East Campus Developments

• 博伊德Farnam -法律事务副总裁
• Jim Hargett - Interim VP Finance & Administration
• Siraj Khan - Interim Associate VP Facilities Management
• Mike Westfall - VP University Advancement

• David Kramer
• Dennis Muchmore
• Bobby Schostak

• East Campus Stakeholder Committee
• Campus Development Environmental Committee
• Senate Budget Review Committee
• Senate Planning Review Committee
• Steering Committee of the Campus Alliance for Sustainability and the Environment
• Senate Steering Committee
• Full Senate
• Student Congress (Upcoming)
• Faculty Sub-Division (Upcoming)

• Amy Barnes-Berceli - Provost Office
• Rochelle Black - Government Relations
• Ethan Bradley BOT - Student Liaison (last spring)
• Evan Derminoff Student - Affairs & Faculty Subdivision
• Ashley Dewling - Golf and Learning Center
• Red Douglas - BOT Student Liaison (current)
• Amy Gould - Staff & Faculty Subdivision
• Jayson Hall - Office of Legal Affairs
• Jim Hargett - Finance & Administration
• Jeff Insko - Faculty
• Mallory Kean - BOT Student Liaison (current)
• Siraj Khan - Facilities
• Michelle Knox - Finance & Administration
• Bill Matt - Meadow Brook Hall
• Chiara Nava - Student Congress Representative
• Chris Reed - OU Sustainability Team
• Andrew Romano - Student Congress Representative
• Joe Shively - College of Arts & Sciences
• Steve Stanton - Faculty & Campus Development and Environment Committee
• Wayne Thibodeau - Student Affairs
• Scott Tiegs - Faculty & Campus Alliance for Sustainability and the Environment
• Mike Westfall - Advancement
• Amanda Wewer - BOT Student Liaison (last spring)
• John Young - University Communications and Marketing & Faculty Subdivision

总沃尔顿/面积指出在亚当斯角落the RFP is approximately 30 acres on the northeastern most point of campus and represents 2% of the university’s total of 1,443 acres. With the wooded area of 11 acres most likely excluded for preservation, a net of approximately 19 acres is the estimated development footprint should a proposal be selected. This represents 1.3% of the university’s total of 1,443 acres.

从time-to-ti他们修改的条例me, and any established exceptions to the Ordinances, generally apply to property that is under the ownership, jurisdiction or control of the University's Board of Trustees including the East Campus Property. Both the Oakland University Police Department and the Oakland County Sheriff Department currently have and will continue to have concurrent jurisdiction over the East Campus Property. As the East Campus Property project becomes better defined, through detailed reviews of developer proposals and ongoing discussions with faculty, students, staff and community members, the University will be addressing issues such as application of specific Ordinances to East Campus Property and the optimal assignment of responsibility for policing the East Campus Property. As always, the University’s primary concern will be protecting the health, safety and welfare of the faculty, students, staff and surrounding community.

Prior to the RFQ and RFP process being initiated, there were a number of stakeholder meetings in April and May, 2022 that included the following groups: East Campus Stakeholder Committee, Campus Development Environmental Committee, Senate Budget Review Committee, Senate Planning Review Committee, Campus Alliance for Sustainability and the Environment, Senate Steering Committee, Full Faculty Senate, and the Campus Sustainability Committee. The East Campus stakeholder committee is made up of staff, faculty, students, and faculty subdivision residents.

Currently, there are 20+ update meetings anticipated (October/November) and proposal review meetings (January-March) set up, or being set up, with Student Congress Leadership (October), Student Congress (October/November/January), Campus Alliance for Sustainability and the Environment (November/January), Campus Sustainability Committee (November/January), East Campus Stakeholder Committee (November/December/January/February), Full Faculty Senate (November/January), Faculty Subdivision (November/January) Senate Budget Review Committee (January), Senate Planning Review Committee (January), Senate Steering Committee (January), Community Open House (January). Additional meeting requests are anticipated and welcomed.

Also, feedback is being requested viacornerquestions@www.zhongqiwg.com. All feedback will be shared with the OU Board of Trustees in advance and/or during public BOT meetings in February and April.

From the onset of discussions regarding the potential development of the corner, the preservation of the wooded area has been viewed as an important preservation feature of the corner. An emphasis on preservation was noted in the RFP with the topic of the preservation of the wooded area being a point of emphasis in all potential developer conversations to date. While the outcomes of this emphasis will not be known until the proposals are submitted in November, each potential developer group has agreed with the preservation of the wooded area to be a priority and an integral consideration within their respective planning. The preservation of the wooded area will be a priority in the evaluation of the proposals that are submitted.

It is important to provide plenty of time to secure as much stakeholder feedback as possible; and that the OU Board of Trustees has ample time for a thoughtful and comprehensive review of the proposals and stakeholder feedback. The proposals and stakeholder feedback will be discussed at the public BOT meetings in February and April.

Each potential developer team has inquired as to the relationship status with Tree Runner. The University has shared that Tree Runner is a valued campus partner and amenity that we would like to see continue.

Ultimately, we believe there is an opportunity to generate new revenue streams for the University in a way that attractively redevelops underutilized campus land and supports the mission of the University. This development opportunity is an industry best-practice with many comparable examples at campuses across the nation:

• Eddy Street Commons – a mixed-use “campus town” district at the University of Notre Dame
• Storrs Center – a similar district adjacent to the University of Connecticut
• The Crossing at KU – a mixed-use innovation district currently in planning at the University of Kansas
• The Pillars – a similar district currently in planning at Houston Baptist University

Yes. Preservation of the woods has been a focus area in conversations with potential developers, and will continue to be so.

Yes. In January 2023, there will be a community open house to review and secure feedback on the final development proposal(s). This feedback will be shared with the OU Board of Trustees in February 2023.

There are a total of four developers (two national, two local) that are submitting bids that are due near the end of November. These will be evaluated in December with final proposal(s) selected for stakeholder review and feedback January 2023 - March 2023.

The study demonstrated a potential max capacity for the site. This level of density is not desired by the university, and the initial discussion with developers has seen a shared desire in this regard.

A consistent theme with the potential developers has been the honoring of the historic aspects of MBH estate, as well as the need to be complementary to the campus and surrounding community.

Yes. Every group engaged early in the process will be re-engaged in January 2023 to review and offer feedback on the final development proposal(s). This feedback will be shared with the OU Board of Trustees in February 2023.

Potentially, yes. This will be a focus area, and be dependent upon the ultimate mix of activities.

No financial details have been submitted yet. OU would prioritize development proposals that are cost neutral; meaning that the university would not make a financial contribution beyond the lease of the land. This type of arrangement is a common P3 best practice.

• 美国Kansas - The Crossing at KU: Mixed-use innovation district / land monetization with office, lab, retail, housing
• U. Notre Dame - Eddy Street Commons: Multi-phase “campus town” with housing and retail on a ground lease, hotel and condo components.
• U. of Connecticut - Storrs Center: Housing, hotel, and retail
• Houston Baptist U. - The Pillars: Arena-adjacent land monetization with retail and future residential and office components
• Old Dominion U.: Campus-edge land monetization with apartments, retail, grocery
• CSU Monterrey Bay: Campus-edge retail / housing
• Redlands U.: Campus-edge retail / housing / hotel

At a macro level, relevant experience, amount of risk, level of control, mission alignment, financial considerations, preservation measures, sustainability strategies, and historical elements.

An extensive market assessment was completed by Brailsford & Dunlavey. The mix of activities has yet to be determined and is an important part of ongoing conversations.

Given that the corner is contiguous to the main campus, it is important that the University retain long-term control over the use of the land. So the sale of the land is highly unlikely.

No.

There is a stakeholder group (listed on theCollaborationsection of this page) of twenty campus representatives that is meeting monthly to discuss project status, planning, and to offer feedback. In addition, there have been a number of meetings with multiple University stakeholder groups including faculty, staff, and students. These will continue with the bulk of remaining feedback being garnered via sessions in January 2023.

Yes. Representatives from Oakland County, Rochester, Rochester Hills, Auburn Hills, and Pontiac have been invited to a May meeting. The university will share information gathered to date and seek feedback. In addition, there will be a community open house to discuss the final development proposal(s) for feedback in January 2023. This feedback will be shared with the OU Board of Trustees in February 2023.

The market survey has demonstrated that the greatest demand, hence greatest return on investment, will likely be in upscale multi-family housing. This is the option currently being vetted to the campus community as well as community stakeholders. The preliminary focus is on non-student housing given that the OU campus master plan has identified two other main campus areas for future student housing. The ultimate target audience has not been finalized, nor has this use been determined to be the predominate use.

Given that the Village is across the street, any retail would be service focused and largely on the campus community and development tenants.

OU is unable to fully finance a PAC. However, it is hoped that via this development and through potential partnerships with the county, regional cities, and private sector, that funding could be secured. OU’s potential investment could be via donor funding and/or leveraging revenue from the overall development.

We are still in the information gathering stage with no decisions having been made. The RFP submission process will be completed by the end of November 2022, with a review in December 2022, campus stakeholder feedback sessions January - March 2023, and OU Board of Trustee review and discussion at the February and April 2023 public meetings. Stakeholder feedback will be shared with the OU Board of Trustees in February and April 2023. If the project were to go forward, an actual ground breaking of any type would be a year or more away due to the planning required.

No. One area of understandable community concern within the concept drawing is the recommended development within the OU Faculty Subdivision on the east side of Adams Road. This area is home to OU faculty and staff, and borders several thriving neighborhoods. This was provided by a master planning consultant in 2019 as a final recommendation, however, no board action was taken at that time, or since. This area is not a part of any Oakland University development scope. The university’s sole focus is on vetting opportunities related to the corner of Walton Road and Adams Road.

While planning is still in the ideation/feedback phase, it will be a major consideration should development of the corner proceed.

No it isn’t. This is still fairly early in the process with the focus being on information gathering so that the OU Board of Trustees can make an informed decision. Building on the market study, the current stage is focused on generating ideas and feedback that once complete will be shared with the development community via a RFQ and RFP process. This will provide the OU Board of Trustees additional information related to what a P3 partnership looks like and include the potential impacts and value of a development partnership. It is following receipt and evaluation of all this information that a “go or no-go” decision would be made.

Yes. The university is committed to sustainability efforts.

There are no formal development plans at this point. Formal proposals for consideration will be submitted near the end of November 2022, with review in December 2022, stakeholder review and feedback in January 2023 (including the OU Faculty Senate). Thus far, the university has received valuable input from a number of university groups including: the Campus Development Environmental Committee, the East Campus Stakeholder Committee, the Senate Budget Review Committee, the Senate Planning Review Committee, the Steering Committee of the Campus Alliance for Sustainability and the Environment, the Senate Steering Committee, and the full Senate.

If a potential conflict of interest were to arise in the course of the project, it would be addressed as provided in the Oakland University Board of Trustees Conflict of Interest Policy.

As a part of the RFP process from potential developers, there will be a conservation clause that asks that specific consideration will be given to those draft plans that preserve and add trees to the site. The university will also seek an environmental impact report from the chosen developer, if/when the project would move to negotiations. Also, additional feedback will be sought specifically from the Campus Development Environmental Committee, and the Steering Committee of the Campus Alliance for Sustainability and the Environment, as well as other groups.

A RFP was distributed and awarded to national consultant Brailsford & Dunlavey. Total cost of this engagement as of November 2022 is $266,600. This cost will be funded from any proceeds from the developer if a proposal is approved to move forward. If not, it will be funded from the capital project supplement fund.

The market is much different now versus in the past. To appropriately meet current demand, and limit risk, the market study recommends a much smaller hotel footprint if a hotel is pursued within any of the proposals.

A specific allocation of any potential development revenue will be addressed upon evaluation of the proposals. It is safe to say at this juncture that should a proposal be approved, proceeds would be utilized to support students, faculty, programs, and infrastructure. Allocations will be decided at an appropriate time should a proposal move forward, and be communicated to the campus community.

From onset of discussions regarding the potential development of the corner, preservation of the wooded area has been an important preservation feature of the corner. Preservation of this area, and sustainability strategies, were noted in the RFP. Preservation of the wooded area has been a point of emphasis in all potential developer conversations. While the outcomes of this emphasis will not be known until the proposals are submitted, each potential developer group has agreed with the preservation of the wooded area to be a priority and an integral consideration within their respective planning. The preservation of the wooded area and sustainability strategies will be priorities in the evaluation of the submitted proposals.

Oakland University is a partner with the City of Rochester Hills and Oakland County in a multi-year Adams Road study being conducted by the Oakland County Road Commission and funded by a federal grant. The study will recommend potential Adams Road enhancements that will address traffic and safety issues. Given the location of the corner in proximity to the main campus, the impact would be expected to be minimal.

TBD. Both the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department and OUPD will have concurrent jurisdiction over any potential development regardless of which agency is the primary responding agency. Depending upon the nature and scope of the proposal, and the negotiations between the University and the developer, one of three options is likely: (i) OUPD is the primary responding agency as it currently is on the remainder of campus; (ii) the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department is the primary responding agency as it currently is in the Meadow Brook Subdivision; or (iii) a hybrid or shared responsibility model as it currently is at the Meadow Brook Music Festival. In any negotiations with the developer, the University will attempt to (i) recover any expenses that it may incur for public safety services that OUPD or any other University department provides to any potential development; and (ii) recover any expenses that it may incur for public safety services that other agencies provide to any potential development.

The Oakland County Sherriff’s Department is the primary responding agency for the Meadow Brook Faculty/Staff Subdivision. Both the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department and OUPD have concurrent jurisdiction within the Meadow Brook Music Festival with the Oakland County Sherriff’s Department serving as the lead during events, and OUPD serving as the lead all other times.

TBD. The University has not had any discussions with the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department about the Sheriff’s Department being the primary responding agency for a potential development. In any negotiations with a potential developer, the University will seek to (i) recover any expenses that it may incur for public safety services that OUPD or any other University department provides to the East Campus development; and (ii) recover any expenses that it may incur for public safety services that other agencies provide to a potential development.

TBD. In any negotiations with a potential developer, the University will seek to (i) recover any expenses that it may incur for public safety services that OUPD or any other University department provides to the East Campus development; and (ii) recover any expenses that it may incur for public safety services that other agencies provide to a potential development.

虽然这个特定主题尚未出现,其他e have been conversations regarding sustainable practice, which this certainly would fall. This question will be specifically addressed during the design phase if a concept proposal is approved to proceed.

Potential academic partnerships questions have come up in the initial conversations with the proposal teams. OU is very open to and would welcome potential academic connections with any conversations/decisions being handled by the Faculty and Academic Affairs. OU will know more once the actual proposals are submitted for review and discussion.

Not to our knowledge, no. OU is meeting with an OU faculty member that specialize in this area to learn more about what this would entail.

The University’s Weapons and Explosives ordinance will apply to any East Campus development that the Board of Trustees approves including any private residences that might be included as part of that development. The University will amend the Weapons and Explosives ordinance, if necessary, to ensure that the ordinance applies to any approved East Campus development in the same manner that it applies to the rest of the Oakland University campus, and that any approved East Campus development will not qualify for any of the existing exceptions in that ordinance.

The OU BOT is committed to a full evaluation of potential revenue generating options, including not proceeding with any of the submitted proposals. The board is interested in proposals that are consistent with the mission, vision, values and goals of the institution and/or that would generate revenue for the institution that can be used to support the mission, vision, values and goals of the institution. It is important that we wait and see what the proposals are and see whether or not they are beneficial to the institution.

Information related to the developer proposals will be shared with the campus community for feedback in the first week of January. In order to obtain this information, interested parties may email the OU Purchasing Office atpurchasing@www.zhongqiwg.combeginning on that date. From this shared information, a sampling of developer concepts and renderings will be added to the website and included in stakeholder presentations. Feedback on the concept and renderings garnered the month of January (and into February) via the website, presentations, media, andcornerquestions@www.zhongqiwg.comwill be shared with the OU Board of Trustees at the meeting on February 6, 2023. Given the need for the university to have a stronger negotiation position for any potential agreement discussions, the estimated revenue projections will be shared with the campus community in March, well in advance of the OU Board of Trustees meeting on April 20, 2023. Concept and rendering feedback garnered since the February OU BOT meeting, via the website, presentations, media, and cornerquestions@www.zhongqiwg.com, will also be shared during the April OU Board of Trustees meeting.