Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-21-2001 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES May 21, 2001 - 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commrs. Zeljka Howard, Hana Novak, Rob Schultz, Michael Boudreau, Vice-Chair Jim Lopes and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: Commr. Mark Rawson Staff: Associate Planner Whitney McIlvaine PROJECTS: 1. 956 Walnut Street. ARC 168-00; Review of a demolition of an existing structure and construction of a 5,000 square foot office building; height exception to allow a 35-foot high building where a 25-foot high building is allowed; and reduced street yard from 15 feet to 11 feet; O zone; David Scarry, applicant. Whitney McIlvaine Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission continue this project with direction. David Scarry, project architect, gave a history of the project design. John Knight, RRM Architects, discussed building height; visual analysis; zoning regulations regarding building height; and criteria for findings to enable a 35-foot tall building. Steven Stewart, project architect, was open to staff recommendations except the recommendation regarding the street yard setback and stepping back the upper floor. The public hearing was opened. John Attiya objected to the 35-foot building height. Rob Strong recommended that visual study include a two-story option. He felt the design should not have assumed approval of height exception. He mentioned regional ARC Minutes May 21, 2001 Page 2 transportation plans for widening Highway 101. He is concerned this project will set a bad precedent. Kevin Owens, attorney for John Attiya, submitted another view from the freeway. He said the project would change the character of the city as viewed from freeway, and is too much building for the site. Rob Strong submitted a petition opposing the project based on story poles erected on project site. Richard Root, 601 Hillside Court, Arroyo Grande, owns the adjacent 4-plex and supports the proposed project, but is concerned with side yard screening. He has no problem with the height of the building. Joe Nichols owns property at 979 Walnut and is concerned with overall size and mass of street elevation. Would prefer a two-story structure. Jim Brock, 663 Osos Street, is concerned with loss of view and traffic. He is also concerned with the availability of on-street parking and the view from the freeway. Abigail Thom owns the property at the southeast corner of Morro and Peach. She remembers the Economy Motel sign. She likes the design of the Scarry project. She suggested that the Economy Motel be declared historic since it is representative of small motels during the war years. John Freeman is a dentist and prospective tenant and supports the project. Scott Stankey, who prepared the visual exhibits, has a background in architecture and his objective was to be objective. He objects to the submittal of photo mockups submitted by John Attiya’s attorney. John Knight said if you can’t allow 35 feet between area with 35 feet height allowance and freeway, where is 35 feet appropriate? COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Lopes asked John Knight about View 2, and Steven Stewart about the need for exterior stairs. Steven Stewart said that exterior stairs reduce the parking requirement. Rob Strong said two stories is also “compact urban form.” ARC Minutes May 21, 2001 Page 3 COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Schultz said there are lots of exceptions, which indicates the project is overly ambitious. He mentioned that the site is within the downtown area although not within the downtown core and cited General Plan Land Use Element 4.13, 4.16.4 and 4.18. He said he might support height exception without all other exceptions. Commr. Boudreau likes the building and the potential view, and also the use of vertical design elements. Commr. Lopes likes the architecture and stepping back third floor, but doesn’t like the dominance of the exterior stairs. He doesn’t support a height exception because he felt there were privacy impacts on an adjacent apartment project. He objected to a parking lot layout that crowds perimeter landscape planters. He agreed with Commr. Schultz that the project can be redesigned to lower height. Commr. Howard said she was of two minds in that she could see good arguments for and against the height exception. She noted that the development regulations did not take into account mitigating grade differences in this vicinity. She felt the project would set a precedent. She stated that low-density development also has a price. She had no problem with other exceptions, but felt the height exception is clearly the biggest issue. She said that through some redesign, the project could be approved with a lesser height exception. Commr. Novak was okay with the street yard exception, but had a problem with the height exception. She complimented the architectural design. She referenced roles of ARC Commissioners in advisory body handout, noting specifically the goal of the ARC for harmonious esthetic development within the city and preservation of the city’s natural beauty and visual resources. She is concerned with potential widening of Hwy. 101 and elimination of some of the right-of-way landscape screening. She is also concerned with the project’s visual impact on the Hwy. 101 corridor. Commr. Stevenson was concerned with any notion of the ARC’s role as policing protection of private views. He was not concerned with height as view blocking and likes that the building helps to screen parking. He was not objecting to height exception, but he has some other design concerns and felt the doctored-up photos presented by Kevin Owens were inappropriate. Commr. Lopes would support a continuance and felt the ARC should look at impact of height on the ultimate width of the Hwy. 101 corridor. He does not support a height exception. Commr. Boudreau said that making stairs more transparent would help alleviate the impact of building mass. Planting could help screen from freeway. ARC Minutes May 21, 2001 Page 4 Several motions to either approve or deny the project deadlocked in 3-3 votes. On motion by Commr. Schultz, seconded by Commr. Novak, the ARC continued this th item to the June 4 meeting. AYES: Commrs. Novak, Boudreau, Lopes, Stevenson and Schultz NOES: Commr. Howard ABSENT: Commr. Rawson 2. 682 Palm Street. ARC 114-99; Review of revisions to approved plans (parking and building elevation); R-3-H zone; Mission College Preparatory, applicant. John Shoals Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval to the plan revisions with findings and conditions. The public hearing was opened. There were no comments from the public. The public hearing was closed. Brian Starr, project architect, described the changes to the original approved project. He submitted noise information regarding the chiller/boiler equipment. The wall lights will be removed. He explained the structural and fire protection reasons for eliminating the continuous clerestory windows. On motion by Commr. Novak, seconded by Commr. Howard, the ARC granted final approval to the project modifications with direction regarding the smaller windows in the west elevation. AYES: Commrs. Novak, Boudreau, Lopes, Stevenson and Schultz NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Rawson ARC Minutes May 21, 2001 Page 5 3. 140 Hind Lane (formerly 3775 South Higuera Street. ARC 23-01; Review of a 11,968 square foot industrial building, 113,528 square foot office building, and parking on 3.2 acres; M-SP zone; Hind Properties, LLC, applicant. John Shoals Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending that the Commission grant final approval to the project based on findings and subject to conditions. The public hearing was opened. Warren Hamrick, project architect, and Greg Hind, applicant, were present. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Warren Hamrick answered questions regarding the outdoor employee area. Commr. Lopes asked about the backflow preventor in the setback. Commr. Stevenson asked about the color. Commr. Boudreau noted that colored storefronts require painting eventually and aluminum is acceptable. He asked about the braces that support the awning. Commr. Stevenson said that Building B needs articulation and said that color will help. Commr. Lopes suggested that applicant choose a tree with more of a canopy between Buildings A and B, and made recommendations regarding outdoor employee break areas. Commr. Novak suggested that the selection of trees be varied to include evergreens. She would like to see the final landscape plan and deep root barriers used in the project. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Schultz, the ARC granted the project schematic approval with colors and landscaping to return to the Commission for final review and approval. AYES: Commrs. Novak, Boudreau, Lopes, Stevenson, Schultz and Howard NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Rawson ARC Minutes May 21, 2001 Page 6 COMMENT & DISCUSSION: 4. Staff Whitney McIlvaine provided the Commission with an agenda forecast. 5. Commission The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. to a regular meeting of the Architectural Review Commission scheduled for Monday, June 4, 2001, at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Respectfully submitted, Whitney McIlvaine, Recording Secretary