11/07/1990 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e 4) Amend zoning ordinance to better gUide types and scale of uses permitted in commercial zones. Consider a new zoning district for small scale neighborhood-oriented uses. 5) Support local economic objectives over national trends. 6) Rely on the redevelopment and infill of existing commercial land and the supply of vacant commercial sites to meet short-term de- velopment needs (1990-1995). Regarding the commission's recommendation to include all downtown Urban Re- newal Agency (URA) surface parking lots as part of the "Buildable Commercial Lands Supply," Ms. Ehrman said that the supply of commercial lands should reflect actual buildable land. As an example, she said that if the City was to make a commitment that certain parking lots would remain as parking lots over the long-term, these lots should not be included in the commercial land supply. Regarding the recommendation which proposes a new zoning district for small- scale, neighborhood-oriented uses, Mr. Bennett asked whether the commission made a distinction between whether the neighborhood commercial site was sur- rounded by multi-family versus single-family residential uses. He noted that some types of mixed-use developments are more successful in higher density residential areas where developers have more latitude in areas such as site planning, buffering, shared open space, etc. In response, Mr. Tollenaar said that the commission did not make such a distinction. Ms. Nathanson provided an overview of design recommendations for commercial e areas. Mr. Tollenaar emphasized that the commission would be revisiting the design recommendations again before signing off on the draft. Mr. Bennett urged the commission to be cautious when implementing design standards for large-scale commercial developments. He spoke about the debate which exists in the community about whether large-scale developments such as ShopKo should be allowed to develop. Citizens who oppose such developments often feel that they are aesthetically displeasing while others support them because they provide a wide variety of items at affordable prices. Mr. Bennett said that it is better to make it clear up front what types of busi- ness will be allowed in the community rather than allowing business to come in and then imposing such stringent design and parking standards that they can no longer compete. Mr. Green voiced concern about the legal ramifications of deciding what type and scale of developments would be allowed in the area. Regarding site development requirements, Ms. Nathanson noted that developers have indicated a willingness to work with more stringent design requirements if they were imposed fairly and equally to all. She emphasized that it is not the commission's intent to curtail creativity by requiring more stringent design standards, and spoke about the possibility of negotiating with devel- opers on site development. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 7, 1990 Page 5