PORTSMOUTH — The City Council is expected to vote Monday on its application to the National Park Service to redevelop the McIntyre federal building with its partners Redgate/Kane, according to Mayor Jack Blalock.

He believes the council will also vote Monday on the proposed development agreement between the city and Redgate/Kane.

“I think we’re close to being ready, and if all the pieces are in place, I think we’ll be able to vote on it Monday,” Blalock said. “No matter what side of the issue you’re on, it’s in the best interest of the city to acquire the property rather than having it go to a private developer.”

The city is working to redevelop the property through the Historic Monument Program. If its application is approved by the National Park Service, which administers the program, Portsmouth can get the 2.1-acre property in the heart of downtown for free from the General Services Administration, which owns it.

Under the terms of the deal the city must retain the federal building.

Redgate/Kane’s plan calls for building two new mixed-use buildings with commercial and retail on the first floor, and 76 high-end apartments above. Fifty-eight of the apartments would be one-bedroom and 18 would be two-bedroom. There would be a total of 92 covered parking spaces. The average rent for the apartments will be $2,975 a month, according to the developers.

Blalock acknowledged it’s likely the council won’t have a completed ground lease with Redgate/Kane when it votes Monday, but he believes councilors will have enough information to move the project forward.

“There’s still going to be some back-and-forth negotiations between the city and park service,” Blalock said Tuesday. “I would expect there will be minor alterations to the ground lease once we have all the facts.”

David Eaton, the city’s financial consultant on the project, said Monday night the ground lease “is being negotiated now.” He stated in response to a question from Paul McEachern, a lawyer who represents the group Revisit McIntyre, which is opposed to the project, that the “development agreement had to be done first.”

McEachern then asked if the council will see the “actual ground lease before it votes on the 15th.”

Deputy City Manager Nancy Colbert Puff, stated they will see a draft “but it won’t be fully negotiated or fully completed.”

“So the city will be voting on the 75-year ground lease before they see it all?” McEachern asked Monday during a public meeting on the financial agreement.

City Councilor Rebecca Perkins Kwoka replied, saying the draft will be “substantially in the form of a future ground lease we would enter into.”

“But we're not binding the city to the ground lease,” she said.

Blalock noted he has been dealing with the McIntyre issue since he became mayor in 2016 and the city has been trying to acquire the property from the GSA for about 15 years.

“It’s time to move forward,” he added.

Once the council votes on the application and development agreement, the city’s land-use boards can start reviewing the project.

“The land-use process will be very helpful,” Blalock said.

If the land-use boards approve the project, Blalock believes those approvals will be appealed.

“I’m sure everything will be challenged,” he said.

Michael Kane, the president and chief executive officer of The Kane Company, said Redgate/Kane has been “working hard at this from the very beginning.”

“We look forward to the City Council voting on Monday,” he said.

City Councilor Ned Raynolds agreed that Monday is “an appropriate time for us to vote on the development agreement.”

He credited the work done by the city’s consultants on the project and said, “The city would not be equipped itself to buy the land and undertake development on our own.”

He stressed, as Eaton did Monday, that the city “is not really at any risk at all except for failure and lost opportunities."

He also criticized Revisit McIntyre members for their opposition to the project, and described them as “a small group.”

“The organizers and leaders of Revisit McIntyre stopped listening and stopped looking at the plans and financial agreement a long time ago,” Raynolds said Tuesday.

He also believes some of the group’s members intend to appeal the decision of the land-use boards before the process starts.

Raynolds pointed to the case of North End Portsmouth, a major mixed-use development that the developer dropped after a long series of legal appeals.

“If that’s the result Revisit McIntyre is hoping for, shame on them,” he said.

City Councilor Rick Becksted believes the council should not vote on the application or development agreement until they have all the necessary information.

“We seem to be on this timetable again when there is no timetable. I have a feeling that there’s a rush to push this through while it’s still summertime,” Becksted said Tuesday. “If it is pushed through, the residents and taxpayers are going to have to live with another unreasonable project, and I think they’re getting tired of it.”

Bonnie Halda, of the NPS, said Tuesday there is no deadline for when the council has to submit its application to the park service.

Becksted believes the upcoming vote on the proposed redevelopment “is going to define the election.”

“I think the public is fed up and they’re going to say, 'This is the last straw,'" Becksted said.

He also criticized the contention Revisit McIntyre represents a small group of people, pointing to their recent submission of a petition signed by 655 people.

“I look at the group a different way. The council received a packet with the petition signed by more than 600 people, that’s more than 10 percent of the people who voted in the last election,” Becksted said. “A councilor’s first job is to listen to the public and that’s not happening.”

Bill Downey is one of the leaders of Revisit McIntyre.

He said Tuesday that “none of us are surprised” the council is expected to vote at its next meeting.

“This is pretty consistent with how they’ve acted since the beginning,” Downey said. “I don’t believe they’ve done their due diligence to look at all the alternatives.”

In terms of Raynolds’ comments, Downey pointed to the petition they submitted to the city, and an online petition calling for the process to be restarted, which has been signed by more than 1,100 people.

“I’m disappointed in him and I’m also angered. This is too important an issue for us to be dismissed,” Downey said. “It just shows what a delusional world they live in.”

The July 15 City Council meeting is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. in council chambers.