07/08/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

J Mr. Sande, .with regard to tax increment funding, noted that those funds were now tied . up in the parking structures. Mr, Keyser was optimistic that funding could be worked out for the recommended program, so much so that he said he would recommend proceed- e ing with the necessary action to implement such a program. ,~ Counclman M~rray asked for a comparison between dealing with a developer on commercial . expansion and the approach of establishing some kind of local development corporation, a combination of public and private interests. Me. Keyser answered that to make a center competitive it would. be necessary to have at least three major department stores _ some of which may already be in Eugene. It would also be necessary, to be competitive, he said, that those three stores be put into a center~type configuration a very ex- pensive and complex project. Because of that, he said, there were a limited number of developers, nationwide, with the ability and expertise to accomplish that type of project. It would still be a public/private partnership, but the odds were that a developer would have to be brought in. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Hamel to refer to the Planning Commission for hearing and subsequent recommendation to the Council the westside refine- ment studies, with referral also to the public for input from-those who testified at this hearing. Councilman Murray asked if there was a time element involved. Mr. Saul noted a meeting scheduled with property owners and tenants in the Lincoln School area on July 28 with regard to the westside refinement plan. He thought the first major public hearing would be at a special meeting of the Planning Commission in mid- or late August. Councilman Haws asked whether there would be public hearings before the Renewal Board e with regard to the Keyser study (commissioned by the Agency). Mr. Kupper explained '>... that there was no need for hearing before the Agency Board unless the plan was changed. If staff recommended expansion of the renewal project area, constituting amendment, he said, there would be a public hearing; if staff recommendation says expansion of the retail area is not to be pursued, there would be no amendment and no need for public hearing. In further response to Mr. Haws, Mr. Kupper said that if there was amendment and a public hearing before the Agency Board, then the issue would come back to the Council, as well as to the Planning Commission, for review of that amendment. Rollcall. vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned. ~. Charles T. Henry) ~ City Manager - .-- 7/8/76 - 6 3l.f S