HomeMy WebLinkAboutA- 5 Staff Report PH- Final Todd CallAGENDA ITEM
TO: HONARABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROY BRUCKNER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
LAWRENCE ONAGA, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
VIA: RICK COLE, CITY MANAGER
DATE: JUNE 2, 2003
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN OF
DESIGN TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO CONCRETE TILT-UP INDUSTRIAL
BUILDINGS. LOCATION: 720 N. TODD AVENUE; CASE NO.: P-2002-249; APPLICANT:
HOWARD PARCELL
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council take one of the following actions:
1. Adopt the attached resolution affirming the decision of the Planning Commission to
approve Precise Plan of Design No. P-2002-249 based on the findings of fact and subject
to the conditions of approval listed in the attached Exhibit “A”, dated April 16, 2003; or
2. Adopt the attached resolution modifying Precise Plan of Design P-2002-249 in accordance
with the revised site plan and architectural enhancements, and subject to the conditions
of approval listed in the attached Exhibit “A”, Revised June 2, 2003; or
3. Refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing to re-consider P-
2002-249 in light of the revised site plan and architectural enhancements presented to the
Council on June 2, 2003.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant’s proposal involves the construction of two concrete tilt-up industrial buildings on a
27,354 sq. ft. “through lot”. In this instance, the lot has street frontage on both Todd Avenue on the
west and Loren Avenue on the east. A 24-foot wide public alley runs along the south side of the
property. The Planning Commission approved the project on April 16, 2003.
At the April 16th Planning Commission meeting, Councilmember Dianne Chagnon raised a number of
concerns about the design of the proposed buildings. Councilmember Chagnon was dissatisfied with
the design of the rear (east) elevation, which faces Loren Avenue. She felt that it should look more
like the Todd Avenue elevation. She also expressed concerns about lighting in the alley, and
P-2002-249
June 2, 2003
Page 2 of 3
(DOCUMENT IN MTG & INVOCATION SCHEDULES\1996-2008 AGENDAS AND AGENDA ITEMS\1997 - 2011 AGENDAS AND AGENDA ITEMS\2003\JJUNE2.DOC)
questioned whether the alley could be vacated. The Commission elected to approve the project as
proposed.
At the May 5, 2003 City Council meeting, the Council, at the request of Councilmember Chagnon,
voted to call up P-2002-249 for reconsideration.
DISCUSSION:
This project was first reviewed at the staff level for compliance with applicable development
standards and design criteria. The applicant’s first design iteration resembled typical concrete
buildings that lacked sufficient architectural design enhancements. In recent years, staff has made it
a priority to raise the design standards and expectations for new industrial developments. Most
developers of manufacturing and warehousing buildings are using concrete tilt-up construction
because it is relatively cheap and quick to build. But tilt-up industrial buildings are often boxy-looking
with massive walls and minimal architectural detailing. The developers’ emphasis is usually on
function and cost savings at the expense of aesthetics. But concrete tilt-up construction techniques
have evolved, and many examples of attractive tilt-up buildings can be seen throughout the nation,
including a few good examples seen in the cities of Irwindale, Burbank, and Arcadia. Staff has used
these examples as interim “guidelines” for reviewing new industrial buildings.
The applicant revised his plans in response to staff’s comments/corrections by adding off-set columns
with stone veneer, a decorative cornice to top off the roof, stucco trim to accent the windows, and a
horizontal fluted treatment to the base of the panels to give a wainscot appearance. To the south
elevation (facing the alley), windows, concrete panels with decorative columns, wainscoting,
horizontal reveals and colored insets were added to match the design of the front elevation. Color
variations are also proposed to visually “break-up” the buildings.
While it was recognized that architectural enhancement is necessary on both east and west sides,
greater emphasis was given to the front elevation – in this instance Todd Avenue - because it is visible
to more of the public. Todd Avenue was considered the front because the West End Specific Plan
classifies it as a secondary arterial street; Loren Avenue is classified as an industrial collector street.
On the Loren Avenue elevation, the applicant has employed some of the same design features used
on the front and alley elevations. The applicant had contended that the design of the “back” of his
buildings is comparable to the fronts of some of the recently build tilt-up buildings along Todd
Avenue north of the subject property. Nevertheless, after hearing the concerns expressed at the May
5th Council meeting, the applicant immediately began to meet with staff to discuss further
enhancements to the “back” of the building.
The applicant has now submitted a revised site plan and elevations (Exhibit “C” Revised, dated June
2, 2003) in response to the concerns of the Council. The rear elevations have been modified in the
following ways: the single continuous plane of the original buildings have been broken into three
planes by off-setting the mid-section approximately 12 feet; the top of the building has been
enhanced through the addition of arches and a decorative cornice detail; decorative two-foot wide
column/arch elements have been added to minimize the appearance of the overhead doors; stone
veneer is added to the base of the columns; and additional windows with stucco trim have been
added. Additional landscaping has been added adjacent to the rear elevation and along the alley.
Through the re-design process, the applicant managed to slightly increase the building square
P-2002-249
June 2, 2003
Page 3 of 3
(DOCUMENT IN MTG & INVOCATION SCHEDULES\1996-2008 AGENDAS AND AGENDA ITEMS\1997 - 2011 AGENDAS AND AGENDA ITEMS\2003\JJUNE2.DOC)
footage and landscaping, while decreasing the amount of paved surface and parking stalls. These
changes were made possible because the applicant’s original plans were over-parked.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant has worked diligently to enhance the design of the proposed industrial buildings. Staff
is of the opinion that the project merits approval, either as originally presented to the Planning
Commission or as modified.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project is a privately funded development of industrial buildings. No adverse fiscal impact is
anticipated.
ATTACHMENTS:
• April 16, 2003 Planning Commission Staff Report
• Exhibit “A” dated April 16, 2003, Original Conditions of Approval
• Exhibit “B”, Vicinity Map
• Exhibit “C”, Approved Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elevations
• Exhibit “A” Revised, dated June 2, 2003 – Revised Conditions of Approval
• Exhibit “C” Revised, dated June 2, 2003 – Revised Site Plan and Elevations
• Draft Resolutions