pages: PlanningBoard/2021-09-27.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-09-27 | 2 | President Saheba opened the board's clarifying questions. Board Member Rona Rothenberg asked how the minimum parking would be calculated for disabled access. She also suggested not using the word "desirable" and instead focusing on reasonable accommodation. She then had questions about EV (electric vehicle) handicap parking. Staff Member McGuire explained the math they used in addition to what the California Building Code required. He then explained the use of the word "desirable" and then explained the standard for how they settled on the number of spaces for accessible EV parking spots. Vice President Teresa Ruiz asked about the intention to deviate from the California Building Code. She wondered if there should be a clause to follow whichever was more stringent. She also asked about encroachment for the parking space dimensions and parking stackers. Staff Member McGuire said these standards were more stringent and the intention was to go beyond what was required. He then explained that for encroachment they would follow the zoning code. They had not really addressed parking stackers. Board Member Curtis asked about disabled parking spaces and wanted to know how many spots would be required under the new ordinance. He did not want to see disabled people penalized to make more room for cyclists or pedestrians. Staff Member McGuire explained how the new ordinance would calculate disabled parking spots and how the feedback they had gotten was in line with Board Member Curtis's concern. Board Member Xiomara Cisneros asked for an overview of what the Transportation Commission had thought of this ordinance. She also had questions for the Exception Piece and asked for examples. Staff Member McGuire discussed the highlights of that meeting. He then explained when the Exception Piece might be needed, which would require a Use Permit. Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning Building and Transportation, discussed what his takeaways were. He acknowledged that better management was needed of on-street parking. He further discussed the Use Permit process if someone needed additional parking for a project Board Member Hanson Hom asked how the threshold was set, provisions, intensification process, and EV charging requirements. He had other general questions as well and asked about how developers on Alameda point had responded. He also had specific questions about certain parking requirements and how this ordinance would affect ADUs. Staff Member McGuire discussed how the ordinance would be applied and how this ordinance would work with existing and new developments. He spoke on the needs and issues that had been coming up on Alameda Point. He answered the more specific questions and explained what they would refine before going to the City Council. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 2 of 10 September 27, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-09-27.pdf |