pages
8 rows where page = 38
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body
date (date) 8 ✖
- 2010-06-15 1
- 2010-07-27 1
- 2016-01-05 1
- 2017-07-18 1
- 2019-09-12 1
- 2021-03-11 1
- 2021-07-06 1
- 2021-09-07 1
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 38 | Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the EIR would provide an option for fewer housing units. Mr. Brown responded an alternative to be studied in the EIR has not been identified; stated work still needs to be done; typically, one option would be to have a lower level of development proposed; the EIR consultant and staff, along with comments from SunCal, would develop an alternative to be studied for a reasonable, smaller project. AGENDA ITEMS (10-46 CIC) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 10-167, "Approving and Adopting the Five-Year Implementation Plan for the Business and Waterfront and the West End Community Improvement Projects (2010-2014)." Adopted. The Economic Development Director gave a Power Point presentation. Commissioner Gilmore thanked the Economic Development Director for the presentation; stated sometimes the City gets busy pushing ahead on the next project and does not take the opportunity to look back on accomplishments; the City has changed for the better. The Economic Development Director stated policy decisions have been put in place with a lot of community input; this is the time for the City to talk about the impact that projects have had on the community; in the last couple of years, funding projects without redevelopment agency support has been difficult; the construction trade is the hardest hit unemployment group in Alameda County. Commissioner Tam stated that she would like to echo appreciation to staff; all Councilmembers throughout the State are telling their legislature that redevelopment funds are an economic engine and create jobs; inquired whether the City has a strategy for locating retail sites. The Economic Development Director responded the City has a number of different retail opportunities which are not necessarily within the redevelopment project area boundaries; stated Alameda Landing has an opportunity for up to 300,000 square feet of retail; the City has identified how much the City could handle through a saturation invoice and retail leakage analysis; the Catellu… | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 38 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY--JULY 27, 2010- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson announced that the City Council attempted to meet in Closed Session tonight; due to the pending investigation into the official conduct of Councilmember Tam, which has been filed with the District Attorney, Councilmember Tam was asked to recuse herself from the Closed Session; Councilmember Tam refused to do so; as a result, the City Council did not meet in Closed Session, but continued the matter to a future date; the City was unable to transact its official business while the investigation is pending before the District Attorney's Office and looks to the District Attorney and Grand Jury to expedite a resolution of the investigation. (10-375) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9); Name of case: Collins V. City of Alameda (Boatworks). Not heard. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council July 27, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 38 | In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated staff is going to review Mountain View's ordinance and come back with a recommendation regarding whether or not to offer one year leases for existing tenants when there is a rent increase. (16-012) Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-5.15 regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries to Define and Prohibit the Commercial Cultivation of Medical Marijuana in the City of Alameda to Protect the City's Jurisdiction Regarding Cultivation, While Preserving the Opportunity to Have a Robust Discussion About Medical Marijuana Cultivation at a Later Date. [The Proposed Amendment is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, Minor Alternations to Land Use Limitations.] Introduced. The Planning Director gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Oddie stated the ordinance prohibits cultivation; the community has not had a discussion; Assembly Bill 21 is on track to pass and be signed by the Governor; that he would prefer the ordinance not take effect if the March 1st deadline vanishes; the City could emulate Placer County, which has declared a local preemption, rather than creating a ban. The City Planner stated agriculture and horticulture are permitted by right in Alameda's residential districts, as well as industrial and commercial; the City would be in a bind if someone made a request tomorrow; Placer County is requiring use permits and has not made a decision about which districts will allow the use; noted the ordinance can be opened back up; stated that he believes the City will start receiving requests. Vice Mayor moved introduction of the ordinance; stated the matter could be opened back up when the State law is clear; now not the time for a robust discussion. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarres… | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-18 | 38 | Lara Weisiger City Clerk and Secretary SACIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency 2 to the Community Improvement Commission July 18, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 38 | The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the March draft of the General Plan put recommendations forward for land use classifications; one is the shopping center land use classification referenced by Councilmember Daysog; the draft identified the types of densities and zoning necessary to get to 5,300 units; the Planning Board and a number of speakers on the draft spoke out in opposition of the plan; the speakers supported a general approach to the plan, and a decision of the necessary zoning and densities of the various land use classification areas; the decisions can be made when the Housing Element is created; staff released proposed revisions to the draft General Plan and brought the land use classifications more into sync with current conditions; staff has eliminated the language which had been recommended to the Planning Board while using the Floor Area Ration (FAR) from the existing zoning of shopping centers; staff will be providing a recommendation to Council for approval; changes can be made to the General Plan recommendation prior to being adopted in the fall; the Planning Board will be recommending the Housing Element to Council the following fall, with the necessary zoning to meet the RHNA allocation; staff has created a sequence of steps which allows Council to make decisions in a logical way. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Daysog is recommending that the second item does not commit to adopting a Housing Element which is in compliance with State law; stated there will be dire consequences for the City as a result. Councilmember Daysog responded the issue is so complex and convoluted; there are other outstanding issues such as categories and densities to come up with in the General Plan land use section and the rules which developers can rely on to build at densities sought; the level of discussion is not currently before Council; Council should be discussing the Housing Element compliance and adopting multi-family zoning separately as a standalone discussion. May… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 38 | Councilmember Knox White stated the matter is not related to two small, hometown newspapers; the Alameda Journal is owned by a Denver hedge-fund with 100 papers and 200 other publications nationwide; the Alameda Sun is a local newspaper; expressed support for Alameda Sun; stated if Council wishes to continue running ads in the Alameda Journal, the number in the original staff report listed $46,000 and Council can commit to funding $46,000 for the Alameda Sun; he did not originally vote to move the legal notices to the Alameda Journal; however, he can support a form of keeping legal ads published in the Alameda Journal as well as providing funding for the Alameda Sun; expressed support for the proposed motion. Vice Mayor Vella expressed concern about circulation, which remains the point of legal notices; stated that she would like to see a way to expand circulation for Alameda Sun; expressed support for looking at other options relative to grants and advertising; stated her position has not changed; both newspapers are not hometown papers; the desire to provide aid to Alameda Sun is separate from the desire to provide adequate legal notices; she does not support moving legal notices to the Alameda Sun in addition to providing financial aid; expressed support for adding the options proposed by staff. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the matter should be bifurcated; stated that she does not support awarding the contract to the Alameda Sun and providing financial aid; questioned whether the City would eventually be the major funder of the Alameda Sun; expressed concern about the concept of the City majorly funding the newspaper. Councilmember Daysog stated the cleanest approach is to terminate the contract with Alameda Journal and award the contract to the Alameda Sun without providing additional funding to Alameda Sun; the contract provides funding; expressed support for the use of one legal notice provider; expressed support for selecting the Alameda Sun to provide legal notices. Councilmember Daysog amended hi… | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,38 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 38 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,38 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 38 | Full Name Zip code Email Signature Susan Fagel 8500 94501 Susan-fagel@yahoo.com Eldie Casti 94501 ec15155@yahoo.com all Kevin Fagel 94501 kevinf3262@gmail.com Matt Stevenson 94501 Mithours can MARSHA LAISON Marthy | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE "pages" ( [body] TEXT, [date] TEXT, [page] INTEGER, [text] TEXT, [path] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([path], [page]) );