Laserfiche WebLink
6.1.D. - Page 1 <br /> REPORT <br /> To the Honorable Mayor and City Council <br /> From the City Manager <br /> January 11 , 2016 <br /> SUBJECT <br /> Bradford Housing Proposal Evaluation Criteria <br /> RECOMMENDATION <br /> Approve by motion the Bradford Housing Proposal Evaluation Criteria as recommended <br /> by the Bradford Site Evaluation Subcommittee. <br /> BACKGROUND <br /> Earlier this year, the City Council approved the issuance of a Request for Proposals <br /> (RFP) for the development of affordable housing on City owned land. A RFP was <br /> published in June 2015 and the City received 7 proposals from developers on August <br /> 31, 2015. The proposals ranged from 56 to 137 units of housing affordable to extremely <br /> low and very low income households. The proposals also included public open space <br /> along Redwood Creek, childcare space and a range of other onsite and offsite <br /> amenities. <br /> An introductory "preview" of the development proposals was provided to Council in a <br /> Special Study Session on October 26, 2015. The Council decided to form a "Bradford <br /> Site Evaluation Subcommittee" to review proposals and prepare a selection process. <br /> The Committee includes three Council members (Seybert, Bain and Aguirre), the Chair <br /> of the Planning Commission, the Chair of the Housing and Human Concerns Committee <br /> and the Vice Chair of the Senior Affairs Commission. <br /> ANALYSIS <br /> The Evaluation Committee met on December 3, 2015 to develop development proposal <br /> evaluation criteria for City Council review and approval. The Committee reviewed the <br /> City's goals, objectives and priorities for the project, as outlined in the RFP, as well as <br /> the proposal submittal requirements established in the RFP. <br /> The Evaluation Committee determined that the following criteria established in the RFP <br /> were already met: submission of the proposal by due date, complete submittal, creative <br /> approaches to mixed use development, and establishment of clear lines of <br /> responsibilities of the development team. The Committee discussed, but opted not to <br />