Eugene needs rules for what’s next when public-backed housing stalls

This is the last of a three-part series on “conservative urbanism” as a governing standard for housing in Eugene. Read part one and part two.

Permits are not homes. On Jan. 21, the Eugene City Council voted 6-0 to extend the closing deadline for a mixed-use housing development at 1059 Willamette St. from Feb. 1 to Aug. 3, after staff reported the development team had permits in hand.

A city can’t manage what it won’t track.

When Eugene backs housing with public land or subsidies, taxpayers deserve two things: a public clock to determine how long a project takes to get from initial application to completion, and a decision rule — a clear, measurable test for what happens next — when a deal stalls.

Earlier in this series, I proposed a citywide Housing Delivery Ledger:

• Accepted (for review): the application is complete and accepted for review, the first honest point to start timing
• Approval: the discretionary land-use decision, when one is required
• Permit: the building permit is issued (not merely submitted)
• Start: construction begins, marked by the first logged inspection (a defensible proxy already used in city reporting)
• Completion: occupancy, tracked by a certificate of occupancy, or a finaled permit status when a certificate isn’t recorded

Residents should be able to see how long it takes to move from “Accepted” to “Completion.”

But for public-backed deals, the city should run a separate clock, from “Permit issued” to “Start.” When that clock runs out without the project breaking ground, the City Council should have to choose whether to extend the project timeline, rescope the project or reset it entirely.

The city’s problem at 1059 Willamette St. is straightforward: “permitted” can still mean “not started.” Under the revised terms of the project, the sale and transfer of title (“closing”) cannot happen until construction begins. A project can have permits and still not reach “Start” if closing and financing aren’t in place. It may face real constraints, but without a date-certain decision rule, delay can become a de facto veto in a public-backed deal. The public asset stays tied up, and “no” happens without an accountable vote to extend, rescope or reset.

The reform package I propose would apply only to public-backed projects. It has three parts: Rule, Memo, Publish.

Rule:

• Define “Ready.” Define “Start.” Put both in a public-backed development agreement at signing. Start the clock only when the deal is cleared to break ground.
• Define “Ready” as construction-ready: the final permit needed to begin foundation or vertical work, and any remaining prestart step the city controls, such as closing or title transfer, that still blocks construction. Ready marks the city’s green light; it does not certify full financing.
• Define “Start” as a city-verified milestone: an inspection record tied to mobilization, demolition or foundation work, plus permit records showing active construction. Not a press release. Not a token gesture.

Memo:

• Govern the stall. If no Start has been verified after 180 days, put the deal on a public Ready-to-Start “Stall Watch.”
• The 180-day deadline is a policy choice: enough time to mobilize once real blockers clear, but short enough to limit rising costs, expired bids and worsening financing terms.
• “Stall Watch” should automatically trigger a decision memo: a public brief explaining what is stuck and why, and teeing up a decision for the City Council to extend, rescope or reset.
• Put those options on the City Council agenda. Within 60 days of entering Stall Watch, City Council must vote on the three options (extend, rescope or reset).
• “Reset” must mean remedies already written at signing, such as ending the deal, reverting the property or reissuing a request for proposals. It must not mean terms invented midstream.

Publish:

• Keep it measurable and fair. Limit Stall Watch to public-backed projects. Allow the clock to pause only for specific, documented blockers: litigation, utility delays, force majeure (unavoidable events outside anyone’s control), or city-caused delays. Require each pause to carry a named category and an estimated restart date.
• Then publish timing summaries and plain-English reason categories alongside the monthly Housing Delivery Ledger, so Stall Watch stays a benchmarking tool and works to actually get projects back on track.

Now apply that discipline to 1059 Willamette. The city owns the downtown parcel and is transferring it to the developer for $1 under an amended development agreement.

The project plan is a six-story building with 133 apartments: 68 income-qualified units at or below 80% of area median income, and 65 market-rate units. The deal locks 51% of units at 80% of area median income for 35 years, monitored by annual certification.

The city reports $1.84 million in total city and urban renewal agency assistance authorized for the project as of Jan. 21, including $740,000 approved two years ago. Yet closing had not occurred as of the Jan. 21 City Council action to extend the deadline. Because property transfer is tied to project commencement, it has not reached a verified Start.

City staff described the immediate barrier as a financing gap of roughly $1 million to $3 million, and framed the extension as time to prepare a request for additional urban renewal funds.

This is one building, not a citywide diagnosis. It is proof of a governance gap: a public-backed deal can look “permitted” and still not start.

The project also shows why a decision memo matters before new dollars are committed. City staff and the development team told councilors that any additional commitment of public funding could trigger state prevailing wage laws, and increase the gap by an additional $5 million to $7 million due to higher labor costs that would be attached to the project. Before committing new funds, a decision memo should clearly state the prevailing-wage determination status, and show costs with and without the prevailing wage determination.

Several fair concerns come up here. Sometimes delay protects taxpayers from rushing a bad deal. Developers will worry these steps will add process. Affordable-housing advocates will worry it punishes projects for delays driven by market conditions, litigation or other factors beyond their control. Process skeptics will worry it encourages token starts and chills bidders.

My answer is that rules replace drift. A fixed menu and a scheduled vote reduce improvisation and open-ended renegotiation. Objective milestones reduce gamesmanship. Limited pause reasons protect projects from being judged for delays they cannot control. And Start, defined as a logged inspection plus active permit status, means token gestures may still happen, but they will not count as a Start.

Reset matters, too. The 1059 Willamette terms include a hard closing deadline and a repurchase remedy if the buyer fails to build. Consequences should be written at signing, not invented under pressure once a project is stuck.

Here is the ask: Direct the Eugene city manager to publish an updated Housing Delivery Ledger, with a “Stall Watch” for public-backed deals.

Then, bring back a standard deal template, with “Ready” and “Start” definitions, the decision memo, and the 180- and 60-day rules for stalled projects.

A ledger without a required decision point becomes an alibi. Publish the clock, then force the choice. Eugene cannot fix every housing problem in one rule. But it can fix this one: When public-backed deals stall after they are ready, the city should decide on a clock, not drift by default.