Last night we received final approval for our project for the ARB. The vote was 2-1 in favor with our architect, Bill Araluce, abstaining (of course). One of the Board Members, Wade Nomura, who had previously been a supporter of our project, was not present for our presentation. The same ARB member, Gary McCarty, who opposed us in the previous meeting continued to oppose our project due to its ‘massing’ on the west side.

One potential problem, though. When we went to the Planning Commission (and previous ARB meetings), the plans called for 8 foot ceilings on the second floor. One of our original design specifications was for 9 foot ceilings on the second floor (or in the jargon, a 9 foot plate). Unbeknownst to me, the architect lowered the plate height from 9 feet to 8 feet in order to lower the overall building height to 27 1/2 feet. When I found out about the change, I explained to him that a 9 foot plate was a greatly desired feature. So he altered the plans when submitting to the city.

The new Community Development Director, Jackie Campbell, stated that she would be discussing with other staff members whether or not the additional 12 inches of building height (now 28 1/2 feet) warranted a return to the Planning Commission for our project. If so, I believe we would be scheduled for the September meeting. To my ears, she sounded like she was personally against the new height of the building. But it is very possible that my biases were reading into her words, that which was not there. It irritates me to no end that although the City’s Municipal Code calls out a 30
foot building height maximum for my zone (and all other zones, as far as I can
tell), that there is so much concern over the 28 1/2 foot height of our proposal.
If the maximum is 30 feet and the ARB has said that our design is acceptable, I don’t
see that any one can arbitrarily say that 28 1/2 feet is too high. So, I will await
the City’s decision on whether we will re-visit the Planning Commission. At
our previous meeting we had a unanimous approval, but as I recorded before, 3
of 4 expressed ‘concerns over the size’ of the project. So, it is up in the air. If
we do run into problems with the Planning Commission, my brother-in-law Ray
Chandler (the family attorney) has graciously offered to help out in any appeal. I hope it does not come to that.