Laserfiche WebLink
Denny Braud, Senior Development Analyst from the Planning and Development Department, reviewed the <br />three proposals that had come in response to the Request for Proposals (RFP) the City issued for the site on <br />th <br />the corner of 10 Avenue and Charnelton Street. He noted that the RFPs had gone through two levels of <br />review: a staff review and a review conducted by the Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee (ERAC). <br />He noted that the ERAC had been expanded by three people for this specific purpose, in order to bring in <br />additional expertise in the areas of financing, sustainability, and multi-unit housing development. <br /> <br />Regarding the Beam Development proposal, Mr. Braud stated that it was contingent upon acquisition of the <br />adjacent privately owned property as the proposal was for a full-block development. <br /> <br />Mr. Braud said the Sockeye Development proposal responded to the RFP objectives well, but included a <br />$3.36 million funding shortfall. He commented that given Sockeye’s previous development projects, the <br />City would expect a project done by them to be of very high quality. Nonetheless, the level of subsidy <br />requested was high. <br /> <br />Mr. Braud highlighted the proposal from the TK Partners (Tom Kemper group). He averred that the <br />proposed housing density could support the Great Street vision for Broadway. <br /> <br />Mr. Braud conveyed staff’s support for the TK Partners proposal. He reported that the proposal had also <br />garnered nearly unanimous support from the ERAC. He noted that staff conducted due diligence on the <br />proposal and had spoken with other cities in which Kemper has worked, who gave favorable feedback <br />regarding Kemper’s work. Additionally, he said Kemper’s connection with Scanlan Kemper Bard, a major <br />real estate investment firm in Portland, brought a lot of credibility to Kemper’s financing plan. Staff sought <br />direction to enter into an exclusive negotiating period of approximately 90 days with Kemper, after which <br />terms would come back before the council for approval. Those terms included purchase price, timeliness, <br />and additional detail regarding the overall development concept. <br /> <br />Mr. Klein clarified that if a council discussion was related to giving specific direction as to what the <br />negotiations should be with an entity, the council could choose to go into an executive session, but if the <br />question was related to gaining more information about each of the proposals and/or choosing which one to <br />pursue, an executive session should not be called. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé expressed his preference for holding an executive session for a discussion of strategy with the City <br />Manager. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Braud stated that the original offer for the property from <br />Oregon Research Institute (ORI) was $400,000. Ms. Taylor observed that the current offer, $192,000, was <br />much less than that. Mr. Braud cautioned the council that initiating negotiations did not indicate an <br />acceptance of that purchase price. He stressed that this was one of the “deal points” that would be <br />negotiated over the 90-day period. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor agreed that the proposal from TK Partners was the best of the three received, though she was <br />not prepared to act on it at the present meeting. She did not believe the downtown area needed any more <br />retail space. She opined that if the City gave a subsidy it should get something in return. She suggested that <br />some of the space could be used for a theater, noting that one of the small local theaters was looking for a <br />new space. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 11, 2006 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />