pages: PlanningBoard/2017-11-13.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2017-11-13 | 5 | David Kim, Alameda Landing resident, said he was concerned at the impacts that lifting the cap would have on the neighborhood. Bill Smith said the board should remove the Government overlay and then respect the underlying zoning of the North Housing site. He said the housing would help attract businesses and jobs to the west end. He said the units there could help support improved transit service. He urged the board to not reimpose the cap. Rasheed Shabazz said he researched the Housing Authority projects during WWII and studying how they were segregated. He said the property previously housed 1,368 units, a school, grocery store, and transit service. He told the history of segregated residents there in the 1960s that faced eviction and cannot speak up for affordable housing today. He supported removing the G overlay and not reinstating the cap. Board Member Sullivan closed the public hearing. Board Member Teague said the amendment to the NAS Reuse plan is out of date. He said the density bonus could allow about 588 units on the property. He said rent control would make the rehab project very expensive to tear down and rebuild. He said he will be in favor of removing the G overlay and not reinstituting a cap. Board Member Köster said he does not want to limit our future options, but said it is difficult no knowing what the plans would be. He said he is excited to see Habitat for Humanity come to Alameda. Board Member Curtis said he is in favor of the Carmel project. He said he is in favor of reinstating the cap. He said he is concerned with the safety of the egress and ingress for future residents with 30 units to the acre without a plan to consider. Board Member Knox White said we need to give some certainty on the zoning for the site. He said he would be interested in conditioning the removal of the cap on a use permit process. He said he would like to recommend lifting the G overlay conditioned on an MOU being signed by the developer on what infrastructure costs are needed. Board Member Sullivan said she supports removing the G overlay. She said she is concerned about the amount of housing. She said she would like to see the cap reinstated until we know what the state is requiring and what the plan would be. Board Member Teague said he would be willing to do a modified cap where 146 units went to Carmel Partners, 30 to Habitat, and the remaining 259 to the Housing Authority parcel. He said he does not think we could separate the cap from the removal of the G overlay. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 5 of 11 November 13, 2017 | PlanningBoard/2017-11-13.pdf |