PHOTOS BY SARAH DECKER
Bang for the Bucks
For a budget of $11 million — that’s the contents of
the city’s replacement fund — either scheme is
buildable, but which gets the public a better bang for its
bucks? Estimates from the committee showed that the
demolition phase would be nearly identical for the
rebuild and build-new options, so the financial starting
point is essentially the same for both options.
The final product of the least expensive option for
the rebuilt City Hall (three sub-options were created by
Poticha Architects) occupies the same space, with a
changed façade. Instead of being closed from the
public, the side of the building that faces 8th Avenue
would be demolished, making the potentially beautiful
council chamber visible. Both floors would be connected
to the street.
In total, this option would create 22,585 square feet
of space that could be immediately occupied, with
31,850 square feet of shelled space rentable to businesses
or reserved for city finishing later. This phase would be
followed by occupation by departments that currently
have long-term leases in other buildings around town.
The build-new option (the architect, Rowell Brokaw,
created three sub-options) would result in a two- or
three-story building of 24,500 sq. ft., with some park
space and room left over for future expansion or to sell
or leverage with developers. Both options would be
seismically stable and would come from existing funds
set aside over the years for a new City Hall.
Mike Penwell, the city’s design and construction
manager, says that the citizens’ committee expressed
slight differences for one option or another, though
members didn’t take a formal vote. “At the end we felt
pretty much unanimously that we had two good options
and that whichever way we went we could be successful
if we did it right,” he says. “I figured it would be a split
group, but it was pretty much across the board.”
What the committee decided, according to Penwell,
was that the best option would depend on the philosophy
and priorities of City Council, not the designs
themselves. From the financial perspective, Penwell
says, using city funds exclusively would probably result
in the rebuild option. “I think that if we’re going to do
it with our own resources and no outside help, just a
standalone city project, probably some sort of major
renovation makes the most sense because it can be done
incrementally and probably at a lower overall cost,” he
says.
On the other hand, Penwell says that a new building
would be preferred if the council decides to partner with
developers and build office or retail space. “For
example,” he says, “a new scenario might reserve a
relatively small part of the existing full-block site for
City Hall and the rest might developed for other things
in conjunction with developer, but it could also provide
future expansion space for us.”
WWW.EUGENEWEEKLY.COM
Wild Card
' No city has
to rn d o wn as
many o f its
hi sto r ic
bu ild ing s as
E u g e ne has. We
hav e to stop
t ear ing d o wn
at the jalopy
phas e. '
— Kevin Matthews
Historical Value
Andrew Fisher, who volunteers on the Historic
Review Board and with the Friendly Area Neighbors,
also served on the citizens’ committee. He says that he
strongly favors a rebuilt City Hall because he sees value
in the current building that money couldn’t replace, and
some people might not see that because they’re not
accustomed to thinking of buildings from the ’50s and
’60s as historically valuable architecture.
“In a period where we’re undergoing a lot of
development, which is vital and necessary, I think that
we need to be mindful of what we’re losing,” Fisher
says.
Both Fisher and Matthews say that City Hall is an
important example of modern architecture, and
Matthews says it might be the most important example
of that style in Eugene. Opening up the south side to 8th
Avenue with a grand staircase that highlights the
council chamber and interior courtyard would go a long
way to creating a more inviting space, Matthews says,
while not eliminating a piece of Eugene’s history.
“No city has torn down as many of its historic
buildings as Eugene has,” Matthews says, comparing
classic buildings to classic cars. “We have to stop
tearing down at the jalopy phase.”
The city’s previous City Hall was torn down after the
current building was completed.
Fisher also says the interior courtyard has a Zen
garden-like feel, but even as a preservationist he would
accept changes to make the design more inviting.
“Given a choice between completely tearing it down
and a thoughtful rebuild, I would embrace the thoughtful
rebuild,” Fisher says. “Our significant local buildings
and landmarks are a finite resource that merit
conservation at best or some form of sympathetic
rebuild when appropriate.”
Mayor Kitty Piercy says that while City Council
voted last year to consider only staying at its current site
for now, that could result in a re-vote and possible
change. There’s a wild card on the horizon, and that
wild card is the Eugene Water and Electric Board
(EWEB). Piercy says that right now, EWEB intends to
move out of its riverfront building, which she thinks
could end up being a good site for City Hall.
“If I had my way, I’d say ‘stay there’ to EWEB,”
Piercy says. “If not, that presents us with other issues
and other possibilities.” She says that because of its
location on the river and heavy public use, she thinks
the public would prefer that it remain a public building.
But what about other public options for the site? And
what does that mean for 777 Pearl?
Piercy says that whatever the City Council decides,
she hopes it ends up improving downtown. She says she
doesn’t want to leave City Hall with its future undecided.
“I think we need to tell the public where we’re going
pretty soon, because I’m of the belief that before you
move, know where you’re going,” Piercy says.
Moving Forward
Even with the completion of two long, detailed
planning documents plus a wild card, more is undecided
about the future of City Hall than is decided, and no work
sessions or hearings were on the council’s agenda as of
press time.
City Manager Jon Ruiz says that once City Hall is
vacated this summer, staff intends to come back to City
Council and show them the work on both concepts, then
work with the council to develop a decision process. “We
would go through a regular design process like we would
for any building,” Ruiz says. “That would entail hiring an
architecture firm, and they would go through a design
process that would take probably 12 months before we’re
ready to start construction.”
DNA member Mandelblatt says that even as the
council tries to find a means of moving forward, it
shouldn’t make bets on being able to meet the needs of a
downtown that’s changing so rapidly, thereby running the
risk of creating more unoccupied space.
Mandelblatt recounts all of the changes happening
due to new development and the expected influx of
almost 1,500 new downtown residents. “Let’s take a
breath, get that stuff put in and see what happens,” he
says. “That’s a huge change, it’s a culture change, it’s a
philosophical change, maybe. Just take a breath, let’s see
where we wind up.”
The build new and rebuild studies are available at http://wkly.ws/1a7
GreatBuildings.com has images of City Hall taken in 2004 at http://wkly.ws/1a8
Contact the mayor and city council to comment at mayorcouncilandcityman-
ager@ci.eugene.or.us
EUGENE WEEKLY MAY 17, 2012 15