My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-13-2002 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
02-13-2002 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:05:38 PM
Creation date
7/23/2008 2:05:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COl1NClL <br />FEBRUARY 13, 2002 <br />The City Adminisu'ator indicated that he would have a report for the Council at <br />their next meeting relative to the risk to the City of providing short-term <br />financing for this project. <br />12EDEVEL,OP- Mayor Fahey reconvened the workshop of the City Council relative to <br />MENT OF THE redevelopment proposals for the southeast corner of Rice Street and Little <br />SOU"THEAST Canada Road. Fahey noted that earlier this evening the City interviewed two <br />CORNER OF finalists for the redevelopment project at this corner. "Those developers were <br />RICE STREET Metro Plains Development and Sherman & Associates. <br />AND L77°I'LE <br />CANADA ROAD Mark Ruff; Ehlers & Associates, reported that the City cannot go wrong in <br />choosing either of these developers. Metro Plains is experienced with mixed <br />use and senior housing developments. Sherman & Associates is also <br />experienced and George Sherman is a very capable developer. Ruff reported <br />that in reviewing the financial analysis provided by each developer, while they <br />each take a different financing approach, the cost per unit for each is <br />approximately $80,000 per rental unit Ruff reported Chat Sherman provided a <br />little more detail at this point and Metro Plains took a more conservative <br />approach. Ruff' felt, however, that both development proposals were close to <br />equal. <br />Scalze pointed out that the Cownhomes proposed by Metro Plains were more <br />suited for seniors. Ruff agreed and noted that Metro Plains was proposing a <br />lower townhome density as well as more expensive townhomes. <br />Montour noted that Metro Plains was assuming more City resources in the <br />project, but felt that this might be negotiable. Fahey asked if the financing <br />proposal of one developer was more favorable than the other. <br />RuR'indicated that if Sherman does not get the financing that he included in <br />his proposal, he may not be able to reimburse the City its land costs. The City <br />Administrator noted that Metro Plains agreed that the City should be able to <br />recover its land costs. The Administrator agreed that each developer should be <br />on equal footing financially, however, the details will still have to be worked <br />through. <br />John Keis, Planning Commission, agreed that both developers were strong, but <br />indicated that he favored Metro Plains. He felt there presentation of the two <br />case studies was strong. He noted that they are proposing all single-level <br />townhomes and stated that he would prefer a combination of single and two- <br />Ievel townhomes. Keis agreed that single-level townhomes are more attractive <br />to senior citizens. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.