pages: PlanningBoard/2020-02-10.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2020-02-10 | 3 | Karen Lithgow said Alameda Architectural Preservation Society wants to protect the character of Alameda's historic neighborhoods and asks that the items in their comment letters be included. Doug Biggs asked that action on this item be delayed. He said the objective standards are being packed with items that could burden affordable housing providers. Kathleen Mertz said the latest version has a lot of new items in it that housing providers need time to review and help refine. She asked for a delay in adoption in order to prevent impacts on the cost to provide housing. She said the Everett Commons project referenced as a good design ended up costing almost one million dollars per unit to build. Danielle Thoe said the board and staff should take another look at what objective standards are. She said they should not include subjective design standards. Betsy Mathieson said it is important that any new building should be compatible with the existing buildings in the area. She said the standards should be at least as prescriptive as our current guidelines because of the streamlined nature of these projects. Christopher Buckley shared some examples of buildings that they would like to avoid by having clear standards and ensuring context sensitive development. Board Member Teague closed the public hearing. Board Member Saheba asked if there was a deadline to adopt objective standards. Staff Member Tai said there is no deadline, adding that a streamlined application today would rely on any objective standards found in existing design guides. Board Member Saheba said creating clarity in this document is a challenge. He said the document gives enough parameters for applicants to decide what course they want to choose. Board Member Ruiz said she had a follow up conversation with Mr. Buckley about the AAPS comments. She said she understands the concerns of both sides and thinks the context section will need the most work. Board Member Hom said staff had a hard job to capture subjective design guidelines in objective standards and it is a delicate balance. He agreed that the neighborhood context item may need further refinement. He suggested getting these guidelines in place now and revisiting them after a year. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 3 of 7 February 10, 2020 | PlanningBoard/2020-02-10.pdf |