Planning 2014-06-24 Item 3 - Adoption of 6/26/14 Minutes

Browse Search

BAR Public Hearing Minutes May 22, 2014 In response to questions raised by the Commission, Ms. Dhaliwal also explained the valet parking service and stacking of cars ; provided more info rmation on preserving the existing trees; information about the traffic impact study; and the long term development vision for the area. Eric Guion , architect for the applicant, gave the presentation. The applicant stated that they will continue to work with staff on several of the issues. They are in agreement with all of the condition s except condition number eight. The Commission expressed the following concerns with the project ’s l ack of green space ; the loss of trees on the site, landscaping and more livable space. The y reque st ed to provide more green space along the parking structure, and also encouraged the applicant to make the project appealing and attractive on all sides. Robert Wiley , one of the partners that own the property adjacent to the south of the project said they are very enthusiastic about the project. Mr. Wiley wanted to go on record making the following two comments ; 1) the applicant has assured them they can manage parking to prevent spill over onto the neighbors, 2) the expectation that redevelopment of other future parcels will be approved for the same height allowance as this project. Jerry Lee , architect, said he was a special consultant for the applicant . He said that the applicant has had a pr etty stringent design criterion that they have met. He also said 90% of the trees on the project can be saved. There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. The BAR deliberated. Inquiry was made on allowable height for future projects. The commission was in concurrence that they like the project and made the following comments : Enhance the articulation ; The applicant shall work with staff to maximize the planters and add more green treatment on the building to be approved administrative ly, and also look at adding greenery on vertical areas ; Increase vegetation in the area of pedestrian activity ; Incorporate more green space on the site; Provide affordable housing . The applicant w as asked their position regarding using brick on the garag e; t he applicant stated t hey would rather not use the brick. Commissioner Alford made a motion to add a ninth condition to read, “M aximize opportunit ies to add more vegetation in areas of pedestrian act ivity to include but not be limited to the parking garage, entrances and vertical surfaces. Changes to will be reviewed administratively at the time of building permit .” Commissioner Maestas seconded the motion . Three were in favor and Commissions Strander, Hansen, and McLeod opposed. Chair Stander asked if anyone would like to make a friendly amendment to the motion. Commission er Hansen asked the applicant if they were ok with the language. Matthew Chan , for the applicant, said he would like to respectfully suggest that the BAR look at what’s more imp ortant to make the project happen. He said it is a waste of money to put in a metal cover then cover it with vines. He said the BAR should let them judiciously pick the right spot and put in greenery. He said he recommends what works for them will be good for the City. The applicant was allowed to provide additional comments during deliberations after the public hearing was closed, which cannot be entered into the record. Staff informed the BAR that they must base their Page 2 of 3 2