CC Minutes - 04/13/98 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regarding the downtown district, Mr. Drysdale agreed with Arthur Shapiro and William Eaton about tax increment financing and maintained that the district was diverting dollars away from other public priorities to fund things that "the public does not generally support." He also agreed with Molly Stafford and others who argued for a new library using tax increment financing as envisioned in Option B. While he agreed with those who said that urban renewal was a valuable tool, Mr. Drysdale maintained that it had been misused in 30 years of practice. The heart of the City had been decimated by urban renewal David Hauser, 2161 Elk Horn Drive, represented the Chamber of Commerce. The chamber supported continuation of both urban renewal districts. He said that contrary to the testimony offered to the council, there was considerable public support for urban renewal as demonstrated by a random sample survey conducted by the chamber. He said that additionally, residents care deeply about the downtown; when polled, 79 percent of respondents agreed downtown was a unique neighborhood that should be supported by the entire community. Residents indicated that they supported a downtown library, transportation projects such as opening streets, housing, and the renovation of older properties. Mr. Hauser said that with respect to community development, every discussion he had participated in had included the concepts of compact urban growth, transit-oriented development, and vital commercial districts. He said that urban renewal could be an effective tool in realizing those planning objectives. For instance, the City could be an effective player in shaping the development of downtown using urban renewal. Mr. Hauser said that urban renewal should be changed in terms of administration, oversight, and application to make it more effective as a tool in the future. Regarding the riverfront district, Mr. Hauser noted the chamber's support for Option F. Regarding the downtown district, Mr. Hauser noted the chamber's support for Option O Mike Schwartz, 2390 Lariat Drive, identified himself as a former member of the Downtown Commission, Eugene Renewal Agency, and Eugene Downtown Association and urged the council to support Option O He agreed with those who said that there was much remaining to be done downtown. Mr. Schwartz said that the initial intent of the district was to strengthen economic conditions downtown, and to improve its importance to the region and enhance its role as a central location for public and private development and investment. He said that many improvements downtown were still needed and urban renewal was the most appropriate tool to fund those costs. Mr. Schwartz suggested that urban renewal could be used to enhance downtown to attract a large retailer or locate a convention center downtown. He asked the council to retain urban renewal. Mr. Schwartz said that a furniture store should not be the largest retailer in downtown Eugene. Ellen Maddox, 2570 Van Ness Street, asked the council to adopt Option O She supported the use of urban renewal to fund a new library and encouraged the council to take leadership and avoid referring a measure to the voters. She said that downtown was the heart of the city and Eugene needed effective tools such as urban renewal to preserve downtown as a vital place. She said that she was working on a committee to locate more Iow-income housing downtown, and that might require more levels on the Pearl Street garage, a cost that could be defrayed by urban renewal funds. Paul Prensky, 933 East 29th Avenue, said that while he believed that urban renewal was anti- democratic and its use dictated by commissions and private interests, he wanted a new library to MINUTES-Eugene City Council April 13, 1998 Page 10 7:30 p.m.