Planning Commission

SUMMARY MINUTES Public Hearing Eugene Planning Commission Atrium Building–Sloat Room–99 West 10th Avenue December 14, 2004 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: John Lawless, President; Jon Belcher, Rick Duncan, Randy Hledik, Phillip Hudspeth, members; Susan Muir, Steve Nystrom, Planning and Development Department; Patricia Boyle, John Huberd, Glen Svendsen, Central Services staff; Mark Schoening, Public Works staff. ABSENT: Mitzi Colbath, Anne Marie Levis, members. PUBLIC HEARING ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM A public hearing on a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of the Draft FY06-FY11 Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Belcher, moved, seconded by Mr. Duncan, to keep the written record open until 5:00 p.m. on January 5, 2005. The motion carried unani- mously, 5:0. SUMMARY MINUTES – Eugene Planning Commission December 14, 2004 Page 1 Public Hearing  MINUTES Public Hearing Eugene Planning Commission Atrium Building–Sloat Room–99 West 10th Avenue December 14, 2004 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: John Lawless, President; Jon Belcher, Rick Duncan, Randy Hledik, Phillip Hudspeth, members; Susan Muir, Steve Nystrom, Planning and Development Department; Patricia Boyle, John Huberd, Glen Svendsen, Central Services staff; Mark Schoening, Public Works staff. ABSENT: Mitzi Colbath, Anne Marie Levis, members. PUBLIC HEARING ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Mr. Lawless called meeting to order and explained the purpose of the hearing. Ms. Muir said that she had a legal opinion from the City Attorney regarding conflicts of interest for Planning Commission members. She reported that the opinion had been sought as a result of questions from Commissioner Hledik, but that the opinion applied broadly to all Planning Commission members. She stated the City Attorney advised that Planning Commissioner members had a potential conflict of interest rather than an actual conflict of interest regarding the Capital Improvement Program for the following reasons: • The City Council may not agree with the Planning Commission recommendation on the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). • There was no certainty that anybody’s company would be selected for work on any of the pro- jects. • The value of the company’s property would be increased by work on adjacent properties. The City Attorney advised that Commissioner Hledik should announce publicly a potential conflict at every meeting when the CIP was discussed, but he may participate. Ms. Muir suggested that the opinion may apply more broadly to other Planning Commissioners and others may wish to disclose potential conflict s of interest. Mr. Lawless asked if other Planning Commissioners had either potential conflicts of interest or actual conflicts of interest they wished to disclose. Mr. Hledik declared a potential conflict of interest, stating he worked for a general contractor that worked on public works projects. Mr. Lawless declared a potential conflict of interest, stating that he could potentially bid on design MINUTES – Eugene Planning Commission December 14, 2004 Page 1 Public Hearing services for city projects. Ms. Boyle offered the CIP staff report. She reported that the Planning Commission held a work session on December 13, 2004, to review the Draft CIP. She said the purpose of this meeting was for the Planning Commission to develop a recommendation that the City Council approve the CIP. Ms. Boyle said that the CIP forecast the City’s capital needs over a six-year period based on various City- adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The CIP for the Airport, Parks and Open Space, Public Buildings and Facilities, Stormwater, Transportation and Wastewater totaled approximately $357 million in funded and unfunded projects. She explained the public review process that the CIP had undergone. She referred to the Funding Overview contained on pages 11-14 of the CIP document. The goals of the CIP were: • Provide a balanced program for capital improvements given anticipated revenues over a six-year planning period. • Illustrate unmet capital needs based on anticipated funding levels. • Provide a plan for capital improvements which can be used in preparing the Capital Budget for the coming two fiscal years. Mr. Lawless opened the public hearing and limited speakers to four minutes. Charles Biggs, 540 Antelope Way, Eugene, identified himself as co-chair of the Neighborhood Leaders Council (NLC), but noted he was not speaking on behalf of the NLC. Mr. Biggs expressed concern about the public process since he had not had an opportunity to review the CIP. He asked that the Planning Commission either make a tentative recommendation to the City Council or put off a decision until January 2005. Kevin Matthews, P.O. Box 1588, Eugene, identified himself as president of the Friends of Eugene. Mr. Matthews asked the Planning Commission to hold the record open until the first week in January, citing concerns about the public notice and public process for the CIP. He said there were problems with the electronic city public meetings calendar and linking problems within the Planning Department website that had created difficulties in accessing information for the public hearing. He requested additional information for what opportunities there were for public input for the CIP. Laurie Segal, 120 W. Broadway, Eugene, identified herself as a representative from 1000 Friends of Oregon. Ms. Segal requested that the written comment period remain open for a few weeks to enable her and others to more thoroughly review the CIP. She expressed concern about the transportation element of the CIP, noting that ¼ of the funded projects and a large percentage of the unfunded projects were transportation projects, creating an imbalance in the prioritization of the projects. She questioned where the phases of city hall replacement were articulated for public review. Mr. Lawless asked for questions from Planning Commissioners. In response to Mr. Duncan, Ms. Boyle said the City Council would first consider the CIP at a public hearing on February 28, 2005, with opportunities for public input before the Budget Committee on February 7, 2005 and February 22, 2005. She said the City Council could take action on February 28, 2005, or could defer action until March 7, 2005. MINUTES – Eugene Planning Commission December 14, 2004 Page 2 Public Hearing Mr. Belcher expressed concern about the unintentional oversight of the information not being available on the website that made it almost impossible for the public to be aware of the public hearing, while noting that his previous experience demonstrated that public input in the CIP was scarce. Ms. Muir explained the changes that the Planning Division webpage was undergoing, noting that hard copies of Planning Commission agendas continued to be distributed to interested parties because of the webpage updates. Ms. Boyle stated the CIP was posted to the Finance Division webpage on December 7, 2004. She explained the process used for tracking public input and distribution to staff, the Planning Commission, Budget Committee and City Council. Mr. Duncan commented that the CIP was a lot of information to review since receiving it on December 8, 2004, and he would appreciate having more time to review it. In response to a question from Mr. Lawless regarding the timeline for the CIP adoption, Ms. Boyle said information was needed by the middle of January 2005 for inclusion in the Budget Committee and City Council packets, adding that both the Budget Committee and the City Council had received copies of the CIP. Mr. Hledik asked what opportunities existed for the public to influence CIP projects, noting that most projects were included in existing adopted plans. He asked how projects were prioritized and carried forward from year to year. Ms. Boyle explained that the CIP did not authorize funding, but rather served as a planning document in conjunction with the capital budgeting process, adding that a project was moved from an unfunded to a funded category as a result of public testimony during the last CIP review process. A brief discussion regarding extending the public comment on the CIP until January 2005. Mr. Belcher, moved, seconded by Mr. Duncan, to keep the written record open until 5:00 p.m. on January 5, 2005. The motion carried unani- mously, 5:0. In response to concerns expressed by Mr. Lawless, Ms. Muir said that limited personnel resources constrained time allocated to maintenance of the webpage. Mr. Belcher asked why the airport expansion was listed in the document. Mr. Schoening explained that Bob Noble, the airport manager, included adding a carousel to serve a potential new carrier as part of the airport master plan and in the 2011 CIP. Mr. Schoening explained the processes that would occur if a new carrier began serving Eugene. In response to Mr. Belcher who asked if collectors identified in the CIP were also designated in the arterial street plan, Mr. Schoening confirmed that they were. Ms. Muir explained that the Planning Commission was charged with reviewing the CIP, although MINUTES – Eugene Planning Commission December 14, 2004 Page 3 Public Hearing approval was not required, in reply to a question from Mr. Hudspeth, adding the Planning Commission had already met its legal obligations. A brief discussion regarding the CIP glossary and funding sources followed. Mr. Belcher said he would make a motion at a future Planning Commission meeting to reintroduce funding for street trees and sidewalks. Mr. Schoening explained that the City Council provided funding for street trees in the 2003 capital budget, but there was no funding included in the 2004 or 2005 capital budgets. Mr. Hledik requesting information describing how city projects fit into regional plans such Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Lane Transit District (LTD) plans. Mr. Belcher stated reinstitution of the neighborhood needs process for future capital planning should be considered. He proposed flagging some projects for the City Council that would encourage more dialogue on not only how projects would develop, but whether they should take place. Mr. Svendsen said that city hall phase one and phase two were included as a place holder to facilitate timing of a future bond measure in coordination with development of the CIP. He added that a recom- mendation for a master planning process would be taken to the City Council on January 10, 2005, that would encourage a public dialogue about civic center development. Mr. Lawless thanked staff for keeping the Planning Commission informed. Mr. Lawless adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. (Recorded by Linda Henry) m:\2004\planning and development department\planning division\planning commission\pc041214ph.doc MINUTES – Eugene Planning Commission December 14, 2004 Page 4 Public Hearing