pages: PlanningBoard/2019-02-11.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2019-02-11 | 4 | Board Member Teague observed that there is a whereas in the resolution referring to section 2.3 of the land use element when none of the proposed changes deal with that section. He asked how the revised 2.2 terminology should be handled given they passed language previously. Staff Member Thomas said they can accept the revised language as complying with the previous approval, or they can adopt the language as a new action. He said staff just needs to know if the changes are acceptable to the board before being brought to the council. Board Member Teague asked how the need to deal with traffic is handled in the General Plan. He said they are approving lots of housing and it all needs to address the transportation impacts together rather than treating them as separate issues. Staff Member Thomas said he will put the Transportation Choices Plan can be added to the next agenda. He said that work plan is the appropriate place to deal with traffic issues. President Sullivan asked if her understanding was correct that the state does care about traffic and only cares about the buildings. Staff Member Thomas said the state has made clear that we must build more housing. He said they change the environmental quality act to not consider traffic delay as an environmental impact. Board Member Teague asked if the requirement to monitor Measure A should be in the report. Staff Member Thomas said that due to state laws they have essentially worked around Measure A's limitations. He suggested that it probably should not be in the charter any longer, but would require voter approval. Board Member Rothenberg said that California's net zero plans could be included to address some of the desire to address climate change goals. Board Member Cavanaugh asked what is the definition of a living unit. Staff Member Thomas explained that the definition hinges upon the kitchen and inclusion of an oven. Board Member Cavanaugh said very small market rate units could potentially meet the low income unit requirements. He said transportation should be the first priority and come before dealing with the units being added. He suggested light rail or buses that could use the Fruitvale bridge without getting stuck in vehicle traffic. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 4 of 7 February 11, 2019 | PlanningBoard/2019-02-11.pdf |