pages: CityCouncil/2012-05-08.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2012-05-08 | 8 | Mayor Gilmore stated money would be spent on a vague possibility; questioned what market research indicates the first phase would get off the ground and generate momentum. Councilmember deHaan stated from the LBNL process, the City now has a vision for said area; as a result, the pad is more marketable. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the environmental review has not been completed; over a year of environmental review represents significant entitlement risk and diminishes the marketability of the project; market research has indicated developers are interested in how fast projects can start; environmental review is the largest expense. In response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry regarding rental rates, Mr. Kelly stated the City needs to find businesses that are currently in the East Bay that want to expand and own their own buildings. Mayor Gilmore stated that she would support moving forward if the funding could come from cash flow; that she has a problem using debt to fund entitlements. The City Manager stated infrastructure cannot be built without a plan; the Base offers the opportunity for campuses and companies to construct their own buildings with great views in a location without adjacent residential neighborhoods; in discussions with the development community, everybody has said the one thing the City can do in the downturned economy is get entitlements in place, which would make the land more valuable when the economy picks up; the amount has to be paid either way; rather than selling the land with entitlements, the land would have to be given away; the reward merits the risk; there is little risk to the General Fund. Mayor Gilmore stated entitlement is a risk; however, the bigger risk is the property itself; developers might not be able to build because of the land itself. Councilmember Johnson stated there are advantages to going forward as proposed; a big benefit is having control over what is developed at the Base; two Master Developers did not go forward; a Master Developer would also develop smaller portions at a time; the proposal allows response to the market. Councilmember Tam stated no one is arguing to go back to a Master Developer model; the community has a limited amount of control; what goes in is really dictated by the market; that she sympathizes with the Mayor regarding the concept of shared risk; that she would like to share the risks with a developer willing to fund part of the CEQA document. Mayor Gilmore noted that the City had a development partner to share some of the costs for the LBLN proposal. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 8 May 8, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-05-08.pdf |