pages: CityCouncil/2013-09-25.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2013-09-25 | 11 | be done; the loss of redevelopment dollars has been lamented; the City's bond rating has been upgraded; figuring out how to pay for the things the City needs and wants without always relying on going into debt has been a good thing; every possible source should be tapped before falling back on the easy way out; staff did a good job of bringing the issues forward; the staff report indicates flexibility must be built into the strategy to adapt to changing market conditions, which is counter to the sequential order; the project is going to take place over 15 to 30 years and will see a lot of different economic cycles; flexibility should be kept in mind; the report states developing a greater diversity of land uses and housing types concurrently may allow units to absorb faster, which would result in more revenue sooner to offset expensive infrastructure costs up front; the City wants to proceed cautiously; however, multiple, different types of development can be entertained simultaneously and would benefit the City. *** Councilmember Daysog left the dais at 9:54 p.m. and returned at 9:56 p.m. Board Member Knox White acknowledged Planning staff's incredible effort; thanked Councilmember Tam, with support from others, for requesting a disposition strategy; stated the disposition strategy is a Council decision which impacts zoning and other Planning Board recommendations; a key question is what is the goal of the strategy, which he thinks should be to: guide efforts, protect finances, protect the City from liability issues, ensure the core vision, which includes a vibrant town center, being fiscally neutrality and generating revenue; that he believes the strategy is too broad; gave a Power Point outlining his suggestions. Mayor Gilmore stated when the City went through the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) process, LBNL had concerns about whether staff would be able to take care of personal matters on the lunch hour or before or after work; the Town Center has to go forward at the same time as a component part to help attract development to Alameda Point; the enterprise zone and Town Center go together; amenities have to be provided for workers and existing residents; requested staff to address subsidies. The City Manager stated items one through nine are not in a strict pecking order; market place realities indicate housing is not hard to get right now; other areas are going to require more imagination and work; assuming the enterprise zone would require a subsidy to the backbone infrastructure is a mistake; the City will have to finance backbone infrastructure because the City will control the construction; the City will not overbuild for things not there; the backbone infrastructure will not be brought to the door of the enterprise area and the City will not proceed if sufficient funds are not coming in; backbone infrastructure to the enterprise area is the same backbone infrastructure for the Town Center; they go hand in hand from the infrastructure perspective; the City will provide backbone infrastructure to the door of each super pad and individual developers will be required to build infrastructure on their property Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 11 Planning Board September 25, 2013 | CityCouncil/2013-09-25.pdf |