Laserfiche WebLink
<br />8A <br />Page 16K <br />previously via a memo) <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />Response Matrix: Precise Plan Comments and Revisions <br />The Preserve at Redwood Shores <br />City Council Meeting - 1.28.08 <br /> <br />to City Counci <br /> <br />(provided <br /> <br />Response <br /> <br />All edge condition setbacks for the Townhomes INo changes to the Precise Plan <br />are included in the Precise Plan as <br />Development Standards, which are <br />compulsory, rather than design guidelines. <br />Refer to pg. 39-41 of the Draft Precise Plan <br /> <br />Comment <br /> <br />Since virtually all edges of the development <br />parcels (i.e. housing, school) within the plan <br />interface closely with public spaces such as <br />streets and trails, It was requested that at least <br />generalized mitigation measures be included in <br />the EI R to assure that these parcels present a <br />good "face" to these public spaces. The <br />Precise Plan presents some compulsory <br />provisions in this regard, but it is often difficult <br />to tell what parameters are required and which <br />would be advisory. The DEIR only addresses <br />issues of light and glare. In particular, the <br />Precise Plan and EIR should have reasonably <br />clear requirements for all development parcels <br />to present attractive, well designed building <br />frontages and site improvements to streets, the <br />public trail and adjacent uses <br /> <br /># <br /> <br />34. <br /> <br />of 13 <br /> <br />Amend the Precise Plan. The Final Precise <br />Plan will be revised to indicate that the tide <br />controlled lagoon should be implemented with <br />either the Fully or Muted Tidal Alternative <br />unless it is not permitted by regulatory <br />agencies <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />The tide controlled lagoon will be implemented <br />whether the Muted Tidal or Fully Tidal <br />Alternative is developed unless it is not <br />permitted by the regulatory agencies <br /> <br />35. The alternatives analysis of the EIR should <br />include and analyze a tide controlled lagoon <br />(rather than a tidal or semi-tidal wetland) <br />between the project and adjacent California <br />Seacrest. This has been done in the "full tidal <br />restoration" alternative, but not in the "muted <br />tidal restoration alternative". The alternative of <br />having the tide controlled lagoon between the <br />Project and California Sea crest is equally <br />appropriate in both the muted tidal action and <br />full tidal action wetland restoration alternatives <br />