Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Conceptual Design Review Board - 11/8/2011 MINUTES ORO VALLEY CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REGULAR SESSION NOVEMBER 8, 2011 ORO VALLEY KACHINA ROOM 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE CALL TO ORDER AT OR AFTER 6:00 P.M. Chairman Sakellar called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chairman Dino Sakellar Vice Chair Richard Luckett Member David Atler Member Nathan Basken Member Rachel Childers Member Kit Donley Member Gil Alexander Member Harold Linton ABSENT: Member Richard Eggerding Member Linton arrived after roll was called. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Sakellar led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. REGULAR AGENDA 1. Function and Purpose of the Conceptual Design Review Board in relation to the overall development review process. David Williams, Planning Division Manager, announced that the meeting was a follow up training to what was done in July and has asked Mayor Hiremath to speak to the Board. Satish Hiremath, Mayor, commented that this training was very crucial to the success of the Town of Oro Valley. The primary function of the Conceptual Design Review Board (CDRB) is an advisory Board to Town Council. There are certain tools at the Boards disposal, the Design Standards, the Zoning Code and the General Plan. 11/08/2011 Conceptual Design Review Board Page 1 of 6 In addition, there is a certain amount of personal responsibility that goes with being a Board Member. With this particular Board you have to be cognizant of the difference between use and design. Personal likes and dislikes have entered into the equation in the past. The Board's responsibility first and foremost is to keep the Town out of legal trouble. Another important component for success is team work. In the past, there has been some adversarial relationship with staff, almost like a tug-a-war for power. The Board should be more solution orientated, but should never sacrifice principle. If someone presents you with a square block and you are trying to fit it into a round circle, be polite and respectful. Mayor and Council fully support what the CDRB does which is a very crucial role in the development process. Staff is there to provide technical support and legal is there to keep you out of trouble. The Council Liaison will be added to the agenda to inform the Board on the highlights of what has happened at Council. This is his vision of how the Board will operate in the future and wishes the Board much success. Steve Solomon, Council Member and CDRB Liaison stated that Taco Bell and QT are some recent projects that have gone through CDRB and are amazing examples of what the Board can achieve. One bit of caution, keep in mind that the developer has invested millions of dollars and are experts on their product. If the developer is saying that a certain design component is not important or that a certain design component is very important, then the Board needs to be sensitive to that and try not to argue with them. Council does not want to get into a trap where a developer or a builder appeals one minor part of a project. When you make a recommendation to the Council, you have looked at everything. Greg Caton, Town Manager, related his thanks to the Board for their services. The Board is a very important part of the process, as well as advisors to the Town Council, which is a critical part of the public process and believes Oro Valley ends up with better projects at the end of the day because of it. The Board is surrounded by the best staff he has ever seen. Each of the members should utilize their expertise to help guide each member to the decisions he or she will be making. The Town is clearly about excellence and innovation and he is really excited about the potential of this Board. Team work, the Boards and Commissions that are the most successful have a great relationship with staff and encourage it. Paul Keesier, Development and Infrastructure Services Director, added that these projects are going through quickly because the applicant is presenting a concept. That concept is coming to the CDRB and the Board needs 11/08/2011 Conceptual Design Review Board Page 2 of 6 to look at community fit and if the project is compliant. There are lot of things that the code does not touch and a lot of gray area. It is not personal likes and dislikes, the Board needs to put personal feelings aside. Chairman Sakellar stated that from what he understood, if a project was denied it would proceed to Mayor and Council. Other than that, the Mayor and Council would not typically rehear a project such as the shade ramada that was mentioned. Chairman Sakellar went on to ask if every applicant can approach Mayor and Council after going to CDRB. Mr. Williams responded only on certain types of applications. Joe Andrews, Town Attorney, added that the applicant has the right to appeal to Mayor and Council. Chad Dairies, Principal Planner, presented the following; - Purpose and role of CDRB - The CDRB is a part of a larger team - Everybody has a different role - Solution oriented direction - Purpose statement and duties out of the Zoning Code - Design character and community fit - Broad direction to the applicant - Level of detail by stages Mr. Keesler commented that the way traffic impacts the community is something the members of the Board may not need to analyze. Chairman Sakellar commented that often the Boards curiosity of a solution in an area may not actually be the Boards role. An example would be grading and hydrology, this is not something the Board reviews. Member Donley asked when the Board is looking at an art project, is the Board to consider any way, shape or form the money that is available. Mr. Williams responded if the Board is asking if the budget is correct, staff verifies these numbers. Member Atler suggested that the applicant should show the proposed access on the site plan and build off of that. Member Alexander suggested adding something on the check list to ask the applicant if they can move their building to fit the property and views Mr. Williams responded that view issues are addressed by the zoning process and building heights are set. Mr. Keesler added this is something the Board needs to be very careful. The purpose of this Board is community fit. If the project has view requirements, then those view requirements will need to be met. It is important for the Board to know the code and know when they can or can not interject. 11/08/2011 Conceptual Design Review Board Page 3 of 6 Mr. Williams proposed placing it on the check list for when the Board has discretionary height, along with photo simulations. Member Luckett suggested adding simpler site plans with less complicated renderings. Member Linton suggested having discussion on what community fit is. Member Luckett commented that community fit results in too prescriptive of decision. Member Alexander asked if the Board is spending too much effort on preliminary color palettes. Mr. Daines responded that this is a component of the Boards review for Conceptual Design. 2. Parliamentary Rules and Procedures/Code of Conduct will be reviewed/discussed. Joe Andrews, Town Attorney, presented the following: - Rules and how meeting are run - Code of conduct Appendix C - Board service Appendix C #3 - Serve at the pleasure of Mayor and Council Councilmember Solomon commented that the primary function of the Board meeting is for the Board to conduct their business. Member Alexander asked if it is okay to make public comments as a resident of Oro Valley at other meetings. Mr. Andrews responded because you are voicing an option, this is something Mayor and Council would expect you as a member of the CDRB to recuse yourself once the project came before the CDRB later. Mr. Andrews continued on his presentation: - Agenda order Section 5.2 - Call to order - Rollcall - Pledge - Upcoming meeting announcements - Chairperson will review the order of business - Call to audience - Business -Zoning Administrative Report - Call to audience --Adjournment 11/08/2011 Conceptual Design Review Board Page 4 of 6 3. Meeting Flow/Making Motions. Staff will provide an overview to improve meeting flow. Joe Andrews, Town Attorney, presented the following: - Rules Section 9, public hearing procedures - Section 10, Discussion and Voting - Getting the floor (10.3) - Interruptions (10.4) - Motions (10.5) -Amendments to motions (10.6) - Calling the question (10.7) - Taking the vote (10.8) - Sections 10.9 and 10.10 Mr. Williams would like to discuss the packet information the Board is receiving from staff. Member Alexander commented that the print is a little small on some site plans. Another suggestion was for photo key plans for photographs. Member Atler commented that buildings should show how grading relates to neighboring property or other buildings. Mr. Andrews suggested thinking about how the Board asks questions to the applicant. Mr. Williams clarified that changes to the minutes should be brought to the Board Secretary's attention by calling or bringing the changes to the meeting. Mr. Williams also clarified that adding agenda items are at the purview of the Chair. If a Board member wishes to add an item to the agenda they should contact the Chair. Member Atler suggested adding updates to the Manager's Update on past agenda items. Member Luckett commented that there is a difference between concepts and design solutions. Sometimes we as the Board get really close to the end of the design solution when we really should be talking about concepts. Member Basken asked if there has been any feed back on the past agenda items that came before the CDRB. Mr. Kessler said there has been a lot of positive feedback. Member Childers suggested a list of materials that are used for public art in order to evaluate durability of materials. Sometimes materials corrodes over time and it is very important that Board members look at each material separately. 11/08/2011 Conceptual Design Review Board Page 5 of 6 ADJOURNMENT MOTION: A motion was made by Member David Atler and seconded by Member Gil Alexander to adjourn the Conceptual Design Review Board at 8:13 p.m. Prepared by: pAi Ilk Roseanne Flores Recording Secretary I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular session of the Conceptual Design Review Board of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 11th day of November 2011. l further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. 11/08/2011 Conceptual Design Review Board Page 6 of 6