pages: PlanningBoard/2022-04-11.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2022-04-11 | 7 | Board Member Hom had questions about the Zoning Code and asked about the discussed design requirements for Park and Webster St. Director Thomas discussed the takeaways from the last workshop and how staff had interpreted the board's notes. Staff Member Tai added information about height limits on Webster St and that the takeaway had been to make them uniformed. Vice President Ruiz asked about the process of submitting to HCD (Housing and Community Development) and next steps. She also had questions about upzoning vs overlays and State Density bonus. Director Thomas described in detail what HCD needed and what was next in the process for the staff. He added that there will be comments back form HCD which would be another opportunity for the board to comment. He then discussed using a combo of both upzoning and overlays and how developers could and have used the State Density bonus in Alameda. Vice President Ruiz opened public comments. Karen Bey supported the amendments to make a uniformed zoning amendment for both Park and Webster Street. She supported higher building heights in high opportunity sites. She discussed areas where retail spaces should be preserved. Drew Dara-Abrams asked to make sure that R1-R6 equally contribute to the housing goals. He was very excited at the proposed zoning changes to Park and Webster and gave suggestions on height limits. Chris Buckley, Alameda Architecture Preservation Society, did not think that the massive upzoning proposed was necessary and was overkill. He also discussed in detail issues and concerns with Density Bonus and the proposed height limits for Park and Webster St. Vice President Ruiz closed public comments and opened board member discussion. Board Member Teague discussed his concerns with the wording around Article 26. He wanted to see the Neighborhood Commercial station called out separately, he was not in favor of putting the density into each one of the zones. He believed that all parcels in all residential zones should be eligible for 4 units. For the transit overlay he believed that a quarter mile was too far. He felt that the section for SB-9 left a lot of information out. He then discussed the changes he wanted to see for height limits for the Stations and the Mixed-Used locations. He added that he wanted to see 7 units by right to every parcel for the Transit Route. He also discussed the Design Standards for ADUs and how to make them contemporary compatible. He then discussed definitions Density Bonus. Planning Board Minutes Page 7 of 9 April 11 2022 | PlanningBoard/2022-04-11.pdf |