pages: CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf, 42
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 42 | non-compliant; it is ok for the City to end up in Court; a long-term answer to the question will result; the multi-family overlay is not a magic concept to duck State allocations; staff came up with the multi-family overlay in order to sell and ignore the Charter based on State laws and calculations; the concept had been pitched to Council and was not fought by Councilmembers; Measure A is illegal and the multi-family overlay is a way for the City to pretend the matter is being addressed; now the City must address the matter in having a multi-family overlay which is placed at well over 30 units per acre; the housing units will need to be everywhere; he does not feel comfortable being one of the Council votes to ignore the will of the voters; expressed support for Council votes being flexible and an understanding that the multi-family overlay will be more than 30 units per acre in some places; for encouraging staff to work on the matter; expressed concern for what will occur in six months' time; expressed concern for proposed units on Park Street being small and over 30 units per project and non-compliant; stated that he is ok with being non-compliant should it mean the ability to be ethically aligned with the previous question posed at the election; he will not be part of a majority which rams through multi-family overlays; the full Council needs to be the adult in the room. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the discussion can be tabled for the time being due to there being no majority vote on anything. Vice Mayor Vella stated Councilmembers are City fiduciaries; one of the biggest problems with the State of California is the previous allowing of zoning via the ballot box; the result is the current housing conundrum being faced; the majority of people that turned out to vote cast the winning ballots; the resulting decisions have shown the City of Alameda does not want to comply with regulations and will limit the ability to have local control and project-by-project decision making; Council and many jurisdictions have allowed for limiting local control through different measures; Alameda is not unique in the issues being faced; outlined uniqueness arguments from cities across the state; stated many different jurisdictions have exclusionary zoning provisions or limits on amounts of density and construction types; expressed concern for Council having conflicting obligations; she would like to hear the options for Council; noted the resolution is before Council for consideration however, a decision does not have to be made at the current meeting; it is important to have a discussion about available options; she does not want to cause or push a lawsuit to be filed against the City one way or another; the elephant in the room must be addressed; expressed concern for the legacy of zoning by the ballot box which has caused current limitations. (21-459) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a vote is needed to consider new items after 11 p.m. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of hearing all of the remaining agenda items that can be heard before midnight. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 July 6, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |