Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rda Development Old City Hall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RDA approves deadline extension for Old City Hall redevelopment; parking agreement remains under negotiation
Summary
The Murray City Redevelopment Agency approved a narrow amendment giving the developer more time to submit a building permit and added biweekly progress updates; a separate parking-agreement negotiation with Rockworth Companies continued without action after extensive discussion of hours, enforcement and EV charging.
Get email alerts on the Rda Development Old City Hall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Murray City Redevelopment Agency on May 13 approved a targeted second amendment to the purchase, sale and development agreement for the Old City Hall site that extends the developer’s deadline to submit a building permit and requires biweekly progress updates to RDA staff.
The change—described by RDA staff as procedural and time-limited—extends the submittal deadline (the developer must still submit the building permit application, not necessarily obtain the permit) and preserves the contract language that requires the developer to close within 30 days after a permit is issued. Chad Wilkinson, RDA staff, told the board the amendment responds to an unusually involved design-review process in the Murray City Center District and noted the developer has made “substantial progress” including demolition and revisions prompted by the design-review committee.
Jim Allred, representing Triumph Group, told the board leasing on the first building has gone “very well,” saying three of five floors are spoken for and that medical tenants are among the prospects. Allred said the development team submitted revised plans to city staff to get onto the next planning-commission agenda and asked for a 90‑day allowance from planning-commission approval to building-permit submittal; staff recommended approval. The RDA approved the amendment by roll call vote (unanimous).
Separately, the board held an extended discussion with Rockworth Companies about a proposed parking agreement for Block 1. Rockworth’s representative, Sarah, said the project will include an underground, access‑controlled garage with 32 city-designated stalls (access via sticker, fob or phone app) and additional surface parking intended for retail and restaurant patrons. She told the board that onsite property management would enforce lease terms and that residents would be prevented from using city-designated stalls.
Key sticking points raised by board members included: whether city stalls should be available 24/7 to employees; how to manage access for after‑hours restaurant or event use; enforcement logistics; assignment of specific stalls; and whether the city should pay to add EV chargers specifically in the city stalls. Rockworth said it is willing to negotiate hours (the draft currently lists roughly 7:30 a.m.–5:30 p.m.), to allow limited evening access for restaurants on busy nights, and to work with the city on allocation and operational rules; Rockworth also confirmed EV conduit across the site and said additional dedicated chargers would require a city contribution.
Next steps: staff said planning‑commission review will proceed in June and that the parking agreement cannot be executed until the property changes hands, but the city and Rockworth will finalize terms in advance so the agreement can be adopted once closing occurs.

