Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> . <br /> ( . <br /> Mr. Ball said that good faith from both parties was needed in a public-private <br /> e partnership. He agreed that the City should retain the lesson learned from its <br /> dealings with this developer in its "institutional memory". He fe lt th at the <br /> City needed to make it clear that the tactic of building something and then <br /> waiting to see if the City would challenge it was not acceptable. He suggested <br /> that the council delay a decision on the matter pending a report from staff on <br /> the legal options available. He noted that the City had a reputation with area <br /> builders as being rigorous in enforcement of construction codes. He felt it was <br /> important for the staff to make clear to the public that this was a matter of <br /> design enforcement not of construction code enforcement. <br /> Mr. Lindberg discussed the possiblity of separating the question of remuneration <br /> for administrative costs from consideration of the design issue. Mr. Gleason <br /> said that the City's leverage in discussing remuneration would be gone if the <br /> council approved the design modifications. Mr. Tharp suggested that the council <br /> could make its approval contingent on remuneration. Mr. Gleason said it would <br /> be possible for the council to instruct the City Attorney to examine the options <br /> for litigation with the anticipation that the council would proceed with this <br /> step unless a negotiated settlement is reached in the inte~im. <br /> Councilor Wooten said this matter was of great concern to her. She felt the <br /> builders had taken liberties with the opportunity given them to build in downtown <br /> Eugene. <br /> Councilor Hamel said he was not interested in delaying the decision on this <br /> matter. He felt the council should pass Mr. Obie's motion,with an amendment <br /> e indicating that the developer should compensate the' City for the difference <br /> between cost of the copper sheathing and the lower cost of the baked enamel and <br /> for added administrative costs. <br /> Councilor Schue also felt that, while it was probably not to the advantage of <br /> the downtown area to delay occupancy of this building further, the City should <br /> be compensated for added administrative costs. <br /> Councilor Miller suggested the council postpone a decision on this item for two <br /> weeks to clarify the matter and to allow room for negotiations to take place. <br /> Councilor Obie asked staff what the ramifications of a three-week delay would <br /> be. Mr. Tharp said that the developer was not present. He said he did not <br /> believe that the developer had ordered the material to make the changes. <br /> Mr. Obie did not want to create a situation which could result in an unfinished <br /> building remaining at length in the downtown area. <br /> Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to delay the matter to a <br /> time certain. <br /> Councilor Lindberg said he would support the motion, since it would provide a <br /> time frame for negotiations to take place. Councilor Wooten said she would also <br /> support the motion, since it would allow negotiations to take place without <br /> eliminating the option of going to court and since it would include direction to <br /> staff to prepare a report to the council on the legal options available and <br /> possible outcomes of legal action. <br /> e <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 1982 Page 9 <br />