My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2012 06 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2012 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2012 06 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:32 PM
Creation date
7/5/2012 8:55:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
6/19/2012
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2012 06 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br /> Meeting Minutes <br /> June 19, 2012 <br /> Page 6 of 20 <br /> Staff released an RFP in April 2012 to seek proposals from developers to partner with <br /> the City to preserve and redevelop the property. Proposals were due May 23, 2012. <br /> One proposal was received prior to the May 23 due date from Steve Poppitz. A second <br /> proposal was received two days later from Amterre Property Group. Given that Amterre <br /> currently has a purchase contract with the owners of the property it was deemed <br /> prudent to review this proposal, even though it was received after the submittal date. <br /> The City Manager created a recommendation team to review the proposals. Members <br /> of the team include; <br /> Heather Balser, Deputy City Manager <br /> Aaron DeJong, Economic Development Director <br /> Troy Russ, Planning Director <br /> Sean McCartney, Principal Planner <br /> Meredyth Muth, Public Relations Manager <br /> Jean Morgan, citizen <br /> Peter Stewart, Historic Preservation Commission <br /> Mike Koertje, Historic Preservation Commission <br /> The committee first reviewed the Poppitz proposal. Team members felt the proposal <br /> lacked significant detail regarding the costs of redeveloping the property. There is no <br /> quantitative analysis. The team presented in the proposal has significant experience in <br /> residential rehabilitation projects but lacks the commercial experience needed for the <br /> project. Much of the proposal is vague regarding the proposed use of the property. The <br /> positives of this proposal include a willingness to draw on multiple resources from many <br /> sources and a significant willingness to partner to make the project happen. <br /> The Amterre proposal is structured around three basic scenarios for possible <br /> preservation and redevelopment of the property: <br /> 1. Acquire the property and preserve the structure <br /> 2. Acquire the property and redevelop the Grain Elevator and former Napa building <br /> to commercial uses <br /> 3. Acquire the property and redevelop the Grain Elevator and former Napa building <br /> to a mix of retail, office and residential. <br /> Amterre's proposal contained a thorough analysis of the costs associated with the <br /> redevelopment of the property. Amterre has an active purchase contract for the <br /> property with a purchase price listed as $950,000. <br /> The selection team was drawn to scenarios 1 and 2 outlined in the Amterre proposal. <br /> Scenario 1 in its simplest form is a preservation of the structure by acquiring the <br /> property, performing the needed improvements outlined in the structural assessment <br /> report, and then essentially 'moth balling' the structure until such a time market demand <br /> for retail or commercial will make the site viable with minimal city assistance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.