Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
02-13-13
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA Council Hearing Room City Hall - 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 February 11, 2013 Monday 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Commrs. Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Steven Hopkins, Anthony Palazzo, Greg Wynn, Vice -Chair Michelle McCovey-Good, and Chairperson Jim Duffy ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. MINUTES: Minutes of January 14, 2013. Approve or amend. PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to five minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to the staff and, if action by the Commission is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NOTE: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public hearing. If you wish to speak, please give your name and address for the record. Any decision of the Architectural Review Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department, City Clerk's office, or on the City's website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $268 and must accompany the appeal documentation. 1. 75 Hi uera Street. ARC 108-12; Review of new storefront windows along the Higuera frontage of the Pacific Coast Center; C-S-MU zone; SLO PCC, LP, applicant. (Pam Ricci) 2. 1423 Calle Joaquin. ARC 153-12; Review of a remodel and additions to an auto dealership building; C-S zone; Charles Alfano, Mercedes Benz, applicant. (Pam Ricci) COMMENT & DISCUSSION: 3. Staff a. Agenda Forecast Architectural Review Commission Page 2 4. Commission ADJOURNMENT Presenting Planner: Pam Ricci N The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Please contact the City Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. ty of Vleetino Date: February 1'1, 2013 sanIUISOBI Item Number: l SUBJECT: Review of new storefront windows along the Higuera Street frontage of the Pacific Coast Center located on the east side of Higuera Street between South and Bridge Streets. PROJECT ADDRESS: 75 Higuera Street BY: Pain Ricci, Senior Planner. Phone Number: 781-7168 E-mail: pricei@,slocity.org NUMBER: ARC 108-12 FROM: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner `�F,,, RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 7) which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions. SITE DATA Applicant SLO PCC LP 77 Representative Tim Ronda, Studio Design Group tl Zoning C-S-MU (Service Commercial s Zone with Mixed Use Overlay) General Plan Services & Manufacturing Site Area 100,980 square feet' Environmental Exempt from environmental Status review under Class 31 (Section 15331), Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, of the CEQA Guidelines. a SUMMARY The applicant would like to install storefront windows in the building wall facing Higuera Street to increase the street visibility for retail business in the adjoining tenant spaces. To achieve this goal, plans show that every other smaller existing window on the west side of the structure would be replaced with a larger window. The applicant believes that larger windows would be beneficial to the success of businesses in the center by providing increased light and a better street orientation. The site is an important historical resource as the location of the former Pacific Coast Railway yard that included the Loomis Feed Company Warehouse. In 1988, the warehouse was substantially remodeled and a new structure built at the back of the site that borrows from the architectural character and history of earlier site development. While the current buildings on the site are essentially contemporary structures, the site is on both the City's Master List of Historic Resources and the National Register of Historic Places Inventory. Therefore, the project requires the review of both the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) and the ARC, and final approval by the ARC. ARC 108-12; 75 Higuera Street Page 2 1.0 COMMISSION'S PURVIEW The project is a modification to an existing building within a developed commercial center. The ARC's role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design Guidelines (CDG). 2.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW On January 28, 2013, the CHC reviewed the proposed modifications to the windows of the existing structure and determined that the changes were consistent with the City's Historic Preservation Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for historic preservation. The CHC recommended that the ARC approve the project with direction for the Connnnission to determine the appropriate window proportions and details (Attachment 5). 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 3.1 Site Information/Setting The site is developed with a commercial center that is named the Pacific Coast Center. The center was developed in 1988 and includes two large metal buildings. The building on the western side is located close to the Higuera Street right-of-way. There is a stop light at Higuera Street and Madonna Road that provides access to the center through a bridge in the western building. The second metal building is located on the east side of the property. Between the two structures is a parking lot that supports the site's retail and commercial tenants and their customers. The westeimnost building is known as the Pacific Coast Railway Company Grain Warehouse building on the National Register of Historic Places Inventory. It is also included on the City's Master List of Historic Resources and listed as the Loomis Feed Company Warehouse. The building was added to both historic listings in 1988, the same year that the site was redeveloped with the Pacific Coast Center project. Figure I — Aerial Photo showing site development The Pacific Coast Railway Company Grain Warehouse building retains the form, placement and scale of the original structure, but was modified significantly with the redevelopment project including the addition of the bridge element. Most of the stricture is new construction. The building is a reminder of the railroad that linked the local farms to the shipping port on the coast and for its role in storing and processing local bean and grain crops. The National Register of Historic Places lists the significant features of the building as: 1) the form, placement and scale of the structure, ARC 108-12; 75 Higuera Street Page 3 2) the brick foundation (now a veneer over a cement foundation) and 3) the original, interior wood trusses. 3.2 Project Description The applicant is proposing to add red aluminum storefront windows with silver metal trim in the west elevation of the building facing Higuera Street by replacing every other smaller existing window with a larger new window. Fib lre 2 below shows the original plans that were submitted and reviewed by the CHC. With this design, staff made two recommendations: 1) Mahe the windows appear more proportional to the wall by lowering the head of the window so that there is more space between the top edge of the window and the roof eave. 2) Provide additional grids or divided lights in main glazing panes to be similar to windows in the tower shown on the right-hand side of the building elevation. The CHC ultimately did not make a specific recommendation on the type of grids deferring this detail to the ARC. Figure 2. Higuera Elevation reviewed by the CHC on January 28, 2013 Figure 3. Current Higuera Street Elevation for ARC review on February 1.1., 2013 Figure 3 above shows the applicant's response to CHC direction. The changes made to the design include: 1) Widow size reduced to 8'-0" x 8'-0" (previously shown 9'-6" wide x 9'-0" tall in CHC exhibit — Figure 2 above). 2) The window head height was lowered to the height of the bottom of the former transom windows as requested. 3) The horizontal mullion below the transoms aligns with the top of the windows in the tower at the south end of the building. 4) The sill height was reduced by approximately one foot. ARC 108-12; 75 Higuera Street Page 4 4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS Staff and the CHC have indicated their support of the applicant's proposal to create larger windows in the Higuera elevation since the window modifications are relatively minor and do not affect any significant character -defining features of the building or destroy historic materials or significant features of the contemporary building reconstruction. The main issues have been the proportion of the proposed windows and how the glazing panes are divided. The applicant has followed the recommendations of staff and the CHC to scale back the size of the windows to better fit and look more proportional to the building wall they will be installed on. Staff is satisfied with the grid design currently shown. The idea of having the same multi - paned grids shown on the tower windows repeated with the new storefront windows was determined to be too busy with the number of windows proposed. Other ideas for the new storefronts considered were to eliminate the upper transoms and have a simple crossed mullion with four panes. 5.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Applicant's Project Narrative 3. Reduced size project plans (current proposal) and plans reviewed by the CHC 4. Photo of Pacific Coast Railway Company Grain Warehouse before remodel, National Register nomination form, and Historic Resources Inventory 5. 1-28-13 CHC follow-up 6. Letter from Richard Schmidt to CHC submitted 1-28-13 7. Draft Resolution Included in Committee member portfolio: Current project plans and plans reviewed by the CHC - WE C-T-mu w C-S-S I a C/®S-40 Im m CI®S-`J Attachment 2 PACIFIC COAST CENTER Project Description & Request for Modification November 27, 2012 The Pacific Coast Center is the location of the former Pacific Coast Railway yard, including the Loomis Feed Co. Warehouse. Preservation, "contemporary re-creation", and adaptive re -use created what is today's Pacific Coast Center. The heritage and architectural character of the remaining buildings recall the Pacific Coast Railway yard that stood in this location for over 70 years. In 1988, the Loomis Feed Co. Warehouse that ran continuously along Higuera Street, was modified and reconstructed to allow for its conversion to a mixed -use office and retail project. The restoration and modifications included: • Modifying the warehouse building with a "bridge" element to permit access from Higuera Street. • Recreating the original warehouse character with all new construction. • Granting significant exceptions and additions within the courtyard. As part of the restoration and modifications, the site was listed on the National Register of Historical places as the "Pacific Coast Railway Company Grain Warehouse". The site is also on the City's Master List of Historic Places as the "Loomis Feed Co. Warehouse". The historic character defining features of the original building that were retained include: • The form, placement and scale of the buildings. • The brick base, which was once part of the foundation, preserved as a veneer with a concrete foundation behind it. • The original restored trusses in the former warehouse building. The Pacific Coast Center has functioned relatively well since its creation; however, retail occupancies have been severely hampered by the lack of street visibility along Higuera Street. Visibility is an important necessary ingredient for active, retail businesses as well as creating visual interest for pedestrians at the sidewalk. The proposed window modifications retain the historic character defining features of the original buildings since they do not compromise any of the characteristics listed above (as noted, the warehouse building was completely recreated / modified with new construction in 1988). The design borrows from the architectural character and history of the building's original use as a warehouse that once had numerous repetitive openings for the original warehouse doors. We believe this is an appropriate archetype that could be added along the Higuera Street frontage by replacing every other existing small window opening with larger fenestration. We believe the requested window modifications are appropriate, architecturally consistent, and historically similar to the building's original character. The proposed windows maintain the historic character defining features while creating an attractive advantage for our tenancies and the City as a whole. -,AEG V3 '000") on I nos Q X 'act �'Hwq 1 Jpjua:) ISV43:) agp Pd HIM Dow %4- 0 mm oil 0 Ali � ±� w9 v - )� ■ \ u C�- IJ Olt-, 1 ) Attachment Photo ®f Original Pacific Coast Railway Company Grain Warehouse Nos Form i%poo 0e2 RECEIVE!, l nited States Department of the lntdr-ll'760 6 190R ` National Park Service Exp. 10-31-e4 For NP5 use only Mational Register of Historic Places received Inventory —Nomination Form date entered See instructlons in Now to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries --complete applicable sections 1. Name ant=,;r-1 ML historic Pacific Coast Railway Company grain warehouse andior common former Loomis Feed Store 2. Location street & number 65 Higuera Street _ NA._ not for publication city,town San Luis Obispo-R& vicinity of (16th Congressional District) state California code county San Luis Obispo code 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use .- district — public — occupied — agriculture — museum X. building(s) X private -X— unoccupied _.— commercial park structure both _ work In progress __ educational ____ private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible — entertainment — religious __ object — In process — yes: restricted _ _ government _ scientific — being considered X yes: unrestricted — industrial — transportation no military --Xother: vacant 4. Owner of Property name Pacific Coast Coal and Lumber street&number 924 Westwood Boulevard, Suite 905 city, town Los Angeles _ vicinity of 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds. etc. County Government Center state CA. 90024 street & number 1050 Monterey Street city, town San Luis Obispo state CA. 93401 6. Representation in Existing Surveys title Historic Resources Survey has this property been determined eligible? —yes X no date 1983 (file # 010 7-05C) __ _ federal state — county --x-- local depository for survey records Ci ty Ha 11 , 990 Pa lm Street 4 7._ Description Condition Check one Check one excellent deteriorated .— unaltered X_ original site _ good — ruins X altered _ moved date .X fair unexposed Describe the present and original (if known) physical appearance The warehouse is a long, gable---roof�d late nineteenth century trackside structure: light wood frame with corrugated iron panels covering both roofs and walls. The appearance of the exterior is little changed from that shown in early photos. The panels on a portion of the building have been painted, but most remain natural. The building once had several doors on Higuera Street, but those have been closed off by placing corrugated panels over former door openings (the widened street passes within a few feet of the structure making entry on this side impossible). The side facing the former trackage has its original door openings and loading dock intact. The closing of doors on one side is the only apparent significant alteration to the building over the years. The free-standing rectangular warehouse's ground dimensions are approximately 360 feet by 50 feet. The building is on a raised brick foundation -- the soft red bricks being of local manufacture from a nineteenth century Chinese -owned -and -operated brickyard. Most of the building consists of a long one-story shed, with gable roof supported by wood trusses; this area was used to store sacks of grain and beans awaiting shipment. Along the peak of the roof, at intervals, are six cylindrical vent structures which lend interesting rhythmic accents to the roofline. The interior of this area is roughly finished: exposed wood framing and roof trusses which have been painted white, rough wood partitions which divide the interior into four separate rooms, and a floor paved with locally -procured bitumen from tar seeps near Pismo Beach. (These same tar seeps were used by Chumash Indians. The floor is apparently the original.) At the southern end of the structure is a double --height portion, with its gable roof pitched at right angles to that of the long shed; this grain elevator type structure housed the grain and bean cleaning, handling, and sacking machinery, which was recently removed. An odd feature of the south end of this tall section is the pattern of the metal wall panels; -they are installed as if the tall area was an afterthought tacked atop the shed. If it was an afterthought, it was an early one, for one interview source says the tower predates the turn of the century. An early photo shows this same curious panel pattern. Along the east side of the building, which faced the tracks, a raised outdoor loading platform remains. Sliding barn -type doors open onto the platform. The platform has a brick side and is paved with the same local bitumen that covers interior floors. The building's exterior remains without significant modifications, (Continued) s: uMted States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory —Nomination Form Contin ation sheet Item member 7 Page 1 according to a source who has known it since 1915. One obvious non -original feature is a small asbestos -cement shingle -covered weigh station office attached to the end of the grain elevator; however, although this construction is not part of the original, the interview source cited above says the weigh station itself dates from the turn of the century or before. .-1 Y 8. Significance Peribd Areas of Significance —Check and justify bolow _ prehistoric _ archeology -prehistoric community planning — landscape architecture— religion 1400-1499 — archeology -historic e conservation law — science 1500-1599 _X_ agriculture — economics _ literature sculpture _ 1600-1699 X architecture education military X social/ 1700-1799 — art _ engineering ____ music humanitarian 1800-1899 _ X commerce ezple. ation/settlement — philosophy theater x 1900- 1930 ` — communications — Industry _____ politics/government X transportation Invention — other (specify) Specific dates 1892/3-1930 Builder/Architect Unknown Statement of Significance (in one paragraph) SUMMARY: The Pacific Coast Railway Co. grain warehouse is significant for its association with the 19th century Pacific Coast Railway Company headquarters complex, and is an excellent example of a once -commonplace woodframe, corrugated iron industrial building type in San Luis Obispo County. This structure is the one remaining building from the PCRC San Luis Obispo headquarters complex, and as such is a visual reminder of an era when the San Luis Obispo area was a major grain and bean --producing region. This building was the trans -shipment point from farm wagon to local narrow gauge trains which led to steamer wharves at Port Harford (now known as Port San Luis/Avila Beach). Architecturally, the warehouse is typical of a vanishing type of once --commonplace wood -framed, iron -clad industrial building that stretched out along local railroad tracks. It is the only structure of that type built specifically for grain handling still remaining within the city, and one of the last (in addition to probably being the oldest) within San Luis Obispo County. Transportation into and out of San Luis Obispo County during the early years of settlement was by overland stage or coastal ship. For transporting bulky goods, both local agricultural products headed for export and the essential non -local imports, ship was the only choice. By 1870 it had become evident that a railroad linking coastal farm areas with ship landings would be a big boost to the local economy. Efforts to build such a railroad began in the early 1870s, but the first stretch, from San Luis Obispo to Port Harford, about 10 miles, was not completed until 1876. This initial stretch of 3--foot narrow gauge railroad ran from the shipping wharves to the site of the present warehouse. The railroad operated under various names at first, but in 1882 the name became the [pacific Coast Railway Company. (The PCRC was an arm of a firm that also ran steamships up and down the California Coast.) From the warehouse site at Higuera and South streets in San Luis Obispo, which became the PCRC nerve center, the rails were extended incrementally to the south: by 1881 to the rich agricultural areas of south San Luis Obispo County (Arroyo Grande), by 1882 to northern Santa Barbara County (Santa Maria and 1,0s Alamos), and by 1887 to their ultiate terminus, Los Olivos. The effect of this 76-male rail line was to give economic unity to (Conti n1l"'O 9xo. 03*-" United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory --Nomination Form Continuation sheet Item number 8 Rage 1 the agricultural heartland of coastal Central California, and to establish San Luis Obispo and Port Harford as centers of this transportation and its dependent commerce. Approximately 30 miles of branch lines to a sugar factory and to sand and gravel pits in northern Santa Barbara County also gave the railroad an industrial base. The PCRC was important as well for passenger travel; its several trains each day provided good intra-regional passenger transport, plus connections to steamers. The PCRC was unchallenged by competition until the Southern Pacific reached San Luis Obispo from San Francisco in 1894; the SP connection to Los Angeles was not completed until 1901. The PCRC remained important until the Great Depression. By then, in addition to suffering from the general economic troubles of the times, it was also being hurt by competition from a standard gauge railroad in the Santa Maria Valley, by truck transport, and by decline of the coastal steamer traffic. The route to Los Olivos was abandoned in 1936, and in a progression similar in reverse to that involved in building the railroad, abandonments and sales of assets proceeded northward, piece by piece, until the PCRC ceased to function altogether in 1942. The grain storage warehouse was in continuous use by the PCRC from its construction until the railroad's demise. The City's historical resources survey provides an 1885 date for construction of the warehouse. A printed source (Nicholson) gives the date as 1892/3 based upon newspaper accounts of rebuilding after a fire; the old headquarters buildings burned to the ground in November 1892 and were completely replaced in the incredibly short time of less than four months, so important was it to have the railroad fully operational once again. In any event, it is clear the building is at least 94 years old. After the demise of the railroad, the warehouse and surrounding property passed into the hands of the Loomis family, a pioneer family whose patriarch A. M. Loomis had held the franchise in the 1870s and beyond for providing San Luis Obispo with its domestic water. The E. C. Loomis and Son feed, tack and agricultural supply store used the warehouse until the early 1980s. The property now belongs to a Southern California shopping center developer, and the building has been vacant and neglected for about two years. The building is architecturally significant as the only remaining grain storage warehouse in San Luis Obispo. The largest similar structure in San Luis Obispo County, the wood and corrugated steel Farmer's Alliance along the Southern Pacific Tracks in Paso Robles, 30 miles north, was demolished several years ago. A smaller, younger, and less noteworthy steel -on -wood -frame example still stands, abandoned, along S.P. tracks in San Miguel, 38 miles north. 9. Major Bohlieg(' iphical Refeerencet Best, Gerald M., Ships and Narrow Gauge Rails, Howell -forth, San Diego, 1981. Nicholson, Loren, Rails Across the Ranchos, Valley Publishers, Fresno, 1980. (Continued) 10. Geographical Data Acreage of nominated property Sri_ ` Quadrangle name San Luis Obispo Quadrangle state UT M References AI I I I I II I I I I I I I a Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing G W L I I I I I I I I I 11=1 HL_IJ 1__ I I I I I I [ I I I I I I Verbal boundary description and justification Starting at the point of beginning on Higuera Street. proceed 52' on the property line on the north to the west edge of the former tracks on the east; then proceed 401' on the western edge of the former tracks; then proceed 52' south tc Continued List all states and counties for properties overlapping state or county boundaries state NA code county NA code state code county code 11. Form Prepared By name/title Richard Schmidt, architectural historian organization date 5-22-87 (originally submitted 10 8E street & number 112 Broad Street telephone 805 544-4247 city or town San Luis Obispo state CA 93401 12. State Historic Preservation Officer Certification The evaluated significance of this property within the state Is: _ national __ state _ local As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89- 665). 1 hereby nominate this property for Inclusion In the National Register and certify that It has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Parts Service. State Historic Preservation Officer signature title date M.�IIA.`�/Y�I.�YYM. �IYr.�IIIIYYrI11YYlY�.��- rI�Y rY� For NP9 use only I hereby certify that this property Is included In'the NnUonal Register +/ ti date Keeper of the National Register — Attests } United States Department` of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory --Nomination Form Continuation sheet item number 9 Pace 1 REFERENCES, continued. San Luis Obispo Historic Resources Survey, City of San Luis Obispo, 1983 May 1903 maps of San Luis Obispo, California, Sanborn Map Co., 11 Broadway, New York City. Copy in San Luis Obispo City --County Library. Interviews (10--25-85) -- Staff of County Historical Museum Pat Brown of San Luis Obispo, who worked for the PCRC, and whose father before had worked for it. Brown's recollections of the warehouse go back to 1915. t S nVb rW....wr.nr� (1� - EXo. *-" United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory —Nomination Form Continuation sheet Item number 10 Page 1 (Verbal Boundary Description, continued) Higuera Street; then proceed 401' along Higuera Street to the point of beginning. These boundaries are drawn around the one remaining building from the PCRC San Luis Obispo headquarters complex. State of California — The R" «ces Agency :; Ser. No. 0107-05C DEPARTMENT OF PARKS P4'- --HECREATiCIN HABS HAER `' NA. SHL Loc UTMi: A 10/7120-4-O�39050 -- r HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY C D IDENTIFICATION Old Warehouse at Lower Higuera 1, Common name: 2. Historic name: Loomis Feed Company Wareiaotase/Pacific Co.as.t. Raa:lroad. Station 4 3. Streetsar:rura! address 65Higuera City ___San Luis _Obispo _ Zip 93401 County San Luis Obispo 4. Parcel number: 04-802-07 5. PresentOvvner; Pacific Coast Coal & Lumber Address: 924 Westwood Blvd. CCity Zip Ownership T.ns AngQlQs _i1O 4 is: Public Private X 5, Present Use: Vacated Warehouse, Original use: DESCRIPTION 7a. Architectural style: Warehouse 5 7b. Briefly describe the present physical description of the site or structure and describe any major alterations from its ( original condition: This large corregated metal building has a steeply pitched roof an a three story section and a broadly pitched roof on the remaining building. Partial overhangs are supported by wood posts. There is a small square structure on the side of the three story structure. It has a 3/3 window with a corregated metal shelf, 8, Construction date: Estimated 1885 Factual 9. Architect Unknown 10. Builder Unknown 11. Approx. property size (in feet) Frontage 135 ' Depth 250 or approx. acreage 12. Date(s) of enclosed photographs) May 1983 13. Condition: Gx"Ijeni —Good 114. Alzeraticris: rair_ Deteriorated 1'110 longer in existence 15. Surroundings. (Check more than one ;s necessary) Open land — Scattered buildings __ Densely built-up Residential —_ Industrial _2j_Comr-nerciai __X — Other: 6. Threats to site: None known _X Private development,_ Zoning _ Vandalism Public Works project __ Other: 17. Is the structure: On its original site? .. ]I(, s Moved? ____ Unknown? 18. Reiared features'. SIGNIFICANCE 19Briefly state his-toricai and/or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons astociated with the site.) This rather delapidated old tin structure was once the warehouse for the Loomis Feed Company. it belonged to the family of A.M. a)omis, a pioneer settler in the county who purchased a franchise to supply San Luis Obispo, with water works in 1872. When the San Luis Obispo Water Company was incorporated in 1874, he was appointed secretary. The company constructed ucted the first reservoir in the oity. The warehouse rests on a foundation of raised bricks manufactured at the factory of Ali Louis, tho historical figure and central character of early Chinatown. The warehouse was later used as a station for the old Pacific Coast Railroad which came to San Luis Obispo in the 1870's. 20. Main theme of the historic resource: 0f more than one is checked, number in order of importancej Architecture .. Arts "Q Leisure Economic/Industrial _ExplarationiSottlement Government _ Military _ Religion — SocialiEducation 21. Sources (Lisl books, documents, surveys, personal interviews and their dates). lnLerview with Daniel Krieger, Pb,D, Professor of Political Science California Polytechnic State Univ., San Luis Obispo, June 1983 22. Date form prepared _,'T1j_n(, _30 _1-983_ By (name) �'S)taff Organization.—.411,* of olan Addrass:_F_Z�_..Box 32-1 City San Luis Ohisro zip---2_3401 Phone, Locational sketch map (dravv and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and prominEnt landmarks): A NORTH Attachment 5 Meeting Update CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE January 28, 2013 Monday 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee Members Thom Brajkovich, Hemalata Dandekar, Jaime Hill, Buzz Kalkowski, Patti Taylor, Vice -Chair Bob Pavlik, and Chair Enrica Costello Vice -Chair Bob Pavlik was absent. STAFF: Senior Planners Phil Dunsmore & Pam Ricci, Assistant Planner Marcus Carloni, and Recording Secretary Dawn Rudder PUBLIC COMMENT: ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: The agenda order was not modified. MINUTES: Minutes of December 17, 2012, were approved. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 1. 75 Hiquera Street. ARC 108-12; Review of new storefront windows along the Higuera frontage of the Pacific Coast Center; C-S-MU zone; SLO PCC, LP, applicant. (Pam Ricci) RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution, which recommends approval of the project to the Architectural Review Commission, based on findings, and subject to conditions. ACTION: Moved by Taylor/Kalkowski (Hill voting no) to recommend approval of the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions, with amended wording for Condition No. 2 as follows: The proposed new storefront windows shall be modified to lower the head of the windows so that they are smaller in scale and more proportional to the building wall. The ARC shall determine the appropriate grid detail for windows. (5:1). 2. 736 Higuera Street. ARC 57-12; Review of a remodel to the Master List Carrisa building as part of the SLO Brewing Company relocation project; C-D-H zone; San Luis Downtown Management, applicant. (Marcus Carloni) RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the .project to the Architectural Review Commission based on findings of consistency with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, and subject to conditions of approval. ACTION: Moved by Dandekar/Hill to recommend approval of the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions, with an added condition for the ARC to review alternate design possibilities for the rear staircase that will be compatible with the Acity of sAn Luis oBispo rw�d Community Development Department - 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 February 6, 2013 SLO PCC, L.P. 750 Pismo Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: ARC 108-12: 75 Higuera Street Review of new storefront windows along the Higuera frontage of the Pacific Coast Center Gentlemen: The Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), at its meeting of January 28, 2013, recommended that the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approve new storefront windows in the Higuera Street building elevation, and referred the project to the ARC for further action based on findings and subject to conditions noted in the attached resolution. The decision of the CHC is a recommendation to the ARC and, therefore, is not final. This matter has been tentatively scheduled for administrative action before the ARC on February 11, 2013. This date, however, should be verified with the project planner. If you have any questions, please contact Pam Ricci at (805) 781-7168. Sincerely, Phil Dunsmore Senior Planner Long -Range Planning Attachment: Resolution No. CHCA 000-13 cc: SLO County Assessor's Office Studio Design Group 762 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 NThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. RESOLUTION NO, CHC-1000-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVE NEW STOREFRONT WINDOWS IN THE HIGUERA STREET BUILDING ELEVATION AT 75 HIGUERA STREET (C-S-MU ZONE), ARC 108-12 WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 28, 2013, for the purpose of considering Planning Application ARC 108- 12, review of new storefront windows along the Higuera Street frontage of the Pacific Coast Center; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicants, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Cultural Heritage Committee makes the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines because the proposed windows do not compromise any of the building's historical character -defining features which are the form, placement, and scale, the brick foundation, and the wood trusses. 2. The project is consistent with Section 3.1 of the Community Design Guidelines for commercial projects to "preserve the design integrity of architecturally or historically significant structures." 3. The project is exempt from environmental review (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15331, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation). Section 2. Action. The Cultural Heritage Committee does hereby recommend approval of the proposed windows in the facade of the Higuera Street elevation (ARC 108-12) with incorporation of the following conditions: Conditions 1. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans as amended and approved by the ARC. A separate, full-size sheet shall be Resolution No. CHC-1000-13 75 Higuera Street Page 2 included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission (ARC), as deemed appropriate. 2. The proposed new storefront windows shall be modified to lower the head of the windows so that they are smaller in scale and more proportional to the building wall. The ARC shall determine the appropriate grid detail for windows. On motion by Committee Member Taylor, seconded by Committee Member Kalkowski, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Committee Members Taylor, Kalkowski, Brajkovich, Costello, and Dandekar NOES: Committee Member Hill REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Committee Member Pavlik The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 281" day of January, 2013 7L- Phil Dunsmore, Secretary Cultural Heritage Committee Attachment 6 RICHARD SCHMIDT, Architect 112 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 544-4247 e-mail: rschmidt(@.rain.org Re: Item 1, 75 Higuera Street Dear Cultural Heritage Committee: I am shocked, SHOCKED!!!, at the misleading and mendacious report on this item that's before you. I don't have time to refute it in its entirety, but can only hit the big issues. THIS IS A PROJECT YOU SHOULD REJECT. IT DESTROYS THE CHARACTER OF THIS HISTORIC BUILDING. IT IS UNNEEDED. IT IS UNDESIRABLE (do we really need any more visual distractions at that busy and dangerous intersection?). The BIG PROBLEM with the staff report is that it is not telling you the truth about this historic building. The BUILDING IS NOT, as the staff report states repeatedly, "a contemporary building reconstruction." IT IS THE REAL DEAL —THE LAST REMNANT OF THE ONCE -EXTENSIVE RAILROAD COMPLEX THAT MADE SLO THE COMMERCIAL CENTER IT IS TODAY. (Sorry Missionphiles, the Mission didn't do it -- just look at all the ruins of missions today out in the country or in places like Jolon and San Miguel. The Pacific Coast Railroad made this place the economic crossroads of the central coast. If you look at old maps, you'll see that the railroad complex covered an entire block, and that its associated lumber yard, from which the central coast as far south as Los Olivos was built, occupied the entire stretch up Higuera to High Street. This was the economic driver of our city, linking two counties with the sea's commerce.) The building you see today is sufficiently undisturbed from the original that it qualified as a National Register property. I did the nomination of this property, and carried it through both state and national processing after the same Community Development Department that today wants to deceive you flat-out opposed the nomination (they wanted it demolished for a strip mall like the one across the street) and brought the combined pressure of city and its well -placed "historic preservation" allies to interfere with and attempt to derail the nomination. They ended up making fools of themselves in the eyes of the State Office of Historic Preservation staff, as they were unable to back up their objections with a single fact. The city's continuing hostility to the truth about this building is perhaps best signalized by the fact not a single piece of the National Register nomination, which would well -present the building's historic authenticity, has been provided to the CHC. OK, this building. The characteristic of this warehouse, where farm products were brought to be shipped out from the bi-county farmshed, is the tall "elevator" at one end, and the long, low almost windowless shed extending for almost a block. Originally there were sliding barn doors along the inner side, now replaced by storefronts. The building survived in that form for almost a century. Sure, improvements were made, as is the Attachment 6 case for any living building, but the form, historic authenticity, structure, cladding, etc., were cared for and repaired or replaced as needed, not by caprice. When the building and its site were redeveloped as part of the Pacific Coast Center, keeping the historic nature of the historic building was high in the minds of the developers. They made some changes: replaced the uneven bitumen floors with concrete (a mistake, I think), repaired the structural features where needed, re -clad the building with the same historic material to give it a more finished look instead of one where bits and pieces had been replaced at different times, finished interior walls where studding had previously been exposed. But the underlying timber framing of the original remains, the form (with one major exception) remains, the rhythmic monotony of the original streetscape remains (despite the regular insertion of the small windows), the locally manufactured brick plinth on which the building sits above flood level (staff calls it a "veneer" foundation, which is nonsense) remains. The one major intervention was splitting the building for an entry opposite Madonna Road, and re -linking the building with a second -level bridge. But even there, the design showed restraint: the bridge is set back from the street so that viewing the building parallel to the street one still sees the monotony of the long form, not the intrusion. The developers were historically sensitive. They bought the site because of their appreciation for the building on it. They officially remained "neutral" on the National Register nomination, which means they secretly favored it, but for whatever reason didn't want to say so. When it came to redeveloping the site, I wish they'd left more of the remnant original artifacts behind the front building, but again, it was the city that forced their removal for parking. THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU IS A MAJOR UNSYMPATHETIC INTERVENTION TO THIS HISTORIC BUILDING. It fails to understand the rhythm of the street facade as a major feature of the structure. It interjects a jarring and ugly rhythm in place of the historic nature of the facade. It is clumsy. It is anti -historic. It is totally unnecessary: there's no pedestrian traffic here to attract with display windows, so what's the purpose? It's an inappropriate idea in the wrong place on the wrong building. PLEASE REJECT IT. Try to see this historic building for what it is. If you do that, the wrongness of this proposal will be clear. This building needs to be appreciated for what it is -- a late 19t" century vernacular functional building that is unique in our town, as well as a reminder of exactly why our town is here and remains an economically strong community. Thank you. Richard Schmidt Attachment 7 RESOLUTION NO. #44#43 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING NEW STOREFRONT WINDOWS IN THE HIGUERA STREET BUILDING ELEVATION AT 75 HIGUERA STREET (C-S-MU ZONE), ARC 108-12 WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 28, 2013, for the purpose of considering Planning Application ARC 108- 12, review of new storefront windows along the Higuera Street frontage of the Pacific Coast Center; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee determined that the proposed windows were consistent with Historic Preservation Program Guidelines because the proposed windows do not compromise any of the building's historical character -defining features and recommended approval of the windows to the Architectural Review Commission with the Commission to review final window proportions and details; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on February 11, 2013, for the purpose of considering revised plans for final approval; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by the Cultural Heritage Committee and staff at said hearings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The project is consistent with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines because the proposed windows do not compromise any of the building's historical character -defining features which are the form, placement and scale; the brick foundation; and the wood trusses. 2. The project is consistent with Section 3.1 of the Community Design Guidelines for commercial projects to "preserve the design integrity of architecturally or historically significant structures". 3. The project is exempt from environmental review (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15331, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation). Resolution No. ARC-00-13 75 Higuera Street, ARC 108-12 Page 2 SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final approval to the new storefront windows along the Higuera Street frontage of the Pacific Coast Center (ARC 108-12), with incorporation of the following conditions: Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans as amended and approved by the ARC. Project conditions shall be listed in working drawings submitted for a building permit. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 1 Ith day of February, 2013 Pam Ricci, Secretary Architectural Review Commission city of Meefin2 Date: Febman, 11, 2013 �UIS OBISPO Item -Nuinber:2 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of a remodel and additions to an auto dealership building located oil Calle Joaquin paralleling US Highway 101. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1423 Calle Joaquin BY.- Pam Ricci, Senior Planner (781-7168) E-mail: pricci(T'slocity,org FILE NUMBER: ARC 153-12 FROM: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION- Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 4,) which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions. Applicant Charles Alfano Representative Jefferey Carlile, Carlile Coatsworth Architects Zoning C-S (Service Commercial Zone) General Plan Services & Manufacturing Site Area 208,357 square feet (4.78 acres) Environmental Exempt from environmental Status review under Class I (Section 15301), Existing Facilities, of the CEQA Guidelines, SUMMARY The applicant recently purchased the former Kimball Motors automobile dealership. The site has been developed with an auto dealership since the early 1970s. The applicant plans to make improvements to the property, but is not looking at a wholesale remodel at this time. As a first step, he would like to remodel and add about 1..800 square feet of showroom to the northern dealership building, as well as an entry canopy on the front elevation and a service canopy on the south side of the same building. Plans also include floor plan and minor exterior changes to The service building located behind the show -rooms at the middle of the site. The project is before the ARC because of the proposed additions to the dealership building and the high visibility of the site along, the Highway 101 corridor, The applicant is seeking final approval, of the current project plans from the ARC. 1.0 COMMISSION'S PURVIEW The project is a modification to an existing commercial building. The ARC's role is to review �1- the project in terms of its consistency with Section 3.4 A. of the Community Design Guidelines (CDG) for auto dealerships (Attachment 3), ARC; 108.12; 1423 Calle Joaquin Page 2 2.0 PROJECT INFOR-MATION A Site Information/Setting The 4e7 -acre site is fairly flat and abuts Prefumo Creek on its west side, It is developed with. four main buildings v tli a total of 37,413 square feet, including the two showroom buildings that parallel. Calle Joaquin which are visible from Highway 101. Most of the site is paved and is dedicated to driveways, customer parking and vehicle storage° Surrounding C-S zoned land uses include the undeveloped lots set aside for auto dealerships to the north, Motel 6 and America's Tire (wader con_strlaction) to the South, and ether auto dealerships and commercial uses to the west. 2.2 Project Description Northern Dealership uilding (Building 2 on plans) Figure 1. Proposed Front (East) Elevation The applicant is proposing to add the follov,ring features to the northern dealership building which will house Mercedes: a. Showroom Addition, 'rhe approximately 1,800 square -foot addition on the northern side of the building will include a series of U-foot high storefront windows capped by a 4-moot fascia.. At the back of the new showroom is a ramp that, allows auto access to the spaces b. Front Lntry Canopy. 'Fhe approximately 1,700 square -foot front canopy is 20 feet wide by 84 feet long. The canopy is 19W' tall and is supported by tubular steel columns finished in a cobalt glue. The columns are finished with a tubular steel capital and rings that is a Mercedes ARC 108-1 , 1423 Calle Joaquin Page 3 trademark, The Fiat roof canopy will have steel structural members with an angled rip and circular embellishments. c, Service Canopy The approximately 1,300 square -foot service canopy is proposed on the south side of the dealership building. The canopy has a simple and utilitarian design with square, stucco -coated colunins supporting a flat roof a with a 4-foot fascia. The building will be substantially remodeled with the removal of the file rnarisard roof and existing storefronts and door. A new AAA -compliant ramp and. railing is proposed to the front entry. 3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS 3.1 Building Changes The C % include the folloNving guidance for auto dealership buildings (CDG 3 A A.Ia. ): "BuildiyWs should be consistent on all sides in teraras of architectural s4'le and exterior finish in aterirals, and well -articulated". Staffs Analysis, The current building has a front facade with aluminum storefronts, a thin metal material with simulated wood grain wrapping columns,. and a clay tile mansard roof, but is principally corrugated .metal siding beyond. The proposed additions will provide a facelift 'to the front of building that will zxaodemi e it and make it function more efficiently. As an addition and remodel, the applicant is proposing to retain nnuch of the existing corrugated siding on the sides and rear of the building rather than replacing it with stucco walls to match the front. The remodel will be a benefit to the site and in keeping with design standards For Mercedes dealerships. As the first phase of dealership upgrades, the positive changes to mode iz:e the northern building will create a span of time where the style and detailing; of the two dealership buildings on the same site will not be compatible with each ether. While this situation is not ideal, the remodel still can. be viewed as are upgrade to the area and site. ARC 108-121-1 14213 Calle Joaquin Page 4 ago= Staff has been contacted by a sign contractor with a request to modift- the existing monument sign faces, The proposal includes moving the Chevrolet sign to the place where the existing Kimball Motor Sign Company sign is and installing a large Mercedes logo on the northern monument. This type of sign swap with changing faces on existing structures can typically be I handled at a staff level. The request is included in this report because of the current project review by the ARC. Figure 4. Monument Signs Staff has observed that the white face of the Chevrolet sign is fully illuminated from inside the cabinet and is very bright. Condition No. 6 is included in the resolution calling for the internal illumination level to be lowered to the approval of the Community Development Director. Staff would also encourage the applicant to consider looking at upgrading the sign faces to use some other material than the plea and more innovative ways of fighting such as backlighting or cut - through letters. Sheet 7 of current plans show two wall signs to be placed on the fascia of the new metal canopy at the entry to the remodeled northern dealership building. One sign spells out -Mercedes Benz" Z= and the other "Alfano". Plans do not specify size, materials or proposed lighting, However, the signs as shown look like they are of a reasonable scale and fit with building elements, Condition No, 5 calls for innovative and attractive building signage will all of The required information to be reviewed by the Community Development Director and proper permits obtained. 3.3 Site Lighting Staff has observed that the site pole lights do not comply�Ndth current City standards (Night Sky Preservation - Chapter 1 "7,2) of the Zoning Regulations) in terms of height (maximum of 21 feet) t, and shielding. Recognizing that the lights have been in place for many years. staff is not recommending that they be replace with new conforming light standards and fixture' s. However, staff is recommending Condition No. 3 that the existing fight fixtures be retrofitted with shields to better direct the light Source and eliminate some glare. This was required with the ARC 108-12; 1423 Calle Joaquin Page 5 redevelopment of the Madonna Plaza and has worked effectively to reduce light trespass and glare. 4.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS The Building Division has pointed out that the proposed service canopy encroaches over an existing property line. The applicant will need to redesign the canopy to conform or pursue a lot merger or lot line adjustment to remedy the situation. The Fire Department notes that the new additions to the northern dealership building will trigger requirements for fire sprinklers. Public Works notes that this substantial remodel requires planting street trees along the site's frontage to City standards. 5.0 ALTERNATIVES 5.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues. 5.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design Guidelines. 6.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Reduced size project plans 3. Section 3.4 A of the Community Design Guidelines (CDG) for auto dealerships 4. Draft Resolution Included in Committee member portfolio: project plans Attachment 2 �® N O N N d § a s fNus a I 8i6 ppy .io WN, hw1 �� 22 3 d I� yi �S ID%3�y? Z4=®Is G E HIP I ]G 13a Iy1� :t � H Ojil r+CD -Lu I I I1 ICT L ((n U O h (Q `� c 1 Q � I I LU (II �I T- I IO $� .// o s® I rF sY I �a G z I ¢s 33 w� m� • aw�,iaw��a�.�.n�e������ ul w ------------ - ------- -------------------- - - ---- --------- 7 Z- -------- I ', I ---- --- - -- - ------------- ----------- — ---- ---- ---------- --------------- ----------- -- 7fLL c", z LU N Lu 7— z ------------ S.0 0 U) LL UJ UJ uj LU O LL LL z to co-) N C�pgF$ yy o C9J � § Hill lisp (I w o QooaaaooEoIF] L-flIt] ®®o IF] ® To®Wo® ®off , Lr LL ®® LIJ LL O � Z 9 m� pp�M LLLL c � e Lf® ® 2 " e - a c �6 O LL L 9 W o nowa sx�x vxiaun 9rLLe�q � _ O u 3 EL ys < oa ed ypp ? O� U me VR • m.o.�etwos��a��m-�.�«�a I z It I I � O L� 9 �!F 12sl iLEI ! F S [ n��f9x =s• L7 J yq9 d-c�—a•-a. a — e z LU tjo - as w LU =z co s� o m ®U) d e LL Lij i:P 0 e e s 0 l d a e a e e p p- e 3 4 ® e h I i Q 0 El Eld Y LC a LL Vv � LL H a � a «� U�p QE C� 3� D� V m�t ' UU w'.wxnw,w"u� �w�mm,.ur�:a g $ 191 iB c Cg IyI Ip y x W I4pI U' W o r n00000[-IF-�LEI o®o oL--]©®F� �000aa ®off J I I T LL co z uj LU--------1p---------- ~ [� LU =€ T Z - -- --v _ Z 00 CO w LL uj NH Q w s - a � a J O f W 0 ❑ I J LL O g� W N xowc mwuaC wax 'min.n �� ? '' osz 9n -x�s�b r - N C� �0 wR{ Ug me U� I 3m @@ SEE ,jE k g tl W ���`3 ��n}3^^i��}z � J ❑ f3�'lI} I3�13 1���I�3`�'I ^^3 ❑ F--I F1 ❑❑` [-12 ❑'- ❑❑�- IJ 0 F]LJ ElLJ JLJ� p p ❑❑O®CIC07 W OP.'§ i = g���,i Y ®4 tl �1®r Y, 1, A, �Y, V ■ O � L I 22T11 I �6 ® > -------- €' she x F- i �s W W Lu g v g w N pm CO 0 w U) W - - ---------------- ------------ �7 D'd rmT� - -- - ------ --- -7W— 'Au TI, vc A a 0) z 0 LL 0 > CD 0 z LU W w = U) 0 z LLI 0(-) 0 —j > LL 0� LU U) !� ! E eesEaesEmmmmEezzESEzwmmlmE§ LLm 02 �O �w w0 =2 3ƒ m 0z k� qD m ±2 oU 2 » ± �q � 3 San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines 3.4 — Guidelines or S eei le Commercial and Industrial Uses Attachment 3 3.4 - Guidelines for Specific Commercial and Industrial Uses The following design guidelines apply to the specific commercial and industrial uses listed, in addition to the other guidelines in this chapter, those in Chapters 2, 6, and 7, and those in the Airport Area Specific Plan. A. Auto dealerships. Auto and other vehicle dealerships are typically characterized by large outdoor areas for the storage and display of vehicles, with comparatively minor portions of the site being used for structures and customer parking. 1. Site planning. Auto dealership site plans should incorporate the following features. a. On -site areas for the unloading of vehicles from carriers. b. Outdoor vehicle displays oriented toward streets are limited to permanent at -grade display areas with all structures architecturally consistent with the buildings on the site. C. Storage and outdoor activity areas not for vehicle display (e.g., car washing, stacking areas for vehicles waiting for service, etc.) that are screened from view from public streets and any nearby residential area. 2. Building design. Buildings on the site of an auto dealership should be designed to comply with the following guidelines. a. Buildings should be consistent on all sides in terms of architectural style and exterior finish materials, and well articulated. b. The showroom should be oriented toward the major public street bordering the site. C. Walls and fences should be architecturally consistent with the buildings. d. Service uses and areas should be entirely contained within the buildings. Internal vehicle access should be provided to each individual service bay. The access points to the service bays should not be visible to the public. e. All storage areas should be screened from public view from streets and adjoining properties by appropriately designed walls, fencing and landscaping. f. Provisions should be made for a vehicle washing area. The wash rack should not be located so as to be visible or audible from any public street or residential area. g. Landscaping should be provided along all display perimeters, but should be maintained at a low level (less then 32 inches), except for street trees along site street frontages. Chapter 3 — Commercial & Industrial Project Design June 2010 38 Attachment 4 RESOLUTION NO. #4#4-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING A REMODEL AND ADDITIONS TO AN AUTO DEALERSHIP BUILDING AT 1423 CALLE JOAQUIN (C-S ZONE; ARC 153-12) WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing for the purpose of considering project plans for final approval in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on February 11, 2013, pursuant to an application filed by Charles Alfano, applicant, for the purpose of considering ARC 153-12, a proposal to remodel and add new building areas to an auto dealership building located at 1423 Calle Joaquin; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by the staff at said hearings. WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. As conditioned, the project's design is appropriate and will be compatible with surrounding development. 2. As conditioned, the project design maintains consistency with the City's Community Design Guidelines, specifically CDG 3.4 providing guidance for auto dealerships. 3. The project is categorically exempt under Class 1 (Section 15301), Existing Facilities, of the CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final approval to the new storefront windows along the Higuera Street frontage of the Pacific Coast Center (ARC 108-12), with incorporation of the following conditions: Planning 1. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans as amended and approved by the ARC. A separate full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that list all conditions, and code requirements of project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. Resolution No. ARC-####-13 75 Higuera Street, ARC 153-12 Page 2 2. The color board for the project presented at the meeting was supported by the Architectural Review Commission. Any modifications to the approved palette shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit. Building colors shall be shown on the building elevations approved as part of working drawings. 3. Details of shields for existing lighting fixtures shall return to staff for review and approval along with, the plans submitted for a building permit to confirm that fixtures will properly shield light sources and prevent glare. 4. The locations of all wall -mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall -mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures, and cut -sheets shall be separately submitted for the project file of the proposed lighting fixtures. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to insure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City's Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations. Details of all exterior light fixtures, including any service area lights, need to be included as part of plans. A note shall be included on plans that "Lenses of exterior wall - mounted lights may be modified or shielding devices added after installation if the Community Development Director determines that they emit excessive glare." 5. New wall signs for the northern dealership building shall utilize more innovative and attractive solutions such as raised, backlit metal letters, halo lighting or external lighting rather than typical strip mall type plex letters with internal illumination. Signs shall be to the review and approval of the Community Development Director and proper permits obtained. The Director may refer signage to the ARC if it seems excessive or out of character with the proj ect. 6. The internal illumination level of the white Chevrolet face shall be lowered to the approval of the Community Development Director. The ARC recommends that the applicant consider upgrading the sign faces to use some other material than the plex and more innovative ways of lighting such as backlighting or cut -through letters. 7. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly show the sizes of proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment to be placed on the roof to confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen them. A line -of -site diagram may be needed to confirm that proposed screening will be adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements. Fire 8. Where buildings abut a fire lane of less than 28 feet in width the fire lane must be striped or posted "NO PARKING — FIRE LANE". Resolution No. ARC-####-13 Page 3 75 Higuera Street, ARC 153-12 9. The required fire riser for the building shall be located internal to the building. 10. Fire protection systems shall be installed in accordance with the CFC and the California Building Code. An approved NFPA 13 system will be required for this project. Shop Drawings and Specifications shall be submitted for review and approval prior to installation. Fire main and all associated control valves shall be installed per NFPA 24 Standards and City Engineering standards. The location of fire control valves/backflow device and Fire Department Connection shall be shown on plans. 11. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20 feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, the back flow preventer and double check assembly shall be located in the street yard and screened using a combination of paint color. landscaping, and if deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community Development Directors. Public Works 12. All underlying lots shall be merged or lot lines shall otherwise be adjusted prior to building permit issuance if required by the Building Division and/or Planning Division. Contact the Planning Division to initiate the Lot Merger or Lot Line Adjustment process. 13. Traffic impact fees shall be paid for this development prior to building permit issuance. Credit for the removal of existing building area will be applied in the fee calculation. 14. An encroachment permit will be required from the Public Works Department for any work or construction staging in the public right-of-way. 15. The building plan submittal shall show the existing or proposed fire service lateral and double-check assembly per City Engineering Standards and adopted codes for the required fire sprinkler system upgrade. 16. This property is located within a designated flood zone as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of San Luis Obispo. As such, any new or substantially remodeled structures shall comply with all Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements and the city's Floodplain Management Regulations per Municipal Code Chapter 17.84. 17. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with the Floodplain Management Regulations. Based on the elevation certificate for the adjoining showroom building #1, it Resolution No. ARC-####-13 75 Higuera Street, ARC 153-12 Page 4 appears that this Building 42 has been elevated above the .Base Flood Elevation (BFE). An elevation certificate or topographic survey will be required as part of the building permit review with a final elevation certificate provided at the completion of construction. It is recommended that a current and separate elevation certificate be prepared for each of the buildings on this campus or that a letter of map change be processed to remove the building pads from the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) if applicable. 18. Projects involving the construction of new structures or the substantial remodel of existing structures requires that frontage improvements be installed or that existing improvements be upgraded per city standard ( MC 12.16.050). 19. The existing driveway approach shall be verified as complying with ADA and city standards for accessibility and compliance with current City Engineering Standards. If not accessible, the approach shall be altered or upgraded to comply with current standards. The current city and ADA standard requires a 4' accessible sidewalk extension behind the ramp. If required, the sidewalk extension could be added to the back of the existing approach. 20. The planting of street trees will be required as a condition of the building permit. The building permit plan submittal shall include a landscape plan showing the proposed street trees. Generally, one 15-gallon street tree is required for each 35 lineal feet of property frontage. The final planting scheme shall be approved to the satisfaction of Planning Division and City Engineer. 21. The building permit plan submittal shall show all existing, proposed, and/or required parking lot improvements. If applicable, the plan shall include dimensions, space dimensions, maneuverability, materials, space and aisle slopes, drainage, pavement marking, signage, and striping in accordance with the Parking and Driveway Standards and disabled access requirements of the CBC. On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 1 I" day of February, 2013. Pam Ricci, Secretary Architectural Review Commission DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES January 14, 2013 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Steven Hopkins, Greg Wynn, Vice -Chair Michelle McCovey-Good, and Chairperson Jim Duffy Absent: Commissioner Wynn Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: The minutes of December 3, 2012, were approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 12350 Los Osos Valley Road. ARC 124-12; Review of facade upgrades, including an illuminated entry feature, for the Toyota dealership; C-S-S zone; John Frangie, applicant. (Continued to a date uncertain) (Marcus Carloni) There was no discussion or public input on the item. On motion by Commr. Palazzo, seconded by Commr. Hopkins, to continue the project to a date uncertain. AYES: Commrs. Palazzo, Hopkins, McCovey-Good, Ehdaie, Curtis and Duffy NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commrs, Wynn The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 2. Staff: a. Agenda Forecast — Pam Ricci provided a forecast for upcoming agendas. She noted that the February 4th ARC meeting would be cancelled. Draft ARC Minutes January 14, 2013 Page 2 b. Mission Plaza Master Plan — Pam Ricci provided an update on the pending grant application. c. Checklist — Building Details The Commission provided direction to staff to add the following items to the checklist: 1) Add a building details category which highlights typical information that is requested with projects. 2) Clarify that section views adequately show how roof -mounted equipment will be screened. 3) Add a requirement that building elevations be provided in color. 3. Commission: Staff briefly responded to questions about on -going projects. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Pam Ricci Recording Secretary