Advisory Design Panel Minutes

Transcription

1 Advisory Design Panel Minutes Park's Meeting Room #1 City Hall Avenue Surrey, B.C. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2010 Time: 4:00 PM Chair: L. Mickelson Panel Members: Cpl. M. Searle M. Ehman M. Mortensen P. Cotter R. Bernstein R. Meyers T. Ankenman Guests: D. Love, Ionic Development P. Campbell, DMG Landscape Architects S. Guindi, Ionic Architecture R. de Beeld, Raymond de Beeld Architect Inc. D. Stoyko, Sharp & Diamond C. Shrubb, DYS Architecture D. Simpson, DYS Architecture P. Gradowski, Durante Kruek Ltd. Andy LaCroix, Boardwalk Gaming Staff Present: H. Bello, Planning & Development R. Duke, Planning & Development M. Rondeau, Planning & Development T. Mueller, Legislative Services A. SUBMISSIONS 1. File No.: New or Resubmit: New Description: Commercial site with 3 buildings Address: 2297/2301/2515 King George Boulevard, South Surrey Developer: Christian Chia, Astral Development Architect: David Love, Ionic Architecture Landscape Architect: Patricia Campbell, DMG Landscape Architects Planner: Keith Broersma Urban Design Planner: Hernan Bello The Urban Design Planner provided an overview of the project: The key challenge for the site is to accommodate three uses and retain the identity of the three architectural elements. Concerns for the area involve signage. Two of the developments currently meet the criteria for the signage within the development. There are some variance permits that have been submitted that are under consideration. This project is a DP for three commercial buildings; generally meets the OCP and CHI Zoning. A minor DP variance for setbacks is required and also for fascia signage for Mr. Lube and A&W. The Project Architect made the following comments: Different configurations were considered for the site. There were three separate components introduced and A&W was made the centrepiece to draw everyone into the whole of the site. The A&W and Kal Tire were located away from the hotel to reduce impacts. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 1

2 A constraint was the requirement by the City Engineering Department to provide a right-of-way to complete a frontage parallel road along King George Blvd. There is a parallel set of connections between the three buildings. Each building has a connection to the city sidewalk. With respect to site lighting and CPTED issues, the buildings are open and there is good visibility around each building. There will be lighting around the site but it will not be intrusive. Canopy lighting will be used in some of the landscaped areas. With respect to the signage design, stone bases and verticals have been added. A&W came in mid project with a new signage prototype, in the kind of style that adding vertical stone to the sign does not work with the design. All of the retail signs have stone bases to create some kind of unity through the site in terms of materials. There is a minor variance for the A&W pylon sign which required a 2 foot variance to the rest of the set back. There are two variances for the building development. The code allows for glazed areas, the street side will be fully glazed. The variance on the north is to do with the CHI zone; the variance permit is requesting 4 feet. The other variance is to the south where a 7.5 setback is normally required. On the west side of the building, there is no fencing but there are garbage enclosures. There is a service lane for trucks that will be for single unit trucks. The Landscape Architect made the following comments: The plan is to continue the standard of large oaks along King George Blvd. The overall planting palette involves a series of broadleaf evergreens and perennials which will be punctuated with colour and ornamental grasses. There are larger conifers near garbage or recycling bins. Trees on site are mostly deciduous throughout. ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL STATEMENT OF REVIEW 2297/2301/2515 King George Boulevard, South Surrey File No It was Moved by R. Meyers Seconded by M. Mortensen That the Advisory Design Panel recommends that the applicant address the following issues to the satisfaction of the Planning & Development Department. Carried T. Ankenman opposed h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 2

3 STATEMENT OF REVIEW COMMENTS Context and Site Circulation For a car, oriented use is well resolved and vehicular circulation that minimizes conflicts. Building placement has taken into consideration impacts on existing adjacent properties. The development would be more powerful if the buildings were closer to the streetscape with the frontage road deleted. The frontage road might undermine the viability of the lane. The current site plan and layout creates a very sheltered parking lot that will be hard to survey at night and will provide a hidden area from the highway. Highly recommend video cameras and suggest keeping it well lit at night. Another suggestion is to put up some chains afterhours. There is a conflict on the raised pedestrian crossing next to the A&W. A car stopped at the drive isle entrance will be straddling the crosswalk. Form and Character The attempt to pull the styles of the three buildings together is commendable. The blank sidewalk along the north of Kal Tire should be addressed. There should be a landscape buffer placed along the north and south, at Kal tire and Mr. Lube. Consider flipping the Kal Tire and having it closer to Mr. Lube. All the noise would then face north instead of facing toward the hotel and have the A&W as a standalone. Concern was expressed with the signage; they seem to be completely out of scale with the size of the buildings. Three pylon signs are too large and should have the same setback. Visual pollution should be a consideration along King George Blvd, discourage enormous size, heights and the sign variance requests. Make the A&W patio experience a little more special with glass screening and stamped concrete; it is the only outdoor people place in the whole development. The location of the recessed stairwell is right on the property line next to the Mr. Lube, this should be better resolved. The compound on the back side of Kal Tire is a concern for visibility and access. Consideration should be given to sightlines. Prototype designs restrict design flexibility. Encourage more prominent and consistent use of elements and materials to link all buildings, i.e., stone, fencing, garbage enclosures, site lighting, sign bases, etc. Landscaping Screening for single family homes would be desirable; particularly for the headlight issue at night. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 3

4 There are almost zero lot lines on the north and south. Both the Kal Tire and Mr. Lube facades should be addressed, particularly facing the hotel. Could be addressed with landscape or architecturally. Landscaping elements should be used more consistently across the site. Look at some way to tie in the buildings across the site and make the details as similar as possible. There is a very tightly spaced network of bollards in front of Kal Tire; an alternative to break them up would be to use a raised planter as a barrier instead; the colour could be toned down. CPTED and Accessibility Historically in the area, there has been a lot of youth pedestrian traffic and congregation of youth along the King George Corridor. There is a very high potential for graffiti. There should be a consideration for the "smash and grab potential" with buildings with glazed store fronts. Because it is on the King George, consideration should be made with the placement of bollards or barriers. There is activity in the lane so good surveillance is needed. Concern was expressed regarding the disabled parking spot for A&W and ease of backing out due to the angled parking scenario. Disabled parking should be reconsidered and moved to another spot that is closer to the building or closer to the entrance. The A&W washroom should be wheel-chair accessible and to the code. Provide let-downs at accessible parking space at Kal Tire. Sustainability Strongly recommend that a storm water management plan be considered with permeable pavers within the area. The Project Architect made the following comment: With any development, it is always a challenge to satisfy the requirements of CPTED. 2. File No.: New or Resubmit: Resubmit Description: DP for commercial-retail building Community Gaming Centre and façade improvement for existing building. Address: 7093 King George Blvd. Developer: Al Watt, Newton Square Properties Ltd. Architect: Raymond de Beeld, Raymond de Beeld Architect Inc. Landscape Architect: David Stoyko, Sharp & Diamond Planner: Akonyu Akolo Urban Design Planner: Hernan Bello h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 4

5 The Urban Design Planner provided an overview of the project: This project was originally presented to the ADP as a general DP prior to going to Council. This submission is a complete submission for a development permit. There are three existing buildings on site. One of the buildings will be demolished to make room for the new gaming facility and the southeast building will be shortened to accommodate parking requirements. The existing buildings are proposed to be upgraded to a higher quality and in character to the new gaming building. The Newton Town Centre plan identifies a number of roads which link through this site and be incorporated into the site plan. The Panel s comments are requested pertaining to the changes from the original development versus what is being presented in the resubmission. The Project Architect made the following comments: Project has been a two-year process. What is shown in the resubmission illustrates a more defined and developed scheme and addresses the comments from the previous Panel. The Community Gaming Centre model has slot machines and bingo but is not a "full-out" casino. The site is quite tight and is smaller due to the new road requirements. The gaming building is defined by the internal space program and some of the lottery corporation concerns about security. The challenge is to provide interest and articulation on the gaming building. A secondary screen will be wrapped around the building to achieve interest. The development will introduce a tilt-up concrete building to allow the building to be re-skinned and articulated on the outside with opportunities for vertical landscaping. The site facing King George will have an animated LED backlit concept. With the LED technology, different colours and themes can be flashed and will provide variety and will create a landmark. The canopy provides a strong focus of the connection to the street. The entrance was moved from the original plan to create a better sense of entrance to the building. Pedestrian circulation is trying to encourage traffic along the CRU s and introduce connections across where possible. A pocket park will be created between the buildings to provide a place for pedestrians to sit and rest. The handicapped parking stalls have been doubled up so they are central to the CRU s during the day. There is a need for a generator on the site; it will be enclosed by a facade. Screening will be used on the roof top units. There will be heavy timber and a lot of stone. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 5

6 The Landscape Architect made the following comments: Through the landscaping, the attempt is to allow the openness of the front and focus the trees where there will be maximum impact. There will be bench seating and open spaces to create open nodes and allow the site to be part of a functional space. Storm-water will be integrated as much as possible. All the drains will be located in the tree pits, feeding the trees and to allow some way to clean the water, essentially using micro-measures to have a major effect. The goal is to create a public realm to draw the users in. ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL STATEMENT OF REVIEW 7093 King George Blvd. File No It was Moved by T. Ankenman Seconded by R. Meyers That the Advisory Design Panel recommends that the applicant address the following issues to the satisfaction of the Planning & Development Department and resubmit the project to the ADP for review. Carried M. Mortensen and R. Bernstein Opposed STATEMENT OF REVIEW COMMENTS The Panel expressed concern that this project is dramatically different from what was presented previously and the level of detail was not provided. It was decided by the ADP that this project should come back to the Panel for further review. Context and Site Circulation Reconsider interface with residential to the north. Refine pedestrian circulation on site to accommodate additional pathways. Integrate/consider pedestrian crossing on King George particularly for transit. The parking areas are too tight; the pedestrian movement does not seem to be sufficiently integrated into the plan. Form and Character Changes to a more rectilinear massing and expression have lost the architectural dynamism of the previous design. Consider breaking roof plane, creating a response/gesture at the south east corner of the building. Make more of the glazing provided at that location. Improve/differentiate treatment of the east facade, support more glazing and transparency. People like to see others inside, light and human activity makes the building more human. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 6

7 Refine and develop the facade as a "decorated box" as an option. Consider providing more contrast in colour palette, perhaps to be more evocative of natural materials, or more abstract to be more expressive. Porte-cochere element seems inconsistent with the architectural language of gaming building. Consider more contemporary planar elements that are better coordinated with the structural elements at the walkway. Moving the entrance to the middle does not create a sense of arrival. The lighting grid does not appear to be well defined; suggest looking at how the lighting is expressed in terms of other buildings. The east end of the building facing the residential needs significant improvement. Consider noise impacts from the generator. The roof-top screens should be better illustrated in the presentation. Existing retail to borrow more from gaming building than the opposite. The CRU entrances are too low; consideration should be given to making them higher. The orientation of the parking stalls to the west of new building should be considered; the trees could hide unwanted activity. Landscaping Landscaping plan is not highly developed at this point and it is difficult to make specific comments. The suggested plant list is relatively single level. Something else is needed to provide a mid-range of plant material. Use large trees where possible with adequate soil to grow. The patio off to the bingo hall is too exposed to the highway. It should be made more private. The high roof overhang does not offer much protection for individuals who wish to sit outside. The landscape screen proposed for the building may not be viable without planting depth. A sense of pedestrian arrival can be created through better use of landscaping; a fair amount of work should be done to the site plan. More can be done with water schemes and landscape articulation. The pocket park has potential as a retail perspective; it could form part of a seating area for a restaurant. CPTED and Accessibility The internal security will be well integrated to the gaming facility. Pathways from the gaming building on the site and to transit should be carefully considered. Disabled parking could be better balanced. Recommend power doors at the entrances. Suggest that the entrance is more pedestrian friendly. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 7

8 Sustainability Commend storm-water management. The Project Architect made the following comments: The road development in the area is slated for the future. The landscaping will be the next phase when the road scheme is determined. Will consider making the panels more vibrant. 3. File No.: New or Resubmit: Resubmit Last Submission Date: March 5, 2009 Description: Proposed 2 high-rise buildings Address: Avenue, City Centre Developer: Carlo Casafrancisco, King George Developments Architect: Colin Shrubb, DYS Architecture Landscape Architect: Durante Kruek Ltd. Planner: Gary Gahr Urban Design Planner: Robert Duke The Urban Design Planner provided an overview of the project: This is a resubmission to ADP, the first submission was November 26, 2009, and the project went to ADP for a workshop March 5 th There are two towers proposed with an FAR of 4.5. The Panel was seeking design development to: o On-site vehicle circulation and drop-off o The plaza design o Improve the public-private interface o Improve the townhouse interface o Improve the building entries. The Panel was asked to consider the general relationship of the two towers and comment on the plaza and public/private interfaces. The Project Architect made the following comments: Major issues identified at the last Panel were: the ground plane and the building entrances. A landscaped node in the plaza ties things together; this is achieved with the introduction of water and the alignment of a walkway to define a public realm. Townhouses have been pulled back to create greater landscaped separation from the sidewalk. The street treatment has been refined to give the townhouses an identity and provide interest to the street. The configuration of the plan has been changed to allow for vehicular circulation and pedestrian drop off. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 8

9 Off street loading and service-access has been provided. The lobbies have been shifted to create one level all the way through from 100th Avenue lobby. An amenity/conservatory space has been created adjacent to the west entry providing an outlook onto the garden with useable seating. The 100th Avenue lobby is taller with a simple glass wall and canopy enhancing the sense of height and the tower coming off of the ground. The fenestration and glazing of the lower tower have been reworked; the building is now a very simple rectilinear form with staggered balconies to create more movement. The two towers are different in expression, connected at the ground plane and share some common elements but because of differences in scale and geometry are not identical. The Landscape Architect made the following comments: There are two different spaces, the natural existing wetland, and park that are being drawn into urban space. They are cut through the middle with an urban trail. Water is uniting the two spaces, one side is more architectural, and the other is a natural pond. Cars go through the site; a series of paving bands on 99 th Avenue gives cues that drivers need to slow down. There are three levels, a playground area, orchard, and an amenity space. There is an open area with two patios and water feature framed by planting. The water falls down the face of the building to a formal patio with a planted edge. There is a rain garden comprised of a series of rocks and boulders. Storm-water management will go through the pond; there is a detention pond off site. ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL STATEMENT OF REVIEW Avenue, City Centre File No It was Moved by M. Ehman Seconded by M. Mortensen That the Advisory Design Panel recommends that the applicant address the following issues to the satisfaction of the Planning & Development Department. Carried h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 9

10 STATEMENT OF REVIEW COMMENTS Form and Character The previous comments from the Panel have been well addressed. Distinguishing between private and public realm is well executed and interesting. 100 th Avenue entry has nice drama, a similar pilotis expression could be incorporated at the SW corner of the building; structural column expression to highlight the tower base. One member considered the entry to such a grand building on 100 th Ave still seemed weak. The top of the tower is disappointing. This will be prominent on the skyline. The statement is conservative; there is an opportunity to do something dramatic at the top of the building. Concerned with the north elevation of the lower tower. Consider refinement of secondary entrance element off mews lowering it from three to two storeys. Landscaping Landscaping has been well addressed. CPTED and Accessibility Crime prevention initiatives have been successful in the area. There is a lot of foot traffic in the centre core, enforce territoriality with walkways, and open spaces. Ensure underground parking secured to prevent break-in s. The development will provide a sense of community to the area. B. ADOPTION OF MINUTES It was Moved by M. Mortensen Seconded by R. Bernstein That the minutes of the Advisory Design Panel meeting of January 21, 2010 be adopted. Carried C. OTHER COMPETENT BUSINESS D. NEXT MEETING The next Advisory Design Panel is scheduled for Thursday, February 18, 2010, Executive Boardroom, City Hall. h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 10

11 E. ADJOURNMENT The Advisory Design Panel meeting adjourned at 7:02 PM Jane Sullivan, City Clerk L. Mickelson, Advisory Design Panel h:\adp\minutes\2010 minutes\min adp docx Page 11