pages: PlanningBoard/2021-01-25.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-01-25 | 5 | William Smith wanted to stress that the housing element provides more than just the housing needs, it provides social relations across many backgrounds. He also thought it was important to change the character of neighborhoods for the better (affordable housing, walkability, bike-friendly) but still protect the historical aspects. Donna Fletcher was concerned by the number of projects and approvals coming down the pipeline, thinking that people would become processing agents rather than being "guardians" of Alameda. She wanted the city to manage this mandate but still end up with something residents would love. Every project that gets built should add value and beauty to Alameda. She also hoped that the board would seriously consider renegotiating the 2014 agreement with the caps. President Teague closed public comment and opened board discussion. Board Member Curtis believed that the number of units required was very dimensional and no thought had been given to infrastructure, impact on the quality of life, and the increase in traffic. He wanted more planning to go into infrastructure before the units were built, and he wanted to renegotiate the $100,000 fee. Director Thomas said these were valid points but the state is saying the housing issue could not be put off while these issues were addressed. He also clarified that the money would be going to the US Navy and that this was very much a political process. The City of Alameda has to make housing a priority. Board Member Hom wanted to know more about the rezoning process and if the higher densities would be incorporated into the general plan. Director Thomas said yes, the game plan was to get all the elements adopted by the Planning board and the City Council this year. Board Member Hom wanted clarification on the Resolution of Intent to rezone the multifamily sites. Director Thomas said this was an additional step that wasn't done in 2014 that was recommended by the City Attorney. They are giving notice now that the City Council will be rezoning down the road and if there are any issues now is the time to bring them up. City Planning Counsel Celena Chen agreed with how Director Thomas explained the Resolution of Intent. Board Member Cisneros wanted clarification on the housing number presented by ABAG. Director Thomas explained the new number due to ABAG making a final adjustment, but that number is still not final. He explained more about ABAG's method. Approve Planning Board Minutes Page 5 of 9 January 25, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-01-25.pdf |