pages: PlanningBoard/2005-03-03.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-03-03 | 5 | PRELIMINARY DRAFT Subject to modification prior to approval by Planning Board Mr. Adams noted that several sites were identified for being suitable for churches, and pointed them out on the site plan. A community member thanked staff for exploring Measure A and mixed use possibilities. He expressed concern about the phrase "less clean housing," and took offense to the concept and the language. Mr. Proud reassured the audience that that wording was not intended to cause offense, and described the Restoration Advisory Board's role in site remediation. He added that they did not blindly follow the Navy's directives. He noted that part of the cleanup process may be privatized, and that unsuitable sites would not be used to residential reuse. Mr. Adams noted that lead paint had historically been used at Alameda Point, and that demolition of such buildings and remediation was very closely regulated. He noted that lead was not easily water-soluble, and that it could easily be scraped from the surface of the soil. A community member inquired how they determined the value from the sale of the land. Mr. Proud described how the residential land values were determined, and added that the master plan developer was instrumental in that determination. Mr. Tom Matthews, Renewed Hope, inquired why the $54 million for the affordable housing component was a public cost, and believed that should be the developer's responsibility. Mr. Thomas noted that was a developer cost and part of the overall financing of the project. Mr. Rask noted that it was a project cost, not a public cost. A community member inquired about the different traffic scenarios and whether the cost of traffic was figured into the project costs; he inquired whether the low traffic scenario would lead to increased savings. He inquired whether any information was available on the price ranges for the market-rate units. Mr. Rask noted that the typical single- and multi-family house trip generation analysis was used. Mr. Bill Smith noted that he had information about a potential investor in the Brownfields project. Reverend Pamela Kerst, Twin Towers United Methodist Church, apologized for her earlier flippant remarks regarding the churches on Alameda Point. She inquired how economic diversity was measured for moderate- and low-income public employees, and how they fit into Measure A and affordable housing. She inquired whether the minimum Planning Board Minutes Page 5 March 3, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-03-03.pdf |