pages: PlanningBoard/2008-01-28.pdf, 10
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-01-28 | 10 | Board member Cunningham concurred with that suggestion. Board member Cunningham noted that 2.5.o, which would "reduce the extent of neighborhood business districts by redesignating residential parcel zone for commercial use to residential use," and inquired whether that was counter to the Board's efforts to introduce local neighborhood stores and encourage pedestrian retail, rather than turning commercial space back into residential space. Mr. Thomas noted that had been unchanged since the 1991 General Plan, and noted that much of that had been done already. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft believed it was important to maintain the balance of the housing and commercial uses because it would preserve the housing stock, and it would reduce auto trips. She did not want to see an area where every former house became some form of a business, which would eliminate the neighborhood business district. She believed the wording was cumbersome, verging on misleading. Mr. Thomas noted that the Board could direct staff to rewrite that policy to reflect Board member Ezzy Ashcraft's comments, which would ensure that the Zoning Map and the General Plan reflected the land uses and building types. He noted that staff could also remove that section of text. Board member Cunningham suggested that with respect to 2.5.u, that an item be introduced that discussed the integration of utility and trash enclosures to these types of environments in a positive way. He would like those uses to be screened form public view, and kept out of main pedestrian pathways. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft suggested that recycling enclosures be included. Vice President Kohlstrand complimented staff on integrating the Board's extensive comments into the document. She noted that 2.5.b contained an extra word. She noted that the extra "be" should be deleted. Vice President Kohlstrand shared the other Board members' concerns about 2.5.o. She noted that the second sentence in 2.5.r should read, "Encourage construction of multilevel parking and shared parking in shopping centers." Vice President Kohlstrand noted that with respect to the third item in 2.5.u, she was unsure whether it was appropriate to say that there should be minimum use of the major drive aisles for internal automobile circulation. She noted that there was no other way for cars to circulate without using the major drive aisles. She suggested striking the language "and minimum use." Board member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that the word "isle" should be corrected to read "aisle" at the bottom of page 5. She concurred with the other comments. Page 10 of 15 | PlanningBoard/2008-01-28.pdf |