CC Minutes - 08/09/06 Workshop - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Kelly agreed that the current City Hall site could be worth more as bare ground, but the intent of the council was to determine if the building had community value as a long-standing downtown structure. He said the issue was not economic but rather community value and there should be some type of outreach to private for-profit and nonprofit organizations, such as a request for interest (RFI), to determine if there would be any interest should the building become available. He would not be willing to support the current City Hall site as the new City Hall site without some feedback from the community. Ms. Taylor declared that the current City Hall building had won prizes when it was built and was considered one of the best buildings in the country. She said the council should be cautious about demolishing the building and later regretting it. Consultant Ellen Teninty said use of the current building and its value to the community would be discussed in more detail later in the meeting. City Manager Taylor agreed that an assessment of community value could be done; however, he felt that it could be difficult for organizations to respond to an RFI without more information about the site and its potential use. Mr. Kelly asked that community feedback be made available by the council’s September 20, 2006, meeting, particularly if the expectation was that a decision would be made about whether the current site would be selected as one of the two sites for further analysis. Mr. Papé wanted clarification about the type of information on the current site’s community value that would satisfy other councilors. He was uncertain that issuing an RFI to for-profit and nonprofit organiza- tions would be effective. Ms. Ortiz echoed Mr. Kelly’s remarks about community value, but said she would also need information about the monetary value. Mr. Penwell said that a more formal analysis would provide that information for the September 20 meeting. Ms. Ortiz also requested seismic information on the current building. Criteria Discussion Mr. Macy demonstrated the consequences of applying evaluation criteria to various sites and the design teams’ recommendations with regard to eliminating some sites from further consideration because of factors such as flood plain, adjacency to or across railroad tracks, remoteness from the downtown core and incompatibility with sustainable design principles. In response to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Hacker explained the challenges of designing to LEED standards for a building facing south and north on its long facades and the importance of orientation as a consideration in site choice. Mr. Macy also pointed out sites that could be developed for commercial use to reinforce Broadway as a commercial street. Ms. Teninty asked for further discussion and direction on the following evaluation criteria: ? Consideration of sites prime for private development ? Affirmation of downtown planning policies and application to site selection MINUTES—Eugene City Council August 9, 2006 Page 4 Work Shop