Laserfiche WebLink
M/S: (Garcia/Radcliffe) to close the Public Hearing. <br />Motion passed unanimously. <br />DISCUSSION <br />Commissioner Paulson commented on the following: <br />Page 10 of the Precise Plan and wanted to the term "generous sidewalk" defined <br />more precisely. <br />Page 15 regarding FAR and Units Per Acre, and asked Ms. Riordan how that <br />related to the current standards for that area. Ms. Riordan said the CA district <br />does not have a FAR, nor does that Multi- Family Residential Districts. However, <br />the highest density for Multi -unit Residential is 36-43 per acre. <br />Pages 20 -21 where it discusses Redwood Creek, she would like to see something <br />in there about using native vegetation. <br />Page 28 she wants the language relating to framing clarified in laymen's terms. <br />Page 29, paragraph 2 where it discusses what is vacant. What constitutes a <br />"vacant" area. <br />Page 32, Section B, paragraph 5 — there is a typo. <br />Page 36, Section C regarding the whole section where it makes recommendations <br />rather than specific requests. What happens if the Project comes back and does <br />not meet any of the recommendations? <br />Chair Foust asked if it wasn't a PC Permit at that point. <br />Ms. Riordan said yes, it is basically a rezoning, so wherever it says "shall ", they have to, <br />and where it says "should" it is strongly encouraged. <br />Mr. Bottomley said in Chapter 3, in terms of some of these requirements, the assumption <br />was that the City Engineer would participate in some of the parameters. <br />Mr Church said that the things mandated would have to be met, and the things that are <br />advisory would be looked at by Planning and negotiated with the applicant. If the final <br />form was not agreed upon, then it would be articulated to the PC for resolution. <br />Commissioner Paulson wanted to hear staff's response to Kaiser's statements regarding <br />Marshall Court and Veterans Boulevard. <br />Mr. Bottomley said in response to Veterans Boulevard, there is not a specific building on <br />the table. The policy proposed by FTB is if there is a public right -of -way anywhere in the <br />greater Downtown Area, it is good general policy to allow pedestrian connections to it. <br />He recommended waiting for the actual proposal that has the specifics, possibly with <br />flexible language, but ultimately sticks to the basic City policy that existing streets rights - <br />of -way should not be closed off. <br />Commissioner Paulson agreed with Mr. Bottomley <br />Page 12 of 17 <br />