you, sir. How's it going? How are you doing? How's it going?
I seen you in real life yet in this new year? I don't think so.
Following this meeting to order, today is Wednesday, 01/08/2025. The time is 05:31PM. Today is we're having a committee on city property. So please follow along.
Chairman John Gandalf? Present. Vice chair, Sue Mandebowell? Present. Councilman Pedro Espinole?
Present. Councilman Malathi Graves is not present. Councilman Michelle T. Peterson cannot make it. So we have three present, two absent.
Thank you. I wanna start off by acknowledging a couple of people here. Thank you to our city solicitor. Thank you to the city clerks. Thank you to our deputy director and also the director of policy, our Gardner, as well as policy analyst, Fran Walsh.
Thank you for joining us. And I'd like to acknowledge Nick Cicatelli, the director of real estate. Who's joining us tonight. So we'll read item number one into the record, and we'll move forward.
Item number one, resolution authorizing the conveyance of the parcel located on Assessor's Flat 98, Lot 26914 Alaska Creek to the PRA for the purpose of redevelopment. They are preparing for economic development and increased tax revenue.
So joining us again is Nick Chitelli from the city of Providence, director of real estate. He's going to give us a rundown on some of these items, but I understand that this item per request of the council person in this ward is going to be continued to date certain. But I don't know if you wanna start us off with just some background information, and then we'll continue this item and move on to the next item.
Yes. Thank you, chairman, members of the committee. Nick Cicatelli, director of real estate for the record. Yes. So these both items number one and two, which is 14 Alaska Street and 107 Summit Street, are both parcels identified on the city rules that would that are right for redevelopment of residential housing.
There's an unresolved request of council member Royce that wants to address a concern with the disposition or, I
say, final disposition of these properties. So pending resolution, I understand that you're gonna continue items number one and two.
K. So was there a motion to continue item number one? I'm gonna make the meeting. We'll make the motion to accurately pass that motion to waive the reading item number two, and then we'll continue both of those items to a date certain. So motion So moved.
Motion made by councilor Espinal, seconded by counselor. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it.
So we're gonna continue item number one. Moving on to item number two, and I have a motion to waive the reading of item number two? So moved. Seconded by Councilor Espinal, seconded by Councilor Inderkoff. All those in favor?
Aye. All those opposed? Aye. The ayes have it, and we'll have a motion to then continue item two to a date of serving. Someone can make that motion.
Moved. Item eight sec motion made by councilor Ingeblois, seconded by councilor Esmail. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed?
The ayes have it. So we'll move on to item number three. Madam Clerk.
Resolution authorizing the terms of purchase and sale for the property located at 691 Adams Avenue.
Okay. So, Nick, if you can take it away here, we'd love to hear more information about this specific lot and the intentions for moving forward with PRA. Yes.
Thank you. This is something of a particular case. 691 Potters Ave was originally transferred to the TRA for the purpose of transferring it, oddly enough, to the parks department for use for for parks activities. On request of the abutting property owner, this property was asked to see if it could be made surplus with the intention of making a residential building across the two properties, which would increase the density of that development, being it owned by the Board of Pops Commissioners at the time and currently, it would need to either be transferred back to the province for your development agency or, set to bid through the board of contracts and supply. That process did happen.
The public process through the board of contracts supplied where anyone can bid did take place. The abutting property that was the impetus for this action was the sole bidder. It was deemed responsive because according to Charter, you cannot sell for less than 90% of an assessed value. The assessed value deemed by the assessor's office was 131,200, and the purchase price for this would be a 135,000 plus meeting the criteria. And on advice of the law department, a council confirmation was also requested, and that's the business reporting today.
K. So questions from committee members. Yeah. That's fine. Thank
you. Can I ask a few questions? One is, does this still need to be approved by the Parks Commission since it is currently owned by the parks?
Nope. The resolution has already obtained this.
Okay. Should know that because I'm on. Sorry. I have not
And the second is do we know like, what was parks gonna use it for?
Well, this woodpiles nearby
kinda done altogether, but they they don't need it.
So It's like where they were gonna do, that where they're already doing, like, the wood manufacturing process. Processing. Yeah. There you are.
But this doesn't interfere with their intentions or activities over there.
Okay. Yeah. That's opening in spring. Okay. That was my last question.
Great. Is there any more information on the residential development that would be proposed for this lot?
Yes. I did bring this is right out of their BOCS proposal to matter record already, but I thought it was
to make it easier to put Well, not reasonable. Sorry about that. It's So can I make a motion to leave this in the exhibit one? I move. And move by seconded by
The images show a lot already in possession of the buffer, and they lock just the corner lock that's in red, which is the one in the topic Property 691. And then allowing this to to be a two parcel development will get you 16 units for minutes. It will be three for the well, up to five, I guess, seventy seventy five. Up to five units. So this allows increased density.
It's in councilman Taylor's district. There's no objection from the councilman. This is this is housing coming online at
much needed time. And I understand that he also sponsored this resolution for the council for and for several co sponsors on the side as well. And then in terms of merging the two lots, that's so it's it's 8,000 square feet, and that would be that would just be Dunbucket Hall, so administratively.
It's about ownerships. Either it's not actually merged, they can still construct that building, but it would make sense for them to merge that. And planning has been answered in this. There's no issue with with improvements. I believe it already went to CBC if it did, but there's no there's no more city administrative steps to take for this move forward.
