pages: AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-11-03 | 2 | Member Matarrese commented that SunCal had no problem spending approximately $50,000 on an election mailer a month ago. Member Matarrese supports APC's request, but would like to require that APC start the proceedings on their contractual remedy to the outstanding bill. Member Gilmore requested an update and report on the status of the predevelopment costs, and of the ARRA budget. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services informed Member Gilmore and the Board that staff will incorporate the ARRA budget and Predevelopment costs information into the update/staff report that will be presented to the Board in January. Vice Chair deHaan inquired how the APC will pay back a $50,000 loan. Mr. Biggs explained that the Project Implementation Loan (PIL) is from the Corporation for Supportive Housing. Traditionally, these loans are paid off by development fees, but since the development plans for Alameda Point are uncertain at this time, APC is asking the City to back them up. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the predevelopment planning cost will be wrapped into the total cost of the project and financed through every available funding source to make the consolidation and relocation work. Speakers: Jon Spangler spoke in support of APC's request. Member Matarrese motioned to approve the recommendation to collateralize $50,000 for the pursuit of the planning study, with the requirement that the APC formally invoke their remedy in their contract in pursuit of reimbursement by SunCal. Member Matarrese also requested that the work done by the contractor be under public domain so that it is not proprietary to APC since it is being underwritten by the ARRA. Vice Chair deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of October 7 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese did not attend the October 7th meeting but will attend the RAB meeting on Nov. 4. Member Matarrese provided comments on Dr. Russell's highlights, stating that most of the activities described are actual remediation activities. He called particular attention to the record of decision on Site 2 which is the southwest portion of the base. There was discussion of a cap and cover for that contamination. Member Matarrese would like Dr. Russell to recommend a strategy to make sure anything that is radioactive is removed from Site 2. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS 6-A. Presentation on Request for Qualifications for a Resource Team for Redevelopment of Alameda Point. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services gave a brief summary on steps staff is taking to move the going forward process. In the next week or two, staff will send out a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for land use planning, urban design, sustainable green design and infrastructure planning, civil engineering, transportation planning, fiscal impact land use | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf |