pages: PlanningBoard/2008-07-28.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-07-28 | 6 | Consider encouraging work-live units when developed in conjunction w/the preservation of a historic resource = yes Consider lowering the existing required percentage of inclusionary units = possibly Consider lowering affordability timeline for inclusionary housing from 55 years to the state requirement of 30 years = yes A Board discussion ensured regarding whether design review is applicable within the second unit ordinance. A Board discussion ensued regarding the Second Unit Ordinance and the Board considered the following elements of the ordinance: Consider that one unit be owner occupied = yes Consider all setback, height, and lot coverage should be the same as the zone district for the site = yes Consider minimizing visual impacts or appearance of a second unit by having entry doors not visible from the street = no Consider whether heritage trees should be removed to accommodate a second unit = yes Consider the design of the second unit for consistency with that of the primary residence = yes Consider allowing second units in all residential areas that permit single-family dwellings = more information requested including examples. A Board discussion about parking requirements for second units ensued. Vice President Ezzy Ashcraft moved and Board member Cook seconded the motion to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m. The motion passed with the following voice vote - 6. Noes: 0. Absent: 1. Abstain: 0. The Board discussion regarding parking requirements continued and considered the following: Consider requiring one parking space for a second unit = requested staff to provide alternatives. Consider if parking should be counted for second units when that primary space is in the driveway = requested staff to provide alternatives. A discussion between the Board, staff, and Ms. Anderly ensued regarding options for parking and second units. Consider attached units must be at least 350 sf and no more than 600 sf, but in no case more than fifty percent of the area of the primary dwelling = yes. A discussion ensued between the Board and staff regarding the Housing Element schedule. Page 6 of 7 | PlanningBoard/2008-07-28.pdf |