CC Minutes - 11/27/06 Work Session

Home Browse Search

recommended motion but if at some point the City should actually acquire some of the parcels she favored acquiring those belonging to Connor and Woolley as they were the most neglected and degraded. She said those properties had a negative impact on the rest of downtown and dragged down the value of other properties. Ms. Bettman referred to five motions she intended to make, copies of which had been distributed to the council. She said the motions had been accepted by staff and hoped they could be incorporated in the main motion as friendly amendments. She said a definition of mixed-use development, modified to add the phrase “or blocks” to the end of the first sentence, was also included with the motions. She hoped to see some effort to relocate Scan Design included in the project, because even though the business did not own the property, it had been a solid presence in downtown. Mr. Pryor expressed his appreciation for staff’s proactive efforts. He observed that the project had been brought to the council at a point where sufficient information was available to evaluate it. He asked if the City was involved in development of the U.S. Bank building. Mr. Braud said it was as the URA owned that parcel. Mr. Pryor asked if the city was involved in development of the Aster Building. Mr. Braud said the City may have assisted with project financing. Mr. Pryor said his point was that downtown development needed help and the City was the logical partner for the private sector in terms of finance and regulatory matters. He said neither the private sector nor the City could develop downtown alone; a partnership was absolutely required. He saw the stirrings of a partnership capable of accomplishing great things, including replacing single-story buildings in the core of the downtown area with multi-story, multi-purpose development. He said the project had to be financially feasible. He fully supported moving forward and liked some of the suggested options. Mayor Piercy commented that there were many successful parts of downtown. She recalled directing staff to pursue possibilities for redevelopment along Broadway and was pleased they had moved forward. She was very hopeful about the prospects for a successful project. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct the Agency Director to: Issue a Re- quest for Qualification (RFQ) for the redevelopment of West Broadway based on the draft RFQ criteria included in this agenda item, with the responses to the RFQ to be brought back to the URA for consideration in early Spring 2007; include an additional criterion “Consistency with City Policies and Goals” in the RFQ evaluation criteria on council agenda packet pages 15 and 16; substitute the word “will” for the word “should” in sub- paragraphs 1 (Urban Design”, 2 (Active Uses) and 3 (Sustainable Development) in the RFQ Evaluation criteria on council agenda packet pages 15 and 16; add the phrase “and will contribute to an active, around-the-clock, 24-hour downtown” at the end of the first sentence in the paragraph under the heading “Active Uses” in the RFQ evaluation criteria on council agenda packet page 15; delete the words “and assistance” from subparagraph 2 under the paragraph captioned “Public Benefit” in the RFQ evaluation criteria on page 16 of the council agenda packet; and add the following definition of the term “mixed use” in the RFQ evaluation criteria: “Mixed use development refers to the practice of containing more than one type of use or activity in a building or set of buildings or blocks. The mix of uses can vary widely but typically includes a higher density combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional or other activities. The uses are typically in close proximity, pedestrian-friendly and compatible with multi-modal transportation.” MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 27, 2006 Page 6 Work Session