My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02720
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2700
>
pf_02720
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:06:19 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 12:38:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2720
Planning Files - Type
Planning-Other
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
RFP 35W/36
PIN
142923220048
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />selection process until 1996, and pending resolution of a TIF study and other <br />legal matters <br /> <br />6. All three proposals could work on the 35W Gateway site. The land uses, <br />revenue generation, equity/investment and security of each proposal were <br />significantly different. At the time that the selection process was continued, the <br />Council agreed that it must decide which proposal meets the Council's directive <br />of meeting both the revenue, jobs, land use and image goals of the community. <br /> <br />7. The Council, at times, also discussed an alternative wherein the City would <br />dismiss the team proposals. The City would then plan, plat, grade, install <br />infrastructure, market and sell the land on a parcel by parcel basis to the highest <br />business park bidder. <br /> <br />8. In October, 1996 the staff contacted the Council's development consultants <br />(based on TIF Policy) Cobb and Associates and Tegra to begin work on the <br />financial, development, and marketing issues that must be answered as part of <br />the Gateway project. They will be available at the October 21 meeting. <br /> <br />Time Frame For Development Team Proposal Reviews: <br /> <br />1. The Council has made a commitment to decide upon a development scheme <br />and negotiate a development contract as soon as the first meeting in <br />December. Additional scheduling will be necessary for the Council to determine <br />renewed interest fro the development teams and to refresh the numerical basis <br />for the three proposals, There are work sessions "weeks" available for study of <br />the issues: <br /> <br />. the week of November 18R22 for overall review and direction with the <br />consultants Cobb and Assoc.(Rich Zabel) and Tegra (Tom Hauschild and <br />Dick Strassburg) <br /> <br />. the week of December 9-13 for financial impact analysis review <br /> <br />. the week of December 16-20 for review of the actual developments and <br />markets <br /> <br />. the week of January 6R10 for interviews (if needed) <br /> <br />. the week of January 20-24 for preliminary selection and direction to <br />negotiate a preliminary agreement. <br /> <br />2. After the selection of a development team, the City and the developer will need <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.