pages: CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf, 31
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 31 | consequences for families as well as the vibrancy of the community; discussed neighbors that have moved away due to displacement; the City has a responsibility to the past to build a better community and ensuring residential zoning results in 5,300 units between 2023 and 2031: urged Council adopt the staff resolution: Gaylon Parsons, Alameda. Expressed support for the City staff resolution; stated it is important that affordable and multi-family housing is dispersed around the City and not pressed onto the base; AFFH ensures the benefits and opportunities of having neighbors of different class statuses and ages; urged Council consider the future when investing in creating the needed community: Grover Wehman-Brown Alameda. Discussed a letter submitted; expressed support for filing the appealfor the Planning Board recommendation to delete the Article 26 clause; stated alternative language should be included should Council wish to leave the clause,; he would like input from the City Attorney as to the necessity of including a statement; State law only partially preempts Article 26; the overall strategy presented in the staff report is good; expressed support for further promotion of Alameda Point and Encinal Terminal sites, including a request from the Navy to remove the cap on Alameda Point: Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society. Urged Council to direct staff to develop a comprehensive game plan to successfully renegotiate Alameda Point's residential cap with the United States Navy; stated there is agreement in adopting a Housing Element which maximizes the use of City owned land at Alameda Point; the space is a tool for meeting the RHNA number; it is clear that the City cannot maximize the use of City owned land at Alameda Point without lifting unreasonable and outdated caps on housing units; the effort must begin now and be on a parallel track with preparing the Housing Element; expressed support for adding language to the resolution which acknowledges the City taking action to renegotiate obsolete caps; urged Council consider each city having an obligation to address the housing crisis: Donna Fletcher, Alameda. Expressed support for filing an appeal; stated the State hands out numbers expecting cities to appeal; the process is a negotiation and it is time for the City to take the next step; expressed support for the Navy lifting caps at Alameda Point; stated the projections for growth in California should consider sustained growth over the next 20 to 30 years by demanding zoning laws be dropped to support multi-family housing; discussed slowed growth due to the economy: Matt Reid, Alameda. Expressed support for appealing the RHNA allocation numbers; urged the City pursue the matter further; stated the issue is simple and Alameda is limited in geography; the City is primarily an island with a peninsula; there are not enough bridges or tunnels to accommodate the proposed growth of thousands of units; urged Council have Alameda join other cities in petitioning a reduction in [RHNA] numbers; discussed a study from the Embarcadero Institute: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 July 6, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |