pages: CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf, 20
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2008-08-19 | 20 | ensure that D.E. Shaw and SunCal would be committed to each other for the duration of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) ; a commitment has been made on behalf of the community; a lot of momentum has been generated; the process has been open and straight forward; she supports directing staff to ensure that the ENA reflects the City's commitment to have SunCal selected as the Master Developer and to ensure that the timeline in the term sheet between D.E. Shaw and SunCal comports with the timeline expected for the planning process with SunCal. Councilmember/Board Member/Commission Matarrese stated that he wants to ensure that the City would have the ability to terminate the ENA if SunCal was removed from the position of Master Developer; D.E. Shaw would be a financial partner, not the developer ; the timeline should be kept the same; direction should be provided to the City Manager/Executive Director to negotiate the amendments to the ENA. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan requested background information on the timeline. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated currently, the ENA has a twenty-four month term; the City is thirteen months into the term; the ENA expires July 19, 2009; the ENA has a provision for progress expansion and mutual extension; the ENA allows for an automatic progress expansion if the project moves forward; a mutual extension could be granted for up to twelve months if there are third party entities. when the ENA was initially approved, requirements were not in place mandating that a conveyance term sheet be completed within nine months from the effective date of legislation; legislation may be approved next month or may not be approved until March, 2009. SunCal has a land plan that would require approval by initiative, which is not a timeframe that is consistent with the July 2009 expiration. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the ballot measure would be. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded SunCal revealed a land plan showing 4,000 units; units could increase to 6,000 in the event of a long-term transit solution; both plans are not consistent with the City's Charter; SunCal understands and recognizes that the land plans would need to qualify for the ballot and be approved by initiative. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 3 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission August 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf |