The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOV139899 Oro Valley 520 7 " 1022 P.02 Nov-18-98 05: 53P Town i TOWN OF ORO VALLEY APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW . PROJECT ARCHITECTURE 20 e 1 DATE: p�q • O V CASE NO_ : 0\1 13 q tg- l I • (office use only) • PROJECT: __IS:tti_O____67., 1--- in C-.., O e) LOCATION: ' APPLICANT: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO. : 2.40 1 2. - H . R. -- PROPERTY OWNER: v ENE NO. : ep ~ -�32 • ADDRESS: PROJECT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER. _ lL. k„.4E5ii:JelT_ _________________ PR ADDRESS : - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW H ING DATE: • 1 --V't W (61 FM DATE: IZa—g?2!/...--BIEL . Sr ATURE: _ N TE.: T - ana welve dimensioned of the projE color x�a ett • chips of bo< Building sq must haVe c elevations c SUBMITTALS CALENDAR Dt .. HEARING DAT y` - _• _, 1.11 : \' - _ ..'Y'.`+l4{ --- _mod l'A _..✓Y -g r M 1 _ w►- - MINUTES OF THE ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING Tuesday December 8, 1998 CALL TO ORDER: 6:10 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present Patti Jo Lewis, Chair Barry Allen, Member Mary Glueck,Member Richard Underwood,Member Nancy Mager,Member Jim Vogelsberg,Member Verlin Smith,Member Others Present: Valerie Feuer, Senior Planner Shirley Gay, Clerk Due to malfunction of sound system meeting was not recorded. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Mager) and carried by a 7-0 vote to approve the minutes of the November 10th, 1998 Development Review Board Meetings as written. CONSENT AGENDA A. OV13-98-98 ELWELL FRONT BEDROOM EXPANSION, 2161 E. AMARANTH, SUN CITY B. OV13-98-101 OSBORNE SIDE ADDITION, 13890 N. ENGLE HILL DRIVE, SUN CITY C. OV13-98-95 RANCHO VISTOSO N11 AF RECREATION CENTER ARCHITECTURE D. OV13-98-96 HAYMORE TWO STORY CUSTOM HOME, HONEY BEE CANYON ESTATES,LOT 20 E. OV13-98-97 NICKLES ROOM ADDITION,LA RESERVE,LA MIRADA,LOT 21 F. OV13-98-91 CUSTOM HOME,RANCHO VISTOSO,Nil,H&N, LOT 61 G. OV13-98-70 DOMINION HOMES,NARANJA RANCH,MODEL 2180 MOTION: Moved, seconded (Vogelsberg/Underwood) and carried by a 7-0 vote to 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 2 recommend approval of Consent Agenda Items A thru G and stipulating Item F setbacks be approved by Building Codes and Planning& Zoning. REGULAR AGENDA OV13-98-93 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES,RANCHO VISTOSO N10 K&L (SUNSET RIDGE,) MODEL 549, APPLICANT ASKED FOR CONTINUANCE . MOTION Moved, seconded and carried by a 7-0 vote to continue OV13-98-93 Richmond American Homes, Rancho Vistoso N10 K&L (Sunset Ridge,) Model 549 to January DRB Meeting. OV13-98-94 LANTANA CORPORATION,CASA VERBENA AT NARANJA RANCH Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. Naranja Ranch I was platted in 1992,with 169 single family lots zoned R-4. The average lot size is approximately 19,000 feet, with lots as small as 10,500 square feet and the largest, over 144, 000 square feet. The subdivision lies on the north side of Naranja Drive, between La Canada Drive and La Cholla. Lantana Corporation, Inc. requests DRB architectural approval for Models 1664, 1736, 2144, 2176, and 2476 for lots 86 to 116 in this subdivision. These lots are located north of Glover Road, west of La Tanya Drive, and on both sides of Via De La Verbenita. All five models are single story configurations and designed in the Southwest Contemporary architectural style. Major architectural elements include recessed windows, a two-car garage, and varying window sizes. This architectural style for Models 2144 and 2176 are compatible with the surrounding structures in the neighborhood. However, Models 1664, 1736, and 2176, are inconsistent with the structures in the surrounding neighborhood because of the metal rooftop element. Staff suggests that the metal roof material be replaced with Spanish roof tile,which is more consistent with homes in the surrounding neighborhood. Leo Murphy,Architect, representing applicant commented he had no problem with staff conditions. He indicated that the colors had been mislabeled,the accent and body were switched. Member Underwood asked what kind of metal. Mr. Murphy commented it is a corregated metal. Member Smith questioned if the Homeowners Association has any problems with using the metal rather than tile. Mr. Murphy replied no. Member Underwood asked would the metal chip or fade. Mr. Murphy commented it does fade but should not chip. Member Glueck suggested the metal rooftop element should be an option rather than standard, and should be painted the same color as the rooftop. Mr. Murphy agreed. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Glueck/Mager) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV13-98-94 Lantana Corporation Request for Architectural approval, Models 1664,1736,2144,2176, and 2476, subject to staff conditions and stipulating the rooftop metal element be an option. 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 3 PLANNING STAFF CONDTIONS 1. Spark arrestors shall be camouflaged with a cap, as approved by the DRB. 2. The metal rooftops for models 1664, 1736, and 2176 shall roof-tile-an option and the metal shall be painted the same color as the rooftop 3. The exterior accen♦colors shall be switched with the exterior body colors 4. 5. Ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be enclosed by a wall to provide visual screening and noise mitigation, and shall respect all setbacks. OV13-98-90 HOME DEPOT STORE AND GARDEN CENTER ARCHITECTURE Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. Greenberg-Farrow, representing the developers request DRB approval of an architectural submittal for a Home Depot Store and Garden Center. The proposed building will be part of the Rooney Ranch Parcel B Development Plan, reviewed by the DRB on November 10th, 1998. The proposed Home Depot store has a floor area of 105,580 square feet, with a 24,000 square foot Garden Center immediately adjacent. The architecture presented for this project possesses several Contemporary Southwestern accents, and is similar to that approved for the Oro Valley Retail Center. A large 'porte-cochere'is also located on the front of the building, allowing for a covered 'drive up'pickup area for lumber and other heavy materials. The west elevation adjoins the Albertson's store, and the east elevation, is largely occupied by the Garden Center. The proposed Garden Center will feature column and cap architectural elements, canvas tent roofing for the nursery area, and a 22' high black plastic coated chain link fence. Matt Moutafis, 10707 N. Pomegranate Drive, provided a scaled model of his art work, "The Dancing Gecko's." He commented the actual sculpture will be approximately 12 feet high and 20 feet wide. It will be made from structural steel, stained glass and a light to project the Gecko's onto the building. There will also be a sitting area underneath. He commented the art piece will be like no other and would be unique. DRB Board Members agreed it was a nice piece of art work. Larry Slonim, Architect for Home Depot, commented that the design has not changed since he presented drawings from the October DRB meeting. He provided color visuals showing where the canopy area was and at the 'porte cochere' showed boxed trees and shrubs. The visual also showed the color of the building. Member Underwood suggested boxed trees or shrubs by the entrance. Member Glueck suggested having a bench or trees in front. Member Vogelsberg questioned the color by the Nursery area. Mr. Slonim replied it would be a contrasting color. Member Underwood suggested a dark green plastic coated mesh. Other Board Members commented they would want to actually see the color before approving it. Valerie Feuer suggested bringing a sample of the mesh so Staff could approve the color. i 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 4 MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Mager) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV13-98-90 Home Depot Store and Garden Center Architecture, subject to Staff conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. Signage for this project is not part of this submittal, and will require separate review for conformance to the sign regulations for Area B of the Rooney Ranch PAD. 2. The color palette for this project shall be compatible with that used for Albertson's and In-line stores for this development, and the Oro Valley Retail Center. 3. An archway element shall be used to screen the visual impacts of the rear lumber delivery door. 4. The roof of the structure shall be of a non-reflective color. 5. Sample of plastic coated mesh must be presented to Staff for color approval. 6. Massing of large trees between Porte Cochere to soften wall. 7. Color sample of woven mesh be provided for staff approval. DESIGN GUIDELINES STUDY SESSION Valerie Feuer introduced Steve Kellogg who is with Cornoyer-Hendrick, Inc. Mr. Kellogg explained how the guidelines would fit into the decisions DRB had to make. He briefly reviewed the guidelines that were drafted up for the Board Members. He informed the Board Members to review the guidelines and give him feedback or questions before they go to Town Council for approval. Mr. Kellogg commented that commercial projects should be reviewed as a whole as that would help the Board to make quality decisions. OV13-98-90 ALBERTSON'S FUEL CENTER ARCHITECTURE Staff recommended continuance of this item. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 7-0 vote to continue OV13-98-90 Albertson's Fuel Center Architecture until further notice. OV13-98-92 ORO VALLEY RETAIL CENTER ARCHITECTURE, ROONEY RANCH PARCEL "D" BUILDING 12 Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. Seaver/Franks, the architecture firm representing the Barclay Group, developers of the Oro Valley Retail Center, request DRB approval of the architecture elevations for building 12 of the center. The new commercial center, located adjacent to Fry's grocery store, is south of First Avenue along the west side of Oracle Road, and is zoned Development Area D of the Rooney Ranch PAD. The building is located along Pusch View Lane, with the front facing north into the parking area. The footprint of this building, as well as the parking configuration, is unchanged from the development plan submitted for Target. The zoning 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 5 permits building height up to 30 feet, and the tallest point of this building is 28 feet. Architectural details include wainscoting, tile accents, arched entries in the center of the building, and columns supporting the covered pedestrian walkway, which spans the entire length of the building. A clay tile roof on both sides of the front facade complements the flat roof segment. Tower elements on corners of the other facades match the clay tile roof. Mike Soto, Architect for Seaver/Franks, provided a color visual for the Board Members. He commented that the theme of this project is like Target, same color and building material. There will not be any windows in the back of the building, the roof will be tiled, stuccoed trellis, and outdoor dining facing Oracle. Members of the Board commented how nice the project would look. Steve Ruble, 1591 E. Sonoran Desert Drive, expressed his concerns about the lighting. Mr. Soto replied it would be the same guidelines for lighting similar to Fry's. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Mager) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV13-98-92 Oro Valley Retail Center Architecture, Rooney Ranch Parcel "D" Building 12 subject to staff Conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS • 2. Paint colors and roof tile samples shall be identical to those on the existing Fry's store. Color samples shall be provided for permanent file. 3. Signage shall be consistent with the approved sign package and will not require DRB Agenda Committee approval. 4. All roof or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be fully shielded from view (including from above) by parapets, walls or other methods as approved by the Planning and Zoning Administrator. Details shall be provided with the construction documents. 5. Conditions 1 through 4, listed above, and any additional DRB conditions, shall be incorporated into the architectural elevations of the construction documents, for staff verification. 6. Flat roof segments shall match building color. OV13-98-99 RANCHO CATALINA OFFICES ARCHITECTURE Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The VCI Development Company, the developers, request DRB review and approval of the Rancho Catalina Offices architecture. The 1.58 acre property is located on the east side of Oracle Road, adjacent and north of the Dome Building. The zoning for this site is R-6, which permits business and professional services. The development plan and landscape plan was approved by Town Council October 27, 1998. VCI Development proposed to build two, one story office building totaling 9,948 square feet and 18 feet high. The buildings are separated by an open courtyard consisting of existing native plants and 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 6 additional trees and shrubs. The proposed architectural style may be described as modified Spanish Colonial. Architectural elements include, fascias, rounded gables along the north elevation, wainscot trim along all elevations, and an arched entry-gate which leads into the open court yard. The Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District requires that structures shall incorporate elements consistent with Southwestern architectural styles. The proposed color and material for the roof is Arizona Desert Blend mission tile. Rick Bright, Rick Bright Architect, presented a colored visual. Mr. Bright asked that item one of the conditions be deleted as the windows cannot be seen from Oracle Road. Member Glueck suggested putting the arch or half moon detail on the back roofline of the building to keep it from looking so plain. Member Smith suggested screening the mechanical equipment with a wall. Mr. Bright was in agreement. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Glueck/Smith) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV13-98-99 Rancho Catalina Offices Architecture subject to Staff Conditions and stipulating item one be struck and adding mechanical equipment be screened and architectural detail be added at roofline in back of building. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 2. Mechanical equipment must be screened by a wall. 3. Add architectural detail at roofline in back of building. PREVIEW: CANADA DEL ORO RIVERFRONT PARK ARCHITECTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. McGann & Associates, representing the Town of Oro Valley, will present a preview to the DRB of a development plan and architecture for the proposed Canada del Oro Riverfront Park. The approximately 23 acre property is located on Lambert Lane, east of the La Canada Drive, and immediately adjacent to the Canada del Oro wash. The Town of Oro Valley proposes to develop a community park on site, which will consist of a variety of sports fields and courts, and equestrial staging area, an outdoor performance area, fitness trail, playground area, and a 240 automobile parking area. The property is abutted on the north by Lambert Lane, to the east and west by residential subdivisions, and to the south by the CDO wash. The purpose of the preview is to review the architecture and development plan and provide feedback to the applicant prior to the formal submittal. Don McGann, McGann and Associates, presented to the Board a colored visual. He explained that the development plan idea of the park is put the highest use in the center away from the adjacent neighborhood. There will be a pedestrian walkway around the park, there would also be softball fields, multipurpose field, concession building, outdoor entertainment area. The architecture will 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 7 have a common theme for all buildings. We are currently working with OVPD about the design to allow a patrol car to drive around and check the premises. Member Glueck ask would the walls be painted with a graffitti resistant paint. Mr. McGann replied no, it would probably be a paint that is easy to paint over. Member Mager asked would the playground be covered. Mr. McGann replied no, due to limited budget. Member Underwood asked about the lighting and park hours. Mr.McGann commented that the hours would be what the Town policy dictates,which he believed to be 10:00 p.m. Warren Bailey, 800 W. Peak Vista Place, expressed his concern over the lighting, is it automated, would there be a lot of noise and traffic. He explained he lives behind the area of where the park is going to be and feels the noise and lighting will carry up to the neighborhood where he lives, as it is a retirement area. On the issue of the traffic he felt there could be a hazardous condition with traffic coming around the curve at Lambert. Member Glueck commented that we must attempt to satisfy the needs of everyone in the Town as it grows (families and retired) but that we would take your particular concerns into consideration. Valerie Feuer commented the traffic concerns would be studied by the Public Works Department. Mr. McGann addressed several of Mr. Bailey's concerns. Karen Rogers, 1815 E. Starmist, asked would the park tie into the surrounding neighborhoods via trails and bike trails, also would there be access to the county trail system. Mr. McGann replied there would be access from the park to the equestrian park area, there is a plan for a bike lane along Lambert Lane and access to the neighboring communities. Member Underwood asked would there be a place for horse trailers and a turnaround. Yes, replied Mr. McGann. There was discussion about the amount of restrooms, are there enough for the amount of people that would be using the park. Also are there more parks in the future. Don Chatfield, Community Development Director, commented that are other parks planned within the next 3-5 years. OV12-98-19 CANADA DEL ORO RIVERFRONT PARK LANDSCAPE PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. She explained there are several planning aspects which apply to this project. They include the Canada del Oro Riverfront Park Master Plan. The OVZCR, and the Oro Valley General Plan. The proposed landscape plan is in general conformance with the CDO Riverfront Park Master Plan. The landscape plan provides the required 60' natural Buffer Yard B along Lambert Lane, and the 200'natural desert buffer along the east and west sides of the park site. A 25'Buffer Yard B is proposed along two portions of Lambert Lane, as the proposed parking area and one of the sports fields intrudes into the 60' natural buffer area. No buffer yard is proposed, or required facing the CDO wash. The landscape plan proposed to use a 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 8 wide variety of native Sonoran desert vegetation throughout the park, including Sweet Acacia, Desert Willow, Mesquite, Blue and Foothill Palo Verde, Brittlebush, Greythorn,Prickly Pear Cacti, Fishhook Ban-ell Cacti, and a Desert Night-Blooming Cereus. The mesquites and palo verdes are used extensively through the parking and outdoor performance areas, and along the periphery of the play fields and fitness trail. Bermuda grass is also used extensively throughout the project. The landscape plan is not in conformance with the park master plan in one notable area. The park master plan calls for a masonry wall and supplemental trees to be located east of the drainage channel to mitigate the visual and noise impacts of the park to the residents to the east, as well as discouraging pedestrian traffic from "short-cutting" through the adjacent residential lots. The landscape plan is not in conformance with Oro Valley General Plan Policies in terms of the extensive use of Bermuda Grass turf on-site. While staff does not question the need for the use of turf in the sports fields, picnic, and outdoor performance areas, Bermuda Grass is also utilized extensively outside of these area. The use of Bermuda Grass as a common landscape element is in conflict with General Plan Policies 8.1R and 8.1 which encourages water conservation and the use of low water,native plants in parks. Don McGann, McGann and Associates, commented he disagrees there is too much turf. The Town provides these community resources, a public park is for everyone and the fields will be utilized. If warranted, a trip to the Dennis Weaver park will show day in and day out there are families out there utilizing the park. The irrigation proposed is a water system that is monitored and cutoff if there are leaks or its raining. Member Mager asked what was the alternative. Valerie Feuer commented the idea is not to replace the turf. If that is what the DRB wants, then Staff will go along with it. Member Smith commented if we have Golf Courses then we should give the kids grass. Member Glueck and Member Underwood agreed. Mr. McGann asked if he have to provide an island between parking spaces, referring to item 2 of the conditions. Valerie Feuer replied that islands are part of the code and perhaps Mr. McGann could apply for a variance to eliminate the island. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV12-98-19 Canada del Oro Riverfront Park Landscape Plan, subject to Staff Conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. The following OV case number shall be stated on all sheets: OV12-98-19 2. As per Sec. 11-104 of the OVZCR, each parking row of seven spaces shall be separated with a 48" landscape planter, containing trees and understory vegetation. 3. Add the following General Note: "A clear plane of vision shall be maintained between 3-" and 72" in height, as not to interfere with vehicular visibility. 4. yard. 5. The trees located on the northeast side of the outdoor performance area, in-line with 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 9 contour elevations 2515 to 2518, shall be moved east 45—' to increase the outdoor seating and viewing area per staff approval. 6s 7. The method irrigation for the multi-parposessportn ds shall be shown—iinn the irrigation plan. 8. A General Note shall be added to state that irrigation plans shall meet minimum ASIC standards and convert to reclaimed water should it become available. 9. The signature and seal of the registered landscape architect preparing the plans shall be places on all sheets. 10. As per the Canada del Oro Riverfront Park Master Plan, a 6' masonry wall and significant vegetation shall be planted on the eastern edge of the property. Talk to the neighbors about the 6'wall and address a letter to the Town. 11. Conditions 1 thru 10 listed above, and any additional DRB conditions, shall be submitted with a revised landscape plan, prior to scheduling the plan for Town Council. OV12-98-16 GIANT AT ORO VALLEY RETAIL CENTER,DEVELOPMENT PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. She explained this item was continued on the November 10, 1998 DRB meeting because there was no consultant present to speak on the developer'behalf. MMLA, Inc. representing the developers of Giant request DRB recommendation for approval of a project Development Plan. The subject property is a 1.42 acre pad with a 3,000 square foot building envelope, Building 10, Block 5, within the Oro Valley Retail Center. The subject property is abutted on the north by Block 2, Target, to the south by the intersection of Pusch View Lane and Oracle Road to the east by Oracle Road, and west by Building 11,Block 4,which is undeveloped. A one-story convenience use is proposed for this site. The development will have vehicular access off of the main parking area of the Oro Valley Retail Center and Oracle Road (SR 77). The building features 21 parking spaces, including 2 handicapped accessible spaces, 2-bike racks, and a loading area. Area D of the Rooney Ranch PAD is exempt from all aspects of the ORSCOD, with the exception of the requirement to landscape the Oracle Road ROW. The Giant development plan conforms to all aspects of the Rooney Ranch PAD. The Giant proposal meets OVCZR requirements for development plans. The use proposed for the subject property fall under the classification of"convenience use" under the OVZCR, and is required to have a 12' landscape buffer on all sides of the site, which is provided. Access to the site will be provided by a proposed 28' and 30' wide Parking Area Access Lane off SR 77 and Pusch View lane respectively to be constructed by Target development. Fill will be placed over most of the site. Approximately 2 feet of fill will be placed on the building location with a lesser amount for the parking lot. Cory Thompson, MMLA, representing the applicant, commented he had no problems with staff conditions. Chair Lewis asked would a sidewalk be provided so pedestrians would not walk on the landscape 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 10 areas. Mr. Thompson replied yes. Member Vogelsberg asked if vapor recovery was required on the pumps and suggested that should be an added condition. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Allen) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV12-98-16 Giant at Oro Valley Retail Center Development Plan subject to the following staff conditions. 1 Per Section 1 1 1 04C of the OV7G , each row of seven (7) parking spaces shall be f 2. Mechanical equipment,whether ground level or roof-mounted, shall be screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building, as per OVZCR Sec.9-110H. 3. Add a note to the Development Plan to indicate that the access road to the southwest of the site is tentative and still requires ADOT approval. 4. Final grading plan showing grading and construction details shall be submitted to the Town for review and approval for grading permit. 5. Per Section 4-504F, all new commercial related projects shall contribute 1% of the project cost towards public art. The design and location shall receive a recommendation by the Town of Oro Valley Arts Advisory Board prior to project approval by Town Council. 6. Signage issues shall be addressed in the architectural submittal phase of this project. 7. All ADOT right-of-way use permit for construction of access point off SR 77 must be obtained prior to grading plan approval. 8. The concern of ADOT regarding the proposed 3rd lane widening on SR 77 and the associated right lane tapers from the Target project must be resolved prior to grading plan approval. 9. If comment# 8 affects sidewalk location, a pedestrian access easement shall be dedicated by this project. 10. Final grading plan showing grading and construction details shall be submitted to the Town for review and approval for grading permit. 11. Add a vapor recovery at the dispersing head of the tanks. 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 11 OV12-98-16 GIANT AT ORO VALLEY RETAIL CENTER LANDSCAPE PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. She reminded the Board this item was continued from the November 10, 1998 DRB meeting because there was no consultant present to speak on the developer's behalf. Area D of the Rooney Ranch PAD is exempt from all aspects of the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay with the exception of the requirement to landscape the Oracle Road ROW. The number of trees required and provided is seven. Several shrubs are also included in the ROW. The Rooney Ranch Oro Valley Retail Center PAD requires a 25' landscape buffer along Oracle Road except at vehicle access points. The landscaping for this area requires Bufferyard D which include 10 trees, 10 shrubs and 15 accent plants per 100 linear feet. A 4' high masonry wall will be provided. All new plantings will be irrigated with an automatic drip irrigation system. The Giant proposal meets the OVZCR requirements for landscape plans. The use propose for the subject property fall under the classification of"convenience use" under the OVZCR, and is required to have a 12'landscape buffer on all sides of the site,which is provided. Cory Thompson,MMLA,representing the applicant was available for questions from the Board. Member Glueck asked has OVPD reviewed the lighting. Mr. Thompson replied yes. The Board members commented how nice the project looked. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Mager/Smith) and carried by a 7-0 vote to recommend approval of OV12-98-16 Giant at Oro Valley Retail Center, Landscape Plan subject to staff conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 2. Landscape lighting should be considered for this project in order to eliminate dark corners or pockets. The lighting on the property should not conflict with landscaping at maturity. PLANNING STAFF REPORT Valerie Feuer commented the next DRB meeting is January l2th, 1999. The reports will be late by a day or two as staff will be limited. It is suggested the next site tour be on January 9th, 199 which is a Saturday about 9:00 a.m. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Allen) and carried by a 7-0 vote to adjourn the 12-08-98 Development Review Board Minutes Page 12 December 8th, 1998 Development Review Board Meeting at 9:40 p.m. Shirley Gay DRB Clerk ITEM (42 ORO VALLEY PLANNING&ZONING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: December 8, 1998 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FROM: Dennis Silva, Jr.,Planner I SUBJECT: OV13-98-99 RANCHO CATALINA OFFICES ARCHITECTURE BACKGROUND: The4 Ve m nCompany, r DRB review and approval of the Rancho Catalina Offices C ve o�i e t the equest pp architecture. The 1.58-acre property is located on the east side of Oracle Road, adjacent and north of the Dome Building. The zoning for this site is R-6, which permits business and professional services. The development plan and landscape plan was approved by Town Council on October 27, 1998. SUMMARY: VCI Development proposes to build two (2), one-story office buildings totaling 9,948 square feet and 18 feet high. The buildings are separated by an open courtyard consisting of existing native plants and additional trees and shrubs. The proposed architectural style may be described as modified Spanish Colonial. Architectural elements include, fascias, rounded gables along the north elevation,wainscot trim along all elevations, and an arched entry-gate which leads into the open court yard. The Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District (ORSCOD)requires that structures shall incorporate elements consistent with Southwestern architectural styles. The window treatments on the north, east, and south elevations are consistent with design features found in southwestern architecture. The building elevations also provide relief and interest,reflecting the topography by stepping buildings up and down hillsides. A color palette has been submitted for DRB review. The proposed color and material for the roof is Arizona Desert Blend mission tile. The fascia and stucco colors are also provided. GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed architecture for the Rancho Catalina Offices complies with Policy 9.1F of the General Plan; all sides of buildings should be coherently designed and treated. The building height and bulk is of low intensity and in harmony with individual site attributes. RECOMMENDATION: The architecture is consistent with the southwestern styles illustrated in ORSCOD and the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval of OV 13-98-99,Rancho Catalina Offices Architecture,subject to the condition attached as Exhibit"A". ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit"A" 2. Reduction of Proposed Architecture F:\OV\OV 13\1998\13-98-99\ARCHDRB.RPT I- EXHIBIT"A" CONDITION OF APPROVAL OV13-98-99 RANCHO CATALINA OFFICES ARCHITECTURE \Y\The west elevation of the building shall have a projecting window treatment similar to those shown on the other elevations. \,L) S KCJARA":\,\CA 9 )tY1 VVLQ4Alcy No 11\ A-6 cOku —Q(24/41 GlAt4 c �� VP' • ,. h ? . , 1S.12C4-el:)I. Pr...,NI.ki& - - ,,.... .,,..,..,_. ----..,-"-:::,----------,,-- -,---4---,- -.--,_ --......--..-.L., . . .-.--:------...----,--,---.=-.-,-----,------- - ..-=-----,--------- ,..... .. .-...i-- --c--------:_.;."- -------:-----.-.---... .... ."_-----,-, ..--'---.--i-=',-:_-------""-''.a.- ,:r.-------.=.-.7,--.--c-',.--",----1-:-,I-4,----;.:.------------- -------- -,-,---:--------:-.--...------.-.--=-.---...----,_=‘,., '...-=.T.--..-.v.-...-..•-- -.-------7'*--.-T------ -----... ,--,--.=--"----'''----1--•--.. ..---.--..---:----------------::1;--..-..--------.:---.-----...:4.---,---- -..--...----- ---7'77---7-Ma,r,k..7- ----7---' -..,..:--2=•--------'- ."--='"---.'---.--- -" ---''''..--'7-.--...'--:------"`"'--"''-- -----.4....:',---1....,,.-:--.=.----...-..-•- ,-_-..•..,....- --------,--. ..--:- ..-....-A.C,Ja-'--a5 .--- -".::-,....,-..4..- -,1 --...--.----.... - ,-..,..-.....-..,....,..-- -----.-----s-•... -4....- ."':--..-'77:',."..:_i":7::::',---... ..:.".-.-'..:-,%.--.....:..,-,F,-,......=-..=.-- ;a:.."------=.--,-,.--..,-...-..-----.-:-.'.--,----.--.. -- -. ---...--.4-....- ----- ------ -,...----,-----, --= - - , ------e,---.Z..". -,-.,,,--.7:=- -,-----,--.7-------..-.--,*-- ------- ------.t---....,----,.'- ---,------,-----•=-,.......--,-.---1=-*--,--- __--_.=,: v... -:":%"----:--,-.7-- -....,.......-.--.- -.--,,,,..=,-..------„...- -,----__,.-.,..--,,,----,,---_-:-. -.-...,--....-.-.,,,-.-.-..-_- __.."--,-- -=_--.-.-_," ----,--z-,-,- -::,..."%-,......=.7-."=".."----..". ..--,----,1_ •-": ".-;-=,:-, _,...-&-.3S,...-. ..:-.:. -•.--,,..:. .....----,------,------.--..7.,..f.Z..."-,3,---"-.."--.:=-:-,--X.:-'0-"=.:.7-..------- ...---,--4:-':, ..-4-..,-,.- -r.,-.....- ---...-.....1.--..--,-,-.---,..-- -..--,--,:-..---W::.-,..F.,..,- • • • -.7=-,---::--;:-.-:-.-.: _-_-:.-.,-----_--.7.-=,.,,..:,---,-,.,-,-7,-,..,,,,r,,,-----,-z-,_-,-;z-.,_,-_•:".,..-,,z-,.--:-----:.-, -,------,r,-- ---_,--L-7- .-_--:.- ,_,...„7-7,.......,,-- - " ---- --;-..-..-,.-- •--- -- -",....:.-...,.......---4.- =:-. ..,...--..-•...-.:::-.-_:::-.,_-__..-.-----,...=.:.:,--z--.--t,s-..-....--2...%_.......--,--,....-......-:-,... ......-:.1F-L.:.----------,..-.--_=-_-......-.=.7., _ • ....,,..,------------7-----_-_-_-.----------=--._.-----z_--`7,.._-----'1......-----=-_-- -_--------.-------.--.._.._-------:..r_.=----7T.7----7-----z-•Tj7------:..--7---:--------------------.--,........---.7.................. .7-:::--7-.1.--___-_-_-_---- ..----; . . ____„...-,..-,_..,-.......... rt-:,- --...,.-.., -,.......--,-____...---._.........1,.-..,.----.-----•,-------------...---------,---,--:=:,..,. .„. ...,,-----7,.., ...-_,..... z-,--7---....--.----_-_._..,.....,-----...,....,..,....,... ._._- _. UV 21:31 -. .1 .. • ...----..------,-,..-..-.. ,_,--,.---,--:---:------,----------:-------------------,--.-- -,-.-4,4,4-.4", ...- -.....-.-...-..-.-.,=-.•-....,--...-..,..-4-4-..-*-2:::.-,-4-4---.-4-4-4:4-, .... .'...: . 1 • 111 II 19" 16"li •.....---------.,-- .-4-4.--4- ---------- -- .---...-.---. ......- ,...-4------ II.MPS CI in ..-• .... ..- ...... ,. .,--_-,,,,,..... _ :aW,--' 3, • _- ---,,,-,----- --,----,-- .....• rtroiellk IMF 12 1,11:14. :11 IL IS .11.1/ Mit MIN. I 4111.177rill 17 *am, ..,_.,.. .3...,,._..,.. ., ... ,• I , • - FikE.C4151.C..41,4. Wkircle--x-ar . ••. . . • Scum ait,F,VATION • ,_. • _- _ . —• ---....w....--._.,.. ._. .------.. .. ___-- _... ....._ ....—_-_-_-_ ......- •--.______-=, -• ..,.„..____„__________ ___„-_,•-•.--„,_._. v ..-..-...._••:-. ._ --,__-_,-_-_,.....______,...,--:-.._ a....----‘,......,,,,,_.._,_,--___.-_-„,....?:-__-r_c_-&-..„____....-..„.• •-•...-,......-- ........„.....„...,..____-_-______-_____,„- •-•-•_„. , if.-0-_ __-__;_-_ ,....-.____,... ...i., ..:_w_,,.,..„..„1,,,,or • ..;.7., .......,................„..._____ :„...„.„..........„.... ..,_______,_„:„....,....„..„._,..:: . --f-7:-:- • • _-..."...2 • -----,':-:17-7-7 ' .---.4'., . . , ID'iii ! no iii, _ L ' IT •__,...,...„,_,.._•••_,,t.,--„„v_ _,......, .,. .,..,.. • . ,. • WEST 311,11417ATERON EAST IILIERA.TlloiN -t•- -A17 C Di s-- ' '4c*i.,A Noi 2 3 199 / , _ .. . . . .. - _- ••••• - _ • -,„ • .1‘.. ,...„...,.......... .. . . , mow _.-...--,-7.---- -...-=..-----...-__.- -------------...,-7 .-...._—_ ----_,.-_,---.....a----------------, ..._ R..,*,. -1.7-7 .1.."....._. . •_. ...,__,_.--------,-.,.---_.7.---„.-.--..--,--.-.-._;...--,--_-.__---,--„:.---- --- ,-,-_:_,.. _7:-._...,. .._-,•-_,__:.._- --;,._-_..,•L—.,-,--- -.,,-_-_-_---._,-_-..__-:,__.,.__ri-.,;-._-_,--:------.r.--,-_•„:-:-:._-;.-._-.-_-_..._--,=-------L.,_-_-.---;;---_-:=--.„ _ • _ ..----.---4- --,-.----4:1-- ,-.1.--,---- -=',.--"--.... -4•-•el.........r--,--.,-,4.--,-...--......--.------•-•-•-.4----,....."-4..----4 ........--4,---.-........ -4,-....-..,44,-,..,-•• -• - ...-,-...--4.-"---"---"-,- - ---- M.-. ,-,MMMT-M04.11,.....0 -., t ...,... 41Ar-imilmm...:,-*---tmomiligetar7-4111MW •. ...244-.-• •• 4.-.-m-.---7,,,--.1,---ur" .-"`-, . . ----.---." .-•--- , V.,---....=.-_-. -^,- -,....-•-•------•............-. .- .-.....-_ ..-..-,. .. -.... ....Z., . -.". '-"-T-'-'"--- .---.-.." --.4"."".".".•---.."---- ----.-,=,.---. ---• ,.-,..n..4....---...... ---4....''....-..-...........r.---.--:------- -, ..................., .14.....-,--4.......-. ...........7,-.... ..4., - ---1 -----•-• ..-,„-..-..-....-,-,- ----..- 4----,,-.4:......_.-----•-4-44----.-.---. --4, 4 -4",-C----- "---111.110111..NWSVaillPIIIIIIIii --^,-_, ,,..,,,,1 , .. .,,,-- , _.,_ iiiiiArb -"--------" "-"-T"'"- ---..."------ -----4 1= --------4------ --...-a-,-,-,-.--..... -------.."-•-..-...-....,-.-....-.. rllNs., , 1 t fiVS' - -- .._,-.. .-"'--=._-..•-•_-,,--17 71:,-.,.-..1-".-- --..._-.- , I , 1 , sl--S-.,,o . ----- f='':- IA • • • Ea ,Ii NW ,NI 14 ell MR Pi MIS: 1 VII-NE 1 U12 CV! ,1 ,, ...:'' i • '4444414444141.1. --..---------:-----"---.-.-- .---'-' s.------...---.------------.. -L- W fl'‘9-,, - ±.. ---._...--,-,-.,-..:F. .:..-,=-a-=--•-------... ...-.-.--.=.-.--.......--_,..-.-.-_,,___..........-- -i-.-_-_,=-_,....-.._,,,... . E"'" I 'W,-."'" ' ' 1111111111111111 1 ,,,... . er-7 him , .a.,,, ,t.. .,, ,.._ , , __... . , [tel.I %Wig I L 41 id Obi E. 'I k •1,11111. 112 Off wain. 1 , ‘ rat.. sis Mak MN VIE ' Ill fle INI 1 ....INN I . • a .1.4 • - WPM 11M1.11 , rw-iii.. .., _ _ .._.. _ ,. -,,,40,..--_-.,•:.•:,._,_•„_.,,,„,,,,,.:_;•„;:-...,.-...„7,..7.•, -__._.• • . _••_:. . .• _ •- -..-- - ,:,•,=_,,,:::, ..,,_-.-..:;ga...,_•_,_ . _ 1 ,...4m,.„.._ i,.Lim 1 !la , _ II IL ._.1 r.. um ini: .._.... , JII lb wat,z '", '-----"-'':-:-'-'-'7:"F'-'7 ...._-..,-- , I ----- r'""lia, • 1 . i " , ,ne , . , czi . _.. ___.__..______________. • . . • . ., NORTE E:1317.A.TIO1 M NCI-In) 61, it.\9' A ti,7N A (5 17 114TIV,11-7,A , / Nov-18-98 05:53P Town of Ora Valley 520 742 1022 P.02 TOWN OF CRO VALLEY APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROJECT ARCHITECTURE DATE: oe7ro 27am 0(11 OV CASE NO_ : '&102 —Cfcl 0vk(5- lV lA (office use only) ' PROJECT: 1_` G cThLIJ± O F tcE. . _ . 'LOCATION: APPLICANT: KACk 61:;<. ADDRESS: 2-1 l E K TELEPHONE NO. : 7 2 Q it4c, PROPERTY OWNER: E>tT9 .AKtL ( 1S .0 .1 , L •P. ADDRESS : e �l `� (.J�= C PHONE NO. . mod"/ '4‘52._ i PROJEC ARCHITECT/E GINEER: KtCk. P3t \c 14 -' : ADDRESS : 2 ( W , 123.1muala .*:„ ._._ ________-_ pEvELOPME REVIEW B•• • • • •INS DATE : N® � 9.. roi f _ . - SIGNA E• ll NOT : This a.� ication mist be accompanied by the required $150 . 00 fee and twelve opies of the plans, 1 1" x 17" in size, each to include dime ed elevations of all structures from all four sides and a copy of the project 's site plan. The submittal must also include a proposed ..olor palette for the project in an 8 . 5" x z 1" format , to include color . chips of body and trim colors and tile color and style, if applicable. Building square footage is also required. AT THE MEETING, applicants • must have on hand for presentation, colored perspective or rendered elevations of all four sides of the structures . SUBMITTALS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT LEAST 18 CALENDAR DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD HEARING DATE. �? o1Gctct . £tSO-aD • _. •• _ „. .•.a.—.., ra..•.• .-,••:.,....,,......../.....,,, ... ITEM ORO VALLEY PLANNING&ZONING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: October 29, 1999 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FROM: Dennis Silva,Jr., Planner I SUBJECT: OV13-98-99 RANCHO CATALINA OFFICES CARPORTS BACKGROUND: Rick Bright, the architect representing the developers, the VCI Development Company, request DRB approval of the Rancho Catalina Offices carports. The 1.58-acre property is located on the east side of Oracle Road,adjacent and north of the Dome Building. The zoning for this site is R-6, which permits business and professional services. The development plan and landscape plan was approved by Town Council on October 27, 1998. The architecture was approved by DRB on December 8, 1998. SUMMARY: Two one-story office buildings are currently under construction and the total square footage is 9,948. The total parking spaces for this site is 41 and the applicant proposes to have 16 spaces shaded with the carport. These 16 covered spaces will be located on the northeast portion of the parking lot directly east from building two. A color palette has been reviewed and approved by the DRB during the architecture request for this project. Staff recommends that the color palette for the carport be consistent with the approved color palette for the architecture. GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE: The proposed architecture for the Rancho Catalina Offices complies with Policy 9.1F of the General Plan; all sides of buildings should be coherently designed and treated. The building height and bulk is of low intensity and in harmony with individual site attributes. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed carports with the condition that the color palette for the carports be consistent with the color of the approved architecture. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit"A" 2. Reduction of Proposed Carports F:\OV\OV 13\1998\13-98-99\ARCHDRB2.RPT TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Planning and Zoning Division 11000 N.La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Phone: 520-797-9797 FAX No.: 520-742-1022 PUBLIC ART REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL TO: GiGi Miller FROM: Michael Shanley, Planner I, mshanley@orovalley.com: DATE: 3/27/00 RE: PUBLIC ART PROPOSAL Attached is Submittal for Rancho Catalina Office Complex Public Art by VCI Development,titled "Forward Motion" by David Furrey of Form and Function Forge. As you will see in the VCI's cover letter, the artist is moving his studio to Colorado and the developer has requested an expedient review from your committee. The office complex architecture was approved by the DRB under town's reference OV#13-98-99. Location is north of the "Dome Building"at 8464 North Oracle,Tax Parcel Code No. 22513007D. COMMENTS: F:\OV\OV13\1998\13-98-99\Public Art.doc F:\OV\OV13\1998\13-98-99\Public Art.doc