07/22/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'...... Lloyd LeBlanc of LeBlanc and Company, economists working on the study with Livings.ton & : Blayney, was introduced, and he explained commercial development projections covered ; in;t.he third section of the report. He pointed out the difficulty, of discerni'ng i clearly a pattern of commercial development because of rise in incomes, entry of ~ : more people into the labor force, increased household earning power, gain in living, ~ standard. The commercial investment sector, he said, reacted to a series of ' interrelated factors with an eye to profit and ways to make money and in anticipa- tion of future possibilities, so that any attempt to pin down commercial potential was more often than notvieWsd'from the investors' standpoint rather than from that of the planners and_persons outside retailing activities. He said that ,the economic decisions in this report were made - rather quickly because of the time factor - on the basis o,f figures available. Mr. LeBlanc-'-went"on to explain_the-reason~~f.or using the figures they did in making their calculations of retail development potential, starting with'LCOG population growth projections and estimating average household generated income to 1990 based on estimated 1972 income levels. Two calculations were made using the five-count~market area and reasonable expectations in view of the inflationary trend to give high and low points on which to base translation from gross wages to retail purchasing, and they were.done_in a manner which would allow new projections over a period of time. Assigning a 55/60% portion of the five-county market area to the Eugene/Springfield area and defining clearcut cate- gories of retail trade -takinginto account variable conversion factors -~resulted in a sales volume figure of $70 per square foot of floor space to determine the commercial potential to 1990. That potential, he said, would .in.J3ffect amount to doubling the amount of present retail space, if projections used hold true and the inflationary trend moderated slightly, which in turn would anticipate a third shop- ~ ping center in a l5-year period. He noted the possible anticipation that this ~ :market area could support two additional centers, but he felt investors would not ~ be inclined to~_specul-ate to that extent, looking instead to about half the potential. So hetelt/it reasonable that the community consider that there would be a period of""Bme when pressure was exerted for one additional outlying shopping center plus possibility of additional space to induce location of other commercial interests to the area. with regard to the "scenarios" (maximum development downtown, maximum development on Goodpasture Island, or assuming development of a third regional shop- ping center at some other location), Mr. LeBlanc sa~d the existing full-fledged shopping center and its remaining residential, department store, and support services potential really posed a question with regard to the downtown area. However, they ,- felt that even if another regional center was proposed there was potential commercial use for up to an additional 500,000 square feet of retail space. That space could be provided, he said, by either rebuilding existing stores or adding at least one or two major stores to attract investors to the downtown area. All in all, he felt, the report pointed out the=possible commercial pressures-and gave enough informat!on to gd ahead on the./xeeommenaations "presen.ted. ~- ~~ ~,~. In response to Mr. Blayney's request to comment on the 'feasibility of c;:mcentrating commercial activity in the downtown and Valley River where it was already committed if a third center was not wanted, Mr. LeBlanc stated that one way of looking at it, was simply not to accept a third center which immediately raised the question of ~~ whether existing retail capacity would absorb the anticipated extra dollars; he thought it would be difficult for the investment community to resist creation of new retail opportunities. Also, it was not just a matter of land use changes, it r altj!o, involved emplol.lment changes L.--J::E:?vem1.~ cl1ang~!?.l...J.Q9_a).g8Yf;!1;nr.nent.' s ou'!=lqok be.__ I cause of added money on the tax roles (through new developll!e!1tL. He sa~d there was no easy answer because it wasn't simply a matter of committing cpmmercial potential, ,other factors had to be considered such as spendable income and needs of the people to be satisfied without upsetting the economy. It would not be realistic; he said to locate all commercial activities at one site; pressures from the crunmunity, local government, and investors would be severe should develop~ ment of commercial activities at other sites not be permitted. Alan Maxwell, Planning Commission member, noted that projections were.,made=on_ the ~. bases of 101" inflation and moderate inflation. He wondered about the effect of a high inflation rate. Mr. LeBlanc answered that a high inflationary trend was in existence at this time, and that he thought that another year or 18 months would " / ' 'see a wage demand cycle resul ting in a good percentage of real dollars consumed ;by inflation. But it must be remembered, he said, that even with zero income :growth there would still be additional households coming into the market area ;which added at present dollar volume would still mean growth of purchasing power. Councilman Murray referred to tables in the study reflecting projected increases of .~ 73.5% in educational employment and 34.4% in manufacturing employment and questioned ,i the validity of those figures in view of the University of Oregon's being the ,largest educational institution in the area'and having student enrollment ceiling; and the general decline in school-age population. Mr. LeBlanc answered that they asked the same questions. They used available LCOG figures and were not sure that 7/22/74 - 10 2.~~