Laserfiche WebLink
Architecture Design Guidelines. The City has adopted a set of Design Guidelines <br />for development along the Rice Street corridor. In instances where the Design <br />Guidelines vary from the Zoning Ordinance requirements, the Design Guidelines <br />control. <br />1. Architectural Elements. The Design Guidelines promotes the policy that <br />franchise design architecture should utilize materials, sale and styles in order <br />to promote a homogeneous sense of space. The following issues relate to <br />the architectural elements of the proposed Tuffy's Auto Center. <br />a. Building Height. Single story structures subject to the Design <br />Guidelines provisions are limited to a height of 14 feet. The proposed <br />Tuffy building is 17'4" tall. As Such the proposed building will need to <br />be redesigned to a height of 14 feet or the applicant will need to <br />request a variance. A variance for a taller building to accommodate <br />auto lifts would not be justified because it is directly related to the use <br />and not due to a unique feature of the land. <br />b. Canopy. The applicant is proposing a canopy over the entrance and <br />waiting area windows. The applicant has not indicated the material <br />to be use for the canopy. The materials and color of the canopy shall <br />be subject to review and approval of the City Council. <br />c. Windows. Windows are required to be vertically oriented, with the <br />height of the window being equal to or greater than the width. The <br />proposed windows of the subject site are wider than they are tall and <br />will need to be redesigned. <br />Service Bay Doors. The service bay doors are also wider than they <br />are tall. These elements should also be revised to be vertically <br />oriented with the height of the doors being equal to or greater than <br />the width. The City may also consider the aesthetic value of having <br />the service bay doors facing Rice Street. It may be a more desirable <br />option to have the service doors facing the private street or to the rear <br />of the property versus Rice Street. This option would require <br />extensive revision to either the proposed site design, building <br />architecture and proposed subdivision, or a combination of these <br />factors. However, given the questions raised earlier regarding the <br />proposed rear lot and the setbacks from the private street, the City <br />may be inclined to encourage the applicant explore this option. <br />Page 37 <br />