The Uncertainties

"If the initiative passes and the city conveys the property to a developer, the new laws would make it impossible for Alamedans to predict or control what Alameda will be like in 10, 20, and 30 years. First, a set of extremely permissive development requirements and standards would allow an extraordinarily wide variety of projects to be built at Alameda Point; second, the city would be forced to approve any project that does not conflict with the permissive standards. This combination would entitle the developers to decide what, where, and when projects would be built." (p.

"It is unknown at this stage whether the transportation public benefits would entirely satisfy the need for mitigation that is expected to be addressed later in the CEQACalifornia Environmental Quality Act environmental review. If the CEQA process identifies more traffic or other mitigation measures than what is covered by the public benefits, they will need to be funded. The DADevelopment Agreement does not identify who will provide such funding; however, the City typically imposes these costs on the developer." (p. 12.)

"[I]f there is a concern with sea level rise, the lack of pump stations minimizes the flexibility of the design. The Specific Plan does not specify how these deficiencies will be addressed. . . . The additional annual maintenance costs associated with these facilities are not included in the fiscal analysis described in Chapter IV [Fiscal Impact]." (p. 23.)

"The DADevelopment Agreement commits to fund, in an amount not-to-exceed $200 million, public benefits that will serve [the city]. The Initiative does not calculate the total cost of infrastructure for the project. Therefore, it is unknown whether the $200 million will be sufficient to fund all of the [planned] improvements." (p. 17.)

"The Initiative could have both positive and negative impacts on the existing retail business districts. The actual impacts will depend upon various factors that are difficult to determine definitively at this time given the information provided in the Initiative." (p. 33.)

"A traffic analysis has not been conducted on this project and consequently, it has not been determined whether the proposed widths are sufficient. A traffic analysis will be performed and these issues evaluated as part of the subsequent project EIREnvironmental Impact Report." (p. 25.)

"Since there are no off-site sewer improvements described in the analysis, if any mitigation measures required by the EIREnvironmental Impact Report exceed the $200 million cap, the source of additional funding is unknown." (p. 24.)

“[S]ince the Initiative includes on-site and off-site traffic and transportation improvements in the public benefit cap, the capital improvements associated with the TDMTransportation Demand Management programs appear to be included in the cap and it is unclear whether there will be sufficient monies to fully fund all the identified public benefit projects and necessary TDM capital projects.” (p. B.)