"The Initiative could have both positive and negative impacts on the existing retail business districts. The actual impacts will depend upon various factors that are difficult to determine definitively at this time given the information provided in the Initiative." (p. 33.)
“Since the Initiative does not commit [but only lists strategies] to a specific TDM program as part of project-related public improvements, it is anticipated that the TDM program will be identified as mitigations through a subsequent EIR process, pursuant to [CEQA].
“[S]ince the Initiative includes on-site and off-site traffic and transportation improvements in the public benefit cap, the capital improvements associated with the TDM programs appear to be included in the cap and it is unclear whether there will be sufficient monies to fully fund all the identified public benefit projects and necessary TDM capital projects.” (p. B.)
“The Initiative does not provide details on the off-site street network that would be enhanced or improved as part of this Project. The current General Plan identifies the planned streets that would be needed to accommodate development in the City. In addition, it is unclear why the current General Plan Policy 9.4.s was proposed to be deleted in the Initiative. This policy requires the redesign of RAMP [Ralph Appezato Memorial Parkway] to include a landscaped multi-modal transit corridor for buses, jitneys, or future light rail development.
"SunCal proposes to write its own Historic Resources Design Guidelines (HRDG) and it is unclear if the Guidelines would include Standards set by the Secretary of the Interior. The proposed approval processes for alteration or demolition of historic resources, as included in the Initiative, are often too broad, easily subject to abuse and the boundaries of the Preservation Mixed Use area are not shown consistently within their own Specific Plan."
"If the initiative passes and the city conveys the property to a developer, the new laws would make it impossible for Alamedans to predict or control what Alameda will be like in 10, 20, and 30 years. First, a set of extremely permissive development requirements and standards would allow an extraordinarily wide variety of projects to be built at Alameda Point; second, the city would be forced to approve any project that does not conflict with the permissive standards. This combination would entitle the developers to decide what, where, and when projects would be built." (p.
“[T]he significant economic risks [the initiative] places on the city’s citizens and businesses . . . expose [both] to significant decreases in services or increases in taxes . . . .”
Copyright © 2009-2024, the Alameda Point Info team.
website volunteered by Superclean