Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Zelenka commented that the terms and conditions listed in Attachment C basically represented an option to <br />purchase the Willamette Street property rather than the purchase itself. He believed that the terms described in <br />Attachment C would enable the City to learn more about the Willamette Street property so that the council <br />might make a reasonably informed decision. <br />Ms. Piercy called for a vote on Mr. Clark's previously stated motion. The motion passed <br />unanimously, 8:0. <br />Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Taylor moved to direct the City Manager to return to the council as <br />soon as possible with a complete report on Lane Community College's proposed sale of its <br />Willamette Street property to the City of Eugene. <br />Mr. Ruiz, responding to a question from Ms. Piercy, stated he did not know for certain if the proposed motion <br />might put any elements of LCC's downtown development plans in jeopardy <br />Ms. Solomon appreciated that the stated motion would provide for longer, more informed discussions regarding <br />the viability of the Willamette Street building as a City property. She further noted that additional independent <br />appraisals of the Willamette Street building were needed in addition to more detailed information on the City's <br />possible plans for the property. <br />Mr. Ruiz referred to Ms. Solomon's comment and noted that such information would be made available if the <br />previously stated motion was passed. <br />Mr. Braud stated that the appraised value of $1.2 million for LCC's Willamette Street property had been <br />provided by the independent firm of Duncan & Brown. <br />Ms. Ortiz noted her concern regarding certain elements of the proposed sale of the Willamette Street property <br />and how such a purchase might ultimately affect LCC’s debt ratio. <br />Mr. Clark commented that he did not understand how the City’s refusal to purchase the Willamette Street <br />property might cause LCC to delay or revise its downtown development plans. Mr. Braud noted that LCC had <br />no more desire to be in the real estate business than the City of Eugene and that LCC ultimately did not want to <br />th <br />be stuck with the Willamette Street property as they moved forward with development at 10 and Charnelton. <br />Mr. Clark hoped that a more detailed plan regarding the future use of the Willamette Street building might be <br />developed before the purchase of the building moved forward. Mr. Clark expressly stated he did not want the <br />City to end up with another pit or vacant building in the downtown area. Mr. Ruiz responded that more detailed <br />plans regarding the viability of the Willamette Street building would indeed be generated as part of the City’s <br />due diligence upon passage of the previously stated motion. <br />Mr. Pryor was encouraged by the level of public discussion surrounding the LCC downtown development <br />project and was confident that a mutually beneficial solution could be achieved. <br />Ms. Taylor indicated she would not support the motion. <br />Mr. Brown advocated against the City purchase of the Willamette Street property unless an interested buyer was <br />immediately available. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 10, 2010 Page 9 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />