pages: PlanningBoard/2005-08-22.pdf, 17
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-08-22 | 17 | backyard. She liked the idea of the small storefronts. She lived across from the Safeway loading dock, and was concerned about the current and future noise and air pollution. She was concerned about her property value, and agreed that Alameda did not need a big box store. Mr. Jon Brooks, 2101 Shoreline Drive #230, spoke in opposition to this item. He had not heard anything from City staff about the requirement for an EIR in this circumstance, and believed there would be a cumulative effect from the traffic and air quality. He did not want Alameda to become homogeneous, and would rather see a mixed use retail store, perhaps with lofts upstairs from smaller boutiques. Mr. Brian McDonald noted that he lived at the Willows, and that he agreed with his neighbors regarding traffic, noise and pollution. He did not like the prospect of having a Target in his back yard, and found the overall size and footprint of the store to be excessive. He believed the developer employed bait-and-switch tactics in seeking approval for this store. He was concerned that the traffic impacts would put the entire East End into gridlock. Mr. Kevin Frederick spoke in opposition to this item, and noted that this store was gigantic and would interrupt the flow of traffic. He believed the Target store would create urban sprawl, which he was strongly opposed to. He hoped the Board would listen to the majority in this matter. Ms. Aulette Floris noted that she was a business owner, but was opposed to a big box store. She was very concerned about traffic congestion and noise. She noted this was so close to a residential area, and was concerned about a potential increase in crime and decrease in the quality of life. The public hearing was closed for Board discussion. Ms. Mariani would like to see the approval for the 90,000 square feet with the conditions. Ms. Eliason noted that staff would provide a copy. Ms. Kolhstrand concurred with the request. Ms. Eliason advised that the last Planned Development Amendment performed in 2003 was adopted on a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Staff would provide a copy of that document to the Board. No environmental review had been circulated for this project yet; a new environmental review would be done for this project, updating the traffic numbers and other areas of concern. Vice President Cook would like to look at this project more closely, especially in view of the City's work in retail strategy and increasing its tax base. She realized that there was considerable retail leakage off the Island that could be captured for the benefit of the schools, police and fire departments. She would like to have a better understanding of the typical Target patron. She believed that many residents did want more retail opportunities, and acknowledged that environmental review was a huge concern. One of Planning Board Minutes Page 17 August 22, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-08-22.pdf |