Item C: Ordinance on Downtown Urban Renewal Plan Amendment

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bierle asked what provision existed for covered bicycle parking to encourage year-round bicycling. Ms. McKinney said the existing code would govern that issue. She said staff proposed to increase the number of spaces as well as the number of covered spaces, but got feedback from TAC members that it would serve as a disincentive to development and was a fairness issue as well. Ms. Bierle asked how one would measure increased demand for covered bicycle parking. Ms. McKinney did not know. Ms. Bierle thought it would be nice if more such parking was available. Ms. McKinney said the commission could make that recom- mendation. Mr. Hledik referred to the 150’ right-of-way of Franklin Boulevard and recalled that the commission was promised a diagram to see how that impacted existing uses. Ms. McKinney recollected that staff had shared that with the commission in November and indicated she would send it out again. Mr. Hledik said that 10-1/2 foot wide travel lanes seemed skinny. Mr. McNeel acknowledged the standards for arterials was 11 feet but indicated the City had 10-1/2’ lane widths in other areas, such as on Agate Street, which was an arterial, and on segments of Hilyard and Patterson streets. Mr. Hledik expressed concern because of the fact that Franklin would still be a major street traveling through the area. He pointed out the sidewalks were wider than the street lanes. Mr. Hledik looked forward to public testimony on the topic. He asked if the proposed canopies were intended to cover the sidewalk on Franklin Boulevard. Ms. McKinney said that for a canopy to project over a right-of-way, one had to have an irrevocable permit. Where canopies were shown, they were depicted on private property. Mr. Hledik determined from Ms. McKinney that the right-of-way included the sidewalk. Mr. Hledik questioned how the reduction in parking standards compared to the standards recently adopted for the adjacent residential neighborhood to the south and west. He wanted to ensure that everyone had a full appreciation of what could happen so that issue did not come up again. Ms. McKinney did not characterize the neighbors as happy with the proposal but believed they were comfortable with the proposed parking reduction. There were still some concerns. She believed that if the City saw a lot of housing construction with inadequate parking the City would hear concerns expressed soon, and she hoped that the code would eb easy to review and amend. Ms. Harding indicated that there was no correlation with bedrooms in the MUC, so ratios would be significantly lower. Ms. Gardner suggested that the MUC differed from those areas in that it was located on an EmX route and there was an expectation residents would be less car-dependent. Mr. Hledik suggested students might opt to live in apartments in the MUC as well. Mr. Hledik asked if the City defined what a family was, as it spoke to the issue of the number of people living in a unit. He suggested staff might want to consider that issue. Mr. Mills agreed with Mr. Hledik that Franklin Boulevard was a major travel corridor with intermixed automobile and truck traffic. He was very concerned about the proposed lane reduction to 10-1/2 feet. Mr. Mills was also skeptical about the parking requirements given the high demand in the area. He suggested that it was wishful thinking to believe it would work. He pointed out the community did not know what it would actually experience when the arena was completed and more high-density residential development built. Mr. Randall commended the work of Ms. McKinney and expressed appreciation for the idea of a form based code as he believed it would help achieve more diversity in development. He thought the area in question a MINUTES—Eugene Planning Commission March 29, 2010 Page 5