PC 11/09/88 - Laserfiche WebLink

PUD-_80=16=3D1_Pactel_Proeerties Application of Pactel Properties for development plan approval to construct a multi-building, approximately 103,160 square foot retail commercial complex to be located on an approximately 9.75 acre site generally in the area bounded by Hopyard Road, Stoneridge Drive, Franklin Drive, and Johnson Drive. Zoning for the property is PUD tPlanned Unit Development) - Industrial/Commercial and Offices District. Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending that the Commission find that the development plan is consistent with the General Plan and the purposes of the F'UD Ordinance, and recommends approval of the PUD development plan and modification for Case PUD-BD-ib-3D, subject to the conditions of the staff report. Commissioner Hovingh asked if the signage request would come at a later date. Mr. Swift said the concept of the signage is in place, but detail such as colors would come back be#ore the Design Peview Board. Commissioner Mahern discussed the possibility of eliminating Building F. She thought it was too close to the street and gave the project a cluttered look. The public hearing was opened. Mona Leone, Vice President of Pactel Properties, represented the application. She thanked the staff for a well-written assessment of the project. She introduced Jack Munson, architect for the project. Jack Munson, ~5U Sutter Street, San Francisco, displayed a revised model of the project. He pointed out the three major changes that the Commission had objected to at the previous meeting. The sunburst artwork on the columns had been removed; the palm trees had been changed to pine trees; the colors of the parapet wall had been changed to a teal green. He showed the revisions of height and the entrances to the inner court. He noted there may still be some graphic changes at a later date. He said their traffic consultant is present tonight to answer any questions, noting that an acceleration lane had been added and the bus stop moved. He said that they have added steel trellises on which vines would be planted at the rear of the building. Commissioner Hoyt wondered about the signage. Mr. Munson said it is their intent to let the tenant choose their own. Chairman Michelotti discussed the elimination of the colored bands at the top of the building in order to decrease the linear look. Mr. Munson said the reason for the bands was a desire to create a memorable look and unify the two blocks.. He thought they were appropriate and was not in favor of eliminating them. Page 5