Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Au~ 22 00 03:47p <br /> <br />415-685-1799 <br /> <br />p.4 <br /> <br />'J .1-A4 <br /> <br />further establish the indemnification provisions precluding any contamination clean-up price deduction by <br />the Agency. In other words, it is our opinion that the jury would not allow any deduction for clean up to <br /> <br />the Agency. <br />The Agency's contamination investigation did not show any significant contamination on the sites, <br /> <br />but disclosed only low levels of hydrocarbon related contaminants consistent with their use as a gas station <br />and auto repair facilities. As to any residential development, it is the opinion of the Agency's <br /> <br />environmental expert based upon their investigation that there would probably be some additional cost <br />related to the site for residential development in order to handle excavated material that might be <br /> <br />contaminated and to remove any remaining subsurface structUres in surrounding soil related to the gas <br /> <br />station and auto repair. These construction costs could be mitigated by subsurface excavation. In addition, <br /> <br />there does not appear to be any groundwater contamination risk. Finally, the County indicated that any <br />remaining contamination would not limit the site use for residential development. The Agency's <br /> <br />contamination expert estimated the total maximum clean-up costs would be approximately $150,000 to <br /> <br />$195,000. <br /> <br />Based upon the above, it is our recommendation that the Redevelopment Agency Board approve the <br />settlement in the amount of $2,125,000. <br /> <br />RECOMMEND A TION: <br /> <br />Approve real property acquisition and purchase agreement. <br />Dated: Iluc;d Sf .:2 ¿;L ,2000 <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />staff report2/Davies <br /> <br />~t,~,~~ <br />CHRISTINE c. Fm E D <br />Special Eminent Domain Counsel <br /> <br />2 <br />