pages: PlanningBoard/2007-03-26.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-03-26 | 14 | was right. She had heard people speak passionately on both sides of the Measure A issue, and believed that some people had misconceptions on what Measure A actually meant. She noted that Measure A could be changed without any greater density, and that more open space could be created; in addition historic resources could be preserved as well under Measure A. She believed it was possible to discuss it without it being an all-or- nothing issue. She noted that there was no attempt to hide this discussion and believed that a public discussion about the process going forward was important. She noted that she was a fan of Measure A, appreciated Victorian homes, and would like to see some of the big stucco buildings on her block disappear. She would like to continue to have this discussion and see where it progressed. Board member McNamara noted that she was disillusioned because she believed the intent of this forum was misconstrued during the public hearing. She believed the intent was to educate the community and citizens of Alameda about the history, consequences, legal aspects of Measure A and to put it in context with respect to the current issues. She noted that the Planning staff had not made a decision, and could not unilaterally change Measure A. She noted that it was not even stated that staff or the Planning Board wanted Measure A to change. She believed that having an informed background was essential to making an informed decision with respect to Measure A. Board member Kohlstrand echoed the previous comments, and noted that staff did not initiate this forum. She had advocated for a forum because she did not grow up in Alameda and did not understand all the history; she wished to help the community as a whole become well versed in its history and effect on the community going forward. She believed that such a forum was important because people had wanted to become better informed as housing and industrial uses evolved over time. She would like to see Alameda's main island character move to Alameda Point, and would like the general public to have the opportunity to learn about the measure and comment on it as Alameda continues to change. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she was able to attend the League of California Cities Planning Institute in San Diego the previous week, and that Ms. Woodbury had attended several programs together. She had attended an interesting workshop on how to configure commercial and residential density in nontraditional ways. She encouraged the public to attend the workshop at Mastick Center on March 29, which would include one of the speakers she heard in San Diego. She acknowledged that density was a hot-button word, and noted that there was more common ground than people may think. She noted that she grew up in an apartment on Pearl Street in Alameda. She noted that the building had a big backyard, and added that it would not be Measure A-compliant. She believed that many conclusions had been drawn from a very brief staff memo, and wished to assure the public that decisions would not be made in a back room by staff and an ad hoc committee. She noted that the purpose was to bring this public and important issue into a public arena. She noted that to have a public discussion, people may not feel intimidated and attacked; she did not believe that approaching the people involved with such vehemence and personal attacks were an appropriate approach. She urged people to have an open mind, and noted that no one had all the answers. She believed that if the public's perception of Measure A was clear Planning Board Minutes Page 14 March 26, 2007 | PlanningBoard/2007-03-26.pdf |