pages: CityCouncil/2020-07-07.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2020-07-07 | 9 | Stated there are many proposals for additional housing but none for improving infrastructure; more people equals more congestion; Article 26 was voted in by majority of voters in both 1973 and 1991: Maria Carballedo, Alameda. Urged Council to focus on reparations in the form of mortgage rate reductions or rent vouchers: Mike Van Dine, Alameda. Provided a flyer: Conchita Perales, Alameda. Stated repeal of Article 26 removes an obstacle to development and does not fight against social injustice; Alameda is not obligated to follow the State's recommendations: residents need Alameda's quality of life and unique character preserved: Michele Bock, Alameda. Expressed opposition to full repeal of Article 26 being placed on the November ballot; expressed support for Article 26; stated Article 26 has helped deter development of more apartment buildings and has saved historic buildings from demolition: Joan More, Alameda. Urged Council not to fulfil a "sneak attack" by including repeal of Measure A on the November ballot; stated there has been no opportunity for community input: Elizabeth Tuckwell, Alameda. Stated Article 26 has been a burdensome yoke around Alameda's neck; the Article is an imprecise planning tool, is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced; urged Council to place a repeal of Article 26 in its entirety on the ballot: Jon Spangler, Alameda. Urged Council to leave the City of Alameda and Bay Farm alone; discussed housing in relation to transportation funds; expressed support for removing Article 26-1; urged Council to leave Article 26.3 in the City Charter: Robert Farrar, Alameda. Stated housing will not increase by 200%; final RHNA numbers will not be published until the end of 2021; staff has identified land which can be used to satisfy State mandates; Article 26 cannot interfere with identified land; repealing Article 26 in its entirety will allow staff to proceed as they please without regard to preserving the current ambience of the City: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda. Stated the egress issue must be addressed; discussed morning traffic issues; urged the issue not be political in nature; expressed support for building larger units versus numerous smaller units; stated high rise buildings will impact the City; urged Council to protect existing citizens of Alameda: Rosalinda Corvi, Alameda. Additional comment via Zoom: Urged Council not to proceed with the staff recommendation to place full repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot and to stick with the June 2 decision to repeal only Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 January 7, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-07-07.pdf |