Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 11/14/05 WS M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall November 14, 2005 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Bonny Bettman, Gary Papé, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor. COUNCILOR ABSENT: George Poling. The Honorable Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. Mayor Piercy welcomed the special guests from Irkutsk, Russia, one of Eugene’s sister cities, who introduced themselves. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER Mayor Piercy reported on the following: ? The League of Oregon Cities met on November 12, and Mr. Papé was acknowledged for his good works; ? Residents of Kanazu, Japan, visited Kelly Middle School today (November 14); ? The Mayor’s State of the City Address had been moved from Tuesday, January 3, to Thursday, January 5. Ms. Ortiz reported that she: ? Will participate in an immigration panel with Mayor Piercy on Wednesday, November 16, at 7 p.m., at Cesar Chavez School; ? Would participate in a Latino Outreach to be held at the Chamber of Commerce; ? Attended the first meeting of the Community Standards Group. In conclusion, Ms. Ortiz referred to the November 14, 2005, memorandum sent to the City Council from the Police Commission and urged the council to approval the commission’s request to conduct research for the council as it moves forward to recruit a police auditor. Mr. Kelly reported he received an inquiry from an owner of one of the local taxi companies who voiced dismay that taxi companies were not permitted to advertise in the manner currently practiced by Lane Transit District. Mr. Kelly said that he viewed this as an equity issue and requested that staff ascertain whether the City should permit ads on taxis. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Kelly announced that at its October meeting, the Region 2050 effort completed its outreach around the Central County Area and the Region 2050 Policy Board and staff would craft a draft of preferred strategies for the region between now and the year 2050. He explained that the draft would be reviewed by each city twice, once prior to the adoption by the Region 2050 Policy Board, and again following presumed adoption in the form of a resolution or intergovernmental agreement. Mr. Kelly added that the Region 2050 meeting to be held on November 16 would include a presentation on legal parameters by Lane Shetterly, the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development. Ms. Taylor announced that the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority changed its name to the Lane Regional Air Protection Agency, and that the agency was currently crafting goals and a vision statement. Ms. Taylor spoke to the visitors from Eugene’s sister city of Irkutsk and thanked them for allowing time in their busy schedule to attend the session. She voiced hope that a delegation from Eugene would be able to visit Irkutsk next summer. In conclusion, Ms. Taylor announced that the recent League of Oregon Cities convention was one of the best in recent memory, with an excellent session devoted to the arts. Mr. Papé echoed Ms. Taylor’s comments regarding the League of Oregon Cities convention and said an excellent resource, Dr. Bill Grace, discussed leadership ethics. He then cautioned that the council needed to pay special attention to 1) attempts to usurp the council’s authority with regard to the telecommunications franchise area; and 2) the State administrative rule around water rights, which would be somewhat complicated. He stressed that the issue around “no impact to the rivers” would be a dilemma. Turning to the subject of Ward 5, Mr. Papé thanked Mayor Piercy for holding a “one on one” meeting in that area which was very much appreciated by his constituents. Mr. Papé reported that a fence would be constructed on Holly Street and asked the City Manager to advise if a permit for that construction will be necessary. City Manager Dennis Taylor announced that he was elected to the Oregon City/County Management Association Board of Directors. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Papé, moved to accept the recommendation of the Eugene Police Commission to proceed with the next steps of the Civilian Oversight Model as set forth in its memo to the City Council on November 14, 2005: To conduct research from other communities with police auditors and based on a compilation of that data, present 1) elements to be considered in a job description for the police auditor position that were tailored to the responsibilities as proposed in the Police Commission’s proposal; and 2) a recommendation for a set of characteristics and qualifications to be considered for the police auditor position. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 2 Work Session Additionally, to 1) assist with the development of enabling ordinance language necessary to establish the oversight system; 2) work with City staff to craft new policies and modify existing policies to ensure consistent operating practices for the oversight system and to reflect changes in the internal affairs process; 3) develop recommendations regarding the role and organizational structure of the Police Commission with regard to the new oversight components; and 4) provide input to council on the disposition of other outstanding issues. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the recruitment of the auditor was a crucial “first step” so that he/she can assist with the design of the civilian oversight process. Mr. Papé stated that the voters have spoken and the process to implement the Civilian Oversight Model must now move forward. He questioned, however, whether Mr. Poling requested that he be present for this motion. City Manager Taylor confirmed that Mr. Poling did not make such a request on this particular motion. Ms. Taylor pointed out that the council was not made aware of the formal request of the commission prior to this meeting. She stated she would vote for approval of the motion with reservations, pointing out that the entire council needed to take the lead on this process at the earliest possible date. Mr. Kelly concurred; however, he opined that the expertise of the commission can be of great value to the council as it moves forward with this process. Mr. Pryor voiced hesitation to approve the motion as the request had not been presented to the council for discussion prior to this meeting. He stressed he had faith in the Police Commission; however, he remained firm in his caution about voting on issues that have not heretofore been discussed. City Manager Taylor reminded the council that in addition to the Police Commission and its staff, the Human Resource staff would be of assistance to the council as it develops a position description and recruitment strategy. Ms. Bettman pointed out that the motion did not move the council forward with a decision; rather, it approves the commission’s request to compile research and provide the first phase of its information to the council for consideration in January 2006. She voiced her gratitude for the expertise of the commission in this particular endeavor. The motion passed 6:1, with Mr. Pryor voting in opposition. B. REPORT ON SISTER CITY TRIP Mayor Piercy thanked the delegation that accompanied her to two of Eugene’s four sister cities, Jinju, Korea and Kakegawa, Japan: David Piercy, Mr. Papé, Ki-Won Rhew, Youn Rhew, David Funk, Duane Funk, Ken Yi , Ruth Yi, Judge Jack Billings, Tom Bickel, and Mary Walston. A slide show highlighting the trip, presented by Council, Public, and Government Affairs Manager Mary Walston, proceeded. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 3 Work Session Mayor Piercy stated that she and Mr. Papé would be pleased to share additional information about the trip and voiced hope that others (both council members and constituents) would become involved in some manner with Eugene’s sister cities. Mr. Papé echoed Mayor Piercy’s comments and said the trip was one of the most interesting he had ever experienced due to its non-tourist form in the manner of home stays, visits to schools, and the visit to the Holt Agency. With regard to the Holt Agency, he noted his renewed appreciation of the work of Bertha and Harry Holt, which lives on in that part of the world. Additionally, he spoke of his visit to Hynix and shared that it was looking to expand its plant in Eugene, which would be a welcome economic boost to the community. Mayor Piercy spoke of the “Slow Life Movement” that had been implemented in Kakegawa, a model that she found most impressive. Additionally, she spoke of the “connection” that presents itself with the Sister City Program and noted an example that was currently taking place in Korea in that children with disabilities were being mainstreamed into schools, which changes the services that were provided to them. Agencies were looking to the Pearl Buck Center as a model for such changes. She stressed that these community-to-community connections seem even more important in a world with many troubling issues. In conclusion, Mayor Piercy commented that she was honored to travel to these cities and share her insights with the community. She then displayed the gifts that had been bestowed to the delegation. Mr. Papé thanked the City Council for allowing the funding for the trip. C. I-5 FRANKLIN PROPOSED INTERCHANGE PROJECT UPDATE Senior Transportation Planner Lisa Gardner stated this agenda item would be the council’s third briefing on the I-5 Franklin Interchange Project. She noted that Phase 2, the input process, was nearing completion and that a series of public workshops would be scheduled in early December, with the Eugene workshop to be held on December 8, in the Eugene City Library. Following that process, Ms. Gardner explained, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) would meet with elected officials to ascertain approval of the process to date. Ms. Gardner proceeded to introduce Tom Boyatt, Senior Planner at ODOT, Sam Suskind of CH2M Hill, and Brian Ray of Kittleson Associates, who she stated would provide a project overview and answer the council’s questions. Mr. Boyatt reviewed his memorandum of November 7 entitled I-5/Franklin Proposed Interchange Update. He spoke to the interchange concepts, the study purpose, benefits of a new interchange, traffic and circulation benefits, and project issues. Mr. Boyatt opined that no transportation problems presented themselves at this time. Mr. Boyatt encouraged the council to ponder what priority it deemed prudent to set for this project. He then spoke to policy issues, namely the Major Investments Policy and the Federal Highways Policy on Access to the Interstate System and said these policies do not preclude building an interchange in the area; rather, there was a process that would need to be adhered to -- assuming it was a priority. Mayor Piercy called for council comments and questions. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Kelly voiced appreciation for the work completed to date on this endeavor and agreed there was merit to the project. However, he spoke to the key issues, such as the impact on the river, parklands, and affected neighborhoods, which he cautioned he would carefully observe. Mr. Kelly asked whether the council could give its sanction to partial interchanges rather than the full interchanges, if it determined such action to be prudent. Ms. Gardner did not think that the council would not be expected to provide that level of detail. She clarified that the council needed only to ascertain whether it approved the continuation of the pursuit of the project, including plan amendments. Mr. Boyatt, with noted concern, asked that the council not pre- determine the refinement planning process. He said that it was his charge to take an objective technical look at the plan. Mr. Kelly agreed that a full range of alternatives needed to be analyzed; however, he opined, it was a full range of alternatives based on ODOT’s purpose and need. He noted that the council, after review and discussion, from a City policy standpoint, could deem it prudent to condition the purpose and need in some way. Mr. Suskind stated that the goal of ODOT was to enable the council to ascertain whether the project was worthy of being included in the City’s plan but not to prejudge the design or the characteristics of the project. He added that input on the purpose and need was most appropriate and therefore a statement would be drafted to identify the issues which need further focus in the development of alternatives. Mr. Kelly agreed that it would be premature at this stage in the process for the council to approve certain alternatives. In response to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Boyatt confirmed that a public comment report would be provided to the City Council for its review. Ms. Ortiz stated that she was not in favor of moving forward with this project. She explained that safety issues elsewhere needed to be addressed; specifically, the Beltline, which was unsafe to travel during peak times. Mr. Pryor stated he supported the project. He concurred with Ms. Ortiz that the Beltline was unsafe but he considered the project under discussion to be a high priority. Mr. Pryor explained that if Eugene was to become a metropolitan area of greater scope, it cannot have a major interstate highway that did not have a functional interchange. Mr. Papé stated it was his understanding that the federal government was responsible for the freeways, the State of Oregon was responsible for connectivity around the state, and it was the responsibility of the City and the County to resolve local transportation issues. Mr. Boyatt concurred; however, he pointed out while the federal government had delegated ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the federal interstate systems to the states, it had retained approval authority through its regulations. He continued, saying that ODOT was responsible for I-5 under the umbrella of the federal approval authority. Mr. Papé said that the council needed to discuss the project in the context of how it improved the system on a local level and with the State system. Mr. Boyatt remarked that the project should not have detrimental impact to Beltline, Franklin Boulevard, I-5, or Hwy 99. Mr. Papé concurred with Ms. Ortiz’s comments that focus must be targeted to the Beltline. He added that when debating this project, consideration should be given to the area’s needs over the next 50 years. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 5 Work Session In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Suskind replied that 24” x 36” diagrams designed around different themes–which would be of interest to the community and based upon the facts to be presented by Mr. Boyatt–would be made available to the community at the scheduled public meetings. Ms. Bettman then spoke of the historical process around the interchange and asserted that ODOT originally agreed to receive approval from local jurisdictions prior to developing a project that may not enjoy community support later on. Mr. Boyatt clarified that the approval being sought at this time from local jurisdictions was to move forward solely with the facility planning process. He added that following that process, it was hoped that ODOT would adopt the plan for the State system and then have the local jurisdiction adopt a facility plan into the transportation system plan which would provide an opportunity for the council to review the project once again. Mr. Boyatt stressed that it was the intent of ODOT to provide as much information as possible on the idea itself, which stops short of developing any particular alternatives. Ms. Bettman opined that community support for this project would depend on its scale and impacts. Ms. Bettman spoke to the contamination issue at Alton Baker Park and asked how it would impact building over that site. Mr. Boyatt replied that the contamination had been identified as an issue and the details would depend on further investigation. Ms. Bettman asked if it would dictate that there must be a partial clover leaf south of the river. Mr. Boyatt replied that ODOT placed fill on the capped site as part of the detour structure and additional fill would most likely be necessary for the replacement bridge. He added that unnecessary excavation must be avoided. Ms. Bettman asked how the dedicated lanes of Bus Rapid Transit on Franklin Boulevard would be impacted. Mr. Boyatt replied that that issue was not a cross-section detail that had been reviewed; however, he opined that a design would be crafted that avoids dedicated lanes that must be respected. Ms. Gardner added that any impacts against existing conditions must be mitigated. Ms. Bettman referred to Attachment B, Initial Concepts – Category 1 – Full Interchange – Diamond 1, and asked for an explanation of possible boulevard treatments. Mr. Boyatt explained that the treatments would be for Glenwood Boulevard, west of the interchange. Ms. Gardner added that it was solely an issue to consider at a later time. Mr. Ray said that the concept of Diamond 1 was that it would take away the freeflow movements of the current Highway 99 ramps; i.e., instead of having freeflow movements near Oak Street, movements from the south would veer to the signal and therefore speeds could be reduced. In response to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Boyatt replied that if ODOT moved forward to interchange area management planning, local approval would be necessary to continue forth with the project. Mr. Kelly stressed that prior to a council vote it was essential that it be clarified if an approval to move forward to pursue the project mandated a second approval phase following the completion of the Facility Plan. Mr. Kelly said he would send any questions regarding the technical memos that were presented to the council on this date to Ms. Gardner, who would forward them to the project management team. Mr. Kelly questioned if alternatives to mitigate the potential cut-off of the Laurel Hill Valley design have been pursued. Mr. Boyatt replied that the northbound freeway exit and the southbound freeway on-ramp both provide connections to the neighborhood. The specifics of MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 6 Work Session design alternatives involving those connections have not yet been analyzed at this high level, but would be investigated in detail during refinement planning as alternative designs were compared and assessed. Mr. Boyatt remarked that the area Mr. Kelly referred to was also currently accessible by the Glenwood Interchange. Mr. Kelly pointed out that ODOT made it clear to the MPC in its discussions regarding a permanent bridge and a full interchange that they will be separate projects with two separate processes. Additionally, that ODOT, in its discussions, promised to build a permanent bridge to avoid precluding ramps. He said if additional background on the relationship between the bridge structure and the ramp structure was requested, Mr. Ray can provide that information. Mr. Papé asked where the potential “superfund” site was located. Mr. Boyatt replied it was the site of the old Goodpasture Dump. Mr. Papé pointed out that the site may have some toxic waste and clean-up required but it was not a superfund site. Ms. Gardner concurred that the site did not appear to be a superfund site. In response to another question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Boyatt replied that the challenge for the bridge designers was how to build a bridge that may not interfere with some future connection to Franklin Boulevard. With regard to the I-5 Beltline Interchange, Mr. Boyatt stated that ODOT had not scoped the community/stakeholder input; however, due to the interest in the project locally, a robust process would ensue, beginning with the December 8 public meeting. Mr. Papé pointed out that if access to and from the Laurel Valley was cut off, fire response and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) issues must be considered. Ms. Gardner replied that that level of impact to Laurel Valley had not been reviewed at this phase. Ms. Bettman pointed out that the original intent of ODOT was to get an indication from the local jurisdictions as to whether the interchange project was a priority so the process could be merged with the bridge process. Mr. Boyatt agreed that the original idea was such a concept; however, as time progressed, it was made clear to ODOT that such a plan would be difficult. He elaborated that the chief hurdles were funding and time lines and that the bridge funding, by legislative fiat, must be tapped by 2012 and therefore ODOT found it difficult to move forward with a $80 million replacement structure which would be funded on a bond time line. Additionally, attaching it when there were no physical or horizontal geometric needs specifically attaching it to the bridge was not deemed prudent. Ms. Bettman said she understood the reasons for such a determination; however, she pointed out that as the interchange project was now a separate and discrete project, utilizing a modified process was unnecessary as it could be pursued through a traditional process. She added that there was no rush to move forward as a time line did not need to be met and that the bridge design process, which was ahead of the interchange process, would need to have a design that would not preclude the on- and off-ramp. Mr. Boyatt countered that there was a possibility some of the construction phases could very well combine at a later time. Mr. Suskind stated that, speaking as a consultant for ODOT, his charge was to inform the policymakers and keep them in charge of the process and make a determination whether to move forward to a refinement plan, regional plan amendments, and finally into the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) process. Ms. Taylor stated it was her understanding that the interchange project would be combined with the bridge project. Mayor Piercy reminded the council that MPC had been informed quite some time ago that constructing the bridge at the same time as the off-ramps would not be possible. Ms. Taylor then questioned who benefitted from the construction of the interchange. Ms. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 7 Work Session Gardner replied that the question put forth by Ms. Taylor would be answered through the public process, followed by further review within the elected official domain. Mr. Kelly recognized that some of the construction could align, regardless if there were two NEPA processes. In terms of benefits, he shared that a number of his constituents voiced support for the project, as it would improve central city access for constituents and visitors. In terms of process, Mr. Kelly pointed to the Beltline/I-5 process and opined that it did in fact produce good efforts; however, the challenge was that most of the work took place in the middle of the NEPA process. With the current process, he appreciated that there was a determination to provide for more dialogue and stakeholder discussion and a series of “thumbs up/thumbs down” exercises with elected officials prior to any allocation of large sums of money. Mr. Boyatt thanked Mr. Kelly for the reminder that planning prior to the NEPA process was most prudent; in fact, essential. In conclusion, Mayor Piercy commented that attention must be paid to purpose and needs as those components guide processes thereafter. Mayor Piercy adjourned the regular work session at 6:47 p.m. D. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Piercy called the council into executive session in accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 192.660(2)(h) The executive session adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Joyce Ogden) MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 8 Work Session