pages: PlanningBoard/2007-03-26.pdf, 22
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-03-26 | 22 | Vice President Cook noted that in 10.8.d should be changed to read, " required new buildings to face the street and buildings along the shore to face the water 's edge.' Board member Kohlstrand did not believe that would be feasible if the buildings faced both the street and the water. President Lynch did not believe the word "required" would be feasible with respect to double entrances on all buildings. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether 10.8.h had been relocated to another section of the document, addressing facades. Mr. Thomas replied that was the case. President Lynch suggested that section be used to cover the issue, and that 10.8.d be stricken due to a conflict in language. He suggested that in instances where the new building did not face the water, that it be oriented to face the street. Vice President Cook suggested that wherever feasible, that public access on the waterfront be activated to enhance safety and waterfront access. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft agreed that "where feasible" would be an appropriate phrase in that item. A discussion of dual waterfront and street access ensued. Mr. Thomas noted that 10.9.d and 10.9.e, Mr. Thomas noted that those policies were moved to Attachment B. He noted that the easiest thing to do would be direct staff to put them in the document. Board member Kohlstrand moved to include 10.9.d. and 10.9.e in the document Board member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote - 6. Absent: Mariani. Board member McNamara moved to extend the meeting to 11:45 p.m. Vice President Cook seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote - 6. Absent: Mariani. Vice President Cook noted that DM-11 should be changed to read, "provide allow for a shoreline public promenade consistent with the requirements of number 24 in Attachment B." Vice President Cook believed that E.2.t. was inadequate in its reference to open space requirements, and that a word stronger than "adequate" be used, such as "ample" or "generous." Planning Board Minutes Page 22 March 26, 2007 | PlanningBoard/2007-03-26.pdf |