CCMIN120396 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Swift stated the Taubman agreement has a provision that says no modification can be made to the Wells Fargo agreement regarding reimbursement for street improvements unless Taubman agrees to that. Both parties are satisfied with the agreements as currently presented to Council. Taubman will agree to the modification to the Wells Fargo Agreement. Ms. Acosta indicated an important element is the fact that Wells Fargo was to have advanced the money for improvements and be reimbursed from Taubman. Now that process has been reversed; Taubman will advance the funds and Wells Fargo will reimburse it. Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing open. Robert Gibney, Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe, 333 Bush Street, San Francisco, representing the Taubman Company, commended the staff on the accurate, thorough and balanced presentation. Taubman entered into its development after Wells Fargo and patterned its agreement on that of Wells Fargo to be consistent. The reason Taubman is asking for an amendment to its development agreement is due to the amendment to the Wells Fargo agreement, however, Taubman felt it appropriate to request further amendments are necessary to support the continued health and expansion plans of Stoneridge Mall. It took twenty years for Stoneridge to reach its current state and it will probably be another fifteen to twenty years until the final approximately 400,000 sq. ft. is completed. It has been made clear that each of the anchor stores have expansion plans in mind, which is why Taubman wants to assure the flexibility to provide that. He went on to explain the marketing strategies and negotiating techniques involved in maintaining the stores in the mall. Taubman is asking for a City commitment that will permit the expansion some years down the road. There are no specific expansion plans from the stores at this date, but it was an appropriate development tool for a phased development like Stoneridge Mall. Taubman is fully committed to paying its fair share of improvements that may be necessitated due to any expansion plans. He pointed out that any expansion of density means Taubman has a greater share of the cost of the improvements and it accepts that added cost. Patrick Gibson, 1453 Third Street//400, Santa Monica, traffic engineer for the Stoneridge Mall, reviewed issues that came up at the Planning Commission. The new square footage requested would consist of new specialty stores and the expansion of existing department stores. He briefly described retail market concepts and the requirements of shopping centers. It was his contention that an expansion to an existing store does not generate more trips, as would a brand new store. He related the changes in the industry standard for parking ratios and stated the requested amendment is only to keep up with that standard. He pointed out that the City has a long-term owner/operator of the shopping center and as owner/operator it does not want to short-change its customers in terms of parking or traffic. People do not have to come to Stoneridge and will go somewhere else if there are problems in those areas. He related how they keep track of parking at the Center during peak times and during holidays and various designs of parking structures. He then referred to the West Las Positas interchange and the fact that it has been in the General Plan for many years and all traffic assumptions are based on its being there. He believed a complete analysis is necessary before reaching the conclusion that 13 12/03/96