pages: PlanningBoard/2007-08-27.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-08-27 | 7 | Ms. Woodbury noted the possibility of revisiting the Alameda Downtown Vision Plan was a Development Services project. She identified that as an additional recommendation of the Planning Board to Development Services to work with the Economic Development Commission on the quarterly review. In response to an inquiry by Board member McNamara regarding the Improved Service Delivery item identified in the previous work program, Ms. Woodbury replied that each Board and Commission that the Department staffed was doing its own work plan. She added that item was part of the Customer Service Improvement Committee, which was not a public board; that group worked directly with staff. Ms. Woodbury noted that the Public Art Commission had developed their work plan, and a Cultural Arts Grant Program was added after being initiated by the City Council. She added that the Historical Advisory Board had a committee working with some citizens to develop an action plan based on the Historic Preservation Element of the General Plan. Vice President Kohlstrand noted that while it was not required by State law, the Station area Plan for Alameda Point was required by a legal settlement. A general discussion of placement of priorities ensued. Ms. Woodbury noted that the Measure A workshop was part of the Housing Element update, and would need to follow the timing of that Element update. Vice President Kohlstrand noted that workshop had major implications for what would happen at the Base. In response to an inquiry by Board member Cunningham, Ms. Woodbury wished to clarify that an amendment to Measure A was not part of the discussion. Board member Cunningham inquired why the impact of Measure A on the Housing Element was being examined because the substance of Measure A relative to housing was well-known. Ms. Woodbury replied that the pros and cons of how Measure A affects the Housing Element must be discussed. She added that the Housing Element discussed "governmental constraints," and that Measure A was a governmental constraint. She noted that the workshop would provide a good platform for public discussion in understanding it. President Cook noted that the Housing Element was conditionally approved, and had never received final approval by the State. Board member Lynch believed that Alameda may be vulnerable in not receiving a certified Housing Element if they do not tackle the Measure A question. He noted that the Housing Element directions have changed, and noted that the legislation was constantly being modified. He noted that not all that was considered to be good in the last round may be considered positively today. He noted that the requirements for the City were different than they were previously. He noted the connectivity between the mandated legislation Page 7 of 11 | PlanningBoard/2007-08-27.pdf |