pages: PlanningBoard/2005-03-03.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-03-03 | 4 | PRELIMINARY DRAFT Subject to modification prior to approval by Planning Board A community member inquired what kind of planning overview was used to create community activity hubs, and did not see those hubs in this plan. Mr. Adams described the 1400 housing units, and noted that a series of smaller retail center could not be supported. Mr. Christopher Buckley noted that there was an assumption that the grade must be raised due to the 100-year flood, and suggested the use of a levee. He inquired how 115,000 square feet of retail was derived, and how much of the anticipated retail demand from the residential uses would be absorbed by that retail. Mr. Thomas noted that the levee question was examined, and that they decided to raise the level instead, rather than create a seawall along the edge of the site. He noted that would create a visual barrier to the water. Mr. Proud noted that they had to compact the bay mud to accept more load. Mr. Rask noted that they did not wish to overbuild the retail spaces, nor did they wish to cannibalize other retail areas in Alameda. A community member noted that the new residents would also need libraries, schools and youth centers, and inquired where they were included in the plan. Mr. Thomas replied that community centers were programmed into the project, including the O Club and the original Navy Mess Hall. Police and fire services were included in the financial pro forma, as well as a small library. He noted that once the planning became more solidified, they would address the impact on the school district in more detail. A community member noted that the Big Whites would involve an expensive process, and inquired why they were included in the non-Measure A option if they would handicap the option. Mr. Rask noted that they had not reconciled all the elements of that plan yet, and they were working with the first version of the financial details. A community member noted that she was recently appointed to the HAB, and had taken the tour, which she believed was very illuminating. She believed that the air traffic control tower should be retained on the site. She believed it was emblematic of the purpose of the Naval Air Station and should be added. She noted that there were discussions to extend the live/work boundaries to Alameda Point, which would give more flexibility to the reuse of the site. Tim Royal, Pastor, All Nations Fellowship, would like the character of Alameda to carry on to Alameda Point. He noted a lack of churches on Alameda Point. Planning Board Minutes Page 4 March 3, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-03-03.pdf |