Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Farmer agreed that there were subsidies that had fostered sprawl. He said the question for <br />him was, given that most of the subsidies were based on federal policies, what could the City do <br />to make a difference? Staff had not found a solution in its research to the issue of "leveling the <br />playing field." He said there were some approaches like Land Value Taxation, which would take <br />action by the State legislature, as a lever that had been used selectively by some Pennsylvania <br />communities to raise the cost of land relative to the cost of the improvement. Regarding the <br />concept of administering a local parking tax on large surface parking lots, Mr. Farmer said it <br />appeared the tax would have to be so enormous because of the turnover of spaces and <br />throughput of businesses to work. There were administrative costs associated with the tax as <br />well. Staff had not found any workable models, particularly for a community that was part of a <br />larger region and that had immediate control of only a certain amount of land. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor suggested that the City could stop development that required large parking lots. Mr. <br />Farmer said that the City had not gone as far as some communities in regulating big box retail. It <br />could do more in the future. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor agreed with Ms. Bettman that activities outside downtown affected the issue of parking <br />downtown. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked who parked in the Pearl Street garages and benefitted from them. Mr. Farmer <br />responded that the City's garage, which was fairly close to capacity, served the area around it. It <br />was not constructed to serve any particularly interest, but replaced the surface parking displaced <br />by the Lane Transit District Station. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor agreed with some parking subsidy but said it should be combined with other <br />approaches outside of downtown. She asked if Mr. Farmer was familiar with the parking <br />structures in Santa Barbara. Mr. Farmer was not. Ms. Taylor said that Santa Barbara had <br />beautiful parking structures that were landscaped to conceal their purpose. She suggested the <br />City needed to consider how to beautify its structures. Mr. Farmer noted that cities sometimes <br />employ business license revenues to underwrite those costs. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor expressed appreciation for the presentation. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor asked if staff and Mr. Moore believed there were enough structures downtown. Mr. <br />Farmer said no. Mr. Moore said he had not evaluated the issue. He said that from a business <br />point of view, finding adequate parking that worked well is difficult for downtown businesses. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor expressed concern that the rates charged by the City for structured parking were not <br />adequate to fund the construction of new garages. He did not see how the City, in its current <br />funding situation, could build any future parking structures unless a private/public partnership was <br />involved. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor did not think a tax on surface parking outside the downtown was workable. He thought <br />the council had attempted to address the issue of leveling the playing field by establishing <br />landscaping requirements and parking limitations for development outside downtown. He asked <br />Mr. Farmer for his reaction to those approaches. Mr. Farmer said that there were several ways to <br />address the issue, including the use of regulations, by limiting supply, and through provision of <br />subsidies. He cited 29th Avenue and Willamette Street and suggested that to achieve denser <br />development at that location, it would require structured parking, which was not likely to be built by <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 30, 2001 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />