CCMIN040406 - Laserfiche WebLink

concern about the design when Council reviewed this in September 2005, particularly related to how it blends in with the downtown. He recalled commenting on the process for the design of the Arts Center and how it would include additional review by the PDA and the Planning Commission. He believed this part of the process did not occur in the way in which he anticipated it would. Mr. Thorne asked if there was a way to look at this project from Mr. Sullivan's perspective without delaying or adding cost to the project. If the consideration for the design included minor modifications, Mr. Fialho said staff could handle this administratively through the Zoning Administrator in order to bridge the gap without delaying the project significantly in terms of the timeline. Mr. Thorne said he was not interested in adding any additional time or money to the project. Mr. Fialho pointed out that if additional time is spent on the conceptual design it would not be a significant cost, but it would increase the total cost for this project beyond what staff had anticipated. Staff could make minor modifications administratively that would add minor costs to the project beyond what was estimated in January 2006. Ms. McGovern wondered if Council could authorize staff to move forward with this project but include a peer review by Larry Cannon, who would look at the proposed design and review the concerns mentioned by the public this evening while ELS Architecture continues to finalize the plans for the interior of the Arts Center. She suggested that the Director of Planning and Community Development review the Mr. Cannon's work and the final interior drawings as presented by ELS Architecture and make the determination as to whether it included additional costs, or if it delayed the project in any way. Mr. Fialho said staff could explore this option. Ms. McGovern asked if the process for the Firehouse Arts Center was the same process that Kollin Hardware had to go through for the PDA Design Review. Mr. Fialho said it was a different process. This project has gone through a two and a half year process with stakeholders who have provided comments and feedback to staff and the Architects. This project has also gone through a staff review process that is similar to the process for other private sector developments. In this case, there is a different opinion between the design and the goals and objectives of the Task Force versus what the PDA Design Committee had presented, which is not uncommon. The process for this project was more intensive and comprehensive than what is applied to other buildings in the downtown because of the public nature of this project. Ms. McGovern acknowledged that this project went through a significant process. If there is a process for all of the projects in the downtown and business owners are required to go through this process, she believed the City needed to go through the same process. She requested a copy of the site landscaping plan that illustrated the use of plazas, entryways and the external building, which she believed softened the building significantly. She did not like the decorative bollards and preferred planters with flowers that would continue to soften the landscape with the building. She requested a copy of the south elevation. She noted that Lions Pleasanton City Council Minutes 16 04/04/06