Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-06-2000 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES March 6, 2000 - 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Jim Aiken, Lance Parker, Mark Rawson, Jennifer Metz, Charles Stevenson and Jim Lopes Absent: Commr. Zeljka Howard Staff: Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner PUBLIC COMMENT: Richard Krejsa discussed creek setback exceptions and indicated that he wanted a 40- foot setback that was originally considered citywide. He did not want to see a bike path in the setback. Josephine Malone asked how she could contact the Commissioners. She also asked if there was a relationship between City tax revenues and window displays. She does not want to encourage window displays that show women and children in a negative way. PROJECTS: 1. 782 Broad Street. ARC 139-99; Review of a proposal to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct two new single-family residences; R-2 zone; Brad Vernon, applicant. Peggy Mandeville presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval to the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions and code requirements, which she outlined. The public hearing was opened. Carol Florence, applicant’s representative, described the project, explaining the request is to demolish an existing residence and construct two new dwellings, with a setback exception request to allow a reduced side yard from 8.5 feet to 5 feet for one of the residences. Commr. Lopes questioned the street trees and the Japanese maple near the walkway. Commr. Aiken discussed the idea of a “Hollywood driveway” under the single parking space. Matt Whittelsey asked if the existing house has been advertised for relocation. He also asked if there had been a historical photo/document survey of the existing structure. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 2 Brad Vernon discussed painting the existing house and said he would prefer not to because they want to remove it from the site within a year. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Metz stated that no neighbors were in attendance at the meeting and felt that this was a good sign. She also felt that the Japanese Maple is a good choice as well as the Hollywood driveway. Commr. Lopes passed out an excerpt of a document from the City of Fremont. He felt a condition should be added requiring bay windows on the front wall. Commr. Parker stated that the applicant’s had done a great job and he would like to see a Hollywood driveway. Commr. Rawson agreed with Commr. Parker that an outstanding job has been done on the project. Commr. Stevenson agreed with Commrs. Parker and Rawson. Commr. Aiken said that he had nothing to add. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Metz, the ARC granted final approval of the project, per staff recommendations and changes as noted in the staff report, as follows: Findings 1. The proposed project, with the recommended conditions and modifications, complies with property development standards for the R-2 zone. 2. The proposed scale and design of the building will be compatible with surrounding residential uses. 3. The proposed project will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the persons living or working in the vicinity because it is a small residential project that has been designed in a way that minimizes any impacts to adjacent land uses. Reduced Side Yard Findings 4. The property that will be shaded by the excepted development will not be deprived of reasonable solar exposure, considering the topography and zoning. 5. The exception is of a minor nature, involving an insignificant portion of total available solar exposure. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 3 6. No significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are likely to result from the exception. 7. The project will not alter the character of the neighborhood, as there are other properties in the immediate area with multiple residences and similar width side yards. 8. The reduced side yard will improve on-site parking/driveway maneuverability and preserve an existing mature tree. 9. No useful purpose would be achieved by requiring the full side yard. Conditions 1. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans, as amended and approved by the ARC. 2. The applicant shall utilize an alternative foundation design for that portion of Building “B” (the rear residence) that encroaches over the root system and into the foliage drip line of the Coastal Redwood tree. The City Arborist and Community Development Director shall approve the foundation design and construction methods used to install said foundation. 3. All site improvements shown on the approved plans shall be installed in the first phase of the project. Those improvements include: the driveway, parking, landscaping for Building B and street trees. 4. A lot merger is required to eliminate existing property lines through proposed structures, etc. 5. If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources or cultural materials, then construction activities, which may affect them, shall cease until the extent of the resource is determined and the Community Development Director approves appropriate protective measures. The Community Development Director shall be notified of the extent and location of discovered materials so that a qualified archaeologist may record them. If pre-historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor should be called in to work with the archaeologist to document and remove the items. Disposition of artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws. A note concerning these requirements shall be included on the grading and construction plans for the project. 6. A “Hollywood driveway” shall be incorporated into the landscape design in the location of the unenclosed parking space. 7. The applicant shall consider stepping back the second floor of Building A. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 4 8. The applicant shall prepare a photo-documentation of the existing residence in accordance with City guidelines before the structure is removed from the site. Code Requirements 1. A water allocation is required, due to the additional unit. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. 2. Water and Wastewater Impact Fees shall be paid at the time building permits are issued. 3. The subject property is located the “B” flood zone. Therefore, all new structures shall have the finished floor raised at least one foot above the highest grade adjacent to the building footprint. 4. Street trees shall be planted in accordance with City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 5. Traffic impact fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Stevenson, Aiken, Parker, Metz and Lopes NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. 2. 10 Santa Rosa Street. ARC 152-99; Review of a new office building and parking lot improvements; request for creek setback exception; and reduced street yard from 15 feet to 10 feet; O zone; Pilch Family trust, applicant. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval to the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions which she outlined. The Public Hearing was opened. Aaron Kaln, applicant’s representative, described the changes to the project. He noted he wants berming instead of wall (Condition 27, not 3). Brian Starr felt the project would be improving riparian habitat. He also stated that the building design should be stately and elegant with windows that are inset 4-5 inches”. He agreed with the concrete base recommended by staff. The Public Hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Metz stated that the enhancement plan includes the entire property. She felt ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 5 the red trumpet vine within setback should be removed. Commr. Lopes stated that the creek setback line is not accurately shown on the plans, and questioned why the designer didn’t work around the tree in the parking lot. He indicated that he likes the architecture and doesn’t mind it being different from the existing building. He said he prefers a building over parking. He would like to see the outside of setback area redesigned, if approved. He suggested Eucalyptus trees between lots 16 & 17. Commr. Parker did not support the project because he does not see a compelling reason to approve additional encroachment into the creek setback. He therefore recommended denial. Commr. Rawson stated that he likes the architecture and is willing to accept staff’s recommendation. Commr. Stevenson said that it is a beautiful building but the additional findings are extremely tough to make. Commr. Metz stated that she agrees with Commr. Rawson. Commr. Aiken concurred with Commrs. Metz and Rawson. Brian Starr said he wants approval of either this plan or the old plan, but he does not want to redesign the project. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Stevenson, the ARC continued this item to a date uncertain with information for the Commission to consider whether they can make the new creek setback exception findings and bring back a modified staff recommendation. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Rawson, Stevenson, Aiken and Metz NOES: Commr. Parker ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. 3. 3290 Broad Street. ARC 164-99; Review of a proposed 5,000 square foot auto parts store in the C-S-S zone; Autozone, Inc., applicant. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission grant final approval, based on findings and subject to conditions which she outlined. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 6 The public hearing was opened. Dan Gibbs, CEI Engineering representing the applicant, described the changes to the project. Commr. Lopes suggested that the trash enclosure be moved back and to the east. Commr. Rawson asked if the applicant was concerned with any conditions. Commr. Aiken stated that he felt the transformer was in an accessible location. Commr. Metz said that she likes the architecture but would like to see additional ground cover planted. Seeing no members of the public wishing to address this item, the public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Parker stated that he wants to leave the bollards where they are. He likes the architecture and the colors. Commr. Rawson said that the project looks good. It doesn’t need to blend in. He asked if the mass could be broken up with paint treatment. He stated that a white sign would look better; the proposed sign doesn’t add to the building. Commr. Stevenson indicated that he liked the revisions and City staff can work out the details with the applicant. He would like to reduce the apparent mass of the building. Commr. Metz stated that she agrees with staff’s landscape recommendations and the requirement for a temporary groundcover. She also agrees with the commission’s color comments. Commr. Lopes commended applicant for being flexible. Commr. Aiken indicated that attention to tree grouping is important to provide a view through the trees. He felt that it was a nice job. Commr. Parker noted that he disagreed with the public art requirement. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Rawson, the ARC granted approval of the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions, as follows: Findings 1. As conditioned, the proposed project complies with the property development standards in the C-S zone. 2. As conditioned, the proposed project will contribute to the quality of life in San Luis ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 7 Obispo, consistent with goals contained in the City’s Architectural Review Guidelines Conditions 1. The Orcutt Road driveway shall be limited to “right in and right out” traffic movements. This shall be accomplished through the installation of a raised median in Orcutt Road. Project plans shall show the location of the median and lane markings across both of the site’s street frontages. 2. A bicycle slot shall be provided, subject to Caltrans approval, on Broad Street along the western edge of the channeling island to safely accommodate through moving bicyclists. The bicycle slot shall be a minimum of 1.2 meters wide as measured from the face of curb. 3. Vehicle access to Broad Street shall be provided as part of this project, subject to Caltrans approval, through the construction of a common access driveway. If this is not accomplished as part of this project, a traffic study shall be done by a qualified traffic engineer to determine the impacts of project traffic on Orcutt Road given the limitations imposed by Condition #1 above. 4. On-site pedestrian access shall include appropriate ramps that meet State Building Code and ADA standards. Plans do not show the necessary 5 feet wide offer of dedication required along the Broad Street frontage to accommodate a “dedicated right-turn lane” onto eastbound Orcutt Road. 5. Plans must label the southerly property line as “proposed property line” as the line does not exist at this time. Presumably, the proposed parcel map will record prior to a building permit for this portion of the existing parcel. 6. The grading, site and landscaping plans must show the alignment of the existing sewer main and gas main through this site, not just the limits of the respective easements. Grading impacts must be evaluated and approved by the gas company. The sewer main is very deep (13-17 ft. deep) through the site, which will not be adversely affected by the proposed grading. 7. The applicant must provide field information regarding the current depths of the high pressure gas main and the public sewer main through this site. The Southern California Gas Company has made it very clear that additional fill over the existing gas main will not be permitted if it places the gas main too deep. Additional fill proposed over the existing sewer main must also be reviewed. 8. Orcutt Rd. shall be widened and improved to provide curbs and gutter, 1.5m detached sidewalk (except 2m integral sidewalk at creek crossing), landscaped parkway, street paveout, street lighting, signing and striping in accordance with the revised setback line widening (additional 9 ft. beyond the prior 84 ft. dedicated R/W) established by the City Council, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The 9 ft dedication and an additional 5 ft. to accommodate a dedicated right turn lane into the site have already been granted to the City under an ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 8 agreement. A median precluding left turns into or out of the site shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Said median shall include appropriate sleeves for future irrigation facilities. 9. The creek culvert below Orcutt Road must be extended to accommodate the widened location of frontage improvements. The culvert shall have a natural bottom. The City will reimburse the property owner in accordance with the existing agreement between the City and the property owner (Mrs. Stickler). Prior to any reimbursement, necessary funds must be budgeted under the City's Capital Improvement Program. The extension of the creek culvert will require review and approval by the Army Corps of Engineers and Department of Fish and Game. 10. The developer shall dedicate an additional five feet of public right-of-way along Broad St. to accommodate a dedicated right-turn lane from northbound Broad St. onto Orcutt Rd. and a deceleration lane for northbound Broad St. traffic entering the site. 11. Broad St. shall be improved with curbs, gutters, 6' sidewalks within a landscape parkway, street paveout to new frontage improvements, street lighting, signing and striping, including additional R/W necessary to provide a deceleration lane along a portion of the Broad St. frontage, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. The landscaped median must be extended to the corner of Orcutt Rd. and modified to allow left turns into the site at the southerly driveway only, also to the approval of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. Provisions are required that will preclude left turn exiting onto Broad Street to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. 12. The developer shall relocate existing traffic signals as needed to accommodate project improvements, including pedestrian protection, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, Director of Public Works and Caltrans, consistent with the Scenic Roadways section of the Circulation Element which states that traffic signals with long mast arms should be discouraged along scenic roadways. 13. Pedestrian crossings must be enhanced at the Broad/Orcutt intersection. The median island should be constructed to include pedestrian landings/refuge. Specific lane widths and median island configurations for the Broad/Orcutt intersection must be worked out to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. 14. Vehicular access rights along Orcutt Rd. and Broad St. shall be dedicated to the City and State, except where driveways are approved. 15. A complete striping plan showing vehicular and bike lane widths and other appropriate dimensions must be submitted by the project traffic engineer, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Caltrans. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 9 16. The driveway ramp serving this site from Orcutt Road shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard No. 2110 (plan indicates a street type entrance with H/C ramps on each side. 17. Common driveway and reciprocal parking easements & agreements must be recorded, to allow for the proposed shared circulation and parking across future lot lines. If the applicant does not provide a “second access” to this site via Broad Street a “focused” traffic study must be prepared, which analyzes the impacts of right-turn ingress and egress only for this project pending completion of the common driveway with adjacent southerly property development. 18. The developer shall pay this project's pro-rata share of the Orcutt/UPRR overpass (grade separation) and the Orcutt/UPRR intersection modifications (based on projected traffic generation) prior to issuance of a building permit, as determined by the Director of Public Works. Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Credit will be given for intersection modifications, as allowed by the applicable ordinance. 19. The plans indicate that the detention basin is proposed to discharge across the property line and into the creek channel to the east. The proposed drain pipe and related improvements should be constructed within the subject property, or an easement from the adjacent property owner is required. 20. A hydraulic analysis shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted for review and approval by the Director of Public Works. Said report shall address general site drainage, creek capacities and shall indicate how the project will be designed to comply with the City’s drainage policies. The proposed development shall not create a situation which increases the flooding potential downstream. 21. Erosion control and energy dissipater is required at the point of discharge from the proposed drain pipe. Both a State Fish & Game Dept. and an Army Corp of Engineers permits are required prior to any work in the creek channel. 22. Future site development shall be designed so that the creek is preserved in a natural state to the maximum extent feasible. 23. Plans for the Broad-Orcutt intersection shall be provided that show all modifications to the intersection (such as lane markings, curb lines, stop bars, crosswalks, pedestrian refuge island, etc.) 24. Drainage conveyed into the creek shall be designed to avoid excessive erosion and water quality contamination. 25. The areas adjacent to the creeks (as delineated on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps) are "B" flood zones and shall be shown on the final plans. Improvements within the "B" flood zones shall have the finished floor elevations "at least one foot above the adjacent grade". If the hydraulic analysis results in greater depths and/or areas of flooding during a 100- yr. storm, finished floors shall be raised to ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 10 one (1) ft. above the calculated 100-yr storm level, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 26. Any necessary clearing of existing creek and drainage channels, including tree pruning or removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, the Natural Resources Manager, Army Corp of Engineers and the Dept. of Fish & Game. Final plans for architectural review shall accurately show any riparian vegetation to be removed and the area proposed for its replacement. 27. A creek vegetation preservation plan shall be required as part of all site development plans. Said plans shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works and the Natural Resources Manager for review and approval. This plan shall be implemented and inspected by the Natural Resources Manager prior to the start of any clearing or grading of the site. A site restoration agreement and bond/guarantee may be required prior to the start of any work or during the course of this project, at the discretion of the Natural Resources Manager. 28. The proposed detention basin shall be designed to appear as a natural feature rather than man-made to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager, City Engineer and Community Development Director. Additionally, the basin shall be designed with less than 2:1 slopes that do not require fencing. 29. Prior to any clearing, grading or construction work on the site, snow fencing marking the edge of allowed construction activity shall be erected and approved by the Natural Resources Manager. Additionally, the Natural Resources Manager or his designee shall attend a project pre-construction meeting to confirm that the project contractors are aware of the creek setback and boundaries of any construction activities. 30. The project landscape plan shall be revised to provide parking lot screening through the use of mounding and additional planting materials (a min. of 36” in height), provide a split rail fence in front of the retaining wall to prohibit foot traffic, provide riparian plant materials between the proposed development and the creek (to the approval of the Natural Resources Manager), provide an approximate 6 foot wide landscape strip at the back of the loading area, replace the sidewalk on the Orcutt Road side of the building with landscaping, increase the length of the landscape planters in front of the building and relocate the two trees away from the building to the edge of the walkway to provide room for their canopies. Temporary ground cover shall be used in conjunction with the permanent groundcover shown on project plans to provide complete plant coverage of the ground until the permanent groundcovers mature. Project trees shall be placed in clusters rather than uniform spacing with the intent as to not block views of Islay Hill and the background consistent with the Scenic Roadway section of the Circulation Element. 31. The project site plan shall be revised to relocate the trash enclosure outside of the street yard and reduce it in size to what is actually needed (currently a 13’ x 20’ ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 11 enclosure is proposed), reduce the minimum width of the walkway in front of the building from 8 feet to 6 feet, and relocate the transformer pad to the loading area and appropriately screen it. 32. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a plan illustrating truck delivery routes that do not block project circulation or public streets to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Community Development Director. If conflicts arise, delivery hours or the size of delivery trucks may be restricted. 33. The building wall planes below the tile roofs should be painted a darker color to visually break up the building mass. 34. To reduce potential negative impacts to the creek and associated riparian habitat, no activities or storage shall take place between the rear of buildings/parking areas and the creek. 35. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from the public right of way through the use of parapet walls, screen walls and/or landscape materials complimentary to the building design to the approval of the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. Because the development is located at or below street grade additional screening of the roof through the use of a higher parapet may be necessary. 36. Bollards at the rear of the loading zone shall either be eliminated or redesigned as an architectural feature (ie. incorporated in the split rail fence) rather than a safety feature. 37. Long and short term bicycle parking shall be provided per City regulations. Short term bicycle parking shall be located near the building entrance. 38. Exterior lighting shall be directed downward and not spill onto adjoining properties. The maximum height of lighting equipment and supporting structures, including fixture(s), standard and base, shall not be higher than twenty feet above the finished grade approved as part of this permit. Lighting levels measured at finished grade directly beneath the fixture shall not exceed 10 footcandles. Any lighting near the creek shall be minimized (maximum 3 footcandles), low profile and to the approval of the Natural Resources Manager. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall receive Community Development Department approval of a master sign program for the center with individual letters used for walls signs in lieu of cabinet signs. Said sign program shall comply with the City’s Sign Regulations. Sign color shall be in the darker value of red rather than orange or yellow. 40. All mitigation measures associated with ER 164-99/193-99 shall apply to this project. These mitigation measures include but are not limited to the requirement for oil and sand separators at each drain inlet, steps to follow if archaeological resources are found during construction, the preparation of a creek ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 12 stabilization/riparian restoration habitat plan, and the requirement for on-site recycling. 41. The use of exterior loud speakers, telephone bells, music or similar devices shall be prohibited. 42. Site retaining walls shall be constructed of materials consistent with the architecture of the center and shall have a decorative cap. 43. Each use shall require approval of an administrative use permit in accordance with the Special Considerations overlay zone. 44. Parking lot signage restricting users of the lot shall be prohibited. 45. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a temporary circulation plan to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Community Development Director. 46. The applicant shall consider providing a commemorative art installation in recognition of the Pacific Coast Railway on this site or in conjunction with the adjoining Village Marketplace. Code Requirements 1. Street trees are required to be planted per City Standards (the number of trees is determined by one tree per 35 linear feet of street frontage) at time of development. No Liquid Ambers are to be planted within 8 ft. of the sidewalk on Broad Street or Orcutt Rd. frontages. Chinese Pistache and Coast Live Oaks to be planted on the Orcutt Rd. frontage. No existing trees are to be removed, except as required to construct the Orcutt Rd. widening improvements. 2. Traffic impact fees and inclusionary housing fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. Water and wastewater impact fees are required to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. It is necessary to be certain that all City facilities fall within proposed easements or property deeded to the City. 5. A water allocation is required, due to the new buildings. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City’s Water Conservation division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits. Water Conservation can be reached by calling 781- 7258. The cost of retrofitting is directly credited against the project’s Water Impact ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 13 Fees, at a rate of $150 per bathroom retrofitted. 6. Water and Wastewater Impact Fees shall be paid at the time building permits are issued. Both the Water and the Wastewater Impact Fees are based on the size of the water meter serving each parcel. 7. Other requirements will apply if the property includes a potentially active well. 8. Certain uses may warrant industrial waste/wastewater pretreatment requirements. These issues shall be coordinated with the City’s Industrial Waste Coordinator, Dale Karnes, at 781-7425. 9. Each parcel is to have its own separate water and wastewater service laterals. 10. The plans shall be revised to align driveways with the existing sewer main, or the sewer main shall be relocated to the proposed driveways. Relocation of the existing sewer main shall be accomplished using the City’s standard minimum pipe size of 8”, constructed to current City standards. 11. The south wall of building A appears to be within 10 feet of the adjacent property line. If so, the windows at this location must be constructed of fire-resistive assemblies (wired glass in steel frame). Setback from this property line to building B is also not dimensioned; similar opening protection may be required at this exterior wall. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Rawson, Stevenson, Aiken, Parker and Metz NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. 4. 3210 Broad Street. ARC 193-99; Review of commercial shell buildings and creek setback exception to allow development within a portion of the crek setback; C-S-S zone; Dan Lemburg, applicant. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending the Commission grant final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions which she outlined. The public hearing was opened. Warren Hamrick, applicant’s representative, described the project revisions. Commr. Metz noted that she supports idea of temporary groundcover. Commr. Lopes stated that he appreciated the seating plan and perhaps the use of benches with backs. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 14 Seeing no members of the public wishing to address this item, the public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Rawson stated that it was a great project. Commr. Stevenson said that it was a great project given the constraints of the design. He felt the applicant qualify for findings supporting the creek setback exception. Commr. Metz suggested a temporary groundcover and gorilla hair. She would also like to relocate the trees in the easement and /or place in pots. Commr. Lopes said he was pleased with the architecture and wanted the architect to consider a focal point between buildings A and B. Commr. Parker stated that he enjoyed the architecture and would like to see the applicant work out the colors with staff. Commr. Rawson stated that he wanted to include the new creek setback exception findings. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Parker, the ARC granted final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements, as follows: Findings 1. As conditioned, the proposed project complies with the property development standards in the C-S zone. 2. As conditioned, the proposed creek setback exception will minimize impacts to scenic resources, water quality and riparian habitat including opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest and movement. 3. There are circumstances applying to this creekside site, including size, shape, topography and development constraints which do not generally apply to land in the vicinity with the same zoning, that would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity with the same zoning. 4. As conditioned, the proposed project will contribute to the quality of life in San Luis Obispo, consistent with goals contained in the City’s Architectural Review Guidelines. 5. Site development cannot be accomplished with a redesign of the project because the site drops off rapidly from the street and is occupied by major public utility lines and a creek corridor. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 15 6. Redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the property because the site drops off rapidly from the street and is occupied by major public utility lines and a creek corridor. Conditions 1. All conditions of the tentative parcel map for this site shall apply to this development. A street-type driveway shall be provided on Broad Street to facilitate easier access onto the site. 2. The grading, site and landscaping plans shall show the alignment of the existing sewer main and gas main through this site, not just the limits of the respective easements. Grading impacts must be evaluated and approved by the gas company. The sewer main is very deep (13-17 ft. deep) through the site, which will not be adversely affected by the proposed grading. 3. Trees shall not be planted within 10 feet of each side of the existing sewer main or gas main. 4. Common driveway and reciprocal parking easements & agreements must be recorded, to allow for the proposed shared circulation and parking across future lot lines. 5. Required parking shall be provided in accordance with use permit approved for this site. To ensure adequate parking is provided, the applicant shall be responsible for providing a running total of the site’s parking requirements and allocations with the submittal of any Business tax certificate, Planning or Building permit applications. 6. Future site development shall be designed so that the creek is preserved in a natural state to the maximum extent feasible. 7. Drainage conveyed into the creek shall be designed to avoid excessive erosion and water quality contamination. 8. The areas adjacent to the creeks (as delineated on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps) are "B" flood zones and shall be shown on the final plans. Improvements within the "B" flood zones shall have the finished floor elevations "at least one foot above the adjacent grade". If the hydraulic analysis results in greater depths and/or areas of flooding during a 100- yr. storm, finished floors shall be raised to one (1) ft. above the calculated 100-yr storm level, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 9. Any necessary clearing of existing creek and drainage channels, including tree pruning or removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, the Natural Resources Manager, Army Corp of Engineers and the Dept. of Fish & Game. Final plans for architectural review shall accurately show any riparian vegetation to be removed and the area proposed for its replacement. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 16 10. A creek vegetation preservation plan shall be required as part of all site development plans. Said plans shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works and the Natural Resources Manager for review and approval. This plan shall be implemented and inspected by the Natural Resources Manager prior to the start of any clearing or grading of the site. A site restoration agreement and bond/guarantee may be required prior to the start of any work or during the course of this project, at the discretion of the Natural Resources Manager. 11. The proposed detention basin located on Lots 2 and 3 shall be designed to appear as a natural feature rather than man-made to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager, City Engineer and Community Development Director. Additionally, the basin shall be designed with less than 2:1 slopes that do not require fencing. 12. Prior to any clearing, grading or construction work on the site, snow fencing marking the edge of allowed construction activity shall be erected and approved by the Natural Resources Manager. Additionally, the Natural Resources Manager or his designee shall attend a project pre-construction meeting to confirm that the project contractors are aware of the creek setback and boundaries of any construction activities. 13. The project landscape plan shall be revised to relocate trees that are proposed within the utility easement into pots or other locations, provide parking lot screening through the use of mounding and additional planting materials (a min. of 36” in height), increase the street yard landscape planter on Lot 4 to a minimum of 7.5 feet (5 foot landscape strip and 2.5 foot landscaped parking overhang), provide a split rail fence along the creek setback line to prohibit foot traffic, include 3 seating benches with backs, indicate a contour graded slope with the inclusion of mounding, provide riparian plant materials between the proposed development, provide larger plantings at the project entry driveway, arrange plantings so as not to appear in rows, and indicate on plants that landscape planters within the parking area are a minimum of 5 feet wide not including curbing. Temporary ground cover shall be used in conjunction with the permanent groundcover shown on project plans to provide complete plant coverage of the ground until the permanent groundcovers mature. Project trees shall be placed in clusters rather than uniform spacing with the intent as to not block fees of Islay Hill and the background consistent with the Scenic Roadway section of the Circulation Element. 14. The project site plan shall be revised to relocate the trash enclosure on Lot 3 outside of the creek setback and replace with landscaping, reduce the walkway at the rear of Building B to 4 feet in width and eliminate any remaining paving at the rear of the buildings, and provide a common accessible path from Broad Street without eliminating landscaping. 15. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a plan illustrating truck delivery routes that do not block project circulation or public streets to the ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 17 satisfaction of the City Engineer and Community Development Director. If conflicts arise, delivery hours or the size of delivery trucks may be restricted. 16. The proposed architectural design shall be revised to provide additional articulation of the sides of Building C and indicate roof overhangs or other form of shade/shadow detail where the roofs meet the building walls. 17. The project shall include a space for some form of public art between Building A and Bin remembrance of the Pacific Coast railway once located through the site. 18. To reduce potential negative impacts to the creek and associated riparian habitat, no activities or storage shall take place between the rear of buildings/parking areas and the creek. 19. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from the public right of way through the use of parapet walls, screen walls and/or landscape materials complimentary to the building design to the approval of the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. Because the development is located at or below street grade additional screening of the roof through the use of a higher parapet may be necessary. 20. The proposed parking lot design shall comply with the City’s Parking and Driveway Standards. 21. Long and short term bicycle parking shall be provided per City regulations. Short term bicycle parking shall be scattered throughout the site near entrances to tenant spaces. 22. Exterior lighting shall be directed downward and not spill onto adjoining properties. The maximum height of lighting equipment and supporting structures, including fixture(s), standard and base, shall not be higher than twenty feet above the finished grade approved as part of this permit. Lighting levels measured at finished grade directly beneath the fixture shall not exceed 10 footcandles. Any lighting near the creek shall be minimized (maximum of 3 footcandles), low profile and to the approval of the Natural Resources Manager. 23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall receive Community Development Department approval of a master sign program for the center with individual letters used for walls signs in lieu of cabinet signs. Said sign program shall comply with the City’s Sign Regulations. 24. The property owner shall be responsible for providing a running total of the site’s parking requirements and allocations with the submittal of any business tax certificate or application for City permit. 25. All mitigation measures associated with ER 164-99/193-99 shall apply to this project. These mitigation measures include but are not limited to the requirement for oil and sand separators at each drain inlet, steps to follow if archaeological ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 18 resources are found during construction, the preparation of a creek stabilization/riparian restoration habitat plan, and the requirement for on-site recycling. 26. The use of exterior loud speakers, telephone bells, music or similar devices shall be prohibited. 27. Each use shall require approval of an administrative use permit in accordance with the Special Considerations overlay zone. Code Requirements 1. Street trees are required to be planted per City Standards (the number of trees is determined by one tree per 35 linear feet of street frontage) at time of development. No Liquid Ambers are to be planted within 8 ft. of the sidewalk on Broad Street or Orcutt Rd. frontages. Chinese Pistache and Coast Live Oaks to be planted on the Orcutt Rd. frontage. No existing trees are to be removed, except as required to construct the Orcutt Rd. widening improvements. 2. Traffic impact fees and inclusionary housing fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. Water and wastewater impact fees are required to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. It is necessary to be certain that all City facilities fall within proposed easements or property deeded to the City. 5. A water allocation is required, due to the new buildings. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City’s Water Conservation division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits. Water Conservation can be reached by calling 781- 7258. The cost of retrofitting is directly credited against the project’s Water Impact Fees, at a rate of $150 per bathroom retrofitted. 6. Water and Wastewater Impact Fees shall be paid at the time building permits are issued. Both the Water and the Wastewater Impact Fees are based on the size of the water meter serving each parcel. 7. Other requirements will apply if the property includes a potentially active well. 8. Certain uses may warrant industrial waste/wastewater pretreatment requirements. These issues shall be coordinated with the City’s Industrial Waste Coordinator, Dale Karnes, at 781-7425. 9. Each parcel is to have its own separate water and wastewater service laterals. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 19 10. The plans shall be revised to align driveways with the existing sewer main, or the sewer main shall be relocated to the proposed driveways. Relocation of the existing sewer main shall be accomplished using the City’s standard minimum pipe size of 8”, constructed to current City standards. 11. The south wall of building A appears to be within 10 feet of the adjacent property line. If so, the windows at this location must be constructed of fire-resistive assemblies (wired glass in steel frame). Setback from this property line to building B is also not dimensioned; similar opening protection may be required at this exterior wall. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Stevenson, Aiker, Parker, Metz and Lopes NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed. 5. 433 Pacific Street. ARC 1-00; Review of a new 19-unit senior apartment project; R-4 zone; SLO Non-Profit Housing Corporation, applicant. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending denial of the project, based on findings which she outlined. The public hearing was opened. George Moylen, applicant, noted that the Housing Authority owns the property. He stated that the project does not include tile roofs, and that it is 2 X 6 construction. He noted the balconies provide private areas for the residents. He felt it would be difficult to provide separate storage within each unit and that it will be difficult to maintain. It was his opinion that there is enough storage within each unit. Jeff Dillon, applicant’s representative, discussed the setback exceptions, colors, and wainscoting. He noted his preference for solid balconies. Commr. Stevenson inquired about the design approach. Jeff Dillon responded that he had considered three stories but felt that it was not appropriate in the neighborhood. He noted the incorporation of a common patio. Commr. Stevenson had questions regarding the lounge area and kitchenette. Jeff Dillon responded that the lounge area and kitchenette was common area. George Moylen, stated that at 1600 Toro Street (senior project) the garden is not used and the tenants do not use the common facilities. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 20 Commr. Metz suggested reducing the lounge area and increasing the outside area. Mike English, 463 ½ Pacific, stated that he would like to keep the trees and would like to shift the building and parking. He said he likes the color. Carol Johnson, 463 Pacific, supported moving the building and said she likes the colors. Lynn, 463 Pacific, wants to make sure the units are affordable once built. Steve Flurry said he likes the colors. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commr. Stevenson stated that he opposed the project because there was no space for people inside or outside. He felt that some thoughtful revisions need to be made. He also felt that the overall building is rather large. Commr. Metz concurred with Commr. Stevenson and noted her preference for more outdoor space. She said she would not have ruled out a three-story design. Commr. Lopes agreed with Commr. Stevenson, and noted the project is in an R-4 zone. He passed out an excerpt and discussed the arcade, entrance transition, roof garden, front door bench, and entrance room. He noted that the lounge is different from entry with kitchen, noting that it would be a place to gather. He felt a 6-foot wide balcony is the minimum needed, and the side of the balcony should have a window. Commr. Parker stated that he likes shiplap siding because it helps to break up the mass. He would not support a three-story building. He felt the need to break up roof to look smaller. He thought a 19-unit, two-story structure would be appropriate. Commr. Rawson stated that he was pleased when he first looked at this project. Commr. Aiken stated that it appears as a large building and he would like to see an effort to reduce the roof by moving the building and make more outdoor usable space. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Parker, the ARC approved the street setback exception to 10-feet on Carmel Street and to 12.5 feet on Pacific Street, AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Aiken and Parker NOES: Commrs. Stevenson, Metz and Lopes ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion failed (tie vote). The public hearing was reopened. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 21 After the first motion failed, the following discussion occurred. Commr. Lopes suggested continuing the item with direction to reduce the roof mass; consider additional kitchen facilities; relocate the lounge within the building; have a balcony feature incorporated which is 6-feet wide and a window at street grade at Pacific Street; consider bringing the building down to the Pacific Street grade. Commr. Lopes felt that as much as affordable housing is desired, a compromise is needed. Commr. Metz stated the towing area needs to be relocated to the corner, street, or other outdoor area. Commr. Stevenson felt that more thought could be given to design. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Stevenson, the ARC continued action on the project to a date uncertain, with direction to the applicant to explore the following ideas: 1. Redesign the project to accommodate the proposed density, but relocate the lounge space to be detached from the entryway and to provide views out onto the street (preferably the street corner). The lounge space should include kitchen facilities. 2. Provide outdoor space on any level for residents to enjoy with southern exposure and buffering from the parking lot. A detail of this design should be prepared for Commission review. rd 3. Vary the building roof line (possibly with the addition of a 3 story) to break up the building mass. AYES: Commrs. Stevenson, Aiken, Metz and Lopes NOES: Commrs. Rawson and Parker ABSENT: Commr. Howard The motion passed on a 4:2 vote. 6. 3440 South Higuera Street. ARC 176-99; Review of a one-story, 12,700 square foot commercial service building next to a creek; and request for creek setback exception; C-S-S zone; San Luis Creek Associates, applicant. Continue to March 20, 2000. There was no discussion. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 22 7. 1273 Stafford Street. ARC 10-00; Review of proposed exterior changes to an apartment to accommodate an attic conversion; R-2 zone; Steve Farrario, applicant. Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending final approval of the project, based on findings and subject to conditions, which she outlined. The public hearing was opened. Steve Ferrario stated that the tenants have to acknowledge that the apartment is a two- bedroom unit, and that he will sign and record a covenant stating that the attic space would not be used as a bedroom. Isabelle Marques felt that it was inappropriate to approve the request since the original project approval showed the attic for storage, rather than added living area. Terry Lee, 525 Kentucky, spoke against the project, citing concerns with added noise, density, and parking. Dorris Johnson, 510 Kentucky, spoke in opposition to the request. She noted the tenants she has spoken to want storage. She felt that the attic should be retained for storage. She said that parking was an issue and the City should take responsibility for neighborhood concerns. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS Jennifer Metz discussed the recommended covenant agreement, noting that it was an effective way to control the use of the room. Jim Lopes agreed with Jennifer Metz regarding the covenant, but had concerns with the use of the space because of its size. Lance Parker recommended denial of the project. He was concerned that future property owners may not honor the restrictions of the covenant. Mark Rawson stated that he could see both sides of the issue. He felt that a larger space makes it more desirable to use for a sleeping area. Charles Stevenson stated that he is also unsure about his position on this project. He indicated concerns that the space could easily be used as a bedroom. Jim Aiken suggested that an open railing to the living room be added, and no closet at the back of the stairs to make the attic space better meet its intended use as a study. ARC Minutes March 6, 2000 Page 23 On motion by Commr. Parker, seconded by Commr. Lopes, the ARC denied the attic conversion, and condition the project to record a Conditions of Use Agreement identifying the layout and number of dwelling units and bedrooms allowed by the site’s zoning and acknowledging that the attic space shall not be converted to a bedroom without prior Community Development Department approvals and compliance with the City’s Zoning Regulations including density and parking requirements. AYES: Commrs. Parker, Lopes, Rawson, Stevenson and Aiken NOES: Commrs. Metz ABSENT: Commr. Howard This denial is based on the fact that that the project was originally approved with the understanding that this area would remain as attic space and that later conversion of such spaces would be precedent setting. The motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. to a regular meeting of the Architectural Review Commission, scheduled for Monday, March 20, 2000 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Interview for ARC will be held on March 21, 2000 at a Regular Meeting of the City Council. Respectfully Submitted, Peggy Mandeville Recording Secretary