Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout220 E. OLIVE ST. - MODIFICATIONS OF STANDARDS - 27-07 - CORRESPONDENCE -Ted Shepard - Red Hot comments on Olin Street as discussed yesterday _ Page 2 6. One last question: Is there a way to add a horizontal element on the third story,say at top of window level, to break it down into proportions more similar to the lower stories, without compromising the design concept? Ted She p and -Red Hot comments on OIi—� —(eet as discussed yesterday 'page 1 From: "Anna Jones" <pumajones@ix.netcom.com> To: <slehman@fcgov.com>, <tshepard@fcgov.com> Date: 9/11/2007 2:02:47 PM Subject: Red Hot comments on Olive Street as discussed yesterday 1. Great project for downtown & city, hits on a number of goals. City Planning staff finds that redevelopment of this site as shown, without a parking lot, will enhance the neighborhood. The scope of the project appears necessary to support the cost of the existing building and underground structured parking. 2. Fits the purpose of the NCB zone in this particular location and circumstances, including the variety of buildings in the relevant context, and the existing development on the site, which already exceeds lot coverage standards in the zone. 3. Staff supports this modification request, with a couple of questions for the applicant, as follows. 4. LOT COVERAGE MODIFICATIONS: In addition to the modifications requested, a modification to 4.9(D)(1) also appears necessary. This lot area/floor area standard can be lumped together with the other modifications related to lot coverage. Staff supports these modifications on the grounds that the plan will serve the standards as well or better than a building complying with the standards by offering an interesting, highly articulated building with creative design solutions for outdoor spaces and mitigation of building mass. This support is based on the presumption that necessary utilities can be fitted into the plan. QUESTION: Exhibits 3 and 5 show small landscape panels between the sidewalk and the building/porches. Other exhibits suggest otherwise or are unclear. Having these panels would be consistent with the zoning and the Downtown Strategic Plan. Are they/can they be part of the project? 5. HEIGHT MODIFICATION: City Planning staff finds that the height is adequately mitigated by the building design. Design establishes a strong 2-story presence; the third story establishes a less -prominent 3-story presence, and the partial fourth story is then almost fully mitigated by mass reduction (terracing back). Staff finds this modification to be as good or better than a 3-story building due to the variation and mass mitigation; and inconsequential due to nearby buildings in the relevant context. QUESTIONS: Do owners of abutting property to north have any objection? Could the fourth story be deleted from the northeast -most unit? That is the one location where it looks like the 4th story could possibly be overbearing. It would be good to see the building next door outlined on the east elevation, in order to answer this question.