pages: PlanningBoard/2005-06-13.pdf, 16
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-06-13 | 16 | The public hearing was opened. Ms. Janin Von Furst, 917B Santa Clara, spoke in opposition to this item. She expressed concern about the environmental impact that such projects have on a city the size of Alameda, particularly with respect to parking. She noted that the design reminded her of Jack London Square, but that Alameda could not handle that amount of traffic from outside the city. She noted that the bridges and tubes would be busier, bringing more traffic through the residential neighborhoods. She was concerned that people would park in the neighborhoods to avoid paying for parking in the parking garage. She suggested the use of residential parking permits for neighborhoods near projects of this size. Ms. Nancy Hird, 1519 East Shore Drive, spoke in opposition to this item, and noted that she was not speaking on behalf of AAPS. She believed that the massing of this building was excessive although it was improved. She believed that a three-screen theater would be sufficient, and did not want to bring more traffic into Alameda from outside the City. She noted that the success of the Central Cinema disproved the theater that multiple screens were necessary to be economically feasible. Ms. Paula Rainey, 556 Palace Court, spoke in opposition to this item. She believed this project was too big for this district, which was pedestrian-oriented and too crowded with traffic. She believed the new design had been improved, but did not believe this design would enhance the neighborhood. She noted that the design was not pedestrian-friendly, and was too close to the street without softening. She suggested that the old theater be restored, but that the new Cineplex be eliminated. She believed this was a megaplex, and the lack of freeway frontage roads made the situation more difficult. Ms. Pat Bail, 825 Paru, believed the design had improved since the beginning, but that the residents were unprepared for the scope of this project and its impact on the neighborhood. She believed this design was overpowering and inappropriate for the area. She supported the garage, and believed there should be more land area for the garage. She believed this design was too massive for the area, and suggested rethinking the Cineplex. Ms. Ani Dimusheva, 2911 Calhoun Street, spoke in opposition to this item. She supported the elimination of the Cineplex from the site, and did not believe that Alameda wanted or needed a Cineplex. She would like an open, walkable, sunny area in that district without excessive traffic. Ms. Valerie Ruma, 1610 Willow, spoke in opposition to this item. She submitted petitions signed by residents who opposed the Cineplex on this site, and believed that the restoration of the historic theater had been lost in the design of the Cineplex. They were concerned about the traffic impacts, and that opposition to the Cineplex design had not been fully heard. The petition called for the immediate halt of this process, and to discuss the alternatives with the Mayor, City Council and the Planning Board. She believed the historic theater rehabilitation had been a "bait and switch," with the Cineplex. Planning Board Minutes Page 16 June 13, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-06-13.pdf |