Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2 - ARCH-0816-2019 (1141 Ella Street)Meeting Date: April 20, 2020 Item Number: 2 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION REPORT 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING The proposed project is a new three-story single-family residential structure, which includes a 3,439- square foot, four-bedroom home, a 967-square foot accessory dwelling unit, and a 1,031-square foot, four-car garage. The project is located on a flag lot, with an average slope of approximately 22%. The project also includes grading and paving for vehicle access and landscaping. The applicant is requesting exceptions from the Hillside Development Standards of the Zoning Regulations to allow portions of downhill building walls of 28 feet (stairwell) and 24 feet (right-side wall section) where 15 feet in height is the standard, and to allow retaining walls up to 12 feet in height where six feet is the standard. General Location: The 11,616-square foot project site is an existing flag lot parcel with direct access to Ella Street. The property is situated on the on north-west slope of Terrace Hill, with the adjacent property to the south designated as the Terrace Hill Open Space. All other adjacent properties, including the parcel below the flag lot, are developed with residential uses. Present Use: Vacant Flag Lot Zoning: Medium-Density Residential (R-2) General Plan: Medium-Density Residential Surrounding Uses: East: Single-Unit Dwelling, Detached West: Single-Unit Dwelling, Detached North: Single-Unit Dwelling, Detach South: Terrace Hill Open Space 2.0 PROPOSED DESIGN Architecture: Modern Design details: Rectilinear design with flat roof, balconies created by offsets in wall plains, use of recessed windows and glass as a prominent material, integrated light well providing egress, light, and ventilation. Materials: Stucco, glass windows and balcony walls, metal railings and window framing Colors: Charcoal grey (Black Fox), taupe (Moth Wing), and beige, with dark bronze on window framing p FROM: Shawna Scott, Senior Planner BY: Kyle Van Leeuwen, Assistant Planner PROJECT ADDRESS: 1141 Ella Street FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0816-2019 APPLICANT: Didier and Beatrice Cop REPRESENTATIVE: TJ Esser, Vellum Design Build ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ For more information contact: (Kyle Van Leeuwen) at 781-7091 or kvanleeuwen@slocity.org Figure 1: Subject Property ARC2 - 1 Item 2 Packet Page 8 ARCH-0816-2019 1141 Ella Street Page 2 3.0 FOCUS OF REVIEW The ARC’s role is to 1) review the proposed project in terms of consistency with the Community Design Guidelines (CDG) and applicable City Standards and 2) provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director. Community Design Guidelines: https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104 4.0 COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES/DISCUSSION ITEMS The project must be consistent with the requirements of the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and CDG, specifically Chapter 7.2. Hillside Development. Staff has identified the discussion items below related to consistency with CDG Chapters 2 (General Design Principles), 5 (Residential Project Design), and 6 (Site Planning and Other Design Details). Figure 2: Project Rendering Highlighted Sections Discussion Items Chapter 7.2 – Hillside Development §7.2.A.3 – Placement of Structures The structure is located as close as possible to the street and in the most accessible portion of the site, while maintaining compliance with setback and driveway slope requirements, and is at the lowest feasible elevation, which minimizes the silhouette of the structure against the ridge of Terrace Hill. The ARC’s review of the project should take into consideration consistency with this subsection, and conformance to development standards such as setback. ARC2 - 2 Item 2 Packet Page 9 ARCH-0816-2019 1141 Ella Street Page 3 §7.2.B.1 – Overall design The project design places the lower floor below existing grade, reducing the amount of structure that will be visible downhill, and the massing is broken up by offsets and recessed windows on downhill facing wall planes. The ARC should discuss whether the structure keeps a low profile and conforms to the natural slopes, emphasizes horizontal rather than vertical features and, overall, maintains as low a profile as feasible. §7.2.B.2 – Exterior wall surfaces The project provides small scaled elements, overhangs, and articulation to create shade and shadow to break up the overall form. The ARC should discuss if the project has applied these aspects effectively to break up building forms and achieve light and dark building surfaces that will blend with similar contrasts found in the surrounding vegetation, which consists primarily of seasonal grasses and mature trees along the east and west property lines. §7.2.B.4 – Colors and Materials The exterior colors of the project emphasize dark earth tones, such as grey and beige, as called for on north-facing slopes. The ARC should discuss whether the colors and materials help blend the structure with the natural appearance of the hillside, or if lighter colors would be more consistent with this guideline. 5.0 PROJECT STATISTICS Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required* Front Setback 23.5 feet 20 feet Density (units/acre) 2 2 Maximum Height of Structures 28 feet 35 feet Max Building Coverage 22% 50% Total # Parking Spaces 4 3 Environmental Status Categorically exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) Zoning Regulations Exceptions The project includes requests for exceptions from the Hillside Development Standards (17.70.090) to allow portions of downhill building walls to exceed 15 feet in height and to allow retaining walls up to 12 feet in height. Exceptions to the hillside regulations can be supported, subject to specific findings as provided in this section. These findings can be made in part because: 1.The exception furthers the intent of the regulations, to protect scenic hillside areas and natural features, by keep the massing of the structure at a lower overall elevation. 2.The exception proposed a design solution that is equivalent for quality, effectiveness, durability, and safety, and, in the case of retaining needing exception, are either interior to the site and will not be easily seen for the public right-of-way and will facilitate requirements for light and egress. 3.The exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege because other properties in the area have similar design aspects. ARC2 - 3 Item 2 Packet Page 10 ARCH-0816-2019 1141 Ella Street Page 4 6.0 ACTION 6.1 Recommend approval of the project. An action recommending approval of the application will be forwarded to the Community Development Director for final action. This action may include recommendations for conditions to address consistency with the Community Design Guidelines. 6.2 Continue the project. An action continuing the application should include direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues, including identification of specific Community Design Guidelines. 6.3 Recommend denial the project. An action denying the application should include findings that cite the basis for the recommendation for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, CDG, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents. 7.0 ATTACHMENTS 7.1 Project Plans ARC2 - 4 Item 2 Packet Page 11 ARC2 - 5Item 2Packet Page 12 ARC2 - 6Item 2Packet Page 13 ARC2 - 7Item 2Packet Page 14 ARC2 - 8Item 2Packet Page 15 ARC2 - 9Item 2Packet Page 16 ARC2 - 10Item 2Packet Page 17 ARC2 - 11Item 2Packet Page 18 ARC2 - 12Item 2Packet Page 19 ARC2 - 13Item 2Packet Page 20 ARC2 - 14Item 2Packet Page 21 ARC2 - 15Item 2Packet Page 22 ARC2 - 16Item 2Packet Page 23 ARC2 - 17Item 2Packet Page 24 ARC2 - 18Item 2Packet Page 25 ARC2 - 19Item 2Packet Page 26 ARC2 - 20Item 2Packet Page 27 Item #2 1141 Ella Street ARCH-0816-2019 Review of new three-story single-family residence on a sloped lot, with a requested exceptions from the Hillside Development Standards of the Zoning Regulations Staff Presentation By: Kyle Van Leeuwen, Assistant Planner Applicant: Didier & Beatrice Cop Focus of Review 4 ARC review due to: ◼New residential development on a sloped lot ARC Purview: ◼Review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, and applicable City standards ◼Provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director for final approval Project Description 8 ◼Three-story, single-family structure ▪3,439-square foot residence, with 967-square foot accessory dwelling unit, and four -car garage ▪11,616-square foot flag lot with an approximate slope of 22% ▪Requested exceptions to Zoning Regulations to allow portions of downhill building walls taller than 15 feet in height and retaining walls above six feet in height Building Design 10 ◼The proposed building is modern in character, with rectilinear design elements and a float roof. ◼The proposed materials and colors include: ▪Stucco and prominent use of glass ▪Metal railings and window framing ▪Charcoal grey, taupe, and beige Recommendation 15 Review the proposed project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, and applicable City Standards, and provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director. Item #2 (Continued) 1141 Ella Street ARCH-0816-2019 Applicant Presentation By: Thomas Esser, Vellum Design Build, representative for applicants, Didier & Beatrice Cop 1141 ella street ARC HEARING April 20th 2020 Statement From Applicant We are truly sorry not to be able to meet with you in person today to present our project to you.The Covid-19 pandemic has really turned the world upside down, especial for those who are over the age of 65 .I thank you for making the opportunity to review our project digitally and to allow us to continue the process of building our home. Both born and raised in Paris,France,Beatrice and I moved our family to California in 1996.We have been San Luis Obispo County residents since 2002.Some may know us as Panolivo restaurants owners,for 15 years in Paso Robles,and a few years in San Luis Obispo. Our vision is to build a multi-generation home,where each generation can take care of each other,still keeping the privacy each one deserves.WE,“the grand-parents” will retire and live under the same roof as our grand-children,daughter and son-in- law,which are our only family in the US. We chose the City of San Luis Obispo for its quality of life,small town feel but with all the necessary amenities.San Luis Obispo is also where our daughter and son-in- law work.Both of them are Cal Poly graduates in Architecture. After a long search,we are happy to have finally found with 1141 Ella,the perfect property to build our family home. ~Sincerely Didier and Beatrice Cop Beatrice and Didier Cop (back) Thomas and Laetitia Esser (front) Maintaining social distancing on Easter 2020 NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1043 Ella Street Multi-Story 16 Unit Apartment Complex 2 stories living over 1 story of crawl space. Building face on Ella Street is nearly 3 stories tall and extends 150 feet down Ella Street for 8 apartments in a row. The building corner at the entrance is a flat plane with no articulation. The massing has little to no articulation and style type is hard to identify. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1063-1083 Ella Street Multi-Story 10 Unit Condominium Complex The building face on Ella Street is 2 stories tall and includes a large roll-out trash enclosure directly on the front property line. This collection of 5 structures is the densest housing complex we observed on Ella Street and is immediately adjacent to two single-family homes. The massing is blocky with gable roofs. Style is traditional ‘Italian villa’. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1101 Ella Street Single Family Home on Flag Lot and Shared Driveway The building face on Ella Street is 2 stories tall and includes a retaining wall on the front property line. The three-story home (1103 Ella) at the rear lot is visible over the roof of this house. One tone color pallet color. Style is semi-contemporary / prairie style. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1103 Ella Street Single Family Home on Flag Lot and Shared Driveway This home is 3 stories tall and has a similar lot configuration as the home proposed at 1141 Ella Street. The garage makes up the majority of the lower floor. The second and third floors provide the living spaces. Decks are used on the front façade to break up the massing and add shadow and relief. Vertical elements and a two-tone color pallet are also incorporated into the design. The massing is blocky with various vertical elements. The style is modern. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1121 Ella Street Single Family Home This home is comprised of 3 stories that extend up the hill. The garage is on the lower level and the second and third floors provide the living space. The house is painted a single color and relies on the roof pitch and roof color to break up the massing. The lot is narrow and deep, which accommodates the terracing of the levels. The proposed home at 1141 Ella, would not compromise any privacy or access to views and light. Massing is blocky with various shed and gables roof elements. Style is contemporary. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1131 Ella Street Single Family Home with Guesthouse Rental Unit This home is directly in front of the proposed house at 1141 Ella Street. The house is a split level 2.5 story building with a detached guest house. Portions of the home are 2 stories tall directly on 20 ft front yard setback line. 1141 Ella shares its driveway with 1131 Ella to allow access to the two-car garage. The uppermost level is below grade with a covered rear yard patio. There are no windows that face the proposed house at 1141 St. The proposed home at 1141 Ella, would not compromise any privacy or access to views and light. Massing is traditional with a courtyard at the center. Style is traditional Italian villa. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1151 Ella Street Single Family Home The house is a 2 story building and the entire front facade is on the 20 ft front yard setback line. This home is located toward the very front of a narrow and deep lot. The proposed home at 1141 Ella, would not compromise any privacy or access to views and light. Massing is blocky with double-height shed roofs at the rear of the building. Style is semi-contemporary. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1161 Ella Street Single Family Home The house is a 3 story building and the front facade is 3 stories tall. The garage is on the lower floor and the second and third floors provide the living space. The vertical fireplace chimney helps break up the massing as do the decks and shading fins. This home won an Obispo Beautiful Association Award in 2009 after it was remodeled. A new detached 800 SF ADU has recently been permitted and will be located at the rear of the property. Massing is blocky with horizontal and vertical elements. Style is contemporary. Obispo Beautiful Award Recipient NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1189 Ella Street Tri -Plex Units A, B, and C The building is 2 stories tall and the front facade is 2 stories tall directly on 20 ft front yard setback line. This building has a 3 car garage and a trash enclosure at the backside of the sidewalk. Massing is blocky with horizontal elements. Style dated but is semi-contemporary. NEIGBORHOOD STUDY 1197 Ella Street Duplex Units A and B The building is 2 stories tall and the entire front facade is 2 stories tall directly on 20 ft front yard setback line. This building has a 3 car garage and a trash enclosure at the backside of the sidewalk. Massing is blocky with horizontal elements. Style is mid-century contemporary. ABOUT THE SITE There are large groves of evergreen trees on the adjacent properties to the northeast (1151) and southwest (1121) These trees frame in the proposed house and help nestle it into the existing landscape. The house at 1131 is behind a tall retaining wall with no windows facing the proposed project. The rear yard of 1131 is also entirely covered with either a tiles roof of a wood trellis/pergola. 1131 11511121 Hillside Development Standard #1: General Site Planning Standards. The proposed structure is nestled deep into the hillside, rather than built on top of it. The design strategy greatly minimizes the overall scale of the structure, relative to the existing natural grade. The entire lower floor is cut into the hill, and half of the second floor is sub grade. By using a walk-out basement, we kept the height of the home significantly below the height limit and well within side yard setbacks. The proposed structure conforms with this standard and no exceptions are requested. Hillside Development Standard #2: Site Access and Driveways. Portions of the existing and the proposed driveway are in excess of 16% slope but do not exceed 20%. The area in front of the garage is relatively flat to make car maneuverability safe and reasonable. The slope of the pavement in front of the garage doors is 2%. Thereby allowing the average driveway slope to conform with the standard. Cars can also easily back out of the garage and proceed down the driveway with their headlight facing forward in 2 movements. The proposed structure conforms with this standard and no exceptions are requested. During the initial planning review a maneuverability study was requested by the public works department, and is included in our submittal. Hillside Development Standard #3: Retaining Walls. (exception requested) Small portions of the proposed walls in the side yards are taller than 6 feet tall. However, they are all screened by existing vegetation on the neighboring properties and are less than 10 ft in length. They are also tapered due to the sloping hillside so their average height is relatively small. To help mitigate their size we terraced the walls in the side yards to break up their massing and to allow us to incorporate vegetation and even some trees into their design. The retaining walls are also incorporated into the buildings massing, which has been seen as acceptable on previous projects. One of the walls along the driveway is 27 ft long and tapers from 1’-0” tall to about 7’-6” tall and then steps up to 8’-6” for a short section of approximately 5 ft in length. The first 13 ft of the wall is below 4 feet tall, and this section of the wall conforms with the standard. The remaining 14ft of the wall is taller, increasing from 4ft in height to 7’-6”. Overall, if we were able to average the wall’s height it would be close to 4’-6” tall. Which is reasonable considering the slope of the hill and the challenge it creates. To help reduce the scale of the wall, we have proposed a vegetated strip in front of the wall that is 2 ft wide. Our intent is to plant a hedge at this location and thereby screen the wall, bringing the visible portion of the wall’s height into compliance with the standard. It is worth noting that the grade as the start of the driveway is already well below grade by 4.5 feet. So we are starting with a challenge and are using as steep of a driveway as is feasible to minimize the height of the wall and still provide access to the site. We feel that the proposed design conforms with the intent of the standard, and we request that you support the solutions we have proposed. Hillside Development Standard #4: Downhill Building Walls. (exception requested) As we worked on designing the home one of the features of the site that we found most challenging was how shallow the lot was compared to the adjacent lots in the neighborhood. After we accommodated a driveway that worked with the slope and the drivability ‘maneuverability’ templates, there was only +/-50 feet remaining before we would run into the rear setback. When we tried to step the house back, we quickly ran out of space and ended up with living spaces that had limited access to light and ventilation as well as egress. Multiple attempts were made to design a structure that stepped back from the lower floor but due to the slope of the lot, by the time we made that step, we would essentially be creating another basement In our attempts to create smaller vertical faces on the down hillside of the home, we found a viable solution by pushing the garage a into the hillside. Doing so allowed us to cantilever the upper floor over the garage to create a strong shadow line below the upper floors. This step back from the front façade is similar, but not identical, to those described in the zoning standard. So an exception has been requested to consider this as acceptable since it does break up the massing and helps make the basement level fade into the hillside. It also creates a strong horizontal feature on the down hill façade, while also reducing the size of the downhill façade. It is also worth noting that the entire garage level is below grade, and is finished with a dark tone, in contrast to the living space above that is finished with light and mid-tone surfaces. We were also able to step the house in at the center and corner decks , which is in line with the design standard, however we could not accommodate that step for the whole length of the front façade. So an exception has been requested to consider this as acceptable since it does create the desired shadow lines. The exterior wall surfaces are highly varied in terms of scale, color, material, solid vs void, and texture to break up the general form of the structure. This combination of design solutions divides the massing of the house into smaller components which we believe does conform with the intent and spirit of the standard, and we request that you support the solutions we have proposed. COLOR BOARD Earth colors/tones to tie into nature Hillside Development Standard #5: Height of Lowest Floor Level, Decks, and Support Structures The proposed structure conforms with this standard and no exceptions are requested. Hillside Development Standard #6: Exterior Wall Surfaces The proposed design incorporates light, medium, and dark wall surfaces to break up the massing of the building. All of the colors that we propose are warm earth tones to blend into the natural colors of the hillside. The architecture of the home includes a variety of small scale elements. The basement is a horizontal element, the stairwell is a vertical feature, and the decks create (3) recessed void features, and spaces to the left and right of the deck are broken down into smaller elements of varied colors and styling. The placement of the decks also divides the front façade in half, into two separate elements. The element to the left side of the decks is wrapped with a shading fin, to create shadow and added articulation. The element to the right side of the decks is in a mid- tone and features a deeply recessed cluster of corner windows to provide texture and variation to the façade. These 5 features create a structure that minimizes the appearance of exterior wall surfaces. This also ensures that the buildingdoes not have the appearance of a large flat plane, but rather a collection of smaller components. The light and dark building surfaces blend in with similar colors found in the surrounding natural vegetation and hillside. Similar care was taken on all sides of the house to create four-sided architecture. We feel that the proposed structure conforms with this standard and no exceptions are requested. Hillside Development Standard #7: Mechanical Equipment The only mechanical equipment that is proposed are the 2 AC condensers located on the side yard of the garage. These units are not visible from the ROW or adjacent properties. The proposed project conforms with this standard and no exceptions are requested. Hillside Development Standard #8: Fencing No fences are proposed as part of the project. If any fencing were to be added to the property, we would have no issue following this standard. The proposed project conforms with this standard and no exceptions are requested Landscaping: All landscaping is be compatible with native hillside vegetation, utilizing low water native and drought tolerant species. The property also minimizes the amount of hardscape surfaces and utilizes a minimal footprint, thereby reducing the amount of stormwater runoff. no exceptions are requested CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 1 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 2 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 3 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 4 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 5 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREE View 6 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 7 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 8 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 9 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 10 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 11 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 12 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 13 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 14 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 15 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 16 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 17 of 18 CONTEXT STUDY A WALK DOWN ELLA STREET View 18 of 18 RENDERING Up Driveway RENDERING From Ella Street SHADE & SHADOW STUDY SUMMER SOLSTICE VIDEO June 20, 6 am –6 pm The proposed project exceeds all side yard setbacks and is well below the max height limit. A height limit exception is NOT requested. SHADE & SHADOW STUDY WINTER SOLSTICE VIDEO Dec 21, 6 am –6 pm The proposed project exceeds all side yard setbacks and is well below the max height limit. A height limit exception is NOT requested. SUNKEN GARDEN Regarding the sunken garden: The majority of the second level is below grade, and therefore the sunken garden is necessary because it provides access to light and ventilation for the habitable space on that floor. It also provides the required access to egress from the bedroom in the ADU. Bedrooms need to exit directly to the exterior and the path or egress travel can not go through any adjoining rooms. POSITIONING THE HOUSE The proposed project is very sensitive to the solar access of the adjacent properties. And is set well beyond the minimum setbacks. A significant buffer was provided to the benefit of 1131 and the home's angled position on the site help maintain the good views from the garden terrace at 1151 Ella. The taller portion of the proposed home is also angled in away from 1151 Ella, and is well below the height limit and conforms to the side yard setback requirements 1131 1151 1121 1131 1151 1121 POSITIONING THE HOUSE By placing the house on the site at an angle, we were able to maintain the primary view sheds of each neighbor. This also pushed the proposed house back away from 1131. In conclusion While working with Vellum Inc, I have had the opportunity to be involved with a number of hillside properties and have come to realize that these parcels sit vacant for too long simply because they are almost unbuildable. As you review our application we ask that you consider that this parcel has changed hands numerous times as previous owners have struggled to find viable design solutions for this challenging site. This parcel has been vacant for over 20 years and Didier and Beatrice will be the 8th owner to try and build a home on this property since 2000. We would like to see infill lots such as these get tastefully developed rather than sprawling outward, and we feel that our design is compatible with the eclectic Ella Street neighborhood and the City of San Luis Obispo’s aspirations for development. We all look forward to living here in San Luis Obispo, and this is where we want to raise our family. We ask that you support the proposed design and recognize the efforts we have taken to be considerate of the hillside, neighboring properties, viewsheds, and the hardships of designing on a lot this steep. Thank you