Laserfiche WebLink
To: <br />From: <br /> <br />Subject: <br />Date: <br /> <br />Catherine Mehelich, City of Elk River <br /> <br />Jim Prosser <br />Sid Inman <br />Stacie Kvilvang <br /> <br />Riverfront Development Analysis <br />June 14, 2002 <br /> <br />Provided is an summary analysis of proposals received for the Riverfront Redevelopment <br />area. All of the proposals are flexible in design and density. Changes in design and density <br />will affect TIF projections and land sale proceeds. Changes typically occur during the pre- <br />development agreement phase. Discussions with developers indicate flexibility in this area. <br />This underscores the fact that the city is selecting a developer at this point and not a <br />development. Land use and planning ratings have been provided based on the following <br />criteria: <br /> <br />4 = Concept appears to meet or exceed expected planning guidelines. <br />3 = Concept meets major components of planning requirements. <br /> Some revisions to concept would be required. <br />2 = Major changes in concept required to meet planning guidelines. <br />1 = Concept is generally inconsistent with planning guidelines. <br /> <br />It should be noted that analysis of developer experience and capability are subjective <br />assessments of expected requirements for this type of development only and do not <br />relate to developer capability generally. The analysis is based on discussions with <br />individuals fmniliar with development products. Most of the proposals project a <br />financing gap. Given the nature of redevelopment this is not unusual. Efforts to close <br />the gap will begin once a developer is selected for preliminary analysis. <br /> <br />The purpose of this information is to summarize information pertinent to selection of <br />developers for interview purposes. <br /> <br /> <br />