As usual, Bruce Stark’s column is full of half-truths and false statements with a few factual statements mixed in. My comments are below.
- “A nonrefundable $900,000 payment from the city for a limited lease of a driveway to the city parking lot, a bike trail, and a sewer outlet.”
Not true: in the Settlement Agreement $900,000 is for the sewer easement.
The lease for the driveway and trail is $1/year for four years.
- “The city cedes any claim to Ocean Avenue extension, the city street which bordered the south side of the DWP generating plant.”
Not True.
- “The city changes the zoning of the DWP property from commercial to residential.” Not true; only after going through the Public Hearing Process to consider it; the city is not obligated by the Settlement Agreement do so.
- “The city abandons the 70-30 requirement between commercial and park, open space zoning.” Not true. You have my previous arguments on the 70 percent Open Space.
- “The city and its employees agree to promote Bay City’s proposal.” Not true.
The Settlement Agreement merely re-states what the city is obligated to do by law with any application submitted to it for review.
- “The city waives any claim for Quimby Act park improvement fees and for any affordable housing requirement.”
True. It is in the Settlement Agreement.
There is a value to this and Bay City Partners agreed to sell the open space to the city at less than market value in partial return for this and other considerations along with the cash provided for in the settlement agreement.
- “The city agrees to dismiss its condemnation lawsuit against Bay City Partners and pay up to $10,000 in their court costs.” True, the city agreed to drop the condemnation suit. It wanted out of a suit that had untenable consequences to the city if they lost. The $10,000 was an estimate. We have not submitted any claim on that.
- “The city agrees to process Bay City’s proposal for half price.”
Partially true. The city only agreed to cut the 17 percent administrative surcharge they put on the Environmental Impact Report contract in half.
- “The city will give the Bay City Partners 7,000 square feet of city land at the corner of Marina and First St.” Partially True. It is being “sold” to BCP as partial compensation for the Open Space land.
- “The city will pay for and build a fence between the residents and the undeveloped park land/open space.” Not true.
The Settlement agreement provides if the project is approved at the California Coastal Commission the city will be a co-applicant as there has to be a Coastal Development Permit to remove the fence around the property the city is getting.
Yes, you need a Coastal Development Permit to remove a fence just as you would if you built one; it is all considered “development” by the Coastal Commission. The city gets title to the property with Coastal Commission approval. This allows the fence to be removed the next day around the property the city is acquiring. The agreement requires the city to fence the dividing line between the public property and remaining Bay City Partners land with a fence that will remain in place until the development of the residential begins; probably about six months after Coastal Commission approval.
This is an example of the paranoia these folks have. The purpose of this is to provide a mechanism to have the ugly fence removed the day after the Coastal Commission approves the project around the Open Space area and be available for public use. If this were not done it would take the city another six months or more to get a permit to remove the fence.
The fence along the new common property line is temporary until construction begins and could probably be done with parts of the fence being removed at little cost to the city.
- “The city agrees the Bay City Partners may grade the park land/open space.”
True. There is minor grading along the boundary between the development area and the open space permitted in the settlement agreement.
This is normal when one sells off a part of their property to another with the intent to develop the portion being retained. Remember the Open Space is being sold to the city not dedicated as a condition of the development.
- “It has the right to buy the park/open space left over from the housing tract for $1,100,000.” This comes from the Settlement Agreement. It is a $2,000,004 agreement. $900k for the sewer easement, $1/yr for the driveway and trail lease (four years), and $1.1 million for fee title to 6.42 acres of open space.
The 6.5 acres of Open Space BCP is selling the city is worth much more than $2 million. The concessions in the settlement agreement are an offset on the true market value. Even when the value of the concessions and the $2 million is totaled the city is getting the 6.5 acres for far less than its true market value. Folks forget that there is nothing in the Specific Plan that requires Bay City Partners to give the land to the city.
The city cannot require it be dedicated as a condition of development. Cities cannot zone otherwise developable land for open space to depress the value to acquire it for little or no compensation. Even with the residential proposal and the Quimby act, the city cannot require land dedication as its dedication provisions only kick in at 50 or more lots. Below 50 Lots it a $10,000 per lot fee.
Ed Selich is the project manager for Bay City Partners.
