04/13/1981 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e preservation of the existing housing is important but they are limited in the ways one can address conversions. The recommendation as outlined in item #10 is the best that can be done with reference to the rehabilitation program. e Ms. Wooten responded that she is aware of the limits of those tools but perhaps the City should look at other tools to preserve low/moderate income residences. Ms. Decker said perhaps item #10 could be left more open with the rehabilitation program listed as only an example. Ms. Wooten asked if they adopted the reV1Slons, would they then be able to revise #10 to stress conversion of housing stock at a later date. Ms. Decker said the council can amend the recommendations at this meeting or at a later date. Mr. Gleason explained the only successful intervention that he was aware of is in housing rehabilitation. However, housing rehabilitation takes a long time to affect a neighborhood. When council reviews the block grant program, council might be able to develop more effective ways to intervene in the housing stock and focus their resources on one area, as opposed to spreading these funds over a wide area. Ms. Wooten agreed that loans seem to be the best now, but noted that other areas on the West Coast had used more assertive policies and approaches. She would like to look into them. Mr. Lindberg asked about the reduced parking requirement for Olive Plaza and its success or failure. Ms. Decker said that the reductions in the number of parking spaces to units have been implemented successfully in several develop- ments. Olive Plaza is not one of them. It has one space for six units. Experience indicates that one space for every four units works better than one space for every six units. Public Works is evaluating the one parking space to every four units of elderly housing at 8th Avenue and Broadway. They intend to make recommendations to the council on the number of parking spaces to units after the survey is completed. - In answer to Mr. Lindberg's question about the implementation of parking in the downtown area, Ms. Decker said that the Downtown Development Board was concerned about the surface parking at 11th Avenue and Willamette Street and the lot across from the Atrium Building. The City's response is that surface parking has never been long-term use. They will implement a parking program and will phase development of parking structures in order not to harm the businesses. Mr. Lindberg noted that Fanni'e r~ae regulations may preclude"o.r:-r-estrict banks from loaning on housing that does not have one and one half parking spaces per unit. Ms. Decker noted that recommendation #6 spoke to that problem. The City might consider allowing developers to site parking more than 400 feet away from the building. Pannie Mae might change their' regulations and allow more flexibility. Mr. Lindberg asked for data that would indicate that there is a market for downtown housing. Ms. Decker said the Eugene Renewal Agency had decided not to rely on old data and has recently hired a consultant to complete a market analysis of the downtown area. Mr. Lindberg asked if there were any indications to support the contention that downtown housing would support commercial develop- ment. Ms. Decker indicated that the City of Portland had had similar studies done and its downtown area is now a very vital area. There is an assumption that peopl e who 1 i ve downtown will be a captured market and wi 11 try to do most of the; r MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 13, 1981 Page 3