CC Minutes - 11/27/07 URA Workshop

Home Browse Search

ing of how urban renewal worked or to true opposition to spending any money on the downtown project. He underscored that urban renewal funds did not take money from schools. Mr. Kemper stated that the original proposal for the Sears site for residential and live/work units as mixed use development would have been difficult to pull off on that site. He related that when the Request for Qualifica- tions (RFQ) came up for the Broadway area it presented the opportunity to create a whole district. KWG thought it could change that area of the downtown significantly, but to do so would take a project of a scale that would create a synergy between the participating entities and was planned to include an upscale neighborhood with hotel, restaurants, and residential units with retail below them among other things. He indicated that KWG Partners was willing to explore options, but it was difficult to be “excited” about moving forward given the results from the election. He said at this point KWG was reluctant to proceed with the Sears site because of the current housing market. Mr. Malsin, of Beam Development, thanked those present for inviting him. He said to a great degree he would mirror Mr. Kemper’s comments. He believed that the downtown needed “a shot in the arm in a considerable way.” He stated that whether the City redeveloped in a piecemeal fashion or something else, the redevelopment needed the support of the community or it would not work. He attributed their confusion to not knowing the reason the ballot measure had not passed. He was uncertain whether it was too big or whether citizens just did not want it to happen. He averred that taking no action would be the wrong thing to do. He said if there were to be a vital downtown the City would have to make a commitment to it; the risk could not be mitigated by inaction. He indicated that Beam Development was still interested in discussions. He agreed with Mr. Kemper that the market had changed. Mayor Piercy thanked Mr. Kemper and Mr. Malsin for coming. Ms. Bettman attributed the failure of the ballot measure to “sticker shock.” She believed the actual financing mechanism was flawed. She felt the City was out of touch with the general population. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager/Agency Director to bring back to the City Council/Urban Renewal Agency for consideration at the December 10, 2007 work session, a proposal(s) that would be consistent with provisions of Option 2 offered by staff/Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee at the April 25, 2007 council work ses- sion as follows: Option 2 engages Beam to proceed with “renovation of the Center Court building and the Washburne building and a yet-to-be-defined level of new construction on the adjacent vacant land;” and, includes that the City Council/Urban Renewal Agency “would also continue to th move forward with the TK Partners project as previously selected on the 10 and Charnelton Request for Proposals process” (consisting of 106 “homes” on the Sears pit site). This motion assumed a proposal(s) coming back to the council would define the use and inten- sity for the Aster Pit development; and maintain Beam and Kemper as separate entities. Ms. Bettman acknowledged Mr. Pryor’s and Mr. Zelenka’s opposition to taking action at the present workshop. She said the reason she wanted to move forward was that Mr. Pryor and Mr. Zelenka had not asked for a postponement of action until they had learned that she would be placing the motion on the table. She affirmed that it was the councilors’ prerogative to request that action be delayed, but she declared that in this case it was important to take the first step. Mayor Piercy verified that Mr. Zelenka and Mr. Pryor had requested that no motions be made at the present meeting. MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 2 Workshop