pages: CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2020-03-03 | 11 | Councilmember Vella expressed concern about the SLA and potential legal challenges; stated that she would like to have had legislative clarity before the item; expressed support for demolishing the commissary building; stated that she would like to see site preparation; expressed support for a funding loan through the Base Reuse fund and for the RFQ. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is anxious to see the project move forward; the need for housing cannot be overstated; the reason that she is not as concerned about the SLA relates to the statistic of the Midway project, which includes 558 units of which48% are very low to low income households; many places in the State are providing 100% affordable housing; the percentage is high for the project; the typical percentage is 25% affordable housing; expressed concern about lost time; stated these are uncertain times due to the Coronavirus pandemic which impacts many aspects; expressed support for moving forward with deliberate speed; questioned whether Council would support being more aggressive; stated two other developers not selected have expressed interest in the project; inquired whether, , a an option should be considered to issue an RFQ only to interested parties; stated APC would like to be involved in the process; questioned whether the interview panel can include APC. The Community Development Director responded staff welcomes APC participation; stated APC was previously involved in the interview process and their input was included as part of the calculation criteria. Councilmember Vella stated that she would like clarity on whether or not the process proposed is possible. The City Attorney responded if the question is whether staff's proposed exemption of the SLA requires the City to do an RFP, the answer is no; stated Council may recall there was a previously published staff report which indicated an RFP is required; the previous staff report had been based on a different exemption; the City Attorney's office believes the current exemption is more sound to rely on; an RFP is not explicitly required under the SLA. The Community Development Director stated the staff recommendation continues to be: go out to RFQ for 4 weeks and encourage those that previously responded to update and submit once more; doing so will ensure a thorough outreach. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a new developer might be discovered; an uncertain economic future could be on the horizon; chances of putting together a viable package might be reduced; expressed support for a discussion of the proposal. Councilmember Vella expressed concern about another delay; stated there is no reason to believe the other developers that submitted for the previous round do not have interest; interest has been conveyed; questioned why another RFP is being issued; stated some proposers could provide more detail; expressed concern about taking up Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 March 3, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf |