CC Minutes - 09/09/02 Work Session

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

something similar to what Springfield had done, which did not involve a complex geographic adjustment but rather a credit for development in the downtown core. Mr. Carlson suggested that was reflected in Option 2. Mr. Meisner said that was true to some degree, but the option did not completely satisfy his concerns. Ms. Nathanson also was interested in analysis from the PDD staff. She said that in the past, people who lived in south or far west Eugene had to drive to Springfield or to north Eugene for home improvement products. The construction of a home improvement store in west Eugene reduced the impact on streets in other parts of town, because west Eugene residents could stay closer to home to get what they wanted. She suggested a variable for the council to consider was whether a comparable facility existed already. If such a business was the first one to be located in a particular place, it became an attractor. Subsequent developments helped split the traffic. Ms. Nathanson wanted to discuss that issue further. Ms. Nathanson noted that she lived in far west Eugene and had to drive a long way to reach a bakery as there was none in her part of town. If the council was trying to encourage development in downtown with an incentive of reduced SDCs and then slightly increase SDCs outside the core to maintain the principle of revenue-neutrality, as suggested by Mr. Rayor, Ms. Nathanson believed the council would still need to acknowledge that the cost of reducing the cost of development downtown was the increased impact on downtown streets and increased pressure for parking. There would be other costs to consider, such as the construction of parking garages. Mr. Farr said he wished the other councilors could come and live in west Eugene for a while and experience the relative lack of services. For example, there was no sit-down restaurant in his area. He had to drive for miles to have breakfast in a restaurant with his family. He believed that the geographic adjustment being discussed would make it more difficult for such developments to occur in the Bethel area. Mr. Farr said that City needed to accommodate a balance of development or development would occur elsewhere and grow toward Eugene. Mr. Farr said that the community continued to grow. He speculated that most of the councilors had arrived in Eugene after he arrived in 1973. He said that Eugene was the population center of the Southern Willamette Valley. Mr. Farr said that the council was purportedly talking about SDCs but he believed it was really talking about thwarting any kind of balanced development in the community. He reiterated his concern that development would grow into Eugene if Eugene did not accommodate balanced development, leading to the type of sprawl that residents of the Valley of the Sun in Arizona experienced. Mayor Torrey was not opposed to incentives for downtown development but was not supportive of a geographic adjustment. He noted that one of his first council votes was in support of the Winco at Barger and Beltline. He thought that establishment benefitted the traffic system by limiting the amount of miles nearby residents had to drive for groceries. Mayor Torrey questioned the difference between the grocery store at 18th Avenue and Pearl Street and the Albertsons Store off Royal Avenue. He asked why a store located on Royal Avenue would have to pay more than the store at 18th Avenue and Pearl Street when both establishments were serving Eugene residents who lived nearby. Mayor Torrey said that the result of such an adjustment would be to drive businesses away to other jurisdictions and Eugene would have no control over them or benefit from the development fees. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 9, 2002 Page 8 Work Session