CC Minutes - 05/24/06 Work Session

Home Browse Search

City Manager Taylor understood the amendment to preclude all other uses of the site. He said the addition of the word ‘preferred’ clarified that it meant to encourage the development of housing. Ms. Solomon ascertained from staff that the amendment would not require housing-only proposals. She stressed that she did not want to hamstring development or lose out on an opportunity with a developer who did not want to build housing. Mr. Pryor echoed Ms. Solomon’s sentiments. Mayor Piercy called for the vote. The motion to approve the amendment passed, 7:0 (Mr. Papé had not yet arrived at the meeting). Ms. Bettman indicated that she had more changes she wished to make to the document. Ms. Bettman moved to change the first point on page 390 of the AIS under Active Uses, as follows (changes indicated in bold): “1. Multiple stories with active ground floors …” Mr. Kelly understood that the floor/area ratio (FAR) for the site was 2.0 so there would be no way the site could be developed without multiple stories. He said the amendment would be redundant. Ms. Bettman averred that there was a caveat that some flexibility in the plan or zoning would be allowed for a proposal that met development objectives. Mr. Kelly pointed out that it would take a land use code change to reduce the FAR. Ms. Bettman withdrew her amendment. Ms. Bettman moved to change the second point on page 390 of the AIS under Active Uses to read, as follows: “2. Very high density residential, particularly ownership housing.” The motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to change the third point on page 390 of the AIS under Active Uses to read, as follows: “3. Major employment center for very high-quality jobs and extended hours of occu- pancy.” Ms. Solomon commented that it would not be known for certain at the time of the RFP who would be the occupant. She did not believe it was within the purview of the council to dictate the hours an employment center should be open. She thought it could become a limiting factor for proposals that would be submitted to the City. Ms. Bettman averred that her amendment merely reinforced the language in the Downtown Plan. Mr. Poling pointed out that the sentence before the point Ms. Bettman wished to amend indicated that this applied to “preferred projects” and was not absolute. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 24, 2006 Page 4 Work Session