pages: CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf, 17
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 17 | Stated the surplus facilities were to be repurposed for homeless services; the buildings had been certified for reuse there has been a misleading intent; discussed alternate locations for the facility and ballot measure language; stated a vote to demolish the building is a betrayal of the voters' will: Harvey Rosenthal, Alameda. Stated that she opposes demolition; the HAB holds a position that the project site has significant historic value; the historic value is supported by the local and national communities; the option to demolish the building contradicts the City's commitments to protection of the environment and preservation of unique historic character; demolition releases toxins into the environment and marine life is particularly sensitive; expressed concern about the developer circumventing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process; urged Councilmember Knox White to recuse himself from the discussion due to association with the developer causing a conflict of interest: Fey Adelstein, Alameda. Stated many of the public speakers are living history; he takes issue around whether or not Municipal Code Section 12-21.3 applies to the matter; discussed the process to obtain a Certificate of Approval; noted processes and discussions have not happened for a Certificate of Approval; urged the process and procedures be completed properly: Matt Reid, Alameda. Discussed a Commission on Persons With Disabilities meeting related to the HAB approval of the permit for demolition for the wellness center; stated the wellness center will provide desperately needed housing and services for seniors and unhoused people, including people being discharged from the hospital; a large percentage of people in Alameda are people with disabilities; each delay in the project is a delay to housing and necessary follow-up care for medically fragile people; delaying the center has life and death consequences; expressed concern about opponents of the wellness center using the historic preservation process to dismiss the conclusions of preservation experts; urged Council to uphold the HAB's decision and allow the center to meet the needs of the community and for Council to take reasonable measures to ensure the McKay Avenue project becomes operational without further delay: Beth Kenny, Commission on Persons with Disabilities. Stated the opposition is not a fight against the homeless and services for people in need; expressed concern about how the matter is being handled; stated the matter should follow the letter or spirit of the law; the legal analysis presented by staff is not supported; facts which are in dispute have been presented; the analysis provided by Page and Turnbull was made by evaluation only; the information falls beyond the timelines provided by State and federal guidelines; the project will not pass scrutiny before a State or federal court; questioned whether the scope of the project has been changed; discussed the project developer and Assembly Bill 1486; stated the premise of environmental quality has been thwarted; urged Council slow down and re-examine the process to complete a proper EIR: John Healy, Appellant. Stated the Alameda Municipal Code defines which structures can qualify as Alameda Historical Monuments; the Code is the only authority needed to verify the Merchant Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 17 | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |