Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

by the Planning Commission. Individually and collectively each of the proposed code amendments would remove some of the barriers that were in the way of attracting new investment, new projects, and more employers in downtown Eugene, and was especially true for local businesses that may wish to invest in downtown. The proposed code amendments were a step in the right direction for the City Council to achieve an economic vital downtown featuring a diverse mix of uses as envisioned in the Downtown Plan. Current code requirements such as the 1.0 FAR and 20 space parking maximum may have been well intentioned when first enacted but they have had unintended consequences as evidenced by seven years of very little private sector development activity in downtown compared to the development activity going on elsewhere in the community. The proposed code amendments were more in line with the basic economic and market conditions and/or limitations for a city the size of Eugene. Allowing adjustment review for all parcels was a good thing. This was not the first time a Eugene Planning Commission had recommended .65 FAR as being appropriate for the overlay zone. It should be noted that .65 FAR was precisely what the Planning Commission recommended eight years ago when it forwarded the Land Use Code Update (LUCU) to the City Council. This was an important opportunity for the City Council. The Chamber of Commerce urged the Council to approve the Downtown Code Amendments. He thanked the City Council and Planning staff for their work and public involvement opportunities provided through the process. Lisa Warnes, 5020 Nectar Way, Ward 2, said there was an implementation strategy in the Downtown Plan that said, “in order to identify impediments for achieving higher density in mixed use development and redevelopment downtown a regulatory audit is necessary.” The Plan further said, “perform a regulatory audit to identify impediments to achieving higher density, mixed use development and redevelopment downtown.” She was unaware of any audit in forming the proposed amendments. The process should be audit first, identification of impediments, and then development of a proposal based on audit findings. Staff findings stated “the proposed code amendments assist private developers to invest downtown by removing impediments in the land use code.” She said the statement was not supported by facts and the record provided no data based on information establishing what the impediments were. The findings failed to address the applicable TransPlan related Metro Plan nodal development policies. She urged the City Council to reject all Downtown Code Amendments until the proposed Chapter 9 amendments to encourage downtown development were based on factual information. Gary Wildish, 2424 Quince Street, supported a vibrant, active downtown. Not much had happened in downtown during the last seven years as most people would have wished. He suggested verifying how many dollars of permitted work had been allowed in the downtown area and comparing it with the amount of commercial development that had occurred outside of the downtown area. He opined everyone would be disappointed in the significance of development going other places, such as Coburg Road and Delta Highway. He encouraged the Council to support the Planning Commission and staff recommendations. Bruce Mulligan, 3056 Hendricks Hill Drive, Ward 3, supported the Planning Commission’s recommenda- tions for the MCAs, which was one of a two stage process. He said the proposed .65 FAR change would increase actual FARs in the area which were currently approximately .25 FAR. He had been briefly th involved with the WestTown on 8 project which had received a waiver from the City Council for development purposes. That low-income housing project would meet .65 FAR and was an asset to the community. It was necessary to create an easy way for people to invest in Eugene in great projects. The changes recommended by the Planning Commission would enhance the capability of Eugene to attract those dollars and see the projects we want to see happen. Some of the lowest land values in the community were in the downtown core, whereas they should be some of the highest values. He supported the Planning Commission recommendations and looked forward to the recommendations that would come from the second stage of the land use code changes evaluation process MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 16, 2008 Page 14 Work Session