My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3: Ordinance on Downtown Code Amendments
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 06/16/08 Public Hearing
>
Item 3: Ordinance on Downtown Code Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:44:08 PM
Creation date
6/13/2008 9:39:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
6/16/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
implications that regulations would have the more they could preclude the type of development <br />they would like to see. She underscored that they were tracking the suggestions for making <br />buildings be greener and more sustainable over time. <br /> <br />Ms. Kneeland opined that some of the conclusions regarding VMT had been based on “fairly <br />simplistic ideas.” She felt that the park once idea was appealing but she was not certain as to how <br />it would be true. She asked what kind of research supported this idea that reducing density and <br />bringing a car that would park once would reduce VMT. Ms. Laurence replied that when the <br />Transit Oriented District was first put in place in the code in 1993 staff had conducted research on <br />what buildable areas and the impact on property owners would be. She recalled that when the FAR <br />had been changed from .65 to 1.0 it had been an effort to round the number up. She did not believe <br />there was a discussion on what the impact to properties that were there would be. She said the <br />research they were doing involved looking at the impacts of this approach in other cities. She <br />related that the division was working with some University of Oregon economics students to <br />conduct a survey of cities either in Oregon or nationwide in order to take a look at what the transit <br />oriented regulations were. She underscored that many cities had transit oriented regulations but <br />hardly any required an FAR. She said they wanted to see from the examples from other cities what <br />impact density regulations have on the type of downtown that was desired. <br /> <br />Ms. Kneeland surmised that it was somewhat of a leap of faith that achieving density would reduce <br />VMT. Ms. Laurence responded that it was not “just a leap of faith.” She stated that movement <br />patterns downtown were known. She said most of the downtown was a parking exempt zone and <br />the City had tried to mitigate that with the construction of parking garages. She related that in <br />looking at other cities it was possible to see the kinds of buildings where people were inclined to <br />walk from one building to another. She added that it was known that a person would typically <br />walk up to a quarter mile or for five minutes from their parked car. She also noted that studies had <br />been conducted in downtown Eugene of circles widening out from the parking structures to see <br />where people would go from a given parking structure as opposed to getting into their car and <br />driving half a block away. <br /> <br />Mr. McCown observed that the commission had spent much of the time he had served on the <br />commission cleaning up the land use code. He said it seemed that there was a lot of passion around <br />it and the updates were for worthwhile goals. He was not certain, however, whether the past <br />MINUTES—Eugene Planning Commission April 28, 2008 Page 6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.