Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Papé requested clarification about the investment the City had made in the Sears site. Mr. Braud noted <br />the original cost of the site, which was one-third of a larger parcel that cost $900,000. The City spent <br />approximately $200,000 to demolish the building. The most recent appraisal valued the land at approxi- <br />mately $30 per square foot. Mr. Papé hoped the City was able to recover its costs and the value of money <br />over time to reach the appraised price. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman agreed the property in question was a key piece of property in downtown and she hoped the <br />City would meet multiple objectives through the development that occurred on the site. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman called for a professional appraisal of the site and said in the meantime staff could work on <br />criteria. She agreed a Planning Commission review of the criteria was a good idea. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asked how another site could work for ORI downtown if the site in question did not work. Mr. <br />Braud said the cost of the proposed building was the major issue facing ORI. City Manager Taylor pointed <br />out that ORI could be among those parties responding to the new RFP. He reminded the council that the <br />City worked a long time with ORI and granted four extensions to the purchase agreement while ORI sought <br />financing. Because of the limited time frame for financing and the nature of the building contemplated, ORI <br />decided against proceeding with the project at this time. Mr. Braud confirmed that ORI had not indicated it <br />was ready to proceed. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said there was no emergency or need to move forward with haste. She thought the City should <br />position itself to get the maximum number of options given the magnitude of the development that was <br />expected to occur. She thought that taking more time would result in a better process. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz asked what happened to the earnest money provided by ORI. City Manager Taylor indicated it <br />would go to the Urban Renewal Agency (URA). Ms. Ortiz pointed out that ORI was a nonprofit agency <br />and given the expected purchase price, she thought the City should refund the money if possible. Mr. Klein <br />said that under the legal agreement between ORI and the City, that was not possible. The council would <br />have to articulate a public purpose for returning the money, such as ORI locating in a downtown location. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling asked if the City had plans to deal with the water that accumulated on the Sears site. Mr. Braud <br />indicated it was in the process of being drained. Mr. Poling asked if the earnest money could offset those <br />costs. Mr. Klein said the money was going to the URA as revenue and thus could be considered a source of <br />funding for that activitiy. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé agreed with the need for a professional appraiser. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé pointed out to those who wanted to see ORI on the site that ORI could respond to a new RFP, and <br />the City could continue to work with it as it would work with other parties who wanted to locate in <br />downtown. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé respectfully disagreed with Ms. Ortiz about refunding the earnest money to ORI, pointing out that <br />PeaceHealth was a nonprofit as well, but the council would be unlikely to grant it such a refund. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if the City could recover the cost of assisting ORI over the past three years by tapping some <br />of the earnest money. Mr. Klein indicated he would need to do further research and would provide a <br />memorandum to the council. Mr. Papé thought it worthwhile to attempt to recover those costs <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 12, 2006 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />