pages: PlanningBoard/2008-04-28.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-04-28 | 7 | Vice President Kohlstrand would like to go further, and facilitate the Board's input into the process. Board member McNamara suggested that the Board adhere to the letter of the law and determine whether it was consistent with the General Plan or not. Board member Cunningham agreed with Board member McNamara's suggestion. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft was comfortable voting because she had read the entire packet. She expressed concern about the $430,000 proposed expenditure of the clocktower at City Hall, and she believed that was somewhat out of priority. She could make the finding that the CIP was consistent with the General Plan. Board Member Cunningham moved to find that the CIP list for the Fiscal Year 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 was in conformance with the General Plan. Board member McNamara seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 4. Noes: 0 Absent: 0 Abstain: 2 (Cook, Kohlstrand). The motion passed. 9-A. PLN08-0155 - 2201 South Shore Center - Applicant - Harsch Investment Realty. Permit includes the renovation of Building 900 and site improvements in the area immediately adjacent to the building. Current review is limited to the architecture design and does not include the use or operational aspects of this building. Building 900 currently contains a single retail store (Mervyn's) and two smaller tenant spaces. A portion of the existing retail store will be converted into five smaller shops. The existing building height ranges from approximately 25 feet to 28 feet. After renovation, the typical building height would range from 25 feet to 29 feet with parapets over the entranceways extending up to a maximum height of 33.5 feet. Site improvements include extensive landscaping, new benches and bicycle parking facilities. (JB/DG). Mr. Biggs presented the staff report and displayed a PowerPoint presentation. Board member Cunningham noted that the staff report did not mention the PDA, and the ability to raise the height of the structure. He acknowledged that was not part of the approval. Mr. Biggs noted that the Planning Board will look at the PDA in the future, and if the second story was confined with the architecture of the building, it would be defined within the building permit process. The height could not be increased without a design review. Board member Cunningham noted that his comments had been addressed, and that he was happy with what he saw. Page 7 of 17 | PlanningBoard/2008-04-28.pdf |