Lafayette council authorizes marketing of Campana property at $3.8 million, seeks easement protections

The Lafayette City Council on June 9 approved putting the Campana property on the market with a $3.8 million asking price and authorized the city manager to sign a listing agreement with the broker, while asking staff to work to ensure public‑access easements discussed by the community are protected in any sale.

Why it matters: The Campana parcel had been purchased by the city as a potential piece of a larger downtown plaza/parking vision. Staff and a council subcommittee said follow‑on pieces of the larger plan (nearby properties and a fourplex) became unavailable, and the city concluded the property by itself was a difficult fit for the original vision. Councilmembers said marketing the site is a way to explore market options and possibly secure a buyer who could activate the site.

Council direction and terms: The council directed the city manager to list the property and enter into a listing agreement with John Cumberlick and Associates at an asking price of $3,800,000, and to negotiate possible conditions of sale including the placement of up to two public easements discussed during the meeting. City staff and the city engineer said the sale need not be delayed to require disclosure of the city’s intent to seek easements; if the council wishes, easement provisions can be included as sale conditions or as requirements in the purchase contract.

Public concerns and staff responses: Several residents and public‑interest commenters urged the city to ensure a public trail connection along Happy Valley Creek and to preserve parking or replace it elsewhere. David Clark, a member of the city’s CREECS committee, asked whether the listing would disclose the city’s intent to secure an access easement for an aqueduct/path connection; staff said they could include easement language in the listing terms and would commission surveys and legal descriptions as needed. Neighbor Kent Grigg asked how sale or development would affect parking for the Park Theater; staff and the city manager said the Campana purchase had not been made with parking funds and that proceeds return to the city office fund.

Outcome and next steps: The motion to instruct the city manager to list the property with the broker, include potential easement conditions and execute a listing agreement passed unanimously. The council also asked the city manager to consult with the city engineer and the broker to determine whether the asking price should be adjusted if easements are required. Staff said any easement approach would require a survey and a legal description, which may affect sale terms. Proceeds from any sale will return to the city offices fund (not to the city’s parking fund), staff said.

Closing note: The council characterized the property as a stranded asset given the failure of the larger plaza/parking vision, and chose to test the market while preserving the option to require easements or other conditions that advance city trail and public‑access goals.