HomeMy WebLinkAboutR13-Redevelopment Agency
. ...iVEL.OPlmtT AGENCY.Au.ST FOR ~/COUNCIL A&ION
GLENDA SAUL
Subject:
SELECTION OF DEVELOPER FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF SUPERMARKET LOCATED
AT BASELINE AND MUSCOTT STREETS
From:
Qt:
Redevelopment Agency
Date: JULY 15, 1986
Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council ection:
On June 2, 1986, the Mayor and Common Council authorized the development and
issuance of a Request for Proposals for the development of a major chain
supermarket at Baseline and Muscott Streets.
Racommended motion:
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
o
A) That Alexander Haagan Development Corporation be selected as developer for the
project located at Muscott and Baseline Streets; and further that,
B) Should an agreement not be successfully negotiated with Haagan Development
Corporation, that Agency staff be authorized to negotiate with Schurgin
Development Corporation without issuing a new RFP; and further that,
C) Inasmuch as a successful UDAG application is considered to be an integral
part of project financing, the Committee recommends that should a UDAG
not be awarded to the City, that Agency staff be authorized to negotiate
with the developer with the strongest financial capability,
Contect person:
GLENDA SAUL/KEN HENDERSON
Phona: 383-5081
6
Supporting date attached: YES/STAFF REPORT
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $ N/ A
Ward:
Project:
Date:
NW
No edverse Impact on City:
OCil Notes:
- '7..;2/-~
Agenda Item No. /3
.CITbOF SAN BERNARDI~ - REQUE~T FOR COUNCIL AC~N
c
o
o
75--0264
STAFF REPORT
On Monday, July 14, 1986, the Development Review Team met to review proposals
received in response to the RFP issued for the proposed supermarket
development at Muscott and Baseline Streets. Those attending included the
following: Carl Clemons, Northwest PAC; Harry Jacks. Northwest PAC; Dick
Botti, Consultant Real Estate Economist; Dan Frazier, Councilman. Sixth
Ward; Roger Hardgrave, Director, Public Works/City Engineer; Frank Schuma,
Director, PlaDlling Department; and Agency staff persons, Ken Henderson, Sandy
Lowder, JeaDlle Wayne, Lisa Dickey and Ezell James.
Proposals were received from five (5) Development Corporations and are as
follows:
a) Sclurgin Development Corporation
b) Halferty Development Corporation
c) AleDnder Haagsn Development Corporation
d) Peppertree Shopping Center Corporation
e) Westcom Development, Incorporated
The proposed review and evalua tion criteria were as follows:
1) Compliance with UP submission requirements.
2) Prior ezperience in dealing with major tenants with respect to
developments of this type.
3) Prior ezperience in the development and preparation of Urban
Development Action Grant applications.
4) Prior ezperience in working with Redevelopment Agencies and
participating in RDA-sponsored projects.
5) Financial strength, ca.pability and ability of proponent to raise debt
financing.
6) Strength (qualifications and ezpertise) and depth of developer's staff
(project management).
The Development Review Team conducted eztensive discussion regsrding the
completeness of proposalS submitted. In view of the time constraints relating
to the submission of a UDAG application, the Committee determined no
additional information would be requested of the respondents. Utilizing the
review and evaluation criteria described above. the Committee is recommending
the following to the Mayor and Common Council:
A.
That Alexander Haagsn Development Corporation be selected as developer
for the project located at !i1scott and Baseline Streets; and, further,
that,
B.
Should an agreement not be successfully negotiated with Haagsn
Development Corporation. that Agency staff be authorized to negotiate
with Sclurgin Development Corporation without issuing a new UP; and,
further, that.
(Continued to next page...)
o
o
o
()
o
o
c. Inasllll1ch as a successful UDAG application is considered to be an
integral part of project finanCing, the Committee recommends that
should a UDAG not be awarded to the City, that Agency staff be
authorized to negotiate with the developer with the strongest
f1nancial capability.
Adoption of form IOOtions A, B, and C would suthorize staff to proceed with the
preparation of the UDAG application and afford staff and the developer the
mazilDUm alOOunt of time possible to accomplish same.
1259L
o