Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-04-2001 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 4, 2001 - 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commrs. Zeljka Howard, Hana Novak, Rob Schultz, Mark Rawson, Michael Boudreau, Vice-Chair Jim Lopes and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: None Staff: Associate Planners John Shoals and Whitney McIlvaine PROJECTS: 1. 771 Foothill Boulevard. ARC 47-01; Review of storefront changes to Albertson’s Grocery Store, and addition of a refrigeration unit at rear of building on loading dock; C-N zone; Albertson’s, applicant. Pam Ricci On motion by Commr. Novak, seconded by Commr. Howard, the ARC unanimously voted to continue this item to a date uncertain with no discussion. AYES: Commrs. Novak, Boudreau, Lopes, Stevenson, Schultz, Howard and Rawson NOES: None 2. 231 Bonetti Drive. ARC 160-00; Review and clarification of previously approved plans for a new 33,000 square foot office/technology building; C-S-SP zone; Fibercoast, LLC, applicant. John Shoals John Shoals, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending that the Commission approve the project changes to be included in the final design based on findings and subject to conditions. Mike Peachy of APS Architects explained that the masonry wall was added for screening. He said moving the loading dock makes it more convenient. Mechanical screening was there but not shown. He clarified plan revisions. The public hearing was opened. ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 2 There were no comments from the public. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Rawson refrained due to a potential conflict of interest. Commr. Stevenson had a question regarding the trash enclosure external material and details. Commr. Lopes had questions on employee deck and access, and the location of the mechanical screen wall. Commr. Howard asked if the architect considered putting the loading dock at the southwest corner of the building. Commr. Lopes liked the building design and felt that employee use areas were nice. He suggested providing a path through the center of the use area, and a low wall or berm in front of the trash enclosure. He felt the plant location is fine, but felt that plant density could be reduced. Commr. Novak suggested considering the addition of detail to the mechanical screen wall. She disagreed with putting a path through the center of the employee area. Commr. Howard said the building is appropriate, but she did not believe a path through the employee outdoor area was a good idea. Commr. Schultz did not have a problem with the building. Commr. Boudreau said the overall patio size was fine and suggested possibly reducing the landscaping. Commr. Stevenson agreed with Commr. Boudreau about the mechanical screening. On motion by Commr. Lopes, seconded by Commr. Stevenson, the ARC granted final approval to the project changes based on a revised finding and modified conditions. AYES: Commrs. Howard, Boudreau, Stevenson, Schultz, Novak and Lopes NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commr. Rawson ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 3 3. 3271 South Higuera Street. ARC 190-00; Review of a new office furniture store; C-S-S zone; Michael Young and Brian Burnel, applicants. John Shoals John Shoals, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval. Val Milosevic, project architect, had a concern with condition #2. He explained why they chose to not provide a connection to adjoining properties. Referring to condition #3, he did not believe items 3b and 3c were consistent with building architecture. Jeff Emrick, project engineer, clarified the grading plan and answered questions on drainage. The public hearing was opened. Kathy Cole expressed concerns with the project and asked for clarification on building setback (distance between the building and residences), building height, grading, wall height, lighting and landscaping (size of trees). She pointed out that many of the existing condominiums have second floor bedrooms that would be impacted by the project. She asked if the location of the trash enclosure, motorcycle spaces and tree on the west side of the building could be switched so the enclosure was further away from the residences. She was concerned about placing a continuous access between the properties at the rear of the building. She did not want to extend access to cars closer to residences. Associate Planner Shoals provided clarification to Ms. Cole's concerns and noted that staff did not support access closer to the residents because it would be a nuisance. Chairman Stevenson asked Jeff Emrick to explain why the rear of the lot had to be graded and what that would mean to the neighbors and project. Jeff Emrick explained the grading plan and answered questions. Mark Wiley noted that the project was modified by placing the building closer to South Higuera and putting more parking at the rear of the site closer to the residents. He was opposed to this layout because it would cause more noise at this critical location. He was also concerned about the location of the roll-up doors and the impacts of loading and unloading on the side of the building. ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 4 Sherry Wright was concerned about the size and location of the trees proposed at the property line between the site and residences. She felt the trees would block sunlight and shade her yard. She preferred having the trees next to the building and not at the common property line. Associate Planner Shoals clarified the types and size of the proposed trees. Associate Planner McIlvaine described the species of tree and its physical characteristics. She noted that the proposed trees would grow to be between 25 and 30 feet and allow light to filter into the adjacent yards. The public hearing closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Novak was confused about trees at the easterly boundary and requested additional information on landscaping size and species. She suggested more landscaping to screen the site. Commr. Howard felt the applicant had generally responded to the ARC's comments. She thanked the applicant for changing the building colors. She and felt moving the building forward was good and there is a trade-off. Commr. Schultz said the applicant did a good job of addressing the ARC's comments. He liked the idea of moving the building over to provide vines on the north side of the building. He did not support raising the existing wall. Commr. Boudreau agreed with the previous comments and supported removing architectural items, but felt the north side could use more articulation. Commr. Lopes agreed with the other comments and supported moving the building south to provide landscaping adjacent to building. He suggested more lights. Commr. Stevenson felt the north elevation needed some treatment. He supported flip- flopping the trash enclosure and motorcycle space. On motion by Commr. Boudreau, seconded by Commr. Rawson, the ARC granted final approval to the project with conditions. AYES: Commrs. Howard, Schultz, Novak, Rawson and Boudreau NOES: Commrs. Stevenson and Lopes ABSENT: None ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 5 4. 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 grant final approval with conditions. Steven Stewart, the project architect, John Knight, the representing planner, and the applicant, David Scarry, were present. John Knight stated the applicant’s request for project approval. The public hearing was opened. John Atiya, the property owner across Walnut Street, and Rob Strong, representative for John Atiya were present. Mr. Strong and Mr. Atiya objected to the proposed building height. The public hearing closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Rawson supports the height exception given the context of site. Commr. Boudreau would like to see a significant tree or trees planted in rear parking lot planter to soften the view of the building from the highway. He supports the building height. Commr. Schultz doesn’t support the height exception because it is contrary to LUE policies 4.13, 4.164, 4.18. He feels the site could be developed successfully with a 2- story building. Commr. Howard supports the height exception and feels that good architecture doesn’t need to be hidden. She did not feel that the project would seriously affect privacy and public views. Commr. Novak does not support the height exception and does not support intrusion of building views on Highway 101. ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 6 Commr. Lopes said that his job is to uphold General Plan policies and that the third floor creates privacy issues. He also felt that the third floor windows exacerbate privacy concerns. Commr. Stevenson liked the project architecture and focused Commission discussion on staff-recommended conditions of approval. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Howard, the ARC granted final approval to the project with conditions. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Boudreau, Stevenson and Howard NOES: Commr. Novak, Lopes and Schultz ABSENT: None 5. 811 and 903 El Capitan Way. ARC 108-00; Review of two new buildings with commercial and residential uses; C-S zone; Covey III (Matt Quaglino), applicant. Whitney McIlvaine Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval with conditions. The public hearing was opened. The public hearing closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: On a vote of 4 to 0 (Commissioners Lopes and Stevenson voting no and Commissioner Rawson refraining), the Commission granted final approval to a mixed use project at the corner of El Capitan and Broad Street. Discussion focused on concerns regarding the parking reduction; the need for additional storage space for the residential units; and building colors. ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 7 6. 2201 Emily Street. ARC/MOD 74-98; Review of new pre-fabricated canopy for truck maintenance; CS-S-H zone; Mountain Valley Express, applicant. Michael Codron Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission grant final approval with conditions. The public hearing was opened. The public hearing closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: On a vote of 6 to 0 (Commissioner Rawson absent), the Commission granted final approval for a canopy structure (16’ high x 24’ wide x 26 ‘ long) for a period of time not to exceed termination of the applicant’s lease or 2 years from the date of the hearing whichever comes first. The Commission was sympathetic to the applicant’s need to provide the mechanic with some form of shelter. The applicant noted that the trucking company will be moving to a new site in Santa Maria once the terminal facility is constructed there. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Howard, the ARC granted final approval to the project with conditions. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Boudreau, Stevenson and Howard NOES: Commr. Novak, Lopes and Schultz ABSENT: None On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Howard, the ARC granted final approval to the project with conditions. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Boudreau, Stevenson and Howard NOES: Commr. Novak, Lopes and Schultz ABSENT: None ARC Minutes June 4, 2001 Page 8 COMMENT & DISCUSSION: 7. Staff Whitney McIlvaine provided the Commission with an agenda forecast. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. to a regular meeting of the Architectural Review Commission scheduled for Monday, June18, 2001, at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Respectfully submitted, John Shoals and Whitney McIlvaine, Recording Secretaries