pages: PlanningBoard/2021-05-24.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-05-24 | 5 | Director Thomas said he thought they were. When the project comes through it had to meet the objective design standard. They had added to the Master Plan additional standards that were site-specific. Vice President opened the board's comments and discussion. Board Member Cisneros thought they should revisit the 100% visitability requirements to make sure that the townhomes were able to meet this. She saw 3 reasons why they should recommend this item to the council. It is simply a great project, it would help with their housing element and so much had been invested in this and if it were to fail it would make future projects more precarious. For the parking, she didn't believe that higher density meant more parking. She appreciated the staff's intention with having maximum parking rules and she agreed with Board Member Rothenberg's comment about having a standard moving forward. Board Member Curtis agreed with his colleagues on this. He addressed that this development had been on the books for a long time. He agreed with Board Member Rothenberg that they should set a parking standard going forward but they should grandfather this with the parking spaces the applicant had requested. He was concerned any change or roadblock would delay the project further and increase the cost for everyone involved including future buyers. He recommended to grandfather the parking that was requested and to approve the Development Agreement with the modification to parking. Board Member Hom appreciated the applicant and the staff for working together to improve the Master Plan document. Overall he was very supportive of the project and agreed with his fellow board members in regards to the parking. He thought that asking the applicant to change the parking was too late in the game so to speak but he appreciated the staff being more aggressive in limiting parking. Board Member Rothenberg concurred with her fellow board members and acknowledged the changes in the Master Plan that had improved and enhanced the project. She supported the project and believed it had a tremendous public benefit all around. Vice President Saheba also appreciated the improvements to the Master Plan. It made sense for the direction that they wanted to go in with the Housing Element. Also, for the parking situation, he agreed with his fellow board members. He discussed the many ways that they should be looking at multifamily and townhome parking differently. Board Member Hom made a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Amended Encinal Terminals Tidelands Exchange Master Plan and Density Bonus Application and Draft Development Agreement for the Redevelopment of the Encinal Terminals Properties, deleting the condition to require adjusting the parking ratio to 1.5. The motion was seconded by Board Member Curtis. A roll call Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 5 of 11 May 24, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-05-24.pdf |