HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.LaTorture.HPC.1978 n r ;- R t ^ I i i=f F itl f r V J 1 T T r' J i , r. L q ).r
�.. C;':� G�,fl`sTii }� ,pt f ._�iPl f ,l . _, (. .
C•'! 7;Li(CTA SLS.; JUN
•
1. Project Narne: , hsid: t d1
2. Location: Block 96, LOJLJLL -n
3. Parcel Size: Lot 0
R. Current Zoning; Zone 1
Zoning under which application is.fiied: _= 3 r, C
Maximum, buildout under current zoning:
' Proposed zoning:
5. Total buildout n : roposed ° ' 4
P r �U ��� • JJ �' li — .
6. Special procedures required: ) 1!
View planes:
Stream Margin Review:
•
Special Review: •
_
Historic District Review: HPC .
Subdivision (condorniniumization):
PUD: •
7. Program Narrative and associated graphics to describe the proposed
project's impacts and other data. (to be submitted with this application)
a. Existing water system, excess water capacity, location of the
nearest water main and estimated water demand of the building.
Water syatem already- inu aIlc l ---no extra water ceded - -oniy floc
L. Capacity of the sewage system, location of the nearest trunk line space
and estimated sewer demand of the building. Ho .extra cic:cl
c. Type and design of surface drainage. one required.
d. Development summary including lot size, internal square footage
and open space. As decignuted on plan
e. Estimated daily number of vehicles generated by the development
and estimated increase of traffic volume on adjacent streets, •
number of on- street and off - street parking spaces to be supplied
location of public transportation stops and routes, other auto
• disincentive techniques incorporated into the proposed development,
and hours of principle daily usage of the development. No increase
•
f. Proposed uses for the structure and potential alternative uses
(by general category of use) without substantial building changes.
g. Types of land uses adjacent and in the immediate vicinity. Commercial
• h. Construction schedule and schedule for phasing of construction if •
applicable.
•
8. List of drawings and maps submitted for review:
• Survey, site plan, elevations for -addition,
building sections and rendorinr. in City filen.
Submittal Date: __F1 ri,_t.__Qubtiliwtcd Yar b
3cv1iced t>lnus suc,r„iti.ed in Aup,uet before moriaor:•1um
1
_ , •
,, • .
.. ,
' . •
• i
I ,
. ,
. ,
•
. ,
• .
•
A LLEY .
. •
• 1 OUND'
RCEP1-• V1, AC.FIC
CAP LS 1270/ c'57+-"'O9I 1" F 050 2 "se
17'W-
. ...l pc:Wa FAD •,.. LIC-,1 Fr F-n, Li . 1, 1
7 V
Fl Dr-S1Pt__
•r-IAETAI ...IGH T j
. •
nt NIEJL
e• • \ 2-I
• ' LOT LOT N LOT 0
• , DLOCK c . _ \ ?II ' '
N \ ft',
- - i: \ I1
I
t0- . „ .
\ ( II
-/ ,4 , / 2-`• , , 1
/
. . ,
. .
lo 6
‘t
ay it
• t
I,-CCa F•/ .
/ ONE 0707 /
/ FRA Po..C.CK / 4
1 1
FQ_OCOS-a) 4‘172111°k1
/ ///,
el i
r-1
. //////// / - ■c., c, ,2 e, ..,14
. 0
ILI a /
/ M 1
t t :5 . '3 OYER
cr t i
- - - — - —
,n 7 1 0 LAGST(14 PAT ID f
,, ...7z
- 6 s
/ ,,,, ---/ r--) i-- - _2a. • L
/ / 1 .
[
• / Id
i ', -• ‘[ -1 ,
/ •
/ i -.•-)
0 .2.
,
/ , ,-.- -
• - v
1 — 0 . 0
1
/ -fm_l
-1_
-r....o-+ 1 /
/ 1 r), - -1 - : -- 1 CINDER li SHLO
in
0 , -, / 1 ---- , _-• _J 7 ., 1 - 5.,
;
. 7
ori OH
I L rAciccioN;. A F- i :--- A _1
f 1/4-." ' -H :., I — • i , — , -,, i. I \ l'4 • ---1 I
,"? T 1
/ •, , i / // 1 -
kJ ‘ \ LAC''ON • I Q 0 .
. . - -=-- li - - 1. - ' • / / 7, - cc:
. ..: : • • r 1 /
'
' - I - -: • 1- '1 '‘ cep crt li,•■ ANC.
............ .........................-..................
.----- • , ' i , 41 i \ V LC1 i• • \I' 1 41 t
b-rs.
• " .111 [ __ 00 ' -f
Rs_ k , N4v, , pi AfT1(....
cAp LS 9018 r
.■•
u
n r.,'AN - r r
AV Li N t-i
-
•
. -
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creatks a major
conflict with historic structures in the ,historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
•
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the imitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
Project Name: e a /
-
Date: ( —
Design Element:
a) MASSING Rating _1,j
Comment: .�r-'r...F u or- )1' c :,,., Sic1.t4 f\-vn.. is
1 ,.. .�.. Cr . A o 5.e r, iu wail L.- 41c. r " >4 e.• L., Ciiler/,: (aft.
f .K�
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating ‘.__57 _
Conn1rent: 'T -1- A, L'�'! � _ �, �. , o, 15.to rV _ u;ri o -' ---
�?1A3 r_.!L� -.
xi as _�— . ,?= ___., lP+ra AMA �_ tC._
acv,„, ?/= .':��F,;.Wi��l _ rT' {'S.L --
2 -
•
c) ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL Rating
Comment: - -- Q s.,ri.d, sic le
l S�cr� � r . 64 E+.a; - „� .mac., n �_�. �r 15��r-�+� ✓c,a-
6 -htter% >. F . X < T N(”, —
d) COLOR Rating
Comment: 11 T
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating
Comment: 7r, �. L r ," �s �cr , �
S Q, L•� • •up_ -re 'r r . .l ,, on) e fix .•r J I/4CRn't" 1 (3, It-
iT (2-„ t 'ht e-E
•
TOTAL Rating G , �1
Name of person submitting the above rating 'K UJfl. -M
I ,
-3-
•
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN •
RATINGS BY HPC
The H.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
---
PROJECT: L..„ -• • 1
REVIEW DATE: e • ' •
HPC REVIEW /
/\<</ e •
c , ) , e
k<
/:\ a
1/4<,
HPC
MEMBER •
1. 0 I LCD
2. s 0 6 - it k CI 0
tn- 1 -5 Lst M. 0
,
_
4. N • ', , \ o Cot
5. '2,„ 1'7
6.
• 7.
GROUP RATING
1/
PLANNING OFFICE RATING / 1 I ''*)
I
/
v •
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES C r r.714
7
,) •
10. W. Growth Management Quality of Design Evaluation Forni - Projects
wi the Commercial Core (CC) and Commercial One -1) zoning
districts shall be assigned points according to the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Architectural design - considering the compatibility of the proposed
building (in terms of size, height, location and building mater-
ials) with existing neighboring developments. Q
Rating 1• U •
Comment:
b) Site design - considering the quality and character of the proposed
landscaping and open space areas, the extent of undergrounding of
utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of
circulation (including access for service vehicles) and increased
safety and privacy.
Rating I'
Comment: 0 due c , /7 / neecSS q U/E W
Frew ACA FU (0
c) Energy - considering the use of insulation, solar energy devices
and efficient tii,; to maximize conservation of energy and
use of solar energy sou 'es.
Rating _
Comment:
d) Amenities - considering the provision of usable open space and
pedestrian and bicycle ways.
Rating
Cement: — — — — — — --
e) Visual Impact - considering the scale and location of buildings
. to maximize public views of surrounding scenic areas.
•
Rating e/
Comment:
•
11. PEZ Growth Management Community Commercial Uses Evaluation Form
Projects within the CC and C -1 shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a project totally lacking in any
housing or uses directed to supplying needs
of local residents
1 - Indicates a project with its main emphasis •
on supplying tourist services with little or
no on -site housing
2 - Indicates a project with housing and uses
that will be relied on by both the tourist
and residential populations
3 - Indicates a project which is designed almost
exclusively to satisfy the needs of the com-
munity's residential population with only
incidental tourist use and no tourist housing •
being anticipated.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Employee Housing - considering the extent to which the project
supplies housing for employees generated by the proposed commercial
uses.
Rating 0
Comment:
14
Q
1 11100
b) Medical and Other Service Needs - considering the extent to which
the project supplies medical, dental and similar professional
office space; as well as banking, appliance supplies and repair,
grocery, hardware, drug store, laundry, and similar uses designed
and intended to serve the routine trade and service needs of the
community.
Rating
Continent: _
-5-
•
12. NET POINTS
HPC AVERAGE RATING (O.
INDIVIDUAL P &Z MEMBER RATING / 7. L'
NET RATING 77v
13. BONUS POINTS (not to exceed 20% of the above net rating) provided
the project merits recognition due to its outstanding quality.
BONUS POINT
14. TOTAL POINTS
NET RATING
BONUS RATING
TOTAL POINTS 1 7
NAME OF PERSON SUBMITTING THE ABOVE RATING:
DATE ) 44
- 6 -
•
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY P &Z
The P &Z reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
•
PROJECT:
•
REVIEW DATE:
P &Z REVIEW
/
MEMBER
1. _l
2.
3. !_
4.
5. _ 6. — —
i
7. - --
GROUP RATING
PLANNING OFFICE RATING I 1
1 PLANNING OFFICE TOTAL
TOTAL INDIVIDUAL RATINGS
AVERAT OF ALL P &Z RATINGS _-____ ___
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
• commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the ,historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
• 2 - Indicates an acceptable (hut standard) design •
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of •
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the irritation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
• Project Name: S I _ _taint)
t
Date: _ — M-J`I
Design Element:
a) MASSING Rating _1/2-
Comment: Y fT / S h - - -�
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating _/• •
Comment. - - ___ 6
1.0000_, 1 - - a f l tf•t _ / -
- --DIV a - - CiN ' .
c) ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL Rating 13_
Comment: __VJ.l l.E `-mow
De - - -
d) COLOR Rating f
Comment: I40 IUD le nkI
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating _ /
Comment: 5l j jl x --
i TOTAL Rating ‘''7,_7
Name of person submitting the above rating gAbe0
-3-
•
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN •
RATINGS BY HPC
The H.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT:
REVIEW DATE:
HPC REVIEW � •
Q�
\ �J 7 ` O j 0 .S % t g !�
P
HPC .
MEMBER •
1. A I 1 1 t 0 =1
2. Fa c.--,-r- 1,6 2 Z - 2 1,
3. _ �s 02.2 iis z 0 1 6',g
4. M cry S 1 , ? IS
- J' s — (
5. 7, 1
' 1,i z 1 - 1iC
6. —` — — '
7 . _ -- - -- — —
GROUP RATING I
PLANNING OFFICE RATING I —_
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES (Q,
9. UPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
cormnercial one zoning districts shall he assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
•
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
{ building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the irritation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
Project Name: OA
MIZ 4 w5
Design Element: /
a) MASSING // Rating 5
} Comment: ,!-< r ? ccir
FralrAL- SALE
h) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating iZ_
Continent: L I Uf ftL 1l-/F / 47fl',44 5
-- - lti' fr-- ky__ lC 1-ST7/V6 , L /x A.
-
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The H.P.C. reviewed the following project and 'rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance. -
PROJECT: I" t 1 i'l/
REVIEW DATE: 4/ill
HPC REVIEId ti.? / e / / N,
I O / v /
F /
HPC
MEMBER
1. 9 1 / o _ / / 4
I, Z 1, 5 2 /i5 /_5
3. `>i )P14 .S / 2 / Z. / "7
4. ►,' ACS /, 3 H 2-. _ / ,5 / - `t -
5. es. l Z Z Z 2 -- qi
6. — -- — — —
7 ' _ - -- - - - -- — —
GROUP RATING
I
PLANNING OFFICE PATINGj li 7 4 Z Z 2- [ 2- II qi'5 p
{ THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES &,
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION - Ratings of projects within the
commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
• 2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing -- (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type oflo
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their •
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
. garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
•
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
•
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
• contemporary design as opposed to the incitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
Project Name: -_- __ 476 . i_ / /!.4 — -- -- —
Date: - --J — — —
Design Element:
a) MASSING Rating Z_ •
Comment: 'UC-T 1C)ki 1 'Csa 61 —
>St= SM9r - t.
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating 2 _
Comment: _ �1a[!�� _((��L_C' _e
•
-2.
w
c) ARCIHITECTURAL DETAIL Rating
Comment: '!1_,'�+c* 4 '
d) COLOR Rating 71/-
Comment: (,t}fQ; p U _ `TO ;5FR Cb1
02 siGwA6E
1
— No Ann - l' CO •
e) ARCHITECTURE ' Rating 3
Comment: _1 S lS t ALMinI/ ilic
( ! e zwileS
emir. €m „etc . — — TOTAL Rat i ng
Name of person submitting the above rating _C ' M
4
•
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The H.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT: _ lcM c4ut) M 6
REVIEW DATE: M{Nt Kt 7 S
•
HPC REVIEW /Se �
`()-\/
t / / O� 0.0
HPC
MEMBER 2 (c? . 3 l g .`1'
1. Said Z,� Z,,S 2•5 2
its
3 . (?X12Ns _ Z, 3 2, $ 2 3 1 3 q -
4. /140 2,5 Z,I 2.7._ Z,g Z,7 1 S
5. — 6. ,C4-
7
GROUP RATING 1 -- - - - - -- I�___
PLANNING OFFICE RATING'
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HFC AVERAGES f
•
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
• application of historic building materials and their •
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
. garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
•
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
• contemporary design as opposed to the imitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weal: factors affecting each of your ratings.
Project Name:ii/
Date: 0 / '7 g -- -- —
Design Element:
a) MASSING _
/ ,' �' / Ratinga_ •
Comment: ( S r ` Q — —
L f� t� _ , radii FA 10415 /i `e-
•
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating �.
-
c) ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL Rating q 1
Comment: ` `&t lilHa7Aa � /1. (,f
a -7
is OK /(fit Cord- �cwc_ v 7 G(tAI - ,/l e t (CliAgiGGti
;,may (, , tt.. ' ( - . (
d) COLOR Rating a.
Comment: 0
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating c,7
Comment: I S (OYYi ` 11-6_ ( S7 C 20
A . 4144 ideZ., h 4 7 & n4G G7A1174114 4' ifr41/7
sc (47 -� ( S l
TOTAL Rating ?j
Name of person submitting the above rating _ 1 - E=R R q ex 0
-3-
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The N.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT: Jwt J� °�
REVIEW DATE: 3/147$ _
HPC REVIEW Q tiQ�
i\ ,<<7,/
HPC
MEMBER
1._6 a a - 5 a . 5 3
2. 4.44Ar a q 3 f 3 ° 7 i y 5
3. _a /J-- 3. 0 0 a- 3 g a •3 : (3 -7
4. 5 )2 C i.c,1 � . d ,.(',n)
_ __M_P 3 1111 3 0.
6.��- a• R.q as 0). a a. is - S
I �.
GROUP RATING /.3.1
PLANNING OFFICE RATING
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES / 3 if
n_d
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the imitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factorsffecting each of your ratings.
Project Name: IV � �1fl1
Date: 3 RI- be — — — —
besiy:; Eie rnt:
a) MMASSING Rating
Comment: —_ -- —�, -- —
if
� vP e�, _ - , rig �„ w
r,:� _ _ Wi t I b,) ce
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL / Rating a _
comm ent: _ L07 L N'r'tc4 &v . (�ji — - GLG4G - 3� ] i i�
•
4 ac Le vtir
y ‘s th inerar qa-i-ca-egey
c) ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL 7� // Rating
S (,{ a
Comment: , Coo( at th qi P.� U/ zt (ke_
• d) COLOR Rating 2__
Comment: '-
/• ..:. as 1 4J
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating
Comment: 4 C' _ _ ' e .Sotrati
efyyrange due r&ia(21 (4)
h IhQQ,y; , AOA `-c U2( ait a (it.. 4 YLV 1 „aLecc,e
TOTAL Rating
Name of person submitting the above rating ell/ D
-3•-
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The H.P.C. reviewed the following project and 'rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT: l`t2 L 'Lfrd
REVIEW DATE: 3/1917‘
HPC REVIEW ~P/
AP A/Ns1
/ k Nt NN / N N.'
J : '' <%' c'ikt ( P / >
HPC
I MEMBER
2. *7A- -e / " S "2_ r I. 5 — /. g _5
3. M-0 / °2 / cR " - 7
` 4. in I' 3 _ , _ q
6. - -- —
GROUP RATING
1
PLANNING OFFICE RATINGI / 5 "2' ,), _ ca, I 1 7 C —
1
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES o- 6
•
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression riven by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the imitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
Project Name:
{ Date: — —
7 �
Design Element.
a) f1ASSING Rating -._
Comment:
(5 C r (k1A lAllT _/! r04' a /
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL /� RRaatiing /
Comment: JJJCi ' / --
iftgAziAci
eptadal
2 _
c) ARCIIITLCTURAL DETAIL Rating/p
Comment: --- _ - - - --
L4l 56:
d) COLOR Rating ,
Comment: —
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating /,
Comment:
—)
TOTAL Rat ng�,, c7�
/ C
Name of person submitting the above rating
//57?/QV w �
_U_
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The N.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commiercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT:
REVIEW DATE:
HPC REVIEW ��~Q Jew
P
COQ �� / Pv ���
. /\-, oCy '<k-'
I HPC
//,`;\ <J ,,_ ,,<<, , S < Q ' ,\t.
1 MEMBER
1 ;�r'L , . / _ ( / / 0 l i
111 /LC
3. IZIA 7
-4. _ A — /-`2 / 5 / -� I l- 5
5. ��! " L a / 5 /ok d / 7
6 . -- --
1 GROUP RATING + _____
PLANNING OFFICE RATINGI I _ — —
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES 6- 7
c) - � - r ��
,..,
Y Growth Mannt i v I t - '(�✓F
1 rm - Projects
WiMin She (,ou f.rf.lal core (((11 - -
ai One ((. -1) zoning
districts shall be signed , r •nrs
- _ding ro the following ie: 02,alc:
0 - Indicates a totally iin_.<nnpr,Lible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design _
Rate the following features: accordingly:
a) Architectural design - considering the compatibility of the proposed
building (in terms of size, height, location and building mater-
ials) with existing neighboring developments.
Rating 'z
Comment:
b) Site design - considering the quality and character of the proposed
landscaping and open space areas, the extent undergrounding of
utilities, and the ari of improvements for efficiency of
circulation (including access for service vchiicles) and increased
safety and privacy.
Rating t. S�
Comment:
c) Energy - considering the use of insulation, solar energy devices
and efficient fireplaces to maximize conservation of energy and
use of solar energy sources.
Rating 2:
Comment:
•
------- - - - - --
d) Amenities -- considering zhe provision of usable open space and
pedestrian and bicycle ways.
Rating 2
Comma n :
n
e) Vri oal 'tripe't.+= col 6e ; r t loth on of buildings
��' e and r' ;
to maximize public V, ■Ch7., u f surrounding scenic areas.
•
Rating -
Comment:
•
• 11. P &Z Growth Management Community Corn erciai Uses Evaluation Form •
Projects within the CC and C -1 shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a project totally lacking in any
housing or uses directed to supplying needs
of local residents
•
• 1 - Indicates a project with its main emphasis
on supplying tourist services with little or
no on -site housing
•
2 - Indicates a project with housing and uses
that will be relied on by both the tourist
and residential populations
3 - Indicates a project which is designed almost
exclusively to satisfy the needs of the com-
munity's residential population rw!ith only
• incidental tourist use and no tourist housing
being anticipated.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Employee 'dousing - considering the extent to which the project
supplies housing for employees generated by the proposed commercial
uses.
Rating 0
Comment:
•
•
•
b) Medical and Other Service Needs - considering the extent to which
the project supplies medical, dental and similar professional
office space; as well as banking, appliance supplies and repair,
grocery, hardware, drug store, laundry, and similar uses designed
and intended to serve the routine trade and service needs of the
community.
Rating a 1
Connen t:
•
- 5 -
AM
12. NET POINTS ■••r
NPC AVERAGE RATING 6,7
INDIVIDUAL P &Z MEMBER RATING 0,3
NET RATING 180
13. BONUS POINTS (not to exceed 20Z of the above net rating) provided
the project merits recognition due to its outstanding quality.
BONUS POINT 0
14. TOTAL POINTS
NET RATING I$.D
BONUS RATIf4G
TOTAL POINTS Ie,0
NAM aF PERSON SUBMITTING THE ABOVE RATING:
1 ( /
c J�� wn .� r � l �' � DATE 4 1 / - 7 8 q
•
1
U -.
G.j Tit 10. PfYi i. ,t h fi - �,
19 n �� r +� r� U i lr I.0 1 t, c i urrn - projects
a" (, G'I iiCY.; l it l (o - u (r (.l and i i 1. ; la1 one ((.-1) zoning
districts shall be assigned points according to the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally inceapat ible design
•
1 - Indicates a u:ajor design flaw
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design •
•
3 - Indicate: ar, acceptable design
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Architectural design - considering the compatibility of the proposed
building (in terms of size, height, location and building mater-
ials) with existing neighboring developments.
Rating �Z
Coarnent:
b) Site design - .considering the quality and character of the proposed
landscaping and open space areas, the extent of undergrounding of
utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of
circulation (including access for service vehicles) and increased
safety and privacy.
Rating 0
Comment:
c) Energy - considering the use of insulation, solar energy devices
and efficient fireplaces to maximize conservation of energy and
use of solar energy sources.
Rating —2
Comment:
d) Amenities - considering the provision of usable open space and
pedestrian and bicycle ways.
Rating
Coumrent:
•
•
e) Visual in aeS... con ,,e , , the scale and loStion of buildings
to maximize public ViC:WS sorrcuilding scenic areas.
• Rating
Comment:
•
• 11. P&Z Growth Management Community Comercial Uses Evaluation Form
Projects within the CC and C -1 shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a project totally lacking In any •
housing or uses directed to supplying needs
of local residents
•
1 - Indicates a project with its main emphasis
• on supplying tourist services with little or
no on -site housing
• 2 - Indicates a project with housing and uses
that will be relied on by both the tourist
and residential populations
3 - Indicates a project which is designed almost
exclusively to satisfy the needs of the com-
munity's residential population with only
incidental tourist use and no tourist housing •
being anticipated.
•
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Employee Housing - considering the extent to which the project
supplies housing for employees generated by the proposed commercial
uses.
Rating °
Comment:
•
•
•
b) Medical and Other Service Needs - considering the extent to which
the project supplies medical, dental and similar professional
office space, as well as banking, appliance supplies and repair,
grocery, hardware, drug store, laundrv, and similar uses designed
and intended to serve the routine trade and servicenceds of the
community.
• Rating
•
Connent:
•
-5-
.4 .
12. NET POINTS
HPC AVERAGE RATING 0,7
INDIVIDUAL P &Z MEMBER RATING /7 o
NET RATING /7 7
13. BONUS POINTS (not to exceed 20% of the above net rating) provided
the project merits recognition due to its outstanding quality.
BONUS POINT 3
14. TOTAL POINTS
NET RATING • /77
BONUS RATING /. 3
TOTAL POINTS /O
NAME OF PERSO. SUB "ITTING THE ABOVE RATING:
f r DATE 4
cte •
9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
• commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creatbs a major
conflict with historic structures in the ,historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
• 2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the imitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
f -
Project Name:
Date:
Design Element:
a) MASSING Rating - ),
Comment:
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating __
Comment: - - - --
-
r�
c) ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL Rating
Comment:
•
d) COLOR Rating
Comment: •
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating
Comment:
TOTAL Rating
Name of person submitting the above rating
- 3 -
erN
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The N.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT:
REVIEW DATE:
HPC REVIEW tiQ�
C / �Jti v 0� P 0.S) /•'\ SLY
HPC
MEMBER •
1
2.
•
3.
4.
5.
6
7. — —
GROUP RATING
PLANNING OFFICE RATING
•
THE COMBINED RATINGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES
•
10. P &Z Growth Mana!Zement Quality of Design Evaluation_ Form - Projects
T tTin the Commercial Core (CC) and Commercial One (C -1) zoning
districts shall be assigned points according to the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Architectural design - considering the compatibility of the proposed
building (in terms of size, height, location and building mater-
ials) with existing neighboring developments.
Rating /, 5
Comment:
•
b) Site design - considering the quality and character of the proposed
landscaping and open space areas, the extent of undergrounding of
utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of
circulation (including access for service vehicles) and increased
safety and privacy.
Rating
Comment:
c) Energy - considering the use of insulation, solar energy devices
and efficient fireplaces to maximize conservation of energy and
use of solar energy sources.
Rating
Comment:
d) Amenities - considering the provision of usable open space and
pedestrian and bicycle ways.
Rating )
Comment — — -- — -- -- — —
1 1,
n ..
e) Visual Impact - considering the scale and location of buildings
. to maximize public views of surrounding scenic areas.
Rating 1
Comment:
11. P&Z Growth Management Community Commercial Uses Evaluation Form
Projects within the CC and C -1 shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a project totally lacking in any
housing or uses directed to supplying needs
of local 'residents
1 - Indicates a project with its main emphasis
on supplying tourist services with little or
no on -site housing
2 - Indicates a project with housing and uses
that will be relied on by both the tourist
and residential populations
3 - Indicates•a project which is designed almost
exclusively to satisfy the needs of the com-
munity's residential population with only
incidental tourist use and no tourist housing
being anticipated.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Employee Housing - considering the extent to which the project
supplies housing for employees generated by the proposed commercial
uses.
Rating
Comment:
b) Medical and Other Service Needs - considering the extent to which
the project supplies medical, dental and similar professional
office space; as well as banking, appliance supplies and repair,
grocery, hardware, drug store, laundry, and similar uses designed
and intended to serve the routine trade and service needs of the
community.
Rating tf
Comment:
5
12. NET POINTS
UPC AVERAGE RATING,
INDIVIDUAL P &Z MEMBER RATING
- r
NET RATING
13. BONUS POINTS (not to exceed 20% of the above net rating) provided
the project merits recognition due to its outstanding quality.
4-7 — I� BONUS POINT /, S
14. TOTAL POINTS
NET RATING /X
BONUS RATING
TOTAL POINTS
NAME OF PERSON SUBMITTING THE ABOVE RATING:
e/C • DATE � ///
■
•
•
`
-6-
0 ,- ,
• 9. HPC GROWTH MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM - Ratings of projects within the
commercial one zoning districts shall be assigned points according to
•
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw which creates a major
conflict with historic structures in the ,historic
district or with the urban environment in the other
areas outside the historic district
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design •
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
The following design elements shall be rated accordingly:
Massing - (maximum 3 points) considering the massing, type of
roof, and overall compatibility with the historic
scale represented in the vicinity of the project.
Exterior Building Materials - (maximum 3 points) considering the
application of historic building materials and their
use on all facades of the structure, avoidance of .
garish, reflective or other disruptive materials.
Architectural Detail - (maximum 3 points) considering overall
visual impression given by fenestration and the use of
building detail near windows, doors, corners, roof
lines and at floor level.
Color - (maximum 3 points) considering the compatibility of colors
and the variation in color when necessary to maintain
historic scale.
Architecture - (maximum 3 points) considering the use of compatible
contemporary design as opposed to the imitation of
historic architectural features.
RATE the above five (5) design elements below. Please comment on the
strong and /or weak factors affecting each of your ratings.
Project Name: — __ —C- � gdz I
Date:
Design Element:
a) MASSING Rating Z
Comment:
b) EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL Rating Z
Comment:
2
c) ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL Rating 3.6'
Comment:
d) COLOR Rating
•
•
Comment:
e) ARCHITECTURE Rating •
Comment:
TOTAL Rating
Name of person submitting the above rating S T
.3-
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RATINGS BY HPC
The N.P.C. reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT:
REVIEW DATE:
HPC REVIEW •
dS-
~`i / �O
V� PS ti� �
HPC
MEMBER •
1. _
1 2.
•
I 3.
4.
5.
7.
GROUP RATING
PLANNING OFFICE RATING
—
THE COMBINED RATIPJGS OF THE HPC AVERAGES
•
•
10. P &xZ Growth Manajement Quality of Design Evaluation Form - Projects
wi hi n the Commercial Core (CC) and Corniucrcial One (C -1 - ) zoning
districts shall be assigned points according to the following formula:
0 - Indicates a totally incompatible design
1 - Indicates a major design flaw
2 - Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Indicates an acceptable design
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Architectural design - considering the compatibility of the proposed
building (in terms of size, height, location and building mater-
ials) with existing neighboring developments.
Rating J<S
Comment:
b) Site design - considering the quality and character of the proposed
landscaping and open space areas, the extent of undergroundinq of
utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of
circulation (including access for service vbhicles) and increased
safety and privacy.
Rating Ir c
Comment:
c) Energy - considering the use of insulation, solar energy devices
and efficient fireplaces to maximize conservation of energy and
use of solar energy sources.
Rating "e,C1
Comment:
d) Amenities - considering the provision of usable open space and
pedestrian and bicycle ways.
Rating /,$"
Comment:
- 1
•
eat '• 0
•
e) Visual impact - considering the scale and location of buildings
to maximize public views of surrounding scenic areas.
Rating 2/C
Comment: •
•
•
11. P&Z Growth Management Community Commercial Uses Evaluation Form
Projects within the CC and C -1 shall be assigned points according to
the following formula:
0 - Indicates a project totally lacking in any
housing or uses directed to supplying needs
of local 'residents
1 - Indicates a project with its main emphasis
on supplying tourist services with little or
no on -site housing
2 - Indicates a project with housing and uses
• that will be relied on by both the tourist
and residential populations
3 - Indicates-a project which is designed almost
exclusively to satisfy the needs of the cm-
.
munity's residential population with only
incidental tourist use and no tourist housing
•
being anticipated
Rate the following features accordingly:
a) Employee Housing - considering the extent to which the project
supplies housing for employees generated by the proposed commercial
uses.
Rating 0
Comment:
•
•
•
b) Medical and Other Service Needs - considering the extent to which
• the project supplies medical, dental and similar professional
office space; as well as banking, appliance supplies and repair,
grocery, hardware, drug store, laundry, and similar uses designed
and intended to serve the routine trade and service needs of the
community.
Rating _IA_
Continent:
•
- 5 -
12. NET POINTS
• HPC AVERAGE RATING 07 l
INDIVIDUAL P &Z MEMBER RATING
NET RATING / 7�
13. BONUS POINTS (not to exceed 20% of the above net rating) provided
the project merits recognition due to its outstanding quality.
BONUS POINT 0
14. TOTAL POINTS
NET RATING /7L7
BONUS RATING
TOTAL POINTS
NAME OF PERSON SUBMITTING THE ABOVE RATING:
__ p DATE ,V.
r
-- 6 -
•
r
•
GROUT!! MANAGEMENT PLAN
• RATINGS BY P &Z
•
The P &Z reviewed the following project and rated each of the
design and community commercial elements as specified by the Growth
Management Ordinance.
PROJECT:
REVIEW DATE:
P &Z REVIEW a�4
/ �v 5 � a ~ c / ,.;1 �/N9 /
'47 ti v ti v � v t
6-, Z co I w U /
MEMBER
1.
2.
--- 1
3.
i - - --
4.
5.
6.
7.
GROUP RATING
PLANNING OFFICE RATING
PLANNING OFFICE TOTAL
TOTAL INDIVIDUAL RATINGS
AVERAT OF ALL P &Z RATINGS
... _
•.:_.„.•••• "%sr
•
•
• ' r•I:ril I IT : ''. Li/ ,•,,i'; iii,
•
Ifw Pri riy..ryci Hy in) TY.iir:1 v j Y i LTC; r••, t. ucch of
•
(Hiyti imrf (:' .:•i: . H . , ; cr•.•T•• ■ Li til r i•••::.. .. : - p - c ii k)(: Ly ; T(.• Gyry,•illi
/■;..Tr.f.y,,HieTri. Ord i ii;..:!.CT: .
, .
' • .
• . .
. •
• PROW CT: ...<#.(-• (.:' ..(,„
i:IY/TILI Dial::
it
/ t
.
/
. / / /
/
•
/
/ /
•-_, 4/
P&L kr V i L'E.
/ / /
/ 4
6" A
/ r
/ //(,::::- z i;
• ./ i., P i 1
/ ,/.:.• (.., / VA.; '
. , ef / c(:' 4 ).( ' 1 2 'F 1 '
, ,
. e, i'•' 1/ ,// ", '.:.' ..,/
.
/ t-.) / -
Al
/
1 ,
II i ,
1 i . ( ,, 1
li
I
I I
1 ; ii it
1 ` — - Ltic , resitt litt /c .' I (7 i -, if 1 '''' ' c
I ' I
I . '
c....„
, , ,, - I , r b , , ,.,:.,
,_ , - . - -
,,., ,..., i 4 I , r- I —7 ! v
2 . _..1 i. ! e's I, i?"::) I 4 "
i / ef• I ' L ' I i 0 1 /63 . I kid
i4 • ••
i . I 0-40 1 t■ .
.0 1 2 N •0-
- r c..- 7.
I I 4' 1— I ... .—_—_1_1-__ 1 1. ( _ "4 ._ ...1 I /9"3
. ..,
1 I--
i .
4, 2 ( iii, ?too lir r/
t
i i - ll 0 I r h ' r i t i?‘ I
j,/, -2
' I , , I /
C. ', /oce / • , ,(T. /, c-„.: 17,5 I),
_
i i
6. 11 1 I I Ii I P
I !I I
I 1 .
2, Ii I I
L Ii U
, , l
,,
.1
II i ( J ,1 I II I
..._.___ _ ....... .
II 1 II i l ii I
ft.t.Lc, it•I L.A. hid JLT 1. I I I I
TI■E CliTH11;1.1 thtir,cs or THT PrE2 AVI S
• •
•
, .
•
•