Damage or destroy any of the distinguishing original qualities or character of the building. The integrity of the distinctive stylistic features are examples of craft man shift have to be preserved. Additionally if distinctive architectural features cannot be repaired, then they have to be replaced in kind wherever possible. Contemporary designs and alteration are permitted however they can not destroy original features of the building and they have to be compatible in material, size and character of the building. There are few other requirements, but essentially it goes to distinctive features that have to be reattend. When you look at the compatibility of the conservation district, the general requirement is the scale and size of the buildings and the character defining features in the nominations ordinary that propose the district. Those are the standards that this body applies. This body is doing a de novo review of the underlying approving with deciding to uphold the appeal and ap
That have to be reattend. When you look at the compatibility of the conservation district, the general requirement is the scale and size of the buildings and the character defining features in the nominations ordinary that propose the district. Those are the standards that this body applies. This body is doing a de novo review of the underlying approving with deciding to uphold the appeal and approve the major permit to alter by a majority vote. Thank you, just to clarify in terms of economic studies and physical abilities study, how does this relate to this appeal. The way it relates is a little indirectly because the project would result in an unvoidable impact under ceqa. When you may have recalled the a pul for the eir that it would contribute to a manner to a cumulative impact to cause shadow on open space. Because of that, the hpc and now this body if it chooses to uphold the hpcs decision and deny the appeal would have to adopt ceqa finding. Those ceqa findings include statement
Questions. I have a couple of questions that i would like from the Planning Department. We asked if there are civil mitigation nebs to reduce the Significant Impact of the project. One of the issues at the heart of this is around financial fees ability. More than any Development Projects in front of us that two sides of this issue has brought out a war of competing experts with regards to financial fees ability. If i can ask the Planning Department, both sides, i think have presented fairly compelling cases as to why they ought to be viewed correctly. Im wondering how does the Planning Department think back and get two perspectives to get your own sense of things. You bring ib your own experts to assess this. If there are economic assumptions made and both have some basis in reality, handout you do you go about evaluating whether certain price makes sense if there are certain valuations given that they are both relying on different sense of data. Planning department staff. Its not up t
Your own experts to assess this. If there are economic assumptions made and both have some basis in reality, handout you do you go about evaluating whether certain price makes sense if there are certain valuations given that they are both relying on different sense of data. Planning department staff. Its not up to us. Its up to the decision makers. They have peer review. My understanding is that it provides substantial evidence for the decision makers. Then maybe my question is to redevelopment. We just received today some documents from the appellants challenging a lot of the economic assumptions that were laid out by the project sponsor. Im wondering if there is a response from redevelopment, john, the issues that were raised in this july 23rd letter around what they are disputing. Office of Community Investment and infrastructure. To that point as miss dwyer indicated, the success or agency acted in their prieptary capacity to setforth all the benefits as the project has proposed at
By two additions. The other one by charles more from the 1984 building by two additions. The other one by charles more from the late 1960s. Thank you, i also wanted to acknowledge that kma is here as well. They are the consultant for the success or agency. I want to let members of the board know also if they wanted to ask questions. There are three different analyze on the fiscal fees ability of this project. I just want to animal acknowledge that its very heart to predict that there is different ranges. I wanted to give the board an opportunity to ask questions if they like. Thank you colleagues. Any questions. I have a couple of questions that i would like from the Planning Department. We asked if there are civil mitigation nebs to reduce the Significant Impact of the project. One of the issues at the heart of this is around financial fees ability. More than any Development Projects in front of us that two sides of this issue has brought out a war of competing experts with regards to