CC Minutes - 03/12/07 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Poling stressed that the motion would specify that the project would be explored in greater detail and that the information would come back before the council. He reiterated that at this point the council was looking at the qualifications the developer brought to the table. Ms. Taylor commented that she was willing to support selecting Beam Development. She felt more public participation was needed before the council took its next step. She averred that tax increment money was the people’s money. Ms. Solomon felt strongly that KWG Development Partners answered the qualification question that the City put out and backed it up with a solid concept proposal. She said the proposal addressed the council’s questions and “got to the heart” of the issues the downtown presented. She acknowledged the interest at the table in Beam Development’s proposal because of the potential rehabilitation of the Washburn and Centre Court buildings. She believed that KWG also could rehabilitate the buildings and was looking toward possible reuse of those buildings. Additionally, Ms. Solomon underscored that the process was not being rushed given that it had been going prior to her tenure as a city councilor. She noted that KWG representatives were present and were hearing the concerns that were being expressed. She averred that this type of project was why the City had urban renewal districts; this was what urban renewal was “all about.” Mayor Piercy expressed appreciation for the KWG Development Partners proposal. She had been “moved” by the discussion of keeping two developers in play, but she also felt that Beam Development had not demonstrated that it would include a residential component in its plan. In terms of the urban renewal discussion, she acknowledged that some people perceived it as giving away public money and others believed urban renewal represented an investment. She said every time the discussion came up it was “one more circle around the block” as each side had its own perspective and was unlikely to change. Mr. Zelenka related that he had been excited by the Beam Development proposal and the company’s LEED experience and none of the other developers’ proposals had raised that level of excitement. Ms. Ortiz , seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to select KWG Development Partners and direct the Agency Director to work with KWG Development Partners to 1) explore in more detail project concepts, with opportunities for community input, and 2) bring back to the Urban Renewal Agency for review and approval the more detailed project concepts. The more detailed project concepts shall include the development footprint, feasibility of building reuse, transfer of prop- erty, project scale, mix of uses, design, and level of financial participation from the Urban Re- newal Agency. Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to substitute a motion to recognize KWG Devel- opment Partners, Beam Development, and Midtown Development as qualified developers and direct the Agency Director to work with them to 1) explore in more detail project concepts, with opportunities for community input, and 2) bring back to the Urban Renewal Agency for review and approval more detailed project concepts. The more detailed project concepts shall address at least the following issues: project cost and scale, the development footprint, mix of uses, transfers of property, design and sustainability, parking requirements, feasibility of building re- use, preservation of Centre Court and Washburn Buildings, preservation of local businesses, and level of financial participation from the Urban Renewal Agency. MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 12, 2007 Page 7 Work Session