Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> -- <br />e the parcel is $973,000. He indicated that the entire parcel will be made <br /> available for purchase, but a buyer will have the opportunity to purchase <br /> only part, if so desired. It is also possible that a portion may be retained <br /> for a public parking structure. <br /> Mr. Bowers pointed out that some of the documents referred to within the RFP <br /> are still in draft form but are treated as final in anticipation of their <br /> finalization. <br /> Mr. Bowers said that the Downtown Commission has offered its unanimous <br /> approval of the RFP, and has suggested that a subcommittee be formed to <br /> review the resulting proposals. It has been suggested that the committee be <br /> composed of seven members representing various constituencies: Downtown <br /> Commission, Planning Commission, City Council, Downtown Eugene, Inc., Chamber <br /> of Commerce, and two citizens-at-large positions, one from the Neighborhood <br /> leaders Council and one the league of Women Voters. The Downtown Commission <br /> has asked for council input on the proposed composition. <br /> Ms. Ehrman noted that it should be indicated in the proposal that the <br /> documents to which it refers are draft policies and have not been finalized. <br /> Regarding the proposed formation of a committee to review the proposal, Mr. <br /> Holmer expressed concern that because the final proposal is subject to <br /> council review, the council should not have representation on this committee. <br /> He also recommended that citizen-at-large representation currently proposed <br /> for this committee be broadened. <br />e Mr. Rutan disagreed with Mr. Holmer on whether the council should have <br /> representation on the proposal review committee. He felt that because of the <br /> location of this parcel and its resulting impact on future development <br /> downtown, it was necessary for the council to take part in RFP review. <br /> Mr. Rutan also pointed out that the council should not direct the specific <br /> type of development which will occur on this site. For this reason, he <br /> suggested that page one of the draft RFP clarify that "design proposals are <br /> encouraged, but not required to contain a housing component." <br /> Mr. Boles suggested that the RFP time line be extended until September to <br /> allow for ample time for design development and enough time to broaden the <br /> committee base of participation. <br /> Mr. Green agreed with Mr. Holmer that the council should not have <br /> representation on the review committee. <br /> Mr. Boles disagreed with Mr. Holmer about whether the council should be <br /> allowed committee representation. In allowing council representation on the <br /> committee, a council member would be able to provide an historical <br /> perspective on the need for mixed-use planning. <br /> Mr. Bennett highlighted the importance of having at least one member on the <br /> committee who thoroughly understands the Retail Task Force1s Tenant Mix Plan. <br />e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 13, 1990 Page 3 <br />