pages: CityCouncil/2012-07-17.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2012-07-17 | 7 | should require notification to every household; staff more than exceeded State law; Planning Board agendas now have seven day notice, not three; Council meetings are noticed 12 days, not three; the City has produced advisories since the new administration has taken over, which he is proud of; people who write and call, receive answers; addressed the timing of the hearing; stated staff is doing its best to preserve the way of life in Alameda. Vice Mayor Bonta thanked the Planning Services Manager for his work and the comprehensive presentation detailing all public engagement opportunities; stated the hearing is robust community dialogue and exchange of ideas; the staff proposal is a common sense, practical, pragmatic approach, which is prudent both financially and legally; the City is out of compliance with State law and needs to get certified; the City has not had a certified Housing Element for 22 years; adoption preserves the City's access to State funding, avoids lawsuits, keeps local control and provides housing options for all residents. Vice Mayor Bonta moved final passage of the ordinance. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Tam stated the meeting culminates a long public process; the Housing Element ensures community concerns can be addressed by preserving local control over Measure A, rather than having control taken away by the State or courts; quality of life concerns will be addressed under CEQA when projects commence; the proposed overlay is a creative way of preserving Measure A; thanked staff. Councilmember Johnson inquired how much transportation funding the City could face losing without a certified Housing Element, to which the Planning Services Manager responded the amount for the next round for the entire Bay Area is $320 million. Councilmember Johnson stated the State is coming down harder on cities without an adopted Housing Element; all cities have unique circumstances and do not agree with the number of units assigned; Alameda has had positive things from Measure A, but Measure A does not prevent the demolition of historic structures; the Council adopted an ordinance which requires a process before demolishing a historic structure; the City faces great risk if the Housing Element is not certified; there could be loss of control over the permit process and the loss of Measure A; the staff proposal would preserve Measure A and result in a certified Housing Element to avoid consequences; the City has to comply with State law; the City would not eliminate the 2,400 unit requirement by not adopting the Housing Element. Mayor Gilmore stated the State does not care about Alameda's uniqueness; a court would come to the conclusion that Measure A does not comply with State law, which is a problem for the City; the entire Island would lose Measure A; the City has taken a rational approach to identify 10 sites to comply with State law and maintain Measure A Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 July 17, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-07-17.pdf |