NAMPA BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN STANDARDS COMMITTEE MEETING HELD MONDAY, JUNE 12, 2017, 12:30 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers

Transcription

1 NAMPA BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN STANDARDS COMMITTEE MEETING HELD MONDAY, JUNE 12, 2017, 12:30 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers The roll of the Committee was taken with the following members present: Members: Chris Veloz - Chairman Frank Larvie Jeff Hatch Vice Chairman Roger Volkert Mike Gable Robert Hobbs Assistant Planning Director Absent: Rodney Moore Jerry Smith Chairman Veloz called the meeting to order at 12:30 p.m. Gable motioned and Hatch seconded to approve the Minutes of the May 8, 2017 Building and Site Design Committee meeting. Chairman Veloz proceeded to the business items on the agenda. BSD : Building and Site Design Approval for architectural plans related to construction of a new 6,296 sq ft Garden of Learning Daycare Center facility, located at 970 S Rising Sun Drive (Lot 24, Block 1 of Fall River West Subdivision, in the NW ¼ Section 32 T3N R2W), in a BC (Community Business) zoning district on the south side of S Rising Sun Dr and east of S Middleton Rd, for Garden of Learning Daycare Center, Rob Powell of Dave Evans Construction representing. Assistant Planning Director Hobbs: The proposed daycare, advised Hobbs would be located in the Fall River West Subdivision, within a BC (Community Business) zoning district. Hobbs noted the Development Agreement attached to the project. Staff, added Hobbs, evaluated the daycare based on the standards within Chapter 16 of the Zoning Ordinance. Hobbs reviewed the Staff Report and noted the architectural treatments for the proposed building were in compliance with standards. According to Hobbs, the horizontal boards in a different color at the bottom of the wall would be considered a base treatment. There would be cultured stone on other areas of the building as accents, added Hobbs, as well as fenestration and doors contributing to the architectural treatments. Hobbs noted the hip roof design with dormers. The requirement for off-sets and jogs in the building wall planes, continued Hobbs, would not be applicable due to the fact that all the walls would be under 100 ft in length. The public entrance was certainly discernible advised Hobbs. Hobbs considered the west wall, facing towards S Middleton Blvd, would be deemed compliant with the 25% glazing [window treatments, etc], and the north wall, facing S Rising Sun Dr, would be considered compliant if the window in the dormer protrusion was taken into consideration. According to Hobbs, the mechanical units for the structure were shown on the eastern side and the trash enclosure on the west side. Hobbs suggested the trash enclosure could be canted or relocated to the east side of the building, subject to access for the Republic Services trash removal trucks.

2 The applicants, noted Hobbs, had advised they were interested in having a fenced in play area on the north and south sides of the building. However, fencing was not normally allowed in the BC zone, so the Committee would be asked to make an exception for this project to allow for the fencing for the play areas, which would be a wise idea. Hobbs indicated the wrap around sidewalk except for the utility area. Hobbs reviewed the issues/exception requests for Committee discussion and decision: the apparent lack of full 25% window glazing on the north side of the Building; and, whether the base simulation by use of a horizontal run of cement board with a different color base would comply with the 40% architectural treatment provision. Hatch referred to the site plan, between the vinyl fence and the existing sidewalk there is a strip of landscaping and questioned if that would be maintained by the development or the subject project. Hobbs replied it would have to be determined if that area was part of the right-of-way, and it appeared that strip was on the subject property. Larvie noted the Staff Report indicated a concern with the trash receptacle and questioned if that issue would be resolved with landscaping. Larvie also questioned if the mechanical units would be screened with landscaping. Hobbs advised the landscape plan indicated the plan for screening the mechanical area. The trash enclosure had a CMU wall proposed with gates. Rob Powell of Dave Evans Construction, 7761 W Riverside Dr, Ste 100, Boise representing the applicant: The Garden of Learning Daycare, reported Mr Powell, was currently located in the vicinity but now wanted to upsize into their own building. The proposed daycare, added Mr Powell, would be a nice new structure in a good area and offer a great service to the community. Mr Powell referred to the base simulation using horizontal runs of cement board with a different color base, and noted the differentiation in materials. The building play areas, continued Mr Powell, were sited at the north and south ends of the daycare building for outdoor play areas for different age groups. According to Mr Powell, a 6 ft vinyl fence would be placed around much of the site/outdoor play areas. Regarding screening the mechanical units, continued Mr Powell, along with the shrubs and landscaping would be the 6 ft vinyl fence. Mr Powell confirmed the landscaping between the fence and the sidewalk along S Rising Sun Dr would either be maintained by the Homeowners Association or the subject property owner. Gable inquired about ingress and egress for the daycare facility. Powell suggested parents would probably drive in to the daycare facility on the westernmost ingress/egress point, drop the children off and then exit via the easternmost ingress/egress point. According to Mr Powell, the majority of the traffic bringing children to the daycare would be between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and leaving the daycare between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Gable inquired if there would be a one-way traffic pattern enforced and Mr Powell replied there would not be any restrictions, however, that would be the natural flow of traffic. Mr Powell added the ingress/egress points would also be shared by other businesses in the future. The main entrance, facing west, stated Mr Powell, would incorporate the front gable, stone and other treatments, as well as signage, making it obvious that was the entrance. Hatch inquired if the trash enclosure would be screened by the existing landscaping. Powell noted the trash enclosure was put in by the developer. Volkert stated there were three configurations for the trash enclosure and questioned which one was correct. Mr Powell advised that A1.0 and A.1.1 were consistent and the landscape plan had not been updated. Hatch noted the northeast side, where the sidewalk would front the vinyl fence, there would be no landscape buffer and inquired if there could be, at a minimum, a 3 ft landscaped area to break up the vinyl fence and the concrete. Mr Powell agreed that area was pinched down, and if required, the applicants would be willing to add landscaping between the fence and the sidewalk, similar to the fence and the curb further to the south. Page 2

3 Hobbs explained there would be a landscaping island required, with a tree, for the northeast parking area and Mr Powell stated that could be accomplished. Larvie congratulated the architect and the owners for a very pleasing design. Larvie motioned and Gable seconded to approve the application for the new 6,296 sq ft daycare building and site design for 970 S Rising Sun Dr, subject to: 1. The applicant shall comply with Nampa City codes relative to development of the project (including all City based zoning codes) as BSDS Committee approval of the design review plans shall not have the effect of abrogating required compliance with the City s Zoning Ordinance and other adopted laws. 2. The Garden of Learning Daycare, and site improvements associated therewith, shall match those architectural plans submitted and received by the City of Nampa, and approved by the Building and Site Design Committee on June 12, 2017, and specifically, a) The site and landscape plans that depict the Daycare s northern playground/yard area show a six (6) ft high fence abutting the back of a section of on-site, private sidewalk, separating the same from the play yard to the west of the fence section in question. Revise that arrangement such that a three (3) ft landscape strip is placed between the fence and said adjoining private sidewalk. b) Applicant to work with Republic Services regarding the position and alignment of the trash enclosure. Assure the trash enclosure is adequately screened as represented, by a walled surround with landscaping. BSD : Building and Site Design Approval for architectural plans related to construction of a new 295,206 sq ft Mini-Self-Storage and Recreational Vehicle self-storage with 2,400 sq ft manager s office facility, located at 82 S Middleton Rd (Canyon County Parcel R in the NW ¼ Section 29, on acres proposed for annexation and BC zoning, at the northeast corner of W Roosevelt Ave and S Middleton Rd, for Chuck Tookey of Maxey Tookey Architects, representing Bob Holman of Holman s Stor-It-Rite. Assistant Planning Director Hobbs: The proposed storage facility, stated Hobbs, would be part of a larger commercial development at the northeast corner of W Roosevelt Ave and S Middleton Rd. The three-phase project would comprise: the storage facility; a commercial element to the south on property owned by Mr Holman; and, to the north a single-family neighborhood area. According to Hobbs, the City Council had recently approved the annexation and BC zoning applications for the property, which included a Development Agreement as part of the approval. Hobbs noted City Council had placed in the Development Agreement a series of standards for the storage facility, as noted in the Staff Report. Hobbs reviewed page 3 of the Staff Report regarding the Development Agreement conditions placed on the mini-storage facility by City Council, similar to those required for mini-storage facilities in the RP and BN zones. Hobbs reviewed those items that would not comply: Buildings A, B and F do not comply with façade change requirements. Hobbs indicated the BSDS Committee would have to determine several compliance issues regarding structural appearance. The office s primary façade, clarified Hobbs, would be its western face and the amount of glazing in the west wall indicated 122 sq ft vs the 242 sq ft required. The north wall of the office building did appear to have adequate glazing, stated Hobbs. Hobbs advised the 16 ft eave height cap proposed by the City Council, would conflict with the roof slope requirement for BSDS standards. The mini-storage facility proposes to use storage buildings as fences, save along the northern boundary where the units will adjoin future residential development, and a security fence is proposed for that portion. Page 3

4 According to Hobbs, a pedestrian pathway and plaza would not be necessary for the proposed storage facility, as it would be out of place for the proposed use. Hobbs reviewed the 6 issues/exceptions found in relation to review of the building and site design standards for the mini-storage facility. Hobbs noted a storage facility on Caldwell Blvd had received approval to emplace a series of CMU freestanding block walls intermittently down the side of the storage building that faced directly on to Caldwell Blvd. Hobbs reiterated there was a conflict between the City Council required Development Agreement and the BSDS standards. Hobbs recapped some of the issues to be determined by the BSDS committee: the issue of the substandard amount of glazing within the storage buildings; the conflict between the maximum wall height and 3:12 roof pitch; lack of building wall undulation and off-sets/jogs to provide visual interest, shadow lines, etc; placement of the mechanical units; placement of trash enclosure; lack of full 40% glazing for the office; as well as the fact the storage building would have metal siding and roofing. Chuck Tookey of Maxey Tookey Architects 1412 W Idaho, Boise representing the applicant: According to Mr Tookey, buildings A, B and F would have cultured stone wainscot to break it up. The cultured stone had not been indicated for Building B as it would have other structures in front of it eventually and would be a full lot behind W Roosevelt Ave. Building A and F could have pilasters added every 25 or 35 ft. Or, added Mr Tookey a different panel type could be utilized instead of the vertical ribbed panel, a flat panel. Mr Tookey indicated where additional glazing could be placed on the west wall of the office building. The mechanical units, added Mr Tookey, would be on the roof of the office building and would have a parapet tall enough to hide the units, or screening. Mr Tookey advised there would be no trash enclosure because typically storage units would just have an office trash can, inside the first storage unit. Mr Tookey reiterated the issue with the conflict between the roof slope limitations of 3:12 pitch and maximum 16 ft building height and questioned how the BSDS Committee would want to address that issue. In response to a question from Chairman Veloz, Mr Tookey stated the 2 ft wide pilasters for buildings A, B and F could go up to the eaves. Volkert inquired what roof pitch would be necessary to meet the height limitation, and Mr Tookey replied the current plans indicated a ¼:12 pitch. Hobbs advised any changes to the 3:12 roof pitch requirement would have to be approved by the City Council. Hatch suggested the pilasters could match the height of the parapet on the front entry. Discussion followed regarding the pilasters and the roof slope for the mini-storage buildings. Volkert considered if the pilasters were added and went above the parapet line, they would provide adequate variation. Hobbs noted the BSDS Committee could recommend to City Council the proposed changes for the pilasters and roof pitch. According to Hobbs, the recommended changes by the BSDS Committee could go forward to City Council as a business item. Volkert considered the 3:12 roof pitch would be inappropriate for the mini-storage structures, in particular for confining the drainage from the roof on-site. Volkert suggested the ¼:12 roof pitch would be adequate. Hatch noted the panels would all be the same color and suggested the metal panel colors could be changed/alternated between the pilasters, in lieu of providing glazing for the storage buildings. Chairman Veloz noted the recommendation to City Council would be to accept the ¼:12 roof pitch for the mini-storage buildings; and to accept the pilasters and alternate/varied panel colors between the pilasters in lieu of glazing for the mini-storage buildings. Hatch motioned and Volkert seconded to approve the Building and Site Design application for architectural plans related to construction of a new 295,206 sq ft mini-storage facility (including a 2,400 sq ft office) at 82 S Middleton Rd, for Bob Holman, Holman s Stor-It-Rite, subject to: The Applicant and Storage Facility shall comply with Nampa City codes relative to development of the Project including all City based Zoning codes as BSDS Committee approval of the design Page 4

5 review plans shall not have the effect of abrogating required compliance with the City s zoning laws, specifically: 1. Additional glazing shall be added to the west wall of the office building. 2. Full wainscoting and the use of pilasters from ground to just above eave height at regular, recurring 25 ft to 35 ft intervals shall line the exterior walls (facing Middleton Rd and Roosevelt Ave on Buildings A, B and F. The metal wall panels adjacent the pilasters shall be broken up/varied in color, in lieu of providing glazing for the storage buildings. 3. A slight variation to the roofline for (at a minimum) Buildings A, B and F, by the inclusion/use of parapets shall be provided, however, eave heights shall be maintained at sixteen (16) ft high or less. 4. Roof-top mounted mechanical units for the office shall be emplaced behind parapets set high enough to screen the units from public view. 5. Recommendation to City Council that the roof pitch of the storage buildings be allowed to be ¼ per 12 run pitch, vs the 3:12 pitch called for by the City Council at the time the Property was annexed into the City and zoned BC. This will facilitate compliance by the Applicant and Project of another of the Council s annexation/zoning requirements: to keep all storage building eave heights at or below 16 ft in height. 6. Waive any requirement for a trash enclosure for the Project due to its nature and the desire to keep any dumpster from being used by the public. Motion carried with Hatch, Larvie and Volkert in favor and Gable opposed. Volkert Motioned and Hatch seconded to adjourn the Building and Site Design Standards Committee. Motion carried Meeting adjourned at 1:32 p.m. Robert Hobbs, Assistant Planning Director :sm Page 5