Councilors, consultants steer RFP toward workforce, missing-middle housing at Gateway site

Matt Brinkley, principal at Green Top Planning, told the Town City Council and Urban Renewal Agency during a Jan. 29 joint study session that staff is preparing an RFP to solicit development interest for the Gateway site and wanted confirmation on housing priorities. “We—re developing an RFP. So this is a solicitation that would be sent out to potential developers, to determine whether or not, there—s interest in redeveloping the site and what specifically that redevelopment would look like,” Brinkley said.

Councilors and consultants focused on middle- or workforce-housing serving households making roughly 80% to 120% of area median income (AMI), and on unit types that fit current household sizes. “I would say that there is definitely need for housing that is affordable to households at 80 to 120,” Brinkley said, describing both incentive gaps and financing constraints that make that product hard to deliver without public support.

Why it matters: The Gateway site sits near transit and downtown amenities, making it a logical place for denser housing targeted to working households and smaller households. Councilors emphasized that the RFP should both signal preferences (ownership opportunities, accessible ground-floor units, mixed unit sizes) and leave enough flexibility for developers to propose feasible solutions.

Most councilors backed the 80–120% AMI focus but asked for market verification. Councilor Medina said the AMI band reflected local need but urged staff to confirm the right mix locally, noting past Housing Authority conversations about shifting income targeting. “So that—s why it went up. But I think that—s our thinking is that this is really a need between the 80 and 120,” Medina said.

Unit mix and tenure: Participants generally favored smaller units (studios and one-bedrooms) reflecting shrinking household sizes, and a “missing middle” approach—townhomes, duplexes, triplexes and small multifamily—to create a mix of rental and for-sale options. Councilor Parry Miller asked whether a developer would prefer a mix of renter and purchasable units; Brinkley recommended balancing clear city preferences with enough flexibility for developers to propose financially viable plans.

Accessibility and building code: City staff and the architect, Jennifer Nye of Salazar Architect, reviewed accessibility baseline rules and options to go beyond them. Nye summarized building-code practice: if a building has an elevator, many units can be made adaptable and a portion of units (quoted in the discussion as about five percent) are required to be adaptable at a higher level; in walk-up buildings, ground-floor units must meet a higher adaptability standard. The council discussed whether the RFP should award extra points for accessibility beyond code.

Condominiums vs. townhomes: Brinkley and Nye explained the regulatory and market differences. Vertical, stacked units generally require condominiumization under Oregon law and can add complexity and costs; townhomes (including attached units) can often be structured so buyers own the land under their unit, avoiding condo requirements. That distinction led councilors to favor townhomes and small multifamily models over stacked-for-sale condo towers for the Gateway site.

Next steps and staff direction: Brinkley said staff will use council guidance to draft RFP language that signals city priorities (AMI targets, unit mix, accessibility and sustainability preferences) while leaving room for respondents to propose viable plans. He also said the team expects to return with additional topics—including architecture and sustainability—at a later study session.

Ending: Councilors asked staff to pair the RFP with a targeted market check and to consider incentives and selection scoring that reward proposals expanding accessibility, ownership opportunities, or middle-income units.