MEMO TO: State Street Corridor Plan Project Management Team FROM: Eunice Kim, Planner II, Project Manager Community Development Department DATE: July 31, 2017 SUBJECT: Summary of Public Input 7.C Memorandum #8: Summary of Task 6 and 7 Public Input This memorandum summarizes input from the third public meeting for the State Street Corridor Plan project held on July 25, 2017 at Court Street Christian Church. More than 85 people attended the meeting in addition to the City staff and project team members. City staff members included Eunice Kim, project manager; Lisa Anderson-Ogilvie, Interim Community Development Department Director; Kevin Hottmann, Traffic Engineer; Julie Warncke, Transportation Planning Manager; and Anthony Gamallo, Senior Transportation Planner. Consultant team members included Bridget Wieghart, project manager with WSP; Marcy McInelly, principal at Urbworks; and Kimi Sloop, associate at Barney and Worth. Naomi Zwerdling from the Oregon Department of Transportation also attended. The public meeting began with a brief presentation by Eunice, who provided an overview of the project. This included a review of the project’s broad goals and the planning process that has occurred to date. The presentation can be found online here. Eunice then described the three street design alternatives that have been analyzed since the last public meeting in September 2016: Improved Four Lane, Road Diet, and Hybrid. Detailed descriptions of the alternatives can be found online in the Tier 2 Evaluation of Street Design Alternatives memo. For each alternative, Eunice showed proposed cross sections for State Street and talked about their anticipated benefits and drawbacks. She explained that the City is recommending the Hybrid alternative as the preferred street design alternative. Next, Eunice provided an overview of the preferred land use alternative, which includes two new mixed-use zones: Mixed-Use 1 (MU-1) and Mixed-Use 2 (MU-2). A description of the two zones can be found online in the Preferred Land Use Alternative and Tier 2 Evaluation memo. Eunice then talked about the next steps in the project, including finalizing the alternatives in August, drafting and presenting the State Street Corridor Plan this winter, and potentially implementing code changes and continuing funding discussions next year. Following the presentation, Kimi told meeting participants that the rest of the meeting would be in the format of an open house where they had the opportunity to ask City staff and the consultant team questions and provide input on the alternatives. There were two stations in the room, one with boards describing the preferred land use alternative, and one with boards Summary of Public Input July 31, 2017 Page 2 describing the street design alternatives. Handouts about the preferred land use alternative and preferred street design alternative (Hybrid alternative) were also made available to meeting participants. Before breaking up for the open house stations, a few meeting participants requested that they be able to ask questions and voice their opinions in the large group setting. In response, Eunice and other City staff answered several questions about the land use and street design alternatives as well as how they would potentially be implemented. The meeting participants then went to the two open house stations and talked with City staff and the consultants about the land use and street design alternatives. Several meeting participants provided comments on large flip boards at each station, and many others provided input on comment sheets, which asked for input on the preferred alternatives as well as more general questions. All of the written comments have been provided in summary form in the following pages. They have also been categorized into themes or topics. Based on the written comments, there appears to be more consensus on the preferred land use alternative than the street design alternative. Land use: There is general support for the preferred land use alternative that calls for two mixed-use zones, but there are concerns about the proposed building heights. Specifically, many meeting participants want the maximum building heights lowered to three to four stories, particularly between 12th to 17th Street adjacent to the historic district and/or Court Street NE. Other common comments include the following: o There are concerns about businesses on State Street potentially creating noise and light pollution that would negatively impact nearby residences, particularly those in the Court-Chemeketa Historic District. o There is a desire to retain and add trees and green spaces on State Street. o There are questions and concerns about the impact new development on State Street could have on parking in the area. Street design: There does not appear to be broad consensus on the preferred street design alternative, the Hybrid alternative. While there is support for the Hybrid alternative, many meeting participants prefer the Road Diet alternative. A small number of participants are opposed to reducing the number of vehicular travel lanes or generally prefer State Street to remain four lanes. Other common comments include the following: o There is a desire to ensure that design changes to State Street do not increase cut-through traffic in nearby neighborhoods. o There is support for pedestrian improvements, but there are varied opinions as to how bikes should best be accommodated – on State Street or side streets. At the end of this memorandum is a summary of other comments that community members have provided through emails, phone calls, social media, letters, and in-person discussions. Comments from members of the technical advisory committee and stakeholder advisory committee have been provided in separate meeting summary documents. Summary of Public Input July 31, 2017 Page 3 COMMENTS ON THE PREFERRED LAND USE Like it Thumbs up Looks good Excellent work; area from 12th to 17th Street makes the most sense for development of housing and commercial Seems “most likely to succeed” alternative Overall support I think the gradual change from more commercial (12th to 17th) to more residential (17th to 25th) is an excellent idea Like the zoning code simplification Comfortable with the proposed land use Like the MU-1 and MU-2 zoning; should be a definite improvement Residents on the south side of Court Street have concerns about six-story buildings on State Street Lower height of MU-1 to three stories; will destroy the historic neighborhood otherwise Six or seven stories is too tall; hoping the City finds ways to reduce density Appreciate the slope roof design Height from 12th to 17th Street is too high and would be detrimental to the historic district; owe it to one of the nicest neighborhoods in town to lower the height to a maximum of four stories Slanted rooflines are ugly and do not add anything to the value of gentrification Want to see 1.5 feet setback abutting residential; can it be 1.75 Building height feet? Protect the historic district and lower heights to three stories Too high even with setbacks; protect our historic district; three stories is enough Two new mixed-use zones should only allow up to three to four stories; need to protect the historic district As this is an urban environment, heights up to 70 feet should be allowed between at least 12th and 17th Street and from 17th to 25th Street on the south side Consider only allowing one to two stories on the north side of th th State Street between 12 and 17 Street Concerned about building height and loss of trees that buffer my property from State Street No more than three stories; taller buildings should be east of th 18 Street Higher density not good for the historic district Prefer proposed setback of 1.5 feet for every 1 foot Limit heights to four stories between 12th and 17th Street; setbacks do not adequately address concerns Concerned about mixed-use buildings casting shadows on historic district homes Can see how building heights can be compatible with residential areas after having the building footprint graphics explained Four stories is the right height in the MU-1 zone Summary of Public Input July 31, 2017 Page 4 COMMENTS ON THE PREFERRED LAND USE Higher roofs will overshadow yards on the south side of Court Street, decreasing real estate values, businesses will turn over to lesser paying residents, leading to the demise of the historic neighborhoods Need to limit buildings to four stories in the MU-1 Appreciate the setbacks to deal with height, but more options should be explored to protect the values and quality of residential areas Hear the concerns about height from the historic district and think they should be addressed in the code If 65 feet and 50 feet are not allowed in the MU-1 and MU-2 zones, it prohibits what developers can do Shade issue is minimal as State Street runs east to west, and Building height (continued) there would not be a shadow cast over Court Street all day No more than three stories for apartments, or historic district residents will move out, and the historic district will disappear MU-1 buildings are too tall; in the neighborhood plan, we talked about not encroaching on houses, we didn’t want noise pollution, and we talked about three stories Limit the height to three to four stories throughout the entire corridor as per the neighborhood plan Maximum three stories Please do not allow more than three stories between 12th and 17th Street Concerned about two mixed-use zones; wonder