pages: CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf, 12
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 12 | Mayor Johnson stated the open space is defined by the General Plan. Councilmember deHaan stated he is concerned that there should be more property than what is shown. The Supervising Planner stated the proposal is based on the General Plan language; the General Plan provides guidance in some of the explanatory text. Mayor Johnson stated Council is not adopting a diagram of how the open space would be configured. The Supervising Planner stated the diagram shows the general distribution of land use throughout the City. Councilmember Matarrese stated the previous motion upheld the 300- - foot description as written in the General Plan. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of rezoning to R-2/PD the MU-5 area encompassed within the proposed project plot that does not include the required portion for the Estuary Park, as per the description in the General Plan, and bringing the other MU-5 parcels back to the Planning Board for a recommendation to the Council at a future date. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the proposed rezoning precludes the densities that the Collins' property originally reviewed, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes : Councilmember deHaan -1. Mayor Johnson stated Mr. Siden indicated that potential funding would be available in the next couple years through ballot measures the City should review how the property could be acquired; a General Plan open space designation is one thing, but someone else owning the land is another thing to do; Council gave direction to bring back a proposal for a Beltline Task Force; suggested having a similar Task Force, or perhaps use the same Task Force, to determine how to purchase the property. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Mayor Johnson; clarified that the City has been serious about the matter before; Council put a million on the table and the Parks and Recreation Department put together an application for funding twice but was unsuccessful; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 October 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |