pages: CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf, 21
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-05-18 | 21 | Mr. Brown stated professional study results would not be known before an 18-month EIR is initiated; the process would be to start with the best judgment as to what would be an appropriate plan given the constraints; professional studies would either validate information or feedback would be received for modification. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated if less residential units and commercial square footage is wanted, it should be changed now before getting too far in the DDA negotiation process; the number can always be changed based upon the EIR findings. Mr. Brown stated another way to address the issue would be through the alternative analysis process contained within the CEQA process; SunCal has proposed a base entitlement of approximately 3,800 homes and has discussed a vision for a density/transit oriented community that could have up to 4,800 homes; studying alternatives is part of the normal CEQA process. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that being conservative is better when starting out to know if it pencils out. Mr. Brown stated SunCal has been working with staff on sensitivity economic runs at various target points; that he would be happy to run an economic model. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the project's economic tilting point is not known; a 25% Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is pretty high; questioned how it could be adjusted. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the City does not know how much tax increment financing would be needed and when; the matter should be added to the list. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the economics involve the project; it is unknown whether the project would be viable with 3,000 units or 2,500 units. Mr. Brown stated the City's 2008 study showed that the project would be greatly benefited by having more units to support ridership and support capital requirements in order to achieve the full implementation of the proposed transit solutions. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated tonight everyone is looking to get as much input as possible. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore thanked staff for the presentation; stated staff was going through the PDC process with Alameda Point Community Partners (APCP); the one thing that she heard from the community was how traffic was going to impact people already on the island; the number one issue is traffic and traffic mitigation and how it would be phased with development; whatever is Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community 9 Improvement Commission May 18, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf |