Planning Commission

MINUTES Eugene Planning Commission Sloat Room—The Atrium Building 99 West 10th Avenue—Eugene, Oregon April 20, 2010 6 p.m. PRESENT: Heidi Bierle, Chair; Jeff Mills, Vice Chair; Randy Hledik, William Randall, Lisa Warnes, Jon Belcher, members; Planning Director Lisa Gardner; Carolyn Weiss, Lydia McKinney, Eugene Planning Division; Rob Inerfeld, Public Works Department. ABSENT: Rich Duncan, commissioner. I. PUBLIC HEARING: WALNUT STATION Ms. Bierle called the meeting of the Eugene Planning Commission to order. Commissioners introduced themselves. Ms. Bierle reviewed the subject of the hearing. She said the commission would be making a recommendation to the City Council and would deliberate on May 17, 2010; a council work session was scheduled for June 9, followed by a council public hearing on June 21, with action to follow on July 26. Ms. McKinney provided the staff report. She introduced public testimony received subsequent to the publication of the Planning Commission’s agenda item summary into the record and distributed copies to the Planning Commission: 1) an e-mail from the American Institute of Architects entitled AIA-SWO Walnut Station Form-Based Code Exercise 2010, Statement of Project, Process, and Findings; 2) an e- mail from Jeff Morton of the Holiday Inn Express property, who wanted to maintain the left-turn lane on the Franklin multi-way boulevard and raising concerns about the step down to three stories as being too low for his development proposal; 3) a letter from Dan Goldrich, who wished to ensure the commission addressed the need for a transition at the 15th Avenue edge and recognizing the importance of the single family neighborhood to the south; and 4) an e-mail from John Barofsky and Susie Smith, co-chairs of the Fairmount Neighborhood Association Walnut Mixed-Use Subcommittee. Ms. McKinney distributed copies of a document prepared by staff entitled Walnut Street Center: Addressing Key Issues. The document described the approach taken in the plan to key issues. Ms. McKinney recalled the commission work session of March 29 and the body’s discussion of a staff recommendation that the appeal body for design review applications be the Planning Commission rather than the Hearings Official. Since that meeting, staff received additional input from the stakeholders group and learned that the Fairmount Neighborhood Association stakeholder group supported that recommenda- tion but the University of Oregon and Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce. Because only one of the four stakeholder groups was in favor of this change, staff recommended that the City retain the Hearings Official as the appeal body. Ms. McKinney referred to Exhibit G, the proposed street right-of-way of map, and suggested it made more sense to codify the right-of-way width in the Walnut Center Form-Based Code rather than amend the right- MINUTES — Planning Commission Public Hearing on Walnut Station Mixed Use Center April 20, 2010 Page 1 of-way and codify the special setback in the Land Use Code. The ordinance and exhibits would be revised accordingly. She referred to the map mounted on wall which showed the existing right-of-way and proposed special setback, and said that staff would continue to refine the map. Ms. McKinney invited questions. There were none. Ms. Bierle called for public testimony. She limited testimony to three minutes per person. John Lawless, 90 East 26th Avenue, representing the American Institute of Architects—Southwest Oregon (AIA-SWO) Eugene Local Affairs Committee Sub Task Force on Form-Based Code Experimentation, noted his organization’s submission of written testimony. He said the AIA-SWO worked with the City to test the form-based code on actual projects in a manner that allowed participants to consider their impact over time. The submitted materials included descriptions of the projects and the findings of several different teams about how the code worked. Mr. Lawless asked the commission to consider the discove- ries the AIA made and offered the AIA-SWO’s future assistance as the code evolved. He supported the code with the modifications recommended. Frances Dyke, University of Oregon Chief Financial Officer and Vice President for Finance and Administration, thanked Ms. McKinney and all City staff for their work on the effort, as well as the Fairmount Neighbors and Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce. She noted the University’s ownership of land within the mixed-use center (MUC) and said the parcels were acquired with the idea that they might be needed to support the University’s mission. The University followed the process closely to determine if its needs could be met. She said that was the case. She said the University fully supported the MUC development for its attributes and protection of nearby neighborhoods. She said the street widening would consume a significant amount of University land and she hoped the University could work with the City to find a reasonable compensation for the loss. She supported that appeals go to the Hearings Official rather than the Planning Commission as she believed it better matched established processes and would result in a more effective appeal process. She looked forward to the day the center was the active, beautiful entrance to the city people imagined it might be. Jeff Nelson, 2144 East 15th Avenue, supported the MUC proposal but believed the plan lacked needed traffic calming measures and expanded parking enforcement hours. Tim Campbell, 3845 Meadowview Drive, owner of Campbell Commercial Real Estate and a member of the stakeholders and code committees, supported the draft code. He acknowledged it was not perfect but he believed it was a good tool that would encourage projects to be built in the MUC. He thought it would encourage companies and residents to locate there and would foster density and vibrancy. He noted the collaborative effort leading to the code and commended Ms. McKinney and staff for their inclusionary attitude. He thought the code, if successful, could be applied to other parts of Eugene such as downtown, and asked the commission to recommendation its adoption to the council. Larry Hirons, 3877 Vine Maple Road, owner of Hirons Drug Store and the commercial property on which the store and Market of Choice sat on Franklin Boulevard, said he was attracted to the concepts in the MUC. However, he believed that the area required a sufficiently sized grocery store so residents did not need to drive across town for their needs. That required an investment in real estate and construction, and such an investment required patronage of people living distances beyond which one could readily walk. Mr. Hirons said that required the use of the automobile and the provision of adequate parking. He MINUTES — Planning Commission Public Hearing on Walnut Station Mixed Use Center April 20, 2010 Page 2 asked the commission to protect parking for such businesses, which was required for business success. He also had concerns about the impact of the proposed multi-way boulevard on existing parking along Franklin Boulevard. Jim Welch, 2139 Centennial Plaza, represented the Eugene Association of Realtors. He expressed appreciation for the staff and citizens who worked on the project. He anticipated that development in the MUC would be “very typical Eugene” and he thought that would be positive for the community. He suggested that the commission consider the need for adequate parking as essential to the businesses in the MUC due to Eugene’s frequently inclement weather. Mr. Welch characterized the planning process as an inclusive one where all parties had a voice to say something meaningful. He anticipated the new code would provide both flexibility and certainty for property owners and potential buyers. He asked the commission to forward the proposed form-based code to the City Council. Jared Mason-Gere, Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, 1400 Willamette Street, commended the work of Ms. McKinney and City staff. He noted the chamber’s involvement in reviewing the plans for the MUC throughout various stages in the process as well as its involvement in the stakeholders and technical advisory committees. He thought the process a model for future processes. Mr. Mason expressed support for the proposed form-based code and looked forward to its implementation. He believed the Walnut Station could be the gateway to Eugene and because of the proximity of the University, the application of the code made sense in this area. He suggested the code added flexibility and certainty for those developing projects and could spur economic growth as well as making growth more affordable. Mr. Mason expressed concern about the multi-way boulevard and the potential of takings associated with the widening of the right-of-way. He anticipated further discussion about those impacts and potential mitigation measures. Mr. Mason also supported having any appeals go to the Hearings Official rather than the Planning Commission. Rena Cowen, Eugene Animal Hospital, 1432 Orchard Street, said she initially supported the MUC and was involved in the process, but she had come to oppose much of it. She had never supported the multi- way boulevard concept because she did not support taking land from viable existing businesses. She thought that such businesses should be encouraged, particularly in the current economy. Ms. Cowen said her own business was auto-oriented because people could not bring their pets to the veterinarian on the bus unless they lived just a short distance away. She thought it was unrealistic to create a neighborhood that was totally divorced from the car. She said people would drive, and if the City made it difficult for them to drive it would kill the neighborhood. She recalled the creation of the downtown pedestrian mall at great cost, which drove people to malls and the periphery, and said thousands had been spent to reverse that trend. Ms. Cowan had to rent customer spaces because of a lack of parking, and had 19 employees who needed parking as well. Currently, customers used the street for parking. She needed to maintain people’s ability to drive and park at her business. She said currently, arena construction workers parked on the street, further reducing available parking, while a large nearby lot that was suitable for parking could not be used because of zoning. Ms. Cowen said that the City was not requiring adequate parking for apartments because it wanted people to use alternative modes, but she did not think that was realistic. She feared her business would be squeezed out as a result of the center and suggested that designating the street for two-hour parking would serve to ameliorate her concerns. MINUTES — Planning Commission Public Hearing on Walnut Station Mixed Use Center April 20, 2010 Page 3 Don Philpot, 1568 Orchard Street, submitted and reviewed his written testimony expressing concern about the lack of a sufficient transition area between the commercial and residential zoning on 15th Avenue. John Barofsky, co-chair of the Fairmount Neighborhood Mixed Use Subcommittee, noted his submission of written testimony and reviewed the introduction and conclusion of that submission. He invited the commission to review the material carefully. He requested that the record remain open for ten days. He commended the work of Ms. McKinney and note that the document received a vote of confidence from the Fairmount Neighborhood Board. Ms. Bierle called for further testimony. There was none. She closed the public hearing. Mr. Belcher, seconded by Mr. Mills, moved to leave the record open for ten days. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hledik asked staff to include a response to each person offering testimony in its written materials. Ms. McKinney agreed. Mr. Hledik wanted to know more about the staff change of position in regard to the appeal process. He understood the commission was initially selected as the appeal body because of the discretionary nature of the criteria. Ms. McKinney pointed out that an appeals process, no matter the body hearing the appeal, always required discretion, even in evaluating clear and objective standards. Staff had changed its recommendation because it initially believed the University and Chamber supported it. The City had no desired outcome and would support the recommendation based on the two of three stakeholder groups supported the recommendation. Ms. McKinney invited the commission to e-mail any additional questions to her. Mr. Randall asked if it was possible to get a numerical assessment of how much parking would be lost because of the multi-way boulevard, and a sense of where other parking spaces could be gained. Ms. McKinney indicated the materials included information about the additional parking spaces that would be created by angled parking on Orchard and Villard streets. Mr. Randall asked where those spaces were in relationship to the ones being lost. Ms. McKinney agreed to provide that information, and indicated she would also provide information about the City’s plans to phase the boulevard on the south side of the street. Responding to a question from Ms. Warnes about the vacant parcel mentioned by Ms. Cowan, Ms. McKinney clarified that the current zoning did not prohibit parking, but the City had requirements related to the creation of stand-alone parking lots. Mr. Hledik determined from Ms. McKinney the extent of staff’s communication with Mr. Philpot and asked staff to address Mr. Philpot’s concerns about the commercial-residential interface in its response to testimony. Ms. McKinney agreed to do so, and reminded the commission of the existing commercial zoning already in place using the map she previously referred to. She said she would also follow-up with Mr. Philpot on his concerns. Mr. Belcher wondered how the zone could prevent University students from using the parking intended for businesses in the area. Ms. McKinney said staff proposed to enhance the existing residential parking MINUTES — Planning Commission Public Hearing on Walnut Station Mixed Use Center April 20, 2010 Page 4 program by extending its hours. In regard to the MUC, she said that metered parking had been suggested for the station itself, but to this point, staff had been focused on protecting the neighborhood from potential spill over impacts from parking due to the reduced parking requirements proposed for the MUC. She suggested that the commission might want to recommend making the parking program and traffic calming enhancements permanent in case the arena went away at some future time. Mr. Belcher raised the possibility of bifurcating the area and creating different parking standards for the area south and north of Franklin Boulevard. Mr. Belcher asked Ms. McKinney to speak to his concern that of the impact of the multi-way boulevard on the existing auto-dependent uses north of Franklin Boulevard. He also questioned if increased commercial development in the area would draw business from other already commercial depressed areas, such as downtown. Mr. Mills did not see any parks and open space in the plan and asked Ms. McKinney to confirm that there was no plan other than the status quo for open space. Ms. McKinney acknowledged that parks was a big issue for neighbors, business owners, and staff. The subject was discussed extensively in the planning process and the alternatives discussed were listed in the materials. Staff consulted City parks staff and found that the City’s existing parks prioritization program was based on distance. The issue came down to money; there was currently no money to purchase and maintain a park in the area. The plan called for positioning Walnut Station higher in the priority list, and included a policy recommendation that the City add density to the factors considered in the prioritization process. Responding to a question from Ms. Bierle, Ms. McKinney recalled that there were parking alternatives considered, such as in-lieu fees paid by developers that would be used to build a parking structure. Some things, such as requiring developers to form an associate to oversee parking, were not practical. Ms. McKinney said that the City heard concerns about spillover impacts on the neighborhood and considered the best way to address that issue, which was to create a residential parking program to protect the neighborhood. The existing program was being enhanced with the construction of the arena. Responding to a request from Ms. Bierle for a synopsis of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commit- tee’s input regarding the plan, Ms. McKinney said that staff presented the project to the committee but never received a formal response. She recalled that the committee did not support the multi-modal path because it did not support the inclusion of cars. Ms. Bierle asked if it was possible to get additional input. Ms. McKinney said due to timing, she would be unable to get input before the commission deliberated. Mr. Mills wanted to ensure the commission had sufficient information about the multi-way boulevard, as what it had seemed sketchy to him. He requested information on how the facility would handle capacity. He wanted to a summary of the results of the traffic modeling and the transportation impact analysis. Mr. Mills requested data on lane capacity and asked how traffic would be handled through the transition years. Responding to a question from Mr. Hledik, Ms. McKinney clarified the traffic lane widths were concep- tual; staff proposed to codify the right-of-way width, which was a maximum of 155 feet, but not the travel lanes because of the need for flexibility to accomplish certain goals, such as phasing in the local access lane in front of Hirons. Responding to a question from Mr. Belcher about any input received from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Mr. Inerfeld indicated that the facility was outside of ODOT’s jurisdiction. He MINUTES — Planning Commission Public Hearing on Walnut Station Mixed Use Center April 20, 2010 Page 5 said ODOT had conceptually approved intersection controls at I-5 where eastbound and westbound Franklin came together to facilitate travel through the area. Mr. Belcher questioned if the University would be allowed to build another athletic facility in the area. Ms. McKinney said institutional uses were permitted within the Walnut Street area, and she acknowledged the neighborhood was concerned about how those uses were defined. She suggested that question of institutional uses was a citywide issue, and the definition used was a citywide definition. Changing the definition would require a change to the Land Use Code. Mr. Hledik asked if Sustainability Commission received notice of the project. Ms. McKinney said yes, adding that staff took the project through the triple bottom line tool with the commission. She believed the commission was tracking the project. Mr. Mills asked if the University had suggested what form reasonable compensation for its properties might take. Ms. Gardner indicated that the City would have to purchase the property from the University at fair market value. Ms. Warnes asked about the potential of removing or consolidating residential driveways on Walnut, Villard, and Orchard streets to increase parking on the street. Ms. McKinney indicated that the City was unable to remove residential driveway access. She said in some cases, the City would unable to create angled parking. There were some opportunities near the commercially zoned properties on Walnut, Villard, and Orchard streets to create angled parking, and it might be possible for some properties to take alley access. Mr. Belcher asked if residents would have dedicated on-street parking. Ms. McKinney said no, all parking would be public. Ms. Bierle adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES — Planning Commission Public Hearing on Walnut Station Mixed Use Center April 20, 2010 Page 6