11-21-16 City Council Minutes
City of Eugene
11-21-16 City Council Minutes
1/3/2017 3:44:45 PM
1/3/2017 3:44:44 PM
City Council Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
All rights reserved.
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View plain text
Eventually the goal is to have a City Hallwhere the public can engage servicesin one <br />location. <br />People want a building that is functional; giving people value for their tax dollars. <br />Common theme is to have all services in one area; EWEB building needs a seismic <br />study. <br />Important to make the right decision that reflects shared values. <br />Acomparison of the options to the degree possible is needed. <br />Need to be forward thinking; everyone talks about the river and downtown <br />development is movingtowards it. <br />Stewardship is understandingneeds versuswants; need to recognize what isneeded. <br />Stewardship values were abandoned when the old City Hallwas demolished. <br />EWEB is in the wrong place and not accessible; need to be close to the County. <br />It is foolish tospend an enormous amount on a building that may be uselessafter an <br />earthquake. <br />Downtown is downtown; City government moving to the river is a concern. <br />All options get us a consolidated City Hall; EWEB is isolated from downtown. <br />Acost per square foot forall optionsis needed. <br />A cost estimatefor seismic upgrades of 1.25 and 1.5 is needed <br />MOTION AND VOTE: <br />Councilor Evans, seconded by Councilor Zelenka, movedto <br />direct the City Managerto cost out an EWEB option using as close to an apples to apples <br />PASSED 7:1, <br />comparison with respect to the values as is practicable. Councilor Taylor <br />opposed. <br />Council discussion item #3 –For all scenarios (A,B,C and EWEB) how much <br />information does Council need on Phase 2 possibilities in order to make Phase 1 <br />decision? <br />Need accurate comparisons for Phase 2; EWEB would save a lot on a Phase 2. <br />Building a Phase 2 may never happen; not important on where we go for Phase 2. <br />Little confidence that voters would support any measure for City hall funding. <br />Need to answer the question of where funds for construction of City Hall will come <br />from. <br />Conversations about Phase 2 should inform decision,not drive it. <br />This is not a building for City Council, but for the community. <br />3.COUNCIL AGENDA ACTIONS <br />MOTION AND VOTE: <br />Councilor Evans, seconded by Councilor Zelenka, moved to <br />th <br />motion regarding next stepson South <br />replace the deadlines identified in the October 10 <br />st <br />Willamette as follows:staff proposal will be due January 312017, with a Council work <br />PASSED 8:0 <br />session to follow,ideally in February. <br />MOTION AND VOTE: <br />Councilor Syrett, seconded by Councilor Zelenka, moved to <br />directthe City Manager to prepare anordinance to bring back to Council before Council <br />goes on break that would exempt the business on River Road from the provisions related <br />PASSED 8:0 <br />to the 1,000 foot buffer. <br />MINUTES –Eugene City CouncilNovember 21, 2016Page 2 <br />Work Session <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.