Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br /> Mr. Schilling asked that the members of the steering committee in the audience <br />expre ss their interest in the committee continuing to study development of the area, and <br />several raised their hands in support. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling seconded Mr. Caravati's motion for sake of discussion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said that Mr. Schilling and Ms. Richards oppose the project and four <br />votes are needed to sell the property so there is no need to go forward with the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said that the RFQs left most on the committee with wanting more <br />information and a desire to talk with the developer. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati sa id he would withdraw his motion if he gets the sense from Ms. <br />Richards or Mr. Schilling that they could ever consider selling the property for Preston <br />Commons. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said Mr. Caravati is talking about future development of the Preston <br />Avenue corri dor, but we have an immediate process that either needs to proceed or not <br />proceed. Ms. Richards said she does not feel that the two issues fit in one motion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati withdrew his motion. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards offered a substitute motion to terminate the R FQ and indicate to the <br />developers who have responded that the City is no longer interested in pursuing the <br />project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch, referring to comments made by Mr. Coleman about his position, said <br />that in November of 200 2 he voted against the RFP because he did not think the City <br />needed to get involved and put money into the project and because he was concerned <br />with how well adjacent property owners were notified about the process. He said things <br />have happened since then and money has been spent. He said he thinks there has been <br />some progress in the process, though he does not think it has caused anyone to like the <br />project. He said it is clear that there are not four votes to sell the land and therefore there <br />is some ju stification to cutting the process short. Mr. Lynch said philosophically he has a <br />problem with pulling the plug before the process is complete. He said he would like to <br />hear why one of the developers feel it will not work and from one developer why he <br />th inks it will work. He said redevelopment of Preston Avenue has been a priority for <br />some time. He said he is disappointed with pulling the plug prematurely. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling made a motion to call the question, Mr. Caravati seconded the <br />motion and the quest ion was called by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Caravati, Mr. <br />Lynch, Ms. Richards, Mr. Schilling. Noes: Mr. Cox. <br /> <br /> Consideration of Ms. Richards substitute motion was approved by the following <br />vote. Ayes: Mr. Caravati, Ms. Richards, Mr. Schilling. N oes: Mr. Cox and Mr. Lynch. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said it is interesting that the person most invested in the project is not in <br />some ways acknowledged. He said he has made an effort to outreach to dozens of people <br />about the project and has made considerable efforts to promote the corridor. He said he <br />hopes the energy and time put into this can be salvaged. He said he had hoped to bring a <br />knowledgeable team to the table. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said the reason he made the second part of his motion was to honor <br />what has been done. He said if the City is not going to sell the land in the end it is not <br />fair to drag people through the process. He said the process has been a bit faulty and he <br />has not found anyone who supports the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said he believes the May or's intentions are terrific. He said the <br />corridor is ripe for development and it has to happen, but it is a matter of whether or not it <br />