pages: CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf, 25
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2008-10-07 | 25 | extended if Alameda hasn't acted on SunCal's land use approvals by that date. The 2nd amendment also establishes several new mandatory milestones : - SunCal's obligation to elect to pursue, or not, a ballot initiative by April 30, 2009 - Complete a final Navy Conveyance Term Sheet by July 31, 2009 - Complete a negotiated DDA by July 20, 2010. 2nd amendment provides Alameda with performance standards it needs to ensure timely progress on the redevelopment of Alameda Point. Failure to meet any mandatory milestone is a default of the ENA. In addition, SunCal will now be required to deposit $250,000 with the City to commence CEQA work by April 20, 2009. Failure to make the initial deposit or subsequent deposits for this work is a default under the ENA. The cure periods for all the defaults under the ENA have been shortened, so the ENA can be terminated more quickly as necessary. The city may request once every six months that the developer prove in writing that they are consistent with the obligations of the ENA regarding any transfer. These modifications protect Alameda's core interests and allows an addition of a new financial partner with the wherewithal to fund the necessary predevelopment activities to entitle a mixed-use project at Alameda Point. Member deHaan asked for clarification on the change of the ballot initiative. Ms. Potter explained that the only change would be whether SunCal elects to put their land plan on the ballot or not. They are not required to place it on the ballot, the mandatory milestone requires only that SunCal to inform us whether they will go on the ballot or not. Member deHaan asked Suncal if they would "stay the course" if modifications to the Measure A ordinance would not pass. Pat Keliher, Alameda Point Project Manager for SunCal, replied that, per the agreement, SunCal would like to continue to have an opportunity to stay the course. To date, they do not believe that there is any non-Measure A plan that would work. Their plan developed with community effort is a plan they will take to the ballot. Mr. Keliher further explained the process it would take to bring their plan to the ballot. Boardmember deHaan asked if SunCal would stay in the project, even if the initiative (to change Measure A) did not pass. Mr. Keliher replied affirmatively. Member Matarrese asked staff about his earlier request for a Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and 6 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting October 7, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf |