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