pages: PlanningBoard/2008-12-08.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-12-08 | 14 | majority of the residents must agree to the program. If enacted all residents will be assessed the fee. In response to a Board inquiry staff stated the survey referenced in the staff report was not done to achieve any scientific data, it was used as an additional form of public outreach. Staffs focus in preparing the report was on creating attractive pricing that would move employee parking off streets and into parking garages or lots thereby creating on street parking for residents. President Kohlstrand stated she was in support of neighborhoods having the option to create an assessment for a residential parking program. Staff stated preparing the ordinances is an ongoing project and feedback from the Board would provide direction to Staff in crafting the ordinances. Staff is looking for Board direction on the in-lieu fees. In-lieu fees can become a large financial part of a project. Staff has proposed some waivers. A demand waiver would apply to a business that can show the demand for parking created by the business is less that what is stated in the code and the calculation would be based on that number. Required parking could be provided entirely on site or a combination of on site parking and in-lieu fees would suffice. To qualify for this option a business must be in close proximity to one of the garages or on a transit route. President Kohlstrand inquired whether a traffic engineer is required to prepare the demand waiver. Staff responded this was required to ensure standard practices and proper methods are being followed. Staff asked for Board input on a historic resource waiver. In the current code if a building is over ten years old upgrading parking for a new or more intense use is not required. Staff is proposing, for Park Street and Webster Street, if it is an historic building and providing parking would require alterations to the building that would affect its historic character then parking requirements could be waived. Staff discussions included continuing to require in-lieu fees for these types of projects and provide the Planning Board with the option to waive in-lieu fees if requiring the fee would make the project infeasible. Staff is requesting Board input on whether this scenario should also apply to a business located in a non-historic building. President Kohlstrand stated that from a land use perspective removing the minimum requirement altogether makes sense. Not factored in is The design guidelines state that not to disrupt the continuous frontage on Park and Webster streets. This is not reflected in the Plan. By eliminating a min parking req is a way to achieve this design guideline but this approach eliminates funding sources. Page 14 of 17 | PlanningBoard/2008-12-08.pdf |