pages: CityCouncil/2020-11-04.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2020-11-04 | 7 | Councilmember Daysog stated Council can join the letter and append the methodology as an amendment; Alameda's liability issues can now be raised as other East Bay cities are contesting the current methodology; a lower allocation for Alameda would result should the letter be taken seriously. Vice Mayor Knox White stated comments submitted acknowledge the requested allocation is less equitable for the region; inquired whether Councilmember Daysog is requesting Council to sign a letter which has a less equitable lens in order to append an unrelated issue; stated that he is struggling to understand the reason for the letter being the vehicle for Council recommendation. Councilmember Daysog responded that he thinks the letter is okay to submit; stated in addition to the equity lens, Alameda needs to have natural disaster components factored in to the methodology; Council can use the letter as a starting point and modify it during discussion; noted more housing could be allocated elsewhere; less housing should be required in Alameda should natural disaster liabilities be included in the methodology. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether there is a natural disaster that Alameda is more susceptible to; stated Alameda is not as prone to fires as surrounding cities and the possibility of liquefaction runs up and down the East Bay; noted Alameda would not be the only city affected by tsunamis based on the previous presentation. Councilmember Daysog responded that he represents the City of Alameda; stated Alameda is at risk for liquefaction in ways that other cities are not; the areas of Otis Drive and west of Main Street are comprised of landfill; there are projects being contemplated for Otis Drive, Alameda Point and estuary areas, which are areas that are potentially subject to natural hazards; natural hazards are enough reason for ABAG to consider; tsunamis are a low probability; however, should still be considered. Councilmember Oddie stated the [proposed RHNA] option is described as having an emphasis on equity and fair housing; the Council Referral is urgent and important; inquired whether it is urgent and important to tell ABAG not to focus on equity and fair housing. Councilmember Daysog responded the focus is not solely on equity, but to take into account the negative factors that natural hazards pose to Alameda. Councilmember Vella inquired whether other cities and locations are allowed to argue that they should receive reduced housing numbers; stated there are significant portions of San Francisco that have been built and rebuilt on marshland or landfill. Councilmember Daysog responded a representative of San Francisco can make the argument; stated that he can only made the recommendation expressing concerns for Alameda residents. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 5 November 4, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-11-04.pdf |