My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-20-07-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
02-20-07-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2007 9:13:00 AM
Creation date
3/19/2007 3:30:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
Work Session City Council Minutes
General - Type
Minutes
Date
2/20/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - February 20, 2007 <br /> <br />In this option, the City would simply hire a real estate broker to market and sell the property to a <br />qualified purchaser. The City would have minimal control over future development of the <br />property in this scenario. <br /> <br />PROS: Minimizes staff time and city costs in disposing of the property. <br /> <br />CONS: The purchaser would have the option to develop the property by going through the <br />City's planning process, or may simply choose to hold the property in its current state, or even re- <br />sell the property. <br /> <br />Staff recognizes the importance of public involvement in the disposition and redevelopment of <br />city-owned property and will ensure that regardless of what type of process is selected, public <br />input will be a siguificant part ofthe development planning process. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked if the City owns any other property other then the old City Hall <br />site. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant noted that the City does own other parcels ofland that are used for storm <br />water and park land. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Karen Barton stated that the City Council can be very open or <br />specific with the development requirements. A formal RFP process would require more staff <br />time and public input. <br /> <br />Councihuember Holden suggested a hybrid of options #1 and #2. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung said that he prefers a form RFP process with zoning requirements, but <br />he is not sure how defined the project specifications should be. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead recommended that the City Council create an advisory panel to review the <br />different proposals. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung suggested that the City create a selection process and criteria before <br />requesting going out to market for proposals. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead noted that this may be a good project for the EDC to review the process and <br />procedures for the sale of City owned land and have City staff develop a pro- forma process. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes asked if the property is still zoned residential/business and if so could <br />the property be developed as single family homes? <br /> <br />Community Development Director Karen Barton stated that the City Council could designate <br />whether the property is developed as residential or neighborhood business in the RFP process. <br /> <br />City staff will work on developing a formal RFP/selection criterion for the old City Hall site. <br /> <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.