Update – CBHD Meeting Notes 9/5 All, Here are links to some recent news, plus I finally got around to transcribing notes from my recording of the 9/5 CBDH meeting. Except where noted, the answers paraphrased below come from Steve Zweck-Bronner, CU’s Attorney in charge of the campus sale. I’m happy to say that I’m optimistic that we are on a much better path now. We’ll remain vigilant and hope that CU does indeed solicit neighborhood input before making a final developer selection. I was also very pleased to hear that some local developers are in the mix. Please stay tuned and thanks for your interest! -Lon. CU’s Call for Offers ucdenver.edu/about/newsroom/newsreleases/Pages/9th-Avenue-Call-for-Offers.aspx Mary Beth’s Memo – September us6.campaign-archive1/?u=884e563510482ebb830d314ff&id=2133302075 9/5 - CBHD Meeting Notes Q: What is different about this new process, that we have hope for better success: A: I bear some responsibility for the situation with Sembler, and ultimately Fuqua. We had been working hard to make the deal with Shea work out and when it failed, they came to us offering to take the property off out hands. We were happy to have the offer. We jumped into that deal way too soon. That is why we have expanded our process to include multiple entities in order cast a much wider net. This should give us a better opportunity to find a project that is acceptable to us (CU), acceptable to the neighbors, and acceptable to the city. Q: Many years ago when Shea was ultimately selected the process included presentations to the neighborhood from multiple potential developers. I think that process helped, might we try that again? A: I think that is a good suggestion. Our process was started to get as many good proposals as we can. That may be a very good thing to do as we get farther along and are able to start boiling it down. I can’t make and commitments but I think that’s a good idea. I’ll take that back. The last thing we want to do is run in to this wall (with the neighbors). I’ll take that back. Q: Would the city or CU be opposed to a completely residential project. A: I don’t think anyone is opposed to that, the question is economic viability. At 26 acres it’s a big chunk of land. I’m not a developer, but most everyone I’ve talked to has indicated that this property would likely have more than just residential. Q: Could we get an offer from the group that redeveloped St. Anthony’s A: That could be a possibility, in fact I have reached out to them. The people who are managing this process for us are the same people who managed the sale of St. Anthony’s. Q: Has there been any selection criteria outlined? A: Yes (available at the CU Denver website). 1) We need someone who can close. Meaning someone who can come forward with a plan that is acceptable to the City, the neighbors, etc… we don’t want to have another false start. 2) We’d prefer an offer from someone willing to buy the entire parcel. 3) Someone who can do this without a lot of conditions or changes. We don’t want slow the process down with a lot of changes to the GDP. Q: How about minor changes? A: Perhaps the City Council could speak to that… Jeanne Robb (Dist 10): I talked to Rocky Piro, Planning Director, about that. We need to check with attorneys, but he and I agree that if someone comes closer to the spirit of the GDP, that would be an easy change. The GDP starts with goals that talk about an urban neighborhood infill project that the community has been talking about for a long time. My opinion is that people had asked us for minor tweaks, for example a change to a street, which seemed minor. But the effect of the change actually went against the spirit of the GDP. Q: Does the GDP have to include a big box? Jeanne Robb (Dist 10): The GDP doesn’t demand a big box. It allows one. Q: Have you lowered the price? A: We have not set a price. It’s whatever the market is going to bear. Q: I thought there was a bottom line? A: We hope the sale will cover the University’s costs. $34.8M. We sold the residential piece so you can figure the rest based on the publically available information about the piece that was already sold. If someone came to us with a deal that got us to that number we’d be ecstatic. Our sale of this campus is dictated by state statute. Any money over our costs does not go to CU, it would go to the State of Colorado. So we don’t have an incentive to get the maximum price, just to cover our costs. We didn’t set a price because we didn’t want to scare anyone off. We just want to see what the market will bear. Q: Is the group that is doing the analysis of the proposals aware of the history and sensitive to the neighborhood point of view? A: The group we have retained is Tim Romani. Who was the Vice Chancellor for CU when the campus was first sold to Shea. He is very aware of the history and he fully understands the need for neighborhood involvement. I always tell developers that they need to understand that neighbors are actively involved, they have been for a long time. That is just a reality that you (potential developer) are going to have to work through. Q: Is the site being sold as-is? A: Yes, the university does not have the capacity to keep throwing money at it, and if we did, it would just increase the price which we don’t want to do. We’ve cleaned up the vast majority of it, but there is still more work that has to be done. Yes, the site is being sold as-is. I encourage you to visit our website (CU Denver). It has the drawings and describes criteria we are thinking about, and the deadlines. There is some flexibility in those deadlines. I’ll take back the suggestion that when we get this narrowed down to a couple that we solicit neighborhood input on those proposals. Q: Could you characterize the volume and quality of interest in the proposal? A: We’ve reached out to 40, more in the next couple days. I’ve heard from 5 or 6 that are very interested and clearly have the wherewithal. I’m optimistic Q: Are any of them local? A: Yes, a couple of them are local and have done some big projects here. It’s not part of the selection criteria, but I think that is important. I think that worked against Sembler/Fuqua. Q: inaudible – regarding the price/market value A: We have done a market survey. But we’re going to see what this process bears out. We brought in Real Estate experts to tell us if we are getting a good offer. I think personally there are a lot of moving parts. This is just me talking but, if someone comes in and says I’ll take the entire site, it’s something the neighbor’s desire, the city thinks it works, and it’s something they can do quickly, but the price is not the highest offer, I think that is something we would look favorably upon. Versus, if someone comes in with a high price but we know it will get a lot of push back, I’m sure we’ll not want to put ourselves through that. We really want a deal that can get us through closing as close as possible to the price that we need. Q: Is the critical care tower now part of the deal? A: Yes, we are work with the University Hospital who owns the Critical Care Tower to include that in the package.
Posted on: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 06:34:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015