pages: PlanningBoard/2007-10-22.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-10-22 | 8 | In response to an inquiry by Member McNamara regarding the process envisioned by staff, Mr. Thomas explained the design review process regarding retail in a commercial zone. He noted that when retail was permitted by right, a use permit did not apply to whether a retailer should be located on that particular site; in a conditional use permit, the requirements would be more restrictive and specific. Traffic at the location would also be a factor, and the City would have the ability to address traffic impacts as well as design for larger retail stores. Member McNamara encouraged a more specific and stringent definition process. Member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she would support the notion of allowing the Board to be more selective through the conditional use permit process. She believed that Alameda has long had the attitude that it was fortunate to have any retail at all; she added that Alamedans deserved to have quality retail in the City. In response to an inquiry by Member Ezzy Ashcraft, Mr. Thomas described the DA and DDA processes. He noted that changes to Zoning Ordinances will not affect major projects that already have a signed development agreement. He noted that Alameda Landing or the commercial developments at Harbor Bay Business Park would not be affected. He noted that Alameda Point, South Shore and Del Monte would be affected, because development agreements have not been signed with those projects. Member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that Building A at Alameda Landing has been entitled for over 100,000 square feet, suggested that in addition to square footage, that a height and limitation should be explored, especially as it related to pedestrian scale. She believed the wording of the second policy on page 6 could be reworked for clarity: "The primary focus of a proposed sizing of tenant space is appropriate to current retailing practice, and is intended to fill a documented aspect of retail sales leakage for the geographic area to be served." Mr. Thomas responded that staff would bring back all the retail policies, and will go through them all for the Planning Board's review. Member Mariani appreciated the comments, especially from the public, and complimented staff on the staff report. Member Cunningham agreed with the concept of using a conditional use permit for the large format retail stores. He believed that the Planning Board needed to control design, and that development should be functional for its purpose. He was wary of putting so many restrictions that it restricted the function for potential retail operators. He believed that there should be options to allow projects and designs to be brought to the table, while reserving the right to say no. He would like the Board to be able to pass judgment on each application and evaluate it on its own merits. He did not want the City to miss opportunities, and suggested keeping the approach balanced between too prescriptive and too nebulous would be avoid jeopardizing any potential development in Alameda. Page 8 of 11 | PlanningBoard/2007-10-22.pdf |