08-08-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Hall/Public Works Site Purchase Agreement Discussion August 1,2005 Page 2 of2 . . I) Do Nothing Option: This is always an option but appears to be against the Council's objective of liquidating the property. The City has spent a considerable amount of money in enviromnental analysis of the property, wetland delineation, establishment of building demolition issues and an appraisal of the property. In addition, because of the past planning action, the site and design issues have been specifically identified, albeit no final resolution to the issues were completed. 2) Renegotiate with Roval Oaks: This appears to be the most straight forward option and one that could be acted on and completed by the spring of 2006. If the Council desires to proceed with this option, direction should be agreed upon as to whether a new appraisal should be ordered and the level of specificity within a new agreement. Most purchase agreements are written with the end use of the property generally described. Since the City has undergone hours of public testimony, had Planning Commission review and in-depth technical review of the site, one option would be to write into the purchase agreement specifics such as allowable street access, signage, square footage of buildings and other considerations. This may appear to take away from the planning process, but as stated previously, all issues have bcen raised and discussed. The last comment is iflesser building square footage is allowed, the developer will be asking for a lower purchase price. 3) Start a New Sale Process: If the Council seeks this direction, a key question will be the acceptable uses for the property. Based on the past planning application there was an agreement not to allow retail or restaurants. If this perspective remains, the list of acceptable uses that the City could submit, with a request for proposal to the dcvelopment/broker community, will be very limited. The other major question on request for proposals is whether the City will allow a company to submit a proposal "to act" as a broker on the property for a period of time. Most developers/brokers do not have a project "in hand" that could immediately be built on the property, so they will seek timc to put a project together. The results could mean a sale and dcvelopment in 2007. Conclusion . If the Council's objective is to have a sale and development occur in 2006, staffrecommends that the purchase agreement for Royal Oaks be renegotiated. The end land use appears to be acceptable and the kcy issues will be renegotiation of a sales price if lesser square footage is mandated, and finalizing site and design issues. The alternative, and potentially longer process, appears to be a general request for proposal, or simple advertisement to the developer/broker community, for a period of time to see what proposals could come forth. l\EarthIPlanninglMisc FileslCily Hall-PW Sitelcouncil-purchase agreement discussion-August 8 200S.doc