Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e Ms. Ehrman pointed out that it is uncertain how many proposals will be <br /> received for site development. She expressed concern that broadening the <br /> committee membership and extending the time line might unnecessarily delay <br /> the entire process. <br /> Mr. Rutan suggested that the resulting proposals undergo some type of <br /> professional review. In response, Mr. Bowers indicated that the staff would <br /> provide this professional analysis. <br /> In considering the number and type of members which should constitute this <br /> committee, Mr. Gleason highlighted the importance of having a constituency of <br /> committee members who are familiar with and have some historical perspective <br /> on the original downtown development goals. <br /> Ms. Ehrman suggested that the council position on this committee be replaced <br /> with a member of the Retail Task Force. <br /> Mr. Boles pointed out that one of the major criticisms of this committee has <br /> been that the current makeup of committee members has an interest in downtown <br /> that would offer an inherent bias to the final decision. In order to account <br /> for this, he suggested that a Mayor-appointed community member be added to <br /> this committee. <br /> Mr. Holmer questioned the propriety of having Downtown Commission <br /> representation on this committee and suggested that a representative of the <br />e Friends of Downtown replace the Downtown Commission position. <br /> Mr. Rutan said that in light of the fact that the council is trying to <br /> promote high-density development on this site, the council should offer some <br /> weighted criteria which encourage the use of subsurface parking. <br /> After lengthy discussion, the council agreed that subsurface parking would be <br /> added to the list of secondary criteria and would be weighted two points. <br /> The council also agreed to reduce the weight of the housing component to five <br /> points. <br /> Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to extend the time <br /> line for the 8th and Willamette Request For Proposal to allow <br /> developers 60 days to respond to the Request For Proposal <br /> after its issuance. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. <br /> The council offered its general consensus that council representation on the <br /> RFP subcommittee would be replaced by a representative of Friends of <br /> Downtown. <br /> Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan to increase the current <br /> constituency of the committee to review the responses to the <br /> 8th and Willamette Request For Proposal by one member to <br /> include a Mayor-appointed citizen-at-large. The motion <br /> carried unanimously, 7:0. <br />e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 13, 1990 Page 4 <br />