08/23/2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MOTION: Affirm the Zoning Administrator's action approving amendments to Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-32 as conditioned. MOTION: Betancourt VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Gartner Turner, SECOND: Gartner Acosta, Alderete, Betancourt, Walters, Yrarrazaval (7) None (0) None (0) None (0) * * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR BUSINESS CALENDAR C. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATION DISCLOSURE (REGARDING AGENDIZED PROJECTS) No disclosures were made. WORK STUDY SESSION D. DISCUSSION ON TOWN AND COUNTRY PLAZA SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT AT 555 EAST MEMORY LANE Principal Planner Vince Fregoso provided background information on the proposed 8-story, 174-unit project. Town and Country Plaza representative Steve Lazarian, Project Manager, stated that he had worked with the City's architectural design consultant, John Kaliski, to address design issues on the project based on Planning Commission in 2007, but that the architecture had remained essentially the same due to the desire of Town and Country to respond to its market base which, they believe; will favor a neo-classical design over more modern architectural interpretations. Marshall Smith, project architect with Pancake Architects, provided a presentation on the architectural design for the building. The presentation featured a 3-D computer model of the proposed building that depicted the neo- classical design and the building's attempt to provide a strong street image and enhanced glass-window corner tower at Lawson and Memory. Following this presentation Commissioner Alderete invited members of the Planning Commission to provide feedback. Commissioner Betancourt stated that, although the Commission provided extensive comments regarding the architecture at the previous Study Session, the project has changed little. She further stated that the design of the new building doesn't fit stylistically, nor does it share any architectural consistency with the buildings in the surrounding area. She expressed ~ concerns with the design of the corner element, particularly the fenestration of the tower, which she found to be lacking in a sense of inspired design. She further stated that the overall architectural design, though it purported to be a n.eo-classical design reminiscent of grand apartment buildings found on Park Avenue in New York City, was a hodge-podge of unrelated styles that was not a gold interpretation of the Park Avenue vernacular. She also refuted the notion that the demographic being targeted for the project, people seeking senior housing, would not be attracted to a more modern architectural style. In general, she stated that the project needed substantial design changes, specifically as to putting a different skin on the facade, providing step-backs on the upper stories to break up the blocky massing, providing a sense of entry from the street, making the corner attractive and making the parking entry more distinguishable. Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 8 August 23, 2010