My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
75B - 2775 N. MAIN ST.
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2005
>
02/07/2005
>
75B - 2775 N. MAIN ST.
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 4:59:09 PM
Creation date
2/2/2005 1:29:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Item #
75B
Date
2/7/2005
Destruction Year
2010
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.
/
408
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />EIR No. 2004-01; ZOA No. 2004-06; <br />DA No. 2004-04; CUP No. 2004-28; <br />VTTM No. 2004-06; and SPR No. 2004-05 <br />December 13, 2004 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Page 13, Item 7. a. Plaza and Fountain Design. Clarify the <br />number of pedestrian level water features. The SD has been <br />revised to require six water features for the retail area and <br />seven water features for the residential area. <br /> <br />Page 14, e. Clarify decorative paving treatments. Staff has <br />conferred with John Kaliski, the city's consulting urban <br />designer who concurred that the use of stamped decorative <br />asphalt at drive approaches and intersections is an <br />appropriate material to denote a sense of arrival to the <br />project and to clarify pedestrian linkages. <br /> <br />Page 17, Item 1. c. Clarify setbacks along Memory Lane. The <br />applicant has clarified that while areas of the building may <br />be at a minimum distance from the right-of-way, the entry <br />doors will be setback a greater distance. Further, there will <br />be a transition from the public space to semi-private space to <br />the front door of each unit. The narrow setback condition <br />along a segment of Building E will utilize appropriate <br />landscape and architectural treatments to address potential <br />graffiti and aesthetic concerns. The applicant has provided a <br />setback plan wi thin the architectural booklet dated December <br />6, 2004 (Exhibit 13). <br /> <br />Page 18, Items 2 and 3. Aggregate open space. This item from <br />the original SD is recommended to be removed because it added <br />confusion by implying that unbuilt areas of the site should be <br />constructed as open space. The staff report has been revised <br />accordingly. <br /> <br />Page 19, Item F. 5. Expand prohibition limited <br />recreational vehicles. Language is recommended to <br />to read boats, recreational vehicles, trailers, <br />storage area prohibited on-site. <br /> <br />to parking <br />be revised <br />or similar <br /> <br />Pages 44-48. Clarify whether signage requirements apply to <br />the lofts? Yes, they do. The provisions outlined within the <br />signage section require the submittal of a sign program. The <br />signage section as outlined will allow flexibility in the sign <br />program. Although it is not envisioned that all loft units <br />will utilize fully-public commercial spaces, those that do <br />will be allowed business name recognition. <br /> <br />758-7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.