My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2012-05-21
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
AgdaPkt 2012-05-21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/2/2012 3:33:37 PM
Creation date
5/17/2012 3:22:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Special
Agency Type
City Council
Date
5/21/2012
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.
/
319
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
8.A. - Page 7 <br /> Staff is treating those specific instances as priorities and will keep the Council advised <br /> as to progress in gaining compliance. <br /> Staff has tried to balance its outreach and pressure on the office tenants with the <br /> recognition of a rigorous code enforcement program's impact on the retailers. Many of <br /> the retail businesses are in violation of the sign ordinance and also the ordinances <br /> requiring visibility into their space. Because of the fragility of the retail market, staff has <br /> not pursued code violations aggressively, but solely on a complaint basis. Staff will <br /> also look to the Pride and Beautification Committee to help identify businesses and <br /> areas of the downtown that are in need of improvement and develop a process to deal <br /> with those businesses. <br /> The attached amendment differs from the Planning Commission recommendation in <br /> three ways: <br /> 1. The Planning Commission recommendation stated that no more that 40% of any <br /> block face in the affected area (frontages with a heavy black line on the Use <br /> Regulations Map) could be occupied by office uses. The attached amendment <br /> only applies this restriction to Broadway. This is due to the fact that corner <br /> locations present significant difficulties. Applying this rule to both frontages of a <br /> corner building could result in awkward floor plans that may not work structurally <br /> or aesthetically, and which would probably be difficult to lease. <br /> 2. In the version of the amendment endorsed by the Planning Commission, the <br /> "Massage, Tanning, and Waxing" use group was called "Private Body <br /> Treatments." Also, these uses were restricted from the areas of the <br /> Entertainment District with the heavy black line (primarily Broadway). However, <br /> this created a situation in which massage establishments were more restricted <br /> than office uses, which may be problematic. Therefore, in the current proposal <br /> the Massage, Tanning, and Waxing use group is conditionally permitted in the <br /> areas of the Entertainment District with the Heavy Black line. Staff does not <br /> consider this to be of concern, because similar uses, such as salons, are already <br /> present in these areas and do not detract from the vibrancy of the retail core. <br /> 3. The Planning Commission-recommended version permitted Bars by right. The <br /> attached amendment allows Bars with a conditional use permit. This enables <br /> staff to continue to hold a public hearing before approving such uses, and to <br /> apply conditions which are necessary to avoid potential conflicts. <br /> ALTERNATIVES <br /> 1. Do not approve the amendments. Keep the DTPP as currently written, excluding <br /> ground floor office from the Entertainment District and Downtown Core. <br /> 2. Amend the DTPP to allow ground floor office in the Entertainment District and <br /> Downtown Core with a specific sunset clause, thereby reverting back to the previous <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.