Laserfiche WebLink
Oregon Research Institute project as an example of development that would have brought many younger <br />workers to the downtown area and perhaps given them an incentive to purchase a home in downtown. He <br />said that providing a subsidy for that project might have been a worthwhile investment in order to achieve <br />residential goals. <br /> <br />Mr. Korth said that critical mass involved creating sufficient appeal to provide the best chance of achieving <br />goals. He determined the appropriate level of commercialization by considering factors such as vacancy <br />rates and market trends. <br /> <br />Ms. Tate urged flexibility in type and use of space in development projects. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor felt that critical mass was when enough elements were brought together to be self-sustaining and <br />no longer require a subsidy. He said the question was what combination of elements was necessary to <br />achieve critical mass in downtown revitalization. <br /> <br />Mr. Prichard remarked that Eugene was the only government, office and financial center outside of Portland <br />and, except for the two blocks in question, there was already significant critical mass, which was a great <br />asset to revitalization efforts. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling thanked the panelists for their presentations. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon acknowledged the need for thoughtful discussion, but hoped the City would move forward <br />with downtown redevelopment in a timely manner. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark asked about the importance of predictability and political commitment to the achievement of <br />critical mass and how the City would facilitate that. <br /> <br />Mr. McLaughlan referred to a large community visioning process conducted in 1997-98 that addressed <br />public policies and investments. He said that 67 percent of respondents were in favor of public investment <br />and incentives were important for things like locating environmentally sensitive businesses in Eugene, <br />building affordable housing and increasing density in development patterns. He asked the council to keep in <br />mind that the community was supportive of its efforts. <br /> <br />Ms. Tate recognized the amount of time and energy that councilors gave on behalf of the public. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman thought there had been considerable progress and broad agreement on the appropriateness of <br />subsidies for downtown development. She said the issue was how to go about redevelopment to achieve the <br />best cost benefit for the public. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka thanked the panelists for helping to better inform the council and educate the public about <br />downtown redevelopment issues. He said his request for a process on downtown development included the <br />panel discussion with people knowledgeable about development. He said other elements of his request were <br />establishing a timeline to assure timely action on options, a financial analysis of the extent and benefit of <br />public and private investments, what type of public investments should be involved and how to educate and <br />involve the public in the process in a meaningful way. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy said the challenge was to determine when it was appropriate to involve the public in the <br />process. She thanked the panelists and councilors for participating in the workshop. She said it would be <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 16, 2007 Page 7 <br /> Workshop <br /> <br />