My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2021.01.25 Amended Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2021
>
AgdaPkt 2021.01.25 Amended Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/10/2021 11:43:36 AM
Creation date
1/22/2021 5:57:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
1/25/2021
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
385
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
RESPONDING TO PUBLIC INPUT <br />REFINING DESIGN TO MEET COMMUNITY NEED <br />The Eden Housing & Lowe team has continued to refine the <br />project massing and land uses in response to public and city <br />feedback. Buildings have also been articulated to enhance scale <br />and improve the public realm, and to provide a varied skyline. <br />Additionally, care has been taken to conform with DTPP principles, <br />as shown in the massing progression and table below. <br />C C <br />B F a' "B/;SIF 1 3 <br />_ A E A <br />D <br />�� <br />DTPP massing05.2019 proposa revised 01.2021 pr osal M <br />DTPPPrinciDles Block BlockB BlockC Block Block BlockF LEGEND <br />Uses (2-2) <br />✓ <br />V <br />V <br />V <br />✓ <br />V <br />New Streets (2.3)' <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Public Frontage (2.4) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Building Placement and Landscaping (2.5) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Parking -Retail (2.6) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Parking- Office and Residential (2.6)'* <br />Q <br />Q <br />Q <br />Q <br />0 <br />Q <br />Maximum Heights (2.7) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />I ✓ <br />✓ <br />Facade Composition (2.8) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Architecture Character (2.9) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Signage (2.10) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />Complete Streets (3.2.2) <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />./ <br />Transit (3.2.3)" <br />✓ <br />O <br />0 <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />✓ <br />residential retail office/life science <br />GENERAL NOTES <br />* While DTPP compliance can be achieved, the proposed setbacks and <br />sfepbacks are further back than envisioned in the DTPP, in response to <br />public comments and to improve street level daylight. The team also <br />proposes to work with the City to consider architectural character types <br />that are complimentary to the permitted architectural character types. <br />** Reduced parking ratios for Commercial/Residential <br />modified vehicular street at Block B to Pedestrian <br />eliminated vehicular street at Block C <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.