Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV139926 Mar 22 99 02: 32p Community Development 520 742 1022 p- 1 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY A,°FLTCATION FOR DEVELOP NE NT REVIEW PROJECT ARc:-ITECTURr. • DJ~TE: , 2- , l OV CASE NO. : Q\fl599- (office use only) PROJECT:: 4 l Cam► r1 ec 1-k w °L O C E S /.%Q D Ver I OW, LOCATION: 1 dCI CD O -rA L L A Kt? K..Pt CS. PL i CANT: O . _ 1 i t s ADDRESS : 1 a"1 <o O S-� LL A t t> rL.MCc. T_T."'nHON: iiC . : r .?3D \ PROPERTY OWNER: DR �I4 CA LO 1 AL.(Z,1 S ADDRESS : I 0 C.1 Co O ST ALLY Rn fPC NO. : 5 - 8y 3 PROJECT ARCH+TECj' ENC-_tiEE N\1 �-- t) S �t`J. -- \11 •1-CE.1.1-T CALJ'NCJ ,DDRESS : 1Ck 1k. Qv L+ikwt • DEVELOPMENT REV L-W =OP. DATE: . akSIGNATURE: DATE : 22 ` +OT E: This application must be ace-mma n i ed by the required $1 50 . C C and twelve comi es of D l e s, 1 1 " x 17" in size, each to ___c____ dimensioned elevations of all ci..-n2c .ur es f om all four sites and a c of the oroj ect ' s site Dla n. The submittal must also inc_' de a prc_c_ color oa ecte for the project in an 8 . 5" x Z" format, to include c chips of body and trim col ors and tile e color and style, if applica e . Building square footage is also recu red. AT THE MEETING, aool , cants must have on hand for presentation, colored perspective or rendered elevations of all four sides of t e sty' .ictures . SUBMITTALS MUST BE RECEIVED 3v THE DZ NN T NG DEPARTMENT AT LEAST S CALENDAR DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ECARD HEARING DATE. 4 . MINUTES OF THE ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING Tuesday April 13th, 1999 CALL TO ORDER: 6:07 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present Patti Jo Lewis, Chair Mary Glueck,Vice Chair Richard Underwood, Member Jim Vogelsberg,Member Verlin Smith,Member Absent: Nancy Mager,Member Others Present: Valerie Feuer, Senior Planner Paul Nzomo,Engineer Shirley Gay, Clerk MOTION: MOVED, Seconded (Underwood/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to approve the March 9th and March 16t" 1999, Development Review Board Meeting as written. CONSENT AGENDA A. OV13-99-24 Custom Home, C&C Construction,Desert Vista,Lot 107 B. OV13-98-59 Horton Homes,Rancho Vistoso 7F, Model 1602 C. OV13-99-29 Miller Custom Home,Rancho Vistoso 11 H&N, Lot 63 D. OV13-99-30 Pennell Custom Home, Ironwood Canyon,Lot 18 E. OV13-99-31 Garcia Custom Home, Fairway Village,Lot 56 F. OV13-99-26 Sigma Technologies Expansion Architecture G. OV13-97-49 Oro Valley Retail Center Architecture Revision H. OV13-97-40 Rancho Vistoso Ambulatory Center Architecture Revision I. OV12-98-19 CDO Riverfront Park Landscape Plan Addendum (This item withdrawn) J. OV12-93-13 Canada Verde Apts (AKA OV Golf Villas) Garage Architecture Valerie Feuer commented that item I had been pull and will be on the next DRB agenda. Mary Glueck has a question on item B regarding the window on elevation A, B, and C in the 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 2 front. There needs to be an arch or some architecture detail to match the style of other Horton homes. Perhaps a condition could be added to add those features. MOTION: Moved,seconded (Underwood/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote to recommend approval of Consent Agenda items A, C thru H and item J subject to staff conditions. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Glueck) and carried by a 5-0 to recommend approval of Consent item B subject to staff conditions and stipulating on elevations A, B, and C add architectural detail to front window. REGULAR AGENDA PREVIEW: OV13-99-25 THE INN AT VISTOSO ARCHITECTURE The applicant had asked this item be withdrawn and expects to submit the architecture for approval at the May 11 th DRB meeting.. OV13-99-22 THE BOULDERS AT LA RESERVE REQUEST TO REMOVE CHIMNEY CAPS (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 9TH, 1999 MEETING) Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. She reminded the Board the applicant is requesting that the DRB allow the chimney caps to be removed entirely, exposing the spark arrestor. The DRB members took a site tour to the property to determine if the chimney caps needed to be removed. Staff did not have a problem with the chimney caps being removed however;they would support the DRB with the decision they made. Member Vogelsberg commented that the caps did not add any architectural flavor to the building and he felt they could be removed. He explained that the Town needed to find an approved detail plan for future purposes. Member Smith supported the caps and felt they needed to be on, he thought they looked good he commented the Town needed to have a plan approved for future projects. Chair Lewis agreed with Member Smith, she felt the caps needed to stay on. Member Glueck stated that the old caps need to come off and an better-engineered cap needs to go on. Member Underwood was in agreement that the caps need to stay on. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend denial of OV13-99-22 The Boulders at La Reserve to remove chimney caps. OV13-99-28 CASAS ADOBES BAPTIST CHURCH PORTABLE RELOCATION Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The applicant proposes to relocate six portables that are illustrated on the amended development plan. The portables will be moved from the Church's current location at Ina/La Cholla. The site plan gives the specific locations of 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 3 the portables. There will be an 8' wide sidewalk between Building I, J,N, and 0,which will be finished to match all other sidewalks in this development. In relation to the overall site, the portables do not detract from the aesthetics of the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval of the architecture for the Casas Adobes Baptist Church Portable Relocation, with the condition that the windows along all elevations be either recessed or popped out. Jay Hanson, The Hanson Group,was present for any questions the DRB may have. He provided a colored visual of the site and where the portables would be located. He briefly explained there would be mini courts between the buildings and how the colors would tie into the existing school. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV13-99-28 Casas Adobes Baptist Church portable relocation subject to staff condition all windows along all elevations be either recessed or popped out. Note for record: Applicant for item 2 joined meeting approximately 6:30 p.m. The Chair allowed him to speak based on the Boards motion. Mr. Vanek, Construction Manager, Greystar Services commented he would remove the chimney caps because of the liability but would agree to putting on new chimney caps provided Oro Valley provide an engineered drawing detail and secondly he will commence with the caps when other residents in the area had chimney caps installed. Valerie Feuer commented Staff could not agree to those conditions but would talk with the Planning Administrator and the Building Administrator and then get back to Mr.Vanek. OV12-99-01 VILLAGES OF LA CANADA BLOCK A PRELIMINARY PLAT Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The proposed preliminary plat illustrates 80 single-family residential lots designed with a similar lot size as the adjacent existing Villages of La Canada. The proposed plat will be accessed from Congressional Way and consists of a 55' buffer area along the western boundary. The western boundary will include a Bufferyard D and part of the recreation area, which links to the main recreation area at the southwest corner of the proposed plat. A 16' maintenance easement is located along the northern boundary of the development. The 16' maintenance easement also runs along the eastern property boundary of this development. A 20' pedestrian access common area between lots 20 and 21 is implemented which will provide a linkage between the proposed residential development and future commercial development to the north. The property development standards for the proposed plat are as follows: the setbacks are front — 20', side — 5', and rear — 5'. The existing zoning is PAD High Density Residential with a conditional zoning of Medium Density Residential. The maximum permitted building height for this subdivision is 25' two (2) stories. Valerie Feuer commented that a condition needed to be added regarding the pedestrian pathway be designed in such a way to 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 4 provide privacy to homeowners. Paul Nzomo introduced the engineer's report into the record. Traffic impact analysis has not been submitted yet. But in accordance with the standard traffic trip generation rates, this proposed subdivision of 80 lots will generate 800 daily trips, compared to 1890 daily trips from currently zoned, and approved development plan, for a 270 unit apartment. Two access points will be constructed off Congressional Way, which will be connected with three internal proposed streets. This project site generally drains from north to south with onsite generated Stormwater runoff entering Congressional Way and the soil-cement to the east with both flows ultimately reaching the CDO Wash. This project is affected by 361-cfs from vacant land at north property line. This offsite runoff will be diverted into the soil-cement channel along the east property line through earthen channel. The earthen channel will be lined with a soil erosion blanket, covered with a thin layer of topsoil and hydroseed. The channel will be irrigated to ensure vegetative growth. The onsite-generated runoff will be collected by slotted drain at three onsite locations and conveyed into the soil-cement channel. Only 37cfs will be discharged into Congressional Way, which is a better situation than pre-developed condition. A grading waiver was approved in 1994 by DRB with the following conditions: 1. All cut slopes shall be benched every eight- (8) feet,providing a three-(3) feet bench. 2. Add a note to the general note stating that the proposed earthen channel will be irrigated to ensure vegetative growth and shall be maintained by the HOA. 3. All cut slopes shall be undulating to match the natural terrain. 4. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1, nor shall slopes require jute mat, grouted riprap, or mechanical means to hold slopes in place. Mr.Nzomo stated that the grading waiver is still valid. Charlie Hulsey, WLB Group representing the applicant commented he had no problems with staff conditions and was available for questions. Member Smith asked about the common area, what kind of path would be provided? Mr. Hulsey commented it would be DG and the path would allow access to the future shopping center on the corner. Member Underwood asked about the water runoff at the entrance of the Villages, he felt water seems to collect at that entrance and he wanted to know how the drainage would be handled. Mr. Hulsey pointed out on the site plan how the water would be channeled and how that should help that particular area. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Glueck/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV12-99-01 Villages of La Canada Block A Preliminary Plant subject to staff conditions. PLANNING AND ZONING CONDITIONS: 1. An addendum for the traffic impact analysis report is required. 2. All existing or proposed easements that affect or benefit this property shall be shown on the plat. 3. All utilities lying outside of the road right-of-way shall be placed in utility and maintenance easements. 4. Any offsite sewer easements benefiting this property shall be executed and recorded 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 5 prior to recordation of the final plat. 5. All existing R.O.W.(s)IEasement(s) adjacent to the site shall be labeled. The dimensions and recording information shall be specified. 6. All R.O.W and easements to be dedicated for this project shall be clearly identified on the preliminary plat. 7. All offsite grading and construction of drainage channel shall require a written permission from the adjacent property owner. 8. The applicant's engineer shall ensure that vertical and horizontal street design meets the Town of Oro Valley Subdivision Street Standards. 9. Two copies of lot boundary closures calculations are required. 10. The applicant's engineer shall ensure all boundary survey bearings and distances shown on the plan are consistent with the title report. 11. At least two ties with survey data to section or quarter corners shall be provided on the plat. 12. Cross section A-A shall be revised to reflect 361-cfs offsite runoff as shown in the drainage exhibit. 13. Recheck and correct the drainage area for concentration point 3E on the drainage tables. 14. A revised drainage report is required,which shall address all drainage conditions. 15. Preliminary plat, grading plan and drainage exhibit shall be consistent with drainage report. 16. Page 11 of drainage report shall be revised to reflect 361 cfs entering the site and a total of 37-cfs only being conveyed into congressional Way. 17. Call out handicap ramps at all streets intersection. 18. The 35-cfs conveyed through 30" SRP pipe in to Congressional Way shall be discharged within Common area A with an energy dissipater at the outlet, and allowed to sheet flow into Congressional way as in pre-developed condition. No concentration of flows is allowed. 19. Call out drainage easement between lots 32 and 33. 20. The grades for the street profile shall be adjacent to meet 14% driveway slope as per zoning code. 21. Label all manholes and catch basins on the plat and grading plan. 22. Call out sizes of all storm drain on the drainage exhibit. 23. The length of storm drainpipe called out in the drainage report does not match those shown on the plat, correct where necessary. 24. Call out size and length for the storm drainpipe at concentration point 2.3. 25. Indicate the type of lot drainage for each lot on the plat. 26. The lot drainage shown on the plat does not match drainage exhibit, revise accordingly. Call out 10' maintenance access easement for the proposed drainage earthen channel. Illustrate on the plat how the access will be connected to the main streets. 27. Common Area "C" in general note 1 shall be changed to "Recreation Area." 28. General Note 2 shall state the Conditional Zoning as Medium Density Residential. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 6 29. General Note 12 shall be changed to 25' two (2) stories as the maximum building height. 30. General Note 13 shall be amended to state; "Typical lot size is 7,085 square feet. 31. Pedestrian access is designed in such a way to provide privacy to adjacent homeowners. OV13-99-27 KAUFMAN & BROAD ARCHITECTURE, THREE MODELS,VILLAGES OF LA CANADA,BLOCK A Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The three models proposed are plans 1579, 2045, and 2166, which are all single-story homes. All three models are designed in the Santa Barbara Mission style architecture with the differences being in front façades and size. Plan 1579 has seven (7) different elevations. The difference in each elevation is the front façade. Architectural elements include a wainscot trim along the front elevation, window popouts along all elevations, gable vents, popout trim along the garage, and tile roofs. This model is well within the maximum height requirement of 25'. The optional fireplaces show an approved Oro Valley chimney cap. The three models proposed are plans 1579, 2045, and 2166, which are all single-story homes. All three models are designed in the Santa Barbara Mission style architecture with the differences being in front façades and size. Plan 1579 has seven (7) different elevations. The difference in each elevation is the front façade. Architectural elements include a wainscot trim along the front elevation, window popouts along all elevations, gable vents, popout trim along the garage, and tile roofs. This model is well within the maximum height requirement of 25'. The optional fireplaces show an approved Oro Valley chimney cap. Models 2045 and 2166 have similar architectural elements, but are larger pads. Each has five (5) other elevations, which are similar with the exception of the front façade. The models shall illustrate wainscot trims along the additional elevations. Charles Hulsey, WLB Group, representing the applicant commented he had no problems with staff conditions. He did ask staff could the wainscoting be dropped once they are past the rear yard fence. Valerie Feuer replied yes. Chair Lewis asked Mr. Hulsey had he met with the homeowners to work out any problems that may arise. Mr.Hulsey replied yes. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV13-99-27 Kaufman & Broad Architecture, Three Models Villages of La Canada,Black A,subject to staff conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. The color scheme must be consistent with the colors of the existing homes in the Villages of La Canada. 2. Ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be enclosed by a wall to provide visual screening and noise mitigation, and shall respect all setbacks. 3. A wainscot trim where visible shall be provided along the side elevations of each model to ensure coherent design and treatment on all four sided. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 7 OV12-99-5 ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL ADDITION DEVELOPMENT PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The Town of Oro Valley proposes to develop a Town Hall Addition on-site. The Town Hall Addition is comprised of the construction of a 9,650 square foot building, additional parking, and landscaping. The new building will contain a public meeting hall, several conference rooms, and will house the offices for the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The building itself will be constructed adjacent to the Magistrate Court and the existing Community Development Building. An additional 100 parking spaces will be added to the Town Hall complex. Ten Class I bicycle lockers are to be added, which will allow for secure storage of bicycles for employees who commute to work via that mode. All aspects of the development plan are in conformance with the El Conquistador PAD. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Development Plan for the Oro Valley Town hall Addition. Paul Nzomo introduced the engineer's report into the record. Main access to this proposed addition will be through existing driveway off La Canada Drive. Additionally the site will be served by a future proposed right in/out driveway off La Canada drive,just north of the Police station. The proposed addition will generate insignificant traffic. This project site generally drains from north to south. The site is not impacted by any off site runoff. The commercial use of the parcel will require 5-year threshold retention to be provided. That is the volumetric difference of the pre and post 5-year developed flows. The pond shall discharge the 2-year pre-developed flows to help maintain downstream riparian vegetation. This site is not designated as being in a Balanced or Critical basin according to Pima County's current map Dated 2-17-87; hence no detention is required. However, detention basin will be provided to maintain post-developed runoff to its pre-developed conditions. This detention/ retention basin will serve as a Master basin for proposed addition and any future expansion. Grading will be limited to the location of the new building, parking lot and detention/retention basin. The preliminary grading plans for the proposed addition meets the requirement of chapter 15 of the Zoning Code. Dino Sakellar, Sakellar Associates, representing the Town was present for questions. Member Smith commented would this driveway be compatible for the future library. Mr. Sakellar replied we feel we have a traffic plan adequate for this particular project. Member Glueck commented that the Town needs a master plan for future Town projects. She felt the Town needed to be looking ahead. Valerie Feuer suggested that DRB might want to add that as a condition if they so desired. Valerie commented this project needed to move ahead as staff is cramped for space. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Vogelsberg/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV12-99-5 Oro Valley Town Hall Addition Development Plan subject to staff conditions and stipulating the Town works on providing a master plan and traffic study for future projects at this site. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 8 OV12-99-5 ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL ADDITION LANDSCAPE PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The landscape plan presented is in compliance with the requirements of the OVZCR. The landscaping for this project is focused on the landscape planters in the parking areas and the area immediately around the new structure to be constructed. The plan calls for the use of a variety of southwestern vegetation, including palo verde,mesquite, acacia, ocotillo, red sage, and prickly pear. As the proposed addition is a 25% or greater expansion of an existing facility, the Town is required to bring the current parking lot in compliance with the OVZCR. Several landscape planters will be added to the existing parking areas, as well as the new parking areas, and will feature mesquites, palo verdes, and fairy dusters. Additional vegetation will also be placed around the new building. Moreover, Staff has also requested that additional vegetation be placed between one of the new parking areas and the retention basin to provide additional screening of the drainage structure. The landscape plan submitted by the applicant is in general compliance with the Town of Oro Valley General Plan. The plan presented by the applicant is in conformance with Policy 9.1H, "mitigate negative visual impacts of buildings and parking lots...add aesthetic charm, interest, and character." Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed Landscape Plan for the Oro Valley Town Hall Addition. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV12-99-5 Oro Valley Town Hall Addition Landscape Plan subject to staff conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. Additional vegetation shall be added to screen the drainage basin from the new parking lot on the south side of the site 2. The Class I bicycle locker area shall be identified on the landscape plan. A minimum 6' clearance shall be maintained between the lockers and all vegetation. 3. Add plant type "LF" to the Landscape Schedule on Sheet#2. 4. The signature and seal of the registered landscape architect preparing the plans shall be placed on all sheets. STAFF REPORT Valerie Feuer briefly discussed the issue of building additions that come before the DRB. The Planning and Zoning Administrator interpreted that staff could make those decisions rather than the Board. Member Glueck commented she would like to see the plans that are front or side additions. Valerie reminded the Board of the upcoming Native Plant Salvage Ordnance Workshop on the 20th of April. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 9 MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Underwood) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to adjourn the March 16th, 1999 Development Review Board Meeting at 7:30 p.m Shirley Gay DRB Clerk ITEM F ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: April 13, 1999 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FROM: Dennis Silva, Jr., Planner I SUBJECT: OV13-99-26, SIGMA TECHNOLOGIES EXPANSION, ARCHITECTURE BACKGROUND: VVC Design, representing Sigma Technologies, request DRB architectural approval of an expansion to an existing development. The existing development is 5.08 acres, with a 40,000 square foot building envelope, located on Lot 1 of the Foothills Business Park. The proposed expansion consists of an additional 5,000 square feet, on the northeast corner of the existing building. The subject property is abutted on the north by Oracle Road, to the south by Lot 2, to the east by Allied Signal, and west by N. Stallard Place and Lot 12. The zoning for this project is Campus Park Industrial (CPI) in the La Reserve PAD and the existing use is industrial. SUMMARY: The proposed architecture is a single-story, flat roofed structure. Architectural elements include windows and planters along the south and east elevations, scuppers along the north elevation, and framed stucco along the rooflines. The proposed color of the expansion will match the existing color scheme. The flood light fixtures along the north elevation will match the existing lighting fixtures. The proposed architecture is designed to match the existing architecture. Almost the entire south elevation is made up of windows, which will provide excellent views to Pusch Ridge. GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE: The Sigma Technologies expansion architecture complies with Policy 9.1F ensuring that all sides of the building are coherently designed and treated. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed architecture for the Sigma Technologies expansion, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit"A". Attachments: 1. Exhibit"A" 2. Reduction of Proposed Architecture F:\OV\OV 13\1999\13-99-26\ARCHDRB.RPT EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OV13-99-26 SIGMA TECHNOLOGIES EXPANSION ARCHITECTURE 1. Mechanical equipment, whether ground level or roof-mounted, shall be screened from public view and designed to be an integral part of the building. 2 . __A;(;) P-xt ►Ya N E r�x�ti# c.xt yf'G c� < TIl000r ©SSµ • 1 W j 1 v f''f- 71 ���' I -I - L TLF-C,1-INIC11pp��..� /�rJe�t '- _- :v - ii -r -_ r���Ft frJCIfdT1N� 1 • ,:i z • ` ER/ N • ''``s,---. r— : ,/, w .�. ` - I ._ �� .. . 1 t? • 1 -- r `-mow: _.,..,,.„ • , .. el_, 1 , ,,,„ --.. ,....... ,,,,..; k..(--v-----(,, \-. , <,-- ( . \,.. a_,:,....,:i._...:..,...-...,... :.® =1mi ___ l__ .—. ���r • IP. �i— — � =.— --�' —i.�3'' I V - it`ll' -4.T i - in 1 �T�, ��_a�� — Icc J-� _-. �► \\ MOr17 ', ssa.s iu r ...r�:� � --_-_-- 1 = .'q r - ���� 1 'L.,�_ " i SZi ��.i �� V C al •3r I r (awl x.14.na�-wsla B r-- \ I-1 -o v all ;yell vain p0+,t0.-71,ITEr.2 -r 11421-11 T�H >.x�iSTIrJG. L' wrLlu.T�_1-00OP i490•il Rs \-=yfdcco per-&tit] pi 5TE 1at.- IC.1FTaF ' mi I frAC v t,44, (Pb W MA-rcH e_xK THr�) aL,1,1M1Niit•!.WnNrw,4-,A+.lr7 a:v s - Lq2- `D-MATCH F.JCIS'rINCA pL�pVEIZSTG... SO-�— ELEVAT O\ EAS EEVAT ON SCALE I/8" = I'-O" SCALE I/8" = 1'-0" S-relza F 12oN r i c...LIU,II'sl f.L. -- _ • Fle•-TRI _FLA 14-6,--OJE12- 14A-TEF- WAVP:14011 i e. 1 - emitt- =MAU*rsxls-f1NI .MA1-444.C%>CI4TtWG+ it I, - -14A rr -MtM1:12o. E.f1o4`M1a vv.- ReAvW.ito M:1-1 sari _coATi o,/ p-FLur4+:_zriu Vial- . : :_ NOTES 0_ .kl init7OL4. ..'TAIL,; s. rl.:Ar J- e.12.--., WESTERN ONE KOTE STUCCO ON PAPER BACKED LATH ON 1/2" PLYWOOD ON MTL STUDS AT PARAPET.SEE ELEVATIONS ® ALUMINUM STOREFRONT DOOR AND FRAME,DOUBLEPANE WINDOWS TEMP.AS REQUIRED.CUSTOM COLOR. s SPLIT FACE CMU,TO MATCH EXISTING. Y ,_,„._ 1?z.= L NE E \ e E.J.TO MATCH EXISTING O SOFFIT 1 L' ` © PAINTED SCUPPERS AND DOWNSPOUTS. G-" r CTYr-s"XB"r-n� rour © METAL INSULATED DOOR N 0 PLANTER TO MATCH EXISTING 1 1 O PAINTED STUCCO OVER CMU WALL I MAZGI4 E),aP~ ��� ' 0 b W kV"X b"SHT METAL RAIN WATER DOWNSPOUT PRECAST CONC. --=_- ,, SPLASH AT BOTTOM.TYP. T ___ ._— . a ._ .,..w,,..,— ' OK SEE STRUCTURAL PLAN FOR CHU EXP.JOINTS .. • '; , �� re--, i) Gut �� l © GENERAL FLOOD LIGHT FIXTURES.MATCH EXISTING. • q_%' ! ✓ —pAII4r 4).111u 10, d J ti�W sit > ® LIGHT FIXTURE ABOVE DOOR ":� J \ORT ELEVAIO \I `4VVC DESIGIN SCALE I/8" = I'-O" ARCHITECT w:o w.cAssM W TUOSON AL wegsT-7040 RIOMA TECMWOLODIEB �� 10960 N. STALLARD PL. eir�V C- cA t 19 Y to of 44 • ' -‘ _ _ . -•ro, , - 7.,•,ravfiff(A ;--•r..,, *•.•• '•!.: '',.&-7' pyip;":k.---""sli. ..,..;:-,-.1-':-.‘"' '':, , ;• . ' . .-fti , ., tie 0 .., ,t,x, . 441, Ai,.4 4 ••••,,le, ., . • -. e Vi4.,Frtilr ' v ,#. , • ,.,, • -1, , J i, . , , • , ..,... ..... .„ .0' ,# •,, 4., A - .3, 1. ., - . •. ..•..,.r,„14=‘,....;. ,a.7,-,'.-",..7* .7,:...1.:- .'...`', " .:,,`•-:',' 's:;'-'''':,f :x.# •-,p ii•t.'.. --..t. s ' ••,:•.••4 ,-, ' g**-",IA"'- -k•. ''',' es), .. • 44.5 ,;,,,44.2::,,,e. ., r 4. .„at,r. ,....1., rvA-;-.-ci-,-,i. _, . ,-, ;,-- -... . ,. .,,,,_,,sir.,,,,l,„..).4-.„.,!t„,;:„..,-- - ,....,.......;:,,,,-1,:::,—':g. .t!f.,.... , •,..:.. '••, .0.•, .•, ' .— . ' -..Yr.: ' .0 • ,. ''. '• •' ' ' • , • • ', ••• •, ,El' ,' ..""C.?,1' , • '• •''—• ' • '''•tj,...1',.'•1 tl,t 1 ''...!.:r.f...4t„•• 4i. •'04•0:k‘,..b 4,„? , ._,L ! ...-4,04 t. - Ate,..,,,f',*.L• .ir, .c.N.fil:e.. ..,,... . ,.. ,.. ,-. . . ,,..., ., ., . . .,e,e:'',,re Itokiv '4' , '4. il .,. '. , ,: .:' .., ... • , • -../ • At . • •• „ . 4 :,i41°.,4 :ti-.I, ''''4TFI'''iisi""4.!''-••.'-• " . , . . ALLIED SIGNAL : • "- --. ...-: '''..:''''''1(1.-3;'..-44'1'..-,-‘;4' "4 .:,1:;':j1:tiii.417 .- ,,V., -.. iy-, , , *''4'' • • ' ' - ' . - • ' - . - . - •— .--,-.44p.;• . • ,..0.*4;„4,,1. .4, -4. ,,vi- .,...1.. 4,. „ 4,4, t . . 4,o„,,,,.A vailikirpl..4.,...:‘,::,••- ‘.• ..•,< .• ,-.. ,. .. .. • , • .. , ' ° ' - ' ' '"ik.,..,'fl'1;)•44.). ' .. ISArid ••• .• ..T4-.'.•--4-1,.1.. , ..---•.. 7 114,> • ." .e'P'r-4,:s'N..'-'4: '•'''... ' ;.". '.•:•.' . •• - --.' , ' ' ' ,'• - • • . • . • ., , . ,... , , •._ , - - ' • • ' •,,,:"''.tli: it,,,t,fr ' ',NI 4 tt •,-•.‘„.• .•- . 4.,' ' -.. f.,11H•i''1.1.,:-..s?.47.1.. ' 1 • . —- ''' ' .. ' ,,,,..‘ ,.. '. -.., ' '1'. :„: i ...''''r,,) ,. :',.., .1 • ..' , :....,. ' •55555 , .1 , ' r •, •• r • ''•''.' 1.....A. t V r , ,' , ' •• ‘s'. ; ,,',:,?.,•r•,„c4-'',.. 4,...,A, ,*,-- 144—, - , .. ,- .- ., . • . ... . , ., , .. :-.1,-',.1,.,.',1,,s'-',,P001.-4 . ,. 0 it,:. ?' .'-.- ....t.w. . . ••,-,.., • -,,. •• . ,. •,, •• • „ ..,. . . • . . ., , . . -. .-• ,-.,,, .1 J.,--,- , ,i,1044- ''.i.- • )10:0 a .• ..,- ' • ' .' . 4;' l'''' *''-',' '-' ' - ' - ' ' . . . . i' , , ',,-„'N,-,",•. , ,- . ' , • . • . „ , . , . . ,.• #'1.,` , . , 101 UT I L ITYEASEMENT t . .. , • -, ,,,„i.::.,• ; '1.'"-, ,"-. • • • . . . , . • .. .— - •• - , • N 35 33' '3S' LI) 642 ' . , ' : ., ,:,:- •. ; . . . ....._ ....... 1,..;,.... ........ ......... ........ _"...Pr.& ••••..... '........ .•. ' -a-- ---1 . . ....... ..... i •••=1111 81111.00 AMMO. MM. ......... ........... ......... ........• ......a. moms. .m.4,AMNIA AAA... ........., . . I • Am. - • ••••+ ``..... `a...a. ...... ..... t ‘_ , • , . . . , EXISTING . 1 l ;) • . , _ . 4 , , , .„ ., . T1RASH 1 CLASS.I BICYCLE SPACES 1 • _ ' ' '' COLLECTION PROVIDED INSIDE 20 (::!;) . . . . , - . • • 1-11 EXISTING , TWO (2) CLA66 11 B1CYCIE SPACES • • • . • LOADING • EN W ADDITION , 5000 SF. , AREA Ft41-614 FLOoR HATCH EXI6 I. *TM WE - zi • -.• i• \III ., • : , ,. • ,..... _______ I 1 11101.11111:4 ao. REr1OVE EXISTING,',FLANTER . . - - . , ..... _ .• .....-- • ' '211 -161' ‘ . .._ .......... ......... ....• . . • % a • isi .... ... %Ilk It ..... . • o CPI. . , , 1 • Ai , • • 2` • ,, . - . . . , . , . . . . - ... i.kE1<1—ll14l1),_11 , EXISTING BUILDI G 1%0‘ 0• IFII .., ...\. . • 2 1 . .... • 4 ()000 S,F % Age v • . . CPI i111,, . , d) \ \ ..... ...._--- • . 5 4111 d) \ .......-------- (Th v. --- ..- It\ 11 = u_i , ...._ -N\ G a ,_....._ ci , \ _ , . ,...,,,,,, .....c) (.._...) \ i 1 ,..., ........------ ..... I4CS EXISTING PARKING i I , ..,---- -Kt- 0 ‘_-....., 1 I L..c.) z _ \ , i 1 I 1 I 1 IMMO. AMA= MM.. alma.. MOMS •••••• AMMO ... ....... .-4.-- — N 35 33' 39.,1 LU .„ . g 35 33' 39'' LIJ 11, .• .......... a . .• CPI PUBLIC SEWER I-% -206, 8' - 10' UTILITY EI ASEMENT • , „ I', .,, . .......... . ....... ,,