pages: CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2014-07-29 | 7 | Councilmember Daysog stated that he is open to working with staff to carefully review the developer's qualifications; the bar is extremely high; the City has worked with major developers in the past and has received RFQ responses from major developers who have known projects; that he is interested in how staff will score the developer's qualifications; the City should welcome anyone interested in the BEQ; however, that does not mean the City will let down its guard on who it works with; noted four votes are needed for the project to work. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Chen, Daysog, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 1. (14-338 CC) Recommendation to Approve an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement between the City of Alameda and Alameda United Commercial LLC for an Approximate 5.5 Acre Site on the Taxiways along the Seaplane Lagoon. [Note: Refer to the ENA for BEQ [paragraph no. 14-305 for the discussion.] Councilmember Chen moved approval of the ENA between the City and AUC for an approximately 5.5 acre site on the taxiways along the Seaplane Lagoon. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he is concerned with how close the site is to the Waterfront/Town Center for which the City has started an RFQ process; he wants developers to set the tone for the area; he does not know how the proposal would work with the RFQ projects; he made a commitment to stick to the 1,425 housing unit cap; the proposal assumes the cap will be exceeded; he is not prepared to exceed the cap at this point and cannot support a residential project. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is concerned with the way the development is playing out; the City is talking to potential developers who responded to the RFQ; she would like to see what comes back from the RFQs; she wants an overall plan with how Alameda Point will be developed and does not want piecemeal development; the development of the 5.5 acre site does not need to be rushed; the site is more of a blank slate; the Council approved moving forward with the BEQ, which gives the developer an opportunity; she will vote against the ENA. Councilmember Tam stated that she does not believe the proposal pushes against the residential unit cap; the value of moving forward with the six month ENA is the information the City will get, particularly pertaining to land value; negotiating land value with the School District and Housing Authority was difficult; the amount offered in the transaction often defines the property value; the process will help the City provide more definition on the land value. Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and City of Alameda Financing Authority July 29, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf |