pages: CityCouncil/2010-01-05.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-01-05 | 8 | Board Member Jensen stated the Department of Education requires: 1) that a proposed school site cannot be within 2000 feet of a significant disposal of hazardous waste; and 2) that the sites not be within an area of flood or dam flood inundation unless the cost of mitigating the flood or inundation is reasonable; global warming might impact the site near Encinal High School; inquired whether the site closer to the estuary would be subject to flooding. Mr. Keliher responded the project assumes sea level rise; stated the site adjacent to Encinal High School is not in a flood plane; said site is one of the highest in the development; as for the environmental conditions, SunCal would not be able to develop on the land unless the land is cleaned, conveyed and approved by all regulators; the other site is 1,000 feet from the estuary; the site is in a flood plane in the current state; the site has to be mitigated, like other areas, if sea level rise is assumed; environmental problems have not been identified for the area, except for above ground problems that SunCal has to pay to mitigate. Board Member Johnson inquired whether remediation costs are included in the $25 million, to which Mr. Keliher responded the [school] mitigation fee is not used for clean up. The Planning Services Manager stated under State law, there is not an environmental impact if the developer pays the school impact fee. Board Member Mooney stated the State sets a maximum amount that school districts can charge for school mitigation fees; requested to get an answer back regarding whether the School District is at the maximum. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the cost to [environmentally] mitigate the school site is included in the $200 million cap, to which Mr. Keliher responded in the negative. Board Member Jensen stated campaign literature says the developer will be required to build a new school; inquired whether the statement is true. Mr. Keliher responded SunCal knows new schools need to be built. Board Member Spencer inquired whether the initiative process has been used in the City of Alameda before to create a DA, to which the Interim City Manager responded the City Attorney indicated this type of initiative has not been used in the City before. In response to Board Member Spencer's inquiry regarding fiscal neutrality, the Interim City Manager stated the language does not say the developer will guarantee fiscal neutrality; the normal process for cities that have had developer initiatives follows a different sequence; the development project, DA and DDA are negotiated, then, the matter goes to the ballot. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 8 Board of Education January 5, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-01-05.pdf |