pages: PlanningBoard/2012-03-12.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2012-03-12 | 11 | housing over retail. So, he wants to know how staff envisions that type of housing interacting with the zone. Mr. Thomas replied that the multifamily zone proposed by staff was primarily for the Housing Element. They presented a variety of housing types and then they added the idea on attachment 4, Draft Multifamily Combining Zone, District Regulations (Section C-II). The objective under Section C-II is for a site that has frontage on either Park or Webster Streets to have ground floor retail space. Vice President Burton encouraged staff to actively pursue ground floor retail on a site. He was glad to see that ground floor retail is required in those locations so the City has an active pedestrian-oriented street frontage. Also, he concurred with Board member Knox White about giving developers a density-bonus for transit-oriented developments, especially along Park and Webster Streets. So, the community is clear on the process he wanted a few clarifications about how the Multifamily ordinance process would work in order for the City to adopt it and how it relates to Measure A. Mr. Thomas explained the City provides some land that facilitates and encourages multifamily housing as well as other types. Additionally, the City is required to show the state how they have enough land zoned at the appropriate density for low-income housing. One way to do that is provide land that is zone at 30 units per acre. So, staff created a zoning overlay (the draft ordinance is located in attachment 4) that is a zoning designation and can be applied to five or six identified sites in the City. Vice President Burton replied the idea is that City's local ordinance cannot supersede state law. Mr. Thomas exclaimed that's right, state law supersedes local law and it's the City's responsibility to comply with state law. The Planning Board and the City Council's jobs with the staff's assistance are to identify appropriate sites in Alameda to apply this law. In terms of adoption and process, there will be a final public hearing before the Board and City Council before it is adopted. Vice President Burton stated he likes the way staff has chosen to look at places where the scale of the buildings and densities are compatible with the neighborhood and development patterns in the City. Regarding the elimination of redevelopment agencies, how has this affected this type of development and how will it affect the implementation of this plan. Mr. Thomas replied he thinks that it only reinforces the importance of this package of amendments and the strategy in the past with the Housing Element was a two-prong strategy. The first strategy was to retain very low-density throughout the City because the City has a lot of land available and can show way more land than necessary to meet their obligation and the second strategy was the fact that they had a Redevelopment Agency. Specifically, the City requires 25% affordable housing and they had a Redevelopment Agency that could essentially buy down the cost of the projects. Now, when presenting the analysis to the state, the 30 units per acre designation seems like Approved Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 23 March 12, 2012 | PlanningBoard/2012-03-12.pdf |