My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 04/10/00 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2000
>
CC Minutes - 04/10/00 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:27:36 AM
Creation date
8/1/2005 2:38:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/1/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
a TDM effect in lower density development unless the tax was very high, and it would be difficult <br />to "level the playing field," which was a stated desired outcome of such a tax. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner was unsure he would change the text of the policy, but he was interested in what <br />Eugene could do locally in this area. He wanted to "level the playing field" and find a way to <br />affect both downtown development and the way development occurred by changing the way it <br />approached development in the periphery by increasing transportation requirements. Mr. <br />Meisner also expressed interest in the efficient use of commercially and industrially zoned lands <br />in terms of parking. He cited campus industrial sites with big parking lots and large lawns as <br />examples of inefficient use of land. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson had no change to suggest to the policy. She noted the City's preferential parking <br />treatment of car pool users and questioned the effectiveness of that approach in encouraging car <br />pooling. Ms. Childs indicated staff would provide information on current programs when the <br />council discussed Eugene's implementation of TDM. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor requested information about the use of the phrase "level playing field." Mr. Schwetz <br />responded that the term came up in the course of developing the plan. Staff was looking at a <br />broad TDM strategy that increased the cost of parking as a way of discouraging automobile use. <br />The phrase was used by people who wanted to maintain the viability of downtown, which was the <br />only location in the metropolitan area with paid parking. Ms. Taylor favored taxing surface lots or <br />charging for parking only in the outlying areas of the community because that was where it cost <br />the most to drive, and such an approach more fairly competed with downtown. She called for <br />restrictions on the size of surface parking lots. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly observed that from the standpoint of new commercial ventures, it was better from an <br />equity standpoint to implement communitywide TDM. He said that TDM Policy 2 was very vague, <br />and without program actions underlying it had no stand alone value. He wanted strengthened <br />program actions added, and suggested one appropriate action might be the taxing of surface <br />parking lots. Mr. Kelly said that such a tax was not designed to produce revenues, but rather to <br />motivate changes in land use. He said he was not committed to one single method, but believed <br />a metropolitan approach to the issue was most equitable. <br /> <br />Responding to a request for clarification from Mr. Kelly regarding the staff response about taxing <br />surface lots in lower density areas, Mr. Schwetz said that the general staff analysis had focused <br />on a parking tax with a direct effect on demand as a TDM measure, rather than the longer term <br />effect on land uses suggested by Mr. Kelly. Mr. Kelly asked Mr. Schwetz to comment on his <br />remarks regarding equity, and why it was that a strategy like a tax or differential for structured <br />parking would not act to balance the inequity between structured parking downtown and surface <br />lots on the periphery. Mr. Schwetz responded that staff was suggesting it was uncertain that a <br />property owner in an outlying area faced with a tax on a surface parking lot spaces would <br />necessarily pass that cost on to the users of the lot, but rather to people paying rent in the <br />building being served by the lot. Mr. Kelly said he would like to see development of a strategy <br />that could cause a business owner with acres of surface parking lot to realize that more could be <br />realized from there land if the parking was structured. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 said that it was necessary to take a metropolitan approach. He called for market-based <br />incentives. Regarding structured parking in the periphery, Mr. Pap8 asked if there was a role for <br />government in assisting a landowner to build a parking structure. He was concerned that the <br />appropriate amount was being charged for parking downtown. Mr. Schwetz responded that staff <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 10, 2000 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.