Train Station Project Update Report from Ad Hoc Committee December 11, 2007

Purpose of Ad Hoc Committee? City wants to be proactive  engage developer to move project forward quickly Elimination of “significant negative impacts” identified in Draft EIR  Shortage of transit parking spaces Draft EIR states parking adequate at 517 spaces July Staff Report says 517 spaces not adequate Recirculated EIR states 760 spaces or more needed  Traffic congestion  Aesthetics Scale and compatibility

Purpose of Ad Hoc Committee-Goals (cont.) Provide adequate transit parking so that the site functions as a regional transit center  Top 20 busiest AMTRAK stations in USA  Second busiest passenger train corridor in the USA Successful vibrant retail environment that will allow City to repay any borrowings for the project Supports and enhances current business district  Mitigates traffic and parking issues Satisfies original seven goals of this project

Purpose of Ad Hoc Committee? (cont) $6 million in STIP money will be lost if transit parking garage is not approved by all agencies by June 2008  Time is of the essence

Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Dates July 24 th City Ad Hoc members July 30 th City Ad Hoc members August 2 nd City Ad Hoc members August 9 th City Ad Hoc/Developer/NCTD August 13 th City Ad Hoc members August 20 th City Ad Hoc members August 20 th City Ad Hoc/Developer August 24 th City Ad Hoc/Developer August 27 th City Ad Hoc/Developer/NCTD (plus NCTD Ad Hoc) September 4 th City Ad Hoc/Developer/NCTD (cont)

Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Dates (cont) September 10 th City/Developer/NCTD  NCTD asks City to contribute City’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA) money to build NCTD parking garage,  NCTD agrees to provide financial projections at next meeting so City can assess requested contribution  NCTD states that it can’t build/operate the project without City contribution September 17 th City/Developer September 24 th City/Developer/NCTD  All agree to six week “roadmap” for meetings  NCTD to provide financials by end of September

Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Dates (cont) October 1 st (meeting cancelled) October 8 th (meeting cancelled) October 15 th City/Developer/NCTD (plus NCTD Ad Hoc and Ms. King)  Still no financial projections from NCTD, verbal significant annual shortfall communicated by NCTD October 22 nd (meeting cancelled) October 29 th (meeting cancelled) November 5 th (meeting cancelled) November 13 th City/Developer/NCTD  Still no financial projections from NCTD  Developer provides financial projections for NCTD parking garage

Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Dates (cont) November 15 th City/Developer/NCTD  Developer asks City to contribute funds for NCTD parking garage November 26 th City Ad Hoc Members December 2 nd City Ad Hoc Members December 6 th City Ad Hoc Members December 10 th City/Developer/NCTD  Still no financial projections from NCTD

Status of EIR Developer is unwilling to pay EIR fees – processing stopped  Developer insisted on tentative agreement before paying fees City has advanced fees to complete the EIR  City acted in good faith to eliminate delay  Avoid delays, protect STIP money EIR scheduled to come back before Council shortly, currently EIR being reviewed by Staff

Committed Construction Funding for Transit Parking Garage $6M of STIP money from the State IIP Fund  IIP=Interregional Improvement Program  This program targets projects that are needed to improve interregional movement of people and goods $2.4M Federal Government Grants Total Committed Funding  $8.4M

STIP Funding $6M of STIP money from the State (IIP Fund)  IIP-Interregional Improvement Program  This program targets projects that are needed to improve interregional movement of people and goods Application is for Solana Beach Parking Structure  Cannot be applied to another project  Must produce at least 500 transit spaces 6/30/08 must “allocate” the funds (all approvals received) 12/31/08 must award the contract, start construction in early 2009 This money is critical to having any shot at a project

Funding Requested by NCTD from City February 2007 NCTD requested private, non-public meeting related to the project  NCTD purpose was to discuss that project was not financially feasible at that date  SB Council invited NCTD to have a “public” meeting Multiple Requests from Developer and NCTD  9/10/07 NCTD & Developer request  10/15/07 NCTD Director & Developer request  11/13/07 NCTD Director denies request  11/15/07 Developer request

Why does City need financials? City is being asked to be a financial partner. NCTD has requested money from the City’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to fund the project  NCTD has asked city to be a financial partner Received Developer Financial Projections for NCTD parking garage Nov 10 th  Still do not have NCTD financials

WHAT’S TAKING SO LONG? City responsibility begins when complete Application submitted Developer’s plan submitted & completed December 2005 (2 years) Average processing time for project of this complexity is approx. 4-5 years Examples of processing time:  5 ½ years Santee train station retail project  4 years Del Mar Plaza  5 years for American Assets office bldgs on Stevens Ave.

Major Issues to Resolve Project Layout  Developer has worked on a redesign of the commercial component that is a significant improvement  How many residential units? Site may accommodate approx. 140 units, based on Zoning and DB but massing and scale remain to be resolved Is the NCTD parking garage financially feasible? City must determine if it wants to contribute money, if it is being requested and if so, how much?  How much 517 spaces?  How much for 760 spaces? Finalize EIR

City’s Efforts to Advance the Project Advanced $67,000 for EIR processing Dedicated several hundred hours of time for Ad Hoc Committee and staff Hired financial consultant to evaluate financial feasibility & alternatives Hired architect (Del Mar Plaza) to work on design solutions

Original Train Project Goals 1. Long-term parking solution (Coaster/Amtrak), support the use of rail transit (below grade) 2. Transit friendly project compatible with community character and resulting in increased ridership 3. Support the Land Use Distribution Element of the City’s Regional Growth Management Strategy, mixed uses around rail transit 4. Generate long-term revenue stream to support NCTD transit operations 5. Compliment existing commercial district and consider concerns of residential community around station 6. Facilitate traffic circulation in and around the rail transit station 7. Consider and implement to the extent possible, the conceptual plan previously proposed by NCTD and accepted by City