Loading...
02/28/1989 - Minutes t' CITY CENTER PLAN TASK FORCE ' Tuesday, February 28, 1989 l � Community Development Conference Room 7:00 p.m MINUTES Members Present: Stuart Cohen, Mike Marr, Pam Juarez, Richard Morley, Joy Henkle Consultants Present: Bob Moore City Council Present: Valerie Johnson Others Present: Ed Murphy, Liz Newton, Duane Roberts, Peggy Weston Byrd, Dan Dolan, Tim Miller Called to order by Chairman Cohen at 7:10 p.m. Minutes of the previous meetings were approved with emendations: Review of Development Plan: Add: Marr pointed out that the Burnham Street projects should be consolidated into one five-year period. Replace the sentence indicating that the Task Force formally voted to approve the proposed development plan with the statement that the Task Force indicated that they favored the proposed development plan. Summerfield Presentation: Revise to indicate that the presentation was made to Summerfield Board members. REVIEW OF PLAN: Newton reviewed the plan starting from section 403. Section 405 will be deleted per attorney's recommendation that it is redundant. Section 501 is a new section that addresses CBD zoning. The attorney has reviewed and approved the language. There is no section numbered 502 in the draft. The sections after 501 will be renumbered to make sequential. Sections 503 and 504 are similar to what Bob originally proposed. Sections 603 and 604 have been deleted. Section 602 has been revamped by the attorneys. The section refers to property acquisition. Peggy mentioned that the City should be careful about using the eminent domain procedure. Newton reviewed 1200-1203. Peggy noted that a zone change could be considered a "substantial change " requiring a vote of the people. Moore noted that this would not be the case for the plan that we are reviewing. Morley felt that the phrase 11. . . in the judgement of the Development Agency . in section 1200 was important because it implies that the Agency will decide what is "substantial". Marr and Cohen replied that the Development Agency needed an opportunity to be flexible within the plan's parameters. Liz will look at altering to "soften" the wording. Marr questioned section 402 under item "A". Wants "consistent with other goals of the City Center Development Plan to the underlined so that the emphasis is on the Vision Statement. Peggy suggested moving the phrase up to the beginning. Consensus was to underline. On item "B" Section 402, Marr wanted the wording .clarified to say "select" industrial. Stuart mentioned that development standards need to be carefully reviewed so that they stay in compliance with our City Center Design Plan. Morely noted that section 601 doesn't address timing. Perhaps this needs to be mentioned here. Moore said that the intent is to give direction to the project. Morley suggested changing "construct" a new bridge to "reconstruct" on page 12. He also suggested that the plan should "encourage" construction of the Pacific Highway off ramp. Cohen suggested "in conjunction with " rather than "encourage". P. 13. Marr suggested taking out the phrase "in the Main-Burnham area" to allow flexibility in the siting of the town square. Marr and Morley suggested inserting "improving Hall Boulevard in conjunction with ODOT" in section 8, page 12. P. 15 section 8. Marr felt that the phrase "payments make to" should be dropped. Marr objected to the Council becoming the Agency. Murphy reviewed what the plan and report should overview: Plan: Adoption and vote Report: Council accepts Boundary Documentation for findings of blight Term Financial Plan Projects Estimate of tax rate impact Agency Moore said we should have a termination date for the plan. We should have an actual date, i.e. July 1,1995. REVIEW OF REPORT: Morley asked if the table in section 300 had to be included. Moore said that it needed to be a part of the report and that every project had to relate to blighted conditions. Marr indicated that the projects should be placed in alphabetic order as previously decided. He also mentioned that Burnham needed to be totally improved or at least that the City engineering department should look at the total picture between Burnham and Main being improved together so each would share in the improvements. Morley stated that perhaps the money for the park was too high. Moore felt that Fanno Creek Park needed to be improved to stimulate apartment building. Stuart concurred. Pan mentioned that she would like improvements to the railroad crossings to be a priority item in phase 1. Valerie suggested designating "SDC" funds for the City Center Area. Valerie suggested showing that we are short $65,00 and then showing that the City might come up with the funds. It was decided to move Burnham back into phase 1 noting that $65,000 will come from the City. Mike noted that we are putting off the Hall/Hunziker intersection for 12 years. As a point of concern, he noted that he would like to move the project up as a priority, if possible. Dan Dolan noted that we should scratch off the identification of the Plaza with Main St. Stuart mentioned that we should keep the plaza on Main because we should not abandon the idea of it being located on Main. It was discovered that the plaza was possibly funded twice. So we picked up $90,000 in the first phase. Marr wants to footnote that where funds are available we would like to see Commercial finished in phase 1. Stuart wants copies of the report, plan, design -report, park report and economic report to present to Council. The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 PM. Respectfully submitted by Joy Henkle, Secretary.