pages: CityCouncil/2015-09-01.pdf, 12
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2015-09-01 | 12 | 369 Mayor Spencer inquired whether the project is directly on the water, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative; stated there is a pathway between the structure and the water. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Planner stated the Balboa Park case is important because the court stated the structure is surrounded by a park which is urban use; in Alameda's case, the building is surrounded by business offices and an urban park which is considered urban use. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the project is an appropriate exemption to CEQA, to which the City Planner responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the exemption would have applied to the Hampton Inn, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired how many floors the Hampton Inn has, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded that she does not know but will find out. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Planner stated the current project is a five-story building at 63 feet and there are no other buildings in the area that are 63 feet; the height limit for the project is 100 feet, which is in the zoning for the Harbor Bay Business Park adopted in the early 1980's. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council could revisit the building height issue to which the City Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the development agreement expires in 2019 and Council can address the height issue at that time. Discussed issues that have been addressed with VF Outdoors; expressed concern over the hotel impacts, including traffic, parking and lighting: Gary Thompson, Alameda. Urged the appeal be rejected; outlined the need for the hotel: Kari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce and Alameda resident. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney stated a reason does not have to be specified when filing an appeal; stating a reason implies taking a position on the project. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how would Councilmembers prepare to address an appeal when they do not know the grounds for the appeal. The Assistant City Attorney responded an appeal is different than calling something for review; stated Unitehere! had a detailed letter when they filed their appeal. The City Attorney stated it is a de novo review on a call for review, which means anything can be addressed in the review. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 1, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-09-01.pdf |