Laserfiche WebLink
5 <br /> <br />Table 2: Guideline Deviations <br />Section Guideline Deviation AAC Rec <br />Building <br />Disposition <br />Type <br />2.7.4.B.2.f <br />(p. 87) <br />No building wing (see illustration for <br />explanation) above the courtyard <br />level should have a width of greater <br />than 65 feet from the street to <br />courtyard, or from courtyard to <br />courtyard. Side or rear yards may be <br />counted as courtyards if they meet <br />the same size requirements <br />described here in guideline (C). No <br />building wing should have a width of <br />greater than 45 feet from a side or <br />rear property line to a courtyard. <br />From streets: <br />- 72’ Franklin <br />- 77’ Diller <br />- 78’-95’ El <br />Camino <br />- 79’ Alley <br /> <br />From property <br />line: <br />- 54’ side PL <br />Deny <br /> <br />Based on the Committee’s recommended denial of the two deviations, the applicant <br />revised its plans so that it is no longer seeking deviations on the parking layout and <br />disposition type. The applicant revised the garage column locations to comply with the <br />guidelines and changed the building disposition type from Courtyard to Rear Yard <br />instead of reducing the wing depth. In addition, the applicant modified the building’s <br />exterior to soften its visual appearance including a more asymmetric design, <br />transparency, articulation, and revised colors and materials. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Review and Action: <br />On November 1, 2016 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the <br />proposal. The Planning Commission was generally supportive of the project’s design <br />and features, including the provision of onsite affordable housing units at the low <br />income level, mixed use, and site amenities. However, it shared the Architectural <br />Advisory Committee’s desire to physically break-up the building’s mass and scale, and <br />provide variation from the adjacent development at 1305 El Camino Real. Staff <br />presented four design alternatives that could address the concern of physically <br />breaking-up the building’s mass and scale. Options included increasing the upper story <br />setback along El Camino Real (similar to 601 Main St), providing a break between the <br />buildings (similar to 640 Veterans), providing a range of building height and stories <br />(similar to 103 Wilson St.), and replacing the ground floor retail with residential units <br />with entry stoops (similar to 488 Winslow). The Commission continued the matter to <br />allow the applicant to revise the plans by providing physical variation in the building <br />façade fronting El Camino Real, vertically and horizontally. The Commission generally <br />supported the design alternative of replacing the ground floor retail with residential <br />units with entry stoops provided that it resulted in breaking up the building’s mass and <br />uniform height. <br />8.A. - Page 5