PC 012611 - Laserfiche WebLink

counted towards private open space. He noted that it is only a matter of ownership and if it were called a public park, the parcel would be smaller and would not have to generate as many units to get the density. Commissioner Blank inquired if the Settlement Agreement would be affected by one or the other. Mr. Dolan replied that the Settlement Agreement does not address parks at all. He noted that staff was very sensitive to the fact that the initial consideration was for retail and the ability to carve out the property for retail, which would not count in the calculation for residential density. He added that this would be true for parks as well. He indicated that renegotiations ultimately resulted in the ability to tinker with the size of the lots. Commissioner Blank inquired about the minimum number of units at a certain income level. Mr. Dolan replied that 130 affordable units must be provided regardless of how many units are ultimately approved. Average Residential Density. At least one Task Force member expressed concern that some of the sites were more appropriate for some of these densities, and different sites have different levels of density. Anything is allowable on each site at this point, and that the issue is compatibility with the surrounding uses, primarily existing residential uses. One idea presented was a gradation of density, allowing a lower density on the sites closer to the residential and a higher density on Parcel 1. There were different opinions: some thought units-per-acre was an issue; others believed it was more an architectural or design issue because no matter what the density, one could build a building such that those right across the street are more in scale of what is across the street. The design experts indicated that the streets are wide enough and the distance far enough so that none of the densities would be that dramatically out-of-scale with what is across the street. The Task Force did not recommend gradation, and having different densities on different sites was not required. Language was added to address design and provide guidance with respect to compatibility with what is across the street. Retail development: how much and where. This was the most discussed issue. The requirement is for a total of 10,000 square feet, with at least 5,000 square feet at either of the corners of Owens Drive.As shown in the diagrams presented by Mr. Williams, the requirement is to construct buildings on the frontage of Owens Drive and a short portion of the frontage on Gibraltar Drive with high ceilings to be designated as Live/Work with the idea that over time, more retail could be accommodated. Some members thought that retail and Live/Work on Gibraltar Drive did not make sense, while others believed this was even more important than the retail on Owens Drive. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, January 26, 2011 Page 18 of 50