07/22/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. .' recent fluctuations in employment were reflected, but there was no time to modify or manipulate the projections in trying to complete the study by the designated time. Councilman Murray referred to the $70 figure for retail sales per square foot of i I space and asked if that was in line with present sales volumes in this area. I - Mr. LeBlanc answered that retail sales ratio to retail space in Eugene led to an $80 figure, but ,:they fel t in preparing the report that that was close enough to the $70 ,average used for the market area. Because of the dffficulty in getting actual figures with regard tO,sales and ~nventories it was impossible to arrive at an accura te figure. I !Mr. Murray then asked whether the study made any attempt to analyze how efficiently :existing retail space was used. And he said he was bothered to some degree that ,the report underscored the inevitability of a third shopping center not so much that 'it might or might not be true but because on the one hand it was recommending re- !vitalization of the downtown area and on the other side saying to the investor who might be considering a downtown location that there would sooner or later be.:an,: lopportunity for a third location. Mr. LeBlanc answered that there was no way of ;pinning down the efficiency of operations because the only way would be to review Itax reports and necause of usual uncooperative attitude of businessmen in that respect exact figures could not be obtained. with regard to the downtown area versus another outlying center, he said it should be recognized that suitable com- merqial space in the downtown was running out, but the space that was there could be accommodated even with the addition of another center. There was also the problem of dealing with large department stores or commercial investors - there , I was always a financial problem involved. So the report was not saying to let the ! .- downtown slide, but to recognize the pressures that would build up for an outlying I ,site. It was not inevitable, a third center; another outlying shopping center could I I ,be stopped, but that did not necessarily mean the focus would then be downtown. I Mr. Bl~!Jn{~y pointed out that the report indicated it would be six years or more be- I , ~fore the third center arrived. The report was quite supportive of giving downtown I , :every opportunity, he said, but that wquld only serve if the community realized ! I that everything could not be contained in downtown and Valley River. There was , that grace period to further develop the downtown but the community could not close I I its eyes to other possibilities. f Councilman Murray still thought the ,report was encouraging development downtown while "ho1ding out a plum" by saying a third center would develop. , Mr. LeBlanc answered that there was an excellent basis in Eugene for further developing the I : down town area and through land use policies not permit a third center. However, I I 'he said he knew of only about half a dozen companies nationwide capable of executing i la project of that size in the downtown area. 1 , I I , :Councilman Williams asked for a broader explanation of the recommended all-day parking~ 'tax, whether it was to include placing a tax on outlying industrial parking within ;1 the urban area as well as around the downtown area. Mr. Blayney replied that they I thought it should be considered for any area served by good transit facilities if e there was to be serious consideration of determining the auto',s role in this metro- politan area. He recognized the necessity for a public relations campaign if it was to be successful and suggested ways the general public could be convinced that use of transit facilities was for the public benefit. If a parking tax was instituted just in the downtown area, he said, it would be inviting investments in outlying : ,areas. In anl.l case, it would be i:!mi!t.ter,of det~rmining whether tha t,kindgf, po.1iq:yi ',was wanted to get 'people out or the~r cars. He confirmed Mr. Williams' assumpt~on ' ' ,that if such a parking tax was to be successful it would haye to involve all three 'governmental agencies - Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County. with regard to inquiry :regarding con~titutionality of the tax, Mr. Blayney said he could foresee no problems !but it had not been tested in the courts. Recent Supreme Court decision upheld a I 'parking tax in the East but it was not precisely the same as the one proposed here. I :In answer to Mr. Hansen, manager of Valley River Center, Mr. Blayney said'the tax jwould be considered as applying to use of parking stalls. He added that regulations proposing hourly parking were unpopular and resulted in considerable expense to the 'store owners. He said the critical transportation probl~s were caused by the store :employes, not the shoppers. Councilwoman Campbell wondered who would pay for the recommended widening of Belt ;Line Bridge or construction of a new one if and when anew shopping center did materialize. Mr. Blayney suggested exploration of creation of an assessment dis- e trict that would pass some of the costs of additional traffic capacities to Good- :pasture Island property owners. He said those property owners had been f6rtunate ;in receiving a generous share of windfalls - regional h:fghway, flood control - making 'a substantial inc[ease in property values so it seemed only fair they should pay a ,port;ion of cost; for access to it. ..- --.-.-.,. .... - u ~ ,.. ''''', -....- ~ ..' ~_ ,......-..'h _.___ 7/22/74 - 11 ,~~