Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 05/19/10 Work SessionMINUTES Eugene City Council McNutt Room — Eugene City Hall 777 Pearl Street — Eugene, Oregon May 19, 2010 Noon PRESENT: Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor, George Brown, members. George Poling initially participated by telephone and then arrived later in the meeting. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the Eugene City Council work session to order. She congratulated councilors Zelenka, Clark, and Poling on their re- election and Councilor -elect Pat Farr on his successful election. She commented that she had not been pleased to observe the mess left over by bar patrons from the night before when walking in the downtown area. She underscored the importance of finding a way to address the mess. She declared that one should not have to walk through "last night's bar activities" at noon on the following day. She believed that the businesses adjoining the sidewalks had a responsibility to step up and do their part. A. WORK SESSION: I -5 Willamette River Bridge -- Oregon Department of Transportation Project Update Assistant City Manager Sarah Medary invited Dick Upton and Chris Henry to the table for their presentation. Mr. Upton provided a power point presentation entitled Willamette River Bridge Improvements for Generations. He underscored the importance of the input they had garnered from the Citizens Advisory Group. Mr. Upton discussed some of the opportunities the project had presented. He explained that the agreement for the bicycle - pedestrian viaduct on the south bank included that they would put back anything that was damaged or removed. He said the bicycle path on the south bank of the Willamette River looped under Franklin Boulevard and then "petered out" into the street. He related that in early conversations they had found that there were plans to put a bicycle path on the north side of Franklin Blvd. connected into a future bicycle system in Springfield. He stated that they had estimated the cost of the viaduct to be $2.4 million, not something that could just be added into the project. He had taken the cost they had estimated it would take to restore the path on the south side, approximately $1.6 million, and had gone to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and submitted a joint grant application with Springfield for $4 million for the rest of the funding. He said the project had scored high and they had been awarded the grant. Mr. Upton said another opportunity had arisen from recognition that they would need to widen Interstate 5 to the west and this would have taken a grove of trees out. He explained that the trees served as a great barrier between the interstate and the park. He related that a member of the citizen group had asked how they could save the trees. They had been required to put in a retaining wall on the east side in the Willamalane Park to keep the fill out. He said Willamalane was concerned that a retaining wall would MINUTES— Eugene City Council May 19, 2010 Page 1 Work Session become a graffiti magnet so it had been proposed that they do some contouring there, providing a "landscape that was more fitting," and then the trees would be saved in the process. Continuing, Mr. Upton discussed the public input they had gotten on the design enhancements from the citizens group and art teams. Through that process they had come up with a number of ideas of which enhancements they would pursue. He invited the mayor and council to visit the site. Mr. Henry stated that the design enhancement process had begun with the Eugene City Council. Mayor Piercy thanked them for the presentation. She thanked everyone who had been involved in the project. She averred that it was an improved way of going about a project of this type. She also expressed appreciation for the bicycle system enhancements. Mr. Zelenka said it was a great job "so far." He ascertained from Mr. Upton that their intent was to do the work on the southbound bridge first and then the northbound bridge. He thanked all of the community members who had participated. In response to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Upton discussed the planned stream enhancements. He said all of the regulatory requirements that were italicized on the slide entitled Opportunities would be completed above and beyond required levels. He stressed that their goal was to naturalize the area. Mr. Zelenka asked what they were doing with the Millrace "ruins." Mr. Upton responded that they had worked out an agreement with the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) for a design that would minimally impact the Millrace. He said they had also agreed to provide some level of signage and they had engaged the art and design team for the south bank to do so. Mr. Zelenka asked what "hydro- acoustic monitoring" meant. Mr. Upton replied that excessive construction noise had been an issue that caused problems on a construction project in Portland. He explained that it involved the impacts that pile driving could have on juvenile fish. He related that they had looked at the historic experience and had decided on building a steel encasement that fit around the two pile placements with foam coating on the inside and that would include small tubes blowing air bubbles inside the casing to further break up the sound. He said they had tested a number of different things and determined this would work best. Continuing, Mr. Zelenka asked about canoe canal enhancements. Mr. Upton discussed the changes that they planned to make on the bridge and how they would open the path up. He said they had renditions of what they intended to build. Mr. Henry added that they were working from the Citizens Planning Committee (CPC) for the Whilamut Natural Area of East Alton Baker Park plan for naturalization of the slough. Mr. Pryor thanked them for the presentation. He recalled the preliminary discussion of the project three years earlier. He felt they had made the process a "nice interactive partnership." He asked about the naming process. Mr. Upton replied that ODOT had a process to nominate names. He noted that CPC member David Sonnichsen was "deeply engaged" in the naming process. MINUTES— Eugene City Council May 19, 2010 Page 2 Work Session In response to a question from Mr. Brown, Mr. Upton explained that the loud noise from the pile drivers could hurt or kill fish by bursting the air bladder and this was why they were seeking to reduce the noise impact. Mayor Piercy thanked them for a great presentation. She had felt more like they were partners in this project. She believed the end result would be a "signature bridge." B. WORK SESSION: City of Eugene Naming Policy City Manager Jon Ruiz invited Mayor and Council Support Manager Beth Forrest to the table to present the item. Using PowerPoint Ms. Forrest provided a brief overview of the policy. Copies of the code regarding naming were included in the agenda item summary (AIS). She stated that there were three elements to naming: transparency, fiscal responsibility, and public engagement. She said in the proposed policy, staff had outlined several specifications for notifying the public and the different methods available for "getting the word out." She noted that the council last discussed the naming policy in 2004. She reviewed the steps proposed for the naming process, from the proposed naming through an appointed committee and its process to a recommendation to the council for approval. Ms. Taylor agreed that naming something after a person should only happen if the person was dead or retired. She opposed placing a naming item on the Consent Calendar. She was also opposed to renaming anything that already had a name. Mr. Clark commended Ms. Forrest for her work. He agreed that a naming item should not be on the consent calendar. He said naming something for someone sought to honor that person and placing such an item on the consent calendar would defeat that purpose. He understood that renaming streets was in the code specifically and asked why there was a reason not to put their naming policy into code. Ms. Forrest did not know. She explained that in looking at the policies and codes of other jurisdictions regarding naming, it was done both ways. Mr. Clark observed that street naming was handled by an ad hoc committee of the Planning Commission. He wondered if any thought had been given to putting place or facility names to the Planning Commission and, if not, whether there was any reason not to do so. Mr. Ruiz thought it would not impact the Planning Commission work plan as place or facility naming was an infrequent occurrence. Mr. Pryor expressed his appreciation for the work Ms. Forrest had done. He thought it was very thoughtful and that it would serve the City well. He did not think the policy needed to be changed. He was concerned about disagreement among committee members on a name. He also would not want to close the door on renaming places, as circumstances could change, though he would only want to rename a place under extraordinary circumstances. Ms. Ortiz thanked Ms. Forrest for her work. She supported having an appointed committee. She would want to have some councilor say -so in the makeup of the committee so that it was geographically and demographically representative. She was amenable to restricting naming to commemorating people who had retired or passed on. She added that one of the reasons she had decided to run for City Council was MINUTES— Eugene City Council May 19, 2010 Page 3 Work Session because of the issues that the renaming of a street to Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard had raised for people. She felt there seemed to be a lack of understanding as to why the naming was so important. She said it was a changing world, the demographics were changing, and young people would want to put their footprint on the City. Mr. Zelenka echoed appreciation for Ms. Forrest's work. He wondered if any jurisdictions just used existing committees to work on naming as opposed to forming an ad hoc committee. Ms. Forrest responded that she was not certain of the answer but she did know that one jurisdiction had a standing naming committee. Mr. Zelenka noted that the subsection of the policy regarding staff naming requests referred to renaming subsections of city facilities. That seemed vague to him. Mr. Ruiz replied that he would consider a library shelf or a chair in the Hult Center for the Performing Arts a subsection of a facility. Mr. Zelenka asked if it was common for jurisdictions to require a little more than a simple majority to rename something. Ms. Forrest replied that she did not remember seeing this clause, but given the controversial nature that some proposals could have, this could be prudent. Mr. Poling did not see why a simple majority would not be adequate. He suggested that the policy regarding the ad hoc committee indicate that the committee should include representatives of the people who proposed the naming and people who lived in the area where the changes were to occur. Mayor Piercy suggested that the portion of the naming policy that recommended that names incorporate geographic, historic, and geologic features also include demographic features. Ms. Taylor did not think it would be appropriate to use the Planning Commission. She said public hearings and actions of the City Council were more watched and monitored by the public than those of the Planning Commission. She did not think a special committee was needed either; the council could serve in that capacity. Mr. Clark thought that financial impacts needed to be a specific part of the policy. He pointed out that the name change to Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard had external financial impacts to area businesses and the council needed to be aware of these impacts during consideration of a name change. Mr. Zelenka liked the idea of requiring more than a simple majority of councilors to approve naming. He echoed councilor opposition to placing a naming item on the consent calendar. Ms. Solomon thanked Ms. Forrest. She noted that it had been mentioned that there might be an upcoming naming opportunity. She asked if the new bicycle bridge over Delta Highway was a federal or local project. Mr. Ruiz said he would have to look into it. Mayor Piercy commented that the last thing one would want if something was being named in their honor would be a lot of fighting over it. She said the closer they could come to consensus on naming items, the better it would be for the process. MINUTES— Eugene City Council May 19, 2010 Page 4 Work Session Ms. Taylor agreed that at least six councilors should vote in favor of a naming proposal for it to pass. Mayor Piercy adjourned the work session at 1:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beth Forrest City Recorder (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES— Eugene City Council May 19, 2010 Page 5 Work Session