CC Minutes - 12/06/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Johnson reminded the council that it held two work sessions on the topic. He called the council's attention to the policy issues listed in the meeting packet. The motions included in the meeting packet were draft in nature and could be amended by the council as desired. Mr. Torrey asked councilors to comment on the issue before them before a motion was placed on the floor. Ms. Nathanson said that her position on the issue continued to be the same: the federal purchase of the City Hall site could solve the problem of ensuring the new courthouse was not located in an inappropriate location, as well as address the problems of the inadequacy of the existing city hall and ensure the safety of City Hall employees and the citizens who depended on emergency services delivered out of City Hall. Although there was uncertainty about the amount of money the federal government would pay for the site, Ms. Nathanson believed the City would receive more for the site from the federal government than from a private party. She did not think the council could afford to lose advantage of the opportunity. She believed if the City turned its back on the amount offered and accepted a smaller amount later, it would be turning its back on several million additional dollars. She said that the money was not enough, but it was more than she thought the City would receive in the future. Ms. Nathanson acknowledged the considerable work to be done to relocate City offices to another location or locations. Mr. Lee asked questions about timing. Mr. Johnson said that the timing of the process was "up in the air." He did not know how long negotiations for the City Hall site would take, and noted that the General Services Administration (GSA) had experienced problems with its appraisal of the site and was requesting more work from its appraisers. Mr. Johnson said that other unknowns included the timing of the budget process and what Congress would do, which could elongate the process. It was necessary for GSA to have a site before it could return to Congress for a construction allocation. Mr. Lee did not think that the council wanted as a legacy an enormous building in the 5th Street District. He acknowledged the time and effort it would take to relocate City offices, but said the council should give the manager authority to negotiate, recognizing it could change its mind and that the final authority rested with the council. Mr. Rayor noted the extremely large difference in cost between building a new City Hall and retrofitting the existing City Hall. He said that the council was proposing to move ahead without a public process, and that bothered him. He was also disturbed by the fact that the council was considering using a property tax bond to underwrite the costs of replacing City Hall. Mr. Rayor said that the proposal required the City to find between $9 million and $19 million in the budget, leaving the City with no reserves to address unforeseen conditions. Regarding the impact of the building on downtown, Mr. Rayor pointed out that another building could be located on the 6th Avenue site at the same scale as the federal courthouse and with the same loss of parking, and there was nothing now in the City Code that precluded such a structure. He believed that the current City Hall should be retained as general City office buildings. He did not think City representatives had to go to Washington to learn more about the building's height and scale as that information was available through the Environmental Assessment. Mr. Kelly suggested that the process had brought many facility needs to the forefront of the council's discussions that were not there before, as well as discussion about urban design, and regardless of the outcome of the process he wanted to see those issues on the council's agenda in the new year. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1999 Page 5 5:30 p.m.