pages: CityCouncil/2011-07-19.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2011-07-19 | 11 | approval need to be met; the final map would come back to Council for approval and lots would be recorded once conditions are met; the two acres of open space include a certain amount of land on the northern side which is owned by the Army Corps of Engineers and would require BCDC approval; the proposed resolution requires completion of the park final design and Army Corps of Engineers and BCDC approval before the final map will be approved. Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the property would be entitled once the final map is approved. The Planning Services Manager responded the property would be entitled but building permits would not be granted until design review for the architectural and landscape is complete. Mayor Gilmore stated staff and the community have gone through a lot of work; inquired what would happen if the property owners sell off the property, what type of assurances the City would have that the property would be built the way the City says it should be built, and whether the City would have any rights on how the property could be transferred and to whom; stated that she would not want the property to be transferred and have someone sit on it for five or ten years. The Acting City Attorney responded Council approved a Settlement Agreement last October; a number of the exhibits are model documents to be used for the project; the property owner would be bound to adhere to Settlement Agreement requirements; assignment provisions would provide protection. The Planning Services Manager stated 90 plus conditions are part of the map and entitlement which runs with the land; Settlement Agreement commitments and an Environmental Impact Report have been baked into the comprehensive list of conditions; any buyer would know what the expectations would be for the next steps. Mayor Gilmore requested clarification on the timing. The Planning Services Manager stated the economy is working against the City; having a Settlement Agreement is advantageous; commitments have been made to financially assist the project with revenue generated by the project, which has a clock; the sale of the land would start the clock; the City's commitment to help financially may expire at a certain point if the land sells and nothing happens; the site has significant blight; there are some significant concerns with building conditions; at a certain point, the City may need to proceed with some type of enforcement action. The Acting Community Development Director stated the Settlement Agreement has a two-year timeframe for meeting a number of obligations. Councilmember Tam inquired what would be the assessed value of the transfer tax, to which the Planning Services Manager responded that he is not prepared to answer. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 11 July 19, 2011 | CityCouncil/2011-07-19.pdf |