pages: CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2014-12-02 | 8 | (14-502) Recommendation to Reject the Developer Finalists for Site B and Postpone the Decision on Development of Site B at Alameda Point for Six Months. Approved. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a brief presentation. The City Manager clarified staff would continue to be opportunistic regarding Site B, but would not commit to bring the issue back on a specific date. Councilmember Daysog stated staff has clear goals, but most of the issues will still be the same six months from now; rejecting the finalists implies starting over; inquired what the argument is against just postponing the development of Site B and not rejecting the developers. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded rejecting the developers does not mean staff would not approach them at a future point; stated staff does not want to string the developers along. The City Manager stated handing the property to a developer is not in the City's interest; bringing the issue back at a later date when market conditions change does not change the scenario of what the City would like at Site B; Site B is not sellable in the marketplace due to the infrastructure. Councilmember Daysog stated the lack of, and need to, improve infrastructure will still be the same six months from now; staff does not need to reject the developers outright. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with the City Manager; stated the Site A developers improving the infrastructure is a changed circumstance; staff does not want to keep the developer on hold if they want to direct their resources to another project; another Request for Qualifications (RFQ) could be done; the passage of time will help; there will be more to offer. Councilmember Tam noted when Council discussed Site A with the developers, the developers stated they may be interested in Site B once the infrastructure is in place; the scenario of interested developers might change once Site A is developed. Councilmember Chen stated staff has invested many hours and money already; the community would like to see more job creation; that he proposes to continue dialogue until the new Council is seated; completely rejecting the developers is premature. The City Manager stated continuing the existing process does not yield a dime; the City would be telling other developers that Site B is not available right now in an effort to be more open; the policy is clearly jobs first at Alameda Point; other items do not drive economic development; the infrastructure is not there and subsidizing jobs would be foolish. Councilmember Chen suggested continuing the dialogue in two weeks or one month. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 December 2, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf |