The Uncertainties

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO CEQA

"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 CEQA 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 DA does not identify who will provide such funding; however, the City typically imposes these costs on the developer." (p.

Referring Documents: 
City of Alameda Election Report Executive Summary-Part I, May 29, 2009
Topics: 
Traffic and Transit

IMPACTS ON CAPITAL BUDGET

"The DA 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.)

Referring Documents: 
City of Alameda Election Report Executive Summary-Part I, May 29, 2009
Topics: 
Financial Issues
Infrastructure
Recreational Facilities and Public Benefits

CLIMATE CHANGE

"There is insufficient information in the Initiative to determine the mitigation measures that may be implemented to address flooding impacts on existing facilities. It is not clear whether mitigation would be in the form of additional fill in some areas, or the construction of levees, which would require additional maintenance, long term monitoring and ongoing permitting." (p. 23.)

Referring Documents: 
City of Alameda Election Report Executive Summary-Part I, May 29, 2009
Topics: 
Infrastructure

STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY

"[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.)

Referring Documents: 
City of Alameda Election Report Executive Summary-Part I, May 29, 2009
Topics: 
Infrastructure
Water

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS

"There is not sufficient detail to determine the size or location of all the infrastructure improvements, consequently, it cannot be determined from the Initiative whether the tax rate cap is sufficient to fund the ongoing maintenance through property assessments alone." (p. 26.)

Referring Documents: 
City of Alameda Election Report Executive Summary-Part I, May 29, 2009
Topics: 
Financial Issues
Infrastructure

DENSITY BONUS

"[A] density bonus project could be granted an exception from the setback, height or other development regulations established by the Initiative, if those exceptions result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions for the density bonus project. The Initiative is unclear as to whether additional units granted to individual projects within Alameda Point will be counted toward the 4,841-unit cap established by the Initiative." (p. 29.)

Referring Documents: 
City of Alameda Election Report Executive Summary-Part I, May 29, 2009
Topics: 
Density Bonus
Housing

Pages