Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Disposition 205 Madison topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears options for 205 Madison property; appraisal and developer interest noted, further community conversations planned
Summary
City staff reviewed options for 205 Madison Street — keep for future use or declare surplus and solicit proposals — and cited a November 2022 appraisal valuing the one‑acre site at about $14,415,000; staff and council discussed developer interest, affordable‑housing proposals and the need for neighborhood outreach before any action.
City staff presented options on Feb. 10 for the 1‑acre property at 205 Madison Street, north of Calapooia Brewing, including keeping the land for city use or declaring it surplus and seeking developer proposals or donation for affordable housing.
"It's about an acre in size. It is zoned WF or waterfront," planner Matthew Rutgers said, and staff told the council the city acquired the site in February 2013 via settlement with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway.
The nut graf: Staff outlined procedural options if the council chooses to surplus the property — a surplus declaration (motion from the dais) would trigger the city’s surplus property policy and allow staff to solicit proposals, issue an RFP for housing, or consider donation to an affordable‑housing developer; staff also noted windows for state funding that could influence timing.
Staff said the city commissioned an appraisal completed in November 2022 that valued the site at about $14,415,000. Two parties identified during the presentation expressed interest in the property: the Edgewater Villages developer (adjacent property owner) and DevNW (Dev Northwest), an affordable‑housing developer that discussed concepts of 15–18 ownership townhouses for households earning up to 80% of area median income using state LIFT (Local Innovation and Fast‑Track) funds. Anne Catlin of the Community Development Department said that a March‑to‑May funding window at the state level could be used if the city declared the property surplus in time to accept proposals.
Councilors raised neighborhood concerns from prior discussions and a 2022 public comment letter by Russell Hawk. Councilor Thompson urged more outreach and suggested a community conversation at the Riverfront Community Center to collect input from neighbors and businesses before any surplus declaration. Staff said the council could defer action; if it directs staff to pursue surplus disposition, staff would return for a council motion (no resolution required) and run the formal surplus process, including a public notice and proposal deadline.
Staff said due diligence items (environmental reports, in‑lieu fees and development costs) would be documented and made available to prospective developers as part of any sale or RFP process. Councilors asked whether costs for environmental reports would fall to the city or to prospective purchasers; staff said such studies are typically part of respondent due diligence, though the city would compile and share existing data before issuing proposals.
Ending: Councilors from Ward 1 asked staff to convene neighborhood outreach prior to the council’s Feb. 26 meeting; staff agreed to return on Feb. 26 with memos and options if council wishes to consider declaring the property surplus.
