pages: PlanningBoard/2005-10-10.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-10-10 | 9 | Cook's question. She noted that while all of Alameda's access was through Oakland, Oakland could also object to Alameda's development, and added that there was a delicate balance between the two municipalities. d. Oral Status Report regarding the Transportation subcommittee (Board member Kohlstrand). Ms. Kohlstrand advised that there had been no meetings since her last report, and that the next meeting would be held Wednesday, October 12, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. in Council Chambers. The street system classification would be discussed. Ms. Kohlstrand noted that a letter from Marilyn Schumacher had been received regarding Mr. Edwards, and requested clarification. Ms. Eliason replied that Mr. Edwards had applied for a Design Review for an art studio behind an existing duplex on property that he owns. He had expressed frustration to Ms. Schumacher, who was a member of the Customer Service Initiative (CSI). His plans were shown to the CSI to demonstrate how the process had not worked in this case; changes were made in the project each time it was brought forward, requiring new staff review. Ms. McNamara expressed concern about the lack of planning staff, and had not seen any movement in that direction. She inquired whether the Board could do anything to bring the staffing levels up. Ms. Eliason noted that the City was recruiting for a new Planning and Building Director. Authorization was received to hire a Planner I on a temporary basis to assist with the counter work and minor Design Reviews, freeing the more senior planners up for more challenging projects. The position previously held by Jerry Cormack was frozen, and Judith Altschuler's position has been eliminated. Mr. Lynch noted that it has recently been difficult to hire experienced planners statewide, and that the market was currently very competitive. He agreed that the Planning Department was woefully understaffed. He noted that the method by which Alameda receives funds has been affected by the relative lack of development in the commercial sector. Municipalities who have done SO are more able to compete economically for planners and other staff members, including safety and recreational services. A discussion of the budget and staffing process ensued. Ms. Kohlstrand requested a presentation before the Board addressing the staffing needs. In response to the Planning Board's request, Ms. Eliason noted that she would prepare some permit information for the Board. She noted that the Design Review loads were often cyclical. The Board also wanted a discussion with the City Manager or the appropriate representative about the staffing needs and shortage, to which Ms. Eliason responded that a discussion would be arranged. Planning Board Minutes Page 9 October 10, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-10-10.pdf |