pages: PlanningBoard/2009-01-26.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2009-01-26 | 7 | testing. The City of Alameda will not approve a project without all of those issues resolved. Vice President Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she shares the concerns that have been previously voiced. She mentioned that even though the site is not included in the Park Street North of Lincoln Strategic Plan she would like the developer to work with that project to ensure cohesiveness with that plan. She stated that the pedestrian walkway could be better. She would like the design of the homes to fit in with the current residences in the area and not "neo moderne" as referred to in the architect's letter. She is concerned that there are not many amenities in the immediate area, which would possibly require residents to drive more frequently. She wants the low-income exclusionary housing dispersed throughout the development and not segregated in one specific area. Board member Cunningham agreed with the public's concern over increased traffic in the area. He also sees the contamination and clean up as a very important issue with the site. He agrees that the property needs to be improved and would like to see alternative uses for the site with less density. Staff responded that talks have been taking place with the developer to look at alternative ways to plan the site such as reconfiguring the open space to make it larger and orient it so there is access from Clement Avenue. Board member Cunningham voiced concern that the City of Alameda may get restricted by their own policies concerning the density bonus and would like to see the City work with the developer to design the site so it works for everyone. He is wondering if there is a way to stay with the General Plan and put in a park and restrict the number of units thus saving the City money through a decrease in residents and a decrease in the cost of city services then that money saved could be redirected to build a park. The community wants to see items in the General Plan come to reality and the City needs to work towards that. Staff commented that it would be very difficult to determine the cost savings. Board member Cook asked if there could be an economic analysis included in the EIR. President Kohlstrand responded that it doesn't necessarily need to be done in the EIR but could be done independently and then inform the environmental process. Staff is looking at alternatives and at least one is a no project alternative with two scenarios. The first being a no build alternative. The other is a no project meaning it develops under the current General Plan and zoning and to look at the financial feasibility of the alternative. Board member Cunningham is also concerned with the impact on the character of the neighborhood. Page 7 of 9 | PlanningBoard/2009-01-26.pdf |