CCMIN021610 - Laserfiche WebLink

reviewed all information available on the project and noted that the Sienna Report questioned the property's capacity because of its overall shape and proximity to environmentally sensitive features. Mr. Fialho agreed to the modification. Councilmember McGovern said the original goals of the task force were identified as studying a mix of one and two bedroom units and noted the staff report makes mention of studios. Mr. Bocian confirmed there are number of studio units proposed. Councilmember McGovern said she was confused about the motivation for that and also asked if a three -story option, which she doubted she could support, should really be studied. Mr. Fialho said the benefit of working with a developer service provider is that they can assist with site plans and offer creativity in terms of overall layout. He said that aspect of the project is still up in the air but could ultimately be two or three stories if designed appropriately. Councilmember McGovern said this does not support the concept of an open garden style design. She asked and confirmed with Mr. Fialho that a three -story design is still on the table. Councilmember McGovern referred again to the Sienna Report, noting its primary finding was that the City would lose $6.8 million assets by demolishing and relocating the development. She said the Council had previously discussed appraising the current asset and asked if that is part of the recommended actions. Mr. Fialho directed her to the 6 bulleted item which provides direction to analyze financing options for construction coupled with annual maintenance and operations of the facility, whether the existing development is rehabilitated, redeveloped, or spread across the two sites. Councilmember McGovern said that did not speak to her question. She referred to the Sienna Report, which found that the replacement of a single Kottinger unit would cost $120,000 or $280,000 if taking into account the City's financing commitment. She requested a clear analysis of the value of these assets and what would be lost by demolition, relocation, and reconstruction. Mr. Fialho said he would add pertinent language. Councilmember McGovern said she would also be interested in a bullet which directs an analysis on alternatively using the $4 million for the project to purchase other land for senior housing. She said that to not consider such alternatives in this real estate market would be irresponsible. Mr. Fialho said it could certainly be looked into but that this may not be the appropriate exercise in which to answer that question. Councilmember McGovern disagreed, noting that both the original task force and the Sienna Report considered the Bernal property as a possible site and that other land options could be considered now. Mr. Bocian explained that if the $4 million set aside for this project were used to acquire property, the City would still need at least $4 million to support the development. Councilmember McGovern said it is entirely possible that entire amount would not be spent and that people deserved the opportunity to review all possible options. She said she would hate to go through this entire process with only one option, only to find out that the proposed capacity does not meet the site's environmental constraints. Mr. Fialho said it is not that staff does not support that kind of effort but that these principles were drafted because of the parties involved (Pleasanton Gardens, the task force, and the City) and in attempt to determine whether or not to combine resources. He said the issue raised by Councilmember McGovern is legitimate but should not necessarily be reflected in these principles of agreement. City Council Minutes Page 11 of 15 February 16, 2010