The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem B: West Broadway Project Update EURA UGENE RBAN ENEWAL GENCY AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Work Session: West Broadway Project Update Meeting Date: April 25, 2007 Agenda Item Number: B Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Denny Braud www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5536 ISSUE STATEMENT On March 12, 2007, theUrban Renewal Agency (URA) held a work session to review responses to a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the redevelopment of a multi-parcel area along West Broadway between Willamette and Charnelton streets (redevelopment area). At the work session, the council recognized Beam Development and KWG Development Partners as qualified developers and directed the URA Director to work with the two developers to explore and return with more detailed project concepts for review and approval. BACKGROUND On November 27, 2006, the URA provided direction to issue an RFQ for the redevelopment of West Broadway based on approved criteria. An RFQ was issued on December 8, 2006, with a submission due date of February 9, 2007. The City received responses from Beam Development (Beam), CenterCal Properties, Greg Bryant, KWG Development Partners (KWG), and MidTown Development. The action taken by the URA at the March 12, 2007, work session directed staff to work with Beam and KWG to explore project concepts in more detail, with opportunities for community input, and to bring the following supplemental information back to the URA for review and approval: Project cost and scale ? Development footprint ? Mix of uses ? Transfer of property ? Design and sustainability ? Parking requirements ? Feasibility of building reuse ? Preservation of Centre Court and Washburne buildings ? Preservation of local businesses ? Level of financial participation from the URA ? Following the work session, the Agency Director and staff met with representatives from both development teams and requested the supplemental information. The Agency Director and staff also toured projects completed by Beam and KWG in the Portland area. The Agency Director believes that L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc the selection of either development team could result in desired development and new activity in the West Broadway Redevelopment Area. On April 12, 2007, the council received a staff memo that addressed the financial capacity of the Downtown Urban Renewal District and other tools to support downtown redevelopment. On April 16, 2007, the council held a workshop on downtown development issues. The council heard presentations from a mix of local developers and interested parties who described development opportunities, challenges, and policy alternatives. On April 25, 2007, prior to this work session, the council will hold a work session on the financial tools that are available to support downtown redevelopment. Beam and KWG Concept Details Below is a summary of the project concept details as requested by the URA for Beam and KWG. Where applicable, the summary combines information from the initial RFQ responses and the supplemental information submitted by each team. Full copies of the supplemental information from Beam and KWG are included in Attachments A and B. Project Cost and Scale BEAM KWG Project cost: $18,126,036 Project cost: $191,152,136 Project Scale: 101,623 sq. ft. Project Scale: 968,849 sq. ft. ?One block face along Broadway ?Concept includes entire Redevelopment ?Five-story (Centre Court – existing structure) Area ?Two-story (Washburne – existing structure) ?Three + 1/8 block faces along Broadway ?One-story (new structure on portion of hole ?Five-story (new construction except cinema) adjacent to Centre Court) ?Five-story (Centre Court – existing ?Surface parking (portion of hole adjacent to structure) Centre Court) ?Two-story (Washburne – existing structure) ?One level of underground parking (entire area) Development Footprint BEAM KWG Land Area Total: 37,278 sq. ft. Land Area Total: 224,675 sq. ft. Centre Court building Centre Court building Washburne building Washburne building Hole adjacent to Centre Court Hole adjacent to Centre Court th Full block (bounded by Broadway, Olive, 10 and Charnelton) Half block (north side of Broadway between Olive and Willamette Northwest corner of Olive and Broadway L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc Mix of Uses BEAM KWG Office 55,423 Hotel 87,800 Retail 40,600 Retail 132,279 Surface parking 5,600 Grocery 58,000 Total Square Feet 101,623 Condos 254,360 Apartments 152,400 * Supplemental information also indicated an Theatre 55,000 alternative scenario with flex/live uses but limited Parking 229,010 detail has been provided. Total Square Feet 968,849 Transfer of Property BEAM KWG Developer purchases property below the purchase Developer purchases property after completion of option price conditions listed in RFQ response (estimated within 12 months) Design and Sustainability BEAM KWG Design: Design: The redevelopment concept focuses on Goal of a rich and varied palette of architecture ?? rehabilitation of Centre Court and Washburne which attracts retailers, customers and home buildings buyers (more information and images to be Elements would include: removal of the provided as project develops) ? stucco siding, replacement of the windows Use of two architecture firms for architectural ? with historic “in nature and look” windows, variety and interest refinishing of the brick and brick detailing, and Differentiated architectural styles and materials ? new metal canopies Primary attention to design of ground floor, ? Based on images initially provided by Beam, including glass storefronts with upscale ? the new construction would be a tall one-story architectural elements, canopies, awnings, structure; supplemental material indicates a creation of active pedestrian realm possible tensile (tent) structure (as a long term Upper levels to have considerable glass faces ? temporary use) in varied architectural styles Renovation of existing Centre Court building ? to historically appropriate appearance Sustainability: Sustainability: Reuse of existing Centre Court and Washburne Dense urban housing, including affordable ?? buildings units L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc Sustainable building materials, operable Reuse of existing Centre Court and Washburne ?? windows buildings Improved energy efficiency, green roofs, Project will include green elements in design ?? stormwater retention and construction: green roofs, sun shading, No LEED certification intended storm water retention, sustainable building ? materials, low E windows, insulation exceeding code requirements, energy efficient appliances Goal for LEED certification on some ? buildings, particularly Centre Court Parking Requirements BEAM KWG 15 new surface spaces added with new Estimated parking needs: construction, plus utilization of existing parking New 600 spaces Existing 1,000 spaces Total 1,600 spaces ?Grocer and retail need 4 spaces per 1,000 feet ?Theatre needs 1 space for every 3 seats ?Condos need 1 space per unit ?Rental housing needs 0.75 spaces per unit ?Hotel to use new and existing spaces Feasibility of Building Reuse BEAM KWG Initial investigation suggests renovation possible. Extensive structural and programmatic analysis is Additional site work is necessary to determine required to determine actual costs and work feasibility of building reuse. required. An increased cost estimate has been factored in to address this issue. Preservation of Centre Court and Washburne Buildings BEAM KWG Both Centre Court and Washburne buildings are Centre Court building is planned to be planned to be rehabilitated for retail and office rehabilitated into a high end, boutique hotel. Per uses. community’s expressed interest, Washburne building will also be retained and renovated for retail and office. L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc Preservation of Local Businesses BEAM KWG Centre Court is currently vacant; no information is The development team will work with the City to provided regarding the existing tenants in the preserve local businesses and accommodate Washburne building. existing tenants. Business displacement expected during construction. Retention of the office tenant in the Washburne building is an important goal. Level of Financial Participation from the URA BEAM KWG In the scenario where the developer obtains Parking $15,987,972 * ownership of the property immediately: Utilities 5,000,000 Offsite costs 1,002,000 Estimated gap $ 1,590,000 Buy-down for profit yield 1,556,251 Affordable Housing Loan 1,327,181 ** Total $24,873,404 * Level of URA participation is not available for the alternative flex/live scenario due to limited * City to purchase and retain ownership of parking information ** Loan to be repaid Opportunities for Public Input BEAM KWG Beam has previous experience with public KWG has previous experience with public involvement in development projects. Indicated involvement in development projects. They that the first task will be to visit with local indicated their interest in contracting with a public residents and stakeholders to identify what the participation expert to create and implement a community needs and how they can work with the public involvement plan for the project. community to deliver a project which builds on established neighborhood themes. Public Involvement The redevelopment of West Broadway is a high-profile project which could include significant public investment and change the urban form and identity of this area of downtown. It will be important to involve a broad spectrum of participants, including the development team, neighborhood groups and citizens throughout Eugene, downtown stakeholders, and business and property owners along Broadway. Staff has prepared a preliminary outline of a public involvement process for the two proposed development concepts (Attachment C). The KWG outline assumes a more comprehensive public involvement effort, which could include a contracted outside party to guide the process. The L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc public involvement program will be addressed as part of a development agreement, much like other components such as timing, financial agreements, etc. Timing The URA has signed purchase options with seven property owners along West Broadway. The option periods vary among the purchase option agreements, with a majority of the options expiring in September and October 2007. (See Attachment D for a summary of the purchase option terms.) There are some advantages to executing/assigning options within the current time periods. Should the URA need to renegotiate purchase option terms, there is no guarantee that property owners will agree to an extension of time or will maintain the current purchase prices. Further extensions would also require the payment of additional option money. Should the URA decide to make a significant financial investment in the redevelopment area, the URA would need to complete several steps to access two potential funding sources: urban renewal and HUD Section 108/BEDI. For urban renewal expenditures over $4.6 million, the URA would need to approve a Downtown Urban Renewal District Plan amendment to increase the existing maximum indebtedness (spending limit). A plan amendment, which would need to begin in May and would take approximately four months to complete, includes a public hearing and council ordinance approval. To utilize Section 108 financing and the BEDI brownfield grant, additional steps include a public hearing, a project- specific council resolution, budget authority, environmental review, and a project-specific HUD application and approval process. The Section 108/BEDI process would need to begin in May 2007 to be completed within the existing purchase option periods. Additional detail on the use of urban renewal and Section 108/BEDI is included in Attachment E (KWG timeline). The preliminary selection process and schedule outlined in the RFQ indicated that the URA would select a developer between March and April 2007. Although additional time for selection is possible, it is important to recognize that the development teams have scheduled their proposed projects along with other projects that they are pursuing. The ability of the URA to keep the respondents engaged during a longer selection process is unknown. RELATED CITY POLICIES Future redevelopment of the West Broadway Redevelopment Area is consistent with the policies and implementation strategies included in the Downtown Plan, including: Downtown development shall support the urban qualities of density, vitality, livability and diversity ? to create a downtown, urban environment. Actively pursue public/private development opportunities to achieve the vision for an active, vital, ? growing downtown. Use downtown development tools and incentives to encourage development that provides character ? and density downtown. Promote multi-story, mixed-use structures downtown through financial incentives or code ? amendments. Stimulate multi-unit housing in the downtown core and on the edges of downtown for a variety of ? income levels and ownership opportunities. L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc In addition, the future development of the West Broadway Redevelopment Area is responsive to the following Growth Management policies: Policy 1: Support the existing Eugene Urban Growth Boundary by taking actions to increase density and use existing vacant and under-used land within the boundary more efficiently. Policy 2: Encourage in-fill, mixed-use, redevelopment, and higher density development. Policy 3: Encourage a mix of business and residential uses downtown using incentives and zoning. Policy 10: Encourage the creation of transportation-efficient land use patterns and implementation of nodal development concepts. Policy 14: Development shall be required to pay the full cost of extending infrastructure and services, except that the City will examine ways to subsidize the costs of providing infrastructure or offer other incentives that support higher-density infill, mixed use, and redevelopment. – This item is also related to one of the new 2007-2008 Council Goals: Downtown InitiativeFacilitate significant revitalization of downtown core. COUNCIL OPTIONS The following three options have been identified: Option 1: Select KWG Development Partners Option 1 is a comprehensive approach to the redevelopment of West Broadway and assumes a significant commitment of financial resources. Upon selection, staff would begin working with KWG to develop more concrete project details, particularly related to the level of financial participation from the URA. Staff would also work with KWG to develop and initiate a public involvement plan for the project. Option 1 would require the URA to maintain the existing purchase option agreements on the West Broadway properties and to continue negotiations on key properties that are not currently under option. In May, detailed financial strategies related to the KWG proposal would be brought to the URA for consideration. An estimated timeline for Option 1, including potential financing steps and future URA approvals, is included in Attachment E. L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc Option 1 Summary Estimated Total Project Cost: $191.2 Million Estimated Public Investment: $24.8 Million (13% of total project) $15M parking, $5M utilities, $1M offsite, $1.5M buydown for profit yield, $1.3M affordable housing loan Estimated Private Investment: $167.5 Million (87% of total project) Concept Result: Hotel (87,800 sq.ft., 106 rooms), retail (132,279 sq. ft.), theatre (55,000 sq. ft.), grocer (55,000), condo units (288 units), affordable rental units (184), underground parking (600 spaces) URA Decision and Timing: May 2007: ?Council review of financing strategies ?Begin process to amend downtown urban renewal plan ?Begin process for Section 108/BEDI funds ?Public hearing on Section 108 financing May – August 2007: Public involvement (see Attachment C) June 2007: Council resolution on Section 108 application July 2007: Public hearing on urban renewal plan amendment September 2007: ?Council approval of urban renewal plan amendment ?Council final project approval, including property transactions ?Council budget authority approval Option 2:Select Beam Development Option 2 would lead to the renovation of the Centre Court building and the Washburne building, and a yet-to-be-defined level of new construction in the adjacent vacant land. This option assumes a more modest commitment of financial resources. Upon selection, staff would begin working with Beam to develop more concrete project details, particularly related to the level of financial participation from the URA. Staff would also work with Beam to develop and initiate a public involvement plan for the project. Option 2 would also require the URA to maintain the existing purchase option agreements on the Centre Court and Washburne properties. The URA would let the options on the remaining L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc properties expire. In May, detailed financial strategies related to the Beam proposal would be brought to the URA for consideration. An estimated timeline for this option, including potential financing steps and future URA approvals, is included in Attachment F. Option 2 assumes that the URA would also th continue to move forward with the TK Partners project, as previously selected in the 10 and Charnelton Request for Proposals process. Option 2 Summary Estimated Total Project Cost: $ 18.1 Million Estimated Public Investment: $ 1.6 Million (9% of total project) Estimated Private Investment: $ 16.5 Million (91% of total project) Concept Result: Retail (40,600 sq. ft.), office (55,423 sq. ft.), surface parking (5,600 sq. ft., 15 spaces) * Supplemental information also indicated a scenario with flex/live uses but limited detail has been provided. URA Decision and Timing: May 2007: Council review of financing strategies May – August 2007: Public involvement (See Attachment C) September 2007: ?Final project approval, including property transactions ?Budget authority approval Option 3: Take no action on the RFQ responses Under Option 3, the URA would let the options on the remaining properties expire. An estimated timeline for this option is included in Attachment G. Option 3 assumes that the URA would continue th with the TK Partners project, as previously selected in the 10 and Charnelton Request for Proposals process. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The Agency Director concurs with the URA’s conclusion that Beam and KWG submitted qualified responses to the RFQ. Based on KWG’s demonstrated qualifications and its overall responsiveness to the approved RFQ objectives and criteria, the Agency Director recommends selection of KWG Development Partners (Option 1, as stated above). The next steps would be to: 1) begin the process for a Downtown Urban Renewal Plan amendment; 2) begin application process for HUD Section 108/BEDI funds; 3) take a specific public involvement plan to Planning Commission/Citizen Involvement Committee for approval; 4) bring back specific project financing strategies for URA approval; 5) L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc negotiate project design and details with KWG over the next four months; and 6) return to URA for approval of the project and financing details (estimated for September 2007). SUGGESTED MOTION Move to select KWG Development Partners and direct the Agency Director to: 1) begin the process for a Downtown Urban Renewal Plan amendment; 2) begin application process for HUD Section 108/BEDI funds; 3) take a specific public involvement plan to Planning Commission/Citizen Involvement Committee for approval; 4) bring back specific project financing strategies for URA approval; 5) negotiate project details with KWG over the next four months; and 6) bring back the final project and financing details for URA approval in September 2007. ATTACHMENTS A. Beam: Supplemental information B. KWG: Supplemental information C. Draft Public Involvement Outline D. Summary of West Broadway Purchase Option Terms E. Option 1 Timeline (KWG) F. Option 2 Timeline (Beam) G. Option 3 Timeline (Take no action) FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Denny Braud Telephone: 682-5536 Staff E-Mail: denny.braud@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070425\S070425B.doc Downtown Eugene Beam Development is a community developer interested in working on quality projects which not only increase the value of the real estate but add to the community. In that vein, we consider ourselves to be community developers with a unique approach to real estate development. Our first task when identifying a new project is to visit with local residents and stakeholders to identify what the community needs and how we can work with the community to deliver a project which builds on established neighborhood themes building and adding to the existing fabric while increasing vibrancy. At the same time, Beam has a passion for historic structures and adaptive reuse. Our projects in Portland has taken many rundown and vacant buildings and turned them into vibrant micro-communities of businesses and residents who together create a synergy that brings new energy into the community. The Eastbank Commerce Center for example has historically never housed more than 30 jobs and most recently served as a storage depot. As redeveloped, the building now houses over 60 companies with over 270 family wage (and better) jobs. These jobs in turn attracted numerous additional satellite businesses into the area such as restaurants (ClarkLewis), Coffee Shops (Bakery Bar) and other businesses. The recent RFQ from the City of Eugene has two historical buildings which should be saved through this same approach. Beam believes we can adaptively reuse these structures to provide space for new companies and residents while preserving these wonderful examples of history. Project cost and scale Our intention is to focus first on the 2 story Washburn Building, rehabbing the building, adding commercial storefront to the Broadway exterior and reinforcing the structure to meet seismic standards and support a penthouse addition. The penthouse addition will consist of housing to test the viability of downtown work/live. In order to use Historic Tax Credits in the financing of the building, the penthouse will most likely be set back from the main façade of the original structure providing outdoor space to the new floors. When complete, the building will consist of approximately 13,000 square feet of commercial retail space and 32,000 square feet of flexible work/live space which could be divided in any number of different scenarios. Initial cost estimates for this renovation range from $4.5 Million for renovation of the existing structure with no additional square footage added to $10 Million for complete seismic renovation with an additional two penthouse floors. Historic Telegram Building with Penthouse The Center Court Building is a larger and more involved project with any restoration requiring removal of the newer brick veneer and exposing of the buildings original skin and window system. Our initial investigation suggests this is possible however additional site work is necessary. The vision for this building is additional work/live space either rental or condominium depending on market conditions. The project foot print and massing would remain the same and costs would range on the low side of $12 Million to a high of $20 Million assuming full seismic and life safety standards are met. The developer’s plan for the vacant portion of the Center Court Site is to investigate a long-term temporary use of the property by the Diva Theater Center. Through use of building technologies using tensile structures such as the Denver International Airport, we feel we can provide a 10-20 year home to the theater group at low cost. This would provide the City of Eugene with an Iconic focal point to add to their downtown, allow the city to continue to promote culture activities and give the theater group a renewed focus for fundraising and operations. Initial cost estimates for a 7,000 foot structure complete with warm shell build-out are approximately $ a square foot providing a total project cost of $ including landscaping and finishing or public space. The development footprint for all three projects; restoration of the Washburn Building with additional penthouse structure, restoration of the Center Court Building, and construction on the vacant site would equate to a footprint of approximately 33,000 square feet across both redevelopment sites. The forecasted mix of uses range from ground floor retail focusing on local and independent companies to commercial office users and work live residents. Beam’s experience in Portland has been that most tenants prefer space in the range of 500 to 2,500 square feet and tend to be in the early stages of business formation. As a property owner/developer, this type of user can require more management however, these tenants produce lower overall vacancy rates as the higher transition provides for a ready market of replacement tenants should space go dark. Parking on the three sites will be limited due to this project’s focus on historical adaptive reuse. The vacant site will allow for a small amount of short-term parking with the remaining parking demand being served by the nearby City-owned parking structure. Development Proposal The developer would prefer that the properties remain in current ownership or owned by the City until just prior to development however, we feel confident that we can negotiate a Development and Disposition Agreement with the City of Eugene which minimizes the direct costs to all parties concerned. Currently, Beam is negotiating the transfer of property from the Portland Public School District to Beam for redevelopment. Our goal with that transaction was to provide the School District with the highest possible purchase price for the property while minimizing the investment risk to the school district. What we proposed was a minimum guaranteed price with the school district sharing in the developer fee. This structure provided the school district with the opportunity to share in the redevelopment value of the property while still providing for a minimum purchase price. It is our goal to follow the same philosophy with the City of Eugene. Design and Sustainability Beam’s market focus is local and early stage companies who typically prefer lower cost space alternatives. We are able to provide this space at lower cost through value engineering of the redevelopment projects, menu driven space pricing and a commitment to long-term ownership and operation of the properties. Our emphasis on value engineering requires that all team members work on the project from the beginning focusing on target rental rate delivery when making decisions on everything from financial structure to selection of finish materials. What we have found is that our attention to this detail has had the added benefit of attracting many creative service firms who view our space as a blank canvas allowing them to finish to their own desires. Throughout all our projects, we strive to incorporate as many sustainable components as possible. We have consciously made the decision not to pursue LEED ratings due to the added costs of compliance auditing and management. We do however incorporate many of the same components found in LEED rated buildings such as energy efficient HVAC systems, separate monitoring of utilities, ventable windows, passive and energy efficient lighting and more. This project will receive this same focus and commitment. The developer feels the Center Court and Washburn Buildings represent a feasible opportunity to preserve two of Eugene’s historical buildings while providing affordable space to small and early-stage retailers and businesses. In addition, the location of these two buildings offers the City an opportunity to provide true work/live space in a downtown location further building on the activity created by recent developments. As provided for in the original RFQ response and attached here, the developer is seeking minimal financial assistance from the City’s Urban Renewal funds and is committed to working with the City to reduce the impact of this development on the URA Funds. Grand Blvd MLK Blvd 3rd Avenue 11th Avenue 2nd Avenue 10th Avenue Rail Line (1st Avenue) 9th Avenue Water Avenue 8th Avenue 7th Avenue 6th Avenue Grand Blvd MLK Blvd 3rd Avenue 2nd Avenue ß¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ Þ ÕÉÙæ Í«°°´»³»²¬¿´ ×²º±®³¿¬·±² ïò Ð®±¶»½¬ Ý±¬ ¿²¼ Í½¿´» Ì¸»¬±¬¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ½±¬¾¿»¼ ±² ½«®®»²¬ ¿«³°¬·±² · ¿ º±´´±©æ Ì±¬¿´ Þ«·´¼·²¹ Ø¿®¼ Ý±¬ ïïéôíðçôéíð Ë¬·´·¬·» ëôðððôððð Ü»³± çêïôçîð Í·¬» ïôïíêôïèð Ñºº·¬» ïôððîôððð Ì±¬¿´ Ø¿®¼ Ý±¬ ïîëôìðçôèíð Ì»²¿²¬ ×³°®±ª»³»²¬ éôêïïôïêð Ô¿²¼ ïèôðððôððð Í±º¬ Ý±¬ ìðôïíïôïìê Ì±¬¿´ Þ«¼¹»¬ ïçïôïëîôïíê Û¨¸·¾·¬ ß »¬ º±®¬¸ ¬¸» ¾¿·½ »½±²±³·½ ¿«³°¬·±² ©» «»¼ ¬± ¿®®·ª» ¿¬ ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ½±¬ »¬·³¿¬»ò Ì¸· »¬·³¿¬» · ª»®§ °®»´·³·²¿®§ò É» ®»°±²¼»¼ ¬± ¿² ÎÚÏ ©·¬¸ ¿ ¹»²»®¿´ ½±²½»°¬ ¿²¼ ª··±² ¬± ½®»¿¬» ¿² »²¬»®¬¿·²³»²¬ ¼·¬®·½¬ ©·¬¸ ¿ ¬¸»¿¬®»ô ¹®±½»®ô ®»¬¿·´ô ¾±«¬·¯«» ¸±¬»´ ¿²¼ ¸±«·²¹ò É» ¸¿ª» ¬®·»¼ ¬± ¾» ½±²»®ª¿¬·ª» ·² ±«® °®±¶»½¬·±² ±º ½±¬ò Ú±® »¨¿³°´»ô ©» ¿«³» üïëð °»® º±±¬ ·² ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ½±¬ º±® ¬¸» ¸±¬»´ò Ì¸· ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ »´»³»²¬ ·²ª±´ª» ¬¸» ®»¸¿¾ ±º ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ ©¸·½¸ ¸±«´¼ ½±¬ ½±²·¼»®¿¾´§ ´» ¬¸¿² ¬¸¿¬ò É·¬¸±«¬ ¿²§ ·¹²·º·½¿²¬ ¬«¼§ ±º ¬¸» ¬®«½¬«®»ô ©» ©·´´ ²±¬ ¾» ¿¾´» ¬± ¼»¬»®³·²» ¬¸» ½±¬ ±º ®»¸¿¾·´·¬¿¬·±²ò É» ¿®» ®»°±²¼·²¹ ¬± §±«® ®»¯«»¬ô ¾«¬ ¾»´·»ª» ¬± ¹± ¼±©² ¬¸· ¿ª»²«» ©·¬¸±«¬ ·¹²·º·½¿²¬ ¬«¼§ ¿²¼ ½±²½»°¬ ®»º·²»³»²¬ ®»²¼»® ¬¸» ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸· »¨»®½·» «¾¶»½¬ ¬± ½±²·¼»®¿¾´» ½±²¶»½¬«®»ò Ì¸»½¿´» ±º ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ · ³¿·ª» º±® ¼±©²¬±©² Û«¹»²»ò ×¬ ©·´´ ®»³¿µ» ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©² ½±®» ¿²¼ ½®»¿¬» ¿ ª·¾®¿²¬ º±½¿´ °±·²¬ º±® ¬¸» ½·¬§ò É» »¨°»½¬ ïððû ·¬» ½±ª»®¿¹» ±º ¬¸» ¾´±½µò ß¬¬¿½¸»¼ · ¿² »¨¸·¾·¬ »²¬·¬´»¼ Þ¿·½ Ó¿·²¹ô ©¸·½¸ · ½±´±® ½±¼»¼ ¬± ¸±© ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ·¬»ô ·¬» ¯«¿®» º±±¬¿¹»ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» »¨°»½¬»¼ «» ±º ¬¸» ¾´±½µ ¾§ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¬§°» ¾§ º´±±®ò Ñ² ¿´´ º±«® ¾´±½µ ¿®» º·ª» ¬±®§ ¾«·´¼·²¹ò Ì¸» º±±¬¿¹» º±® »¿½¸ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¬§°» · »¬ º±®¬¸ ¾»´±©æ Ø±¬»´ èéôèðð Î»¬¿·´ ïçðôîéç Ý±²¼± îëìôíêð ß°¬ ïëîôìðð Ì¸»¿¬®» ëëôððð Ð¿®µ·²¹ îîçôðïð Ì±¬¿´ Í¯«¿®» Ú»»¬ çêèôèìç îò Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Ú±±¬°®·²¬ Û¨¸·¾·¬ Þ ¸±© ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ º±±¬°®·²¬ º±® ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ½±²½»°¬ò ×¬ ®»º´»½¬ ïððû ·¬» ½±ª»®¿¹»ò íò Ó·¨ ±º Ë» Ñ«® ½±²½»°¬ ·²ª±´ª» ¿ ³·¨ ±º ®»¬¿·´ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿ ¹®±½»®÷ô ¬¸»¿¬®»ô ¸±¬»´ô ¿²¼ º±® ¿´» ¿²¼ ®»²¬¿´ ¸±«·²¹ò Û¨¸·¾·¬ Þ ¹®¿°¸·½¿´´§ ·´´«¬®¿¬» ¬¸» ³¿·²¹ ¿²¼ ·¬·²¹ ±º ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ «»ò ß«³»¼ º±±¬¿¹» ¿®» »¬ º±®¬¸ ¿¾±ª» ©·¬¸ ¿ ½¸»¼«´» ±º º±±¬¿¹» ½±²¬¿·²»¼ ·² Û¨¸·¾·¬ ßò ìò Ì®¿²º»® ±º Ð®±°»®¬§ ß ©» ·²¼·½¿¬»¼ ·² ±«® ·²·¬·¿´ ®»°±²»ô ©» °®±°±»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ¿½¯«··¬·±² ±º ¬¸» °®±°»®¬·» ©±«´¼ ±½½«® ·³«´¬¿²»±«´§ «°±² ¬¸» ½±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ Ü»ª»´±°»® ½±²¼·¬·±²æ ¿ò½±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸» °«®½¸¿» ¿¹®»»³»²¬ñ»¨¬»²·±² ±º ±°¬·±² º±® ¬¸» °®±°»®¬·»ô ¾ò½±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¼«» ¼·´·¹»²½» ®»´¿¬·²¹ ¬± ¬§°·½¿´ ¼»ª»´±°»® ·«»ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¬·¬´»ô »²ª·®±²³»²¬¿´ô ¹»±¬»½¸²·½¿´ ³¿¬¬»®ô ¿²¼ ³¿®µ»¬ «¾¬¿²¬·¿¬·±²ô ½ò´»¬¬»® ±º ·²¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¿ ½·²»³¿ ½±³°¿²§ º±® ¿ ³«´¬·°´»¨ ¬¸»¿¬®»ô ¼ò´»¬¬»® ±º ·²¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¿ ¹®±½»®ô »ò½±³°´»¬·±² ±º ´¿²¼ «» ¿²¿´§· ¼»³±²¬®¿¬·²¹ ´¿²¼ «» »²¬·¬´»³»²¬ øÜ»ª»´±°»® «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ¬¸»®» · ²± ¼»·¹² ®»ª·»© ±® ·³·´¿® °®±½» ®»¯«·®»¼ º±® ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ô ¿²¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ´¿²¼ «» »²¬·¬´»³»²¬ · ¿ º«²½¬·±² ±º ¿¬·º§·²¹ Ý·¬§ Ý±¼» ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ò÷ É» ©±«´¼ ¿´± ²»»¼ ¬± ½±³°´»¬» ±«® ¿¹®»»³»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ò É» »¨°»½¬ ¬± ½±³°´»¬» ¬¸»» ½±²¼·¬·±² ©·¬¸·² ïî ³±²¬¸ò ëò Ü»·¹² ¿²¼ Í«¬¿·²¿¾·´·¬§ Ç±« ¸¿ª» ¿µ»¼ « º±® ¼®¿©·²¹ ±® ·³¿¹» ±º ©¸¿¬ ¬¸» ½±²½»°¬ ¼»·¹² ©±«´¼ ´±±µ ´·µ»ò Ü»·¹² · ½®·¬·½¿´ ¬± ¬¸» «½½» ±º ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ò Ù·ª»² ¬¸» ½±²½»°¬«¿´ ²¿¬«®» ±º ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ °®±¹®¿³ô ©» ¿®» «²¿¾´» ¬± °®±ª·¼» ¼®¿©·²¹ ©·¬¸±«¬ ½±²·¼»®¿¾´» »¨°»²»ô ©¸·½¸ ©» ¿®» «²©·´´·²¹ ¬± ¼± ¿¬ ¬¸· ¬·³»ò É» ½¿²ô ¸±©»ª»®ô °®±ª·¼» »¨¿³°´» ±º °®±¶»½¬ ¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®» ©» ©±«´¼ ¼®¿© ±² ·² º¿¸·±²·²¹ ¬¸» ´±±µ ±º ¬¸· ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ò Ì¸» ¹®±«²¼ º´±±® ´»ª»´ · ¬¸» ³±¬ ½®·¬·½¿´ ¼»·¹² »´»³»²¬ ±º ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ¿ ¬¸· · ¬¸» »´»³»²¬ ±² ©¸·½¸ ¬¸» °»¼»¬®·¿² º±½«»ò É» ©±«´¼ »¨°»½¬ ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ º´±±® ®»¬¿·´ »´»³»²¬ ¬± ½±²·¬ °®·³¿®·´§ ±º ¹´¿ ¬±®»º®±²¬ ©·¬¸ «°½¿´» ¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´ »´»³»²¬ ½±²·¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ´±±µ ±º Ì¸» Ð±·²¬» ¿¬ Þ®·¼¹»°±®¬ô Þ®·¼¹»°±®¬ Ê·´´¿¹»ô ¿²¼ Ð·±²»»® Ð´¿½»ò É» »» ½¿²±°·»ô ¿©²·²¹ô ¿²¼ ±«¬·¼» ¼·²·²¹ ±°°±®¬«²·¬·» ¬± ½®»¿¬» ¿² ¿½¬·ª» ¬±®»º®±²¬ ´·º»ò Ì¸» ¸±«·²¹ »´»³»²¬ ©±«´¼ ¬¿µ» ±² ¿ ª¿®·»¬§ ±º ´±±µò É» ©±«´¼ »¨°»½¬ ¬¸» ®»²¬¿´ ¿°¿®¬³»²¬ ¾«·´¼·²¹ ±ª»® ¬¸» ¹®±½»® ¬± ¾» ³±¼»´»¼ ¿º¬»® Ò±®¬¸ Ó¿·² Ê·´´¿¹»ò Ì¸» ½±²¼± ¿²¼ ´±º¬ ¸±«·²¹ ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ½±²·¼»®¿¾´» ¹´¿ º¿½» ·² ¿ ª¿®·»¼ ¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´ ¬§´» ¿µ·² ¬± ¾«·´¼·²¹ ·² Ð±®¬´¿²¼ Ð»¿®´ Ü·¬®·½¬ò É» »¨°»½¬ ¬± ®»¸¿¾ ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ ·²¬± ¿ ¾±«¬·¯«» ¸±¬»´ ½±²·¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ª··±² ±º ¬¸» ß®¾±® Í±«¬¸ ß®½¸·¬»½¬«®» Ðß º·®³ º±® Ó½Ó±®®¿² Ý·¬§ Ô±º¬ò Ì¸» ¬¸»¿¬®» ©·´´ ¾» ¬¸» ³±¬ ½¸¿´´»²¹·²¹ ¬± ¼»·¹² ·² ¬¸¿¬ ·¬ ©·´´ °®»»²¬ ¿ ¾´¿²µ ©¿´´ º¿½» ¿¬ ¬¸» »½±²¼ ¿²¼ ¬¸·®¼ ¬±®§ ´»ª»´ ¿²¼ ©» »¨°»½¬ ¿ Ð·±²»»® Ð´¿½» ´·µ» º¿9¿¼» º±® ¬¸» ¬¸»¿¬®» »´»³»²¬ò Ñ«® ¹±¿´ · ¬± ½®»¿¬» ¿ ®·½¸ ¿²¼ ª¿®·»¼ °¿´»¬¬» ±º ¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®» ©¸·½¸ ¿¬¬®¿½¬ ®»¬¿·´»®ô ½«¬±³»® ¿²¼ ¸±«·²¹ ¾«§»®ò ÕÉÙ · ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ¬± «¬¿·²¿¾·´·¬§ ·² ¬¸· °®±¶»½¬ ¿ ©» ·²¼·½¿¬»¼ ·² ±«® °®±°±¿´ò ß¬ ¿ ³·²·³«³ ©» °®±°±»¼ ¿¼¼·²¹ ¿ ²«³¾»® ±º ¹®»»² »´»³»²¬æ «² ¸¿¼·²¹ô «» ±º ¹®»»² ®±±ºô ¬±®³ ©¿¬»® ®»¬»²¬·±²ô «» ±º «¬¿·²¿¾´» ¾«·´¼·²¹ ³¿¬»®·¿´ô ´±© Û ©·²¼±©ô ·²«´¿¬·±² »¨½»»¼·²¹ Ý±¼» ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ ¿²¼ »²»®¹§ »ºº·½·»²¬ ¿°°´·¿²½»ò É» ©±«´¼ ¸±°» ¬± ¿½¸·»ª» ÔÛÛÜ ½»®¬·º·½¿¬·±² º±® ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ±³» ±º ¬¸» ¾«·´¼·²¹ô °¿®¬·½«´¿®´§ ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ò Ò±¬©·¬¸¬¿²¼·²¹ô ·¬ · ±«® »¨°»®·»²½» ¬¸¿¬ ¿½¸·»ª»³»²¬ ±º ÔÛÛÜ ½´¿·º·½¿¬·±² ®»¯«·®» ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ·²½®»³»²¬¿´ ·²ª»¬³»²¬ò É» ¾»´·»ª» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸»®» · ¿ ¾¿´¿²½» ¾»¬©»»² ½±¬ ¿²¼ ¹®»»² ±¾¶»½¬·ª» ¬¸¿¬ ©·´´ ·³°¿½¬ « ¿²¼ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ «²¼»® ±«® °®±°±»¼ ¬®«½¬«®»ò Ú·®³·²¹ «° ¬¸» »¨¿½¬ «¬¿·²¿¾´» º»¿¬«®» ©·´´ ·²ª±´ª» ¼·¿´±¹«» ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¿²¼ ÕÉÙ ±ª»® ·²ª»¬³»²¬ ·² ¹®»»² ³»¿«®»ò É» ¿®» ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ¬± °«®«·²¹ «¬¿·²¿¾´» ¹±¿´ ·² ¬¸¿¬ ½±²¬»¨¬ò êò Ð¿®µ·²¹ Î»¯«·®»³»²¬ Ð¿®µ·²¹ · ¿´©¿§ ¬¸» ³±¬ ¼·ºº·½«´¬ ·«» º±® «®¾¿² ·²º·´´ °®±¶»½¬ò ×¬ · ½®·¬·½¿´ ¬± ¸¿ª» º±® ¿ °®±¶»½¬ «½½»ô ¾«¬ ·¬ · ª»®§ »¨°»²·ª»ò Î»¬¿·´»® ·²·¬ ±² ¸¿ª·²¹ ·¹²·º·½¿²¬ °¿®µ·²¹ ²»¿®¾§ ¿ ¿ °®»®»¯«··¬» ¬± ´»¿·²¹ ¬¸»·® °¿½»ô ¬§°·½¿´´§ ¿¬ ì °¿½» °»® ïôððð º»»¬ ±º ®»¬¿·´ò Ù®±½»® ¿®» ·³·´¿®´§ ¹®»»¼§ º±® °¿®µ·²¹ô ©¿²¬·²¹ ¿¬ ´»¿¬ º±«® °¿½» °»® ïôððð º»»¬ò Ì¸»¿¬®» ¿®» »ª»² ³±®» ·²¬»²» ·² ¬¸»·® °¿®µ·²¹ ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ ¬¸»§ ©¿²¬ ¿ °¿½» º±® »ª»®§ ¬¸®»» »¿¬ò Ú±® ¿´» ¸±«·²¹ ·² ±«® ³·²¼ ®»¯«·®» ±²» °¿½» °»® «²·¬ò Ü±©²¬±©² ®»²¬¿´ ¸±«·²¹ ½±«´¼ ¹»¬ ¾§ ©·¬¸ ±³»¬¸·²¹ ´»æ òéë °¿½» °»® «²·¬ò Ì¸» ¸±¬»´ «»® ©·´´ ²»»¼ °¿®µ·²¹ ¾«¬ ½¿² ®»´§ ±² ª¿´»¬ »®ª·½» ©·¬¸ ±ºº·½» °¿®µ·²¹ ´±¬ ©¸·½¸ ¸¿ª» ¼·ºº»®»²¬ ¬·³» ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ º±® °¿®µ·²¹ «¬·´·¦¿¬·±²ò Þ¿»¼ ±² ±«® °®±¹®¿³ô ©» »¬·³¿¬» ¿ °¿®µ·²¹ ²»»¼ ±º ïôêèð °¿½»ò É» °´¿² ±² ¾«·´¼·²¹ ±ª»® êðð °¿½» ¿²¼ ½±«²¬·²¹ ±² ¬¸» ±¬¸»® ïôððð °¿½» º®±³ ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ´±¬ò Ñª»® ¸¿´º ±º ¬¸· ¸±®¬º¿´´ ½¿² ½±³» º®±³ ¬¸» ½·¬§ ´±¬ ¿¬ Þ®±¿¼©¿§ ¿²¼ Ý¸¿®²»´¬±²ò Ì¸»®» ¿®» «®º¿½» ´±¬ ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® °¿®µ·²¹ ´±¬ ©·¬¸·² ¾´±½µ ¬¸¿¬ °®±ª·¼» ¬¸» ¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ °¿½»ò É» ¿´± »¨°»½¬ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸»®» ©·´´ ¾» ·¹²·º·½¿²¬ ¬®¿²·¬ «» ¹·ª» ¬¸» ´±½¿¬·±² ±º ¬¸» É»¬ Û²¼ ¿¬ ¬¸» »°·½»²¬»® ±º ¬¸» Û«¹»²» ³¿ ¬®¿²·¬ §¬»³ò éò Ú»¿·¾·´·¬§ ±º Þ«·´¼·²¹ Î»«» É» ¿®» °®±¹®¿³³·²¹ ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ ¬± ¾» ®»¸¿¾¾»¼ ·²¬± ¿ ¸·¹¸ »²¼ô ¾±«¬·¯«» ¸±¬»´ò É» ¿®» ¿©¿®» ±º »·³·½ ¿²¼ ¹»±¬»½¸²·½¿´ ©±®µ ¬¸¿¬ «²¼»®°·² ¬¸» ¸±°» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸· ½±²ª»®·±² ½¿² ¾» ¿½½±³°´·¸»¼ò É» ¸¿ª» °®±ª·¼»¼ ¿ ¾«¼¹»¬ ±º üïëð °»® º±±¬ ·² ¸¿®¼ ½±¬ ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ½±¬ ¬± ¿½¸·»ª» ¬¸· ¹±¿´ò É» ½¿²²±¬ ¾» «®» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸· · °±·¾´» ©·¬¸±«¬ »¨¬»²·ª» ®»ª·»© ±º ¬®«½¬«®¿´ ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® °®±¹®¿³³¿¬·½ ·«»ò Ì¸» Ý·¬§ ¸¿ »¨°®»»¼ ¿ ¬®±²¹ ¼»·®» ¬± ®»¬¿·² ¬¸» É¿¸¾±«®²» Þ«·´¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ®»²±ª¿¬» ¬¸¿¬ ·²¬± ¿² »´»³»²¬ ±º ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ò É¸·´» ¬¸· ®»«´¬ ¼·³·²·¸» ¬¸» ¼»²·¬§ ±º ±«® °®±°±»¼ °´¿²ô ©» ¿®» ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ¬± ®»°»½¬ ¬¸» ½±³³«²·¬§ ¼»·®» ¬± ®»¬¿·² ¬¸· ¬®«½¬«®» ¿²¼ ©±«´¼ ·²½±®°±®¿¬» ¬¸» ®»²±ª¿¬»¼ ¬®«½¬«®» ·²¬± ±«® ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ °®±¹®¿³ò Ì¸» ¬©± ¬±®§ ²¿¬«®» ±º ¬¸· ¾«·´¼·²¹ ³¿µ» ®»²±ª¿¬·±² º¿® ·³°´»® ¬¸¿² ·¬ ²»·¹¸¾±®ô ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ò É» ©±«´¼ °®±°±» ®»¬¿·²·²¹ ¬¸» ±ºº·½» «» ±² ¬¸» »½±²¼ º´±±® ¿²¼ ®»¼±·²¹ ¬¸» ½±³³»®½·¿´ ¬±®»º®±²¬ ·²¬± ¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª» ®»¬¿·´ º®±²¬¿¹»ò Ñ¬¸»® ¬®«½¬«®» ±² ¬¸» ®»³¿·²·²¹ °®±°»®¬·» ©±«´¼ ¾» ¼»³±´·¸»¼ò èò Ð®»»®ª¿¬·±² ±º ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ ¿²¼ É¿¸¾±«®²» Þ«·´¼·²¹ ß ·²¼·½¿¬»¼ ¿¾±ª»ô ©» ¿®» ½±³³·¬¬»¼ ¬± ®»¸¿¾¾·²¹ ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ ·²¬± ¿ ¸·¹¸ »²¼ ¾±«¬·¯«» ¸±¬»´ò É» ©·´´ ®»¬¿·² ¬¸» É¿¸¾±«®²» Þ«·´¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ®»²±ª¿¬» ¬¸¿¬ ¬®«½¬«®» ¿ ¿°°»¿® ¬± ¾» ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¼»·®»ò çò Ð®»»®ª¿¬·±² ±º Ô±½¿´ Þ«·²»» É» ©·´´ ©±®µ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¬± °®»»®ª» ´±½¿´ ¾«·²»»ò Ì¸»®» ¿®»ô ¸±©»ª»®ô ±¾ª·±« ¼·°´¿½»³»²¬ ·«» ¬¸¿¬ ¿®·» º®±³ ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ¿½¬·ª·¬·» ©¸·½¸ ©·´´ ¬¿µ» ±ª»® ±²» §»¿® ¬± ½±³°´»¬»ò É» ©·´´ ¿´± »»µ ¬± «°¹®¿¼» ¬¸» ½¸¿®¿½¬»® º®±³ ¬¸» »¨·¬·²¹ ¹®±«²¼ º´±±® ®»¬¿·´ ¬± ½®»¿¬» ¿ ´·ª»´§ ¿²¼ «°½¿´» »²ª·®±²³»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¿ ³·¨ ±º ²¿¬·±²¿´ ¿²¼ ´±½¿´ ®»¬¿·´»® ¿²¼ ®»¬¿«®¿²¬ò É» ¿®» ¿©¿®» ¬¸¿¬ ¿ ²«³¾»® ±º »¨·¬·²¹ ¬»²¿²¬ ¸¿ª» »¨°®»»¼ ¿ ¼»·®» ¬± ¬¿§ ·² ¬¸» ¿®»¿ò É» ©·´´ ¼± ±«® ¾»¬ ¬± ¿½½±³³±¼¿¬» ¬¸»³ô µ»»°·²¹ ·² ³·²¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸»§ ©·´´ ¸¿ª» ¬± ¸¿ª» ¿ ¬®¿²·¬·±² °´¿² ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» ½±²¬®«½¬·±² °»®·±¼ ¿²¼ ¬¸»§ ©·´´ ¸¿ª» ¬± ¾» ¿¾´» ¬± ¿ºº±®¼ ¬¸» ²»© ®»²¬ò Î»¬»²¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ±ºº·½» ¬»²¿²¬ ·² ¬¸» É¿¸¾±«®²» Þ«·´¼·²¹ ©±«´¼ ¾» ¿² ·³°±®¬¿²¬ ¹±¿´ò ïðò Ý·¬§ Ú·²¿²½·¿´ Ð¿®¬·½·°¿¬·±² ß¬ ½±²·¼»®¿¾´» ®·µô ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°»® · °®±°±·²¹ ¿ ¾±´¼ ¿²¼ ¿¹¹®»·ª» ½±²½»°¬ ¬± ¹·ª» ¼±©²¬±©² Û«¹»²» ¿ ¹·¿²¬ ¸±¬ ·² ¬¸» ¿®³ ¾§ ½®»¿¬·²¹ ¿² ¿½¬·ª»ô »¨½·¬·²¹ »²¬»®¬¿·²³»²¬ ¿²¼ ®»¬¿·´ ¼·¬®·½¬ ·² ¬¸» ½·¬§ ½±®»ò É» ©»®» ª»®§ «°º®±²¬ ·² ±«® ÎÚÏ ®»°±²» ¿¾±«¬ ²»»¼·²¹ Ý·¬§ º·²¿²½·¿´ ·²ª±´ª»³»²¬ ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸· ª··±² ¿ ®»¿´·¬§ò É» ¿µ»¼ º±®æ ¿òÌ¸» Ý·¬§ ¬± °¿§ º±® ¬¸» °¿®µ·²¹ «²¼»® ¬¸» ¹®±½»®ñ¿ºº±®¼¿¾´» ¸±«·²¹ô ¬¸» ¸±¬»´ ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¬¸»¿¬®»ò ¾òÌ¸» Ý·¬§ ¬± ¾«§ ¼±©² ¬¸» ´¿²¼ ¬± ¿ ´»ª»´ ¬¸¿¬ ©±«´¼ °®±ª·¼» ¿ ïíû §·»´¼ ±² ½±¬ º±® ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ º±® ¬¸» »¯«·¬§ °¿®¬²»®ò ½òÌ¸» Ý·¬§ ©±«´¼ ¾» ®»°±²·¾´» º±® ¿²§ «¬·´·¬§ ®»´±½¿¬·±² ½±¬ ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® ±ºº·¬» ½±¬ò ¼òÌ¸» ¸±«·²¹ «²·¬ ©±«´¼ ¾» ¹·ª»² ¿ ¬»² §»¿® °®±°»®¬§ ¬¿¨ ¿¾¿¬»³»²¬ò »òÌ¸» Ý·¬§ ©±«´¼ ¿·¬ Ü»ª»´±°»® ·² º·²¼·²¹ ¹¿° º·²¿²½·²¹ º±® ¬¸» ¿ºº±®¼¿¾´» ®»²¬¿´ ¸±«·²¹ »´»³»²¬ô ·º ²»»¼»¼ò É» ¸¿ª» ¿¬¬»³°¬»¼ ¬± ¯«¿²¬·º§ ¿² »¬·³¿¬» ±º ¬¸· ¿·¬¿²½» ¾¿»¼ ±² ¿ °®±º±®³¿ ½®»¿¬»¼ º®±³ ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ½±²½»°¬ °®±¹®¿³ò Ì¸· · ·² ±«® ³·²¼ °»½«´¿¬·ª» ¿¬ ¬¸· ¬·³» ¹·ª»² ¬¸» ´¿½µ ±º °®±¶»½¬ ¼»¬¿·´ ¿²¼ ¬«¼§ ±º ¬¸» ·¬» ·«»ò Ì¸»®» ¿®» ¿ ²«³¾»® ±º ³¿¶±® °®±¹®¿³ ·«» ¬¸¿¬ ¼®·ª» ¬¸· ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ò Ú±® »¨¿³°´»æ ¼± ©» ®»¬¿·² ¬¸» É¿¸¾±«®²» ¾«·´¼·²¹á Ý¿² ©» ¹»¬ ¿ ¹®±½»® ¬± ½±³³·¬ ¬± ¿ ¼±©²¬±©² ¬±®»á × ®»¸¿¾ ±º ¬¸» Ý»²¬®» Ý±«®¬ Þ«·´¼·²¹ º»¿·¾´»á Ý¿² ©» ¿½¸·»ª» ¿ ÔÛÛÜ ·´ª»® ®¿¬·²¹ ±² ¬¸· ¾«·´¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ¿¬ ©¸¿¬ ½±¬á Ý¿² ©» ¹»¬ ¿ ¬¸»¿¬®» ±°»®¿¬±® ¬± ½±³» ·²¬± ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©²ô °¿®¬·½«´¿®´§ ·² ¬¸» ´·¹¸¬ ±º ¬¸» ±°»²·²¹ ±º ¬¸» ²»© Ê¿´´»§ Î·ª»® ¬¸»¿¬®»á Ü±» ¬¸» ½·¬§ ©¿²¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ïèì ¿ºº±®¼¿¾´» ®»²¬¿´ «²·¬ ·² ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©²á Ý¿² ©» ½®»¿¬» ¬¸» §²»®¹·¬·½ ¿¬³±°¸»®» ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ½±°» ±º ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¬± ¿¬¬®¿½¬ ¬¸» ¬§°» ±º ®»¬¿·´»® ©» ©¿²¬ ¬± ¿¬¬®¿½¬ ¬± ¬¸» ¼±©²¬±©²á Ý¿² ©» ¹»¬ ½±²¬®±´ ±º ¿´´ ¬¸» ´¿²¼ ©» ©¿²¬ ¬± ¿½¯«·®» ¿²¼ ©¸¿¬ ©·´´ ·¬ ®»¿´´§ ½±¬á É» ¾»´·»ª» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ¿²©»® ¬± ¬¸»» ¯«»¬·±² ©·´´ ¾» °±·¬·ª» ·² ²¿¬«®»ò Ì¸¿¬ · ©¸§ ©» ¿®» °«®«·²¹ ¬¸· ±°°±®¬«²·¬§ò Þ«¬ ¬¸» ¯«¿²¬·º·½¿¬·±² ±º ¬¸» »½±²±³·½ »´»³»²¬ · ¼·ºº·½«´¬ «²¬·´ ¬¸» ½±²½»°¬ · ®»º·²»¼ò Ò±¬©·¬¸¬¿²¼·²¹ô ¿¬ §±«® ®»¯«»¬ô ©» ¸¿ª» ³¿¼» ¿«³°¬·±² ¿²¼ °«¬ º±®¬¸ ±«® ¾»¬ »¬·³¿¬» ±º ¬¸» »½±²±³·½ °®±º±®³¿ º±® ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ½±²½»°¬ò Û¨¸·¾·¬ ß °®±ª·¼» ¿ ¾®»¿µ¼±©² ±º ¬¸» ½±¬ »´»³»²¬ ¿²¼ ³¿¶±® ¿«³°¬·±²ò Þ¿»¼ ±² ¬¸¿¬ °®±º±®³¿ô ©» »¬·³¿¬» ¬¸» Ý·¬§ «°°±®¬ ¬± ¾» ¿ º±´´±©æ Ð¿®µ·²¹ ïëôçèéôçéî Ë¬·´·¬·» ëôðððôððð Ñºº·¬» ½±¬ ïôððîôððð Þ«§¼±©² º±® °®±º·¬ §·»´¼ ïôëëêôîëï ßºº±®¼¿¾´» Ø±«·²¹ Ô±¿² ïôíîéôïèï Ì±¬¿´ îìôèéíôìðì Ì¸» Ý·¬§ »²¼ «° ±©²·²¹ ¬¸» °¿®µ·²¹ º±® ¬¸» ¹®±½»®ô ¬¸»¿¬®» ¿²¼ ®»²¬¿´ ¸±«·²¹ò Ì¸» Ý·¬§ ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¿ ´±¿² ¬± ¬¸» ßºº±®¼¿¾´» Ø±«·²¹ Ð®±¶»½¬ô ©¸·½¸ ©±«´¼ ¾» °¿·¼ ¾¿½µ ¿¬ ±³» °±·²¬ò Ú·²¿´´§ ¬¸» ¿½¬«¿´ Ý·¬§ ½±²¬®·¾«¬·±² ©±«´¼ ±¾ª·±«´§ ¾» «¾¶»½¬ ¬± ©±®µ·²¹ ±«¬ ¬¸» º·²¿´ °®±¹®¿³ ±º ¬¸» ¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ò EXHIBIT B EUGENE WEST BROADWAY RFQ KWG DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS BASIC MASSING SITE 334 BC160 D 160 A 334334 334 SITE NUMBERSMAP GUIDE BLOCKS WANTED A334334111,556 PARKING B160558,800 RETAIL C16033453,440 HOTEL D16033453,440 THEATRE HOUSING Total footage227,236 Acres5.22 UNDERGROUND 334 BC160 D 160 A 334334 334 EUGENE WEST BROADWAY RFQ GROUND FLOOR 334 BC160 D 160 A 334334 334 SECOND FLOOR 334 BC160 D 160 A 334334 334 EUGENE WEST BROADWAY RFQ THIRD FLOOR 334 BC160 D 160 A 334334 334 FOURTH FLOOR BC D A 334334 EUGENE WEST BROADWAY RFQ FIFTH FLOOR BC D A 334334 ß¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ Ý ÜÎßÚÌ Ð«¾´·½ ×²ª±´ª»³»²¬ Ñ«¬´·²» øÓ¿§ ß«¹«¬ îððé÷ Ò±¬»æ Ì¸· ±«¬´·²» · °®»´·³·²¿®§ò Ì¸» ¼»¬¿·´ ±º ¿ ½±´´¿¾±®¿¬·ª» ¿²¼ ½®»¿¬·ª» °«¾´·½ ·²ª±´ª»³»²¬ °®±½» ©·´´ ²»»¼ ¬± ¾» ¼»ª»´±°»¼ ¬± »²¹¿¹» ½±³³«²·¬§ ³»³¾»® ¿²¼ ¼±©²¬±©² ¬¿µ»¸±´¼»® ®»¹¿®¼·²¹ ¬¸· ·³°±®¬¿²¬ ®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬ ¿®»¿ ·² ¼±©²¬±©²ò ßòÐ«¾´·½ ×²ª±´ª»³»²¬ Ñ«¬´·²» ·º ÕÉÙ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Ð¿®¬²»® Í»´»½¬»¼ Ó¿§ ïòÐ«¾´·½ É±®µ¸±°æ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ñª»®ª·»© îòÐ«¾´·½ Ø»¿®·²¹ ±² Í»½¬·±² ïðèñÞÛÜ× Ö«²» íòÍ¬¿µ»¸±´¼»® Ó»»¬·²¹ Û¨¿³°´»æ Û¨·¬·²¹ ¼±©²¬±©² ¾«·²»» ú Ü±©²¬±©² Û«¹»²»ô ×²½ò Ü±©²¬±©² Ò»·¹¸¾±® ß±½·¿¬·±² Ð®±°»®¬§ Ñ©²»® Ì»²¿²¬ ìòÝ±²¬·²«·²¹ ±«¬®»¿½¸ ¬± »¨·¬·²¹ É»¬ Þ®±¿¼©¿§ ¬»²¿²¬ ëòÌ±©² ¸¿´´ ³»»¬·²¹ ¬± ¾» ¸»´¼ ·² ¿°°®±°®·¿¬» ´±½¿¬·±² ±«¬·¼» ±º ¼±©²¬±©² Ð±¬»²¬·¿´´§ ½±ó°±²±®»¼ ¾§ ²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ ¹®±«°»¼ ¾§ ¿®»¿ øÒÉô ÍÉô ÒÛô ÍÛ÷ ¿òÌ±©² Ø¿´´ Ó»»¬·²¹ ýï ø»¿®´§ ³±²¬¸÷ ¾òÌ±©² Ø¿´´ Ó»»¬·²¹ ýî ø´¿¬» ³±²¬¸÷ Ö«´§ êòÌ±©² ¸¿´´ ³»»¬·²¹ ø½±²¬·²«»¼÷ ¿òÌ±©² Ø¿´´ Ó»»¬·²¹ ýí ø»¿®´§ ³±²¬¸÷ ¾òÌ±©² Ø¿´´ Ó»»¬·²¹ ýì ø´¿¬» ³±²¬¸÷ éòÐ«¾´·½ Ø»¿®·²¹ ±² Ë®¾¿² Î»²»©¿´ Ð´¿² ß³»²¼³»²¬ ß«¹«¬ èòÐ«¾´·½ ·²°«¬ ±² º·²¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ¼»¬¿·´ Þò Ð«¾´·½ ×²ª±´ª»³»²¬ Ñ«¬´·²» ·º Þ»¿³ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Í»´»½¬»¼ Ó¿§ ïòÐ«¾´·½ É±®µ¸±°æ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ñª»®ª·»© îòÐ«¾´·½ Ø»¿®·²¹ ±² Í»½¬·±² ïðèñÞÛÜ×ô ·º ¿°°´·½¿¾´» Ö«²» íòÍ¬¿µ»¸±´¼»® Ó»»¬·²¹ Û¨¿³°´»æ Û¨·¬·²¹ ¼±©²¬±©² ¾«·²»» ú Ü±©²¬±©² Û«¹»²»ô ×²½ò Ü±©²¬±©² Ò»·¹¸¾±® ß±½·¿¬·±² Ð®±°»®¬§ Ñ©²»® Ì»²¿²¬ ìòÝ±²¬·²«·²¹ ±«¬®»¿½¸ ¬± »¨·¬·²¹ É»¬ Þ®±¿¼©¿§ ¬»²¿²¬ ëòÌ±©² ¸¿´´ ³»»¬·²¹æ °±¬»²¬·¿´´§ ½±ó°±²±®»¼ ¾§ ²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ ß«¹«¬ êòÐ«¾´·½ ·²°«¬ ±² º·²¿´ °®±¶»½¬ ¼»¬¿·´ Attachment D Summary of West Broadway Purchase Option Terms Renew Options: #11 (Centre Court, $30,000), #12 (Washburne, $20,000), & #15 (Diva to Shawmed, $40,000): applied to purchase price th April 26 Renew Option on #4 (Horse Head Bar, $10,000) nd May 22 Renew Option on #10 (Roberts: Taco Time $2,000) Renew Option on #8 (Keim, $4,000 & price increase $70,000) th By September 15 Renew Options on #5 & #7 (Lazar, $4,000 & price increase $100,000) th By September 19 Purchase #6 (John Henry’s Bar, $625,000) th By September 25 Purchase #9 (Scan Design, $2.2M) th By October 19 Purchase #11 ($2.8M), #12 (Washburne, $1.9M), & #15 (Diva to Shawmed, $3.15M) th By October 26 Purchase #4 (Horse Head Bar, $1.98M) th By November 22 Purchase #8 (Keim, $900,000) By March 15, 2008 Purchase #10 (Roberts: Taco Time, $1.2M) By September 15, 2008 Purchase #5 & #7 (Lazar, $1.55M) By September 19, 2008 Attachment E Option 1 Timeline: Select KWG Development Partners URA Selects KWG th April 25 Renew Options on #11, #12, & #15 Public ($90,000, applied to purchase price) th Participation: April 26 ongoing Renew Option #4 ($10,000) through project nd May 22 planning Define Financing Strategy May May 2007 to October 2008 Amend Downtown Urban Renewal Plan Section 108/BEDI (130 days) Start in May CC/URA Initial OK Public Hearing MayMay Public Hearing Resolution th JulyBy June 15 URA gives OK to CC HUD Approval (75 days) July By September CC Ordinance September URA Final Project Approval & CC Budget Authority September Renew Option on #10 ($2,000) Renew Option on #8 ($4,000 & price increase $70,000) th BySeptember 15 Renew Option on #5 & #7 ($4,000 & price increase $100,000) th By September 19 Sign Purchase and Sale Agreement & Finalize Section 108/BEDI Funds September Purchase #6 ($625,000) th By September 25 Project Planning October 2007 ? October 2008 Purchase #9 ($2.2M) By October 19, 2007 Purchase #11 ($2.8M), #12 ($1.9M), & #15 ($3.15M) By October 26, 2007 Purchase #4 ($1.98M) By November 22, 2007 Purchase #8 ($900,000) By March 15, 2008 Purchase # 10 ($1.2M) By September 15, 2008 Purchase #5 & #7 ($1.55M) By September 19, 2008 Purchase Remaining Necessary Property (not currently under option) By September 2008 Permitting October 2008 to January 2009 Construction January 2009 ? January 2010 Urban Renewal Revenues start FY11 Attachment F Option 2 Timeline: Select Beam Development URA Selects Beam th April 25 Expiration of Option on #15 Renew Options on #11 & #12 th April 26 $50,000 (applied to purchase price) Public th Participation: April 26 ongoing through project planning Define Financing Strategy May 2007 to May October 2008 City participation less City participation greater than $4M than $4M Use Cash Section Amend Downtown Section (Urban Renewal 108/BEDI Urban Renewal 108/BEDI or Other) Plan (130 days) start in May Expiration of Option on #4 nd May 22 Public Public Hearing Hearing May May CC/URA Initial OK May Resolution Resolution By June By June Expiration of Options on #10 & # 8 15th 15th th September 15 URA gives OK to HUD CC HUD Approval July Approval (~75 days) (~75 days) By By September September CC Ordinance Expiration of Options on #5 & #7 September th September 19 URA Final Project Approval & CC Budget Authority September Expiration of Option on #6 September 25th Sign Purchase & Sale Agreement September Expiration of Option on #9 th October 19 Purchase #11 & #12 ($2.8M & $1.9M) th By October 26 Project Planning October 2007 to October 2008 Permitting October 2007 to January 2008 Construction January 2008 to January 2009 Urban Renewal Revenues start FY10 Attachment G Option 3: Take No Action on the RFQ Responses URA does not select KWG or Beam th April 25 Expiration of Options on #11, #12, & #15 th April 26 Expiration of Option on #4 nd May 22 Expiration of Option on #10 & #8 th September 15 Expiration of Option on #6 th September 25 Expiration of Option on #5 & #7 th September 19 Expiration of Option on #9 th October 19