HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-13ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AGENDA
Conference Room #1
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
June 19, 2013 Wednesday 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 May 6, 2013 and May 20, 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. 12350 Los Osos Valley Road. ARC 124-12; Review of a 26-foot tall illuminated
entry feature, 1,200 square foot addition, new signage, and fagade upgrades for
the Toyota dealership; C-S-S zone; John Frangie, applicant. (Continued to a
date uncertain) (Marcus Carloni)
2. 720 Foothill Boulevard. ARC 56-13; Review of a proposal to construct a 7,100
square foot structure for a fraternity use; R-4 zone; Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp.,
applicant. (Brian Leveille)
Architectural Review Commission
Page 2
COMMENT & DISCUSSION:
3. Staff
a. Agenda Forecast
4. Commission
ADJOURNMENT
Presenting Planners: Marcus Carloni and Brian Leveille
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.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ITEM #1
BY: Marcus Carloni, Assistant Planner/" � MEETING DATE: June 19, 2013
FROM: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner FK
FILE NUMBER: ARC 124-12
PROJECT ADDRESS: 12350 Los Osos Valley Road
SUBJECT: Review of a 26-foot tall illuminated entry feature, building addition, new signage,
and fagade upgrades for the Toyota dealership in the Service Commercial (C-S-S) zone,
located at 12350 Los Osos Valley Road.
RECOMMENDATION
Continue to a date uncertain to allow the applicant further time to review the projects
consistency with City regulations.
city Meeting D,te. June 19, 2013
san luis ompo
ftem Number: 2
ARCHITECTURAL VIE OM I SION AGENDA PtEPORT
SUBJECT: review of a new threc-level, 7,100 square -foot residential structure with ground
floor parking for ail existing fraternity use located on the north side of ]Foothill Boulevard
between North Chorro and Ferrini.
PROJECT ADDRESS-. 720 Foothill Blvd. BY- Brian L,eveille, Associate Planner (781-7166)
E-mail: bleveille@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER- ARC 56-13 FROM. Pain Ricci, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 3) which grants final
approval to the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant
Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp.
Representative
Lou Smith, Architect
Zoning
R-4 (High -Density Residential)
General Plan
High Density Residential
Site Area
11,375 square feet (.26 acre)
Environmental
Exempt from environmental
Status
review under Class 32 (Section
15332), Infill Development
Projects.
The applicant is proposing to develop a new residential structure for an existing fraternity which
was recently approved for expansion by the Planning Commission on June 24, 2009. The
existing fraternity was originally granted a use permit in 1991 for the currently approved eight
residents. The Planning Commission approval allowing expansion of up to 14 residents was
contingent on architectural review approval and completed construction of the new fraternity
building. In addition to the architectural review discussion, the report notes a minor exception to
setback standards to accommodate the covered porches at the front of the project facing Foothill
Boulevard and the relocation of an existing flag pole.
The ARC's role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines (CDG) for residential project design and the requested setback exception.
2.0 PROJECT SITE INFORMATION
The fairly flat, "U-shaped .26 acre site is currently developed with two buildings near the street
ARC 56-13; 720 Foothill Blvd
Delta Upsilon Fraternity
Page 2
with a central driveway leading to a rear parking lot. There is a storage building in the "L"
portion of the site beyond the parking lot.
The project site is adjacent to High -Density residential development (R-4) to the north, west, and
east. Across Foothill Blvd. to the south is the Foothill Plaza shopping center zoned Community
Commercial (C-C). Properties adjacent to the site on the north and west sides of the property
consist of apartment buildings constructed in the late 1950's and early 1960's. To the east of the
project site, a six unit condominium project (Foothill Courtyards) recently completed
construction. The project site is approximately 1/3 of a mile from the Highland Drive entrance to
Cal Poly and 3/ mile from the California Blvd. entrance to Cal Poly.
2.1 Site Information/Setting
Site Size
11,375 s.f. (.26 acres)
Present Use & Development
Existing fraternity with six bedrooms and 12 space parking lot.
Topography
Flat, developed site
Access
Driveway from Foothill Boulevard
Surrounding Use/Zoning
North: High -Density Residential (R-4)
South: Shopping Center, zoned Community -Commercial (C-C)
East: High -Density Residential (R-4)
West: High -Density Residential (R-4)
2.2 Project Description
The applicant's proposal is to demolish existing site improvements to construct the new
fraternity building and associated site improvements. The existing storage building at the
northeastern portion of the site would remain. The proposed building is three levels with the
parking area at grade under a portion of the second level. The proposed structure contains a total
of 12 bedrooms on floors 1-3, with a common kitchen, living area, study room, and outdoor deck
located interior to the project on the second level. The total living area of the proposed structure
is 7,164 square feet. Access to the parking area is provided via a two-way driveway from
Foothill Boulevard which passes under the intermediate level.
Figure I. Front elevation
ARC 56-13; 720 Foothill Blvd
Delta Upsilon Fraternity
Page 3
The building design is a Craftsman inspired style which is intended to reflect and be compatible
with the style and massing of the Foothill Courtyards condominium project to the east. The
proposed structure steps back at each level and includes a significant amount of articulation and
roof variation. Consistent with the Craftsman theme, architectural details include detailed attic
vents, wood outriggers, gently sloping pitched roofs, and a combination of horizontal siding, and
cement plaster. Roofing material is an architectural grade composition shingle. The front porches
are supported with 2x4 wood posts and finished with a wood milled top sill and stone veneer
bases. Windows around the building are vertically oriented with white vinyl windows with upper
divided lights. Wood window trim is included around windows on all elevations.
Setback Exception
The front walls of the two structures are shown on the site plan with a 15-foot setback from
Foothill Boulevard, which is the minimum street yard requirement. However, the front yard
porch posts extend into the street yard an additional 5 feet showing a 10-foot setback, which
would require approval of a street yard setback exception to allow (Figure 3, below & plan
sheets A.4 & A.5).
15-foot setback (complies with standard)
10-foot setback to street (requested
exception)
Figure 2. West elevation
2.3 Proiect Statistics
Statistics
Item
Proposed'
Ordinance Standard 2
Street Yard setback (main building)
15 feet
15 feet
Street yard setback (covered
10 feet3
15 feet3
porches)
Interior yard setbacks (east & west
9 feet
9 feet (buildings up to 31 feet)
to 3`d level, 30'-9" in height)
Interior yard setback (north, or rear
22 feet, 9 inches
10 feet
property line to 3rd level, 33'-4")
Max. Height of Structure(s)
33 feet, 4 inches
35 feet
Coverage (bldgs., driveways,
52%
60%
parking)
Parking Spaces
17 auto —1 motorcycle
17 (standard requirement of 18
may be reduced with additional
ARC 56-13; 720 Foothill Blvd
Delta Upsilon Fraternity
Page 4
bike parking provided per
section 17.16.060.F.2)
Bicycle parking
8 short term & long term within
1-(one) short term & two long
interior storage building and/or
term spaces per unit.
rooms.
Notes: 1. Applicant's project plans submitted 4-01-13
2. City zoning Regulations
3. Exception requested. See exception discussion below
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
Community Design Guidelines
Chapter 5 — Residential Project Design
The following applicable guidelines from Chapter 5, Residential Project Design, are
highlighted followed by staff s analysis of the project's design consistency with the cited
guidelines.
■ 5.2.E Exterior Finish Materials.
Staff Analysis: The above guideline states that buildings should have "four-sided"
architecture with all elevations utilizing the same materials, design details and window
treatment, and that facade details should not only be limited to the elevation facing the street.
In general, the project complies with this guideline since siding, windows, and window trim
treatment are carried around the street facing south facade as well as the west and east
elevations.
Some refinements are needed to fully comply with this guideline. The stone veneer is shown
on the front elevation only and does not wrap around the corner of the building or extend
along the west and east elevations of the structure. Staff recommends that the fence shown at
the front elevation should be set back a minimum of 5 feet from the front plane of the
building and the stone veneer be wrapped around the corners of the front elevation a
minimum of 5 feet (Condition #3). The rear elevation does not include the siding or gable
end details of the front elevation. Staff recommends that the vent gable details street facing
fagade details should be included on the rear elevation (Condition #4).
5.2.H. Garages and Carports.
5.4.B. Parking and Driveways.
Staff Analysis: The project design includes parking behind and under the building which is
consistent with the above guideline which states that multi -family projects should avoid the
common problem of projects which appear garage and driveway dominated. The project also
employs guidelines which encourage alternative paving and safe and protected bicycle
parking.
ARC 56-13; 720 Foothill Blvd
Delta Upsilon Fraternity
Page 5
■ 5.3A. Infill Development
Staff Analysis: Residential development in the vicinity consists of apartment buildings
constructed in the late 1950's and early 1960's timeframe. The project is designed to be
compatible with and reflect the recently constructed Foothill Courtyards project to the east.
The Foothill Courtyards project is also a Craftsman inspired design with similar massing to
the proposed project. The proposed project is compatible with the size, scale, and character
of surrounding development but does not have a traditional neighborhood pattern or
architectural character in surrounding development which need to be considered in the
proposed design.
■ 5.4. C.3. Balconies, porches, and patios
Staff Analysis: The Community Design Guidelines encourage the use of balconies, porches, and
patios for practical and aesthetic value since these elements can help break up large wall masses,
and provide offset floor setbacks and add humans scale to structures. Covered porches are
included in the project design for the front elevation facing Foothill Boulevard.
The proposed project does not incorporate balconies on the upper floors which face outward
from the project. A large deck is incorporated between the two bedroom wings of the project
which is accessed from the main living and dining area and oriented toward the interior of the
site. This is a desirable project design for the fraternity use since it contains outdoor deck areas
interior to the building. This design should help to minimize potential noise disturbances with
neighboring residences. Without exterior decks, the project achieves adequate offsets and
articulation with floor setbacks, and roof variation.
3.1 Setback Exception
The proposed project requires an exception to the setback standards to allow a ten foot setback
for porch support columns along the Foothill Boulevard project frontage. The walls of the main
building comply with the minimum 15 foot street yard setback. Staff supports an exception to
allow the front porch posts at 10 feet since they provide for a pleasing architectural transition to
the street in character with the style of the buildings and highlight building entries. The reduced
setback is minor and will not be inconsistent with neighborhood pattern. The Foothill Courtyards
project immediately to the east was also approved for the same setback exception. Staff has
provided findings in the resolution of approval for the setback exception.
The applicant also has an existing flag pole in the street yard that they wish to relocate with
redevelopment of the site. Section 15,40.470 N.I. of the Sign Regulations requires that flag
poles be located out of required setback areas. There does not appear to be a location available
for a flag pole with the development of the new project that can meet the setback requirements.
Therefore, if the applicant wishes to pursue this, they will need to follow up with an exception
request in the future.
ARC 56-13; 720 Foothill Blvd
Delta Upsilon Fraternity
Page 6
4.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The requirements of the other departments are reflected in the attached draft resolution as
conditions of approval.
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. Draft Resolution
Included in Commission member portfolio: project plans
®l
a
t
2
3 � v
q s c 1 1 i i 3q
m
-,$ f ! 1
y �
� illy
9
=p A
aC
aZ B3 o$N$'c .ae
Our
a
m
o
V
y
oz
r'1
€�gK�
R
fa
R�a��;?=��x
oN�
yo
}q,y ink
o:$gQ.
D
��§T�
A^.y A}u
A vz v �o o
Q ,ygv�BS�
M1mk��
-�y
m� m
=m
"o
wok
„➢m
n eat
o >ri
oNg:
2
2
C$C
�6�ci
o�
dia
O0
NA
Ify��
W
mo
r�
L
B e v
3 X 3 Milt
[ [k� 4� 1
O S 1�� i 1 l
z`
kil
N z\ �iiips
i
q
eos
2 y
a .0
�
aR
�2
Na�sxB�
a M
7-TF-'- - - -- -, F------ - - T------
I
F
ORN2 V,AY K
•el
P
m....
_.. _. ....
....... .............. ...._..-
a
E. FOOTHILL BLVD
8?py.'
4 2 x
a T
3 i i
&I'-2
26 2° 171
9
_
sHo i
r
iH d
I p
O
x �AJrtoRY
��i �',
i i O
s
I o "
w
3
rn
b r~n
.m
r
O
O
a
v
Z
u S s a c s
m t i
„I
c ^
wn
a
P C !
a ZZ:
aa�
,
Ad hikk
`a
I
°
v
b
7
-- ---_
Ib
z
N
m
N
m �
IP
��
n 9
N
m
L
£
2
z❑
m
s
£Ll�_.__
F
❑
\
�z
n
d�
rm
0
z
a
u
B 7
M
5
z.
84
�1
i
LJ
589°a9 x8'W - _._Aoz - -7520
g9v
09
O
N�.O
6"
-
a�n6
�
� o
E.
FOOTHILL BLVD—
aRio
^F
a
P
�
4
Attachment 3
RESOLUTION NO. ####-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION GRANTING FINAL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL
FOR A 7,100 SQUARE FOOT FRATERNITY BUILDING
AT 720 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD (R-4 ZONE; ARC 56-13)
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
Conference Room 41, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on June 19, 2013, pursuant
to an application filed by Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation, applicant, for the purpose of
considering ARC 56-13, a proposal to construct a new building at 720 Foothill Boulevard; 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 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. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project (ARC 56-13), based on the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project's design is appropriate and will be compatible with surrounding
development.
2. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the City's Community Design
Guidelines for Residential Projects.
1. The proposed street yard setback exception from 15 to 10 feet for the porches along Foothill
Boulevard is supported since:
a. The exception is minor and would not impact neighborhood character or appear out of
context with surroundings since the area consists of other multi -family structures with
lesser street yard setbacks and commercial uses are located to the south. The exception is
consistent with the recently constructed condominium project immediately to the east.
b. The building meets the interior yard setback requirements adjacent to the multi -family
development to the north, east and west which minimizes potential impacts to
neighboring properties.
c. The minor exception allows for the covered porches which is an important Craftsman
style design feature and adds to the architectural character of the project.
4. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or
residing in the vicinity since the proposed project is consistent with the site's High -Density
Residential Zoning designation, and the project is consistent with relevant Zoning and
Resolution No. ARC-####-13
720 Foothill Boulevard, ARC 56-13
Page 2
development regulations and will be subject to conformance with all applicable building, fire,
and safety codes.
5. The project is categorically exempt under Class 32 (Section 15332), Existing Facilities, of
the CEQA Guidelines since the project meets the following criteria:
a. The project is consistent with its general plan designation and applicable general plan
policies.
b. The project site is within City limits on a project site of no more than five acres and is
substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic,
noise, air quality, or water quality.
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following 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
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.
2. The color board for the project presented at the meeting was supported by the Architectural
Review Commission. Plans shall clearly note that all stucco surfaces are not a sprayed -on
product and have a smooth hand -finish (steel -troweled) to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director. A sample of the finish shall be submitted prior to issuance of a
building permit. 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. Plans submitted for construction permit approvals shall include modifications from the ARC
reviewed plans to include wrapping the stone veneer on the Foothill Boulevard elevation
around the corners a minimum of five feet on the east and west elevations and fences shall be
moved behind the front elevation of the building a minimum of three feet.
4. Plans submitted for construction permit approvals shall include modifications from the ARC
reviewed plans to include gable end attic vent details and wood outrigger supports on the rear
elevation which are the same as details provided on the street facing fagade reviewed in ARC
approved plans.
5. 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
Resolution No. ARC-####-13
720 Foothill Boulevard, ARC 56-13
Page 3
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."
6. The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan containing an irrigation system plan with
submittal of working drawings for a building permit. The legend for the landscaping plan
shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding
symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans. The surfaces and
finishes of hardscapes shall be included on the landscaping plan.
7. The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times. All landscaping shall
be maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan.
8. 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.
9. Long and short-term bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 6.5 of the
Zoning Regulations. Bicycles shall be parked vertically or horizontally with at least the rear
tire resting at floor level. Peak racks (Peakracks.com) or inverted "U" racks can be used for
short term bicycle parking. Inverted "U" racks used for short-term parking shall comply with
City Engineering Standard 7930 and the City's Community Design Guidelines which
identify minimum clearances from other features. Short-term bicycle racks shall be placed in
visible locations near public entries. Details of the short and long-term bicycle parking shall
be provided on the project's construction plans including rack design, location, clearances
and circulation for users in compliance with manufacturers' standards.
10. The building plan submittal shall include a complete demolition and topographic survey plan.
The plan shall show all existing trees to remain and trees to be removed. The trees in the
area of the existing storage building shall remain unless otherwise approved for removal by
the City Arborist.
Resolution No. ARC-####-13 Page 4
720 Foothill Boulevard, ARC 56-13
11. The landscape plan shall show the planting of two 15-gallon street trees in the front yard
areas per City Engineering Standards.
12. The building plan submittal shall show and note compliance with City Engineering Standards
for the new driveway approach. The current City and ADA standard requires a level 4'
sidewalk extension behind the driveway ramp.
13. The building plan shall show and note all parking and drive aisle improvements per the
parking and driveway standards. The plan shall include all space and bay dimensions,
clearances, pavement materials, and drainage in accordance with the parking and driveway
standards.
14. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. The plan shall show all
utilities to be abandoned, upgrades, and/or relocated. The plan shall show and note all work
within the public right-of-way for reference. The plan shall show the location of the existing
public water and sewer mains located in Foothill Blvd along with the other existing utilities
for reference. City improvement plans are available upon request.
15. The utility plan and/or architectural site plan shall show the location of all utility company
meters and appurtenances for reference. The plan shall include the location of the required
backflow preventer for the fire sprinkler service.
16. The utility plan shall clearly show and note that all wire utilities shall be underground. The
plan shall show all existing overhead wiring for reference. The plan shall show and note any
existing or proposed Public Utility Easements (PUE's) for reference. Building vertical and
horizontal clearances from the existing overhead wiring shall be approved to the satisfaction
of the PG&E.
17. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading and drainage plan. The civil,
architectural, and landscape plans shall show the location of any passive water quality
treatment system before drainage is discharged to the public street. The landscape plan shall
clarify the limits and extent of the vegetated drainage way or bio-swale as noted in the
project description.
18. A construction staging plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to
encroachment permit issuance for work or construction staging within the public right-of-
way.
19. The property's existing sewer lateral to the point of connection at the City main must pass a
video inspection, including repair or replacement, as part of the project. The CCTV
inspection shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and
approval by the Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
20. The solid waste enclosure must meet the City's standards and include space for two three
yard bins for trash and recycling. Written approval from San Luis Garbage Company
Resolution No. ARC-####-13
720 Foothill Boulevard, ARC 56-13
Page 5
regarding the size and location of the enclosure must be submitted prior building permit
issuance.
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 19th day of June, 2013.
Pam Ricci, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
May 6, 2013
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Steven Hopkins, Greg Wynn,
Vice -Chair Michelle McCovey-Good, and Chairperson Jim Duffy
Absent: Commissioner Anthony Palazzo
Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Associate Planner Brian Leveille, and
Recording Secretary Dawn Rudder
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES:
The minutes of April 22, 2013, were approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 892 Aerovista Place. ARC 142-12; Review of 37,000-square foot office building;
BP-SP zone; Quaglino Properties, applicant. (Continued from March 18, 2013,
ARC meeting) (Brian Leveille)
Brian Leveille, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending the
adoption of the resolution which grants final approval to the project, based on findings
and subject to conditions.
Commr. Curtis questioned if Condition #14 on the resolution should remain in the
conditions. Mr. Leveille indicated it is no longer relevant and should be removed.
Commr. Curtis questioned staff if they were convinced the rooftop equipment is no
longer visible. Mr. Leveille indicated it was a standard requirement to show screening at
submittal of construction documents and that a sectional view had been provided in
plans demonstrating the rooftop equipment will be sufficiently screened with the parapet
heights shown.
Draft ARC Minutes
May 6, 2013
Page 2
Commr. Wynn questioned if they were also approving the future building expansion.
Mr. Leveille stated yes the intent would be to not have to bring the proposed future
building expansion back to the ARC.
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good asked for further explanation about the possible future
addition. Dustin Pires, applicant architect, stated that three-dimensional plans for the
addition have not been developed yet, but that it would be two stories and integrated
into the same design as the proposed building.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Wynn stated he would vote in support of the proposed project but mentioned a
missed opportunity to add more variety through bold offsets in keeping with design
guidelines of the Airport Area Specific Plan.
Commr. Hopkins stated the proposed project is an improvement from the previous
design.
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good concurred with Commr. Hopkins. She stated the offsets
could be bolder and more differentiated.
Commr. Ehdaie supported the proposed project and noted the revisions were a big
improvement.
Commr. Curtis supported the proposed project. He indicated he shares the concerns of
the other Commissioners but that, even though there may be missed opportunities, the
issues were not significant enough to delay approval.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Ehdaie, seconded by Commr. McCovey-Good, to recommend
final approval of the proposed protect deleting condition #14 and adding the noted
Utilities Dept. condition shown in the staff presentation.
AYES: Commrs. Curtis, Ehdaie, Hopkins, Wynn, McCovey-Good, and Duffy
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commr. Palazzo
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
Draft ARC Minutes
May 6, 2013
Page 3
2. 3725 Orcutt Road. ARC 137-11; Introduction to project design for a new
residential development in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan; Terence Orton, applicant.
(Pam Ricci)
Pam Ricci, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending continuance of
the project to a date uncertain and providing preliminary comments to the applicant and
staff regarding the overall project design.
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good questioned how the site will be accessed from Orcutt. Ms.
Ricci indicated that there is currently access to the site from Orcutt Road and that it will
be maintained with early development phases until a third access point is created in the
future. She noted that the long-term plan is for general vehicular access to Orcutt to be
closed.
Commr. Wynn questioned if the zero lot line is a requirement of subdivision. Ms. Ricci
stated it was the applicant's choice.
Terry Orton, Orton Engineering, provided a summary of plans highlighting access
points, grading, and drainage. He stated the zero property line is intended to provide
solar access and will protect adjacent property units.
Eric Grunigan, applicant architect, provided an overview of the project including density,
types of housing units, site amenities including a park and convenience store,
streetscapes, material selections, and entry landscaping.
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good questioned how the homes will avoid replication per lot. Mr.
Grunigan stated that specific and varied designs will be fixed on certain lots.
Commr. Wynn asked about the zero lot line choice and visitor parking. Mr. Orton
indicated the one side of home not articulated will be less visible with the adjacent
building placement. He also stated there will be parking at the park site and additional
parking spread throughout the subdivision.
Commr. Curtis asked about when the design of Atelier building would be submitted.
Ms. Ricci indicated that it would be a later phase, but did not know the specific timing for
its submittal.
Commr. Curtis asked if there will be parking on any internal streets and how large
vehicles will access the smaller streets. Mr. Orton stated the widest street is Mont
Azure Drive which will have parking on the street. He also indicated the garbage
company has signed off on the street access.
Commr. Hopkins questioned the detail of building and color variation. Mr. Grunigan
stated the proposed homes have various elevations, materials on facades, window
openings, and placements.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Draft ARC Minutes
May 6, 2013
Page 4
Phillip Gray, San Luis Obispo, was pleased to see development start in Orcutt area;
however, he noted concerns with the architectural design. He indicated the proposed
plans ignore specific plan recommendations that home styles be bungalow or mission.
David Gray, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns with the contemporary architecture.
John Evans, San Luis Obispo, spoke against the proposed architecture varying from
specific plan style recommendations. He suggested a reduction in the massing and
appropriate levels of ornamentation. He also stated that the neighboring properties
would like to have the opportunity to discuss where the access points will be when the
project is completed, as they will directly affect their properties.
Dia Heard, San Luis Obispo, raised concerns with the traffic impact of this project as
well as surrounding development. She also stated she is not in support of the proposed
architecture.
Patti Taylor, San Luis Obispo, was appreciative of the public comments and expressed
that this meeting is a great start for this upcoming project.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioners utilized the outline on Page 9 of the staff report and discussed three of
the main topics.
Pedestrian Linkages
Commr. Wynn stated that the size and layout of the project did not warrant additional
pedestrian linkages.
Commr. Curtis stated that it would be useful to get a continuous pedestrian linkage
through the center of the project.
Commr. Ehdaie concurred with Commr. Curtis and would propose more than one to
promote walkability.
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good agreed with Commr. Curtis.
Chairperson Duffy concurred with including an additional pedestrian linkage.
Guest/shared Parking
Draft ARC Minutes
May 6, 2013
Page 5
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good noted concern with the lack of parking for guests.
Commr. Wynn concurred with Vice -Chair McCovey-Good.
Commr. Curtis stated that guest parking should be provided throughout the subdivision.
Building Design
Commr. Hopkins agreed with the public comments regarding the proposed architectural
styles and stated that the contemporary design does not appear to be consistent with
the specific plan.
Commr. Ehdaie concurred with Commr. Hopkins. She also stated the design is boxy
and would like to see additional roofline articulation.
Commr. Curtis stated the row houses seemed monotonous and that the overall
appearance is the same even with the variations.
Vice -Chair McCovey-Good appreciated the contemporary architecture, but was not in
agreement that this design is a good fit for the site. She encouraged adjusting the
homes on lots to allow for better four-sided architecture.
Commr. Wynn concurred with Commr. Curtis indicating he doesn't feel the modernism
is appropriate in this subdivision. He also agreed with the four-sided architecture
comment.
Chairperson Duffy stated that the contemporary architecture can be successful on this
property and has potential if additional articulation is added. He also encouraged four-
sided architecture and suggested that the applicant revisit the porch concept.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
y y r. Curtis, to continue the project to a
n a motion Commr. Wynn, seconded b Comm,
date uncertain with the following direction:
1. Explore the possibilily of adding a central pedestrian link between Mondrian
Plaza and Mont Azure Drive.
2. Work with the adjacent property owners„ ,regarding the proposed locations of
street and pedestrian linkages.
3. Provide building designs within the project „that _provide greater articulation and
four-sided architecture.
4. Include information on future plans that address guest parking needs within the
rp oiect.
5. Provide floor plans and elevations for the Atelier Building_
6. Recommend that a digital model of the „proaect be provided to better understand
the massing of structures and „relationship to topography.
Draft ARC Minutes
May 6, 2013
Page 6
AYES: Commrs. Curtis, Ehdaie, Hopkins, Wynn, McCovey-Good, and Duffy
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commr. Palazzo
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast — Pam Ricci provided a forecast for upcoming agendas. She
noted that final design review of MindBody was scheduled for the next meeting
on May 20th. Because Commissioners McCovey-Good and Wynn would need
to recuse themselves because of potential conflicts of interest, and
Commissioner Curtis would be on vacation, she emphasized that the remaining
four commissioners would need to be present to have a quorum.
4. Commission: There were no specific communications to report.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:52 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Dawn Rudder
Recording Secretary
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
May 20, 2013
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Suzan Ehdaie, Steven Hopkins, Anthony Palazzo, and
Chairperson Jim Duffy
Absent: Commissioners Greg Wynn and Ken Curtis and Vice -Chair Michelle
McCovey-Good
Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Deputy Director of Public Works Tim Bochum,
Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, and Recording Secretary Dawn
Rudder
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 651 Tank Farm Road. ARC 26-13; Review of an approximately 60,000-square foot
building and site development plans including a four -level parking structure for
MindBody; BP-SP zone; Tank Farm Office Park LLC, applicant. (Continued from
April 1, 2013, ARC meeting) (Pam Ricci)
Pam Ricci, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending the adoption of
the Draft Resolution which grants final approval to the project, based on findings and
subject to conditions which she outlined.
Tim Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works, provided an overview of area -wide
circulation and traffic issues and discussed related conditions proposed with the project.
Carol Florence, applicant representative, agreed with staff's recommendation for final
project approval. She asked for consideration of a modification to Condition #3 to allow
for more flexibility with the type of stucco finish and asked for further clarification to the
wording of Condition #44c related to the "dry" recycled water main in Tank Farm Road
across the parcel frontage.
Draft ARC Minutes
May 20, 2013
Page 2
Scott Martin, applicant architect, highlighted changes made to plans and added
information to address direction provided with the conceptual review of the project on
April 1st, which were:
• How the parking lot could accommodate the turning movements of trucks for
loading;
• More detailed elevations and floor plans for the parking structure;
• Reasons for compact spaces to add efficiency to the layout of the parking
structure;
• Actual paint and material samples shown on the colors & materials board; and
• An overview of the public art concept for parking structure walls.
He added the reason for the requested modification of Condition #3 from a smooth
stucco finish to a medium stipple or heavy sand effect was to provide more texture on
both the office building and parking structures.
Commr. Hopkins questioned the reason for the modification. Mr. Martin indicated it was
to further distinguish the vertical elements and to create more variety in the surfaces of
the structures.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Hilding Larson, San Luis Obispo, noted concerns with: the project's impacts to safety
and traffic flow in the area; the timing for the installation of a traffic signal at the project's
main entry driveway off of Tank Farm Road; and the potential that left -turn movements
would be restricted from neighboring properties to the west.
Matt Tacket, San Luis Obispo, mentioned the importance of maintaining traffic safety
with the eventual intensification of the area. He explained that he was in favor of the
MindBody project, but wanted to make sure that traffic impact issues were addressed.
Doug Hoffman, San Luis Obispo, concurred with Mr. Larson about the need for traffic
signal installation with the development of the project. He indicated that there are
issues with truck access and turning movements because of the traffic levels on Tank
Farm Road. He questioned the applicant's plan for accommodating food truck
deliveries.
Tim Bochum acknowledged the public comments and noted that the City would provide
outreach to property owners in the area to involve them in future decisions regarding
right-of-way improvements. In response to Commission questions, he noted the
complexities and unknowns with the traffic signal installation and reasons for the
wording of Condition #24.
There were no further comments made from the public.
Draft ARC Minutes
May 20, 2013
Page 3
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Ehdaie supported the proposed project as designed.
Commr. Hopkins spoke in support of the changes made to the project design since the
last meeting and expressed that project conditions should address traffic concerns
raised by the public as summarized by staff.
Commr. Palazzo also indicated support for the project and asked staff to clarify some of
the proposed conditions related to traffic issues.
Chairperson Duffy also voiced support of this project and is optimistic that the traffic
issues will be dealt with by the City appropriately.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Ehdaie, seconded by Commr. Hopkins, to adopt the draft
resolution__granting final approval to the proiect as recommended with the following
modifications to conditions:
1. Modify the third sentence of Condition No. 7 to read: "Roof light fixtures shall be
located to minimize visibility from any off -site location."
2. Move Condition_ s 40 & 42 to the Transportation section of the resolution.
"
3. Modify__ Condition No. 44c to read: The applicant shall install a "d[y" recycled
water main in Tank Farm Road across the parcel frontage per City Engineering
_tUtilities Director. Any waiver or deferral
Standards and to the satisfaction of the
of construction of said main shall be approved by the City."
AYES: Commrs. Palazzo, Hopkins, Ehdaie, and Duffy
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commrs. Wynn, McCovey-Good, and Curtis
The motion passed on a 4:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
2. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast
Pam Ricci provided a forecast for upcoming agendas. She noted that the June 3`d
meeting would be cancelled.
Draft ARC Minutes
May 20, 2013
Page 4
3. Commission:
There was general discussion between Commissioners and staff regarding the ARC's
role in reviewing traffic impact studies.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Dawn Rudder
Recording Secretary