Oh, I knew someone would ask that. This is one of the conditions in the staff report [PDF]:
Quote:
B. The areas indicated on Exhibits C.9 through C.11 shall not include back-of-house functions such as storage, mechanical, and shelving, and the glazing immediately adjacent to these areas shall remain clear and transparent.
|
Basically the city is trying to ensure that the glassy and transparent lower floors shown in the renderings actually look like that. The developers says that they don't have any intention of doing anything otherwise, but that it's too much of an encumbrance given that the Land Use Review needs to be recorded against the title of the property and that banks may be unwilling to finance the project if it has such a heavy restriction. The lawyer argued that the Design Commission doesn't have the power to regulate interior uses.
On a different but related note: the grocery tenant wanted to have wood cladding at the entry. (Design Commission made them change it to metal, out of concern that it wasn't coherent with the rest of the design). Can anyone think of a grocery chain whose brand standards include the use of wood at the entry...?