Laserfiche WebLink
In response to a question from Councilor Nathanson regarding the possibilities of redeveloping the <br />site, Mr. Sullivan said the entire parcel was for sale as a unified lot and was not separable. He <br />said the City was seeking an option from Wells Fargo Bank, and once that was secured, would <br />conduct a study of housing possibilities on the site. He said there was no intent to use the <br />existing building in an interim period before redevelopment. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Kelly regarding community organizations that could have <br />uses for the building on the site and whether there were formal requests to use the building, Mr. <br />Sullivan said there was no information from any organization on the financial feasibility of <br />redeveloping the building. He said staff would do a preliminary site study on whether the building <br />could be used before it was demolished. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Taylor regarding whether community groups would have <br />a better chance of being involved with the purchase if the council delayed action, Mr. Sullivan said <br />the best opportunity for any community group interested in the building property was for the City to <br />proceed with getting a purchase option. He said the City was proceeding with the option but <br />noted that this was no guarantee that it would purchase the site. Linda Dawson of the Planning <br />and Development Department added if the City decided to purchase the property with a partner, <br />then the council would have another chance for input. <br /> <br />Councilor Pap~ noted that the property could be sold from the land bank to another developer and <br />did not have to be used to develop Iow-income housing for the City. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; Item D passed unanimously. <br /> <br />Regarding Item F, Councilor Kelly raised a concern that the funds were being used outside of the <br />standard Request for Proposals (RFP) process. He said he like the proposed project but did not <br />favor such a proposal outside of the standard RFP process. <br /> <br />Ms. Dawson said there were two RFPs pending, which were for housing and nonprofit capital <br />projects. She said the results of both would be examined to determine where the funds could <br />best be used. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; Item F passed, 7:1; Councilor Kelly voting in opposition. <br /> <br />III.PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning the Change of Street Name From Centen- <br /> nial Boulevard, Located Within the City of Eugene Between Coburg Road and <br /> Interstate 5, to Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard; and Adopting a Severability Clause <br /> <br />Steve Nystrom, Planning and Development Department, provided the staff report. He said the <br />request regarded only the segment of Centennial Boulevard between Coburg Road and Interstate <br />5 and would affect 12 properties and 202 addresses. He read the approval criterion contained in <br />Eugene Code Section 9.8485 into the record. He noted that the Eugene Planning Commission <br />had determined that the name change of Centennial Boulevard to Martin Luther King, Jr. <br />Boulevard met the sole criterion, that the renaming was in the best interest of the community, and <br />had unanimously recommended that the council approve the proposal. He said the meeting <br />packet contained written material supporting the name change as well as all of the written public <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 27, 2003 Page 3 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />