03/01/1989 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Ms. Bascom expressed her concern with the implication that the City will be involved in weighting proposals, noting that she felt that the council.s original intent had been to avoid involvement in the redevelopment process. She felt that such an evaluation process would involve a lengthy selection process. Mr. Bennett expressed his appreciation for committee members' work. He noted his concerns with the extended time frame for RFP distribution and selection, with minimizing the City's costs, with the continuing deterioration of the building, and with reported trespassing within the building. He said he would prefer that an initial review occur within 60 to 90 days. He stated his opinion that several additional months would not be sufficient for inexperi- enced developers to acquire expertise to manage a development of this magni- tude. He also felt that RFP review should be done by councilor by a commit- tee of the council. He felt that strong development proposals with merit usually require quick responses. He suggested that if no proposals are received within a relatively short period of time, council should reconsider the issue. Mr. Boles shared Mr. Bennett's concern with the extended time frame and expressed his preference for a shortened time frame. He said he had spoken with several architects who have worked with community groups on proposals such as this. They had suggested that four months is a reasonable period of time. He added that the process might be shortened further if council were to make the selection. Mr. Rutan said that he had initially supported the City's investment in Lincoln School because he had thought the City was acquiring park space. He said he had understood that feasibility of development would be considered by the advisory committee. He stated his concern that the process is costing more money and taking more time than he had originally envisioned. He sug- gested that councilors need to carefully consider spending priorities before allocating any more resources to Lincoln School. He recommended that the RFP specifically state that: 1) the City will have no financial involvement in redevelopment of the building; and 2) that the RFP will be distributed for a period of 120 days, followed by City Council review within two weeks of the end of this period. Ms. Bascom shared other councilors. concern with added expense and also supported a condensed time line of 60 to 90 days for the RFP process. She also wanted to know if there might be a way to have public involvement in a council review of proposals, and she requested clarification on the issue of selection. Ms. Ehrman said she felt selection should be a council decision since coun- cilors have been making decisions on this issue all along. She also support- ed a shortened time frame for the selection process. She affirmed Develop- ment Department staff's responsible handling of the RFP development process. Mr. Gleason commended the committee's work in developing the RFP. He expressed his opinion that if the council decides it wants the building MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 1, 1989 Page 7