Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - Page 136 <br /> Bradford Street be open to allow traffic to cross through the Downtown area in <br /> ways currently blocked by county buildings. T'o the extent these recommendations <br /> are even feasible, the DPP and the Enviromental Impact Report(EIR) supporting <br /> it should have considered those possibilities for the fuYure in determining what <br /> treatment of Bradford Street should be made now to accommodate higher traffic <br /> in the future. A review of the DPP and the EIR reveals no such consideration of <br /> that possibility. <br /> N. 2.5.1 (page 70) The setbacks for properties on "city streets" described at page 69 <br /> of the DPP allow for up to a ten foot setback which would tend to mitigate the <br /> problems of heighY differential between the Development and the cluster of <br /> historical buildings on the adjacenY block. No consideration seems to have been <br /> given as to whether adding ten feet to the setback would assist in creating a <br /> complete street environment, a more attractive pedestrian walkway, a more <br /> pedestrian friendly streeY and a more pleasing architectural transition between the <br /> Development and the hisYorical cluster of buildings on the adjacent block. <br /> O. 2.5.1 C (page 70) Defines the specific street type involved at Bradford between <br /> Middlefield and Jefferson and encourages development that ensures that these <br /> streets are"attractive and comfortable". What is attractive and comfortable about <br /> a ten story building staring down a narrow street at a totally lopsided set of <br /> buildings on the other side of that street? <br /> P. 2.7.1 (page 87) If the regulations expressed in 2.71 are to be believed, this <br /> Development violates maximum corner height requirements in that within the ten <br /> story zone applicable to the Development, the DPP requires the "tallest mass of <br /> the building"to be located at the comers. Because the proposed tower on <br /> Bradford Street takes up the entire street, and because there is no variation in the <br /> top treatment of that building between the corners, the Development does not <br /> comply with the requirement that there be decorative masses at the comers that <br /> would offset the "escarpment" feeling of the development as it currently exists. <br /> Q. 2.7.1 E (page 88) Recommends a four story step down height to "bring heights <br /> 6 <br />