pages: PlanningBoard/2011-03-14.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2011-03-14 | 8 | Mr. Wright stated that the overriding consideration was to reduce travel times on 880 towards Oakland. There was not a reduction of access points, but there would be a consolidation of ramps. President Ezzy-Ashcraft opened the public comment period. Mr. Ratto, Park Street Business Association, recommended that the Park Street bridge receive additional signage to redirect traffic to the Fruitvale bridge, which he considers the least utilized bridge of all bridges. He was also concerned about traffic impacts on Park Street during the construction periods. Lastly, he stated that signage on the freeway needs to be greatly improved so that traffic is better directed to Alameda. Board member Kohlstrand supports adding more signage on the freeway showing the way to Alameda, but she is concerned about the realignment of the overpasses causing more impacts than benefits on the Oakland and Alameda neighborhoods. She is concerned that the Park Street triangle, as proposed, does not show any pedestrian pathways across the triangle. She is uncertain that the proposed realignments will really create a project that is a benefit to the communities it is supposed to serve. 9-D Presentation of the Draft North Park Street Regulating Code. The presentation is for informational purposes. No action by the Planning Board is required. Discussion only no action taken Mr. Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, gave a brief overview of this planning effort to develop form-based code for the North of Park Street Regulating Code and asked the board for their comments on the Draft Code. Mr. lan Ross, City Design Collective, presented the web-based development code that would allow a developer to easily grasp the development regulations. Kohlstrand motioned, seconded by board member Zuppan to limit the speaker time to 3 minutes per speaker. President Ezzy-Ashcraft opened the public comment period. Mr. Garfinkel, resident in the subject area, liked the web-based form, but is very concerned about the classifications on the land use map. He is concerned that the existing residences would be reclassified to commercial or office uses, when they should be retained as residential uses to protect existing owner's property rights. He also recommended that a public park be included in this area to serve this area. Ms. Paul, resident in the Wedge neighborhood, stressed that this neighborhood is primarily residential and she would like to see height limits no higher than 3 stories in the Park Street area, and two stories for the residential areas. She also made recommendations on the land use map that makes residential buildings subject to demolition and replacement by commercial development. APPROVED MEETING MINUTES 8 of 10 PLANNING BOARD 3/14/2011 | PlanningBoard/2011-03-14.pdf |