My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2010
>
CC Agenda - 05/24/10 Meeting
>
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:30:13 PM
Creation date
5/21/2010 12:33:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
5/24/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Brown agreed LCC’s development project would be a fabulous project for the downtown area but <br />noted he had a problem with the language of the motion that had been suggested by staff and maintained <br />that it should be revised to expressly postpone directing the Agency Director’s negotiation of the purchase <br />and sale agreement until after LCC had completed its feasibility study for the development project. He <br />believed that turning over the negotiation authority to the City Manager prematurely, in that regard, <br />would mean that the council would “lose a large part of our voice” with respect to the property <br />acquisition. He believed further information regarding LCC’s feasibility study and the subsequent <br />property acquisition was needed. <br />Ms. Muir stated that staff’s intention with the suggested motion had been to return to the Eugene Urban <br />Renewal Agency (URA) at the end of February with more detailed information regarding the terms of the <br />property acquisition after further negotiation and discussion with LCC representatives. She reminded Mr. <br />Brown that the motion had expressly stated that the Agency Director would return to the URA Board for <br />final approval of the terms of the property acquisition. <br />Mr. Brown supported the project but believed that more information regarding LCC’s offer for the subject <br />property was needed before proceeding. <br />Ms. Piercy commented on previous negotiations for other downtown property development projects. <br />Ms. Muir noted that the current level of information and the current process surrounding the City’s <br />consideration of the LCC development project was very similar to that which would have been done in an <br />RFP process. She noted that current considerations had placed the City and LCC in a very favorable <br />position to move forward. <br />Mr. Poling reiterated his support for the LCC development project and noted that LCC remained a very <br />important partner in the community. <br />Ms. Taylor was concerned about LCC’s intention to abandon its current downtown facility but noted that <br />such concerns would be addressed later. <br />Ms. Taylor asked for more specific information regarding the nature of the resources that LCC hoped the <br />City would provide with respect to their project development plans. Ms. Spilde replied that such <br />resources would likely come in the form of direct financial assistance or indirectly in the form of waived <br />systems development charges or other strategies. She noted that more specific discussion in that regard <br />would take place in the future. <br />Ms. Taylor indicated she would support a waiver of systems development charges for the LCC <br />development project. <br />Ms. Taylor voiced her support for community colleges in general and hoped she might have the <br />opportunity to teach at LCC’s new facility. <br />Mr. Clark referred to Mr. Brown’s earlier comment and expressed that the suggested motion did not <br />remove the authority of the URA with respect to LCC’s development project but rather allowed the <br />Agency Director to more accurately determine the nature of an agreement with LCC in a manner similar <br />to what had been done with previous development processes. <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 25, 2010 Page 7 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.