pages: PlanningBoard/2006-11-13.pdf, 13
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2006-11-13 | 13 | density in Alameda. Member Kohlstrand expressed concern about the coverage on the site as it related to the extension and the elderly care facilities. She noted that it was appropriate to develop an existing shopping center with retail uses, but the question was how intense should the development and traffic be. Mr. Kyte noted that they had put forth an application consistent with what Target wanted, and did not believe the project was being forced on anyone. They had listened very carefully to the concerns of the Board and the public with respect to the design and massing of the store, as well as what may be more appealing. Member Kohlstrand noted that Target had not compromised on the square footage; Mr. Kyte responded that Target had inherited the 90,000 square foot stores, which have since been phased out. He noted that Target had a certain square footage in their prototype designs to serve their customer base as they deemed necessary. He added that the overall density on the site was the result of blending anchor stores and shop space. Vice President Cook expressed concern about the density that made a two- to three-level parking structure in order to meet the parking capacity. She was less concerned about a particular tenant or the size of an individual building than the overall site plan. Member Cunningham echoed Vice President Cook's concerns about the appropriate density for the site, and was not as concerned about having a large or small store, but rather the total GLA for the site. He also believed the public's concerns about the density and traffic impacts were a critical part of the decision-making process. He inquired about the definition of a "destination mall" was, as referred to by the developer. Mr. Kyte noted that in his presentation, he identified the pieces that were complete and then worked around the center. He suggested that the types of users for each piece of the center being completed should be defined. He noted that the hardscape was being installed in the center court center, and that in a year, they envisioned that whole section of the mall being fully tenanted; they had commitments on a majority of the space. They had been in ongoing discussions with Mervyn's for the past few years; he believed that they appear to be solidifying their balance sheet and were ready for an economic resurgence in this region. They had approached the developers regarding a long- term commitment, as well as Harsch's expectations of them to stay; he noted that the store must be substantially upgraded. He did not believe it would be practical to reposition existing tenants elsewhere, and invited the Board and members of the public to examine the large model of the shopping center they had displayed at the center. Member Cunningham noted that he supported the site, but was still concerned about the GLA for the site. Mr. Kyte noted that they had tried to be responsive and open with the Board and the community with respect to their concerns and issues; they intended to work to find a solution to address those concerns. Planning Board Minutes Page 13 November 13, 2006 | PlanningBoard/2006-11-13.pdf |