pages: CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 7 | Mayor Johnson stated other residential structures in the area are not as dense as would be allowed in R-4 or R-5; other uses in the areas are the reason for the zoning. Councilmember deHaan stated the original proposal included 42 duplexes with 84 units on 7.2 acres; 2.4 acres were added; 4.2 acres were extracted for open space; now over 300 units are proposed; inquired how long the owner has been in control of the property, to which the Supervising Planner responded 20 years. Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the likelihood of getting the additional 5.8 acres from the other area. The Supervising Planner responded the City's ability to get the land comes down to the City's ability to purchase the land; stated the City's goal should be to purchase the land; the applicant is open to discussing the land purchase. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City looked at the 10 acres immediately off Clement Avenue for grant purposes at one point. The Supervising Planner responded the City submitted a grant application to the State for money to purchase Estuary Park. Councilmember deHaan inquired where the land is positioned, to which the Supervising Planner responded where the land is shown on the General Plan. Councilmember deHaan stated that he saw a setback off of Clement Avenue. The Supervising Planner stated he was not aware of one. Councilmember Daysog stated tremendous pressure exists to build and convert industrial sites into residential sites on both sides of the Estuary warehouse land value is approximately $2.2 million per acre, manufacturing is approximately $2 million per acre, and flex space is approximately $1.9 million per acre; the gross residential value is approximately $8 million to $11 million per acre; lessons need to be learned from Oakland; the density is too high; the Collins' numbers are more consistent with the other side of the Estuary [Oakland] Council needs to have serious discussions on the numbers desired, if rezoning is considered; he cannot vote on the matter until he is sure that he understands what the density would be. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 October 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |