Laserfiche WebLink
engineering discussion just addresses difficulties in converting that structure into a restaurant. It <br />does not show that preservation as an open shade -providing structure with, for example, picnic <br />tables for the public or a stage for performances, is not feasible. In fact, the Preservation <br />Alternative Memo Appendix states: <br />The observations of the existing building indicate that it is a viable structure that could be <br />brought up to standards for the original occupancy and other similar uses (e.g., the current <br />use as a storage facility). Any physical alterations needed could be performed without <br />significantly changing the current appearance to maintain that existing use. However, such <br />improvements would be substantially different from those required for a new occupancy <br />and use, such as a code -compliant retail restaurant. <br />Is this our new standard for historic resources? If they can't be converted to a restaurant then <br />they're expendable? If true, that is incredibly disappointing and the public needs to be aware of <br />this change in standards when it comes to the preservation of historic resources. <br />4: A paucity of public open space and green space <br />The incredible lack of public open space and green space offered by this project is shocking. It <br />appears to be an afterthought. Many of you expressed concerns about this during the study <br />session and it appears the issue is being ignored. The developer is so desperate for open space <br />they are counting pathways to a dog park, a block -long sidewalk along a creek that rarely has <br />water in it, and entry plazas into buildings as public open space. Attached is a map that shows a <br />little thumbnail in the southernmost corner where a mini plaza is slotted. This plaza is half the <br />size of Courthouse Square! Where are the 1,000+ residents and the nearby neighbors <br />supposed to recreate and play? Why are we allowing the developer to short-change open space <br />solely to maximize their office space? <br />5: A suspect design for a transit -oriented development <br />Given the relative lack of car traffic through this neighborhood, why are we not considering the <br />closing of Lathrop St (and possibly Beech) completely and turning it into a cool, Theatre Way -type <br />boulevard? We could place all of the entrances to the parking garages along the perimeter of this <br />project and create a truly pedestrian and bike -friendly experience. For a project like this to work, <br />you should have almost no cars in the center of the four main buildings. Lathrop and Beech Street <br />could be car -free and therefore counted as real open spaces. The project would have plenty of <br />space for restaurants - especially now that restaurants need more outdoor spaces due to Covid. <br />There could be flexible workspaces for people that want to work not -from home and a <br />coffee/breakfast shop and places to grab a quick lunch. <br />In closing, I believe we can do better. I recognize this project has made significant changes along <br />the way but given the glaring shortcomings that still exist, I am asking you to deny this project and <br />provide additional feedback to the developer for much-needed improvements. <br />Regards, <br />Kris Johnson <br />