Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 21, 2001 <br />Rutzick indicated that they have the financial stability and would be able to put <br />together a viable project. <br />Montour asked if the RFP would ask for proposals for Phase I or would <br />proposals also include Phase II. The City Administrator indicated that the <br />focus is primarily on Phase I, but developers will not be limited to Phase I and <br />can propose beyond that phase. <br />Montour questioned how difficult it will be to compare proposals if one <br />developer includes only Phase 1 and another goes further than that. The City <br />Administrator felt it will be possible to do a side by side comparison of various <br />development proposals determining which provides the most value. <br />Johnson and Rutzick thanked the Council for their attention this evening and <br />left the meeting. <br />Montour indicated that the only way that he could support the City's <br />undertaking this project would be if there were substantial differences in rents <br />that would be charged for the senior housing units. Montour asked how many <br />Little Canada residents would be able to take advantage of a senior housing <br />opportunity as is being proposed. Fahey pointed out that preference can be <br />given to Little Canada residents even if the project is developed privately as <br />long as the developer does not use Federal subsidies. <br />Anderson asked how the Council will compare proposals if some include only <br />the corner piece and others take in more area. Keis suggested that developer <br />be required to factor each component separately. Keis felt that the only solid <br />requirements the City had at this point was the 25,000 square feet of retail and <br />the 60 to 80 units of senior housing. Keis suggested that the City give <br />developers more of an idea of what it wants for Phase II. <br />The City Administrator suggested that the City see what developers propose <br />for Phase IL He felt that if one developer proposed townhomes and another <br />proposed a co-op, the City would not have a problem evaluating one against <br />the other. <br />Keis felt the issue is what is the City's goal Is it to maximize taxes or is it to <br />have something workable that creates a buffer that flows away from the corner. <br />Fahey stated that he was concerned about the ability to evaluate conflicting <br />proposals. Anderson felt that if the City left it open-ended, all developers will <br />maximize the density. <br />