AgdaPkt 2003-08-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

15A -�35 Ms. Zand said it is parking and has access to a few of the existing buildings. There are no pedestrians walking through the site. She said Kaiser's alternative proposal would not change the function much. Commissioner Garcia said it was a funky little street, and he personally wou'dn't have a problem just doing away with it. Commissioner Paulson asked what the Cvofess buildina setback was. Ms. Zand said 20 feet, as are most of the buildings on Veterans Boulevard. Commissioner McCoy asked Mr. Bottomley if the statement on page 10, second paragraph of the Precise Plan where it states that "Sidewalks should be generous in width, and buildings should not crowd streets visually" was in conflict with the statement on page 16, paragraph E - Front/Street Setbacks, which states, "A distinctly urban character is desired for the Precise Plan area, and buildings should be located close to streets to frame them as public spaces and to encourage street activity." Mr. Bottomley said general urban design practice is to tailor the building and setbacks and sidewalk improvements to the street type. He said that was the reason for looking at a larger setback for Veterans Boulevard. It may not be consistent with exiting buildings, but it would apply to Parking Structure B as well as the Hospital, and possibly get some additional "green" wrapping around from the Creek down Veterans Boulevard. Commissioner McCoy asked Mr. Bottomley (as our "urban look and feel consultant "), if he advises the PC to accept Kaiser's suggestion, or was he still championing the 40 -foot minimum? Mr. Bottomley said right now the Precise Plan is a Policy document, not an architectural set of plans. So from a Policy standpoint, we are trying to layout what is good to pursue. He said it would be good to wait for the Development Review stage or the PC Permit stage to look at actual building plans before changing of policies. Commissioner McCoy asked Mr. Bottomley if he is recommending that the PC not touch the Plan, let Kaiser come in on a phase -by -phase basis, and at that point propose variances to the plan. Mr. Bottomley said that would keep the intent in tact, and would keep an arms - length relationship to the development, ideally keeping it as policy. He said he recommends sticking with the 40 -foot setback, but wait for a specific proposal to respond, rather than giving it up at the get -go. Commissioner Seybert referred to the Plan on page 23 of the Precise Plan and said he could understand the 40 -foot setback on Parking Structure B, but not for the rest. He asked Mr. Bottomley what his thoughts were. Mr. Bottomley said he stays obedient to Policy perspective. He would look at the Policy reason (i.e., to step back the buildings as you approach the Creek open space). Page 9 of 17