Toxics and Environmental Restoration:

I have no doubt that existing cleanup standards are less than stringent. Alameda needs to press for stricter standards, to try to get the Navy to clean up larger areas than what are currently contemplated, and to be vigilant in assuring that the Navy is living up to its promises. Certainly it is not acceptable to allow construction of housing, single family residential especially, in areas where a hazardous soil condition exists. Deed restrictions on digging may indeed be difficult to enforce. As a City Council member I would try to learn from RAB members who have devoted so much time to these issues. I am very concerned about comments I have heard recently about the current City Council essentially ignoring RAB's hard work.

Regional Development:

Without a doubt regional issues such as those listed are important to Alameda Point planning. The nearest access point to that part of the island is the tube, which implicates Oakland and more particularly Oakland's Chinatown in assessing the transit needs. I believe that Alameda Point will require a mix of residential, commercial and recreational uses to be attractive to any company able to finance such development, although I do not currently have an answer as to how big any such area should be, or what density level is best for residential development. Even though Suncal has become a dirty word in this town, I believe that Peter Calthorpe's basic plan is a good starting point to address environmental and transportation issues, with housing density levels to be determined in consideration of public transportation goals. I recommend that Alameda comply with, meet, and support regional housing goals, transit-oriented development, and the newly adopted Housing Element.

What I have heard so far about creating a public transportation corridor from Alameda Point down Lincoln to the BART stations in Oakland sounds very promising as a means to encourage use of public transportation by residents at new developments at Alameda Point. I support the revised Housing Element because I believe that Alameda needs to fulfill its part of the State commitment to build low income housing and fulfill regional housing requirements. Obviously, however, environmental concerns, including traffic impacts, need to be addressed as specific projects are proposed for the designated districts.

Fauna, Flora, Open Space and Recreational Land Management:

Yes [I support creating a wildlife refuge], although I am concerned about the VA's ability to manage such a site, and would insist on involvement by the Fish and Wildlife Service in that effort.

I was not happy about the decision to allocate WW funds to the Boys & Girls Club, although that project has turned out well for the City. [Regarding requiring EBRPD to give the city WW funds before it creates and manages a regional park on the Northwest Territories], I am strongly in favor of using funds that are available as a result of a public initiative for the purpose for which the voters approved them.

I support creation -- or restoration/renovation/re-creation -- of the regional park in this area [Enterprise Park], and believe that we have a great opportunity to assess our specific recreational needs (all-weather athletic fields, e.g.) and build appropriately -- or better yet, have someone else like a master developer or local business that locates at Alameda Point, build it for us.