AgdaPkt 2011-06-27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

6.1.A. - Page 12 2. An Exclusive Right to Negotiate agreement under the Redevelopment Agency Council consensus was to go with option #2 and pursue an RFQ (Request for Qualifications) process with some Charter clean -up. Minute Order- 11 -073 The Council may elect to use different processes for the selection of developers for Block 2 and the Winslow Lot if that is their preference. Mr. Bell explained that this is a follow -up to last month's presentation on the same topic. Ms. Ekas, Planning Manager, then provided a brief overview covering each of the options before Council. Council inquired about how many developers have communicated on this with staff and Ms. Ekas said about six. Questions were posed about parking as well as the possibility of changing the City Charter. Ms. Thompson added that if the Council needed it she could do some technical clean -up of the Charter including a provision reverting to General Law in certain issues related to this matter. Public Comment Richard Watkins, a Partner at TMG Partners, expressed interest in the project and working with Redwood City. He said his firm has worked solely in the Bay Area for 28 years and their focus is on infill development. Nick Watry, a former Planning Commissioner and former Housing and Human Concerns Committee Member, supports housing in this area and is representing Essex Homes. He has discussed this with staff and commented that technology has moved forward and transit -based housing can be successful, for example the Franklin Street Housing where there have been no complaints about the noise and vibration. Deke Hunter, with Hunter Storm, provided a business profile and their repertoire in building in Redwood City and other communities (presentation on file). He explained that his organization has much strength to make this a reality. He asked for a strong consideration by Council. One Council Member asked about the issue of housing versus business use. Ms. Ekas provided information on the pros and cons of each option. One Council Member would like to go slower rather than faster and she finds this an opportunity to look at what is out there and find a balance between the need for office space and the need for other uses. This Council Member inquired about timelines and Mr. Bell explained that an RFQ (Request For Qualifications) would take about 90 days and staff could come back towards the end of summer. He added that on the RFP (Request For Proposals) process under the RDA, it would take longer. Another Council Member supported the RFQ process and two others concurred. Ms. Thompson added that the RFQ is more of a conceptual design approach. Another Council Member noted that this has to be good for the entire downtown. Yet another Council Member agreed with the RFQ approach. A Council Member asked about the JOINT CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD May 23, 2011 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 12