pages: PlanningBoard/2007-08-27.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-08-27 | 9 | Council had recalled that was a Development Services project, and that they would be the lead department before taking it to the EDC. President Cook requested copies of the quarterly reports, and recalled that there were many important concepts in the Vision Plan that are probably still relevant. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she would like see more business activity on Webster Street, especially as the development of Alameda Landing continues. She suggested that may be addressed by EDC and Development Services. Ms. Woodbury noted that staff would provide updates to the Planning Board when they are available. No action was taken. 10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 10-A Status of Compliance with Conditions of Approval for Bridgeside Shopping Center Ms. Woodbury noted that Planner Douglas Vu was working with Bridgeside to complete compliance with other conditions of approval before signing off on the site. Staff went through Board member McNamara's memo and responded in writing regarding the status of Bridgeside. She noted that the Board would take a walk-through of the site once it was completed. Board member McNamara noted that after reviewing the response, and that she had missed the final approval meeting on the project. She believed that some of the responses to her concerns seems somewhat weak in that when a wooden lattice, one would assume that plants would be planted under the lattice to cover it. From the response, it seemed that was not the intent for the landscaping. She did not believe that a lattice was a design feature; the addition of wisteria or bougainvillea did constitute a design feature. She found it hard to believe that it had taken so long to get the canopies and fabrics approved and put it. She would like to meet with Mr. Vu to review the details, and try to learn from it moving forward. She believed that some of the responses were disheartening. Ms. Woodbury wished to respond to the Compliance with Conditions, and noted that staff was charged with ensuring that the Building side worked on all the Building Code issues, that Planning worked with the approved plans through the permit process, and that the planners work on resolving any issues with respect to compliance with the conditions of the discretionary approvals. She noted that on projects of any size, it was the last 10% that took 90% of the time, which was the nature of the business. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that on page 2, she was concerned about the response with respect to a driveway that had been designated off of Tilden Way. She understood Page 9 of 11 | PlanningBoard/2007-08-27.pdf |