Letter to the editor: Chauncey Project

To the Editor,

I enjoyed the recent [Chauncey Project] article in the February 20th issue. It was well written and entertaining. However, there were two details I feel were not fully dealt with.

First, it should be pointed out that the RFP issued by the city did not include the decision matrix as a criteria of selection. Understandably, with nine proposals to review the Council may have felt that they needed some assistance in making evaluations. They asked staff to help with the process by creating this matrix. It just happened that the majority of councilors found that the information they had on hand was adequate to make the decision without this additional input. But be clear, this matrix and its criteria were not published with the RFP. It was not a requirement to use the matrix or to address its criteria specifically in the proposal.

More important, the RFP did specifically request that responders’ propose new features and uses be brought to downtown at this site. Clearly the Chauncy was the only proposal that focused on this aspect. All the others chose to relocate an existing use from one site to another nearby location. All of the proposers had an equal opportunity to present what they felt was the best use of the site. It just happens that the Council selected the proposal that the majority felt best met the spirit of the Request for Proposal.