New Search
410 IMO <br /> 2 <br /> Basically, these figures reflect Mr. Holt's conclusion on land value <br /> and Mr. Geiser's on the value of improvements on the site. The result <br /> would be a L&WCF grant of $129,269 to the City of Eugene. This figure <br /> is more reasonable with respect to the regulations we have to operate <br /> under, not because of the dollar amount involved, but because it is <br /> based on a documented estimate of the property's value rather than <br /> your state appraisal review which, in this case, is little more than <br /> an unsupported statement of opinion. <br /> Based on the above discussion, and other factors inherent in this pro- <br /> posal , the following changes should be made to the grant agreements <br /> 0 submitted with this proposal : <br /> 1. June 7, 1976 should be entered as the project period beginning <br /> 0 date (the effective waiver date for this project) . <br /> 2. The Project Cost section of the agreement should be changed to <br /> reflect a total cost of $258,538 and a Fund amount of $129,269. <br /> You may add your state administration cost to these figures if you <br /> wish. The level of Fund support should be changed from 42.78% to 50%. <br /> 3. A special provision will have to be added to the grant contract <br /> certifying that The Nature Conservancy was not acting as an agent of <br /> the City of Eugene in the acquisition of the Morse Ranch. This re- <br /> quirement is explained in our letter of April 10, 1975. <br /> It will also be necessary to revise certain portions of the M-4 <br /> application and the Standard Form 424 to reflect the above changes <br /> in dollar allocations. <br /> In response to your letter of May 27, 1976 submitting this appli- <br /> cation, we acknowledge that it is more difficult to prepare a <br /> development plan when a project sponsor is gathering input from 11 <br /> different agencies and numerous individuals. However, we will not <br /> participate in the acquisition of a parcel of land without at least <br /> some foreknowledge of what will eventually be developed on the site. <br /> We are not going to insist on a finalized development plan in order <br /> to approve this project. However, we do think the applicant should <br /> get together with those providing input, determine their own general <br /> priorities, and then decide on a tentative development theme for <br /> this park. At that point, the city should be able to put together <br /> a conceptual development plan which should be adequate to meet the <br /> 'immediate needs of this office for project evaluation purposes. <br />