pages: CityCouncil/2012-06-06.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2012-06-06 | 9 | Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the funds could be used for the additional work if a commercial opportunity creates land sale proceeds, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative. In response to Councilmember Johnson's inquiry about the impact on the value, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the amount is not known at this point. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the residential area would not be marketed, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative. In response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry about impacts of not completing the residential work, the City Manager stated staff was betting that having all the residential work done would draw people in because the process would be so streamlined; however, not completing the work would allow more flexibility. Councilmember deHaan inquired how the City would balance interest in pads, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the City would hold the cards as the property owner. In response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry, Mayor Gilmore stated the master infrastructure work would be complete; further stated previous attempts have shown developers want to develop housing at Alameda Point, due to the location and fantastic views; getting the commercial aspect to work is harder; the commercial development would also create jobs. Councilmember Tam stated both options include the master infrastructure plan which is critical to understanding cost exposure; inquired whether the EIR is required as part of the Oakland Chinatown Settlement Agreement. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative; stated the Settlement Agreement requires a project level EIR before construction can start; programmatic level EIRs have been performed. Councilmember Johnson stated residential is the one part that can be removed; going forward with the commercial is focusing on job creation; doing the residential part would give the City more control. Speakers: Ken Peterson, Alameda, encouraged proceeding incrementally to not lock in poor ideas and suggested ideas for earlier scoping sessions be included; Paul Kibel, Center on Urban Environmental Law, expressed support for a City led process, made suggestions for proceeding and submitted information; Diane Lichtenstein, Housing Opportunities Make Economic Sense (HOMES), urged the Council to proceed with Option 1; Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative, expressed support for Option 1; Helen Sause, HOMES; Karen Bey, Alameda, expressed concerns with Option 1 and urged a Master Plan be prepared; former Councilmember Tony Daysog, Alameda, Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 June 6, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-06-06.pdf |