|
• Least Successful Project Elements: Online survey responses regarding least successful
<br /> project elements are summarized to include:
<br /> Prominent garages facing street/PROW, reducing emphasis to pedestrian entries
<br /> 0 The size of private open space is compromised because of parking (consider
<br /> placing parking underneath residences to allow for larger outdoor spaces)
<br /> The building colors are not compatible with surroundings in some projects
<br /> Enhanced design treatment should be consistent on all facades, particularly
<br /> those visible from PROW (i.e., do not limit it to the front facade)
<br /> The visibility of utility equipment such as air conditioning units is undesirable
<br /> The common areas not inviting or usable in some projects
<br /> • Other Comments: Responses to the online survey also included other more general
<br /> comments:
<br /> Maximize outdoor living (e.g., consider garden plazas)
<br /> Streetscape and public views of projects are of most importance and should be
<br /> prioritized over internal site design
<br /> Review of best practices for higher density projects (in the 30-60 dwelling unit per
<br /> acre range) will be imperative as we proceed
<br /> Example Revisions to Housing DG
<br /> Based on feedback from today's meeting, as well as recommendations from the consultant
<br /> team and staff, the revised Housing DG will be brought forward for Planning Commission
<br /> review and discussion at a future meeting.
<br /> To help frame the range of revisions the Planning Commission is likely to see, two examples of
<br /> ways in which the existing subjective standards could be modified, related to some of the key
<br /> topics discussed in this report. The examples illustrate that, while in many cases it will be
<br /> possible and logical to translate subjective guidelines into objective standards, in others,
<br /> continuing to frame items as guidelines, to allow for necessary flexibility or accommodate a
<br /> range of site conditions, will continue to make sense.
<br /> Example 1, Building Design (Translate Guideline into Standard)
<br /> Existing Housing DG:
<br /> C l.a. Entries should be the predominant feature of front facades, and should have a
<br /> scale that is in proportion to the size of the building and number of units being
<br /> accessed. Larger buildings should have a prominent, centralized building
<br /> entrance.
<br /> Potential Revisions:
<br /> Primary common entries shall front on Public Streets, Internal Streets, or Common Open Spaces.
<br /> • Common entries shall provide a door and an entry feature such as a porch. arcade, or
<br /> plaza
<br /> P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission
<br /> 8 of 10
<br />concepts identified by the Commissioners that have responded thus far:
<br /> The use of high-quality materials on some projects (e.g., Andares, use of brick at
<br /> Mason Flats)
<br /> The density from the public right-of-way (PROW) appears less than actual
<br /> density of project, either because of good quality design or because the density
<br /> is "tiered" as is the case at the Vintage Apartments
<br /> ., Less prominent garages (e.g., Vintage Apartments)
<br /> • Quality architecture and streetscape on some projects
<br /> P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission
<br /> 7 of 10
<br /> a
<br /> traditional façade pattern.
<br /> P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission
<br /> 6 of 10
<br /> P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission
<br /> 5of10
<br /> streamlining.
<br /> P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission
<br /> 4 of 10
<br /> 4 of 10
<br />e +� .�,� - `
<br /> Cio < °' cit 1 �,. t- ; t+ $.
<br /> 4000
<br /> park
<br /> t.
<br /> rr v m. ♦ k..a 'AY 4b 0f ; .t Zn 47R
<br /> w, 1� �s ,,,c,,,< 7?,T`➢ �' bs, is gds [^V I' J .7.no -
<br /> ..,e,iv+ y,-' >.io/ "� -.!4 �� •y rr `\-\ G, air L Jbz
<br /> '`i �! '� r !I '• \\`''' b'� t'i
<br /> �s < • 7 , ` P v gFtw� ' 4' `o, a • / ' iP °4. xov `yahj)ll
<br /> rErA'S-A4,7„..'r ® >3[RNAI ,(. qLlib �, A 5�,j
<br /> , c�I_I� BERN aL.
<br /> Ora a
<br /> 1:5.672
<br /> 0 0.05 0.1 „i P20-0987, Wells, CUP, 706 Main St
<br /> Planning Division _ a_, ,
<br /> , January 4,2021 I>r.
<br /> LE +j S. N
<br /> 0 355 710 Feet
<br />
|