pages: PlanningBoard/2012-01-09.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2012-01-09 | 3 | President Ezzy Ashcraft asked staff to provide an update of the redevelopment process later this year. Board member Kohlstrand stated that Tax Increment Financing funds redevelopment and would that now go into the general fund. Ms. Potter replied that the Tax Increment Financing monies would go back to the county and the county would establish a trust fund. The money would then pass through agreements and any extra money would be distributed through all the tax entities that receive a share of the property tax. She further explained that the City of Alameda is actually a low tax jurisdiction so the City wouldn't receive a significant amount back to the general fund. 7. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR: None. 9. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 9-A. PLN11-0372 - 1537 Webster Street. The applicant seeks a use permit to operate a tattoo business within an existing 2-story commercial building. The proposed business will serve customers by appointment and walk-in service daily from noon to 10 pm with five employees per shift. Retail sales will be limited to jewelry and store branded fashion accessories. The application was withdrawn. 9-B. Development Plan Amendment, Master Street Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Addendum Applications- PLN11-0328, AT TRACT 7884 (Alameda Landing) Applicant: Catellus Alameda Development, LLC. A proposed Development Plan and Master Street Plan amendment to construct an approximately 23 acre retail center with eleven buildings and associated parking, landscape and street improvements including the extension of 5th Street and Mitchell Street. The site is located north of Stargell Avenue, south of Mitchell Street, west of Mariner Square Loop and east of the 5th Street extension in western Alameda. Mr. Thomas presented a staff report on the Alameda Landing Development Plan Amendment in response to November 28th's public workshop. He provided a one-page memorandum about the traffic study conducted and included supplemental information about levels of service. He brought up critical questions that were raised by the Board during the November 28th hearing, which was how the interface would work with buildings along 5th Street and the planned residential development across the street. Approved Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 14 January 9, 2012 | PlanningBoard/2012-01-09.pdf |