pages: PlanningBoard/2021-06-28.pdf, 12
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-06-28 | 12 | powered. She also discussed transportation demand management and asked for consideration for residential parking permits. President Teague said he was all about the cost of housing, keeping it down, and making it easier for developers to build projects. He liked the idea of getting rid of all parking requirements, he had even pushed Habitat to have less parking for their affordable housing and they would not go for it. Habitat said they needed parking which brought up the equitable aspect. Income and age were also a factor, someone in their 70s or 80s may be able to drive but not be able to use other forms of transportation and not qualify to be disabled. He wanted to look at the impact on equity with this change and he absolutely believed they needed to make this change. He discussed how many projects that he had seen, other than the Habitat ones, had wanted to reduce their parking. He agreed that whatever it takes to make your project successful was fine but they would need to make sure they built the right number of disabled spots. He was concerned the new parking maximum would also lower the disabled spots. He wanted to explore completely removing parking requirements other than for disabled spots. Staff Member McGuire clarified that the draft amendment they were reviewing did eliminate parking minimums. If an applicant wanted to build no parking the code would allow that. President Teague said unless their project needed more than the minimum then they would have to come before the Planning Board and ask for it. He said he wanted it more simplified, no maximum and no minimum. Board Member Curtis wanted to reinforce some of what President Teague had said about the controls with the parking in regards to the development. The first one was that the developer was going to build as many units as they possibly could which would take parking down. The other one was, even if they thought parking would help sell the unit they still have the control because they have to have so many low-cost units. The market takes it up and the low-cost housing takes it down and the developer was the one who had everything on the line. So if you don't have minimums or maximums the developer would police that. President Teague thanked the board for all of their comments and acknowledged that his comments were probably the most radical ones. He believed getting rid of minimums was good and it needed to be addressed in some way. 8. MINUTES 8-A 2021-1048 Draft Meeting Minutes - May 10, 2012 Board Member Ruiz wanted her comments on page 3 where she referred to Portland's Fareless Square to be expanded on, she thought her comments had been oversimplified. Board Member Hom wanted a comment of his about the mixed-use districts to be rewritten and clarified, it had not clearly expressed his thoughts. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 12 of 15 June 28, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-06-28.pdf |