Item B: Review of West Broadway Request for Qualifications Responses

Home Browse Search

Beam Develooment: · Experience and expertise lies with adaptive reuse of facilities. · Have done historic rehabilitation work in the Portland area. · Would use phased approach, with the Phase One including ground floor retail and upper floor offices in the Centre Court Building; ground floor retail and upper floor offices in theWashbume Building; new construction at the former Woolworth's site consisting of a single story structure with surface parking in back. Phase tWo could consist of new construction at the ClUTent Taco Time to H.orsehead half block. · Renovation of the Centre Court and Washburne Buildings would attempt to preserve the historic character. . Issues with the Beam concepts: o Limited footprint in Phase One. o Purchase options that the City of Eugene holds on Phase Two property would expire before Phase Two started, and would, therefore, require additional action on the part of the City to maintain control of the properties. o Concerns about the structural condition of the Centre Court Building, regarding whether it could be rehabilitated into another use. o Primary approach was that Beam Development would serve as a fee developer for the Urban Renewal Agency (URA), with the URA. purchasing the property, and Beam Development renovating and tenanting the property, after which time, the property would be sold to Beam and the proceeds shared by the City and Beam Development o Secondary approach was that Beam Development would purchase the property and move forward with the development o Possible land use codes, including floor area ratios (FAR) and other issues that had not yet been detailed. o May not require substantial City resources, for example, not asking the City to finance structured parking, which could result in a limited role for the City. Staff responded to comments fron1 the committee. . Concerns about structural and asbestos issues. o Response: Building Official had indicated that a change of use of the building would require substantial structural retrofit to come up to ccurrent code. Moving from business occupancy to residential occupancy presented different risks in the building, thus structural amendments to the building. Significant diligence with the current building conditions would need to occur. -What are the seismic conditions of the Washburne Building? o Response: City did not know specifically; assumed Washburne Building was out of step with the current cod-e. Issue was how much would be required to renovate the building in its current use pattern, i.e., with retail on the ground t100r and office use on the second floor. . Ifpart of proposal "vas for Bean1 to be a fee developer and-the City was to become part owner in the building, the City would want the building to be structurally sound. o Response: Beam proposal was to either do the development as a fee developer or purchase the properties in\vhich case the configuration of the costs \vouldbe different The City disregarded the idea that the City would buy the property and MINUTES- Eugene .Redevelopment Advisory Conmlittee February 23, 2007 Bage