Laserfiche WebLink
**C ~If1 AC I+A \ICG\IT ^A~ C\IIIA~*Yr <br />**END OF CONSENT CALENDAR** <br />BUSINESS CALENDAR <br />D. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATION DISCLOSURE (REGARDING AGENDIZED <br />PROJECTS) <br />Commissioner Chinn met with Walter Cha regarding 320 West Fourth Street <br />' project. <br />E. DISCUSSION OF WEST-END LOFTS AT 320 WET FOURTH STREET <br />Associate Planner Hally Soboleske stated that the item was returned to the <br />Historic Resources Commission for a consensus of commissioner <br />recommendation(s) to proceed with the project. She mentioned that the <br />Development Agreement would be amended by the Redevelopment Agency and <br />City Council. Commissioner Chinn stated that the existing covenants run with <br />the land; City Council cannot change the establishgd CC&Rs with the vacant lot. <br />Mr. Trevino recapped the issues to be reviewegl by the Historic Resources <br />Commission (HRC). HRC does not discuss land u e issues, they are concerned <br />with the architecture, aesthetic value and legal ram~ication. <br />Commissioner Macres abstained from the discussian. <br />Chair Cook-Giles agreed to proceed with the project. <br />Commissioner Chinn stated that the CC&Rs should be in compliance with the <br />Secretary of Interior Standards. He commented that the size of the project was <br />not in compliance with the historic guidelines. He vpiced concern with the project <br />' within the historic setting, specifically the scale and visual effects from a large <br />glass box design. <br />Commissioner Schaeffer expressed concern with the scale of the project and <br />would support project as long as the first three levels blend with the existing <br />historic structure facades. <br />Commissioner O'Callaghan expressed concern with size, mass, and scale of the <br />project. <br />Commissioner Lutz commented on the existing Dievelopment Agreement. Mr. <br />Trevino discussed the fundamental differences with the development agreement <br />(DA) and the disposition and development agreement (DDA) and stated that the <br />agreements were irrelevant to the Historic Resources Commission. Mr. Lutz <br />indicated that the juxtaposition is good -historic viersus new; does not want to <br />create Disney effect. <br />Commissioner Corpin expressed concern that this project would ruin the historic <br />fabric of the area. <br />Commissioner Bustamante stated this project would enhance the area and <br />maintain the historic value. Agreed with juxtaposition comment, cannot have <br />historic without new. <br />Commissioner Seeley expressed concern with the infill situation, upholds historic <br />fabric, indicated old/new are well balanced. This project poses an opportunity to <br />make an architectural historic statement. <br />Commissioner Chinn stated that atwo-story structure would maintain the historic <br />theme whereas asix-story building was not feasible for that area. <br />Historic Resources Commission Minutes 2 December 7, 2006 <br />