PC 090915 - Laserfiche WebLink

She indicated that she was contacted by neighbors to the rear and requested the website where they can review the plans. Commissioner Piper inquired if all three options are on the website. Ms. Hagen replied that all three options were attached to the staff report on the City's website. Commissioner Ritter inquired if the story poles are in Option 1. Ms. Hagen replied that they are only for Option 1 and Option 2. Commissioner O'Connor inquired why the notice card would not indicated that the plans are available for review on the website. Ms. Hagen replied that the website address is included on the notice card, as well; the notice states that the staff report will be available on the City's website, and it gives the website link. Commissioner Nagler stated that sometimes the challenge of the question does not have much to do with the size or scope or mass of the project. He indicated that what makes this interesting is that one of the elements of the Downtown Specific Plan is an intent to preserve existing views, although the other elements of the Downtown Specific Plan call for maintenance of a certain kind of architecture, maintenance of street views, and an attempt to not substantially alter the look of the Downtown area by virtue of new buildings. He added that it seems to him that there is no perfect answer, and it is a question of relativity amongst the things the Commission is being asked to consider as far as the Downtown Plan. Commissioner Nagler stated that it would be to the neighbor to have that view line obstructed: the view that is available is limited, it will always be limited, and it has the potential over time to become more obscured. He indicated that if that is the case, then the Commission also ought to have at least as much care about the architecture and the massing of the buildings and the maintenance of the look of the neighborhood. He stated that he actually thinks that a three -story building would be a tough thing for that neighborhood to aesthetically swallow. He noted that he does not have a vote tonight, but if he did, he would be supporting Option 1 on balance. Chair Allen stated that this is a tough one for her as well and that she feels somewhat the same way as Commissioner Nagler when she came in. She indicated that it is a balancing act between preserving the view versus the Downtown guidelines in a small, tight neighborhood. She noted that she is also thinking about precedent- setting because there will be more buildings in this neighborhood, and she is concerned about creating a three -story building as well as a building that has three units versus two just because the guidelines are trying to go toward creating a neighborhood that is more consistent architecturally and that limits the massing. She stated that for that reason, she is not excited about Option 3 because the architecture is not as consistent and is more massing; and Option 2 does not totally help the view and does not protect the neighbors' views as they would like it to be: the view is somewhat limited today and will PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 9, 2015 Page 10 of 17