pages: CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf, 20
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-07-20 | 20 | are not backed up with strong commitments to meet performance milestones; Footnote 4 of the scheduled performances addresses a milestone for vertical development that would apply to each water parcel in a phase and sixty months after the day the developer would transfer a lot or parcel to a vertical builder; stated there is no date for when the transfer has to occur; an initial phase could be taken down and a subsequent phase could be taken down but nothing requires SunCal to finish the first phase or to develop a commercial phase; timelines build off of phantom dates; force majeure, things beyond control, provisions are very broadly worded and allow way too much flexibility; Section 17.8.1 discusses changes in laws which could be broadly interpreted; a provision addresses actions of public agencies that regulate land use, development, or the provision of services to Alameda Point property that prevents, prohibits, or delays either the construction funding or development of the Alameda Point project under the conveyance of the property to developers; the City is a public agency that regulates land use; some of the provisions undermine the whole concept of the scheduled performance. Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether SunCal would need to abide by whatever is in the last, best, and final offer if the City decides to accept said offer, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the offer would need to be accepted or rejected, and there would be no room for negotiations. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded DDA negotiations would continue if the MOEA is not denied and Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners direct staff to move forward and negotiate with SunCal. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the offer is a take-it-or-leave-it offer for the City. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded not if the City continues with SunCal; stated Section 7.6.12 addresses modifications to development phasing requested by the developer; the developer wants to be able to request modifications to the phasing plan; Section 7.6.12 further states that the DDA would continue to give SunCal broad authority to change both the phasing and the context of any particular phase in response to new information, change in market conditions, improved technologies or techniques, new funding strategies, and opportunities; "new information" is so broad; staff thinks that the City's ability to enforce certain commitments is under minded by the provisions. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated there are very specific City Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and 8 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 20, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf |