05/09/1983 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Holmer asked how feasibility of the ATO project was defined. Mr. Byrne responded that the proposed financing for the restoration was extremely ~ comp1 icated and invol ved a combination of CDBG funds, hi storic restoration loan .. funds, and a commercial redevelopment loan, and was contingent on the building's being accepted into the National Register of Historic Places. He noted that if any of these components failed, the project could be in jeopardy. Councilor Holmer asked if this was the council's final chance for action on the project if all the financing does go smoothly. Mr. Gleason responded that the council would hold a hearing on the ATO house. Tim Sercombe, City Attorney's Office, said that the Hi storic Review Board was considering an appl ication for demol ition of the ATO House and, under City Code regarding such considerations, was bound to examine feasible alternatives to demolition. Mr. Sercombe said that if the Review Board denies the demolition permit request, the matter would come before the council in early June. The council cou1 d then decide whether to allow the demo1 ition or se1 ect some other a1 ternative. Mr. Sercombe said that the council's action tonight would not prejudice the decision on the merits of demolition of the buil ding. Councilor Obie asked why the ATO request had been recommended for funding through the Economic Development Opportunity Fund rather than the historic preservation and rehabilitation funds. Mr. Byrne responded that the Community Development Committee (CDC) had made the recommendation. Councilor Lindberg said that the COG had wanted to force the council's hand by asking that the ATO request be treated as an exceptional case and had felt that $55,000 could be taken out of the Economic Development Opportun ity Fund wi th the understanding that thi s cou1 d be consi dered a loan to the proj ect and that funds woul d be returned for economic development. He said that the CDC had fel t the council could decide whether the investment was worth the risk. 4It Publ ic hearing was opened. Rob Bennett, 250 Pa100lino Drive, sought support from the council for a preserva- tion project his company was interested in being involved in. He said his firm had been approached by a broker representing the owner of the ATO House. Mr. Bennett noted his firm was interested in restoring the building but did not feel thi s cou1 d be done through conventional financing. He had fe1 t that the project would need additional community financial support and had worked closely with City staff to see how such support could be achieved. Mr. Bennett said that he was interested in thi s development opportunity for hi s fi rm, which hoped to move its offices downtown; that he wel corned the opportunity to support hi storic preservation; and that he bel ieved the project coul d be an economic success and an asset for the downtown. He estimated the total development cost at $418,000, with $210,000 in private funds, $125,000 in below-market interest rate loans, and $83,000 in equity. Carmi Wein~rod, 2654 Harris Street, represented the Historic Review Board and testified ln favor of the rehabilitation loan program. She urged the City Council to continue the program which assists owners of historic properties. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 9, 1983 Page 6