for the meeting regarding the topic on April 15, Ms. Swanson Gribskov requested information on the impact of precluding development north of the tracks. Ms. Nathanson asked staff to clarify the revenues that would be realized by the General Fund under either options E or F for the riverfront district if the district were terminated. Ms. Taylor asked if the City could guarantee that urban renewal would be used only for library construction and, if the library was not in the district, that the district would be terminated. City Attorney Glenn Klein indicated that the answer was yes; the ordinance adopting grandfathered option 1 to guarantee the funds would be used only to build a library and defease existing debt. Mr. Tollenaar asked if there was anything the council could do if it adopted the base option to influence the University to concentrate development south of the tracks. Specifically, would it be possible to amend the zoning district to provide greater assurance future development would be confined to that area. Mr. Torrey encouraged councilors to forward additional questions to staff. IV. ORDINANCE REGARDING REVISIONS OF TREE REMOVAL PERMIT PROGRAM Mr. Laue moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to refer the item to the Budget Committee and ask the committee to look for funding options to continue enforcement of the tree ordinance during the upcoming budget process. Responding to a request for direction from Administrative Services Department Director Warren Wong, the council directed staff to prepare a contingency fund request to support the program for the remainder of fiscal year 1998. Mr. Laue said that he believed the council could find a way to make the program work, although perhaps not at the previous levels. Mr. Meisner indicated his support for the motion but said he hoped the council was not discussing maintaining the status quo. He said that the current ordinance had symbolic value but had not been particularly effective. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 14 7:30 p.m. Responding to a question from Ms. Swanson Gribskov regarding the needed funding for the remainder of the fiscal year, Public Works Department Director Christine Andersen said that the amount was approximately $15,000. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. V. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM HEARINGS OFFICIAL AND PASSAGE OF AN ORDINANCE LEVYING ASSESSMENTS ON KINGSLEY ROAD Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, to approve the Hearings Official Findings and Recommendations of April 3, 1998. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. CB 4645--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, storm sewers, and street lighting conduit on Kingsley Road from Goodpasture Island Road to 1,000 feet west; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that the bill, with the unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment by considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4645 by number only. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, and because Ordinance 20114. The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager Pro Tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) r: 1998~adm~cis~councfl~cc980413m2 MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 15 7:30 p.m.