pages: CityCouncil/2015-01-06.pdf, 12
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2015-01-06 | 12 | Mayor Spencer stated that she wants to respect the people present; she is concerned about meetings going on to 2:30 or 12:30 a.m.; she would prefer not to hear the items unless there is a timeline; questioned how long the items will take. Councilmember Daysog stated the concerns are something to consider; noted the Council might find itself in the same situation at the next Council meeting; inquired whether the Council could decide not to address an item when it is called. The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated another vote would be required to continue the meeting at 11:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Matarrese suggested moving forward and seeing what occurs. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, and Oddie - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1. *** Stated the City has addressed truck traffic by rezoning the property multi-family; affordable housing will be built as required; the Council should seek additional information; the project will still go forward: Former Councilmember Doug deHaan, Alameda. Stated the Council should have tried to work with the developer; expressed opposition to re-hearing the matter: John Piziali, Alameda. Expressed concern over delaying the project: Nick Cabral, Alameda. Stated that she supports the project, but could not find project renderings; discussed the number of housing units continually changing; stated repealing the ordinance would not stop the project; expressed concern over the project area along Sherman Street: Carol Gottstein, Alameda. Questioned how affordable the affordable housing would be; stated that she appreciates the Jean Sweeney Park funding and that the project is transit oriented development; she supports speakers on both sides of the issue: Irma Garcia, Protect Alameda. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed her support for the staff work; stated that she and staff explained the Density Bonus to concerned members of the public; the following should be considered: 1) what would the City gain from moving forward with the Del Monte development; 2) what the City would lose from rescinding the ordinances and not moving forward; and 3) are there less draconian measures that could be used to address the legitimate concerns raised; moving forward would eliminate blight and truck traffic; noted the increased truck traffic around Thanksgiving was due to labor strikes at other ports throughout the State; stated the City would gain housing; workforce housing is needed; everyone living in the units would not drive through the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council January 6, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-01-06.pdf |