Memorandum CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY

Transcription

1 COUNCIL AGENDA: ITEM: CITY OF SANJOSE Memorandum CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC v. City of San Jose, et al. FROM: Richard Doyle City Attorney DATE: November 10, 2016 RECOMMENDATION Approve a global settlement in Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC v. City of San Jose, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court case no. 16CV296834, and authorize the City Attorney to execute a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release relating to the Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC's claim against City of San Jose, San Jose City Council, Trammel Crow Company, LLC, and Diridon Station Joint Venture, LLC challenging the City's approval of the Delmas Avenue Mixed-Use Development Project and addendum to the Environmental Impact Reports. OUTCOME Approval of a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release to resolve a lawsuit filed by Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC (SSE) against the City of San Jose, San Jose City Council, Trammel Crow Company, LLC, and Diridon Station Joint Venture. BACKGROUND The City Council considered this case during the Closed Session held on November 8, On June 23, 2016, SSE filed a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Petition for Writ of Mandate naming the City of San Jose and San Jose City Council as Respondents. Trammel Crow Company, LLC and Diridon Station Joint Venture are the real parties in interest named in this case. SSE is challenging the City's approval of the Delmas Avenue Mixed-Use Development Project described in the Planned Development Permit No. PD ("PD Permit") approved by the City on May 24, SSE requested the court direct the City to vacate and rescind all project approvals and direct the City to comply with CEQA and the San Jose Municipal Code. ANALYSIS Settlement is recommended to avoid further litigation and because settlement terms are reasonable. Upon execution of the Satisfaction Agreement with the City and dismissal

2 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL November 10, 2016 Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC v. City of San Jose, et al. Page 2 of this lawsuit, Trammel Crow will contribute $4 million dollars to the City to be restricted for the acquisition of certain properties to the north of the SAP Center for the use of public parking. City will make good faith efforts to purchase these properties with the provided funds. If the City is able to acquire all the properties, the City will also lease certain adjoining SSE properties for $1 /month and construct a surface parking lot that will be operated by SSE for the purposes of public parking. It is important to note that the City Council had previously set aside funds for additional parking at the SAP Center in the General Purpose Parking Fund that can be used for the construction of a surface lot. SSE also gives the City an option to purchase the SSE properties if the City constructs a parking garage or upon termination of the Arena Management Agreement. City gives SSE an option to purchase its properties if the City decides to sell, lease or otherwise transfer the property it owns during the term of the Arena Management Agreement. The City will also make efforts to secure additional parking for SSE employee parking. Following the City's receipt of the settlement payment, this Office will work with the Budget Office to bring forward appropriation actions for the City Council's approval, likely as part of the Mid-Year Budget Review. PUBLIC OUTREACH/INTEREST The final settlement agreement will be posted on the City's website once approved by Council. COORDINATION The Director of the Office of Economic Development and the City Manager have been advised of the proposed settlement. CEQA Not a Project; File No. PP10-066(h), Settlement Agreements RICHARD DOYLE City Attornev By Elizabeth Klotz Deputy City Attorney cc: Norberto Duenas, City Manager Nanci Klein, Director, Office of Economic Development For questions please contact RICHARD DOYLE, City Attorney, at (408)

3 W-V&-W Shasta/Hancfi ett Pat It II e tgl) bsrhn a d isspciatittij RO. Box 2B034 * Son loss, ft BSS5B, intehpno:«rg « November 15,2016 Mayor Iiccardo and Members of City Council City of San Jose 200 East Santa Clara St San Jose, CA Re: November 15,2016 Council Agenda Item 3.7: "Settlement of Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC v. City of San Jose, et al." Dear Honorable Mayor Iiccardo and Honored Members of City Council, On behalf of the Shasta/Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association, we would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed settlement of Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC v. City of San Jose. The Shasta/Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association represents 1,400 households in neighborhoods immediately West of Diridon Station, the area that is most direcdy impacted by events and associated traffic that take place at SAP Center. Similarly, members of S/HPNA and the residents it represents have been intimately involved in die Diridon Station Area Plan since the first public hearings. Therefore, it is with great concern that we write to you, requesting that you do not approve the proposed setdement. The proposed setdement contradicts bodi the spirit and the letter of the Diridon Station Area Plan, and undermines the City's ongoing attempts to address the drastic jobs ration disparity. The Diridon Station Area Plan tagged the proposed parking lot site(s) as innovation jobs lands, a center for R&D and the types of jobs that continue to prosper throughout Silicon Valley. This agreement, at best, all but indefinitely delays the implementation of this area as a jobs center. At worst, it is the first step down a slippery slope, surrendering the very purpose of the Diridon Station Area Plan as a jobs,center. Hie City has expressed a stated intent to see the Diridon Station area as a dense, walkable destination. Reinforcing the Sharks' ability to remain car-centric direcdy contradicts this stated intent, and undercuts the Diridon Station Area Plan. Doing so this early in die Plan's implementation sets a dangerous precedent, and devalues die substantial community input that has come before. Between High Speed Rail, VTA, BART, Caltrain, and BRT, there are those, both within the City of San Jose's employees and without, that refer to Diridon Station as having the potential to become the Grand Central Station of the West The Diridon Station Area Plan's successful implementation is central to this stated intent, and the multiple billions of dollars that are being spent to bring all the disparate transit systems to San Jose. Extracting tiiese jobs lands for use as surface parking is not in keeping witii the City's stated jobs goals, transit-oriented development guidelines, or Urban Village proposals. It is therefore the preference of our neighborhood association that Council reject the proposed setdement. Our community can only benefit from your support today. We look forward to being a part of the process to address quality urban planning, fiscal stability, and truly livable amenities for our diverse community. Respectfully submitted, Edward Saum President, Shasta/Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association

4 \V-\S 3 From: Richard Nieset [mailto:r ] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, :55 AM To: City Clerk <city.clerk@sanjoseca.gov>; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOfficeofMayorSamLiccardo@sanjoseca.gov>; Districtl <districtl@sanjoseca.gov>; District2 <District2@sanjoseca.gov>; District3 <district3@sanjoseca.gov>; District4 <District4@sanjoseca.gov>; District5 <District5@sanjoseca.gov>; district6@sanjoseca.gov; District7 <District7@sanjoseca.gov>; District8 <district8@sanjoseca.gov>; District9 <district9@sanjoseca.gov> Subject: adina.levin@friendsofcaltrain.com Mayor and City Council, I am writing to let you know how important it is to keep the Diridon Station Area Plan intact. The alternative plan to purchase land for San Jose Sharks parking would violate this idea and negatively impact the City's ability to extend growth through business and commerce that not only makes it more vibrant but has the potential to increase tax revenue far beyond the proposed alternative to provide a land deal for the Sharks. Please resolve to stick to the objective of getting people out of their cars, and promoting transit infrastructure development. Please DO NOT vote to go forward with a plan of providing an option to the Sharks for the land purchase. That land needs to be reserved for the purpose as provided in our agreed on Station Area Plan. One more time ~ can we please do this right, think long term, not sports term? Regards Richard Nieset

5 From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Adina Levin Sent: Tuesday, November 15, :52 AM To: City Clerk <city.clerk@sanjoseca.gov>; The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOfficeofMayorSamLiccardo@sanjoseca.gov>; Districtl <districtl@sanjoseca.gov>; District3 <district3@sanjoseca.gov>; District4 <District4@sanjoseca.gov>; District5 <District5@sanjoseca.gov>; district6@sanjoseca.gov; District7 <District7@sanjoseca.gov>; District8 <district8@sanjoseca.gov>; District9 <district9@sanjoseca.gov>; District2 <District2@sanjoseca.gov>; District 10 <DistrictlO@sanjoseca.gov> Subject: Diridon Parking Settlement Dear Mayor and Council Members, Friends of Caltrain is a 501 c3 nonprofit supporting sustainable transportation and transit-oriented development in the Peninsula corridor from San Francisco through San Jose. We strongly support the goals of the Diridon Station Area Plan to evolve the area to a mixed-use, urban place with much more walking, bicycling, and transit use. We have concerns and suggestions regarding the Diridon Parking Settlement for review today. According to the settlement offer, Trammel Crow will provide $4M for the city to buy land North of the SAP Center for public parking, and to give the Sharks an option to purchase the land if the city wants to sell it in the future. The land north of the station is land that was slated in the Diridon Station Area Plan for jobs - an innovation, R&D area. If the land stays parking, this agreement surrenders the purpose of the Diridon plan as a jobs center. If and when developers want the land for offices in the future, the Sharks have the option to buy the land and take all the profit from office development near a major transit hub. Having the Sharks business stay car-centric even as the area urbanizes around it is counter to the City's goals for the area. The City should work with the Sharks over time to reduce the need for parking, just as the City of San Francisco worked with the Giants to transition from 90% driving at Candlestick Park to 50% driving at urban AT&T park. Also, giving the Sharks the option for full financial return if and when the parking lot turns into valuable offices is highly generous. Would it be feasible for the City to amend the settlement agreement to share in the upside if and when the land is sold? The City badly needs the revenue for streets, parks and other city services. Thank you for your consideration, - Adina Adina Levin Friends of Caltrain