pages: PlanningBoard/2010-05-10.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2010-05-10 | 4 | a development plan. Ms. Rogers, Alameda resident, expressed concern that during Measure B campaign leading up to the February 2010 election, volunteers had received feedback from the community that the trust placed in Sun Cal at the onset of the planning process had significantly eroded. She recommended developing a proposal that limited the number of dwelling units to 1,800 and stated that the City of Alameda be the master developer. Mr. Biggs, from the Alameda Point Collaborative, supports the redevelopment plan in Alameda Point, but cautioned that the plan requires increased specificity, which could be attained through the Environmental Impact Report analysis. He pointed out that the proposed plan needs to be evaluated in light of environmental justice impacts, sustainability, and impacts on low-income, vulnerable residents with chronic health conditions. He stated that to nothing at the site puts existing infrastructure at risk, as well as the local job creation. Ms. Hird, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society representative, spoke about preserving the historic resources at Alameda Point and they are important and need to be saved. She recommended commencing an adaptive reuse study that would help preserve the historic buildings and allow for their continued use. Mr. Karvasales, Alameda resident, stated his opposition for the Sun Cal plan because it increases density. Mr. Stevens, Alameda resident, added his opposition to the the Sun Cal proposal, as it does not meet the City of Alameda charter. Ms. McNally, Alameda resident, expressed her opposition to the Sun Cal proposalbecause of the political climate it has created. She is concerned that the decision of the electorate is being ignored in the light of investment pressures. Mr. Ingram, Alameda resident, stated opposition to the Sun Cal proposal because traffic impacts are too severe and the community's vote was a clear indication that it opposed this company. Mr. Khan, Alameda resident, opposes the Sun Cal proposal, as Sun Cal does not have the best interest of Alameda in mind especially when they ask for significant fee waivers and financial contributions from the City. Ms. Freeman, Alameda resident noted her opposition to the Sun Cal proposal because Sun Cal does not respect the vote of the people and will develop a proposal that will only increase the population density. She noted Alameda is already 4th densest city in the East Bay. Ms. Morrison, Alameda resident, is concerned that the project is not feasibility as the flood plain issues will impact the ability to construct this project. She is also concerned that sustainability of the project is not sufficient. Planning Board Page 4 of 8 Meeting Minutes 5/10/2010 | PlanningBoard/2010-05-10.pdf |