pages: PlanningBoard/2021-02-22.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-02-22 | 4 | Ms. Coleman explained the requirements more clearly and agreed it could be formatted better. Board Member Curtis wanted to know the difference between a prescriptive and a performance document. Board Member Rothenberg explained that a performance document would have less detail but still describe what you wanted to accomplish in broad terms. She suggested that the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP) be referenced in appropriate sections and include General Plan climate action goals. Board Member Cisneros asked if there were examples of performative design objective standards. Staff Member Tai said performance standards were more results-driven. The current approach was a bit of a hybrid but they do mostly explain how to get there. He then gave examples of each. He said they want to address poor design standards they don't want to see. President Teague asked about roof-mounted equipment and visibility, he found the language to be very vague. Ms. Coleman explained the intent more. President Teague opened public comments. Daniel Hoy, WABA (West Alameda Business Association) design committee, said he felt that the TDA (Traditional Design Area) left out half of the community. He felt that it goes against what the community wanted and what they had envisioned. He added that WABA is more than a business association; it's a community and the TDA map disregards all their hard work and efforts in bringing the community together. Brenden Sullivan also wanted to address the TDA map and that it should include all of Webster Street business district and all of the North Park Street Area. He also felt that the residential part East of Park Street and North of Tilden be included in the TDA design to help ensure future development maintains the same character. He ended by talking about the architectural pedigree of Alameda. Sylvia Martinez, Director of the Housing Authority of Alameda, discussed how the list of standards did not serve affordable housing for two reasons. First, it has too many costly requirements, requirements that add cost without benefits to the residents, and it places restrictions on the ability to build at the density required for affordable housing. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 4 of 12 February 22, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-02-22.pdf |