Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-16-2021 ARC PresentationsArchitectural Review Commission Regular Meeting August 16, 2021 •All attendees enter the meeting muted. •You can rename yourself by following the steps below. •When Public Comment is called for an item you would like to speak on,please raise your virtual hand. •When your name is called,you will be moved to a Panelist.After a brief moment,you will be able to unmute your mic and turn on your video (optional). •Please state your first and last name and address (optional)for the record. •After providing your comments you will be moved back to an Attendee. Directions for Public Comment PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA •If you would like to speak on items NOT ON THE AGENDA,please raise your virtual hand. •When your name is called,you will be moved to a Panelist. •Before you begin speaking,unmute your mic and turn on your video. Please state your First and Last name and address (optional)for the record. •After you complete your comments, you will be moved back to an Attendee. Public Comment At this time,people may address the Commission on items not on the agenda. Items raised are generally referred to staff and,if action by the Commission is necessary,may be scheduled for a future meeting. Item #1 CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1.Minutes of the Architectural Review Commission meeting of July 19,2021. __________________________________________________ Recommendation: Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission meeting of July 19,2021. Item #4a PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 175 Venture Dr. (ARCH-0624-2020) 4.Review of the proposed design and layout for the phased Medium Residential Density (R-2)Component of the Avila Ranch Development Project,consisting of 297 Residential Units;Project Address:175 Venture Dr.;Case No:ARCH-0624-2020;Zone:R- 2;Wathen Castanos Homes,owner/applicant. Staff Presentation By: John Rickenbach, Contract Project Manager Recommendation: Review the proposed project in terms of its consistency with the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP);Avila Ranch Development Plan (ARDP);Community Design Guidelines (CDG);and applicable City Standards and provide comments and recommendations to the Planning Commission. VTTM 3089 Avila Ranch Project 175 Venture Drive ARCH-0624-2020 ARC Presentation for the Avila Ranch Project –R-2 Product Review August 16, 2021 Applicant: Wathen Castanos Homes Representatives: Carol Florence; Reed Onate Requested Feedback from ARC ◼Review the proposed R-2 residential design for consistency with ◼Airport Area Specific Plan ◼Avila Ranch Development Plan ◼Community Design Guidelines ◼Provide Comments and Recommendations to the Planning Commission 6 Previous Approvals ◼Avila Ranch Project was approved in 2017 ◼Development Plan ◼Development Agreement ◼VTTM 3089 ◼Certified Final EIR ◼Overall project was found consistent with City policies, including the Community Design Guidelines 7 Avila Ranch Location within the AASP 8 R-2 Portions of the Avila Ranch Plan Area 9 ◼R-2 covers 27.3 acres of the 150- acre site ◼R-2 developed in Phases 1-3; 297 homes total ◼Phase 1 map under review—179 homes ◼Phases 2 and 3 maps will come later R-2 Product Types and Floor Plans ◼Cluster Units ◼Six floor plans, ranging from 1,609 to 2,273 SF ◼All have 3 bedrooms; most have 2.5 bathrooms ◼Most have a 2-car garage (smaller units have 1-car garage) ◼131 units in Phase 1 (74 over 2,000 SF) ◼Pocket Cottage Units ◼Five floor plans, ranging from 819 to 1,708 SF ◼48 units in Phase 1 (including 13 units at 819 SF; and 25 units over 1,550 SF) ◼Most are 3 BR/2.5 BA; smallest units have 2 BR/1BA ◼Most have a 1-car garage 10 Architectural Styles: Cluster Units 11 Architectural Styles: Pocket Cottage Units 12 Summary of Proposed R-2 Development 13 Development Rendering 14 Development Rendering 15 Fence Height Exception Request ◼Municipal Code section 17.70.070 ◼Allows a maximum wall/fence height of 6 feet along rear and side setbacks or up to 9 feet when combined with a retaining wall. ◼Exceptions to these requirements can be granted for circumstances relating to topography and privacy. ◼Requested Exception ◼Request is to protect the privacy of residential uses ◼Applies to areas adjacent to existing industrial property ◼Would allow for a 6-foot high solid fence on top of a previously approved retaining wall ◼Total height of wall/fence combination would vary from 9-13 feet 16 Fence Height Exception 17 R-2 Design Guidelines -ARDP 18 Discussion Items ◼Key Issues for Discussion ◼Are the proposed site design and building designs consistent with AASP, ARDP and CDG requirements? ◼Is the mix of architectural styles and floor plans appropriate? ◼Are there other design features necessary to ensure substantial conformance with key requirements? 19 Recommendation/Next Steps ◼If ARC recommends approval to the Planning Commission, this could be done with or without recommended conditions or further guidance ◼Planning Commission to consider application based on ARC recommendations 20 Questions and Comments 21 Applicant Presentation By: Carol Florence Dave Kosco Item #4a PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 175 Venture Dr. (ARCH-0624-2020) Applicant: R-2 Land Uses within Phases 1-3 Architectural Review Commission 16 August 2021 Overall Development Plan TO AIRPORT R-1 C-N R-4 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-2 R-2 R-2 TRUST AUTOMATION R-2 PARK A PARK C PARK B PARK E PARK F PARK I PARK H PARK G PARK F OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE OPEN SPACE TO HIGUERACOTTAGE HOMES PHASE 1-48 PHASE 2 –0 PHASE 3 -28 CLUSTER HOMES PHASE 1-131 PHASE 2 –29 PHASE 3 -61 R-1 R-3 COTTAGE: 76 CLUSTER: 221 GRAND TOTAL: 297 TOTAL R-2 HOMES STEVENSON PARK MULTI-USE TRAIL Street Scene Elevations A EARTHWOOD DRIVE (view north) B VENTURE DRIVE (view south) Cluster and Cottage Homes at Paseo Entry Location of Cluster and Cottage Homes along Paseos TRUST AUTOMATION EARTHWOOD DRIVE BUCKLEY ROADVACHELL LANEVENTURE DRIVE 6 & 8 LOT CLUSTER & COTTAGE HOMES 6 & 8 LOT CLUSTER & COTTAGE HOMES REFER TO 6 & 8 LOT ENLARGEMENT 6 & 8 Lot Cluster and Cottage Homes Layout SEE LOT ENLARGEMENT Example of Residential Landscape Architecture Plan Location of Cluster and Cottage 4-Lot TRUST AUTOMATION EARTHWOOD DRIVE BUCKLEY ROADVACHELL LANEVENTURE DRIVE 4-LOT CLUSTER HOMES 4-LOT CLUSTER & COTTAGE HOMES REFER TO 4-LOT ENLARGEMENT Cluster Homes Layout 4-Lot CLUSTER PLAN 1 CLUSTER PLAN 2 CLUSTER PLAN 4 CLUSTER PLAN 3 Location of Vachell Lane Landscape Buffer TRUST AUTOMATION EARTHWOOD DRIVE BUCKLEY ROADVACHELL LANEVENTURE DRIVE REFER TO ENLARGEMENT VACHELL LANE LANDSCAPE BUFFER Vachell Lane Landscape Buffer Cottage Homes along Paseo Cluster Homes along Paseo Buyer’s Choice Character Selection Quality SLO Heritage Design InspirationFunctionality Architectural Styles/R-2 Neighborhoods Area 1 –60% Agrarian +40% = 10% of each of the other styles. Area 2 –60% CA Bungalow/Craftsman +40% = 10% of each of the other styles. Area 3 –60% Mission + 40% = 10% of each of the other styles. Avila Ranch Neighborhoods Source: Avila Ranch Development Plan –Figure 23 Architectural Color & Materials –Spanish (Mission) Architectural Color & Materials -Bungalow Architectural Color & Materials -Craftsman Architectural Color & Materials –Farmhouse (Agrarian) Architectural Color & Materials -Contemporary Architectural Details Fence / Wall Height Exemption On -+ Off-site Improvements and Home Construction Schedules PHASE 1-131 PHASE 2 –29 PHASE 3 -XX LAND DEVELOPMENT Buckley Road Ext Aug 2022 Sewer Lift Station Dec 2021 Buckley Rd Widening Dec 2023 Tank Farm/Higuera Jan 2022 Higuera/ South Complete Suburban Road Ph 1 Complete Vachell Widening Nov 2021 Higuera/Vachell Sept 2021 Multi-Purpose Trail June 2022 HOME CONSTRUCTION Bldg. Permit Plan In process Start Model Homes Nov 2021 Model Opening (6)April 2022 Production Homes March 2022 Occupancy August 2022 Off-site Improvements Questions/Comments? Architectural Review Commission 16 August 2021 PUBLIC COMMENT •If you would like to speak on this item,please raise your virtual hand. •When your name is called,you will be moved to a Panelist. •Before you begin speaking,unmute your mic and turn on your video. Please state your name and address (optional)for the record. •After you complete your comments, you will be moved back to an Attendee. Public Comment Item #4b PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 175 Venture Dr. (ARCH-0624-2020) 4.Review of a Draft Zoning Regulations Amendment,consisting of Draft Objective Design Standards for qualifying housing projects. This project is exempt from environmental review (CEQA).Project address:Citywide;Case#:CODE-0523-2021;Zone:all zones; City of San Luis Obispo,applicant. Staff Presentation By: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner Recommendation: Recommend the proposed draft Objective Design Guidelines to the Planning Commission for review.This action may include recommended revisions or changes to the draft Objective Design Standards. Objective Design Standards August 16, 2021 Housing Element & State Legislation Housing Element Update adopted in November 2020. Housing Element Program 6.22 puts forth that the City will update the municipal code to expand objective design standards within one year of the adoption of the Housing Element Update. This program was included because recent California legislation has been adopted that requires a streamlined,ministerial process or by-right ministerial review for specific,eligible,residential developments. Per State legislation these eligible projects have to be reviewed ministerially against objective standards rather than through the City’s discretionary entitlement process. Eligible Projects Projects that will be reviewed against objective design standards include: Projects that qualify under Government Code Section 65913.4 (SB 35). Transitional and supportive housing (AB 2126). Housing developments in which at least 20% of the units are affordable to lower income households (Housing Element Programs 2.17 and 2.18) Objective Standards Objective standards are a type of regulation that do not require judgement to determine that they have been met. Examples: specific building heights limits, building setbacks from property lines, and a minimum number of parking spaces required for a development project. These are considered “objective standards” because they are numeric and do not require a subjective opinion to determine whether a development project follows those standards. Example Objective Design Standard ODS:Buildings shall use the same colors,materials,and detailing throughout all elevations.Street facing and the most visible elevations may use more architectural details,but colors and materials shall be the same on all elevations. CDG:Designs should demonstrate a consistent use of colors, materials,and detailing throughout all elevations of the building. Elevations which do not directly face a street should not be ignored or receive only minimal architectural treatment.Each building should look like the same building from all sides. Previous Review & Feedback July 29,2021:ARC received a presentation from staff regarding the development of ODS. ARC selected an ARC subcommittee to assist staff with the draft ODS prior to full ARC review. July 21st &July 27th staff met with the ARC subcommittee. Additionally,staff received comments from local professionals. Draft Objective Design Standards Building and Site Design Building Details Roof Designs Massing &Articulation Common &Private Spaces Landscaping Downtown Building Design Building Details Roof Designs Massing &Articulation Other Design Requirements Parking Area Bicycle Parking Areas Pedestrian Access Lighting Fencing Trash Miscellaneous ARC Discussion Items for the ARC to consider include: Are the proposed objective design standards clear? Any concerns in implementing the proposed objective design standards? Should illustrations be added? Is something missing? ARC Discussion Appendix A,page 2 (top): 3.At least two (2)materials shall be used on any building exterior,in addition to any glazing and railings.Any one material must comprise at least 20%of the building’s exterior.Veneers shall turn corners and not expose edges so that finish materials do not appear “thin”,as in the example of “brick”veneer applied to a single building face so that it is obviously only 3-inch thick when viewed from the side. ARC Discussion Appendix A,page 2 (bottom): 2.Overhanging eaves shall extend two (2)feet or more past the supporting walls.This requirement does not apply to gable faces. ARC Discussion Appendix A,page 11 (bottom): 1.All mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally within the proposed buildings.If equipment cannot be located internally due to code requirements,it shall be screened with walls,fencing,or landscaping or a combination these methods consistent with other City standards. 2.Any required backflow preventer and double- check assembly shall be located inside the building within twenty (20)feet of the front property line.Where this is not possible,due to code requirements,the backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard and screened using a combination of paint color,landscaping and a low wall or fence. Recommendation Recommend the proposed draft Objective Design Guidelines to the Planning Commission for review. This action may include revisions or changes to the objective design standards based on ARC direction. Project Review Timeline August 16,2021:Architectural Review Commission Review September 16,2021:Planning Commission Review November 2,2021:City Council Review Item #5 COMMENT & DISCUSSION 5.Staff Updates and Agenda Forecast Senior Planner Shawna Scott will provide an update of upcoming projects and the agenda forecast. ADJOURNMENT The next Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission has been rescheduled to Monday, September 13, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. via teleconference The Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission will resume shortly *Recess in Progress*