Day 1988.10.20DR

The regular meeting of the Vacaville Design Review Committee was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Whalen.

PRESENT: Chairman Whalen, Vice-Chairman Dykwell, Committee Member Clark, Committee Member McKenzie, Alternate Member Planning Commissioner Rajander.

Correction on Agenda, Minutes of September 29 were included in the packet, should be acted on under the consent calendar.

Vice-Chairman Dykwell moved, Committee Member McKenzie seconded, to approve the following minutes. Motion approved 5-0.

Assistant Planner Shields reviewed the proposal, introduced the staff report into the record and recommended approval per conditions A through I listed in the staff report.

Chairperson Whalen expressed concern about the parking layout and asked that the future buildings be returned to the Committee.

Committee Member Clark also expressed concern about the parking and traffic and asked that the sample of the deep grout be returned to the Committee.

Chip Gallagher, the applicant, addressed the concerns of the Committee on parking and traffic. He requested the conditions of approval not address buildings A, B and E as different developers may build on those parcels. He specified the desired tenant mix for buildings C and D were oriented towards the specialized contractor/retailer such as plastics, automatic rain, mastercraftsmen cabinet shops and similar uses with a need for storage space.

Mr. Gallagher specified he would provide a full scale plan showing onsite and offsite traffic circulation with the use permit for the convenience market.

By consensus the Committee agreed that a sample of the deep jointed block would be made available to the Committee. The applicant agreed to have a sample ready for the meeting of October 27, 1988.

By consensus the Committee agreed all future buildings should be returned for review by the Design Review Committee.

Vice-Chairman Dykwell moved, Committee Member McKenzie seconded, to approve the Environmental Assessment (REA-52-88) reaffirming Negative Declaration (EA-19-87) as adequately addressing the impacts of the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, based on the following findings:

B. The project does not involve any impacts which were not adequately addressed in the previous assessment. Motion approved 5-0.

Vice-Chairman Dykwell moved, Committed Member McKenzie seconded, to approve the design aspects of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-9-88) as meeting the required findings in Section 17.60.050 of the Zoning Ordinance and as meeting the required findings for a five percent reduction in parking subject to the following conditions:

A. Compliance with the Standard Conditions of Approval for Non-Residential Development A-Q, including Public Works memo #387, the Fire Department Memo dated October 3, 1988 and Police Department memo dated September 7, 1988.

C. Building designs for Pads A and B shall be consistent with the design of Buildings C and D and shall be subject to the approval of the Design Review Committee. A storefront treatment, consistent with Buildings C and D and illustrated by the Alamo Drive Elevation Sketches, shall be incorporated into the design of these buildings. In addition, this storefront treatment shall be provided on the rear elevations of Buildings A and B, as determined by the Design Review Committee.

D. The 4 ft. x 9 ft. tree well/planter boxes in the parking areas shall be enlarged to 6 ft. x 9 ft. as shown on Attachment B.

E. The parking space on the east side of building D nearest the front elevation shall be deleted and replaced with a landscaped planter, as shown on Attachment C.

F. A sample of deep-jointed grout used with smooth-faced block shall be made available for approval by the Design Review Committee. If it is determined that the grout lines do not provide an adequate textured look to these walls, then the building shall incorporate another style of textured block in place of the smooth-faced block, subject to the approval of the Design Review Committee.

G. Full frontage landscaping shall be provided along Alamo Drive and Alamo Lane as a part of Phase One. The frontage landscaping shall incorporate the use of berming (3 ft. plus in height) and clustering of shrubs to effectively buffer the views into the parking areas. The frontage landscaping along the Pad E area, however, can be deferred from the Phase One construction requirements and installed with the Building Pad E improvements if a building permit for Building Pad E is issued and construction started prior to the completion of the Phase One buildings.

H. That the design of the building and canopy structure for Pad E shall be consistent with the architectural designs for Buildings C and D, incorporating the same building materials and colors. The design aspects of this building will be reviewed with the submittal of specific development applications for the site.

I. Approval of this Design Review is contingent upon the approval of the Variance (V-7-88) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-9-88) applications by the Planning Commission.

J. That a parking reduction of up to 6 spaces may be permitted in conjunction with the development. Motion approved 5-0.