pages: PlanningBoard/2011-12-12.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2011-12-12 | 7 | here in order to level the job/housing balance. She also asked the City to provide homes for all residents and to have the housing element done in a timely manner so housing can be built within a reasonable timeframe. Lynette Lee, Member of renewed Hope and former executive director for a non-profit organization that built and managed 1,400 affordable housing units. She asked the Board members to take a bold approach to get the housing element approved by considering higher densities of more than 30 units per acre. She went on to say that for the next meeting, she will bring pictures of affordable housing developments of 60 units and more to show the Board and staff how affordable housing can be attractive and complement the neighborhood. She also brought up the demise of California's Redevelopment Agencies and how the agency's revenue was critical to constructing affordable housing. Laura Thomas, President of Renewed Hope Housing Advocates, explained that the organization was formed in 1999 to fight for rehabbing the former navy housing parcel called East Housing. She stated that the former Planning Board did not welcome their organization's East Housing proposal. So, she asked staff and the Board to create residential opportunities for all income levels, working people, and families. She commended the staff and Board for taking up the housing element finally because the Board must show leadership as well as accelerate the timeline. President Ezzy Ashcraft called for Board member comments and questions. President Ezzy Ashcraft called on Board member Henneberry to make comments on affordable housing and housing for working families. Board member Henneberry stated that his day job represents mainly grocery store and butcher union members so workers housing is a critical issue. He felt that being able to live where one works comes up within the redevelopment agency and this should be addressed in the housing element. Board member Zuppan noticed that the illustrations don't show the parking impacts. She also stated that since current public transit service is so volatile in Alameda County, the staff and Planning Board should discuss issues regarding traffic impacts, parking, and public transportation within the housing element. She asked Andrew Thomas to post the presentation on the City's website. Finally, she was curious about the idea of having to have 16 units altogether. She felt it was important to spread affordable housing throughout neighborhoods rather than having them clumped in one dense location. Mr. Thomas responded by saying that parking concerns are a legitimate concern. Moreover, he pointed out that staff has to looked at the parking requirements at the chosen sites. He went on to explain that early this year or end of last year the Planning Board and community completed a comprehensive review of parking requirements for all uses including residences on Park and Webster Streets. He also stated that he would post the presentation on the web absolutely. Lastly, he wanted to point out that the 16 unit requirement made by HCD doesn't mean that affordable housing has to be put on one site in projects of 16 units or more. HCD defines large sites or by definition, sites Draft Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 13 December 12, 2011 | PlanningBoard/2011-12-12.pdf |