Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.16.2017 SP PC Minutes @3:00MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE y HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ZITO PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 1. Call to Order. 2. Roll Call. 3. Public Comments. None. Matters for Consideration Meeting will be held at: CITY MANAGER CONFERENCE ROOM 400 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA MONDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2017 3:00 p.m. TIME: 3:01 p.m. PRESENT: Councilmembers Addiego and Matsumoto, and Planning Commissioners Faria, Ruiz and Wong. Report regarding the developer selection process for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Site, APN 093 -312 -060 including consideration of confirming the recommended developer short list and approving the draft Request for Proposals (Mike Lappen, Economic Development Coordinator) Director Greenwood stated staff was asking the committee to review the work of the selection panel, approve a recommended shortlist for Parcels B and C, and provide any feedback, corrections, or edits on the RFP. Coordinator Lappen provided background on the planning process and policy goals. He explained the two phases of the developer selection, RFP and interview process. He summarized the proposals from the top four developers Blake Griggs, Sares Regis, AGUKASA Partners, and Summerhill. Coordinator Lappen announced the members of the RFQ review panel. He discussed the RFP review process, expectations, criteria, term sheet, and proposed schedule. Planning Commissioner Ruiz asked if Colma Creek was considered an amenity for the project. Coordinator Lappen stated Bart, Centennial Way and Colma Creek would be used as open space. Planning Commissioner Ruiz asked if the developer had the option to build over Colma Creek. Coordinator Lappen stated the plan did not call for that. Planning Commissioner Wong asked if the proposals would be for Lots B and C together. Coordinator Lappen stated the proposals would be for Sites B and C which were on one parcel. Councilmember Addiego commended Blake Griggs for receiving five number one rankings. He asked the process for going beyond the top four. Director Greenwood stated the committee had great latitude on how to proceed. He recommended looking at additional teams in order of the rankings. Councilmember Addiego stated he would review the proposals and asked if staff was requesting a decision. Director Greenwood explained the proposed schedule. Planning Commission Wong asked if there was a wide range between fourth and fifth place. Director Greenwood discussed the deliberation of the selection panel. Manager Poncel stated the panel was unanimous in recommending the top four. Director Greenwood stated the panelists came from differing disciplines but unanimously ranked the teams. Councilmember Addiego asked if a Councilmember could make a recommendation. Director Greenwood stated the work of the selection panel was completed and the Committee could make its recommendations. Councilmember Addiego requested considering six teams. Planning Commissioner Faria asked the separation between four and five and six. Director Greenwood stated the recommendations of the selection panel were based on fit, community input process, and members of the project team. Planning Commissioner Faria stated one and two were clearly in the forefront. Councilmember Matsumoto stated she only read the first four proposals but could support Councilmember Addiego's recommendation to add two additional teams. Councilmember Addiego suggested the $100,000 cost might eliminate teams. Councilmember Matsumoto stated her requests might weed out the field. Coordinator Lappen stated serious firms would vest their time and energy to prepare an acceptable proposal. Manager Poncel stated all eight teams had good qualifications and the panel was challenged to dig deeper into the qualifications. She stated the next evaluation committee would have to review the proposals. She asked if there was something about Remax that JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 16, 2017 MINUTES PAGE 2 stood out. Councilmember Addiego stated there was. Director Greenwood discussed the proposed RFP and he requested feedback. Councilmember Matsumoto stated the Oak Street extension and affordable housing would greatly influence her decision. Director Greenwood confirmed that Councilmember Matsumoto wanted 30 -80% AMI. Planning Commissioner Wong concurred with Councilmember Matsumoto and expressed concern with the commercial component and economic benefit. Councilmember Addiego asked for the affordable housing breakdowns. Director Greenwood stated the ordinance required 70 -110% AMI. Councilmember Matsumoto changed her request to 60 -80% AMI. She suggested the use of density. Director Greenwood explained the RFP stated the goal was 20 %. Councilmember Matsumoto stated she wanted trees included in the landscaping. Director Greenwood stated the RFP required Oak Avenue be built as part of the development. Councilmember Addiego asked the cost to the developer for Oak Avenue. Coordinator Lappen discussed the traffic analysis and cost at $16 million. He estimated $3.2 million as the developer's fair share. Councilmember Addiego asked if the County of San Mateo modified the numbers. Director Greenwood stated there was the cost to build the road, City contribution, developer's fair share and funds to be fronted by the developer. Councilmember Matsumoto stated the design should be timeless. Councilmember Addiego discussed the importance of the project in conjunction with the Civic Center. Adjournment Being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 3:56 p.m. Submitted by: Approved by: a Gabriel Rodriguez, Deputy City Clerk , Councilmember City of South San Francisco City of South S Francisco JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 16, 2017 MINUTES PAGE 3