title
APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR A PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDING HOUSING CHASE BANK AND STARBUCKS LOCATED AT 520 N. EL DORADO STREET
recommended action
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of the Chase Bank/Starbuck’s Design Review application and adopt a resolution to:
1. Deny an application for a proposed commercial building housing Chase Bank and Starbucks located at 520 N. El Dorado Street based on a finding of inconsistency with the General Commercial Design Guidelines; and
2. Direct the City Manager to work with the applicant to achieve consistency with the General Commercial Design Guidelines, including at a minimum moving the building to the El Dorado Street property line and placing the drive-through away from public view.
body
Summary
The appeal before City Council is a result of the Planning Commission’s December 15, 2016 denial of an application for a proposed commercial building to house Chase Bank and Starbucks on a parcel located at 520 N. El Dorado Street. The denial of the design review application was based on the Commission’s determination that the project is inconsistent with the Citywide Design Guidelines.
The property is located in an area known as the Greater Downtown Stockton area. The Greater Downtown area is the transitional area situated between the urban core of downtown and the more suburban area north of Harding Way.
Staff evaluated this project against the applicable section of the Citywide Design Guidelines known as the General Commercial Design Guidelines and found areas of inconsistency. Input was also obtained from the Architectural Review Committee (ARC). The ARC panel of architects stated that the current site plan layout and architectural design were inconsistent with the General Commercial Design Guidelines. Specifically, its incompatibility with surrounding context, not having street-adjacent development consistent with the pattern along El Dorado Street vicinity, and the project’s inappropriate and inconsistent architectural design. The site is also visually dominated by parking adjacent to the El Dorado Street Corridor and by the drive through aisle. The Planning Commission heard from the applicant and ultimately denied the application due to the inconsistencies with City Design Guidelines.
DISCUSSION
Background
The applicant is proposing to redevelop a parcel located at 520 N. El Dorado Street (Attachment A - Location Map). The redevelopment proposal includes demolition of the existing 8,341 square foot former bank building that covers the northern half of the parcel fronting N. El Dorado Street to construct a 5,050 square foot multi-tenant building at the center of the site to house Chase Bank with a drive-up ATM and a Starbucks with a drive-through facility (Attachment B - Site Plan and Elevations). The site is located in a major transportation and activity area at the corner of El Dorado and Fremont Streets in the downtown and civic center, adjacent to the waterfront entertainment area (Attachment C - Site Context Photos).
The site is zoned CD (Commercial, Downtown), and is bounded to the:
• north by a bank and commercial storefronts zoned CD
• south by a mix of office and commercial storefronts zoned CD
• east by adaptive reuse of historic buildings containing a restaurant and storage facility zoned CD
• west by City Hall, Dr. Martin Luther King Plaza Park, and Cesar Chavez Central Library zoned CO (Commercial Office)
The General Plan designates the project site for Commercial land use. This land use designation along with the CD zoning allows for commercial development provided that the proposal is consistent with adopted City development standards and design guidelines. Site planning using these guidelines and at this site considers how the various components of a development (i.e., buildings, circulation, parking, open space, etc.) relate to adjacent streets and existing development, and how the various components relate to each other within the development site. The main issues related to site planning include:
• Ensuring the new development has the appropriate relationship to the street given the context of surrounding development.
• Ensuring that new development takes into account its relationship to and interface with surrounding existing development, especially residential uses.
• Ensuring that the arrangement of onsite facilities has been planned in a comprehensive manner and that the layout of the various site components is efficient, convenient, safe, and aesthetically pleasing.
Additionally, Design Review has specific findings that must also be made based on consistency with the findings outlined in section 16.120.060 of the City Development Code.
The review authority is required to find consistency with all eight of the findings to approve the project. The proposed project is inconsistent with five of the eight necessary design review findings:
• The proposed development is inconsistent with all applicable provisions of this Development Code and other applicable City ordinances because the proposal’s site planning is not consistent with the urban context of the site and the architectural design is out of scale with surrounding development, lacks equal treatment of all facades, and the proposed materials are incompatible with the urban context of the site (Finding A)
• The general design considerations, including the character, quality, and scale of design are inconsistent with the purpose/intent of this chapter and the Guidelines and other design guidelines adopted by the City because it does not continue the existing development pattern of “Street Adjacent Buildings-Pedestrian Orientation” as outlined in the General Commercial Design Guidelines (Page 4.01-5) Specifically, the site is in the CD zoning district surrounded by buildings that are built directly adjacent to Fremont and N. El Dorado streets. Some of these buildings include newer development such as the Bank of the West just north of the site. (Finding B)
• The architectural design of structures and their materials and colors are not visually compatible with surrounding development. Design elements (e.g., awnings, exterior lighting, screening of equipment, signs, etc.) have not been incorporated into the project to further ensure its compatibility with the character and uses of adjacent development because the proposed project does not address site context in the site plan or materials palette as determined by the panel of local licensed architects that make up the Architectural Review Committee (ARC). The proposed project was identified by ARC as an architectural style and layout that would be typical in a suburban setting and not typical for more urban areas such as the downtown. (Finding C)
• The location and configuration of this structure is not compatible with its site and with surrounding sites and structures because the proposed structure should be located at or near the El Dorado Street property line consistent with surrounding structures. The drive-through should be placed at the back of the building not visible from the street front consistent with the adjacent Bank of the West building’s drive-through (Finding D)
• The general landscape design, including the color, coverage, location, size, texture, and type of plant materials, provisions for irrigation, planned maintenance, and protection of landscape elements have not been considered to ensure visual relief, to complement structures, and to provide an attractive environment because the project proposal does not include full landscape plans at this time. (Finding E)
The applicant’s proposal is consistent with three of the necessary design review findings including lack of interference with surrounding development (Finding F), ensuring the intended use will best serve the potential users or patrons of the site (Finding G), and meeting special requirements and standards (e.g., American Disabilities Act regulations) (Finding H).
As part of the pre-site plan review process, staff’s initial review of the proposed project determined that it was inconsistent with a number of policy documents including the General Plan, Design Guidelines and the Waterfront Merged Redevelopment Plan (Attachment D - Citywide Design Guidelines, General Commercial Design Guidelines & Other Applicable Policy Documents).
The project as proposed fails to comply with the following principles contained in the policy documents:
• Represent development that is compatible with the context of its surroundings
• Follow the existing development pattern of “Street Adjacent Buildings-Pedestrian Orientation”
• Avoid parking that interrupts a continuous street wall of building frontages
• Ensure that parking lots do not visually dominate views of the project site
• Provide for drive-through aisles that are located in the rear of the building away from the street frontage
Additionally, both the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and the Site Plan Review Committee (SPRC) met to review and discuss the proposed project. Site plan and design review procedures apply to discretionary and nondiscretionary review of development throughout the City to encourage development that is compatible and harmonious with the design and use of surrounding properties and with the City in general. The City Council has established Design Guidelines that lay out the criteria by which Design Review is conducted for each project.
After review of the project against the SMC and General Commercial Design Guidelines, the ARC and SPRC recommended that the:
1. Building should be relocated to the front and street side property lines
2. Drive-through should be relocated away from public view
Architectural Review Committee (ARC)
The ARC met on November 30, 2016 to evaluate the project consistent with the General Commercial Design Review Guidelines. The ARC panel of architects stated that the current site plan layout and architectural design were inconsistent with the General Commercial Design Guidelines. Comments from the meeting included:
Site Planning
(Pg. 4.01 -3 Sect. 4.01.040, General Commercial Design Guidelines)
• Site layout and architectural design is appropriate for a suburban area that has a more auto-centric focus, not an urban downtown where you typically have street-side development that is more pedestrian-oriented and continues street-front activity along existing commercial corridors.
• The applicants selected this location with the knowledge that it is located in an urban area surrounded by the City’s civic center and downtown that would need to be taken into consideration in the design of the building and site layout.
• The existing building’s placement and circulation is more consistent with the Design Guidelines than what is proposed for the new building. The existing building fronts onto N. El Dorado Street and the drive-through lanes are located behind the building at the northern edge of the property.
• The design should take full advantage of the visibility that this corner lot provides, as the Bank of the West development does to the north of this site.
General Design Objectives
(Pg. 4.01 -2 Sect. 4.01.030, Citywide Design Guidelines)
• The building should have 360-degree architecture because it’s on a prominent corner lot (i.e., avoid blank walls or facades with a lower quality design than the building’s front façade like the Bank of the West north of the site) (Pg. 4.01-12 Section F(3), Pg. 4.01-14 Section4.01.050, Citywide Design Guidelines)
• Scale and proportion should relate to the surrounding context. The existing building and surrounding area development tend to cover more of their sites with buildings and devote less site area to parking than the proposed use of the site. (Pg 4.01-15 Sect. A, Citywide Design Guidelines)
• Look at material palette for appropriateness. Architectural features such as stacked stone and wainscoting is an architectural treatment found in more suburban areas and is not found in the more urban area that surrounds this site. (Pg. 4.01-19, Sect. 4.01.060, Citywide Design Guidelines)
Site Plan Review Committee (SPRC)
The SPRC met on November 30, 2016 to review the project and issued a statement of inconsistency with development standards that will need to be addressed with additional information and revisions. The SPRC is comprised of City representatives from a number of departments including, Municipal Utilities, Fire, Public Works, Building, and Planning.
Present Situation
Following the Commission’s denial of the design review application, the applicant filed an appeal to City Council where Council is asked to review the project and determine whether it is consistent with the General Commercial Design Guidelines. The key design review issue revolves around the applicant’s request to have the building sited at the center of the property with parking along El Dorado Street which breaks with the existing surrounding street-adjacent development pattern that has parking behind the buildings. Additionally, the architectural design is incompatible with its surrounding context and gives uneven treatment to the building’s front, side, and rear facades. The applicant’s proposal represents a suburban design that is incompatible with the site’s urban context.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION / ACTION
There was no public comment offered in support or opposition to the project.
The applicant shared letters from the perspective tenants, Starbucks and Chase Bank (Attachment - E). The applicant asserted that the parcel is difficult to design a site plan that meets the needs of the future tenants and what the City is asking. The applicant stated that the changes that the Planning Department requested make it difficult to facilitate a drive-through for Starbucks, which does a large portion of its sales through the drive through service.
The Market Director of Banking of JPMorgan Chase & Co, prospective tenant, spoke to the project and answered questions from the Commissioners. She spoke about safety protocols for Chase Bank staff and the bank’s desire that the design of the building and site accommodate company safety protocols that call for greater setbacks from streets. The Chase representative also indicated that the Bank located Downtown at 400 E. Main Street will close and relocate to this site at 520 N. El Dorado.
A Commissioner asked the Chase Bank representative if the company would choose not to go into an existing building in urban areas, such as the City of Oakland’s downtown, that couldn’t meet the requirements outlined in the safety protocols. She answered that the safety protocols would be modified in the event the building could not accommodate the protocols as intended.
Commissioners discussed the idea of bringing a portion of the building forward to the property line so that it would front along El Dorado Street and provide a visual buffer from the parking and drive-through lane areas. The Planning Commissioners also discussed the potential to conceal the parking and drive-through lanes with landscaping and a patio area in addition to placing the proposed building along El Dorado Street.
The Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2016-12-15-0601:
1. Denying the application for a proposed multi-tenant building located at 520 N. El Dorado Street based on a finding of inconsistency with the General Commercial Design Guidelines; and
2. Directing staff to work with the applicant to achieve consistency with the General Commercial Design Guidelines, including at a minimum moving the building to the El Dorado Street property line and placing the drive-through away from public view.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
There is no anticipated financial impact to the City as a result of the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE
Denial of the application does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and, therefore, no environmental analysis is needed.
CONCLUSION
Although this is a desirable project for this site, the building placement, circulation design, and architectural design need to be consistent with the applicable Design Guidelines that focus on pedestrian-oriented development and be compatible with the context and development pattern of the surrounding area.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of the Design Review application for 520 N. El Dorado Street and adopt a resolution based on a finding of inconsistency with the General Commercial Design Guidelines and direct the City Managert to work with the applicant to achieve consistency with the General Commercial Design Guidelines, including moving the building to the El Dorado Street property line and placing the drive-through away from public view.
VOTES
The City Council may uphold the Commission’s action and deny the appeal with four (4) vote (a majority) of the Council. If the Council wishes to grant the appeal and override the Commission’s decision, it may do so with five (5) concurring votes, in accordance with the provisions of SMC Section 16.100.040.G.1.
Attachment A - Location Map
Attachment B - Site Plan & Elevations
Attachment C - Site Context Photos
Attachment D - Citywide Design Guidelines, General Commercial Design Guidelines & Other Applicable Policy Documents
Attachment E - Letters from Applicant