pages: CityCouncil/2010-07-07.pdf, 10
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-07-07 | 10 | thought he was here for questions and did not know he had a presentation. Mr. Brown stated there are a number of things SunCal obviously disagrees with in the staff report; thanked the Deputy City Manager - Development Services and the Planning Serves Manager for help in completing the application process and finding it finally deemed complete, and also for continued efforts in the weekly meetings; stated they are professionals and he very much appreciates the continuing dialogue that SunCal has had with them and looks forward to doing it [dialogue] in the coming months; a couple of weeks ago, Vice Chair/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan asked both staff and SunCal not to come back here with a cat fight over statistics and facts; as staff indicated, information has been traded back and forth over the last several weeks; unfortunately he, nor anyone on his team, received the pretty extensive and detailed report both from staff and the City's consultants until Friday of last week, just before the holiday weekend, so it has been relatively difficult for SunCal to digest the information and give a more comprehensive report; that he disagrees with many of the conclusions presented tonight; turning to some of the areas where there was conversation, and probably the first one talked to is home valuation; a lot of time was spent on that [home valuation]; that he gave extensive comments several weeks ago at a prior review; putting aside all the numbers, SunCal has had conversations with the City's consultants extensively on valuation; there is a fundamental disagreement between the way SunCal views the piece of property, the project SunCal proposes to build, and the way, apparently, the City looks at it; although the community of 4800 homes and millions of square feet of commercial will be built in Alameda, is intended to be integrated into the community of Alameda, can be a part of the City of Alameda and the marketplace, both on the commercial level, as well as on the residential level, it is not simply Alameda [involved]; SunCal views the property and opportunity, as something that is going to be an asset to the entire Bay Area; when looking at valuations and comps, SunCal looked at current sales across the entire Bay Area; SunCal looked at areas in the East Bay, as the City's consultant did, and also looked at areas in San Francisco; SunCal does not comp to a bigger size house in San Francisco; similarly, houses in other parts of the East Bay may need to be increased; SunCal looked at the totality of the market and said this is not a community of 100, 200, or even 400 homes; this is a community of 5,000 new home sites, it is a destination that is going to be a significant piece of the residential and commercial marketplace in the Bay Area for years and years to come; the amenities designed into the project support that and to simply go back and look at, as the report appears to do, that is the fundamental difference; all the details and numbers can be discussed; saying the project is simply an Alameda project that needs to be compared to Alameda comps comes to a different conclusion than SunCal's project view; said view of the project has not changed on over the last three years; SunCal has always expressed the vision of the project as much larger than just another subdivision in a wonderful community; that is the fundamental difference. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the $1,042,000 home price is medium home Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and 9 Community Improvement Commission July 7, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-07.pdf |