New Search
* Priority for public investment given to housing, parks/public open space <br /> and ped/transit infrastructure improvements, NOT for parking nor to guar- <br /> antee areturn on an investment of a private developer. <br /> And most importantly: showing our community that we can spend tax- . <br /> payer money responsibly; with genuine public value for public subsidies. <br /> 6) IN SUMMARY <br /> Most Eugeneans share CPA's excitement about downtown. We have vary- ` <br /> ing perspectives about the value of an incremental approach that doesn't <br /> displace successful businesses and non-profits, and the value of insuring <br /> little risk for the developer and significant risk for our community's public <br /> dollars. <br /> Some say: be careful with public money, accrue quantifiable public ameni- <br /> ties as part of any public-private relationship. Some say: "just do some- <br /> thing" downtown, let the developers design our downtown; and don't do <br /> anything to scare them off. <br /> Given the integrity and talent brought to the table, I believed the Commit- <br /> tee could come to find balance with the specificity the public needs for a <br /> return on their tax dollars, and the flexibility a designer needs to mesh a <br /> myriad of values and design elements. <br /> Sadly, our Committee collectively failed in this effort. We failed to address <br /> the concerns and values of the broader public, but instead adhered to the <br /> mantra "keep recommendations vague, don't upset the developer': <br /> Rob Handy <br /> d <br /> <br /> 4 ~ Appendices <br /> <br />