pages: CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf, 17
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-05-18 | 17 | Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated questions need to be worked into the process; providing some frame of reference is important; the progression of the residential unit burden needs to be addressed including the Conveyance Plan, PDC, Measure B, and Optional Entitlement Application (OEA); that he would like to have the issue measured against Associated Bay Area Governments (ABAG) obligations; more depth is needed regarding the economic development strategy, including the type of commercial activity, intra-City commute, and meeting the original base reuse and alignment mandate to replace jobs that disappeared when the former Naval Base closed; requested a report on financial conditions that were present in the run up to Measure B and the status of the large delta between SunCal estimates and/or caps on public amenities versus Public Works' estimate; a report is needed on whether the $1.8 million burden that was in the draft term sheet with the Navy back in 2006 is still relevant and if not whether there is a way to portion out some of the clean up at the end of the process; that he would like to have an analysis and presentation from the City and SunCal regarding how to ensure that the City does not become a Albuquerque; a risk analysis is needed; the signed Project Labor Agreement is a positive and has always been a requirement; that he is glad the Agreement was signed after three years; an intense time is needed for filling in facts, then decisions can be made. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated SunCal made a presentation to the Planning Board last week; inquired whether the ideas in the presentation were conceptual. Mr. Brown responded the Density Bonus option was presented and is the plan that SunCal intends to build within the community. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan provided a handout; stated the highlighted section on page 6 sits directly over the contaminated area and is a high density area which is approximately one mile from the transportation center; the back page shows embedded garages and sixty-five foot buildings with no set backs; inquired whether the drawing is conceptual. Mr. Brown responded the product is intended to be an urban product that would fit in with the overall community vision; stated the complex would have zero or small set backs. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the example shows a picture of a very dense building adjacent to a railroad track; page 5 shows an artist's rendition of what the ferry terminal would look like; inquired what is the size of the buildings. Mr. Brown responded sixty-five feet; stated the height limitation would result in more varied, interesting architecture. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community 5 Improvement Commission May 18, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf |