Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHC Meeting Minutes 4.27SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES April 27, 2015 ROLL CALL: Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, James Papp, Victoria Wood, 1 Position Vacant, Vice-Chair Thom Brajkovich, and Chair Jaime Hill Absent: None Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, Assistant Planner Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of April 13, 2015, were accepted as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments from the public. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 1. 546 Higuera Street. ARCH-0982-2015; Conceptual review of the proposed rehabilitation and repositioning of a Master List Historic Resource (Norcross House), including addition of a two-story residence attached to the rear of the structure; C-R zone; Higuera Commons, LLC, applicant. Senior Planner Leveille noted the recusal of Vice-Chair Brajkovich from this item due to a professional conflict of interest. Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending continuation to a date uncertain with direction to staff and the applicant on items to be addressed in plans submitted for final design approval. Brandon Roscoe, Paragon Design, and John Belsher, applicant, gave a presentation. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Members Wood and Kincaid noted support for the overall design of the project. Committee Member Papp noted for the record that City legal counsel had determined no conflict of interest existed with relation to his personal familiarity with John Belsher, CHC Minutes April 27, 2015 Page 2 applicant. Papp stated that approving removal of the existing extension and an addition to the original structure would be premature without further information from architectural historians, and review of the Bertrando Report which provided the basis for the Council’s rationale to add the property to the Master List. He noted that photos from the 1873-1876 timeframe appear to show that the extension was present on the original building. Committee Member Papp noted for the record that past development of Marsh and Higuera Streets as gateways to and from the highway has had a negative impact on in the historic character of the area. Chair Hill and Committee Member Baer expressed disapproval for the project as presented; noted desire to see an addition in the form of a more appropriately scaled, detached unit instead. Committee Member Papp noted approval of the idea of multiple structures instead of a single larger scale addition. There were no further comments from the Committee. On motion by Committee Member Baer, seconded by Committee Member Papp, to continue the item to a date uncertain with direction to incorporate directional items #2 and #4 included in the staff report, with additional direction that further historical and architectural evaluation be performed upon the portions of the home proposed for removal. AYES: Committee Members Baer, Hill, Kincaid, Papp, and Wood NOES: None RECUSED: Vice-Chair Brajkovich ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 5:0:1 vote. Vice-Chair Brajkovich arrived at 6:41 p.m. 2. 1921 Santa Barbara Avenue. ARCH-0521-2014; Environmental review (Mitigated Negative Declaration) of a new building with four live/work units and a small commercial suite in the Railroad Historic District; C-S-H zone; Garcia Family Trust, applicant. Senior Planner Leveille summarized the history of the project, noting that the CHC conducted a conceptual review of the project in December 2014, and found it to be consistent with the Railroad District Plan in January 2015. He noted that the project was returned to the CHC for review since the initial study found potential impacts to a historic resource at 875 Upham; and that the CHC should focus on the adequacy of the mitigation measure in their recommendation to the ARC. Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending adoption of a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission approve the CHC Minutes April 27, 2015 Page 3 project with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. George Garcia, applicant, summarized the status of the project, noting that the potential to flip the building footprint would result in greater setback from neighboring residential uses, and allow the large tree to remain. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Jason Browning, nearby property owner, SLO, distributed photographs of structures in the neighborhood; expressed concern that the size and massing of the proposed project will negatively impact neighboring residential uses. John Grady, SLO, stated that the CHC has clearly noted its concern in the past about the building’s mass, commented that General Plan policies dictate the prioritization of protecting residential uses where they abut commercial zones. Don Ray, nearby property owner, SLO, noted the “low profile” character of the neighborhood; expressed concern about building incompatibility and lost viewshed. Leslie Terry, nearby property owner, SLO, expressed concern that approval of the proposed project will set a detrimental precedent; opined that the proposed mitigation measures, particularly relating to aesthetics, are insufficient. Debbie Collins-Johnson, nearby property and business owner, SLO, commented that the proposed building appears to be inconsistent with the Railroad District Plan. There were no further comments from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Member Papp expressed disapproval of the project based primarily on scale and negative impacts to neighboring residential uses. Vice-Chair Brajkovich noted concern about public comment relating to height of the building. Committee Member Baer concurred. Committee Member Wood expressed lack of approval of the proposed project based primarily on the size of the structure which does not fit on the narrow lot. Committee Member Kincaid concurred, commenting that bungalow-style architecture could make the building more compatible. Chair Hill stated that zoning design criteria are intended as maximums, not goals, and that evaluation must be tailored to Historical Districts. Senior Planner Leveille noted that the CHC previously found the project consistent with the Railroad District Plan and Historic Preservation Guidelines on January 26, 2015, CHC Minutes April 27, 2015 Page 4 and that in order to remain consistent with the prior action, the CHC should focus direction based only on responding to condition #2 from the January 26, 2015 CHC action relating to potentially significant impacts on adjacent neighboring historic properties. There were no further comments from the Committee. On motion by Vice-Chair Brajkovich, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to continue the project based on previous CHC conditions #1 & #2, to allow the applicant to return with a redesigned project incorporating the following items:  Reduction in building scale  More cohesiveness with the historic neighborhood and Railroad District Plan.  Smoother transition between residential and commercial uses  Preservation of the tree onsite Committee Member Wood noted for the record her observation that all Committee members and all neighbors who have commented have expressed a desire for reduction in building mass and scale and the project has not changed. AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Hill, Kincaid, Papp, Wood NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. The Committee recessed at 7:45, and reconvened at 7:55 with all members present. 3. 570 Higuera Street. ARCH-0913-2015; Review of a remodel and rehabilitation of the Historic Master List Golden State Creamery and a new mixed-use structure within the Downtown Historic District; C-D zone; Creamery, LLC, applicant. Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Committee adopt a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approve the proposed remodel and the addition of a new mixed-use structure, based on findings and subject to conditions. Greg Wynn, project architect, and Damien Mavis, developer, summarized the evolution of the project and the history of the project site, clarifying that parking requirements will be satisfied by the payment of in-lieu fees. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ursula Bishop, representing nearby Dana Street residents, SLO, spoke in support of the project. She noted concern about potential noise impacts with the inclusion of proposed windows added to the east side of building 2 and about limited parking. CHC Minutes April 27, 2015 Page 5 There were no further comments from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Member Wood spoke in support of retaining brick walls. She noted concern about the corrugated metal siding, the sawtooth roof design of the new structure, and about reducing parking on site. Committee Member Kincaid expressed support for the project, with the exception of the sawtooth roof design for the new structure and noted concern about reducing parking on site. Committee Member Papp spoke in support of the project’s historical sensitivity and staff’s recommendation. He noted aesthetic concern of the sawtooth roof design of the new structure with the existing architecture of the Creamery. Vice-Chair Brajkovich spoke in support of the project and staff recommendation. Chair Hill spoke in support for the project and commented that the sawtooth roof formation will rarely be seen in profile due to its location. She also noted for the record that landscaping could be used to minimize noise impacts upon the Dana Street residences. There were no further comments from the Committee. On motion by Committee Member Papp, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to adopt a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission approve the proposed remodel and the addition of a new mixed-use structure. AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Hill, Kincaid, Papp NOES: Committee Member Wood RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 5:1 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 4. Staff a. Agenda Forecast Senior Planner Leveille gave a forecast of upcoming agenda items. b. Cultural Heritage Committee Bylaws Review CHC Minutes April 27, 2015 Page 6 Senior Planner Leveille summarized the packet materials, and the CHC discussed their role as an advisory body and review process of recommending projects to the ARC for final action. There were no recommended changes from the Committee. 5. Committee ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Erica Inderlied Recording Secretary Approved by the Cultural Heritage Committee on May 26, 2015. Laurie Thomas Administrative Assistant III