06/25/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Park Work Program as distributed if it had some background on the conference and the various projects being performed throughout the United States. He stated - that Richard Hersch and Dan Williams of the University of Oregon, John Porter of the Eugene Development Department, and two Oregon Pacific representatives had also attended the conference. Addressing the present projects being proposed, Mr. Rutan stated that the key concepts were: 1. Each project must be individually designed and organized. 2. Participating parties must set project objectives. 3. Expert advice must be obtained to properly develop the project. 4. No pure research parks existed in the United States; all had some mixed use. 5. Once the project has been defined, roles must be set for full-time organization staff. Mr. Rutan said the work of the City of Eugene, the University of Oregon, and the community has been accurate in the direction of the Riverfront Park project. He said he heard numerous comments reflecting the appropriateness of the project for marketing Eugene based on the presence of the factors identified by developers as necessary for business sitings. Mr. Rutan stated that staff had developed and presented the proposed Riverfront Park Work Program to the Planning Commission as directed by the council. He felt that the commission should not take action on the work program until he had the opportunity to discuss the program with representatives of the University of Oregon. He stated that he has discussed the program with Dr. Hersch who has supervised the University staff in making recommendations on who will be in the authoritative position regarding the research park, establishing a core group, developing a consensus among the e faculty and administration, and identifying internal processes and key decision- makers. Mr. Rutan asked the council to review the proposed work program as revised subsequent to its presentation to the Planning Commission. He added that the program has been reviewed by Dr. Hersch and the Citizen Involvement Committee. Referring to Item A(3) on Page 3 of the June 15, 1984, Riverfront Work Program and Citizen Involvment Program, he said University personnel felt that different people would be needed throughout the project to address various issues. While he stated that the proposed work program had not been formally approved by the Planning Commission, he said the commission looked to him as the expert based on hi s involvement wi th the project. He asked the council to take action on the program at its June 27 meeting, adding that the University was ready to proceed with the project. He stated that Susan Brody and Jim Farah of the Planning Department were available to answer any questions of the council. Councilor Holmer asked if it would be appropriate to add a representative of the banking or capital formation interests to the Riverfront Study Task Force. Mr. Rutan responded that it would be appropriate at some point but that it was an issue of size. He explained that capital formation would be a functional issue rather than a structural issue if the Univerity provided the land for the project, that land to represent the initial project capital. Councilor Holmer asked if the Southern Pacific Corporation in the Technical Advisory Group would be the only transportation interests represented. Mr. Rutan sta ted tha t the corporation would be involved in a technical standpoint. He added that the Southern Pacific Corporation had been very aggressive in developing its properties and had a vast amount of experience in the transportation area. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 25, 1984 Page 11