Laserfiche WebLink
5. Project Design and Compatibility <br />Overall Concerns <br />The Panel discussed the project’s overall design <br />elements and agreed that the applicant provided <br />a narrative and accompanying graphics that <br />adequately demonstrate how the project <br />addresses the basic design principles, including: <br />•Scale, form, and quality of building; <br />•Mixture of project elements; <br />•Relationship to the street and <br />surrounding uses; and <br />•Parking and circulation. <br />The Panel concluded that based on the MUPTE <br />decision criteria, the project meets the “parking <br />and circulation” component. There were some <br />parking concerns and the ordinance does not give <br />the Panel the authority to evaluate parking <br />impacts. Several members expressed concerns <br />about the land use adjustment review process <br />that would reduce the minimum required parking <br />to the amount including in the MUPTE <br />application and its potential negative impacts <br />beyond the project site. <br />6. Historic and Existing Housing Sensitivity <br />Overall Concerns <br />The Panel agreed that the project does not <br />impact historic locales or existing housing. <br />None. <br />7. Project Need <br />Overall Concerns <br />Based on Johnson Economics’ analysis, the <br />majority (6 members) of the Panel concluded <br />that the 10-year exemption is needed for the <br />project. One member advocated for an 8-year <br />exemption, which could be amended should the <br />permanent loan have a 5% interest rate. One <br />member advocated for a 5-year exemption. One <br />member advocated for no exemption. <br />The Panel had a robust discussion about the <br />project need, including evaluation of the pro- <br />forma assumptions and the challenge of <br />evaluating variables that are hard to predict. <br />Overall recommendation to the City Manager: <br />Provide a ten-year MUPTE. <br />September 11, 2019, Work Session – Item 1