pages: CityCouncil/2021-11-30.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-11-30 | 9 | central areas; staff is proposing to spread the housing around. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is concern for tsunami risks. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded staff has raised the issue with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), which responded every city in the Bay Area has environmental risks and the risk cannot be a reason not to build housing; the concerns are real issues; however, none will allow the City to avoid identifying where to build housing. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is concerned with how to evacuate or bring supplies to people and what mitigation can be done; ABAG offered support; expressed support for keeping access to the Estuary in mind; stated South Shore is problematic due to a lack of ferry access. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff is working on the issues; a hazard mitigation plan exists; staff works with the community and surrounding agencies to prepare for the event of an emergency; staff should be working on these issues irrespective of a Housing Element; the Housing Element does not force the issues of safety and evacuation. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated Alameda Point is the better site due to ferry access; noted South Shore does not have boat access; boat access is available along the Estuary as well. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated pieces of the draft Housing Element are not yet complete; a full demographic report and a fair housing analysis will be completed; if previous land use patterns show discrimination, the City must show ways the patterns are being corrected. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the tone of the Housing Element could be changed; expressed concern over comments showing one side town in a negative way. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 7:17 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m. *** Councilmember Knox White stated the City has to follow State law; inquired what happens if the City be out of compliance with the State. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded there is a deadline for Council to adopt a new Housing Element; stated if Council misses the deadline, the City is considered out of compliance; when out of compliance, the City no longer has a valid General Plan or the ability to govern land use; the City would be found out of compliance by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) which cuts off all State grants and funding sources; funding includes affordable housing and park funds; many grants received by the City would not have been possible without being in compliance with State law; the City would likely immediately be sued; State law is set up to encourage people and interest groups to sue the City; if the City loses the case, the City has to pay attorney fees; State law includes penalty fees for being out of compliance; adoption of the Housing Element would likely be forced via Court order; a Housing Element in compliance with State law will be adopted at some point, whether the City willingly adopts it or if it is by court order; the cost will ultimately be borne by the Continued November 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 30, 2021 9 | CityCouncil/2021-11-30.pdf |