pages: PlanningBoard/2007-01-08.pdf, 15
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-01-08 | 15 | he added that they had "way too much parking." Member Kohlstrand noted that the MTC study, undertaken through the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Agency, stated that the Planning Board members could participate as Alamedans. While she believed that was positive that all Alamedans had an opportunity to participate in this process, it seemed strange that a fundamental planning issue would not come before the Planning Board, nor was there a mention of the Planning Board having a special presentation on this issue. Mr. Thomas apologized for that information not being included in the memo. He noted that the products of the MTC scope of work included the recommendation for new designs for parking standards, block sizes and other public improvement standards and parking standards. He noted that these findings would be implemented as zoning text amendments, which would come to the Planning Board for recommendation to the City Council. He noted that the parking studies and other tasks were designed to inform the Planning Board and the City Council. Member Ezzy Ashcraft agreed that the City needed additional expertise from people who have worked on outside projects in different communities. She noted that she recently spent five days in Vancouver, British Columbia, which was a vibrant water-oriented community. Vice President Cook agreed with Member Ezzy Ashcraft that this should not be viewed as strictly a Measure A forum. President Lynch noted that it would be one of the vehicles where the public could speak about Measure A as it applied to a particular area and different design concepts. Member Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the workshops could be televised. Mr. Thomas noted that the venue had not been selected yet. Vice President Cook noted that some people cannot watch the telecast because they already had schedule conflicts. Mr. Thomas noted that it may be videotaped and reshown on the cable channel. President Lynch requested an update on Item 8-C. Mr. Thomas advised that staff and applicants had met, and the applicant understood that the appeal failed. The applicant would live with the current requirement, which was to remove the gate. They would work with staff to examine some of the options in the staff report, which can be approved without coming back to the Planning Board. Planning Board Minutes Page 15 January 8, 2007 | PlanningBoard/2007-01-08.pdf |