CC Minutes - 04/23/12 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

consistent with the Downtown Plan, Growth Management Policies, and Envision Eugene. He suggested that if the community wanted students from the UO to stay in Eugene and contribute, it must find ways for those students to connect with residents outside of campus. He also suggested that students living downtown would be more willing to support the efforts of local nonprofits. Dennis Casady, Ward 2, opposed the MUPTE application because the development was geared toward student residents and because he feared the project owner would sell the project. He said if the company could not build at a return rate of 9 percent it should not be build the project. Paul Cauthorn, Ward 2, opposed the proposed development and the MUPTE application because the project would bring many students downtown. He shared an unpleasant experience he recently had at a downtown restaurant with drunken students. He recommended the City seek another project or wait for a project that was a better fit. Paul Redhead, Ward 5, Eugene Hotel Retirement Center, supported the proposed project and MUPTE application and did not anticipate the project would have any negative impact on the residents of his complex. He pointed out the center had its taxes frozen for the first 15 years of its existence and its conversion from a hotel to a retirement center funded with the assistance of State of Oregon revenue bonds at a low entrance rate. Without those factors, the center would not exist and would have either been torn down or left derelict. He believed the project would maximize the value of the parcel and result in a revenue windfall for Eugene. Bill Sokol, Ward 1, supported the proposed development as a positive thing for the community and downtown. He referred to an article about the project in the April 18 edition of The Register -Guard by David Funk and Harriett Cherry and hoped all those present had a chance to read it. He asked that the council not change the MUPTE rules in the middle of project development. Misha Seymour, Ward 1, opposed the Capstone project. He averred that all those who supported the proposal were impelled by greed. He called the MUPTE tax breaks for the fat cats. He advocated for housing for the homeless and the poor. Barbara Goldberg, Ward 1, objected to the proposed MUPTE application. She questioned why students were being placed next to senior citizens. She asked how the council would like to live next to so many college students. She did not think the project could be considered a success if it degraded the quality of life of Olive Plaza residents. Olive Plaza residents deserved peace of mind as they aged. John Holtz, Ward 8, supported the proposed development and MUPTE application because he believed students living in the core would help existing businesses and bring more business opportunities. Hollie Hawes, Springfield, supported the proposed development and the MUPTE application. Growth demanded development, and it often required assistance for development to occur. Limiting development would limit the creation of new jobs and housing. She asked the council to support the MUPTE application. Michael Gannon, Ward 7, was perplexed by the struggle in a wealthy society like Eugene's to provide adequate care for youth. He did not think any of the students he knew would be able to afford to live in the project. He opposed the MUPTE application because it would take away money from education. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. She thanked those who testified for expressing their views. MINUTES— Eugene City Council April 23, 2012 Page 10 Regular Meeting