pages: PlanningBoard/2005-03-03.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-03-03 | 7 | PRELIMINARY DRAFT Subject to modification prior to approval by Planning Board A community member inquired whether there would be any further delay in the transfer of the Base, and noted that in 1997, the Big Whites were sold to them as a major part of the project. He believed the project was too packed together, and added that he had served on the Base during his military career. He was shocked at the state of several historic buildings that had been vandalized before the property was taken over. Mr. Proud noted that the delay in the conveyance would have a significant impact on project economics. They had worked very cooperatively with the Navy with respect to Alameda Point, and their open approach during negotiations would be beneficial to the conveyance transfer. A community member inquired whether the 1% for public art was included in the overall cost. Mr. Thomas indicated that it was. A community member expressed concern about the middle-income units, and noted that the Warmington Homes were no longer middle-income homes. Ms. Lucy Gigli inquired about the comparison of the value of the difference properties on the site. She expressed concern that the multifamily units were all bunched together, which increased the density of those blocks. She would like to see pockets of multifamily housing, as well as an evaluation of the mixing of the retail uses, and noted that Bayport and Coast Guard Island don't have any corner stores or cafes. Mr. Thomas noted that there were combination duplex/small retail possibilities. A community member inquired what an in-law unit was. Mr. Thomas replied that it was a small unit on the same lot, usually a loft or one-bedroom unit. She suggested that the name be changed because in-law unit implied a non-approved unit. Mr. Thomas noted that the in-law terminology would be changed to "secondary unit.' PUBLIC COMMENT WAS CLOSED. President Cunningham noted that it was important to clearly identify the goals of the land use, and that there were some misunderstandings about the use. He suggested that use of a "laundry list" to identify what will be provided. He believed it was important to understand the fiscal impacts of the existing structures on the final picture. He believed that social and ecological responsibility was important, and that a sustainable ordinance should be examined if the community wished to engage in sustainable design. Ms. Kohlstrand believed that a Measure A-compliant option should be examined, and that the density and patterns of development on the Island as a whole should be examined as well. She believed that mixed use and the mix of patterns on the blocks should be looked at, and that the density should be served by transit. She supported the non- Measure A-compliant option, and examining how the transportation network fit in. Planning Board Minutes Page 7 March 3, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-03-03.pdf |