AgdaPkt 2011-01-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

ATTACNMENT �i • Alternative 4: Revised MAD caps - Residential remains at 2,500 units - Office cap increased to 500,000 square feet - Retail cap reduced to 100,000 square feet - Lodging cap remains at 200 rooms , • ALTERNATIVE 3 • Alternative 3: Reduced Building Heights - 10 and 12-story zones eliminated, replaced by 8 story zone. � • ALTERNATIVE 5 , • Alternative 5: Revised Historic Regulations '�� - Disallow attached additions to the most sensitive resources. ' - Preserve all historic exterior walls, not just character-defining facades. - Encourage preservation of historic interior spaces whenever possible. - Keep additions as low as possible. - Review addition setbacks. - Utilize a well-defined project review process for consideration of exceptions to the above provisions. • COMBINING ALTERNATIVES • STAFF RECOMMENDATION • ALTERNATIVES: STAFF RECOMMENDATION • Staff recommends adoption of both Alternatives 4 and 5. I, - Alternative 4 best responds to current and foreseeable market trends. � Demand for retail is weak, demand for office space is growing. Additional office workers can help support existing retail businesses. Environmentally superior to Project. - Alternative 5 strongly addresses historic preservation concerns brought forth in the lawsuit and preserves what is unique and speciai about � Downtown, while still allowing for some sensitive expansions and adaptive reuse. Also environmentally superior to Project. Jill Ekas, Housing and Economic Development Director, updated the Commission with positive dialogue they are having with Safeway as well as Regency (the property owner I for Sequoia Station). She stated that their focus is on the Applicability section of the Downtown Precise Plan and careful consideration with respect to existing plan developments - Sequoia Station and Franklin Street Apartments. She proposed an addition to the Staff recommendation that in addition to what they added with respect to properties with valid plan development permits, they also acknowledge that in those cases development with a valid plan development permit is conforming in terms of its structures. She noted that the threshold of 30 percent with respect to applicability for working with the structures and developments under the plan development permits that are existing could be raised to 35 percent. She stated that some fine tuning needs to be done to specifically conform how they address plan developments with the zoning code itself. She explained that Article 46 of the Zoning Ordinance covers plan development, and Article 26 is the zoning district that applies to the property, and the R5 is the zoning I Page 4 of 13 ',