pages: CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf, 20
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 20 | delisting from the HBSL; stated the City's Code section does not have a process for demolition connected to the HBSL; she does not think the process was addressed at the HAB level; the City's Code section speaks to the monument list and the buildings in question are on the HBSL which differs from the monument list; the HAB did vote not to delist the building and an opportunity should have been provided in order to clarify; there have been two votes from the HAB, including one vote not to delist the building; a discussion about what to do with the monument list should have occurred after the first vote; the City has a Code section related to demolition; the ballot language should also be honored related to reuse of the building; a vote for demolition should not be considered at this time; outlined comments provided by Christian Yuhas; stated the buildings are to be used in times of war and peace; expressed support for time being provided to work through the process of the buildings being on the National Registry prior to demolition, for the buildings not to be demolished and for the Certificate of Approval to be withheld until the process has been completed; stated staff can request information from the National Registry to find the current timeline; noted the City can be more reasonable working with the National Registry to provide an opportunity to decide whether or not the buildings are of historical significance; the EIR is a legitimate concern; there are ways to avoid an EIR; many people care about the environment and demolishing buildings can impact a community; speakers have misrepresented her position in regard to tearing down the buildings; there have been discussions related to using the buildings as part of the park to help provide a facility for student activities; it is better to protect and reuse existing buildings; expressed concern about a bait and switch; stated ballot language for reuse should be honored; many people have supported the reuse and would not support demolition. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the title of Measure A referenced is: "The Caring for Alameda Act;" she worked closely on the Measure with others; the focus of the Measure was to provide a facility for vulnerable individuals; she has worked closely to address the housing crisis; people complain about homelessness and fight even benign and humane solutions which provide a respite center to ensure people do not have to live and die on the streets; as the problem grows, more people live and die on the street; it is well and good to remember the Merchant Marines; a significant percentage of the homeless population are veterans; it is the ultimate insult for veterans to be left homeless; the Veterans Administration (VA) has made some significant headway in getting homeless veterans housed; however, headway has been lost during the pandemic leaving more veterans to become homeless; she appreciates the voters' intention with Measure A and she is ready to move forward with the matter. Vice Mayor Vella noted that she was at the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee meeting in February of 2019 when Council colleagues made presentations; widening of the street and the addition of parking for Crab Cove was discussed as part of Measure B; a number of things were said by various proponents of both measures; some of the talking points in support of Measure B had been to add parking, possibly indicating the removal of buildings; there have been numerous opportunities to address the matter; she does not appreciate the arguments against the wellness center are not at the same time and instead are attempted at multiple times creating a domino effect; Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 20 July 6, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |