Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-06-2001 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES August 6, 2001 ROLL CALL: Present: Commrs. Rob Schultz, Michael Boudreau, Mark Rawson, Vice-Chair Jim Lopes and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: Commrs. Zeljka Howard, Hana Novak Staff: Associate Planners Whitney McIlvaine and Pamela Ricci PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mary Beth Schroeder spoke about a petition she circulated concerning Mitchell Park. She, and the 1000+ registered voters who signed the petition, do not want the park disturbed in any manner. She also stated that the people of the community want the Senior Center moved to Emerson Park. Chairperson Stevenson stated that the th discussion concerning Mitchell Park was continued until the August 20 meeting of the ARC. No further comments from the public. PROJECTS: 1. 11855 Los Osos Valley Road. ARC 88-01; Review of a public art proposal for the DeVaul Ranch subdivision; Hamish Marshall, applicant. Pamela Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission find the proposed sculpture consistent with the City’s guidelines for public art. The public hearing was opened. Artist Jim Jacobson presented a model of the proposed sculpture. He discussed the historical significance of the design noting each design represents an historical event of the DeVaul Ranch property. He explained that the tower design appealed to him as an entry statement. He added that he was attempting for the sculpture to contain “Greene & Greene” craftsman-style elements. He noted that he was looking at a brick facade for the base and a powder-coated metal support structure with bronze squares. Hamish Marshall asked for some additional flexibility regarding the height of the proposed sculpture. He wanted the option of raising the structure to not exceed 18 feet by using 20-inch squares instead of 18-inch squares. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 2 Rade Radakovich asked if the brick would be Clinker brick and asked how big the stone squares would be. Mr. Marshall replied that it would not be Clinker brick since it is hard to find, and the size of the squares would be about 18-20 inches. Ann Ream was pleased with the selection process and noted that there was a great response from the art community. The public hearing was closed. Commission Comments Commr. Lopes suggested that the sculpture be oriented to better parallel the adjacent streets. Commr. Rawson asked why the order of the squares varied form one side to the next. Jim Jacobson replied that it was intended to add interest. Commr. Stevenson suggested that the design of the base be less square and more in the Greene & Greene style. There was a general discussion by the Commission on the height, materials, orientation, and lighting of the sculpture, and the landscaping surrounding it. On motion by Commr. Boudreau, seconded by Commr. Schultz, the ARC granted final approval to the DeVaul ranch public art proposal, with the addendum of allowing the structure to be a maximum of 18 feet in height. AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak 2. 755 Capitolio Way. ARC MI 42-01; Appeal of the Director’s approval allowing installation of six panel antennas on an existing PG&E transmission tower, with an enclosed and screened support facility at the ground level; C-S zone; Sprint PCS, applicant/appellant. Pamela Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending the Commission uphold the applicant’s appeal, and approve the antenna installation and equipment enclosure design, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. She noted that the conditions of approval reflect the change in the location of the enclosure and equipment, but generally are reiterated from the director’s previous approval. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 3 Gordon Bell, Bell and Associates, representing Sprint, PCS, discussed the reason for filing the appeal which was based on the strict requirements set by PG&E concerning landscaping and equipment used on their easements. It was discovered that they could not work with the City’s original condition, which was to move their equipment outside the tower footprint. Sprint PCS designed a facility which would work under the tower footprint. Alpine PCS submitted an application which led to the City’s desire to have Alpine and Sprint co-locate. During that process, it was discovered that it was not possible to co-locate and meet the creek set back and fit all their equipment under the tower footprint. They have been working with Alpine engineers and believe they have come up with a solution, which would allow for co-location of both carriers under the tower. Sprint PCS would like to ensure that their rights under the original entitlement were preserved and that they be allowed to move forward with a single carrier facility if in fact a co-location agreement could not be agreed upon. The public hearing was opened. Heather Fornay, Alpine, PCS, 3220 So. Higuera, Suite 102, supported staying with the first condition of approval and to continue pursuing the co-location with Sprint, PCS. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: General comments were made concerning the positive results of Sprint PCS and Alpine PCS being located in one spot. Discussion took place concerning access to the site and vegetation surrounding the site. On motion by Commr. Boudreau, seconded by Commr. Rawson, the ARC upheld the appeal and approved the project, as conditioned with the following modifications: To Condition (1), shall state that if the final project proposes to not have co-location, it shall include language to the Community Development Director as to why it is technically infeasible to co-locate. To Condition (9), add Natural Resources Manager for approval of the landscaping. AYES: Commrs. Stevenson, Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson and Lopes NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak 3. Citywide. ARC 42-00; Review of draft design guidelines for warehouse retail and large-scale commercial projects; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (To be continued to August 20, 2001) This item was continued to the August 20, 2001 meeting, without discussion ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 4 4. 140 Hind Lane. ARC 23-01; Review of 11,968 sq. ft. industrial building; a 13,528 sq. ft. office building; and parking of 3.2 acres; M-SP zone; Hind Properties, LLC, applicant. Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending final approval, based on three findings and subject to 11 conditions. Discussion was held concerning the 11 conditions recommended by staff. Commr. Lopes questioned whether the City Code has particular standards concerning turf. Whitney McIlvaine replied that there were no set standards. Greg Moore and Warren Hamrick, submitted information concerning lighting, which meets the requirements of being within the Airport Land Use area. They felt they could meet the City’s ordinance requirements. They have reviewed the staff report felt that conditions 3 and 4 are of concern. Construction has begun with a building permit already secured for the area of the trash enclosures. It was noted they could move one of the enclosures over, but would prefer not to lose the space for parking. The landscape strip on both sides of the trash enclosure can also be accomplished if the parking spaces were narrowed. The parking spaces as shown are 9 feet, which is more than the minimum required of 8-feet 7-1/4 inches. They would prefer not to make the spaces narrower, or lose the spaces by planting. The public hearing was opened. No public comment. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Further discussion was held by Commissioners concerning landscaping and benches. Commr. Boudreau commented that the architect has responded well to the concerns of Staff. No further questions or comments from Commissioners. On motion by Commr. Rawson, seconded by Commr. Lopes, the ARC granted final approval based on the findings and subject to the conditions noted in the staff report, with the following modifications: Condition 3. The parking spaces and southern trash enclosures near Building “A” shall be rearranged by moving the enclosure north one parking space to comply with the Parking and Driveway Standards of one landscape planter after every six parking spaces. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 5 Condition 4. Plant vines, such as creeping fig, on the eastern side the two trash enclosures and train them to grow around the sides of the enclosures. Add Condition 12. Use a bench for the employee break areas that has a back on it. Add Condition 13. Substitute evergreen pear trees for the proposed ornamental plum trees and plant trees at the ends of the landscape peninsulas so that their canopies provide more shade in the parking lot. AYES: Commrs. Stevenson, Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson and Lopes NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak 5. 261 Sandercock Street. ARC 30-01; Review of four new residential studio units on a vacant lot; R-2 zone; Greg Moore, applicant. Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending final approval, based on five findings and subject to nine conditions. The architect for the project, Ernie Kim, was present to answer questions. Discussion was held concerning the landscaping and parking locations. Parking was relocated to the rear of the building. The appearance of the building was changed to reflect a more residential feel. The direction of the entryway was changed and a wrap-around porch was added in keeping with the neighborhood. The roofline was adjusted by placing a type of shed roof over the back patio. Landscaping photo examples were distributed for perusal. Concern by staff that tenants of the upper apartments had no private space, was addressed by creating a semi-enclosed stair with storage underneath. A new proposal for the placement and appearance of the trash enclosure was submitted. No further questions of Staff. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Rade Radakovich, 1853 Partridge Drive, discussed the back side of the building, suggesting that the architect “pop out” the second floor, positioning an overhang with beams coming out to break up the back and not make it so flat. Commr. Stevenson felt that because it is so close to the setback, it would not be feasible, but that it was a good idea. The public hearing was closed. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 6 COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Stevenson said that the re-design accomplished a lot of what he had been looking for, that it has a nice residential feel to it. The landscape planter could go either way, wider or narrower. Commr. Schultz commented that project has gone well and the architect has done a great job meeting the concerns of the Commission. Mr. Kim suggested that raising the covered patio roof in the back so they start right at the bottom of the roof, and from the side view, the roofs would be slightly above the fence line and therefore seen better. Further discussion was held by Commissioners concerning the roofline, and landscaping along the fence and surrounding the building. Mr. Kim submitted photos of similar landscaping projects, and said he is willing to work with the Commission to develop a landscape design agreeable to all. Commr. Stevenson suggested introducing some color (i.e. sand color) to the concrete to cut the glare inherent in most concrete layout. Commr Rawson made a motion to grant final approval per staff recommendations. Seconded by Commr. Schultz. Further discussion ensued concerning the trash enclosure and landscaping. Commr. Lopes suggested additional tree choices, something that would grow faster and provide a canopy. Commr. Rawson amended original motion to include the following conditions: Condition 10. Substitute a faster growing more open-canopy tree as a substitute for Magnolias. Condition 11. Add additional trees along the west and north property lines. Condition 12. Use a color or texture in the concrete driveway to break up its expanse and reduce glare. No further questions or comments from Commissioners. AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 7 6. 3290 Broad Street. ARC/PR 164-99; Review of site plan and new building designs for commercial buildings at the corner of Broad Street and Orcutt Road; C- S-S zone; Dan Lemburg, applicant. Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She explained that the original project for the site was approved for Auto Zone, but they did not follow through with the original plans. The project currently presented for review is a whole new project consisting of two separate buildings: 3,000 sq. ft. and 6,500 sq. ft. There is substantial grade to the site. A creek runs through the rear of the site and there are easements running through the middle of the site. Color, materials, and building design, in staff’s opinion, will hopefully work better with the previous design. Color sheets were circulated to the commissioners. There is a tower element, which is a nice landmark design and staff suggested it be used as a clock tower. Planner McIlvaine noted a critical element to the site is the creek setback. The footprint of the building is closer to the setback area. There is a concern about a drain line, which drains part of the site into the detention basin, which runs through the creek setback. Staff recommended reducing the depth/width of the building to enable the drain line to not be in the setback, and also to enable the detention basin to be something less than a 2 to 1 slope, which was a condition of approval on the previous project. Given the easements through the site, it was noted that there are several trees on the landscape plan, which could never actually be planted. Staff recommended losing a parking space to place landscaping for screening in the parking area, and moving the motorcycle spaces out of the setback area. She noted that there are questions about the turf and trees along Broad Street. She recommended approval of the project, based on findings and subject to 30 conditions, many which were applied to the previous project. Commr. Stevenson expressed concern about bicyclists and safety issues. Ms. McIlvaine suggested the best course of action would be to have Public Works and Transportation review the lane configuration. Commr. Lopes asked if pictures were taken of the site. Ms. McIlvaine sent photos, which were taken of Broad Street looking down Orcutt Road. The concern was that trees planted at the site might block the scenic view. The suggestion was made for trees to provide relief to pedestrians walking along the street. Commr. Lopes questioned whether the integral sidewalk was required. Ms. McIlvaine said that an integral sidewalk was approved as part of the subdivision of the site. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 8 Commr. Lopes asked if the City could require that tree wells to be in the sidewalk. Ms. McIlvaine said not with a 6-foot sidewalk. No further questions of staff. Warren Hamrick commented about the view corridor. He said he would prefer not to have trees on the corner. The trees planned for the site would grow to about 12 feet. The building was sunk below street level so that people could see the rest of the center and give the site a three-dimensional view. Responding to conditions: Condition 1: Larger cornice moldings – they will match others proposed. There are no proposed trellis features. No problem with architectural embellishments. Condition 2: Replace at least two of the windows with a clock face. Because of cost and maintenance issues, preferred to go with windows or vents. The tower is a design element, which serves no particular function other than to provide a three-dimensional view to the project. Condition 3: Replacing parking space with plantings. The setback along Orcutt Road is 5 feet. The proposed parking space is 9 feet, well within requirements. Planting a hedge would be fine. Parking provided exceeds zone requirements. Condition 7: Grading of creek setback. Suggestion to cut 8 feet off the building is not economically feasible. Could run a drain line between the edge of the building and creek setback. Condition 8: Provide two motorcycle parking spaces outside the planter along Orcutt Road. Would prefer to simply locate motorcycle parking outside the 5-foot setback. Condition 15: Basin with a slope of 3 to 1, or less. We are required to place a fence along there. It will be a split rail fence. If condition 19 is followed to eliminate the rear exits from the building and eliminate the walkway, the basin can be enlarged to go up to within 3 to 4 feet of the building without cutting off the building. Condition 17: Re-locate the trash enclosure outside the street yard and reduce in size to what is actually needed. The enclosure as shown, was designed to serve two buildings for both trash and recycling, and is in excess of zone requirements. The public hearing was opened. There was no public comment, and the public hearing was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Boudreau commented on the good design and said he liked the project, and that the proportions are good. He supported the project. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 9 Commr. Schultz liked the project overall. He felt the clock tower could be shorter. He also felt the applicant would have to make the drain issue work because of the creek setback. Commr. Lopes suggested a mission style design to the building. He discussed a cornice line to make it less Victorian. He felt if the tower had a vent or a cutout, it might be more pleasing to the eye. If the building could be notched out by the utility room, it could provide the drainage area needed. He disagreed with staff about using trees in the front corner area and did not feel a trellis was necessary. He noted that removal of a parking space near Orcutt Road would be a great opportunity to have a Mediterranean garden appearance. Further discussion concerning plantings and canopy trees took place. Commr. Rawson liked the project. He did not favor changing the window on the tower to a vent, and questioned staff concerning the trash enclosure and whether it meets the setback requirements. Ms. McIlvaine replied that the enclosure does meet the setback requirements, and that it is a really large trash enclosure. Also, at least one of the motorcycle spaces should be removed. Warren Hamrick suggested making a smaller trash enclosure and moving it to the right in order to put in conforming motorcycle parking. Commr. Rawson concurred with most of the other conditions. He did not feel the tower needs a clock. Commr. Stevenson felt the project is well done. He was not convinced the tower is the correct element. He said he likes the feature, but felt it should be a bit lower or to one side. He concurred with Commr. Lopes concerning the Mediterranean palette for landscaping, by perhaps adding a boulder or two. A motion was made by Commr. Lopes to grant final approval of the project with the findings and conditions noted in the staff report modified as follows: Finding 3, will not wall off scenic roadways and block views. Condition 2; Redesign of the Tower element, consider a shorter, wider tower with rooflines to match the building roofline. Consider other features beside a window, such as; cutouts, vents or a clock. Strike the last sentence of condition 2. Condition 3: The project landscape plan shall be revised to include Mediterranean or early California plant palette and occasional boulders. Continue with the rest of the sentence to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Strike trees in the fifth line. Replacing the turf with shrubs and ground cover would be fine. Add; “such as Holly Oak” to the use of large evergreen trees in the parking lot. Add “The density of tree planting shall be carefully managed so that views through the site are retained at maximum feasible, while still achieving other goals such as screening and shade.” ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 10 Condition 8: Relocate the motorcycle bays outside of the setback area. Condition 15: Add “by the use of rolled sod” after man-made on line two. Add Condition 31: Consider adding a pedestrian walk from Broad Street to the first building. Commr. Boudreau seconded. Discussion held concerning Condition 3. Commr. Lopes modified Condition 3; after Community Development Director, strike the word “to”. Then, start the second sentence to read “ Provide parking lot screening through the use of plant material of varying heights along Orcutt Rd. (Stop the sentence) Take out the rest of the sentence up to “eliminate the use of turf . . .” Also, take out the word trees, before shrubs and groundcover. Condition 7: Keep the first sentence and remove sentence two. Discussion concerning lighting and benches. Condition 32: Consider other bench materials and use of benches with backs. No further questions or comments from Commissioners. AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak 7. 0 Higuera Street. ARC 143-00; Study session to explore alternatives for a new telecommunication antenna and ancillary facilities on the South Street Hills; C/OS- 40 zone; Alpine PCS, applicant. Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She explained that the City has received an application to place a new antenna and support facility on top of South Street Hills. The application has changed somewhat over time in terms of what was really being proposed to be put up there. Initially it was a 60 ft. monopole and equipment surrounded by chain link. It evolved into a shorter monopole for now with approval for a 60-foot monopole later. The project includes a partially underground equipment shelter, which will be larger than the current equipment shelter. Commr. Stevenson suggested visiting the site before discussing the plans. He said he would like to see a comprehensive, long-term plan. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 11 Ms. McIlvaine continued with report. She noted the essential point is that we are at a critical point in this particular site. There is this application and another at a lower level of review, but still entails a set of antennas on some existing poles and equipment. There are residents objecting to the use of the access. Basically it is impassable in the winter. She noted there are both access and aesthetic issues and that staff is not prepared to make a recommendation at this time. No further questions of staff. Mr. Mark Savage, Alpine PCS, 3220 S. Higuera Street, submitted initial plan objectives: 1) to preserve the natural beauty of the community, 2) eliminate, if possible, the unsightly aspects of existing structures and 3) enhance the natural landscape. There was discussion concerning why the site is ideal for transmission of signal for local PCS use and design concepts to minimize visual impact. Efforts were concentrated on the existing radio station. There are a number of different ways to hide or disguise equipment. One option is to build small outcroppings echoing the look of existing rocky outcroppings. Another option would be to build a water tank to cover, or disguise the equipment; the antenna could be placed flush against the tank. It was noted that PG&E was not allowing companies to locate on their distribution poles, but would allow locating on transmission lines. They have not given a definitive answer as to whether the requirements have changed recently. The last option would be to build a rocky outcropping to hide equipment. This could be built to accommodate another carrier, but it was requested that a decision be made soon. The applicant was willing to locate on an existing structure if it would speed up the process. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Lopes asked what is the shortest antenna that can be effective? Mr. Savage replied that usually six feet but it must start two feet off the ground, so 8 to 10 feet is better. Commr. Lopes asked if they had considered using a light, lattice frame. There was discussion concerning lattice frames and visibility. Commr. Boudreau asked for clarification of the proposal. Mr. Savage replied that their concern was to work towards a compromise agreeable to existing companies on the hill, neighbors to the site and the City of San Luis Obispo. The public hearing was opened. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 12 Landis Everson, 198 Loma Bonita, said he lives right near the access gate. He noted the property is besieged by diesel trucks at all hours of the day and night. He was concerned about more buildings bringing more traffic to endure. The Condominium Association has asked that the access road be closed. Gail Rosenberger, 2444 Sendero Court, noted that when the project was initially proposed for the emergency services tower, many people felt that it was an acceptable tradeoff. At that time the cell industry had not exploded as it has today. She asked what the total build-out capacity of the site is. She felt that other buildings on this site need to be taken into consideration, as well as other issues such as, screening, visibility, height issues, co-location, possible abandonment and obsolescence of the site. She said she hoped that staff and applicant will go forward in a manner that will be more amenable to everyone. John King, neighbor on adjoining property, said he owns acreage below the hill (referred to as Margarita Annexation). He was concerned with the amount of antennas allocated to the Spangler property, and about the proliferation of antenna structures in general. He noted his willingness to allocate/appoint some of his property to help solve the problem. He explained he was working with TACIT in Arroyo Grande, using fence posts (depending on the gradient) to locate a signal. Mr. King noted the easement across his property was given to the City of San Luis Obispo, provided that the Fire Department hide their building, which had not been done. He also noted that others have used and graded the easement road without permission. He showed a drawing of the Margarita specific plan. Discussion concerning hill grading, saddlebacks and coverage area took place. Mr. King said he is willing to assist as he can, but felt that solutions must be reached that accommodate everyone. Mr. Mike Spangler, property owner of tower site, felt there was much opportunity because of technological changes. This project is known as a boomer site, which is becoming obsolete. He explained the need for additional antennas. He noted they want to come lower on the hill, but add more antennas. He recommended berming to raise the silhouette at the hill and screening the equipment. He felt there is no reason to see antennas on the site, in his opinion, and felt the City has a major responsibility to help solve the view-shed problem and develop solutions. Mr. Spangler noted the carriers have a time-constraint problem. He suggested allowing the carriers to go on the mono-poles, paying an in-lieu fee to mitigate the site at some future time when the ARC, the Planning Commission and the City Council finally decides what they want to do to make this a master site that would totally clean up the view shed. He felt this is a master plan problem. Ms. Jean Markowitz, Cumbre Court expressed concerned about what in happening on the hill. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 13 Mr. Larry Stabler, lives south of the South Street hill. He felt the site is already overbooked. He felt proper steps to upgrade and maintain the site have not been followed, as far as re-seeding. Some paint colors have worked well, the rock wall situation is a good step, but is very rectilinear and would like to see it changed. He felt large equipment has damaged the site and the access road, and showed a picture of the truck and the road. He noted that the rains from last winter have eroded the road. He said he saw a crane on the hill and was concerned about access. He was also concerned about property values and would like to see alternate sites considered. He felt the plans should incorporate plants onto site. Mr. Mark Savage addressed the issue of trucks on the hill. AT&T apparently has a generator running on diesel fuel. He said they have tried to improve the hill for the future. Planned access is once a quarter unless an emergency arises. He was concerned about abandonment, and would rather take down the antenna than abandoning. The public hearing was closed. There was discussion concerning fees, screening devices, antenna heights and a master plan for the site. Commr. Stevenson called for a motion to continue to a future date, and take no formal action tonight, noting his desire to visit the site. Mr. Savage questioned whether Alpine’s plan could proceed with an interim solution and dovetail with whatever the future master plan would be. Commr. Stevenson felt that short-term approval may be possible, but would prefer to visit the site before making any decisions. Commr. Lopes felt all the comments were good points to be used to develop a master plan, i.e., build up capacity at the site, appearance issues, screening, antenna height, how to achieve co-location, technology, how to deal with abandonment, ways to mitigate existing development, and possible payment of fees. He felt it would be good to look at alternate sites as well. Commr. Stevenson requested Whitney McIlvaine to look into selecting a date to visit the site, prior to the next meeting of August 20th. Commr. Lopes moved to continue this item to a date uncertain with direction to staff to prepare a scope for a Master Plan for the South Street Hill, to include several possibilities that have been discussed tonight, consider the list of points made collectively, ultimate extent of use on South Street Hill and how future and existing development can be accommodated and mitigated. Commr. Schultz seconded. No further questions or comments from Commissioners. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 14 AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: Minutes from May 21, 2001. On motion by Commr. Boudreau to approve the minutes as amended. Commr. Schultz seconded. AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak Staff gave an Agenda forecast. Commr. Stevenson discussed his meeting with Steven Peterson, Chairman of the Planning Commission concerning a joint meeting of the ARC and Planning Commission to discuss issues of coordination and vision for the future. Commr. Schultz moved to plan a joint meeting with the Planning Commission. Seconded by Commr. Lopes. AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak Discussion of the ARC budget request took place. On motion by Commr. Lopes to agendize ARC budget request and Council-adopted goals for a discussion. Second by Commr. Schultz. AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak Commr. Schultz made a motion to invite the City’s arborist, Todd Martin, to come to a meeting of the ARC to discuss reasoning for current selection and/or removal of trees, criteria for street trees, historical perspectives, tree wells, and his feelings concerning treescapes. Motion by Commr. Boudreau to invite Todd Martin to a future meeting for a discussion of tree selection. Second by Commr. Rawson. ARC Minutes August 6, 2001 Page 15 AYES: Commrs. Schultz, Boudreau, Rawson, Lopes and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard and Novak The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nora O’Donnell, Recording Secretary