CC Minutes - 09/12/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Laurence spoke of the examples that arose during the commission's discussion, including the US Bank Building on Willamette Street and 8th Avenue, which at eight stories was less than 2.0 FAR, the library, which at four stories was barely 2.0 FAR, and Broadway Place, which at three stories was less than 2.0 FAR (1.55) because of the open space included in the development to add livability. The Heron Building was brought out to the street and had parking located behind the building, achieving urban design goals but resulting in a lower FAR of 1.47. Ms. Laurence shared examples of two possible developments on the present US Bank site to demonstrate how a low-rise commercial development and a high-rise commercial development at the same density would occupy the same site. She suggested the high-rise commercial development would produce a result more in line with the recommendations of the Downtown Plan, because while it included surface parking on a portion of the site, the surface parking could be redeveloped as another building. Ms. Laurence showed the council a slide of the TOD boundaries and identified where 1.0 and 2.0 FAR was required. She said the commission agreed the City should consider the long-term consequence of requiring a higher FAR outside the downtown core, as it could encourage development outside the core that the community might prefer to keep in the core. Ms. Laurence discussed the City's requirement for nonresidential uses on ground floors in residential structures in the C-2 zone. The commission agreed that the City needed to take a look at the requirement and reconsider its application in downtown. Ms. Laurence said the commission believed the City needed to balance its desire for ground-floor commercial with its desire for downtown residential development. She noted the many vacant storefronts that already existed in downtown, and said the requirement increased the cost of residential development in downtown, which was already higher than in other areas of the commu- nity. In addition, the requirement encouraged development on streets that were not designated as Great Streets and, given existing vacancies the community would have difficulty filling vacancies even on the Great Streets. Ms. Laurence discussed the limitation on surface parking contained in the C-3 zone. She suggested the issue required a balance of values; parking was needed to support commercial uses downtown, but the City had a desire for a densely developed downtown. Some surface parking might be needed to facilitate commercial development, with the proviso that such parking was not permanent. Ms. Laurence said the commission discussed the provision of such parking as a landbanking strategy, and agreed the entire issue needed further reexamination. Ms. Laurence discussed the issue oflong-term bicycle parking requirements. She said the code required a number oflong-term spaces be located in a building, but there could be more than one way to park bicycles. The City was working with the University of Oregon's Community Planning Workshop and the commu- nity's bicycling community on a survey to explore the issue. She asked if it was possible to have a code that was sufficiently flexible to accommodate bicycle ridership while allowing for a project to have a different response to the requirement for long-term parking. Ms. Laurence sought council initiation of the code amendments so staff could move forward with the implementation of the code amendments, beginning with a public process. She noted the next steps in the process, and emphasized that the council would be the final decision maker. Mayor Piercy solicited council comments and questions. MINUTES-Eugene City Council Work Session September 12, 2005 Page 5