Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - Page 137 <br /> down from the standard eight story maximum permitted in areas with high <br /> concentration of historic resources". While this paragraph does not strictly apply <br /> to a ten story area, the same architectural considerations apply. The Development <br /> therefore does not comport with the architectural vision expressed in the DPP that <br /> would create step transitions between buildings of different heights. <br /> R. 2.8.3 A (page 97) The DPP requires that base cap treatments of buildings promote <br /> a "human scale"to aid in reducing the imposing nature of higher buildings. The <br /> proposed building base cap treatment fails to accomplish this goal in any <br /> meaningful way, particularly when compared to the representative examples <br /> described in the DPP. <br /> S. 2.8.5 (page 108) This provision requires a"substantial horizontal articulation of <br /> the facade" at the top of the building middle, known as the building middle cap. A <br /> review of the Development elevation reveals no horizontal articulation on Yhe <br /> facade at Yhe top of the middle of the building. While the architectural <br /> committee's report requested a"lighter treatmenY' of the top of the building little <br /> attention was paid to the requirement for a horizontal articulation which would <br /> decrease the imposing nature of the building, particularly in relationship to its <br /> differential in height to the block across Bradford Street. <br /> T. 29 (page 112) The DPP allows "contemporary architecture" in the development <br /> area and supports this decision on"community character workshops" which were <br /> held to reach this conclusion. One has to wonder why the specific property owners <br /> affected by the proposed development, all three historic structures on the block in <br /> question, were not asked their view of what would be appropriate architecture <br /> immediately adjacent to them. Without a referendum on this issue to the general <br /> publiq "workshops" hold no value in the eyes of the property owners in the block <br /> affected because very few people in these workshops would have any personal <br /> stake in the outcome of any architectural style choice in this area unless they <br /> happen to wark there or own affected property. <br /> U. 2.9.1 (page 114) As a result of whatever"communiYy" workshop were conducted, <br /> Victorian architecture was eliminated for the district in which the Development is <br /> 7 <br />