pages: PlanningBoard/2006-07-10.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2006-07-10 | 3 | Ms. Allegra O'Donoghue noted that as an Alameda native, her college-age peers will not be able to afford to live in Alameda. She believed that careful planning at Alameda Point would create the City's own growth and enable more people to live in the city. She noted that there were no Victorian homes on Alameda Point, and believed that Measure A did not apply to Alameda Point in practice. Ms. Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope, believed that Alameda should be committed to provide for future generations in Alameda. She believed that exempting Measure A on Alameda Point would enable Alameda to continue to thrive, and to allow the next generation to live in Alameda. She believed that Measure A should be vetted again with the development of Alameda Point in mind, and believed that Measure A kept the City in a virtual development lockdown. Mr. David Kirwin, 1416 Seminary Avenue, spoke in opposition to the City Council putting Measure A on the ballot, rather than by public initiative. He noted that Measure A was not just to save Victorians, but to prevent overdevelopment and high density in Alameda. He noted that Alameda Point development has been in development for ten years, and inquired why Measure A was being revisited at this late date. He noted that traffic should be limited, and did not believe that density was needed to support transit. He believed that transit supported existing neighborhoods. Ms. Dorothy Reid, 2101 Shoreline, did not believe all the facts of this issue were known yet. She noted that the staff report pointed out a downturn in retail activity, which may not support the labor and transit from Alameda Point. She noted that existing rents in Alameda were already out of reach for moderate- and low-income households. She noted that Alameda already has sufficient high density and multifamily housing, and that there were constraints on Alameda Point. She did not believe it was within the purview of the City Council or the Planning Board to change Measure A. Mr. Jon Spangler, 1037 San Antonio Avenue, strongly supported public transit and bicycling within Alameda, using high density and mass transit to keep the lowest possible impacts at Alameda Point. He supported as many green measures as possible for development on Alameda Point. He noted that his own life has changed and has been re-examined in the last 33 years, and believed that Measure A should receive the same consideration. Ms. Janet Gibson expressed concern that a ballot initiative would become a political issue where monies would be spent on behalf of public and private interests. She noted that her own children have been unable to afford to live in Alameda, but believed that other affordable housing measures have been unexplored. She believed that multifamily dwellings may still be very expensive per unit. President Cunningham believed this issue should be addressed by the Planning Board members, and noted that the Board was required to act within the City Charter. He did not believe that it was within the Planning Board's purview to act directly on Measure A. Vice President Cook noted the Board discussed Measure A many times in relationship to projects before us, and believed that the issue was being brought forth by the citizens because City leadership was not discussing it at this time. Vice President Cook noted that the Board has dealt with Measure A many times, and believed that this issue was too controversial for City leadership to touch at this Planning Board Minutes Page 3 July 10, 2006 | PlanningBoard/2006-07-10.pdf |