pages: PlanningBoard/2020-02-10.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2020-02-10 | 2 | Ms. Coleman said that the two inch recess is a requirement and the four inch recess was provided as part of a menu of options to meet the articulation requirement. Board Member Rothenberg asked why the standards regarding site context only applied if pre-1942 buildings were present. Staff Member Tai said staff was trying to ensure that new development within traditional historic neighborhoods would be sensitive to architecture called out in the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Board Member Saheba asked how context would be defined. Ms. Coleman said they looked at different ways to define context and decided they would limit it to the buildings that are most visible from the project site as opposed to a set distance. Board Member Teague asked if an applicant could pick multiple context buildings with different styles. Ms. Coleman said that they would want to avoid mixing styles and the intent is to limit the context building to one style. Board Member Teague asked if objective standards could be created to only apply to a specific area within Alameda and not the entire city. Ms. Coleman said that you could create a standard that applied to a defined area. Board Member Teague asked if stricter standards could be implemented in the future. Assistant City Attorney Chen said that nothing would prevent revisiting the standards, noting that whatever standards are in place when an application is deemed complete will be applicable. Board Member Teague opened the public hearing. Dorothy Freeman noted the 2100 Clement project as an example of excellent design which respects the context of the existing historic neighborhood that should be applied citywide. Greg Smith said the West Alameda Business Association requests strengthening items to help preserve the character of Webster Street. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 2 of 7 February 10, 2020 | PlanningBoard/2020-02-10.pdf |