pages: PlanningBoard/2005-10-10.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-10-10 | 3 | discussion about placing that plaza across the street from City Hall Ms. Eliason noted that the small structure was a historic structure. Mr. Thomas advised that the 1991 General Plan discussed the linkage of spaces, design and uses, and that there were several visions of a civic center area. He added that not every civic center must be organized around a large open space. Vice President Cook noted that there was some desire to have an outside public meeting area that created a public presence in the area. There had also been discussion in incorporate public spaces in the City's alleyways, such as Park Street. She noted that the waterfront public access studies had been halted midway through the process. She believed the Planning Board should be more strategically involved, and realized the budgeting process directed these processes. She acknowledged that the staffing situation was also a constraint on accomplishing these goals. Mr. Lynch would not advocate a Specific Plan in this case, and noted that they had been recommendations in the 1980s. He added that the development of a Specific Plan was very arduous, similar to adopting a minor General Plan. He agreed with the efforts that the City has taken thus far, especially the committees and task forces. He suggested that as those documents come forward, the City seek ways to incorporate those documents in the community's initiatives. He added that a Specific Plan would be time-, money- and staff-intensive, as well as legally intensive. He noted that there were substantive differences between "recommended" and "required," as well as "should" and "shall." Ms. Mariani noted that she attended several Downtown Vision meetings as a Greater Alameda Business Association (GABA) member, and that she recalled seeing the picture of the downtown City Center. She inquired whether that was in the Downtown Vision report, and added that she would like to see those documents resurface. President Cunningham recalled that the top ten priorities were agreed upon following that process, and were considered to be policy directives. Ms. Eliason noted that she could make those documents available. Ms. Kohlstrand noted that the City was more than 50% towards its housing goals in the Very Low Income category, but that the other categories hadn't fared so well. She inquired how the City intended to achieve those goals, and what strategies and programs were in place to do SO. Mr. Thomas replied that Alameda Point and Catellus were the major pieces of the program, and that Alameda Point alone had 612 affordable housing units, spread from Very Low to Moderate. He anticipated that a proposal from Catellus would come forward in the next year to re-entitle a portion of the office portion for residential, including a variety of affordable housing. From a Housing Element perspective, the land must be available, and the land at Alameda Point is not currently available. Planning Board Minutes Page 3 October 10, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-10-10.pdf |