May 2, 2006 CCP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

attached. We note that the only allowable exterior- surfacing materials in the PF zone are "brick, stone, and glass". This site plan submission depicts approximately 20% of the exterior surface proposed to be "pre -finished architectural metal". Either a plan revision or a variance would be required. All sloped roofing is proposed to be "standing seam metal" which is permitted by PF performance standards. 5. PF standards provide for a maximum building height of 50 feet., but no structure side wall exceeding 35 feet in height. With measurement of building height on a pitched roof taken from the mid point of the pitch slope it appears that the roof height of the structure complies with the 50 foot standard. However, it also appears that that structure side wails exceed the 35 foot maximum height at several locations — in some places nearly 50 jfeet. Either s redesign or a variance would be required. 6. Section 300.12 of the Zoning Ordinance specifies that no building shall exceed 35 feet in height, including "...church spires...". It would appear that the PF standards as to building height may supersede that standard (one more internal conflict of the Zoning Ordinance), but inclusion of church spires in that limitation would seem to imply that if the PF height standard is 50 feet, church spires must be included in the maximum height calculation. Either the church spire needs to be reduced in height or a variance applied for. 7. The exterior lighting plan appears to potential) comply with Section 1350 standards for nonresidential sites. The levels of illumination forecasted are within the limits specified by the ordinance (except with 20 feet of the light source — now permissible). We do not find "cut sheets" of the light fixtures specified (by model number only) so we can not ascertain the degree of cut-off angle for those fixtures. That fixture information will be required to enable a determination as to whether a 20 foot of 30 foot fixture height must be used IThe site plan specifies a 23 foot fixture height (including the 3 foot base — which mush be included). 8. The site landscape plan is extensive and should comply with the Section 520 standards for value as a percentage of project costs. The only outside reviews requested for this site plan have been to the City Engineer and V Valley Branch. Both have recently responded and their review comments are attached Staff does not detect any major issues raised by those reviews, but recommends the usual conditions of approval to include compliance with Engineer and Watershed recommendations. Findings and Recommendations: The Commission should be aware that staff had previously advised the applicant's consultantsthat there would be a height compliance issue with the plan they had brought to a pre -application meeting with staff. The project architects (BWBR) have submitted a letter dated March 1, 2006 addressing the building height issue. It appears that the architects are arguing that height should be measured only from the "primary entrance" building elevation. I see no such reference in the'City Code definition of building height. Staff was not at the time of that pre -application meeting aware that the PF zone was excluded (but should not have been) from the amended Performance Standards adopted for all commercial zones in 2002. Based on the foregoing staff review it appears that this site plan proposes at least three design features that are non -compliant with City Code standards. If it is the applicant's intention to continue to pursue those non -compliant design features (height, exterior surfacing materials and panting set back.) it will be necessary to publish Legal Notice and conduct a hearing on the resulting variance applications. That Hearing can not take place until at least the April.10 Planning Commission meeting.