pages: AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-10-05.pdf, 2
This data as json
| body | date | page | text | path |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-10-05 | 2 | - a representative from AAPS requested a reuse study be included in the PDC for the historic buildings - a representative from the APC expressed their interest in continuing to be involved in the development plan process - a representative from Operation Dignity expressed concerns about the Board accepting the PDC in draft form - representatives from HOMES and the Sierra Club expressed their appreciation and support with the progress of the PDC compared to other developments. Member Matarrese thanked the staff for providing the input and revisions. He agreed with the speaker who mentioned that the Board should not approve a draft document; and rather, approve a final document. He would like to see more information on a green standards plan and a plan for sustainable communities and expressed concern about the word "feasibility study", afraid it might be dismissed because it does not "comply" with the PDC. He further stated that the PDC document is still conceptual. Members Gilmore and Daysog agreed with Member Matarrese's statements. Member Daysog would like to see more information on the fiscal implications of the PDC, especially on Phase II and Phase III. Member deHaan reminded folks that there was a community reuse plan prior to this PDC, which included the development of commercial and industrial spaces to maximize transportation. Member Matarrese motioned for Council to direct staff to simulate the comments that were made and produce a final document for approval. He requested the document be in red-line/strikeout format so that revisions are clearly seen in the document. City Manager, Debra Kurita, recommended that the draft revisions be text-only to save cost. It was agreed by all Boardmembers to just bring back the document at the regular ARRA Board meeting in November; there was no need to make a motion for this action. Steven Proud, Alameda Point Project Manager, clarified some points to the Board. He stated that the PDC is a component of the conditional acquisition agreement (CAA) that we have with APCP. Other components include getting a conveyance agreement structure set forward with the Navy and then the completion of the preliminary development concept. Based on the timing with regards to meeting with the Navy, Mr. Proud recommended the revised document be brought back at the December meeting, instead of November. All Boardmembers accepted this recommendation. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. There was no report, as Member Matarrese stated the meeting was the following day. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Bill Smith spoke about various topics. 2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-10-05.pdf |