pages: PlanningBoard/2021-03-08.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-03-08 | 2 | Board Member Rona Rothenberg said it was a very thorough and explanatory report. She suggested it would enhance the report to have a small graph on page 2 and explained how it could make the information more clear. She also wanted clarification about the inclusionary ordinance where in-lieu - fees were discussed. She also suggested adding a bullet on page 16 to inform the public that staff had contacted the state about not making the numbers. Board Member Xiomara Cisneros asked when was the last time they had done an Impact Fee Nexus Study. Director Thomas said it was about 5 years ago when they did their current Impact Fee. They had updated a portion in the last couple of years for the Open Space piece of the Impact Fee. The larger issue they need to address over the coming months is they need to look at all the Impact Fees together. He spoke about the delicate balance of trying to impose costs on projects to cover public projects and how those fees impact many different things. Board Member Teresa Ruiz wanted clarification on the next RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) allotment since there were two different numbers in the report. Director Thomas explained that the current draft number was 5,350 and how the number had been changing over time. He said that it would be finalized this summer and they would correct and update the report. Board Member Ruiz also commented on the inclusionary housing and wanted to know if they currently allow offsite inclusionary housing since it could be an economic way to offset affordable housing requirements. Director Thomas said they do currently allow that under the code. He explained what the code allows and past projects that had done that. He also explained variations that had been allowed. Board Member Ruiz suggested they refine the zoning to code to encourage this more it could make affordable housing more feasible. She also pointed out that Density Bonus had gone up to 50% from the 35% that was noted. Director Thomas said that was correct and the report would be updated. Board Member Ruiz also thought that on page 15 they should refine the Universal Ordinance to achieve the goal without becoming a burden. Also, they should better define Group Housing such as Co-Living. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 2 of 12 March 8, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-03-08.pdf |