pages: CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf, 25
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2009-11-17 | 25 | The Planning Services Manager responded the reduction would not provide longer term housing but would make the inclusionary housing requirement within the City consistent; stated applying the 25% inclusionary requirement would automatically entitle applicants to the density bonus requirements plus concessions, incentives, and waivers; staff did not want density bonus concessions and waivers to be automatically triggered; by rolling the percentage back to 15%, the applicant would have to make more affordable units within the development. In response to Councilmember/Commissioner Tam's inquiry, the Supervising Planner responded any inclusionary housing units count towards the density bonus units; staff does not want to create a situation where someone would automatically be entitled to a density bonus plus concessions and waivers. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she likes the idea of caps; perhaps the Planning Board should be requested to look at particular items. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan stated one item would be open space; visuals should be provided in order to show what projects would actually entail. The Planning Services Manager stated visuals could be provided. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents (In favor of ordinance) : Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) i Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society; Jamie Keating, Trailhead Ventures, LLC . There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he would like to send the ordinance back [to the Planning Board] ; the two most important points are: 1) separating pure residential from other projects; 2) setback and height caps cannot be arbitrary or non- technical; Fire Department pictures show the hazard that could be used as the rationale for setting a cap; if the ordinance is sent back to the Planning Board, it should be time critical so that the process can be finished. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Community Improvement Commission November 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf |