pages: CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf, 22
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 22 | Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated the outline of the public input process would return following the NWSP adoption; there should be a commitment to enter into an ENA if the developer satisfies the public input meetings. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated said commitment cannot be made now; the ENA would come back for consideration; the ouncil/Commission should not commit to entering into an agreement if the developer completes various steps; the Council/Commission might decide an ENA is not appropriate when the matter returns it is not the appropriate time to consider the ENA; after the proposed meetings is the correct time to consider an ENA, but the Council/Commission is not committing to approval. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the process allows for reaching the correct point to consider an ENA. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the process allows consideration [of an ENA] however, he is not sure an ENA is necessaryi he does not know whether the 6.7 acres [of Tidelands property] kicks in the need for an ENA. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated said discussion would occur when the ENA returns; the City would have the benefit of the NWSP, additional public input and board/commission deliberation at said time. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion with the modifications. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated although he would like an understanding that the City would enter into an ENA, he is satisfied that there is a process in place once the NWSP is adopted. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the steps that the City expects the applicant to complete would lead to consideration of an ENA; however, the City is not committing to enter into an ENA upon completion of said steps; the process is normal; the City does not commit to an agreement with a developer when all the City has is a concept. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated the normal process is the developer comes forward with a concept, which is reviewed for consistencies with applicable plans; the plan is presented to the public, which involves being flexible; entering into an ENA is reasonable once said processes are completed. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 10 Community Improvement Commission November 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |