Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV130314 1_k.,,TV II ,,,,I %,"IVX,J. T -3L,-41--.1.J A P1 CMG& ZONING DIVISION 11,000 N.I, OADA DR,ORO VALLEY AZ 8573'7 Phone:(520)229-4800 Fax:(520)742-1022 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROJECT ARCHITECTURE DATE:0+_21/4. ,4292.- 0 V CASE NO.: CW\, ---c:) ,!:--,_saa_..._Office use only) pitki AgrA PROJECT NAME : efit'l tike-ZelWat SUBDIVISION LOT# Zi I.,0C AT ION I ADD R.ESS:._ __1_,0,7E &Icki Atietta)_,J=Ekla__ ___: .. e ID4/2e( 0K•sct.we 12040 i4-5 ci. .1, Ave?3*ft ZONING PARCEL NUMBER: LOT SIZE L (t-t'l/A Pec(2) MODEL NAMES OR NUMBERS NM 35,1S APPLICANT: .t. 4)/V )( s.) . C hC*--. ADDRESS 3444...t • Ce.u vi-±q ati, 12...Ai_ cs1/4_,14c rp. , 1 lc PHONE NO.: 321 - ...kl_p____,_ FAX NO,: 5:a7-L,SSila____ PROPERTY OWNER: liy\l*ItAy___ (1#1 e 1 /„„L, L. ,6. _ ADDRESS: [ . 2 L %,(AC- 1a / /. PIIONE NO.: -14--2. _ 1 FAX NO: PROJECT ARCFITTECIfENGINEER: --Wfry -• 1 I C -, ASSOC.. ADDRESS: t_.G.P. _Ll,kilD [ 2/4___Sd P 101007z.A 1 057 IC t__,,__ DEVELOPMENT REV/V BOARD HEApG DATE: JOV 121 2c19 2- % I ( SIGNATURE: 41111IL 4 i DATE: 61 A2- w,r,.,,'--••-••- ' 4 ...—__—. --__ Submittal Requ - lents: u/ S150.00 Fee Fifteen cop ics of the following: Dimensioned Elevations of all four sides of all buildings (11" x 17" format) Commercial projects require color drawings or photographs of elevations (8 Y2" x 11" format, _,.. List square footage of buildings ,-v Site Plan (11" x 17" format) Tea copies of the following: Color chips of body,trim and roof tiles (8 Y2"by 11"format) Applications will not be accepted without all required materials. SUBMITTALS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE PLANNLNG DEPARTMENT AT LEAST 18 C.41ENDAR DAYS IN ADVANCE OF TEE DESERED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD REARING DATE. \\OVPiD\Pil\ADMIN\FORM$A)R13PROJARCRAPII,duc ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CHECKLIST COMMERCIAL & MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ov f 3 -oa-ovi PARCEL NO. APPLICANT DATE REC'D REVIEWED BY QWv 1,1 Process DRB Meeting Date 1Vd1/ /tj Report Due Date I to ARirie •, 1, 1 Date Added to Executive Summary Oct 02 l Project History Provide all OV numbers for all actions associated with subject parcel and related conditions: ZONING CODE COMPLIANCE . Ensure that the building fits on the lot. C, '� NC N/A 2. Note the following as indicated: a. OVZCR C NC N/A b. PAD Designation Y N N/A i.) The proposal must conform with all PAD standards. ii.) The proposal must conform to all "General Notes" on the plat. 3/. Setbacks: a. Front C NC N/A b. Side C NC N/A c. Rear C NC N/A Permitted Building Ht. C NC N/A jS. Proposed Building Ht. C NC N/A A( Lot width C NC N/A y Lot Depth C NC N/A Number of Stories C NC N/A fW Permitted Grading Limits C NC N/A Proposed Grading Limits C N C N/A Comments . Distance between buildings C NC N/A (--1„ ). Within Oracle Road Overlay District C NC N/A �" . Within Tangerine Road Overlay District C NC N/A 714. Section 13-102, Accessory Buildings (p.13-1) C NC N/A a. No accessory building shall be permitted in a required front or side yard. C NC N/A b. Accessory building shall not be constructed closer than 5 feet to any rear lot line. C NC N/A c. Accessory buildings used as a garage or carport having access from an alley shall not be located closer than 15 feet to the center line of said alley. C N C N/A .15i Section 13-104, Exceptions to Ht. Restrictions C NC N/A ,V'Py a. Chimneys and solar equipment for heating or cooling are exempt from the height limitations of this ordinance. C NC N/A 16,. Section 13-106, Projections into Required Yards of Residential Buildings (p. 13-2). a. Sills,belt courses and ornamental features may project up to 2 feet into the required yard. C NC N/A b. Terraces,uncovered porches,platforms and ornamental features which do not extend more than 3 feet above the adjacent natural ground level may project into the required yard provided their projections be at least 5 feet from the adjacent side lot line. C NC N/A c. Balconies and stairs may project 4 feet into the required yard,but not nearer than 5 feet to an adjacent side property line. C NC N/A d. Covered porches may project into the required yard provided they are not nearer than 10 feet to the rear property line or may project 3 feet into the required side yard. C NC N/A e. Cornices, eaves, canopies, and awnings projecting over windows may extend into the required side yard up to 5 feet. C NC N/A f. Chimneys may project 2 feet into the required yard. C NC N/A g. Mechanical equipment such as air conditioners may be constructed in the required side and rear yards of residential buildings provided they meet the following conditions: C NC N/A ) They are screened by a minimum 4' masonry wall and are not visible from adjacent properties. Mechanical equipment which is located within a yard walled by at least a 4' masonry wall and placed no further than 10' from the wall, or greater than 40' from the property line,will not require its own screening wall. C NC N/A 1 A minimum 3' access way shall exist on at least one side of the building to allow for access to the rear yard for maintenance and emergency purposes. For the purposes of evaluation and enforcement,mechanical equipment is assumed to be 4' wide without a screening wall, and 5' with a screening wall. C NC N/A Comments 2 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS - Sec. 3-302 Criteria In considering any application for development review,the Development Review Board shall be guided by the following criteria: l. The proposed development shall promote a desirable relationship of structures to one another,to open spaces and topography both on the site and in the surrounding neighborhood. C NC N/A . The height, area, setbacks and overall mass as well as parts of any structure (buildings,walls, signs, lighting, etc.) and landscaping shall be appropriate to the development, the neighborhood and the community. C NC N/A Ingress, egress, internal traffic circulation, off-street parking facilities, loading and service areas and pedestrian ways shall be so designed as to promote safety and convenience. C NC N/A 4. The architectural character of the proposed structure shall be in harmony with, and compatible to, those structures in the neighboring environment and the architectural character adopted for any given area avoiding excessive variety or monotonous repetition. C NC N/A .. 5. Mechanical equipment, appurtenances and utilities shall be concealed from view and integral to the building design. C NC N/A ,6( The architectural character of a development shall take cognizance of the unique desert, climate and other environmental factors of this region and promote an indigenous architectural feeling. C NC N/A �..T:✓ All buildings and structures and parts of any buildings such as walls and fences shall be designed to be compatible with the surrounding desert and mountains in the background. C NC N/A 8. All exterior materials and colors including roofs,walls and fences shall be predominantly muted earth and plant tones and shall minimize contrast and glare. C NC N/A General Planning Considerations: Encourage setbacks to be staggered (two feet) when reviewing multiple models C is NC N/A 2. Ensure that identical models will not be placed on adjacent (*) lots. Sample condition; "No two elevations shall be adjacent to one another." C NC N/A 3. Screening wall to enclose ground mounted electrical and mechanical equipment. C N N/A 4. Flat roof segments painted to match stucco. C NC N/A 5. Windows utilize pop-outs or recessed on all sides, except under porches. C NC N/A 6. Window treatments added to top of garage bays (consistent w/rest of home). C NC N/A Comments 3 7. Cap over spark arrestors? (All vents & chimneys must terminate per manufacturer listing. 8. (Fixture subject to review by Planning & Zoning and Town Building Official). C NC N/A 9. Organize File Folder. C NC N/A 10. Contact applicant and find out if architecture has previously been approved for another Oro Valley location or in the Tucson metro area. C NC N/A 11. Visit site of proposed project. Identify adjacent architecture and compare to submitted design. Check for design elements such as windows on garage doors that should be incorporated. Recognize terrain features that may conflict with design. C NC N/A 12. Discuss all conditions with the applicant prior to the meeting. C NC N/A 13. Adjacent— shall mean the condition of being near to or close to, but not necessarily having a common dividing line (e.g. two properties that are separated only by a street or alley shall be considered as adjacent to one another. C NC N/A II. DESIGN GUIDELINES - Sec. 16-103 pp. 16-1 through 16-9. 1. De-emphasize visual impacts of grading. C NC N/A a. Use "land form" grading that reflects and blends with natural grades, contours and existing site conditions. (Figure 1) C NC N/A b. Locate and design buildings in a manner that is harmonious with the natural contours of the land. (Figure 2) C NC N/A Design driveways and roads that complement the natural contours. C NC N/A c. Minimize impacts of cut and fill slopes by meeting the following conditions: C NC N/A i.) All disturbed areas should be re-vegetated with natural rock and plant material. C NC N/A ii.) Tops and toes of slopes should be rounded to blend with the natural grades. C NC N/A iii.) Retaining walls may be used to reduce excessive amount of slope area and/or preserve existing vegetation. C NC N/A d. Encourage retaining walls that meet the following conditions: C NC N/A i.) Color and texture should be consistent with associated architecture and/or character of surrounding natural areas. C NC N/A ii.) Utilize multiple walls (terracing) with 5' wide minimum planting areas between terraces. (Figure 3) C NC N/A Comments 4 21. Natural features (drainage corridors, vegetation, habitat, etc.) should be preserved. C NC N/A a. Maintain integrity of hillsides and ridgelines. (Figure 5) C NC N/A b. Vistas of surrounding natural terrain should be preserved. C NC N/A c. Plot vistas during master planning to identify significant visual resources. C NC N/A d. Consider vistas when designing sites and locating buildings. (Figure 6) C NC N/A a. Design buildings so that orientation and height are sensitive to adjacent land uses. C NC N/A A. Site design should also be sensitive to adjacent land uses. C NC N/A 5. Where possible avoid traditional back to back relationship of uses. Design uses for positive interaction. C NC N/A Architectural design should consider the climate and energy conservation. Design solutions include: a. Provide shade for exterior walls. C NC N/A Use roof overhangs, exterior shading devices or inset windows. C NC N/A b. Design outdoor spaces so they are protected. C NC N/A c. Use materials and colors that minimize heat absorption without reflecting. C NC N/A 6: Design should consider the historic context. The history is closely related to the climate; therefore, southwest themes are consistent with the character of the area, but are not intended to limit the architectural vocabulary(Figure 8). Historic styles include: C NC N/A a. Southwest Traditional C NC N/A b. Territorial C NC N/A c. Pueblo C NC N/A d. Spanish Colonial C NC N/A e. While a single style or combination of the above styles is not required, the use of or a contemporary interpretation of historic styles is strongly encouraged. Design elements should be considered along with the following design principles. C NC N/A 7. The scale of Oro Valley is low profile and oriented to human scale. This can be maintained by: Comments 5 a. Design buildings at the ground or pedestrian level that express human scale. This can be done by using the appropriate sizing of openings, level of detail, articulation and use of textures. C NC N/A b. Design buildings to be compatible with appropriately scaled surrounding or adjacent structures. C NC N/A c. Compatibility with the natural environment is encouraged. Building should not dominate the land, but conform to the natural landscape. C NC N/A d. Integrate building design with the design of street, hardscape and landscape elements, so that the building and grounds present a natural, integrated appearance. C NC N/A 8. Reduce the apparent size and mass of larger buildings. C NC N/A a. Break up mass of large buildings by dividing into basic geometric components (one story at pedestrian entrances), with intersecting wall planes. (Figure 9). C NC N/A b. Emphasize the horizontal, but break up long continuous building surfaces with off- sets or contrasting forms. C NC N/A c. Vary roof line silhouettes. (Figure 10). C NC N/A d. Encourage wall mass over glass area. (Figure 11). C NC N/A e. Utilize pedestrian scale features at the ground level, such as planters, benches and textures. (Figure 12) C NC N/A 9. Project design should consider and integrate all elements. C NC N/A a. Design buildings with consideration given to all sides of a building. C NC N/A b. Coordinate accessory structures (structures other than the primary building/s, such as, screen walls, gas station canopies, signage structures) so that they reflect the character of the primary building/s in terms of scale, materials, colors and style. The color of carports should be coordinated with primary structures. C NC N/A c. Coordinate similar project types on adjoining parcels, e.g. commercial at an intersection. Coordinated means that certain design elements, such as site walls, open space, colors or landscape elements can be similar. Compatibility and visual coherence is desired, not necessarily sameness. C NC N/A d. Rooftop mechanical equipment, vents and ducts should be screened or installed in a manner that prevents obstruction or distraction of other views. Screening should be consistent with building design. Low reflectivity materials are preferred. (Figure 13) C NC N/A a Substantial earth-tone materials should be used. C NC N/A a. Use exterior materials such as stucco,brick, adobe, natural stone, textured concrete or textured and split face concrete masonry units.0 NC N/A Comments 6 b. Discourage undesirable materials such as pre-fabricated metal wall panels and smooth-faced concrete. C NC N/A r{ Variations in roof lines should be used to add interest and to reduce the scale of larger buildings. Roofs should consist of one or a combination of the following: a. Low sloping roofs C NC N/A b. Parapets to conceal flat roofs and roof-top equipment. C NC N/A c. Overhanging eaves. C NC N/A 12. Signage a. Intent: The intent of design guidelines for signage is to reinforce the low intensity and low profile identity of the Town of Oro Valley. Well designed and coordinated signage clarifies the presence of residential and business communities. Signage can contribute to the success of the Town's economy by enhancing the Town's image in the environment. Design opportunities may occur in the following ways: i.) Integration of signage with corresponding architecture C NC N/A ii.) Directional signage C NC N/A iii.) Business identification signage C NC N/A b. Signage should be integrated into the design of a building. C NC N/A i.) Integration means that sign elements (including logos) are defined by building elements and are in proportion and scale with building components (figure 18).0 NC N/A ii.) Use sign letters and shapes that are not predominating on any surface (a size that allows for ample area on the sign surface surrounding the sign). Colors should coordinate with mounting wall. (Figure 19). C NC N/A iii.) Coordinate colors with corresponding building's or project's colors. No more than three colors should be used in one signage system (one project). Signs within the same project should be the same color or color scheme. C NC N/A iv.) Use materials that appear natural to the surroundings and complement the corresponding building's or project's architecture. C NC N/A c. Signage should be integrated and coordinated within a project and, as appropriate and feasible, between related projects. C NC N/A fr-` Residential and Infill Projects a. Street character should be diverse in residential r areas. Diverse is defined as providing safety, interest and variety while maintaining a harmonious context. C NC N/A i.) Vary individual street character through the use of street trees or landscape themes, setbacks, or architectural treatment. C NC N/A • Provide additional setbacks for buildings larger than 1-story. C NC N/A • Vary lot widths. C NC N/A b. A variety of garage placements is encouraged. C NC N/A c. Create a design theme identified by materials, color, roof types, etc., for larger projects/neighborhoods. C NC N/A d. De-emphasize garages on street frontages. (Figure 21) Techniques for varying garage treatments include: C NC N/A i.) The garage should consist of not more that 50% of the total building frontage. (Two story structures—2nd story included in 50%) C NC N/A ii.) At least 50% of garage doors should be flush with or recessed from the front of the house. C NC N/A iii.) Garages may project no more than five (5) feet in front of a house (unless side-entry) and must have an entry feature or porch to moderate the visual impact of the garage. C NC N/A iv.) Garages for three cars should have the third portion offset from the other two.0 NC N/A v.) Side entry garages should have articulation (e.g. windows) on the side facing the street. C NC N/A vi.) Recess garages from living areas. C NC N/A vii.) Placement of garage at rear of lot. C NC N/A viii.) Type of garage door(door with windows, vary styles). C NC N/A e. Vary the street appearance by providing different roof lines and shapes. There should be no visible rooftop mechanical equipment. Solar panels must be integrated into the design of the building and conform to roof slope. C NC N/A f. Provide multiple floor plans and at least two elevations for each plan. Elevations should vary in use of accent materials or accent colors. At least two color schemes should be provided for building and roof colors. C NC N/A g. Encourage the use of porches. C NC N/A h. Articulate windows (pop-outs, recessed and/or accented sills or lintels) on elevations visible from a street or pathway. This is optional on other elevations. C NC N/A Vary second story treatments: i.) The second story should have less area than the first so as to provide some setbacks from the first to the second story in order to reduce building mass. C NC N/A ii.) Second story setbacks and articulation are required for corner lots and for lots with exposure to arterial and collector streets. C NC N/A j. Building projects that are proposed within an existing context of buildings will be compatible with the existing structures, where a consistent context exists. This does not apply when there is an intended change of character due to redevelopment or rehabilitation. Compatibility will consider the following: i.) Roof Shape: The intent is not that all roof shapes will be the same,but if there is a predominant shape existing, then the new building should have a similar shape. This also applies to type and pitch C NC N/A f' i.) Proportion and Scale: Proportion deals with the relationship of the height to the width and the relationship of each part to the whole. Scale is the relation of each building to other buildings in the area. Proportion and scale will be considered in the evaluation of compatibility. C_NC N/A iii.) Rhythm of Openings: The number, size and spacing of windows and doors in a facade should be similar to other buildings in the area. C NC 1 N/A II'v.) Massing: Massing deals with volume created by sections of a building. The massing of existing buildings should be respected. C NC N/A v.) Materials, colors and detailing: Sameness is not required, but similarity should be considered in determining compatibility. C NC N/A i k. Walls should be used as an element in the community to provide project identity, security, and noise attenuation. C NC N/A i.) Establish a"theme" for subdivisions/communities that includes wall design. Methods to define walls include: C NC N/A ii.) Use colors and materials that blend with the surrounding elements. C NC N/A iii.) Comprehensively design walls and fences within a project using materials and colors coordinated with architectural and signage elements. C NC N/A iv.) Combine with other design elements. C NC N/A v.) Avoid the severe appearance of long, solid walls (more than 40 feet)by using at least two of the following techniques: C NC N/A vi.) Decorative features: caps,patterns, and variation in textures or materials. C NC N/A • Use of swales, berms and landscaping C NC N/A • Undulations or offset areas. C NC N/A • Vary setbacks. C NC N/A • Encourage alternatives to solid walls including berms, dense landscaping, view walls (walls with wrought iron or a combination of wrought iron and solid wall) and decorative fencing. C NC N/A III. Commercial/Office Projects 1. Non-residential areas should have coordinated streetscapes. C NC N/A a. Provide consistent setbacks for structures. C NC N/A b. Require "context plan"to show relationship of proposed building to existing buildings on neighboring sites. C NC N/A c. Limit building mass along street frontages and sensitive edges. C NC N/A d. Encourage parking setbacks that provide consistently landscaped areas. C NC N/A e. Encourage locating a portion of the parking to sides and/or rear of buildings. C NC N/A f. Encourage plans that cluster the buildings. C NC N/A 2. Mechanical equipment should be screened from public view. C NC N/A a. Encourage ground mounted mechanical equipment. b. C NC N/A c. Use landscaping, walls, undergrounding and rear placements to screen equipment. C NC N/A 3. Loading and service areas should be screened from public view. a. Discourage loading and/or servicing between building and street unless approved by DRB. C NC N/A b. Design loading and service so entire operation is on-site. No loading vehicles may extend beyond site boundaries. C NC N/A c. Screen loading and service areas from the street and design as an integral part of the building architecture. C NC N/A d. Screen all outdoor refuse areas. No refuse areas permitted between a building and the street. C NC N/A 4. Drive-throughs should not be the dominant feature viewed from adjacent roadways. C N N/A a. Use landscaping, screen walls or berms to screen from adjacent roadways. C NC N/A b. Design buildings and canopies so that drive-throughs are a harmonious element of a building. C NC N/A c. Discourage drive-throughs adjacent to the roadway. C NC NA 5. The visual impact of large scale commercial buildings ("big box") and commercial complexes should be moderated to reduce the apparent scale and mass of such projects. C NC N/A a. Articulate facades (exterior walls) to reduce scale and mass and provide visual interest. C NC N/A This is to be accomplished by: • Ground level facades that face public streets and/or primary parking areas should have one-story pedestrian scale features for at least 2/3 of the horizontal length of the side of a building. Features may include windows, entry areas, arcades and/or overhangs (awnings, trellis, etc.) C NC N/A • Facades greater than 100-feet in horizontal length should be broken by recesses or off-sets. Alternatively, the horizontal length may be broken by vertical elements. Off-sets or vertical elements should be of sufficient size to effectively mitigate the visual impact of the horizontal line and mass. C NC N/A b. Vary roof lines to reduce the visual impact of building mass. C NC N/A c. Add variety and interest of a human scale by using color or textures. C NC N/A d. Increase textures at the pedestrian level. C NC N/A e. Coordinate the design of retail complexes that involve multiple buildings to achieve visual compatibility. The relationships of buildings should be considered to create open spaces and pedestrian continuity. Drive-throughs and service areas should be oriented to face away or be adequately screened from public streets. C NC N/A 6. The scale and massing of multiple story office buildings should be broken up to retain visual interest. C NC N/A a. Clearly articulate building entries. Entries should be clearly articulated and a pedestrian scale maintained by the use of low level detail, textures, covered or recessed areas. C NC N/A b. Use a combination of geometric forms for building design, not just a single block. Expanses of glass, especially curtain wall, and unfinished surfaces are not desired. Window area should not dominate the surface area, except as may be desired on the ground level. Facades should be broken up by recesses, off-sets or other articulation. Varying roof lines or heights are encouraged. C NC N/A c. Design parking structures to be similar in scale, materials, colors and articulation as primary structures. C NC N/A 7. Signs Related to Architectural Design C NC N/A a. Coordinate freestanding signs (monument, directional, and informational) with the corresponding buildings or project's architecture by using similar materials, colors and/or illumination. C NC N/A b. Discourage box signs with acrylic, although box signs with punch-through letters are acceptable. C NC N/A 8. Corporate logos should be placed and sized so as to integrate into architectural elements. C NC N/A IV. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Goal 1.1 Preserve Oro Valley's natural Sonoran Desert environment and scenic resources which are an important part of the community's quality of life. C NC N/A Policy 1.1B Promote clustering(average density) developments to protect environmentally sensitive areas. Clustering is a development design technique that permits a reduction in lot area and bulk requirements,provided there is no increase in the number of lots, and the remaining land area is devoted to open space. In large-lot or multi-family developments, clustering may also be accomplished by placing building pads close to each other as mechanisms are in place to protect remaining open space. C NC N/A Policy 1.1E View protection shall be an essential aspect of Oro Valley's community design review and project approval. C NC N/A Policy 2.1E Bike, vehicle and pedestrian conflicts are to be minimized through appropriate design standards. C NC NA Policy 3.1F Maintain and enhance Oro Valley's residential/resort/recreation character. C NC N/A Policy 3.1 J Employment-related uses are encouraged to provide work places for a growing employment base. Office, technical and corporate employment facilities shall be compatible and consistent with the scale of the surrounding area. Campus-style employment centers that emphasize a unified architectural theme,pedestrian orientation, inward-transportation patterns, and a natural landscaping theme are encouraged. These employment centers do not include high-rise structures or heavy industrial uses. C NC N/A Policy 3.1K Heavy industrial and outdoor commercial uses that require significant infrastructure, introduce greater truck traffic, and are visually and environmentally incompatible with the Town's vision are generally unacceptable. C NC N/A Policy 3.1 L Industrial uses, such as colleges or health care, are desired and will be actively pursued and supported when located in appropriate locations. C NC N/A Policy 3.1 M Specialty commercial development, similar to St. Phillips Plaza in Tucson, is encouraged in appropriate locations. C NC N/A Policy 4.2A Encourage the provision of a variety of housing choices matched to employees within a reasonable proximity of employment sites. C NC N/A Goal 7.4.1 To promote high quality residential neighborhoods. C NC NA Goal 9.1 To ensure that the built environment is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with the natural surroundings. C NC N/A Policy 9.1D All development proposals should attempt to arrange buildings,massing of buildings, and/or arrangements of lots to preserve views from adjacent properties and streets while providing privacy for residents. C NC N/A Policy 9.1E All development proposals should show design strategies used to minimize changes to existing topography and the disturbance of existing vegetation. C NC N/A Policy 9.1F All sides of buildings may impact their surroundings and should be coherently designed and treated. C NC N/A Policy 9.1G In order to maximize integration of the built environment with the natural environment, and minimize distractions of the built environment, all new development proposals should incorporate means of reducing the apparent size and bulk of buildings. C NC N/A Policy 9.1I All new development proposals should consider existing landscaping within 400 feet of the project site to provide and maintain landscape continuity within the community. C NC N/A V. OVERLAY DISTRICTS Comments 3 Tangerine Corridor Overlay District (TRCOD) Regulations/Guidelines Section 10-002, p.10-0.The District shall include lands located between Naranja Road and Moore Road or their alignments, within the corporate limits of the Town of Oro Valley(the "Corridor"); and shall be applied to all properties lying within the Corridor at the time of this Ordinance adoption; and to such lands within the Corridor which may, from time to time, be annexed into the Town. A. Applicability. Overlay District regulations, as stated herein, apply to all property within one quarter mile of the Tangerine Road centerline (the "Target Area", as defined in the Tangerine Road Corridor Specific Plan). Overlay District guidelines pertain to all uses in the Corridor. Construction, addition to or remodeling of individual residences within the Target Area shall require only observance of frontage tract and setback standards (unless nonconforming building lines exist, in which case the Board of Adjustment may consider granting a variance) and of non- access provisions. C NC N/A B. Tangerine Road Corridor District Design Guidelines— Section 10-006, p. 10-0.13. Design guidelines are intended as a flexible, regulatory supplement and complement the development standards set forth in Section 10-005 for general land development use types. The full intent of the following criteria should be met, as determined by the DRB, in order to obtain development approval. Distinctions by use type are organized according to the underlying zoning district classifications cited in Section 10-005 for Residential, Commercial and Employment/Institutional uses. C NC N/A 1. Guidelines Applied. The review of development proposals' responsiveness to design guidelines is mandatory for all properties or portions of properties located in the Corridor Target area. Review is optional for sites in the Corridor's peripheral areas. Alternative means for complying with guidelines' intent may be accepted by the Town. C NC N/A 2. Architectural Design Guidelines. Buildings constructed in the Tangerine Road Corridor should be low and of colors, materials and textures, which blend with natural desert vegetation, leaving large areas 6f open space between developments. Buildings that are visible from Tangerine Road should seem to be a part of, or in, the landscape rather than appearing to be an imposition orb the site. The buildings should follow the natural contours of the existing topography. Where taller structures are permitted, the massing of their elevations should provide relief a d interest, avoiding unbroken, massive expanses of structural walls, and creating inte sting variations of light and shade. C NC N/A 3. Building Materials. Building mate als that respond to community desires for southwestern and ranch-type design themes, prow e energy efficiency and low maintenance, should predominate in the Tangerine Road orridor. The use of large expanses of glass or metallic material (e.g. constituting fo y percent or more of a building face) is discouraged; Comments 4 highly reflective glass (exceeding twenty percent reflectivity) is discouraged, due to the obtrusive glare and low energy efficiency. C NC N/A 4. Building Colors. Building colors should relate to one another and the natural environment on the basis of pigment, color value and/or intensity. In the Tangerine Road Corridor, earth tones and pastels are encouraged, especially in areas of high visibility. Color schemes should avoid jarring juxtapositions with primary colors. In more private area, away from the Tangerine Road view corridor, homeowners and business owners are permitted more freedom in color selections. C NC N/A C. Commercial Development Regulations— Section 10-006,p. 10-0.15. Developers are expected to document proposals for construction with plans, graphics, elevations and narrative descriptions that demonstrate responsiveness to these design guidelines. Review of all commercial development plans in the Tangerine Road Corridor should consider the following particulars to assure design consistency with Specific Plan intent: 1. Further Considerations: (p. 10-01.6) a. Architectural rooftop treatments tb screen equipment and architectural details on all structural facades. C NC \I/A b. Subdued lighting for entries, signage and parking areas. C NC N/A c. Safety and crime prevention. C NC N/A 2. Structural Treatments. The following app f arance and environmental compatibility criteria are expected to be met for the approval of r ny development plan: C NC N/A a. Principal structures are constructed +f rough masonry, slump block or similar materials; board and batten, untreat:s concrete block or metal buildings are discouraged. C NC N/A b. Bright colors, highly reflective glass greater than 20%) and moving appurtenances (other than official flags) are not pe itted to be visible from Tangerine Road or other public rights-of-way; only indigenous, desert colors (the earth, vegetation, rock outcroppings), are permitted C NC N/A c. Incorporation of natural elements suc as boulders, native rock or designing to blend structures with natural washes o existing stands of vegetation is highly desirable; and C NC N/A d. Further considerations: C NC ! /A i.) In locations upslope from the u timate Tangerine Road right-of-way, richer, earthtone or geologic colors a d rougher textures are preferred especially those which complement bac .ground views; downslopes, darker earth colors with more dense landsc.,sing clusters (i.e., structure, colors derived from natural background). C NC N/A ii.) Frontage landscaping should be ative, low water use plants with indigenous, low-lying accent foli=ge edging access roads or driveways as contrast to paving and earthen be s screening access or frontage roadways parallel to Tangerine Road. C C N/A Comments 5 • iii.) Architectural detailing includes rough cut stone accents, recessed window treatments and vertical elements in visible walls of greater than 50' length. C NC N/A D. Employment and Institutional Design Guidelines, p. 10-0.17 - Applicants or designers of these uses are expected to document proposals for construction with plans, graphics, elevations and narrative descriptions that demonstrate responsiveness to these design guidelines. Site Planning and Structural Treatment expectations apply to the evaluation criteria established for Commercial Design Guidelines (Subsection D above), and, in addition, structural height is limited to a ratio of 1:3 relative to width. C NC N/A E. Residential Design Guidelines,p. 10-0.14—Homebuilders are expected to document proposals for residential consideration with plans, graphics and elevations and narrative descriptions that demonstrate responsiveness to these design guidelines. Review of all residential developments other than individual, detached, single-family home construction should consider the following criteria to assure design consistency with Overlay District intent and character: C NC N/A 1. General a. Consistent, finished rooftop treatments, without visible roof-mounted equipment. C NC N/A b. Subdued or managed lighting C NC N/A c. Safety and crime prevention C NC N/A 2. Residential Style Considerations. The following criteria, pertaining to appearance and environmental compatibility, are expected to be ` et for the approval of any residential development plan: C NC N/A a. Only indigenous desert colors (t earth, vegetation, rock outcropping) are permitted; variations within developments are to be transitional, rather than abrupt. C NC N/A b. Materials, textures, and rooflines included in residential structures are to observe Southwest rural ranch architecture themes. C NC N/A c. Residential siting anticipates the integration of natural features such as existing vegetation, boulders, drainageway C NC N/A d. Noise Mitigation is addressed by mliasonry construction, double-paned windows and limited window openings and recre tional yard uses facing Tangerine Road. C NC N/A e. Desert/mountain colors that blend 'th the natural background are encouraged C NC N/A f. Xeriscape groundcover, earthen be s screening access or frontage roads and parking visible from Tangerine Roa and structural integration with terrain, such as building lower floors into slopes NC N/A g. In architectural design terms, there s ould be: avoidance of boxlike structures and reflective materials; vertical elements in walls of greater than 50' length; and subdued lighting for entries, signage and parking areas. C NC N/A Comments 6 2. Oracle Road Scenic Corridor District—Section 10-401, p. 10-25. A. Applicability—The provisions of the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District apply to development in the area shown on the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District Map. C NC N/A B. Exceptions: 1. Rooney Ranch PAD—Rooney Ranch Planned Area Development- The Rooney Ranch Planned Area Development contains an approved layout plan for commercial development within the Oracle Road Corridor. Area G, located on the west side of Oracle Road and south of Pusch View Lane is exempt from the provisions of this overlay zone. C NC N/A 2. Development Area B of the Rooney Ranch PAD are exempt from the following provisions: Sec. 10-407C.2.a.&b. (front setbacks) and Sec. 10-407C.3.a. (building bulk). Development area D is exempt from all provisions of this overlay zone except, Sec. 10-406, 9, Right-of—way landscaping. C NC N/A 3. La Reserve Planned Area Development-All portions of the La Reserve PAD that fall within the Oracle Road Corridor Overlay District are subject to the provisions of the district, with the exception of the Foothills Business Park. C NC N/A 4. Based on the recorded plat for the Foothills Business Park,Lots 2-8, 16, and 17 shall be exempt from the requirements of Sec. 10-407D.4.a. (open space) and Sec. 10-407D.5.a.-b. (view corridors). Lots 9-12 of the Foothills Business Park shall be exempt from the provisions of Sec. 10-407D.2. (setbacks) and Sec. 10-407D.4.a. (open space). All other provisions of this district shall apply. C NC N/A 5. Lots 1, 13, 14, and 15 of the Foothills Business Park have been fully developed, and are exempt from the provisions of the overlay district. C NC N/A 6. Steam Pump Ranch Planned Area Development-If the Steam Pump Ranch PAD gains ordinanced zoning status, the following exemptions shall apply. If the PAD lapses or is substantially altered as to building layout or circulation patterns, all provisions of the ORSCOD shall apply. C NC N/A 7. Based on the tentative development plan approved as part of the Planned Area Development document, the Steam Pump Ranch PAD will be exempted from Section 10-407C.3.a. related to permitted building bulk, if the conditions stated above are satisfied. All other provisions of this district shall apply. C NC N/A 8. If any PAD is substantially changed from the Town approved plan, as determined by the Planning and Zoning Director, all provisions of this overlay district shall apply. A substantial change from the approved land use plan includes a change in 1)the number and general massing of buildings or groups of buildings, 2)density, 3) setbacks, 4) open space or 5) circulation configuration. Such a deviation will cause the loss of exemption. All cases evaluated for significant change shall be made Comments 7 known to the Planning&Zoning Commission through the Planning &Zoning Director's Report. C NC N/A (cC. Architectural Design Guidelines—Section 10-408, p. 10-44. C NC N/A 1. Within the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor,buildings should be low and clustered, with 1/4,, � g varied setbacks, leaving large areas of open space between developments. Buildings should seem to be a part of, or in, the landscape rather than appearing to be an imposition on the site. The buildings should follow the natural contours of the existing topography. Building heights should be limited, in most areas of the Corridor, to two floors. The building elevations should provide relief and interest, reflecting the topography by stepping buildings up and down hillsides. The massing of the elevations themselves should also provide relief and interest. Such a massing scheme provides interesting shadows which are not possible on large, unbroken expanses of wall. Flat, undistinguished elevations should be discouraged. C NC N/A 2. Building Materials. The predominant building materials used in the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor should be masonry and/or wood frame with a masonry or stucco exterior finish. The inclusion of masonry materials will tie the buildings to the topography in pleasing ways, such as in Mediterranean hill towns. These materials also provide energy efficiency and low maintenance. The use of large expanses of glass,particularly highly reflective glass, is discouraged, due to the obtrusive glare and low energy efficiency. C NC N/A 3. Building Colors. Building colors should relate to one another and the natural environment on the basis of pigment, color value and/or intensity. Within the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor, earth tones and pastels are encouraged, especially in areas of high visibility. Color schemes should avoid jarring juxtapositions with primary colors. In more private areas, away from the Oracle Road view corridor, homeowners and business owners are permitted more freedom in color selections. C NC N/A D. Residential Design Guidelines -Review of all residential developments other than individual, detached, single-family home construction shall consider the following criteria to assure design consistency with Overlay District intent and character: C NC N/A 1. Consistent, finished rooftop treatments C NC N/A 2. Screening of support piers C NC N/A 3. Structure spacing to permit views. C NC N/A 4. Maintaining views from interior neighborhoods to mountains. C NC N/A 5. Subdued lighting for entry monumentation C NC N/A E. Residential Style Considerations. The following appearance criteria are expected to be met for the approval of any plat: C NC N/A Comments 8 1. Only indigenous desert colors are permitted; variations within developments are to be transitional, rather than abrupt; C NC N/A 2." Residential structures, including materials, textures and rooflines are to observe Southwestern architectural themes; C NC N/A 3' Integration of natural features such as existing vegetation,boulders, drainageways; and C NC N/A Further considerations: a. Lighter, desert colors are encouraged C NC N/A b. Xeriscape groundcover C NC N/A c. Avoidance of boxlike structures C NC N/A d. In areas upslope from Oracle Road, darker, geologic colors to blend with mountain slopes C NC N/A e. Structural integration with terrain C NC N/A f. Avoidance of reflective materials C NC N/A g. Thematic architectural detailing C NC N/A h. Earthen berms screening access roads and parking visible from Oracle Road C NC N/A i. Vertical elements in walls of greater than 50'width. C NC N/A j. Subdued lighting for entries, signage and parking areas C NC N/A F. Resort Development Design Guidelines -Proposed resort developments are to be evaluated r' according to the Oracle Road District expectation criteria to assure project excellence: 1. Grouping structures well away from view corridors C NC N/A 2. Preserving views through the site. C NC N/A 3. Creating low-lying building profiles C NC N/A 4. Subdued lighting for entries, signage and parking areas C NC N/A (G. Structural Treatments. The following appearance criteria are expected to be met for the approval of any resort development plan: 1. Distinctive architecture blending with the Sonoran Desert context(see Architectural Design Guidelines above) C NC N/A 2. Creative use of light and shade in plazas C NC N/A 3. Extensive use of natural materials (rough native stone,wood) C NC N/A 4. Facilitating split-level entry from parking areas C NC N/A 5. Blending colors with existing vegetation, rock/earth forms C NC N/A 6. Further considerations: a. Clustering structures as a central "outcropping" C NC N/A Comments 9 b. Mission-style, Santa Fe, or Territorial architecture is appropriate C NC N/A c. Landscaped focal points C NC N/A d. Keeping principal structure on lower slopes,not exceeding ridge heights C NC N/A e. Architecture which runs with land contours C NC N/A f. Integrating structures,pedestrian paths with natural earthforms C NC N/A g. Maintaining wide sight angles beyond structures C NC N/A h. Casitas deployed to create residential scale C NC N/A i. Emphasizing existing vegetation to accent principal building,plazas. C NC N/A ii. Commercial Design Guidelines, Section 10-408, p. 10-47. Review of all commercial development plans within the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor shall consider the following particulars to assure design consistency with Specific Plan intent: Further considerations: a. Consistent, screened rooftop treatments C NC N/A b. Structural height restricted to 1:4 (from natural grade)relative to width C NC N/A c. Architectural detailing on all structure facades C NC N/A d. Subdued lighting for entries, signage and parking areas C NC N/A 2'- Structural Treatments. The following appearance criteria are expected to be met for the approval of any development plan: a. Principal structures are constructed of rough masonry, slump block or similar materials; board and batten, untreated cinder block or metal buildings are prohibited. C NC N/A b. Bright colors, highly reflective surfaces and moving appurtenances (other than official flags) are not permitted to be visible from Oracle Road or other public rights-of-way; only indigenous, desert colors, are permitted. C NC N/A c. Rooflines are preferred to be horizontal; others are permissible, such as Santa Barbara Mission style. C NC N/A Glass panels measuring greater than 4'in width or height are to be of 20%reflectivity or less. C NC N/A Incorporation of natural elements such as boulders, native rock or designing to blend structures with natural washes or existing copses of vegetation is highly desirable; C NC N/A 5, - Further considerations: a. Lighter, desert colors C NC N/A Comments to '`} b Access coloration similar to native vegetation C NC N/A ,r c. Frontage landscaping for desert coloration--in natural state or xeriscape C NC N/A 4f Indigenous, low-lying landscape accents edging access roads or driveways as contrast to paving C NC N/A y In areas upslope from Oracle Road, richer, earthtone or geologic colors; rougher textures C NC N/A .,,- Recessed window treatments C NC N/A g. Colors derived from background rock forms and vegetation C / NC N/A -,"E. Thematic architectural detailing,preferring rough cut stone accents C NC N/A -'i. Foreground colors harmonizing with natural or built background C NC N/A j. Vertical elements in visible walls of greater than 50'width C NC N/A k. Earthen berms screening access roadways parallel to Oracle Road. C NC N/A I. Employment/Institutional Design Guidelines,p. 10-48. 1. Adjacent to residential districts, setbacks of the residential district are to be met or exceeded, and to include a masonry wall with heavy landscaping as augmentation. C NC N/A 2. Internal circulation to minimize access points onto Oracle Road or other public z s streets, and reduce conflicts with pedestrian circulation and pathway linkages. C NC N/A 1. Further considerations: a. Consistent screened roof top treatments C NC N/A 4 b. Maintaining through-site view corridors C NC N/A c. Structural height restricted to 1:3 relative to width C NC N/A d. Architectural detailing on all structure facades C NC N/A Structural Treatments. The following appearance criteria are expected to be met 1(. for the approval of any employment/institutional development plan: C NC N/A a. Bright colors, highly reflective surfaces are not visible from Oracle Road or other public streets. C NC N/A b. Rooflines are preferred to be horizontal. C NC N/A c. Glass panels measuring greater that 4 feet in height or width are to be of 20% reflectivity or less. C NC N/A d. Principal structures are constructed of rough masonry, slump block or similar materials. Untreated cinder block,board and batten or metal buildings are discouraged. C NC N/A Comments 11 5. Further considerations: a. Lighter, indigenous desert colors C NC N/A b. Accent colors similar to native vegetation C NC N/A c. Enhanced native landscape along frontage C NC N/A d. Indigenous shrubs, ground covers and accents should be used for pavement edge definition C NC N/A e. Richer earthtone colors derived from background rock forms and vegetation C NC N/A f. Recessed window treatments C NC N/A g. Rougher building material textures C NC N/A h. Foreground colors harmonizing with natural or built background C NC N/A i. Vertical elements incorporated with visible walls of greater than 50 foot width. C NC N/A Comments 12 JP\_LEY ARi TOWN OF ORO VALLEY OQ° o2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning and Zoning • Building Safety PP' 11000 N.La Canada Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-4800•Fax(520)742-1022 P , Oro Valley Public Library 1305 W.Naranja Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737• (520)229-5300•Fax(520)229-5319 A. Parks and Recreation PwN D ED�0�1 680 W.Calle Concordia,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-5050•Fax(520)797-2202 November 7, 2002 Larry J. Click&Associates 3444 N. County Club Rd., Suite 105 Tucson, AZ 85716 Fax# 327-8816 RE:OV13-02-29, ARCHITECTURE COMMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 2 & 3 WITHIN THE SAN JOSE PLAZA, PARCEL #22431002D Dear Mr. Click: Thank you for meeting with me on November 6, 2002 regarding the proposed architecture for the San Jose Plaza. This letter is to summarize all the comments addressed in our discussion. The following is the list of issues; • All four elevations must be consistently designed and treated. Per our discussion, additional architectural design/treatments equivalent in stature to the front elevations will be provided on the north side of Development Area 3 and the east side of Development Area 2. • The "Peacock" blue color along the roof line and columns is not consistent within the Plaza. Per our discussion, a green color similar to Pizzeria Uno and Holiday Inn Express will be utilized. The exterior colors should also be consistent with the Holiday Inn Express. • Pedestrian scale features (planters and/or benches) shall be added along the building frontage. • The architectural submittal will be removed from the November 14, 2002 DRB agenda until a revised Master Development Plan, landscape plan and elevations are submitted concurrently. The resubmittal must include the following; • Three (3) full size blueline and fifteen (15) 11"x17" copies of the revised San Jose Master Development Plan. • Three (3) full size blueline and fifteen (15) 11"x17 copies of the landscape plan. The landscape plan must be in conformance with the most recent update of the landscape code. • Fifteen (15) 11"x 17" copies of the architectural elevations and color samples. The next resubmittal deadline is November 22nd in order to proceed to the December 10, 2002 DRB meeting. The revised development plan may be administratively approved; however, the landscape plan and architecture will require DRB approval. Please contact me at 229-4817 if you have any questions. ncerely, sUi/4\t7 David Ronquillo Planner I cc: Shirley Gay www.townoforoval ley.com TOWN OF ORO VALLEY STAFF REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE: April 8, 2003 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD APPROVED :Y:TC/P 1::OA FROM: David Ronquillo,Planner I 1.. PT '..,� y,�,t,� PZ PROJECT M NAGER SUBJECT: OV13-03-14, LARRY J. CLICK& ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING GARY HEINFELD, REQUESTS ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 2 & 3 OF THE SAN JOSE PLAZA; LOCATED 1/4 MILE NORTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE ROAD AND EL CONQUISTADOR WAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD, PARCEL #22431002D BACKGROUND: The San Jose Plaza consists of 13.4 acres and the zoning for this site is C-2 Commercial. The San Jose Plaza was platted into various lots that are designated as Development Areas 1 - 6. The Master Development Plan for this site was approved on October 1, 1997. Currently, there are only two lots that have been developed, Pizzeria Uno &the Holiday Inn Express, and the four remaining lots are graded but not developed. The developer has submitted a revised Master Development Plan for this site with the intent to develop the two vacant lots on the south side of the property. The two remaining lots on the east side of the property would be developed in the future; therefore, the proposed architecture is only for the buildings within Development Areas 2 & 3. Since a Master Development Plan has already been approved, the applicant is only required to submit a conceptual pad specific development plan subject to staff approval. Currently, staff is in the process of reviewing the revised development plan and will update the DRB at the meeting, if there are any significant issues that would affect the floor plan of these buildings. SUMMARY: Larry J. Click & Associates has submitted architectural renderings for Development Areas 2 & 3 of the San Jose Plaza. Development Area 2 consists of a 6,525 sq. ft. building and Development Area 3 consists of a 6,800 sq. ft. building. The two structures will be single story in height (18') and utilize the same architectural elements of the adjacent buildings. Some of these elements include; a flat roofline that varies in height, pitched roof towers with concrete roof tile, exterior stucco finish and brick trim around the columns. A theme of contrasting design has been established within this area. In particular, the architecture, landscaping, and signage for Pizzeria Uno and Holiday Inn Express have set the precedent. Design elements found in the aforementioned projects have also been utilized for the proposed architecture. The aim is to create and maintain general themes that are consistent in design and style from the existing buildings. Overall, the proposed architecture integrates a variation of design components similar in style to the adjacent structures. OVZCR Design Guidelines There are two distinct sets of design guidelines that apply to the project: Oracle Road Overlay District in Section 10 and the Design Guidelines in OVZCR Section 16. The following items are noteworthy: TOWN OF ORO VALLEY STAFF REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Page 2 10-408D1: Principal structures are constructed of rough masonry, slump block, or similar materials; board and batten, untreated cinder block or metal buildings are prohibited. The proposed building complies with these standards. 16-103B5b: Coordinate similar project types on adjoining parcels, e.g. commercial at an intersection. Coordinated means that certain design elements, such as size of walls, open space, colors, or landscape elements can be similar. Compatibility and visual coherence is desired, not necessarily sameness The proposed colors and architectural style is compatible with Pizzeria Lino and Holiday Inn Express 16-103.B-4, Reduce the apparent size and mass of larger buildings. a. Break up mass of large buildings by dividing into basic geometric components (one story at pedestrian entrances), with intersecting wall planes. Two individual single story buildings are proposed which avoid the appearance of a massive building structure. b. Emphasize the horizontal, but break up long continuous building surfaces with off sets or contrasting form. The proposed building integrates various design elements, preventing the appearance of a long continuous building surface. c. Vary roof line silhouettes The buildings provide a combination of flat and pitched roof design that varies in height. d. Encourage wall mass over glass area. An adequate combination of wall mass over glass area has been provided. e. Utilize pedestrian scale features at the ground level, such as planters, benches and textures. The applicant must provide planters and/or benches to integrate pedestrian scale features that should be positioned in close proximity to the location of the public art. A condition has been added for this to be achieved. f Design buildings with consideration given to all sides of a building. Adequate architectural treatments have been provided on all four sides. , TOWN OF ORO VALLEY STAFF REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Page 3 Overall, the proposed buildings utilize the same design elements & colors of the existing structures within the Plaza. A sample of the exterior color,brick and roof sample is attached. Setbacks The following are the required setbacks for this development; Front 20', Side 10 and Rear 25'. The maximum building height is 18' for all buildings with the exception of Development Area 4 which may be 24' (two stories). The proposed buildings in Development Areas 2 & 3 meet the maximum height of 18' and the required setbacks. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE: The proposed architecture complies with the General Plan Design Policies. In particular, Policy 9.IF, which states, "All sides of buildings may impact their surroundings and should be coherently designed and treated". The proposed elevations are consistently designed and treated. PRESENTATION REQUIREMENTS: All presentations before Boards, Commissions, and Council must be formatted to be shown on the Town's projection system or overhead system. A presentation must be designed to insure that the audience, staff, and the voting body can view the graphics. Examples of acceptable computer formats are PowerPoint, ArcView, videotape of presentation boards, and/or overhead transparences. The applicant is responsible for the development,presentation, and coordination of all presentation materials. If an applicant does not conform to the aforementioned resolution,the item may be continued due to non-compliance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends architectural approval for Development Areas 2 & 3 of the San Jose Plaza with the conditions listed in Exhibit A. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: The DRB may consider one of the following motions: I move to approve OV13-03-14, Architecture for Development Areas 2 & 3 of the San Jose Plaza, with the conditions listed in Exhibit"A" attached,herewith. OR I move to approve OV13-03-14, Architecture for Development Areas 2 & 3 of the San Jose Plaza, with the conditions listed in Exhibit"A"attached,herewith and the following added condition(s): . OR TOWN OF ORO VALLEY STAFF REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Page 4 I move to deny OV13-03-14, Architecture for Development Areas 2 & 3 of the San Jose Plaza finding that: Attachments: 1. Exhibit"A" 2. Floor Plan/Elevations 3. Color renderings cc: Larry J. Click Fax: 327-8816 ti EXHIBIT "A" OV13-03-14 SAN JOSE PLAZA 1. All signage for this project must be approved by the DRB Agenda Review Committee by a separate permit. 2. The applicant must provide additional planters and/or benches in close proximity to the location of the public art. MAR 2 1 2003 1 Si 70 cl z F COVERED PORCH m � Zv. 73 ar._._____r__ .suio. D n nII 6 .-r_. m - COVERED PORCH z 1 O tv m (71 cil -n N (s N -n V O p GTi 6T I T I I -n c o ,23 w r • ....... r COVEREp PORCH L - • WOW • - ♦ 117-0" I / rn rn cp ND y O = ;>f! E Q m > .� rn " .n Z: . % t 0 LARRY J.CLICK&ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTS S 3444 N.COUNTRY CLUB,SUITE 105TrUCSON,ARIZONA 85716/(520)327-6670 CD ~ CD SAN J05E PLAZA o N N o DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 ---a o° m N FLOOR PLAN r L I 1 CONIC RQOF TU.E FAINTER MET/'}._*. :li _____li FINISH GRADE - . �_I I! -_ T niln",".. 1 O11GK- STUCCO N WEST ELEVATION N < • SCALE 1/!"=1'�0" N QL CSC --I z O >- © ....jI W a i - 4 • la'on 18'-0" * _ �{ l 14' D" I _ „• 5 I a�y` 'y+ G�i .ire I 1 , 4 1 L_,.t —____tcr - . _..‘_- -4 t,11 C-171 i — _ . _, 1 f i — _ i ruusa FINISH GRADE SOUTH ELEVATION NO TH:ELEVATION SCALE va-1-a .SCALE I/&'=1.-0° 9 ro N I io 17. cot ON ILI cc a £&) <C U it;g 16'-0" 1 1 g w i0'0 ►�e1:44_i.,...Wei.YM *MM_,M �w/!►N^f 4M M►w� MYY�rMw 11.o irrM �y ; -- DATA TENANT SPACE 6525 SF I I ..; __,...„_ i , ,... PORCH AREA 1510 SF N z jt 1 J Sio,[1 E. N...�� ���: ,�T,._ R ^-- T1NSH GRADE. ,_ � ... Rom._. ,..�,. .:.. ec 4 5 x 2002.09 • OCT.11,2002 1/8"GRAPHIC SCALE O . r""l 'IF""'" 1 ! EAST ELEVATION I 16 8 4 2 0 8 16 172.2SCALE 1/8"=1'-0" - . f I 120'-0" rillii • I COVERED PORRC"H ri,...) 4 . _, 1.....„ • i COVERED,PORCH 0 "11111' . I,it Z1-- 1----1 p Z ^_I LJ'- < w 800 Sf 1400 SF 1400 SF 1200 5F 1000 SF 1000 5F (S) ILI 1 lis .y_ 1, ...) pi••• -__-- -----mac— }_,________Amm=f\\zi.._._._.____amm-- . —...)- .,: COVERED PORCH L • MOM ! 1111111114 • 111111.11111+ • im.t • 111111111111. 0 I , r t0 ro FLOOR PLAN 6800 5f SCALE 1/8"=1'-Q" '*OATH I 1 co co a CO z BUILDING DATA w F—a TENANT SPACE 6800 5F cio PORCH AREA 1810 SF gri <w vf- 4-, C.) I 1 U i 2 i cc 51 2002,09 OCT.11,2002 1/8"GRAPHIC SCALE6 7-11-r1•7----mi 1 1 16 8 4 2 0 8 16 I ;31 • 1 . . I. I v 1 + t • 18'-0"' .1 16'-0" $ I ., -..7iiiiiiVigiliiiiiii. ► ,.Ri■Y17 MIr V ItV niyt 1., ,u 11I 1 MIL LL--ila: MI FINISH GRADE' — u " tO NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/8=1-0 •N SQL . _I4z W Z 1.:,. 111 O .2 Q.. LL1 < u GONG R00F TILE ;PAINTED METAL SHAPE Cr) y. III 161 11 (T. f . + 16'-0" �IIM��Y11_ -i/�,v�lr,'�.',/'"'.4.4 .�Ir ..i4 4041a44tV§1:0111 14.' (`. a'l�,04 0•,*v;3.._ !!I! j __ — = FINISH GRADE . -I... .._,,, ,,._, --- STUCCO BRICK, EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION SCALE 1/8"=1'-0" SCALE 1/8"=11-0" 0 10 a I 1 co cz :-...: cc o v I I 18'-O" w 0 .::/s.��I/01 �6!/1i/�>%�i ��er■�. ea.ser!',�/V+^•• ..•1i _ .erra�yr:i+r::ii�'i 111�... �.:i.'..:.: i.ri+:i �G 1'i �1.•j1+ Yi'F:••.f�..ywi�aisi a - 1, Ltraztiw�lur !.. r YAryA l.,1lii /I/l�/irA' M r11.ti•r'•►YY■/• u�,RrY►..►4r11'4fit/.,;ia.iirele e..►, /1r4l-/ • i ray„; - ,.. ..4 ..r,,1,.,.,.:0,, .la .rou.::144,.•;.e•:Y,r, .►. :...+Y .,!. ,/r.■I.:. .!„.."1�■r,.. ,.nni3f��l:.r,;:i fi- .�/� t'- Chin►. :,.. BUILDING DATA -... yr ��� /���A/1�A�IA eN��.+11I,�+j1/YV�iI !{�.//.!i�/�lA//+ ���. � .�IA �1+'MY lhrl;A-:..�� �1.► ■�/i►r9/,� .�tl.!r�y4►rMVVywrm+,a.1v ■//4!1 /f. /I'1_/.V✓►!J !•�1"��. - 0'-G]" .60 _ � , . ^\'� �� TENANT SPACE 6800 5F v'a �7-�1-�-���., I • PORCH AREA 1810 5F v Z i_! I� 'LJ - 1l a--- --nil, _—�Ji 11 I •_ 1 t _ 7 ;_= - _-4---_—r I— —_` �— 1---' _____r--'`_I —. �- -__ — '- `— '-l `' --- FINISH GRADE 1 2002.09 OCT.11,2002 1/8"GRAPHIC SCALEo T SOUTH ELEVATION -. SCALE 1/8"=11-O" 16 & 4 2 0 8 16 I 1 ir. aie tiiiie-4R411.-......759.-: ---.- . -- i 7 an. r'''l i H .11 I I C-Y 7' - 1 ... _ _-__A_: ?'"? .:, - ' * ' - - .<. - ., .- .... •, - - 4 . , rommlieumsill 3. 04",1111441* I - -.--: fi n i...--.4 1 ,37-' tt_L.1-.__A-. ' 4-1-4 st . ........ -, SOUTH EL EVAJcir, , - - = , . . ,....-- , 4 ., -,"S-I.---,.----,:—•:, -,.7 I1::-.3"7:':',-"7:-;-77:!..-•'f'.'-i..._ forilIV'n.. 5.u- .....:..4..-L tA 1,.._ -....4 *4 * . ' 4 i 1,11 CP ' i,.....st•„"....t .:', i....--....—..4• . E.:. ,, rt _It WI [LI - 1 HAS r ELEVATION —.- f.e...a. E22 _._ ..., Ile. .......m......11., .... ,....T.....................comomow//11 . i Ir. .....—,. . , • 4. . , 0 • 1 ._I 1 I ! 0-: NOK T I.-1 i•t.t-VA T!ON < < K. ....4 IEK I '15. —; a '..i..... .... V' "." ••'.' .,. "..i. .4.4." •-•.• 0 00....•••••./......00 -- 0 c .,--....sen.......-... ...-41160i. _0 0110.0000010 P11404411211/4 , 110/10=f 1100100 .14:104614 4 V-rf --..r7-- 7 4 '.-- ' ' 1 r -- 4-= 1_-__11__________._ 1- - • 1 rf a , • .. ___ 04145MPH_ • E A6'.1 ELEVATION ',...,“vc,:-•:, .... , .„..--...... - '" 11.1."1""INIMIIMIPIENIF - , -- •— - -- , : 4, -,-*)`-aq. ,...:Pr.r:•;r_if..:77- 7-..;--71-'--."'-1,5-:._ --7 -'7-:--.7‘--;4F,W7ixo.z.-777"-, .. "7-,--P7-,' --- ",,y-t 1--,.....-;:,i,- • • ,..„ .,--,, ,,------N ,- ., - , 1 mi r--17:• — , —-----1 .-- 2 : ',,,'N'-•*"..It a A a- r •rt I ., Is P,.1'1 a i-, '. ‘,..;• --——. ,-,--IN suremoom.....sit.eimmre.......... P3.2 re................." '4,empeerron.es . r 1 Ail SAN JOSS FLAZA LEVELOF'MEN1 AREA 2 & 3 COLOR CHII7S POTOMAC BLUE SW 2393 _ • Wickenburg SP 2390 i r 1 Foxtail SP 2420 y\' 1/4 ._. , ',� CONC ROOF TILEr'AINTEU METAL SHA.D 4 c.e.' - ,.�I.�V..s►... .VJti• r � • V.IkV�Q is0 �i s..V• ♦ f� /.♦1h Yf}i«.. ... 'ikt..o.,.y. U..��..i.li.- ..,_,. ...oi1t„. `"-341 ,e,ar.4 f... ,�,.. s ,� .s+-i V ..r wa.1 V�v .r..s .,.R «►• K►.rr ,.5) . rsr.Y.� Y.s.Q' ... A.o-.- `. ,..----41"--, - — :•1 Ili--- ; -1 1 1 ----7:-.--- 1 , - nlir.-"-- 1 — `. —' T I _ _ I Y / , --- ``,. f31:ICK. - ----STUCCO MINUTES OF THE ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING TUESDAY,APRIL 8, 2003 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER: 6:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Jim Vogelsberg, Chair Nancy Mager, Vice Chair Clark Reddin, Member Richard Feinberg, Member Al Kunisch,Member Jeff Weatherford, Member(6:08) Mary Caswell, Member Others Present: Bayer Vella, Senior Planner Craig Civalier,Development Review Division Manager David Ronquillo,Planner I Bob Conant,Planner II Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney Kristina Curry, Secretary II EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to ARS § 38-431.03(A)(3), Legal Advice regarding application of the El Conquistador PAD on the Beztak Development on the Northeast corner of Lambert Lane and La Canada Drive. Recessed: 6:03 p.m. Reconvened: 6:25 p.m. CALL TO AUDIENCE Bill Adler, 10720 N. Eagle Eye Place, addressed the General Plan's policy of allocating recreational space. He stated that the current policy should be preserved as written, as it allots space more equitably than the proposed policy. He advised the Board to approach the Council on this matter. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MARCH 11, 2003 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES Approved as submitted 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 2 A. OV6-01-06, LAKE & COBB PLC, REPRESENTING CRICKET COMMUNICATIONS REQUESTS AN EXTENSION TO CONDITION #4 SPECIFIED ON THE SITE PLAN; THE FACILITY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ORACLE ROAD AND EL CONQUISTADOR WAY On December 10, 2003, the DRB conditionally approved the site plan for this project. The applicant wished to amend condition #4, which specifies, "The new facility (antenna & ground equipment)must be complete within 120 days of the DRB approval date. B. OV13-03-10, ORIGIN DEVELOPMENT LLC FOR BOBBY SCOTT BURRIS, PROPERTY OWNER, REQUESTS ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR A CUSTOM BUILT HOME FOR LOT 84 OF THE CATALINA SHADOWS RESUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1725 W. GANYMEDE DRIVE (PARCEL NO. 220-056-360) The approximately 8,000 square feet lot is zoned R1-7. The subdivision was approved by Pima County as a cluster home development in 1988 and was annexed into the Town of Oro Valley in 1994. The subdivision is mostly built-out, as are the parcels surrounding this lot. C. OV13-03-13;THERESE BROWN, REPRESENTING RICHARD AND SARAH OZOLS, REQUESTS ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL OF A CUSTOM HOME TO BE LOCATED AT 13951 N. OLD FOREST TRAIL, STONE CANYON SUBDIVISION LOT 108, PARCEL #219194360 The applicant requested architectural approval of a two story custom home for this lot. D. OV13-03-12, MONTEREY HOMES, REPRESENTING VISTOSO PARTNERS LLC. REQUESTS ARCHTIECTURAL APPROVAL FOR MODELS 510, 520, 530, 540, 550, 560, 570 AND 580 TO BE BUILT WITHIN RANCHO VISTOSO NIEGHORHOOD 10 PARCEL W The applicant has submitted various model homes for review. MOTION: Member Kunisch moved to approve Consent Agenda Items A - D. Member Caswell seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 3 REGULAR AGENDA 1. OV12-02-06, SEAVER-FRANKS ARCHITECTS AND EEX, REPRESENTING THE BEZTAK COMPANIES, REQUEST APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 138 UNITS OF APARTMENTS WITH A CLUBHOUSE AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND 31,187 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LAMBERT LANE AND LA CANADA DRIVE,PARCEL 224-250-25C Bayer Vella stated that Agenda Items 1-3 all pertained to the same property, therefore, to save time, only one report would be presented for all three. He reminded the Board that each item would need to be voted on separately. Robert Conant introduced the staff report into the record. Staff's recommendation was that the DRB recommend to Town Council approval of the Development Plan subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit A. Staff Conditions: 1. All conditions of the Grading Exception approved by Town Council on March 5, 2003 and attached hereto shall be conditions of the Development Plan. These shall be added as General Notes on the Development Plan. 2. All parking lot light standards shall not exceed eighteen (18') feet in height. 3. All outdoor lighting shall be in compliance with Chapter 17 of the OVZCR. 4. Public Art shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Council and shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the site. 5. A comprehensive sign program shall be reviewed and approved by DRB prior to the issuance of any sign permit on the site. 6. All trash enclosures shall be roofed. 7. Pedestrian connections shall be made from the end of building 7 to OSCO and at the end of building 8 to Bank One. 8. The design of the first flush system is unacceptable. The engineer shall set up a meeting with the Department of Public Works staff to discuss the issue. 9. The proposed design on Lambert Lane is unacceptable. A striping plan is required showing existing and proposed. The Lambert Lane project will install the medians. The engineer shall set up a meeting with Department of Public Works staff to discuss the issue. 10. All ADA sidewalk ramps to buildings shall meet ADA standards. 11. The maximum cross slope for standard parking spaces shall not exceed 5%. 12. The maximum cross slope in ADA accessible routes shall not exceed 2%. 13. The maximum cross slope for all sidewalks shall not exceed 2%. 14. The slope south of the sidewalk between building 5 and 6 will exceed 2:1. Clarify the construction method. 15. The drainage and sewer easement, DKT 11062 and PG 2914 must be modified to construct building 9. 16. The cross slope in the PAAL between buildings 6 and 9 exceed 5%, check elevations in this area. F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 4 17. Check the spot elevation of 22.4 just west of building 4, apartments 412/422/432, appears too high. 18. Assure that the scuppers are at the lowest elevation in the PAAL's or parking areas so that drainage does not run down the access drive to the water well site. 19. What is the proposed pad elevation of the maintenance building? 20. Check the gutter grade of 32.4 in the northern most parking space in front of shops 2, it should be 33.4. 21. Explain the purpose of the ADA ramps to the back of shops 2. Neither of them meets ADA standards. Check the cross slope grade of 5% in the PAAL behind shops 2. The spot elevations do not agree. 22. The north end of building 7 is below grade. Will stem walls be used here? 23. Check the elevation of 31.8 east of the southeast corner of building 7. Should it be 31.3? 24. Can drainage be maintained along the western side of the clubhouse without using a stem wall? 25. Show the design of the landscape berm along Lambert Lane. 26. If the existing multiuse path is removed the proposed multiuse path shall be constructed with the identical section. Show a typical section and a detail on the development plan. This multiuse path shall be located in its ultimate location. 27. A landing is required for the sidewalk ramp on the east side of the accessible route from the access road to shops 1. A section of the route is too steep, check elevations. Michael Franks, representing the Beztak Companies, made a presentation and answered questions. Member Caswell asked if the design of the third stories of the proposed apartments could be made more consistent with the two story buildings. The applicant stated that the design was identical, but that the elevation made it appear otherwise. Viewing the front elevation of the third story, Member Weatherford questioned if the mass could be broken up visually through the use of texture or color. The applicant answered that the scoring of the stucco would add texture, but voiced concern over the addition of another color, as it may appear "striped". Member Feinberg observed that the third stories of apartment buildings 7 & 8 would look down on the roofs of the retail shops. The applicant replied that the view would be interrupted by landscaping, which they have agreed to intensify. Additionally, Member Feinberg noted that only 30 feet separated the proposed restaurant from residential units. The applicant pointed out that staff required an additional setback, which moved the location of the restaurant closer to the apartments, but also indicated that a 6 foot wall was added to help screen its sight and scent. Member Kunisch inquired where the garbage receptacles would be located. The applicant responded that they would be scattered throughout the project. Also, Member Kunisch suggested that the applicant supply a playground area for the children living in the proposed apartments. Similarly, Member Feinberg raised the question of whether or not there was supposed to be a recreation area within the development. It was answered that the recreation area would be the central grassy area adjacent to the clubhouse. F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 5 The applicant confirmed that there would be sidewalks within the development. Member Reddin analyzed the visual impact of the parking lot of the restaurant from the road. He proposed adding a patio seating area close to the landscaped walkway. Furthermore, he voiced concerns over the visual impact the back of the shops would have on the apartments. His suggestions were to add articulation to the building design, provide pass-through access to residents as well as service vehicles, and examine the landscape design as it relates to the trash receptacles. The applicant responded that t he views would be buffered by a 6 foot wall. This wall, along with an enhanced sidewalk, would define he pedestrian access from the residential component to the commercial component. He related that their plan discouraged the free-flow traffic of residents to the service side of the commercial buildings for security as well as visual reasons. Vice Chair Mager expressed that this development plan does not compliment mixed use. She agreed with Member Reddin that the residents should be able to co-mingle with the businesses, and that they should not be made to walk around to the front entrances. She further voiced that the backs of the proposed commercial buildings are visually unappealing. The applicant maintained that the retail establishments must have a service side, and that their development plan attempted to make the transition from residential to commercial a positive one by controlling access to this service side. Member Reddin asked staff why walls are being proposed to separate the businesses and residences, when the definition of"mixed use" is to integrate the two uses. Bayer Vella answered that there are two basic approaches to mixed use development: integration, which emphasizes walking, and segregation, which provides significant green belts and buffers. He noted that this project promoted walking. Member Weatherford commented that it was unlikely that customers would walk from one end of the shops to the other, and so advised diverting the commercial traffic flow away from the internal residential streets. Member Feinberg inquired if there were any other mixed use developments within Oro Valley. Bayer Vella responded that this would be the first, but also mentioned that the proposed General Plan has a mixed use category. Vice Chair Mager asked how many water features were being proposed, and if they were similar. The answer was that there would be two, and that they would be different designs. The applicant related that the size of the restaurant would be approximately 5,000 square feet, and that there would hopefully be lots of outdoor seating. Chairman Vogelsberg noted that this would make it the first major restaurant at that intersection. He inquired as to what type of ventilation system the restaurant would use, and stressed the need for control of the smell. The following citizens voiced their opposition to the proposed development: • Dyanna Jordan, 1983 W. Arizona Rose Drive, Oro Valley • Jerry Roberts, 10280 N. Camino Valde Flores, Oro Valley • Connie Culver, 10503 N. Fairway Vista Lane, Oro Valley • Terry Parish, 1311 W. Tee Up Way, Oro Valley • Cal King, 10261 N. Oak Knoll, Oro Valley • Karen Strattman, 1707 Placita Caracol, Oro Valley F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 6 • Bob Oro, 10260 N. Camino Valde Flores, Oro Valley • Bill Adler, 10720 N.Eagle Eve Place, Oro Valley Issues of concern included: • Success/failure of mixed use development • Traffic safety • Recreation area for children and teens • Incompatibility of development with surrounding neighborhoods • Overcrowding of schools • Adequacy of landscaping/view protection • Architecture/height of apartments • Security/crime/vandalism • Overcrowding of buildings and parking spaces within the development Gary Forrest, 1100 W. Moonlit Place, views the development plan submitted by Seaver-Franks Architects as an upgrade from what is there now. He also voiced that it is a better plan than what is on the other three corners. MOTION: Vice Chair Mager moved to continue OV 12-02-06 Development Plan to an unspecified date. Member Reddin seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. 2. OV12-02-06, SEAVER-FRANKS ARCHITECTS AND EEC, REPRESENTING THE BEZTAK COMPANIES, REQUEST APPROVAL OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR 138 UNITS OF APARTMENTS WITH A CLUBHOUSE AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND 31,187 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LAMBERT LANE AND LA CANADA DRIVE, PARCEL 225-250-25C MOTION: Member Kunisch moved to continue OV12-02-06 Landscape Plan to an unspecified date. Member Caswell seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. 3. OV13-02-27, SEAVER-FRANKS ARCHITECTS, REPRESENTING THE BEZTAK COMPANIES, REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECTURE FOR 138 UNITS OF APARTMENTS WITH A CLUBHOUSE AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND 31,187 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LAMBERT LANE AND LA CANADA DRIVE, PARCEL 225-250-25C MOTION: Member Feinberg moved to continue OV13-02-27 Architecture Plan to an unspecified date. Member Kunisch seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 • 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 7 Recess: 8:45 pm Reconvene: 8:55 pm 4. OV12-03-01,MMLA REPRESENTING MONTEREY HOMES,REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 160 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS ON 74.25 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TANGERINE ROAD AND LA CANADA DRIVE, PARCELS 224-070-010 AND 224-070-020 Robert Conant introduced the staff report into the record. Staffs recommendation was that the DRB recommend to Town Council approval of the Preliminary Plat for Verde Ranch, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit A. Staff Conditions: 1. The following off-site improvements shall be constructed: a. West bound turn pocket on Tangerine Road. b. Improvements to the intersection of Silverleaf and La Canada. c. Deceleration lanes at all access points to the subdivision. 2. Provide easements necessary for maintenance access of box culverts within the subdivision. 3. Adjust General Note 35 to read "Drainageways will be constructed according to approved plans prior to....." 4. Add a detail to sheet 4 of the Preliminary Plat that describes terraced retaining walls, terraced sloped grading or combination thereof for grade differential between lots greater than six (6') feet to a maximum of eight (8') feet (lots 129, 126 and 127). Detail I/10 will not suffice. 5. Check elevations on sheet 7 of the Preliminary Plat at the entry of La Canada Drive and street "G". Maintain a minimum of 0.5% slope for asphaltic surfaces. 6. Include Table 10 note (All splash pads will be underlined with filter fabric) on Splash Pad Summary on sheet 10 of the Preliminary Plat. 7. Include schedule for detail H2 on sheet 10 of the Preliminary Plat to describe erosion protection of slopes greater than 3:1 up to 1:5 (11:V). 8. Add toedown at the erosion hazard setback line of common area "A" north of street "G" from headwall of box culvert to southeast corner of lot 85 and to southwest corner of lot 84. Valerie Feuer, representing Monterey Homes, made a presentation and answered questions. Discussion included: • Traffic crossing riparian areas • Recreation areas • Drainage ways • The layout of the houses and the possible elimination of lots MOTION: Member Kunisch moved to approve GV12-03-01 Preliminary Plat for Monterey Homes, subject to conditions listed in Exhibit A. Member Caswell seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 8 5. OV13-03-14, LARRY J. CLICK& ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING GARY HEINFELD, REQUESTS ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 2 & 3 OF THE SAN JOSE PLAZA; LOCATED 1/4 MILE NORTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE ROAD AND EL CONQUISTADOR WAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD, PARCELS#22431002D David Ronquillo introduced the staff report into the record. Staff recommended architectural approval for Development Areas 2&3 of the San Jose Plaza with the conditions listed in Exhibit A. Staff Conditions: 1. All signage for this project must be approved by the DRB Agenda Review Committee by a separate permit. 2. The applicant must provide additional planters and/or benches in close proximity to the location of the public art. Larry Click, representing Gary Heinfeld, made a presentation and answered questions. Member Feinberg inquired where the "plaza" in San Jose Plaza would be located. Staff responded that there is no plaza; it is simply the name of the development. Additionally, he asked if there would be any public art or seating, which was answered affirmatively. Member Weatherford voiced his disapproval of the color palette. He also suggested wainscoting as an architectural treatment. The applicant expressed that the color sample the Board received was not a good representation of the colors that would be used. Bill Adler, 10720 N. Eagle Eye Place, Oro Valley, viewed the architectural plan as unimaginative, and suggested the addition of courtyards. Member Feinberg agreed with him. Member Reddin proposed looking to the back of the development for courtyards. The applicant confirmed that they were planning open landscaped areas in the rear of the complex. MOTION: Member Reddin moved to approve OV13-03-14 Architectural Plan for San Jose Plaza, subject to conditions listed in Exhibit A. Vice Chair Mager seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-2. (Members Feinberg and Caswell opposed) 6. OV12-97-14C, LARRY J. CLICK & ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING GARY HEINFELD, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 2 & 3 OF THE SAN JOSE PLAZA; LOCATED 1/4 MILE NORTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE ROAD AND EL CONQUISTADOR WAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD, PARCELS #22431002D Withdrawn from agenda F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 4/8/2003 Development Review Board Minutes Page 9 7. OV12-00-03C, TMHS, REPRESENTING COTTONWOOD PROPERTIES, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR RANCHO VISTOSO NEIGHBORHOOD 3 PARCEL B; LOCATED Y4 MILE WEST FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLEH ROAD AND RANCHO VISTOSO BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RA O VISTOSO BOULEVARD,PARCEL#22302019A David Ronquillo introduced the staff report into the record. Staff recommended approval of the Landscape Plan for Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 3 Parcel B, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit A. Staff Condition: 1. The applicant must provide a self supporting shade structure covering the entire footprint of the tot lot area (playground equipment). The roof and support columns must provide an adequate distance between the equipment to prevent any injuries. Bill Hallinan, representing TMHS, made a presentation and answered questions. MOTION: Member Weatherford moved to approve OV12-00-03C Landscape Plan for Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 3 Parcel B, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit A. Member Kunisch seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. STAFF REPORT Bayer Vella reported that Vice Chair Mager and Member Kunisch will be stepping down from the Development Review Board in June;therefore there will be two vacancies. Interviews will begin in May. Member Feinberg called the Board's attention to the proposed General Plan's recreational facilities policy, and the weakened role of the DRB. He suggested having this subject on the next agenda. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Member Weatherford moved to adjourn the April 8, 2003 Development Review Board Meeting at 10:00 p.m. Member Reddin seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0. Respectfully submitted by, Recording Secretary, Kristina Curry F:\Minutes\DRB\2003\4/8/03 minutes.doc Approved 5/13/03 o JP��EY ggi�o TOWN OF ORO VALLEY oet- .� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning and Zoning • Building Safety jb► 11000 N.La Canada Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-4800•Fax(520)742-1022 ,j Oro Valley Public Library 1305 W.Naranja Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737• (520)229-5300•Fax(520)229-5319 ►� ,�� Parks and Recreation OUN D ED A' 680 W.Calle Concordia,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-5050•Fax(520)797-2202 April 11, 2003 Larry J. Click & Associates 3444 N. County Club Rd., Suite 105 Tucson, AZ 85716 Fax: 327-8816 RE: OV13-03-14, ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 2 & 3 WITHIN THE SAN JOSE PLAZA, PARCEL #22431002D Dear Mr. Click: At their regular meeting of April 8, 2003, the Development Review Board conditionally approved the proposed architecture for Development Areas 2 & 3. The following conditions were specified: 1. All signage for this project must be approved by the DRB Agenda Review Committee by a separate permit. 2. The applicant must provide additional planters and/or benches in close proximity to the location of the public art. Please present this letter when you make your submittal for a building permit. If you have any questions, or if you require a copy of the motion, please phone me at 229-4814. Si erely, �ti v David Ronquillo Planner I cc: Shirley Gay www.townoforovalley.com Orr r TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 0 02 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning and Zoning • Building Safety 11000 N.La Canada Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-4800•Fax(520)742-1022 Oro Valley Public Library 1305 W.Naranja Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737• (520)229-5300•Fax(520)229-5319 A Parks and Recreation °UN ID ED 1g 680 W.Calle Concordia,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-5050•Fax(520)797-2202 April 15, 2003 Larry J. Click&Associates 3444 N. County Club Rd., Suite 105 Tucson,AZ 85716 Fax: 327-8816 RE: OV13-03-14, ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 2 & 3 WITHIN THE SAN JOSE PLAZA, PARCEL #22431002D Dear Mr. Click: At their regular meeting of April 8, 2003, the Development Review Board voted (7 — 0) to conditionally approved the proposed architecture for Development Areas 2 & 3. The following conditions were specified: 1. All signage for this project must be approved by the DRB Agenda Review Committee by a separate permit. 2. The applicant must provide additional planters and/or benches in close proximity to the location of the public art. Please present this letter when you make your submittal for a building permit. If you have any questions, or if you require a copy of the motion, please contact me at 229-4817. cerely, David Ronquillo Planner I cc: Shirley Gay www.townoforovalley.com