Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: June 14, 2010 Agenda Item Number: 2A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the November 9, 2009, Work Session, January 5, 2010, Work Session, January 11, 2010, Work Session, February 16, 2010, Council Meeting, and April 14, 2010 Work Session ATTACHMENTS A.November 9, 2009, Work Session B.January 5, 2010, Work Session C.January 11, 2010, Work Session D.February 16, 2010, Council Meeting E.April 14, 2010 Work Session FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 541-682-5882 Staff E-Mail: beth.l.forrest@ci.eugene.or.us Z:\CMO\2010 Council Agendas\M100614\S1006142A.doc ATTACHMENT A M I N U T E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room—City Hall—777 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon November 9, 2009 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark, Andrea Ortiz, Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor, George Poling, George Brown. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Betty Taylor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the work session of the Eugene City Council to order. She announced that Ms. Taylor was attending a National League of Cities conference. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER Ms. Piercy proclaimed Saturday, November 21, 2009, as Eugene Public Library Foundation Appreciation Day. She distributed cards received from citizens on the subject of arbitrary enforcement of fence height restrictions. She attended a meeting of the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) that included a presentation on the West Eugene Collaborative and a roundtable discussion by jurisdictions on their current activities. She met with mayors from throughout the County on formation of an Area Commission on Transportation (ACT). She said that the Oregon Department of Transportation would come to the area to present information on legislatively mandated road projects and noted that the FOOD for Lane County Dining Room had celebrated its third year of operation. She was pleased with the number of people who visited downtown during the First Friday Artwalk. Mr. Clark described his experience as principal-for-a-day at Cal Young Middle School. He attended a Santa Clara Community Organization meeting and commended a presentation by City staff on the Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment (ECLA) process. He also attended the LCDC meeting and posed a question to the commission about possible conflict resolution mechanisms. He announced there would be a fundraiser for the Save Civic Stadium organization at Tsunami Books on November 12. Mr. Pryor thanked Ms. Piercy and Mr. Clark for representing the City at the LCDC meeting. He attended the swearing-in ceremony for Police Chief Pete Kerns and was impressed with the support of the entire Kerns family and their commitment to public service. He attended a West Eugene EmX Corridor Committee meeting, which had expanded membership to include business owners and other stakeholders th along West 11 Avenue. He found the Budget Committee meeting helpful in identifying the financial challenges facing the City. Ms. Ortiz reported on a conference she attended recently in Austin, Texas, at which there were many sustainable practices to support a commitment to being green. She acknowledged and thanked veterans for their service to the country. She would participate with Lane Transit District in a meeting with business thth owners along 6 and 7 avenues regarding an EmX corridor. She also attended Chief Kerns’ swearing-in MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 1 Work Session ceremony. She supported the Dream Act and would be presenting information on that initiative to the council and the Human Rights Commission in the future. Mr. Brown attended the Budget Committee meeting and Chief Kerns’ swearing-in ceremony. He also attended a meeting of the Police Commission’s Use of Force Subcommittee, which was reviewing the Taser policy. He encouraged the council to discuss the Taser policy as well and would support Mr. Zelenka’s request for a work session. Ms. Solomon reported that a recent Active Bethel Citizens meeting was very well attended and discussion topics included the proposed YMCA location and the West Eugene EmX. Mr. Poling extended thanks to veterans for the sacrifices they made for the country. He wished the United States Marine Corps a happy birthday. Mr. Zelenka remarked that the financial picture presented as the recent Budget Committee meeting was not optimistic. He congratulated Chief Kerns on his appointment. He noted that the work session he requested on the Taser policy would occur following the Police Commission’s conclusion of its work on the subject. He thanked veterans for their service. He attended the Greenhouse Gas Task Force meeting, which was developing proposed legislation related to land use and transportation. He announced upcoming meetings of Fairmount Neighbors, the Sustainability Commission and Laurel Hill Valley Citizens. City Manager Jon Ruiz stated that he and Ms. Piercy would attend a Eugene-Springfield leadership class to discuss opportunities and challenges in the region and encourage emerging leaders. He, along with the executive team, attended a recent diversity conference at Lane Community College and found the presentations very thought-provoking. He said the first Arts and Business Alliance of Eugene breakfast was very successful and recognized the efforts of businesses and arts organizations that had partnered to promote both business and the arts. He announced there would be an Economic Development Summit on November 19 and encouraged everyone to participate. He also thanked veterans, particularly City employees, for their service to the country. Ms. Piercy added her thanks to veterans and appreciation to Chief Kerns for his willingness to serve the committee. She also encouraged councilors to participate in the Economic Development Summit. B. WORK SESSION: Infill Compatibility Standards Recommendations Ms. Piercy and Mr. Ruiz thanked the community members and staff who were working on Infill Compatibility Standards (ICS). Mr. Ruiz introduced Terri Harding, Planning and Development Department, to present the item. Ms. Harding stated that the purpose of the work session was to prepare for a public hearing on the first round of ICS recommendations. She used a slide presentation to present an overview of the topic and highlight the initial recommendations. She said ICS and Opportunity Siting (OS) were companion projects that promoted different aspects of strategies for compatible residential growth; ICS was aimed at adopting land use regulations that ensured compatible infill within neighborhoods and OS was aimed at finding sites for facilitating higher density development. She said growth management policies nos. 1, 6 and 9 provided the context for the projects. She described the composition and activities of the ICS Task Team and briefly reviewed the list of 17 recommendations. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 2 Work Session Ms. Harding indicated that there were four recommendations in the first round, although the two related to parking had been grouped together. The recommendations were: 1. R-3/R-4 Parking Strategies and parking for Subsidized Housing a. Near the University of Oregon: i. Require more off-street parking for apartments with three or more bedrooms ii. Allow tandem parking to count toward the minimum off-street parking requirements iii. Amend the West University Refinement Plan (Policy 3A) regarding parking for consistency with the new code b. City-wide: i. Require less parking for low-income, senior and disabled housing developments ii. Clarify the City’s requirements for off-site parking leases iii. Adjust dimensional standards for parking spaces along alleys to allow for more backup space Ms. Harding said the Planning Commission was generally supportive of the package of parking amendments and encouraged the City to blaze a path for creative solutions like car-sharing and tandem parking. She said the commission asked staff to develop code language for car-sharing as that was not currently in the ordinance. The language would allow, for each 15 spaces required, a credit of three spaces for each shared car, up to three credits per development. Ms. Harding reviewed the recommendations related to building height limitations. She said the proposal was to reduce allowable building height in the R-3 zone from 50 to 35 feet, and in the R-4 zone from 120 feet to 35, 50, 75, or 90 feet, depending on location and size of the development site. She used drawings to illustrate implementation of the proposed building heights and compare them to the MiCAP (Minor Code Amendments) regulations they would replace. She said while the building heights represented compromise, there was still some opposition to the 90-foot height without additional design standards. Ms. Harding used an aerial photograph to illustrate the R-2 zoned areas within the Jefferson-Westside neighborhood that would be subject to proposed standards related to dwellings per lot, sloped setbacks, building height, roof form, parking and open space. She said the proposal would allow dwellings per lot within the medium density range of the Metro Plan, from 10.3 to 15 per acre, and the sloped setback concept would establish a compatible building envelope for all new construction. Next steps included a public hearing before the council on November 16, with action scheduled for December 14. Ms. Piercy asked if there had been any discussion of providing rent discounts to students who did not use a vehicle. She noted that some individuals had expressed an interest in developing a ride-share program in the community. Ms. Harding said that question had not been raised. She said there was a shared car th arrangement among three developments on 19 Avenue and membership by residents was voluntary. Mr. Clark thanked members of the task team for their work. He asked if the number of housing units lost by reducing the maximum building height from 120 to 90 feet within the designated zones had been calculated. Ms. Harding said that had not been calculated, but information gathered by volunteers in the neighborhood showed that maximum density could be achieved within the lower height. She said the discussion had focused on reducing excess capacity. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Clark asked for data on the number of housing units at maximum capacity that would not be built if the council adopted the lower building height. He said the possibility of creating one-way streets and diagonal thth parking between 18 and 19 avenues, and Agate and Alder streets, had been raised in earlier discussions of parking. He asked if any analysis of that had been done. Mr. Ruiz said he would check on the status. Mr. Poling asked for more information on the car-sharing concept, such as who provided the car and certified the car-sharing organization and what role the City had in the arrangement. Regarding the Jefferson-Westside Special Area Zone, he asked why there was a gap between the two areas in the zone. Ms. Harding replied that those were the two areas currently zoned for medium density residential; the majority of the area in the gap was zone R-1. The solutions were intended to address development problems within the R-2 zone. In response to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Ms. Harding said that a 10,000 square-foot site qualified for a 90-foot building height would be comparable to two single-family lots combined. Mr. Zelenka asked staff to provide more information on the square footage of a block and examples of how building height limitations would be implemented, including allowing a bonus height of 90 feet. He like the concept of car-sharing, but was concerned that the concept was new. He did not want to trade off an untested approach with a permanent solution like reduction in parking spaces. He said the language specified that the car-sharing program had to be offered, but not that there had to be participants in it. He asked how the provisions related to requiring compliance with the minimum number of parking spaces would be enforced if car-sharing agreements ceased to function. Ms. Harding agreed that enforcement was the biggest challenge as the City’s enforcement activities were currently complaint-driven. She said the amendments package also included provisions for improving the City’s administration of off-site parking spaces. Ms. Ortiz concurred with Mr. Zelenka’s concerns about enforcing parking arrangements. She thanked ICS Task Team members for their work. Mr. Brown questioned why Section 12 of the proposed ordinance indicated that it would take effect pursuant to Section 32 of the Eugene Charter 2002 or on the date of its acknowledgement as provided in ORS 197.625, whichever was later. City Attorney Emily Jerome replied that the language was standard in most land use ordinances. The second clause indicated the provisions would not go into effect if the matter was appealed and would be delayed until the courts had determined the ordinance was enforceable. She said that avoided requiring compliance with a land use regulation that was remanded and went out of effect. She said the State had to acknowledge land use ordinances and that took 21 days; if there was no appeal the ordinance became effective on the thirtieth day according to the Charter. If there was an appeal, acknowledgement was withheld until the appeal was final. Mr. Brown preferred to have the second clause removed because it opened the opportunity for mischief. Ms. Jerome indicated she would provide a motion to accomplish that. Mr. Clark explained that he felt the proposed 90-foot building height was reasonable, but his question about the number of dwelling units eliminated by the reduction from 120 feet related to the broader community conversation about density. Mr. Zelenka expressed general concern about implementing the ICS recommendations when the City’s enforcement was complaint-driven. He questioned how anyone would know if a car-sharing program lapsed MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 4 Work Session or the number of bedrooms had been increased, thereby affecting the required parking. He asked if other enforcement strategies were being considered. He agreed with Mr. Brown’s concern about the second clause related to an effective date for the ordinance. Ms. Jerome reiterated her willingness to provide a motion to address that. She recommended inclusion of the clause in ordinances because it represented the safest legal approach and clarified for the community exactly when an ordinance went into effect. Ms. Piercy asked staff to provide information on how car-sharing and ride-sharing programs operated in other communities of a similar size with a large student population. . WORK SESSION: C Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment (ECLA) Planning Director Lisa Gardner stated that as a result of a council motion regarding the ECLA timeline, staff was developing a revised scope of work through April 2010, including strategies for identifying priority issues, and had reconvened the ECLA Community Advisory Committee (CAC). She introduced Jason Dedrick, Planning and Development Department, to provide an ECLA status report. Mr. Dedrick said the primary purpose of the work session was to obtain additional feedback from the council on the technical products that were presented at the October 28, 2009, council work session. He highlighted the information provided on October 28, including the Residential Capacity Analysis and the Baseline and Variations to Baseline Assumptions Analysis, which were associated with determining the acreage need over the next 20 years. He said a review of data from 2001 to 2008 indicated a reduction in density on slopes between five and 30 percent. Additionally, some Local Wetlands Inventory (LWI) wetlands were not protected by Goal 5 and the assumption was that only 50 percent would be developable. He said the conclusion was that Eugene’s vacant lands could produce about 8,000 dwelling units and 14,000 units would be needed over the next 20 years. He noted that although the supply of vacant industrial land exceeded the demand for the next 20 years, it did not mean there was no need, depending on the size of parcels. Ms. Piercy asked if staff had heard concerns from stakeholders that were not represented on the CAC as she wanted the process to be as inclusive as possible. Mr. Dedrick said he was not aware of any. The CAC members were doing a good job of representing stakeholder groups and their questions and concerns. Mr. Zelenka asked if the CAC would be involved in the ECLA process through April 2010. Ms. Gardner said the CAC was involved in the early part of the process and given the expanded timeline there was an opportunity for them to participate in strategizing and prioritizing ECLA work. She invited suggestions from the council on any stakeholders that should be added to the CAC for the ongoing discussions. Mr. Clark asked what percentage of the LWI wetlands were in private ownership and public ownership. Mr. Dedrick said that data could be easily provided. He estimated that somewhat more of the unprotected LWI wetlands were in private ownership. Mr. Clark said if the assumption that 50 percent of those LWI wetlands would be developed meant all of the privately-owned wetlands or also included some public wetlands. Mr. Dedrick said that publicly- owned land was not considered as vacant and buildable. Mr. Clark said there had been significant work over the years in the Santa Clara area to protect natural stormwater drainages and the neighborhood association had done a detailed mapping of the area’s natural MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 5 Work Session drainage ways. He asked if the Capacity Analysis included protection of some of those drainages and could the mapping work already done on that area be used to identify sections for possible protection. Mr. Dedrick said the natural drainage ways was an issue raised by the CAC. He said consultation with Public Works and the City Attorney indicated the areas were not prohibited from development. Whether there was a policy intent that was not codified in a way that prohibited development of those drainages was an area that had not been encompassed by the ECLA process. He said the data collected by the neighborhood would be helpful. Mr. Clark said he was interested in the difference between net and gross acreage and understanding how that impacted recommendations. Ms. Solomon also expressed an interest in data on the percentages of LWI wetlands in public and private ownership. Mr. Dedrick said his presumption was that all of the acres identified were in private ownership or they would have been excluded from the analysis. He confirmed that the assumption was 50 percent of the privately owned wetlands could be developed. Ms. Solomon cautioned that developing wetlands could encounter barriers that would make the 50 percent development assumption too high. Mr. Pryor commended staff for seeking input from a wide range of perspectives. Mr. Zelenka agreed with Mr. Pryor. He asked for clarification on the next steps of the ECLA process. Ms. Gardner said efforts would be focused in the next three weeks on identifying the core pieces of the technical assumptions and methodologies that needed to be corrected with a goal of beginning to produce the right final product at the beginning of December, while meeting the intent of HB 3337 by December 31. Mr. Dedrick said he would be asking all CAC members what issues were critical to address by early December and what issues should be captured by April 2010. Mr. Zelenka encouraged planning that built in flexibilities that could accommodate uncertainty in the future rather than single-line planning. Ms. Gardner agreed that it was preferable to maintain as much flexibility as possible instead of debating absolutes. Ms. Piercy commented that the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) wanted more frequent updates on the ECLA process and that would perhaps result in the City being given more planning flexibility. Ms. Gardner agreed. She said that formal updates would be made to the commission, but informal updates were also being provided more frequently at the staff level. Mr. Clark remarked that redevelopment affected areas of the City differently. He asked if data on potential redevelopment rates by neighborhoods was available so the council and public could understand the impacts of decisions. Mr. Dedrick responded that the additional planning time would allow for the discussion of that type of information. D.CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes of June 22, 2009, City Council Meeting; September 14, 2009, Joint Elected Officials Meeting; September 14, 2009, Work Session; September 16, 2009, Work Session; September 91, 2009, Public Hearing; September 22, 2009, Joint Elected Officials Meeting; September 23, 2009, Process Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 6 Work Session Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. The motion was passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 7 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 7 Work Session ATTACHMENT B M I N U T E S City Council Eugene Hult Center Lobby Eugene, Oregon January 5, 2010 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor, George Poling, Andrea Ortiz, George Brown, members. I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Council President Alan Zelenka opened the meeting and welcomed those present to the 2010 State of the City event and wished them a Happy New Year. He introduced other members of the council present and recognized the City’s executive management team. He also recognized the student delegation from Eugene’s Sister City of Chinju, Korea, as well as appointed and elected officials and leaders from throughout Lane County. II. MUSICAL SELECTIONS DIVISI performed the musical selection “Don’t You Worry ‘Bout a Thing” by Stevie Wonder. III. AWARDS AND RECOGNITION Community Awards Mayor Piercy recognized the following organizations and groups for their contributions to helping the council achieve its goals in 2009: ? Safe Community Volunteers in Policing Downtown Guides ? Sustainable Development Lane Transit District ? Accessible and Thriving Culture and Recreation Lane Arts Council—First Friday Art Walk MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 1 ? Effective, Accountable Municipal Government Walnut Station Stakeholder Group ? Fair, Stable, and Adequate Financial Resources Eugene Budget Committee City of Eugene Executive Management Team Employee Recognition Awards Environmental Management System Team, Public Works Wastewater Youth Services Team, Eugene Public Library Human Resources Division, Central Services Youth Services Team, Eugene Public Library IV. MUSICAL SELECTION DIVISI performed the musical selection “Imagine” by John Lennon. VII. STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS Mayor Piercy delivered the following address: Welcome to Eugene 2010. It’s good to see you here tonight. It’s time for us to celebrate the end of a tough year and “turning the corner” to this New Year. It took “people power” to keep moving forward in these hard times. We had that - our neighborhoods, our volunteers, our activists, and our partners. The leadership and deep commitment of our community was evident in 2009 with so many talented people working together, day after day, meeting after meeting, for public benefit. Moreover, we relied on partnerships that extend well beyond Eugene, to other cities, other institutions and agencies. We learned we are truly “better together.” While I don’t want to linger on all the challenges we faced, they were definitely big. Last year, the recession worsened and we were among the hardest hit in the country. Our unemployment, hunger, crime, and homelessness rates soared. Our budget shortfall expanded and tax returns shrank. We pitched in and tightened our belts. Council, staff, partners and volunteers pulled together to keep steady and on course. The economy was our number one focus for 2009. ? ECONOMY WAS NUMBER 1 We worked to take charge of our destiny. We were sure that by working together, we could harness some of MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 2 our creativity, educational assets, and immense public will to protect our natural resources, ensure social equity and build economic prosperity – the triple bottom line. We built on the foundation we’ve carefully put in place over the last few years. In 2009, we delivered a three-pronged economic strategy. The three-pronged strategy: One : We brought federal stimulus dollars to our region. Two: We protected our local businesses. Three : With our partners, we strategized and planned how we can emerge from this recession and be ready to go. Stimulus Let’s talk about those federal stimulus dollars for a moment. In our metro area, over $101 million dollars was awarded to cities, the county, schools, educational and research institutions, non-profits, utilities and our transit authority. Funds were received for a diversity of local projects including transportation, public safety, housing, scholarships, health centers, electric vehicles, training nursing assistants, tobacco prevention in middle schools, drug abuse prevention, school readiness, and domestic violence prevention. By far, the greatest amount went to the University of Oregon for research in numerous areas ranging from language to migration, from zebra fish to global warming. Eugene received more than $10 million dollars to construct bicycle paths and a bridge at Delta Ponds, for energy efficiency projects, pedestrian and bike facilities at our train depot, pavement preservation, neighborhood stabilization and community development programs, homeless prevention, youth employment opportunities and a justice grant for our police. These funds bring jobs, business growth and opportunities in our region. They also lay the foundation for the future. Saving Jobs The second strategy was to support the businesses and jobs we have. City fee increases were deferred, permit reviews were fast-tracked, same-day and Saturday residential inspections were put in place, automatic three-year extensions were given for certain land use applications, and business loan funds were increased by $320,000. The City loaned money to such great local companies as Green Gear, Ninkasi Brewing Company, and the th Inn at 5 Street Market. This made a difference! Economic Summit The third strategy was a Joint Elected Officials regional economic summit involving over 300 participants. The cities of Eugene and Springfield, Lane County, and other partners worked together to plan for a vibrant economy aligned with our area’s assets and values, with the goal of good paying jobs and high quality of life. MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 3 In early 2010, the Joint Elected Officials will meet again to use the findings of the summit and move economic planning forward. Important, too, to this economic discussion will be the completion of our required buildable land supply inventory (ECLA) and how we address the future direction of our community. We intend to have this pivotal policy discussion collaboratively and productively, avoiding polarizing presumptions and politics. To prevent sprawl, we are going to have to live more densely and protect the character of our valuable, inner core neighborhoods. We’ve seen some deterioration in these neighborhoods already, so the timing here is crucial. Downtown Revitalization A fourth, additional strategy was to move downtown revitalization forward. I feel like a broken record here, but my commitment is unerring. We deserve a downtown to be proud of. This requires a multifaceted approach that includes development, public safety and social services. It includes you. ? Development We’ve been successful in partnering with Lane Community College to fill the Sears pit. They plan a total investment of $25 -35 million that is expected to produce several hundred construction jobs, 45 new permanent downtown jobs, and at least six job programs training 8,000 students a year. The LCC Downtown Center will prepare a workforce for the rapidly growing green jobs sector and provide a highly trained labor pool for green industries looking to locate in the area. Please let LCC know what a great thing this will be for Eugene. A city party is due when this pit is finally plugged! Eugene’s Downtown Revitalization Loan program provided gap financing for critical projects such as Kesey Enterprise’s purchase of the historic McDonald Building and Lord Leebrick’s redevelopment of the West Broadway property. These projects are important in building our arts and entertainment district as a significant local economic resource and the cultural identity of our community. Beam Development’s rehabilitation of Centre Court made important progress. The remodeled building proposes to provide flexible “incubator” space for small businesses - a need we heard about in our recent Economic Summit. I give Beam Development and Brad Malsin every credit for being great partners and keeping this on track. Other hopeful possibilities include the upcoming Peace Health Hospital revitalization in our campus area and a regional veterans’ clinic in our downtown. ? Public Safety Public safety plays a vital role in our quality of life, economic future and downtown revitalization. This has been a year of ups and downs. We’re pleased to have our new Chief of Police, Pete Kerns sworn in and our new Independent Police Auditor Mark Gissiner hired, and have confidence that they will both help us move forward. Top on their list will be our city’s taser policy and any changes that are needed. The Public Safety System - Our tattered regional public safety system gained national attention this year. Limited county dollars meant fewer county jail beds and a revolving door for criminals. Additional jail beds MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 4 have since opened, offering some temporary measure of relief and stimulus funds have helped meet some needs in the short-run. Unfortunately, ongoing system funding solutions haven’t yet been found. The county is legally responsible for prevention, intervention, treatment, judicial, incarceration and post- incarceration services, but they currently don’t have the resources to pay for them. We expect new directions from the county and look forward to the recommendations of a community committee led by Jean Tate and Dave Frohnmayer that is working on some “out of the box” solutions. We’ll be supportive as they move forward. City Services - At the City level we’re addressing our public safety needs in new and innovative ways. Chief Kerns initiated strategies to reduce car theft and other property crimes through targeted deployment and increased use of data. He has a task force focused on downtown-specific strategies. He instituted additional crisis intervention trainings to ensure our officers have tools to deal effectively with people in crisis, including those with mental illness. This should help with a number of the behavioral issues in our downtown. We appreciate the work of the Police Commission and Human Rights Commission as we work to create a safe environment for all who live here, no matter their circumstances. Network Charter School youth are also part of our public safety solution. We look to them for leadership and partnership. We understand that youth need good, safe places to go. Once again, the Eugene Rotarians have stepped forward to help provide such places and we thank them. By supporting the transformation of Washington/Jefferson Park to a regional skating facility close to our downtown core, Rotarians will help displace some criminal activity, reinvigorate an ailing park and demonstrate to our youth that they matter. That’s great partnership. Increased positive activity in our downtown, increased numbers of officers, combined with help from neighbors, businesses, agencies and non-profits will be needed to solve all our public safety issues. ? Fire and Emergency Services Fire and Emergency Medical Services is another part of our public safety system that is strained and we’re looking for solutions. Providing ambulance services remains far more expensive than the Medicare reimbursements received. We’ve taken steps to use a private company for transporting non-emergency patients in order to reduce costs. We are looking for other ways to address costs and to continue the high level of service our fire department provides. A second issue is whether to merge the Springfield and Eugene fire departments to cut costs and improve efficiencies. These two departments have shown they work well together through their “Third Battalion,” where each department steps in if the other is not available. It is a huge local control decision to merge two cities’ core services. Recommendations for both ambulance and fire services will move forward in the next year and we will need your input. MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 5 ? Social Services One of the biggest questions we ask ourselves is how the community can better address homelessness. We’ve worked together successfully to better meet needs with public/private partnerships such as Project Homeless Connect and the Thomas Eagan Warming Centers. We’ve recently affirmed through council resolution the rights of those with mental illness. Yet, still before us is the need for housing for the chronically addicted and mentally ill. There’s a lot of interest in additional shelter facilities. The city currently invests in affordable housing, support for existing shelters, permanent housing efforts and prevention work. If we’re serious about expanded shelter capacity, we’ll need new public/ private resources, community leadership and stewardship. ? Climate Change As we moved to build economic capacity, we’ve been fully aware of the imperative for an increased response to finite resources and climate change. Our federal and state governments require us to ramp up our efforts to address this issue. Staff responded this year with many innovations in sustainable practices that reduced material needs and greenhouse gases. These included warm–mix asphalt for street repair - thereby reducing emissions by 190 metric tons; recycling existing streets in place, and white-topping. Parks staff reduced fuel consumption by a whopping 20 percent, conserving more than 3,700 gallons of fuel and the Wastewater division made a transition to a green fleet. The city’s Sustainability Commission recommended a community climate and energy action plan be developed. With the participation of many members of our community and our partners, this draft plan will be complete in August. Climate change has enormous impacts and the Sustainability Commission also recommended a Food Security plan be developed. The scoping plan for this will be out in the next couple months. We will continue to recognize public and private entities that adopt more sustainable practices through our Bold Steps Awards. Our work here is extremely important and we are committed to doing our part in this community and region. ? Infrastructure Investments Public investments in our community paid off in 2009 and promises were kept. Gas taxes, road bonds and stimulus dollars brought long-needed road repairs to fruition and more will occur this next year. Eugene invested $16 million to fix streets in every part of the community. Our bond measure had a specific list of streets to be repaired and required a 12-member citizen oversight panel to verify those repairs. We‘ll continue to be accountable and good stewards in everything we do. Our libraries were there in this recession, meeting our community’s needs. Three million books were checked out. 7,300 children participated in our summer reading program. 800 free events served 40,000 participants, including help with job searches. MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 6 Our parks were also there in this recession, offering “stay-cation” activities for families. Parks bond funds and matching grants allowed renovations and developments in seven neighborhood parks. This simply would not have been possible without the sweat equity of the many neighborhood groups involved. ? The Budget All this work with partners to help in these tough times was truly remarkable. We dealt with a $12 million dollar budget hole, kept our employees, provided services and made progress toward a sustainable budget. Our staff and manager did quite a job. We downsized through attrition, reduced our fleet and brought our legal staff in-house (as promised) to cut costs. Staff made many sacrifices and we thank them. ? Eugene Counts Despite our best efforts, we face yet another $6-8 million dollar deficit in the general fund. We have invited the community into the discussion of what is most important. We call it Eugene Counts. I like this name because of its double meaning that what happens in our city does matter – it “counts” - and that we are accountable to show our citizens our progress on their behalf – an ongoing report card if you will. As you have seen, we are looking for ways to provide the services our community wants, as well as the critical ones that are currently underfunded, such as public safety. ? Shared responsibility Some of the services are ours alone and some are shared with our partners. Clean energy sources, water, and air matter, and they are shared responsibilities with EWEB and LRAPA. A public transit system that efficiently and cleanly allows mobility of people and goods is essential and is a shared responsibility with LTD, and the state and federal governments. Access to food and shelter, justice and civil rights is a shared responsibility. We will continue our strong partnership with the Human Rights Commission and other groups working to protect basic human rights. Public Safety is definitely a shared responsibility and one that touches every facet of our lives. Ensuring our children are educated, healthy and prepared for the future is a shared responsibility. Recently, the council passed a resolution in support of measures 66 and 67 that help protect funding for all of these shared responsibilities. Please vote in January. We have done much together and we have much more to do in the upcoming year. To wrap this up, I will mention some 2010 goals. As you know, many long-term ones continue and we are working with you on defining others. 2010 goals 1. We’ll focus on an aggressive, regional economic development plan that includes bringing in stimu- lus funds, local business support, downtown revitalization, and turning our assets into job growth. We‘ll expand partnership opportunities with the University of Oregon to help achieve these goals. 2. We’ll focus on a successful, collaborative policy discussion regarding our land supply needs that MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 7 will provide understanding and broad support for Eugene’s future growth and development. 3. We’ll address land use and transportation planning as an integrated process. We’ll follow through on the West Eugene Collaborative recommendations to achieve short-term traffic improvements in West Eugene and the technical analysis of the long-term vision that could transform the area. 4. We’ll focus on filling the downtown pits with the collaboration of Lane Community College and Beam; supporting the growth of our downtown cultural district; and working on public safety and social service solutions. In my opinion, we have to look for ways to finally deal with our city hall and either fix it or put it out of its misery. The EWEB master planning will come into play, as will the riverfront connection to our downtown. All planning must be integrated. 5. We’ll work to organize and adequately fund our public safety services including police, fire and ambulance services. This should include new opportunities to partner with the County and to plan in the context of our work to become a Human Rights City. 6. We’ll complete our climate and energy action and food security plans and escalate our commitment to reducing global warming. 7. We’ll support public transit and the EmX West Eugene corridor development and its utmost impor- tance to achieving broader community goals. 8. We’ll aim for platinum for our bicycle system now that we have achieved gold standard. 9. We’ll make certain “Eugene Counts” in every respect. So, promises are being kept and things are getting done. Services for our community are important whether they be for roads, parks, culture and recreation, neighborhood organizations, municipal planning and economic development, public safety, our judicial system or wastewater management. People are working hard as employees and volunteers, as committee and commission members – because we believe it is important, because we love this place and because we know we can and do make a difference. I’m proud of our staff for their commitment to providing excellent service and keeping people employed. I’m proud of their efforts to create better communication with all parts of the community. I‘m proud of their support for our council’s goals and moving our city forward, even in these hard times. None of this is perfect of course, but the effort has been unswerving and focused. Eugene’s management team and employees are excellent and care about our community. Our city council has worked hard, through their leadership, their hours of meetings and their dedication to the needs of their wards. Ultimately, they have immense and bottom-line responsibility for the well-being and future of Eugene. We all love Eugene and intend that our children and their children and their children will love it and be stewards of it for generations to come. 2010 is the beginning of all our tomorrows and there is much to do. This brings to mind three quotes from Mahatma Gandhi: “We must become the change we want to see.” MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 8 “Honest differences are often the sign of healthy progress.” “The future depends on what we do in the present.” Welcome 2010! We are ready to move forward. VIII. Adjourn Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—City Council January 5, 2010 Page 9 ATTACHMENT C M I N U T E S City Council McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon January 11, 2010 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Mike Clark, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, George Brown, members. ABSENT: Alan Zelenka. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTERST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER Mayor Piercy thanked City staff for its effort at the recent State of the City event. She had also enjoyed the recent State of the County and Springfield State of the City events. She called the council’s attention to its receipt of a letter from David Agnew of the Obama Administration expressing appreciation for the City’s work with the Administration. She also noted the potential sale of the downtown United States Post Office and said she had spoken to Representative Peter DeFazio’s Office, who was sending a letter to the U.S. Postal Service encouraging it to rethink the decision. Mayor Piercy noted an alteration in the route for the Martin Luther King, Jr., Day walk. She noted the recent town hall meeting conducted by local State legislators and reminded people to vote in the upcoming election. Mr. Clark reported he attended the recent press conference held by the Eugene Police Department (EPD) in regard to its data-led policing efforts related to property crimes. He complimented EPD staff and Police Chief Pete Kerns for their attempts to be innovative. He had also attended the State of the City and State of the County events and acknowledged the challenges that lay ahead. Mr. Pryor had also attended the events mentioned by Mayor Piercy and commended the frequent mention of partnerships and collaboration. He also commended the recent council goal-setting session. Mr. Pryor said the West Eugene EmX Extension Corridor Advisory Committee recently met at the Eugene Station and display materials regarding the process were available at the site. He had also attended the EPD press conference and encouraged the council to become familiar with the department’s approach as he believed property crimes affected people as much as any type of crime. Ms. Taylor had also gone to the recent town hall held by local State legislators and commended the legislators for being prepared and knowledgeable. She noted that Board of County Commissioners Chair Peter Sorenson had recognized former Congressman Jim Weaver for his achievements at the State of the County event, and the board also gave awards to those who completed the County’s government school. She hoped the City emulated the County in that regard, and suggested the first topic of discussion could be the charter limitations that applied to the council. MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 1 Work Session Ms. Taylor asked if it was possible for the City Council to place a moratorium on the use of tasers. City Attorney Glenn Klein agreed to follow up with a memorandum. Ms. Taylor spoke to the lack of flexibility in the City’s regulations regarding fences and suggested there should be exceptions for certain circumstances. Ms. Solomon arrived. Ms. Taylor observed that the council’s subcommittee on downtown parking had not met recently and had not yet brought its recommendations to the council, and she had recently learned that the City installed meters that accepted credit cards. She had not known that was happening, and had received a complaint they were so high that short people could not access them. She asked if the City purchased or leased the parking machines. Ms. Taylor observed that Nashville, Tennessee, had an art gallery in a former post office. Ms. Ortiz had also commended the Eugene State of the City event and noted her attendance at the Legislative Town Hall. She noted the upcoming Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations meeting to discuss legislative priorities on January 27. Ms. Ortiz reported on a discussion by Police Commission members on best ways to capture the conversation at subcommittee meetings and their interest in securing a video camera to record such meetings. She suggested that the council assist the Police Commission and Civilian Review Board by providing audio equipment to substitute for a lack of minutes recorders. She envisioned the funding would come from the Council Contingency Fund. She would have more information about cost later. Mr. Brown commended Ms. Ortiz’ suggestion, saying he had been hearing similar concerns from those groups and some members of the public about the lack of a record. He reported on his attendance at the recent Use of Force Committee meeting, and said the committee was taking its time to carefully review the taser policy. He also noted his attendance at the recent Human Rights Commission retreat and reported it had been a good grounding session for the eight new members. Mr. Brown said he met that day with two citizen members of the Budget Committee and Planning Division staff to discuss some of the remaining concerns and questions about the Beam project. Mr. Poling also had attended the EPD press conference and anticipated the new approach would allow officers to be more efficient and to focus on particular areas. He noted the upcoming Chamber of Commerce and Lane Council of Governments award dinners. Mr. Zelenka noted that the meeting was his last as Council President and thanked the council and staff for their support during his tenure. He too had attended the State of the County and two State of the City events, and particularly commended the Wildish Theater, which had been the venue for the Springfield event. He said that Springfield had presented a very well-done slide show that encapsulated 2009 events in Springfield. Mr. Zelenka noted that he had attended the last Civil War basketball game between the University of Oregon and Oregon State University to be held in MacArthur Court and reported that progress on the new arena was steady. He looked forward to seeing the Police Commission’s recommendations MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 2 Work Session regarding the taser policy. City Manager Ruiz reported that boards and commissions training would be held the following day. He planned to attend the next meeting of the Friendly Area Neighbors, and invited councilors to attend the upcoming Fire and Emergency Medical Services awards the following week. He also reminded councilors of the January 23 goals setting session. Mayor Piercy thanked Mr. Zelenka for his service as council president and Mr. Clark for his service as council vice president. Mayor Piercy reported that she had three constituent contacts in regards to the new meters and heard complaints that the meters were too tall and the meter required that one be tall enough to be able to look down at it. 2. WORK SESSION: Downtown Projects The council was joined by Development Analyst Amanda Nobel Flannery, who provided a PowerPoint presentation on Downtown Projects. Copies of the presentation were provided to the councilors. The presentation touched on strategies for downtown and included funding options and timelines for several downtown projects. The projects included a new Lane Community College downtown center; an arts and entertainment district; a new Veterans Affairs clinic; business assistance and housing; rebranding, easy payments, and free parking; green infrastructure; the Beam project; and illegal behavior consequences, physical spaces, and coordination. The funding options included a general obligation bond; self-supporting bond; local option levies; grants, donations, and tax credits; adjustments to the downtown service district; adjustments to Human Services Commission funding; Urban Renewal Agency (URA) loans and grants; cost shifts to the Urban Renewal District; the General Fund; and redirection of other funds, including the Parking and Facility Reserve funds. Ms. Nobel Flannery invited questions at the conclusion of the presentation. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor on how much a tax on unoccupied properties in downtown would realize, Planning and Development Director Susan Muir said such a tax would produce $20,000 to $30,000 annually. She noted that such a fee was recommended by the downtown safety task force convened by Police Chief Kerns and herself. Ms. Taylor indicated her support for such a tax. Ms. Taylor acknowledged her personal opposition to expanding the urban renewal district or increasing the debt limit. Whatever the City did downtown, she wanted the public to be able to vote on it. Ms. Ortiz asked questions of Finance Director Sue Cutsogeorge clarifying the amount left in the Downtown District loan program ($1.8 million) and the possible cost shifts from the URA. In response to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Nobel Flannery confirmed that the boundaries of the th Downtown District would have to be adjusted to accommodate a VA Clinic at 12 Avenue and Willamette Street. That would require a plan amendment. Mr. Poling did not object to adjusting the Downtown District boundaries on a case-by-case basis. He questioned why the General Fund was listed as a funding source given it lacked sufficient funds. Ms. Muir indicated that staff was attempting to be exhaustive in the options it offered to the council but it could be MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 3 Work Session taken off the list. City Manager Ruiz suggested that the question came back to what the council priorities were. Mayor Piercy thought Mr. Poling’s remark about the General Fund was well-taken, and pointed out that a choice to use money from the General Fund would be a decision to reduce services in another area. Ms. Solomon determined from Ms. Muir that there would be $500,000 available for URA grants based on the current spending limit. Ms. Solomon asked how much Lane Community College (LCC) would ask from the City. Ms. Muir anticipated that LCC could request $8 million. She also clarified that the cost shifts to the URA previously mentioned as a funding option would require a plan amendment to increase the spending limit, and the council’s decision on the plan amendment could be referred to the voters. Responding to a question from Mr. Brown, Ms. Muir did not anticipate that LCC would have all the project details in place by the time the council next discussed the topic. She noted that an LCC representative was present at the meeting to hear the council’s discussion. Mr. Brown referred to page 25 of the annual financial report of the URA, which indicated the district had $11 million in equity, accrued cash, and investments. Page 8 indicated the funding was available to be spent at the URA’s discretion, which indicated to him that the money could already be spent on Lane Community College. Ms. Cutsogeorge clarified the figure Mr. Brown referred to was for both urban renewal districts; funds from the Riverfront District could not be spent in the Downtown District. In addition, the Downtown District plan currently included a maximum indebtedness amount that allowed the City to spend no more than $500,000,the actual amount available had been reduced by the payment of the library debt. Mr. Clark referred to page 38 of Attachment H and clarified with Ms. Nobel Flannery the amounts associated with the costs of the proposed parking equipment and further determined from Parking Manager Jeff Petry that the number of metered spaces in the core was 427 meters, or about half the total in the Downtown Plan area, and the cost estimate for free parking was based on that number. Mr. Clark emphasized the importance of attracting the VA hospital to downtown and asked City Manager Ruiz what the City could do to address the negative perceptions that might exist in regard to Eugene. Ms. Muir said the council’s discussions had helped, and Peace Health had also assisted a great deal. The City had put out the message that staff was here to help, and was working with Peace Health on its submittal package. Staff was following up on the comments recently published in the newspaper that suggested Eugene was considered challenging to work with. Speaking to the meters on the Park Blocks mentioned by Ms. Taylor, Ms. Muir agreed they were too tall, and were being removed as a result. Mr. Pryor suggested the General Fund option, even if constrained, should be retained because it sent a message that the council was interested in change. He said the council should retain the option with the understanding it represented a tradeoff of some kind. Mr. Pryor thought the days of “unrestricted urban renewal growth” were gone and the debt limit could not be increased for unknown reasons or possible future development. However, he wanted to retain the urban renewal financing mechanism for a focused, specific opportunity. MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 4 Work Session Ms. Solomon supported shifting costs to the URA to pay the Parking Fund debt, which would allow the Parking Fund to contribute to the General Fund to pay for police. She wanted more understanding of the impact on community services. Mr. Zelenka also supported the VA hospital being located downtown. It was a high priority for him and he thought it would be good for both downtown and local veterans. He hoped the City was doing all it could to bring it downtown. Mr. Zelenka wanted to eliminate the General Fund option and indicated there were no tradeoffs he could envision supporting in that regard. Responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka, City Attorney Glenn Klein clarified the points in the memorandum he prepared for the council regarding urban renewal, and agreed to follow up with the Oregon Department of Revenue on a question regarding the implications of expanding the downtown district or increasing its indebtedness level for a new VA hospital downtown after June 30, 2010. Mr. Zelenka asked under what circumstances the tax base would be calculated to the current assessment level. Mr. Klein believed the City could adopt a new plan and reset the base but would have to wait for increases in assessed value to receive the incremental increase. He agreed to follow up on that question as well. Speaking to the funding mechanisms under consideration, Mr. Zelenka did not want another divisive community fight about the use of urban renewal for the downtown area. He preferred the path of least resistance that gained the most community support. He thought several mechanisms could achieve the same or similar results without divisiveness, and encouraged the council to focus on them. He acknowledged they might not be the most cost-effective, but could be the most politically acceptable. Mr. Brown opposed the use of urban renewal for the identified projects, except for what was left in the fund. He found all the projects mentioned to be interesting and important but did not think they could be accomplished at the same time. He advocated for a focus on the Beam project and the LCC downtown campus project as a way to address the major eyesore areas of downtown. He questioned spending money on a federal project and suggested that the VA hospital should be in the purview of Peace Health and the General Services Administration (GSA). He questioned why the City would be involved given that Peace Health would continue to own the property. Mr. Clark suggested to Mr. Brown the value of the VA hospital would be the number of people it would draw downtown, and a synergy could be created by the close proximity of an LCC campus with a nursing program. He was less excited about the Beam project because the City had already contributed a great deal of money without getting the pit filled. He hoped Beam could find tenants because he did not want to see the City end up in the role of tenanting the building. Mr. Clark was more focused on ensuring the City did what it could to encourage LCC and the GSA. He was willing to consider urban renewal to pay for that effort. Mr. Clark suggested the City consider the idea of turning the existing meters into art opportunities for local artists that could be contributed to voluntarily. Ms. Solomon determined from staff that the Parking Fund could realize $700,000 to $800,000 annually until the fund debt was paid off in 2018. Mr. Zelenka asked that the number actually available be double- checked given the other existing demands on the fund. Mr. Zelenka suggested that each funding mechanism had an economy of scale that required it to be matched MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 5 Work Session to a package of projects that would be appealing to the public. He proposed the council anticipate that any proposal it developed would be referred to a public vote, which would mean that the proposal must attract some yes votes to be successful. Ms. Muir indicated it was staff’s intent to return with such a proposal. Mayor Piercy recalled the success of the City’s last Parks and Open Space bond measure, which included elements that were attractive to a wide variety of people. Ms. Taylor concurred with the remarks of Mr. Brown about the need to focus on the eyesores that existed downtown. She believed that the issue of the VA hospital was between the GSA and Peace Health, and the City’s role was in removing barriers rather than contributing money. Mr. Brown noted his general opposition to urban renewal because it did not benefit the General Fund. He criticized the downtown urban renewal plan as overly vague and nonspecific about the projects to be funded. He suggested it be eliminated and that the City start over again. Ms. Solomon said it would be useful to know what other measures might be on future ballots to help guide the council in its decision-making. She also suggested the potential of reducing or eliminating the systems development charge assessed to the VA hospital as a means of assisting the GSA, rather than providing urban renewal funds. Ms. Muir indicated she did not yet have sufficient information to offer input about the systems development charge as a potential tool. Ms. Ortiz encouraged staff to do what it could to facilitate continued conversation with the GSA. She said that a VA hospital would be an economic development tool and would provide needed access to health care for local veterans, who currently had to travel out of town. Mayor Piercy suggested the tools the City used to encourage the projects under consideration could take a variety of forms based on the financing the City had available. Mr. Pryor speculated that the council was probably in general agreement about the City’s use of funds to support the development of infrastructure, but disagreement would arise when the council discussed what constituted infrastructure. He might consider certain aspects of public safety to be infrastructure, while others would not. He asked if removing barriers was an infrastructure discussion, or if supporting the construction of an actual building was an infrastructure discussion. Mr. Pryor suggested that those issues needed to be worked out, and that it was difficult to talk about the funding mechanism when the council lacked clarity about what the money would be used for. He suggested the council needed to focus on the strategies for downtown and associated project list and determine where the City was appropriately involved. Responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka about the status of the Farmers’ Market, Ms. Nobel Flannery referred him to Attachment I and acknowledged that the cost of buying the butterfly parking lot from Lane County was not included. She suggested the potential of non-cash alternatives, such as a land exchange. Mr. Zelenka said that the Farmers Market had indicated that an impediment to its growth was a lack of space. Ms. Nobel Flannery concurred. Mayor Piercy observed that the Farmers’ Market vendors had not been of one mind on the topic, and the City had been working with them to attempt to get to a vision for the future that could be supported by most. She suggested that the City attempt to put a timeline on that process. Mr. Zelenka concurred. MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Clark believed the City Council should leverage what already worked downtown, and it was clear that the Farmers’ Market was working. He wanted to do what was possible in regard to the market. He suggested that the City Council look into the potential of providing more room for the market by further investigation of Professor Mark Gillam’s idea for extending the Parks Blocks to the river. Ms. Taylor determined from Mr. Petry that the City charged the Farmers’ Market for parking and indicated her opposition to that. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—City Council January 11, 2010 Page 7 Work Session ATTACHMENT D M I N U T E S City Council Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon February 16, 2010 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Mike Clark, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, George Brown, members. ABSENT: Alan Zelenka. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. She encouraged councilors to attend the Asian Celebration and noted that the Eugene School District 4J Board of Directors was beginning its deliberations in regard to the fate of Civic Stadium the following day, and suggested that the council consider if it wished to take a position. Mr. Clark requested a memorandum from the City Attorney related to any legal considerations the council needed to keep in mind in regard to taking a position on the stadium if any stadium-related proposal came before it. I. PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION An Ordinance Adopting Hazardous Substance User Fees for the Fiscal Year Commencing July 1, 2010 Fire and Emergency Medical Services Management Analyst Glen Potter was present for the item. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no request to speak, she closed the public hearing. Mayor Piercy determined there was no councilor who objected to taking action on the item. Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved that the council adopt Council Bill 5022, a bill adopting hazardous substance user fees for the fiscal year commencing July 2, 2010. Responding to a question from Mr. Poling about the percentage increase in fee and how it related to other City fees, Mr. Potter said that the fee increase was approximately six percent, but he did not know that increase compared to increases or decreases in other City fees. He said the fee was not derived by a set inflation formula but rather to the number of a reporting firm’s employees. Roll call vote; the motion carried 5:2; Ms. Solomon and Mr. Poling voting no. 2. PUBLIC HEARING An Ordinance to Redesignate and Rezone “South Willamette Properties” for General Office Use by: Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram; Amend- ing the South Willamette Subarea Plan Diagram and Text; and Amending the Eugene Zoning Map Mayor Piercy called for conflicts of interest or ex parte contacts. Councilors had none to declare. MINUTES—City Council February 16, 2010 Page 1 City Manager Ruiz reviewed the request before the council. He noted the February 9, 2010, letter of testimony received from Matt Sprick of Eugene in support of the request, copies of which had been distributed to the council. Mayor Piercy reviewed the applicable criteria found in sections 9.77303, 9.8424, and 9.8865 of the Eugene Code and the rules governing the public hearing. She opened the public hearing. Rick Sorrett , the property owner of 2440 South Willamette, provided a brief history of his investment in the property in question. He attributed the property’s current vacant status to the fact of the move of Peace- Health to River Bend, which led many doctors and clinics to re-locate near the hospital. The building had been zoned R-3 but was never used in any capacity but as a nonconforming medical use. He had not intended to change the zoning, but the vacancy forced him to look to alternatives. The property was at the north end of the commercial corridor in this area, and he sought the General Office zoning as a transition zoning between the existing commercial and residential uses in he area. He hoped that the rezoning would help to re-tenant the property and contribute to the general well-being of the area. Justin Schmick , 1600 Oak Street, distributed and reviewed his written testimony in support of the request. Carl Mueller , 370 G Street, Springfield, believed the application complied with all relevant approval criteria and noted that the Planning Commission also found the application compliant. He reviewed the request and suggested the impact of the proposal would be very minor given it had been in office use for a considerable period of time. He did not think that the property would be counted in the Residential Lands Inventory because of its past use and did not think it should be included, and noted that the code provided for residential uses to exist in the General Office zone. He concurred with Mr. Schmick’s testimony. Mayor Piercy determined that there was no staff response, and no councilor wished to continue the hearing. She closed the public hearing. 3. PUBLIC HEARING An Ordinance to Redesignate “Lane Memorial Gardens” for Low-Density Residential Use by: Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram; and Amending the Willow Creek Special Area Study Diagram (City Files MA 08-1 and Z 09-1) Mayor Piercy called for conflicts of interest or ex parte contacts. Mr. Clark noted his acquaintance with the Musgrove family but said he had not discussed the issue with them and believed he was capable of making an unbiased decision. City Manager Ruiz reviewed the request before the council. Mayor Piercy reviewed the applicable criteria and rules of the public hearing for the item. She opened the public hearing. Carol Schirmer , Schirmer and Associates, noted the thorough review the application had undergone by staff and the Planning Commission. She attributed the request to the changing nature of the cemetery business wherein more people were choosing cremation over burial, which meant less land was required for the long-term viability of the operation. The property owner proposed to redesignate the vacant land on the site to low-density residential, which the site was well-suited for. Ms. Schirmer said the site was currently MINUTES—City Council February 16, 2010 Page 2 zoned residential, as confirmed by a unanimous vote of the Planning Commission. Speaking to the traffic th impact, she said that a traffic impact analysis indicated that problems on West 11 Avenue could be addressed with a trip cap on the property until such time that the infrastructure was improved. In regard to the decision to drop the site review overlay, she suggested that the current zone provide sufficient protec- tions, making site review unnecessary. th Dan Terrill , Law Offices of Dan Kloos, 375 West 4 Avenue, Suite 204, commended the Oregon Department of Transportation and City staff for their assistance in helping the applicant to develop a trip cap. He offered to answer any council questions. Mayor Piercy determined that councilors had no questions and did not wish to continue the hearing. She closed the public hearing. 4. PUBLIC HEARING Safe and Efficient Streets Through Access Management: An Ordinance Concerning Access Connection Location Requirements, Special Setbacks, and Street Width; Amending Sections 9.0500, 9.5500, 9.6506, 9.6735, 9.6745, 9.6750, 9.8030, 9.8090, 9.8415, 9.6570, 9.8675, 9.8680, and 7.420 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and Adding Sections 9.6703 and 9.6873 of that Code Peggy Keppler of the Public Works Engineering Division reviewed three different examples provided to the council showing how the proposed ordinance would impact existing driveways in three different locations in the community. Mayor Piercy thanked staff for responding to the council’s information requests and determined the three examples would be posted on the City’s website. Mr. Poling noted the testimony submitted to the council by Jim Hanks of JRH Engineering, which made reference to the width of driveway flairs. He asked if what Mr. Hanks described was similar to the driveways at T. J. Maxx’ on Coburg Road. Ms. Keppler said no; she did not think Eugene had any driveways similar to those described by Mr. Hanks. She added that the code language would improve the situation that now existed on Coburg Road. She said staff agreed with much of what Mr. Hanks spoke to for commercial uses, and would prepare a response before the council took action. Mr. Poling noted that Mr. Hanks had advocated for extra curb width that would make wider driveway flairs possible, and determined that Ms. Keppler would return with language making that change. Mr. Poling agreed, saying he would also like to see that change. He asked if the committee that studied the issues involved had reached consensus about its recommendations. Ms. Keppler said generally, it depended on the subject. Committee members had been clear about what they did and did not like and she was aware of at least one member who had not necessarily been in agreement with a recommendation but did not oppose it. She commended the quality of the committee and said many code changes were made in response to members’ input. th Referring to Example A, which illustrated the access into Blockbuster Video on West 11 Avenue, Mr. Pryor acknowledged the reason for the proposal to limit access, but said as the City limited access on the main thoroughfare, it would need to be compensated by adding accesses between the commercial properties, th such as the one that now existed between Fred Meyer and Lowe’s on West 11 Avenue. He had hoped to see more such connections, particularly in light of the interest expressed by the West Eugene Collaborative th in improving inter-commercial access on West 11 Avenue. Ms. Keppler noted that such connections were more easily facilitated when properties were in a single ownership. MINUTES—City Council February 16, 2010 Page 3 Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. 5. PUBLIC HEARING Safe and Efficient Streets through Access Management: An Ordinance Concerning Access Connection Design and Construction Requirements; Amending Sections 7.010, 7.085, 7.290, 7.279, 7.308, 7.360, 7.375, 7.385, 7.407, 7.410, 7.430, 7.445 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Repeal- ing Sections 7.405, 7.415, 7.425, and 7.435 of that Code; and Adding Sections 7.408 and 7.435 of that Code Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Returning to the subject of Civic Stadium, Mayor Piercy said that the question of the council’s interest in the subject was frequently brought up. She recalled the direction the council gave the manager to try to retain the Ems at Civic Stadium. City Manager Ruiz said that the City was actively involved in discussion of the disposition of Civic Stadium. Ms. Ortiz advocated for a brief work session on the subject. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 8:17 p.m. (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—City Council February 16, 2010 Page 4 ATTACHMENT E M I N U T E S City Council McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon April 14, 2010 Noon PRESENT: Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling, Chris Pryor, George Brown, members. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the April 14, 2010, work session of the Eugene City Council to order. She announced she had attended the sneak peak of Wicked that occurred earlier that morning and noted that season ticket sales were in progress. She also reminded citizens to turn in their census forms and emphasized the difference the accurate count made in funding City services. A. WORK SESSION: Beltline Highway - River Road to Coburg Road - Oregon Department of Transportation Facility Plan Update The council was joined by Project Manager Chris Henry of the Eugene Public Works Department and Savannah Crawford, Area 5 Planner for the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Project Manager for the Beltline Facility Plan. Ms. Crawford provided a PowerPoint presentation entitled Beltline Facility Plan: River Road to Coburg Road. The presentation provided information on the Beltline project planning process and illustrated the design options currently under consideration. Councilors asked questions clarifying the details of the options. Mayor Piercy asked Ms. Crawford what major issues were coming up in discussion. Ms. Crawford said that ODOT was receiving a range of comments, ranging from concern about the footprint of the bridge to concerns about the need for improvements. The public seemed to favor the middle- to high-build options with auxiliary lanes. People also seemed to realize that there were tradeoffs that would occur through the process. Mr. Henry indicated that people were concerned about access from River and Division avenues for business purposes, the signal operation at River Avenue and River Road, and the interchange operation at Delta Highway and Beltline. Ms. Crawford said many people wanted ODOT to close Division and River avenues but ODOT had found that if Division Avenue was closed, all the traffic now using that road went to River Road, and Division Avenue was a heavily traveled route. Asked for comment by Mayor Piercy, Ms. Ortiz, a member of the ODOT Beltline Plan Steering Committee, commended the comprehensiveness of the presentation. She observed she had been surprised by how many people used Beltline. Mr. Clark, also a member, was impressed by the thoroughness of the options presented. He said, at this point, a majority of committee members believed that the split-diamond and collector-distributor had the best chances of solving the problems that existed on Beltline. Mayor Piercy solicited general questions and comments from the council. Responding to a question from Ms. Ortiz, Ms. Crawford indicated that ODOT heard considerable opposition to a bridge south of the Beltline near the Valley River Center area, while others indicated they wanted ODOT to revisit the question. However, that was outside the study area. MINUTES—City Council April 14, 2010 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Clark observed that he had initially favored the flyover option but it would have required that ODOT fill in about half the Delta Ponds, which was not an option. Ms. Ortiz said that she heard that whatever the council supported collectively could go forward. She felt a strong commitment to the project and believed the council had a role in securing funding. She thought the council also needed to be supportive of whatever the collective agreement was and move forward with it. Mr. Brown asked if there was to be another public presentation and if larger maps were available to members of the public. Ms. Crawford said ODOT had no plans for more open houses for this stage of the process, but there would be several comment opportunities associated with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) phase of the project. She recalled that large maps had been available at the forum that occurred on March 14, and indicated whatever recommendation was forwarded by the steering committee would be represented on large maps that would be presented to the community. Mr. Henry referred Mr. Brown to both Attachment B, which included color maps, and to the project site for more maps at www.beltlineplan.com. Mr. Brown said he did not drive on Beltline very often but he acknowledged that there appeared to be a congestion problem. Mr. Poling arrived. Mr. Pryor was pleased to be having the conversation. He anticipated that the council would have to work with its partners to secure sufficient project funding. He commended the collaborative planning process. He was appreciative of the discussion of need to balance capacity improvements against cost. Mr. Pryor did not think that transportation demand management (TDM) alone would solve the problems that existed on Beltline, and wanted to ensure that proposed improvements adequately addressed those problems. He believed they would, and believed the right people were involved. Ms. Solomon liked the idea of having a bridge just north of the Beltline for those who wished to travel between Green Acres and the residential area north of Division Avenue. She determined from Ms. Crawford that the intersection at Delta Highway and Green Acres would be a full movement intersection under the scenarios presented. Mr. Zelenka was also pleased to be having the conversation. He asked if ODOT had a sense of the costs involved with the options under discussion. Ms. Crawford indicated that ODOT would produce a range of costs for the planning phase but would not do a detailed analysis until the NEPA stage. Mr. Henry suggested that the council consider the costs of the Beltline/ I-5 interchange as a way to estimate the costs. Mr. Zelenka wanted to see TDM and Transportation System Management (TSM) techniques maximized to the degree possible, followed by the build option. He wanted to see a solution to the weaving problem that existed when vehicles traveled northbound on the Delta Highway. He appreciated that all the options seemed to address the major congestion points that existed now. Ms. Taylor determined from Ms. Crawford that the existing bridge would be replaced under all the options under discussion. Ms. Taylor suggested that would involve a lot of disruption. Mr. Clark thanked Ms. Crawford and ODOT staff for working to involve the community in the process. He recalled the fatality suffered at a ramp on Delta Highway and emphasized the importance of addressing safety issues in that MINUTES—City Council April 14, 2010 Page 2 Work Session area. Fire Station 9 staff responded to traffic accidents in the area everyday. He believed that the City needed to do what it could in terms of TDM, but he was looking for solutions that solved the problems that existed and created safer conditions and lessened congestion. Mayor Piercy anticipated that the council would hear conflicting concerns about the size of the bridge footprint, greenhouse gas emissions, and safer travel that it would need to balance as it considered the options. Mayor Piercy did not see any indication in the evaluation criteria that the project was attempting to meet State greenhouse emissions goals. Ms. Crawford said that ODOT had no methodology or metrics in place to address that issue and instead used two proxies: 1) modeling vehicle hours of delay (VHD) and, 2) modeling vehicle miles traveled (VMT). ODOT found that outside the low-build concepts, the high-build concepts reduced VHD and VMT increased slightly, depending on the alternative. She anticipated that the NEPA phase would address the issue as well. She said that ODOT planned to have something in place in regard to greenhouse gases within the next two years. Mayor Piercy emphasized nearby residents’ interest in safer travel as well as retention of their quality of life. Mr. Zelenka asked if the existing bridge had pylons that entered the river. Mr. Henry believed the current bridge was a simple span. Mr. Zelenka said he did not want to see any pylons in the river. Mayor Piercy thanked Ms. Crawford. Ms. Solomon left the meeting. B. WORK SESSION: Review of 2009 Implementation of Bond Measure to Fix Streets The council was joined by Public Works Director Kurt Corey, who provided an update regarding the implementation of the 2009 bond measure for street maintenance. He recalled that along with the projects identified for funding, the measure stipulated that the council would contract with an outside auditor to verify the use of the funds. The manager had committed to the appointment of a Street Repair Review Panel to advise him on the expenditure of the funds and provide a separate report regarding the use of the bond proceeds. A copy of that report and the auditor’s report was included in the council packet. Mr. Corey reminded the council of its tour of 2009 projects and enumerated several of the projects viewed by councilors. He quoted from the auditor’s report, which indicated the bond proceeds were used appropriately in the restrictions set out by the council. Mr. Corey reviewed the membership of the Street Repair Review Panel, which included Paul Adkins, John Barofsky, Howie Bonnett, Dan Brown, Janet Calvert, Paul Holbo, Bob Kline, Steve Lee, Bruce Mulligan, Clayton Walker, Jim Wilcox, and Gary Wildish. He noted the panel also reached the conclusion, stated in its report, that the bond proceeds were appropriately spent. The panel also encouraged the acceleration of projects to the extent possible to take advantage of favorable bid prices and urged continued public education on the topic. Mr. Corey previewed some of the projects to be constructed in 2010 using bond proceeds. He distributed copies of a press release the City would issue the following day regarding the projects to be funded using local gas tax revenues and federal economic stimulus funding. Mr. Corey spoke to the issue of street maintenance funding in general, noting the expiration of the bond and the need MINUTES—City Council April 14, 2010 Page 3 Work Session to consider how to sustain the funding. He expressed cautious optimism about funding for operations and maintenance in the near term. City Manager Ruiz commended the work done by Mr. Corey and his staff and called the bond a good example of promises made and kept. He termed the bond the big success story from the last 12-18 months and suggested the community would be pleased with the results. Mayor Piercy thanked the Street Repair Review Panel members present and asked them if they wished to comment. Member Paul Holbo noted the long time he and other community members had been working on the issue of street maintenance funding and spoke to past committee efforts and his pleasure at finally seeing some results, citing in th particular the work planned for 18 Avenue. He believed that would produce many positive reactions. He recommended the City do outreach to residents living along Harlow Road and solicit their input into street improvements planned for that road. Member Janet Calvert spoke of the need to educate citizens about the topic, as they were frequently unaware they lived on an unimproved street and why unimproved streets had not been improved. Mayor Piercy agreed with Ms. Calvert about the importance of community education. She noted the many th constituent contacts she received about conditions on 18 Avenue and agreed with Mr. Holbo the project would make a difference. Mr. Pryor was encouraged by the process the City made in street maintenance and acknowledged the long time the problem had existed. He thought the City was about to “turn the corner” and might be able to get its operations and maintenance issues under control. However, that did not address the backlog in maintenance, which still existed and th needed to be addressed. He also received many calls about 18 Avenue. He was proud the council had made as much progress as it had. Mr. Poling thanked the review panel and also thanked the voters for approving the bond measure and reminded the voters it was coming due in three years with the potential of renewal. He hoped that reports such as the one the council was hearing would help to encourage support. He also agreed about the need to educate residents about the difference between improved and unimproved streets. Mr. Poling was glad to see Harlow Road on the project list and said he received a number of contacts about the change in road conditions when residents left Springfield and entered Eugene. Mr. Zelenka also thanked the committee and the voters. He was happy about the work the council had done in regard to the bond. He considered it a good start but agreed the City still had a problem in the form of its gigantic backlog of work. Mr. Corey estimated the cost of that backlog at $150 million. He noted that the City had recently received favorable bids and was also able to determine some streets did not need a complete reconstruct. Mr. Zelenka asked for a status update on what he considered to be the most equitable funding option, a street utility fee. Mr. Corey indicated that staff had no specific timeframe for bringing that fee back to the council. He said that a critical element of such a fee was the billing system, which would require cooperation from the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB). Mr. Zelenka asked about the status of the conversations with EWEB. City Manager Ruiz said that outgoing General Manager Randy Berggren was deferring those conversations to his successor. Mr. Zelenka agreed resident education was very important as he frequently received questions about why some roads th were fixed while others were not. He was pleased to see the projects planned for 18 Avenue and Patterson Street and thanked Mr. Corey for his good work. Mr. Clark recalled the council’s past discussion about the difference between improved and unimproved roads. MINUTES—City Council April 14, 2010 Page 4 Work Session Many were roads without curbs and gutters that were formerly under County jurisdiction. He requested staff provide information about the number of miles of unimproved roads in Eugene and what it would cost to do a two-inch overlay on all such roads. Mr. Corey indicated he could provide that information, although he did not think the council would want to take that approach given the other options that existed. He said as a result of the enhanced pothole program, the City had made some progress in that regard at minimal cost. He hoped to be able to continue that in the future. Mr. Clark said while it was true the council had always felt those living on unimproved roads were responsible for the costs of improving their streets, he thought the City also had some responsibility because it had assumed responsibility for such streets from the County without having a plan to improve them. He wanted to see such a plan for bringing unimproved roads to improved status, pointing out there were large potholes in many well-traveled roads. Mr. Corey suggested the council committee charged to review street assessments might take up the topic. Acknowledging that it might take a while before such streets could be brought to ideal standards, Mayor Piercy suggested that Mr. Corey be prepared to discuss what kind of strategy the City could employ in such an effort. Speaking to Mr. Clark’s request about what an overlay approach would look like, Ms. Ortiz asked Mr. Corey to take a tiered approach to that subject using different levels of improvements, for example, gravel versus asphalt. At the request of Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Corey discussed the range of improvements completed on Riverview Avenue. Mr. Zelenka asked when the City chose concrete over asphalt. Mr. Corey said that construction of a new concrete street was significantly more expensive up front although maintenance costs were less. Asphalt was the maintenance material of choice for existing asphalt streets. He acknowledged the tradeoffs involved. He said that Springfield had a favorable experience with concrete streets, but Eugene was trying to stretch its limited resources as far as possible while continuing to look for opportunities where a large investment made sense. Mr. Zelenka asked about a pothole patrol. Mr. Corey did not anticipate a dedicated crew but the response would be the same. Residents could call 682-4800 to report pot holes or visit the Public Works Department home page. Mr. Pryor believed the council discussion was pointing toward an additional, more robust council discussion of future options, including different street types and what treatment they warrant. Mayor Piercy adjourned the work session at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz, City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—City Council April 14, 2010 Page 5 Work Session