City Council Minutes 1998 09 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mayer stated that he can understand why some feel there is no parking problem. Council hears from downtown residents that there are employees parking in front of their homes all day long. They also hear that two-hour parking isn't available because people park there all day long, violating the limit. He expressed concern that the downtown infrastructure cannot support the current densities being proposed. He felt that a short-term moratorium would allow Council time to determine how much infrastructure would be required downtown and how much infrastructure the City can reasonably provide for additional development. He felt that would also provide clear guidelines for all future applicants to follow. He agreed with Sisk's proposed ordinance limiting downtown building heights. Keany stated that while he initially proposed the moratorium, he intended for it to be short-term, possibly for ninety days versus six months. He agreed with Lathrop that a quick decision is not the answer. He felt that the Downtown Design Guidelines, once adopted, might provide answers for some questions. He suggested Council pass a ninety-day moratorium to provide a deadline by which a decision might be reached. Davidson stated that downtown parking has been discussed for the past twenty years. David Stahl, City Administrator ten years ago, attempted to form a downtown special improvement district to address issues such as parking, but the business owners didn't participate. The City formed the Downtown Task Force approximately seven years ago. One of their objectives was to resolve the parking issue, possibly by forming a special tax district, but that did not materialize. He stated that, historically, the unwritten policy has been that the City would provide parking for retail customers of downtown in return for the sales tax they generate. There is also an unwritten policy that the City does not provide parking for its employees. He felt that the time has come for a written policy, because unwritten policies only work for so long. He stated that the City needs to participate in a solution to the parking problem, as their employees contribute to the parking problem. He would not support a moratorium. He stated that, legally, Council could apply the Commercial Design Guidelines to downtown; however, they have always stated that the guidelines do not apply to downtown. He stated that his proposed parking plan is intended to be a talking point only. He thought that after twenty years, if the downtown business owners were going to form a parking district to provide parking, they would have done so by now. He provided a brief explanation of his proposed parking plan. Mayer commended Davidson for his proposed parking plan. He agreed with Keany that a moratorium, if passed, should last no longer than ninety days. Mayer suggested removing the Special Review Uses from the moratorium and allowing for modest renovations. He agreed with the proposed ordinance limiting the height of downtown buildings to twenty-seven feet. He felt that if Council does not pass a moratorium, they are sending a message that they are prepared to accept further applications under the current rules. He felt that the various build ont scenarios indicate the impact of parking and traffic would not allow development to continue much longer. Keany stated that his intent was for a moratorium to be placed on expanded square footage and new construction only. He did not feel a short, ninety day moratorium would affect the momentum of downtown. He thought imposing impact fees should be explored.