Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-19-2001 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTUAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 19, 2001 ROLL CALL: Present: Commrs. Rob Schultz, Michael Boudreau, Mark Rawson, Zeljka Howard, Hana Novak, Vice-Chair Lopes, and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: None Staff: Associate Planners, Philip Dunsmore, John Shoals, and Michael Codron PUBLIC COMMENTS: Cathy Cole, 206 Via San Blas, (Margarita Villa Homeowners Assoc. Board member) noted the building had been flipped from the original drawing. PROJECTS: 1. 3251 South Higuera Street. ARC 68-01; Review of a new 13,820 sq. ft. commercial building and associated site improvements; C-S-S zone; John Brezden, applicant. Associate Planner John Shoals gave staff report and recommended final approval to the project, based on the findings and subject to the conditions noted in the staff report. Vice-Chair Lopes asked what the minimum width of a city sidewalk is in front of a Service-Commercial zone. Planner Shoals replied it is typically 6-feet. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if the proposal was for a 5- or 6-foot wide sidewalk. Planner Shoals replied the proposal is for an 8-foot wide walkway from the sidewalk to the front of the building to better accommodate existing pedestrian flow. Vice-Chair Lopes questioned if the 5-foot wide public sidewalk is proposed be 6-feet wide. Planner Shoals stated it meet City standards. He noted that the Bus shelter has been redesigned several times to accommodate the sidewalk. He felt this is not a typical bus turnout due to an easement that would allow the sidewalk rather than a straight dedication. Vice-Chair Lopes asked the distance from the shelter to where the bus would stop. Planner Shoals replied 40 feet. The public hearing was opened. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 2 Warren Hamrick, representative, clarified that the project is 11,556 square feet. He noted they did not get a photometric chart on the lighting plan in time for this meeting, but stated they will comply with the lighting standards. He said they have no problem with the 6-foot wide planter being reduced to 4 or 5 feet to increase the landscaping area. He requested some flexibility on the tree well planter at the entryway of the project, explaining that rather than 8-square feet, he would like to go a little smaller to accommodate the bumper overhang. He noted the City Code requires parking stalls next to the wall to be 1-foot wider than the standard stall width, and felt they have enough room to add space to these parking stalls as well as planting around the trash enclosure. He stated they could put some recess panels against the wall for additional articulation at the corner. He noted the fire riser is inside the building and the double check assembly has been provided behind the bus stop, which they intend to screen with landscaping, and that the Public Works Department gave them the bus stop design. Vice-Chair Lopes noted that the recess that is shown on the north wall portion of the building is much lower than the south side, and asked about an alternative approach by shifting the floor area that is in the front of the building. Mr. Hamrick replied he would consider it. Commr. Boudreau asked if the applicant agreed with the conditions as proposed by staff. Mr. Hamrick replied yes. Commr. Schultz asked if there were concerns with Condition 7. Mr. Hamrick replied other than the 8’ x 8’ tree well, he is comfortable with the conditions. Ms. Cole asked if the building is located more than 70-feet back with a landscaped screen and a loading dock with trash enclosure on the north side of the building away from the residences. Mr. Hamrick replied the loading dock is on the east side. Ms. Cole expressed her concern with this location because of the type of business proposed and the hours the loading dock will be utilized. She felt this could create a noise problem with residences that are immediately adjacent. The public hearing was closed. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commr. Lopes asked for clarification of the elevation of the building and asked whether or not there is any landscape screening proposed east of the wall. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 3 Mr. Hamrick replied there are trees along the property line, but there are no tall landscape screens at the rear of the building. Chairperson Stevenson asked what the height of the building is. Mr. Hamrick replied the original design had a slope up the driveway into the project at 20%. This was an error because the City’s standards call for a maximum of 10%, so the building was raised up to accommodate that. Commr. Novak asked what the size of the proposed landscape material is. Mr. Hamrick replied they want to use a minimum of one gallon for ground cover on smaller shrubs, but would like to use 15-gallon minimum for larger trees. Vice-Chair Lopes stated he liked the articulation of the project and felt the building height is a little tall in front, but fits with the building. He felt the bus shelter needs to be in half of the bus turn out, and that there could be more trees to soften the front of the building. Commr. Novak asked if there would be a 10-foot setback at the rear of the property to prevent the encroachment of cars at the overhang, and to insure that there would be a significant, sufficient, and adequate buffer of the landscaping to screen some of the adjacent uses. Chairperson Stevenson asked for comments on the landscaping plan. Commr. Novak agreed with Commr. Lopes’ comments about providing more trees along the eastern elevation adjacent to the building for a greater degree of screening. Commr. Lopes moved to grant final approval for the project based on the findings and subject to the conditions in the report, with the following modifications; condition 3. to read: The building design shall be modified to add architectural treatments on the south side of the building that is visible from the public street. If feasible, the front portion of the building shall be shifted to provide space to allow windows. If a space wide enough for windows cannot be accommodated, the building shall be designed with recesses and landing; Condition 7 change the 8 x 8 to a 6 x 6 feet; Condition 8 to read The site plan shall be revised to provide a minimum 2-foot wide planter on both sides of the trash enclosure. These landscape areas shall be planted with vines and other plant materials to screen the enclosure. Condition 9: add a sentence that the bus shelter shall be located adjacent to the bus turnout in a convenient location next to the bus stop. Condition 14: have the condition speak to a species called Pinus canariensis and suggest adding Pearins Bradford to that. Seconded by Commr. Rawson. Commr. Boudreau suggested that Condition 3 note “windows and/or landscaping” to give the architect some feasibility input. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 4 Add to the motion: If feasible, the front portion of the building shall be shifted to provide space to allow windows. If a space wide enough for windows cannot be accommodated, the building shall be designed with recesses and landing. Revise Condition 21 to read: Additional trees shall be installed adjacent to the north, west and east sides of the building. The final landscape plan shall include trees of sufficient size to screen the building Chairperson Stevenson said he appreciated the building getting “flipped”. He also expressed concern with the use permit dealing with the hours of operation, particularly with regard to loading activity of the current dock. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Rawson, Novak, Boudreau, Schultz, Howard, and Stevenson. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The motion carried 7-0. 2. 900 Southwood Drive. ARC 156-01; Review of proposed batting cage at Sinsheimer park; PF zone; Youth Sports Association, applicant. Associate Planner Phil Dunsmore presented the staff report recommending final approval based on findings and subject to conditions as noted in the staff report. Chairperson Stevenson asked if there is a schedule for the use of this facility. Vice-Chair Lopes felt this is not a good location and asked if there were any other alternate locations discussed. Planner Dunsmore replied that some of the sites are quite heavily sloped and other areas are utilized by the other existing park activities, but other locations could be considered. Paul LeSage, City of SLO Parks and Recreation Director, stated the cages will be open on a set schedule and be supervised by a paid City staff member when open. He agreed that the park is out of the way, but felt they are limited in the space that they have for the project. Garth Kornreich, project architect, stated that most of the money would come from donations, noting this is not just a City project. He felt it necessary to mention this because he felt some of the things staff would be requiring would increase the cost of the project, which will make it more difficult. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Terry Mulian, 2416 Santa Clara Street, stated his main concern is noise. He felt the balls used in the demonstrations were not the same as the ones that will actually be ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 5 used. He asked if the batting cages were going to be mechanical pitchers, and if so, how are they going to be operated. Mr. LeSage stated the balls that were used in the demonstrations are the exact balls that will be used when the cages are in use, and that the City would be providing all of the balls. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if the balls are rubber-coated? Mr. LeSage replied it is a ball designed specifically for batting cages. He stated the pitching machines will be electric with 110 outlets, and they won’t be heard. Ron Regier, Youth Association representative, explained that a combination of balls were used for the demonstration, both regular hardballs and pitching balls, and the neighbors would have heard the “ping” if they were going to be heard. Rich Kriet, Chair of the, Joint Youth Committee, expressed the need for more recreational facilities. He stated there is a lack of places to play, and shares the concern of the cost and some of the conditions that are proposed may have the potential to add significantly to the cost. He felt the aesthetic benefits are questionable, such as the vinyl coated chain link. He encouraged the Commission not to impose the landscaping condition on this project, where 80% of the money is from volunteer organizations. Chairperson Stevenson noted the only place to have batting practice is on the fields, and this would take a load off the fields. Mr. Kriet replied that these fields, as well as fields throughout the City are restricted as far as practice. Bill Thoma, Youth Sport Association, felt this is an important project and they have solicited donations for both volunteers and labor materials. He stated the labor portion allows them to possibly get started before the winter rains begin. Commr. Boudreau asked if the fabric would go around the perimeter of the black fabric. Mr. LeSage replied yes, it would go around the perimeter of each cage. Commr. Boudreau asked the feasibility of the City planting three or five trees in the tree wells so the City truck could water them for the first few years. Mr. LeSage replied that if the Commission found that five trees planted in tree wells was an acceptable compromise, the City would take responsibility. Mr. Kornreich replied they had preferred to go with the precision block because of long- term maintenance. Chairperson Stevenson asked about paint. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 6 Mr. Kornreich replied they would paint it. Commr. Novak asked how far the drinking fountain is in relation to the proposed batting cages. Mr. Kornreich replied there is a drinking fountain at the softball field, which is about 100- feet. Vice-Chair Lopes stated he would like to see the stones that are used painted to look like brick. He asked if the fabric is available in a color other than black. Mr. LeSage replied it is to be UV rated and has to be black. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commr. Boudreau made a motion to grant final approval, based on findings and subject to the conditions noted in the staff report, with condition 3 amended to include galvanized chain link and omit the second sentence, (b) it should be painted block and change the roofing color to a dark if the mesh is black get a black roof with a gray reflective to go with galvanized to make it look like it is part of the same system and #5 that dry trees be planted as part of the condition of approval. Seconded by Commr. Schultz. Vice-Chair Lopes commented that trees should be on the railroad side like large shrubs. Commr. Novak suggested they soften the landscape rather than trying to screen it, so people traveling through this major thoroughfare corridor on the Amtrak see a softscape along with the hardscape. Commr. Boudreau revised his motion to say if they could do more than the dry planting. Mr. LeSage stated that the City is going to relieve the Youth Sports Association of this responsibility, so whatever is decided, they will do. Chairperson Stevenson stated this is a capital improvement. The goals staff has recommended for softening are good, especially from a landscaping standpoint. He stated there is a City component that could bring forward the desire of the Commission to see this as a better landscaping, and possibly be brought forward as a budget review item for the City Council to consider the expense. Commr. Rawson made an amendment to the motion: Condition 4: to require 5 trees and ask the applicant to coordinate and work with the Parks and Recreation Department to pursue the landscaping, as outlined in the plan. The motion maker and seconder both agreed with the amendment made to the motion. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 7 Mr. LeSage stated they have an approved project to renovate the field on the left, which is the softball field. They may not be able to do some of the things they had originally proposed, so they might be able to pursue the plan to make it move forward quicker. AYES: Commrs. Boudreau, Schultz, Novak, Howard, Rawson, Lopes, and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: None The motion carried 7-0. 3. 1464 Auto Park Way. ARC 148-01; Review of a new auto dealership building and associated site improvements; C-S-PD zone; Gordon Giocomazzi, applicant. Associate Planner Phil Dunsmore presented the staff report, noting that the applicant will be changing the project design to develop the site with two separate buildings. He stated staff had not reviewed this site plan and it is very preliminary. He stated he is asking the ARC for preliminary feedback on this particular site plan with the understanding that they will continue the item to a date uncertain. He stated that staff’s recommendations regarding lighting and landscaping may still apply to this new project, and the ARC could perhaps offer recommendations on lighting, signage, landscaping, and possibly a preliminary building design for this site. The public hearing was opened. Carol Florence, applicant’s representative, stated that because of differences between Nissan and BMW there seems to be a consensus that the buildings need to be separate. She noted they will be developing this scheme well beyond what is presented at this meeting. She commented the recommended condition regarding lighting, and expressed her preference of the height of the lights at 25 feet rather than 20 feet. She stated the elimination of the light standard at the front of the building would be revised based on the new site plan building elevations. She voiced her concern on the foot- candles and felt they would be happy with the 75-foot foot-candle. Ms. Florence commented on condition 11, that merchandising for automobiles are different than merchandising for retail market clothing. She stated cars are on the ground and the whole point of floor to ceiling glazing is to be able to see the automobile, so they are not in agreement with this particular condition. She stated the landscape berm at the corner has a short retaining wall that currently exists at the corner of LOVR and Auto Park Way, which elevates this area. She did not feel that shrubbery would help the automobile sales aspects. She stated they are willing to comply with the sign ordinance and are hoping to have signage at both entities. Commr. Boudreau felt the Commission could better review the project and changes if a site plan were provided. Gordon Giocomazzi stated there is an issue between BMW and Nissan, that they want the buildings to stand alone. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 8 PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Novak recommended that they use something more indigenous to this area. Vice-Chair Lopes suggested if palms are used that they be clustered palms. Commr. Howard suggested that the two buildings should work as a group and be friendly to one another, but not necessarily be a copy of one another. Vice-Chair Lopes moved to continue this item to a date uncertain. Seconded by Commr. Boudreau. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Boudreau, Novak, Schultz, Howard, Rawson, and Chairperson Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: None The motion carried 7-0. 4. 1480 Monterey Street. ARC 34-01; Review of a new 4,900 sq. ft. office building; C- R-S zone; Clifford Branch. Applicant. Associate Planner Michael Codron presented staff report recommending final approval. He noted the most significant change to the project is the relocation of the elevator from the rear of the project site to the Monterey Street frontage. Commr. Novak asked how many parking spaces are proposed. Planner Codron replied 14 parking spaces will be provided on-site. He stated there is one parking space that is located in front of the building along Monterey Street. Chairperson Stevenson noted they were required to provide bicycle spaces and now they are going to provide additional parking to offset some pending spaces. Associate Planner Codron replied yes. Chairperson Stevenson asked how many total bicycle spaces will be provided. Associate Planner Codron replied 13 total bicycle spaces; 8 are long-term with lockers. Steve Puglisi, applicant’s representative, stated they agree with the staff report, with the exception of one issue: that they are being asked to dedicate 16-feet on Monterey Street and 10-feet on California Boulevard. He felt that the ARC’s recommendation for taking the entrance to this building from the back and putting it on Monterey Street was ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 9 a better idea than what he had come up with. He stated the drainage structure that runs through the property is a very significant structure and it cannot be reduced, relocated, or abandoned, but it is something they must work with. He stated he does not want to under-build a significant corner in town because of an issue that does not meet the parking requirements. Chairperson Stevenson stated the applicant would have to appeal the dedication to the City Council, and he is not comfortable with not including it. Vice Chair Lopes asked why the new tower on Monterey Street is taller than the tower originally proposed at the rear of the building. Mr. Puglisi replied he did not make it as tall as he could have and felt this is where it should be. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS; Commr. Rawson complimented the building. Commr. Howard also complimented the building. Commr. Rawson felt the railing in the front of the building on the original plans was too dominant. Commr. Novak asked if there is a 10-foot dedication along California Boulevard, if California Boulevard is envisioned to be widened, and if part of the sidewalk would be lost. Associate Planner Codron replied the sidewalk would be reconstructed. Commr. Schultz asked if they had considered a double door in the front. Mr. Puglisi replied the elevator is immediately to the left of this door and the space is very constrained. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if they considered reversing the elevator and the stairway, so the elevator shaft is at the rear of the tower. Vice-Chair Lopes noted there is room for smaller trees in the landscaping. Commr. Rawson moved to grant final approval of the project, based on the findings and subject to the conditions and code requirements noted in the staff report. Seconded by Commr. Howard. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 10 Associate Planner Codron suggested they add a statement to the end of condition 3 that states “to the approval and Public Works Director”, and add Condition 7: Colors and materials shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval prior to building permit issuance for the building. Commr. Lopes made an amendment to the motion to add additional tree planting for fall colors, particularly in front of parking space #10 and consider ground cover as a substitution, but not to hide the building. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Howard, Novak, Boudreau, Lopes, Schultz, and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: None. The motion carried 7-0. 5. 210 Tank Farm Road. ARC 113-01; Review of proposed health club, including two structures totaling 47,000 sq. ft. and outdoor recreation facilities; M-SP zone; Kevin Kennedy, applicant. Michael Codron, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending schematic approval of the proposed building design. He noted eight items that the applicant must address for final approval, which include considering relocating the clubhouse building to the Long Street frontage, designing a landscape area that could be converted to parking in the future, and a revised landscape plan to include provisions for run-off and a street tree plan that would help preserve views of the hillside east of the City. Warren Hamrick, applicant’s representative, stated the Planning Commission requested they explore locating the building to the corner of the site at Tank Farm Road and Long Street. He noted that people need to access this building from the front. If the building was located near the street with parking in the rear, the main façade of the building would be facing the rear parking lot. He noted that access is provided from the street. Mr. Hamrick stated they would like to retain the logo signs. He felt there would be no problem developing a street tree plan and providing shade trees in the parking lot, as well as energy-efficient interior and exterior lighting. He stated they would be open to putting berms and hedges along Long Street and Tank Farm Road to help screen the parking. Commr. Howard asked for the location of the contaminated area on the site. Mr. Hamrick referred to a document which identifies the contaminated area. He explained the contamination is a tar substance that is down a minimum of 15 feet. Commr. Novak asked if they could provide a concrete area around the exercise pool for people to sunbathe. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 11 Kevin Kennedy, applicant, noted there is a concrete deck proposed. Chairperson Stevenson questioned why the Planning Commission was unaware of the contaminated site. Planner Codron noted the information was contained in the initial study. The staff report did not include an evaluation of site plan alternatives because it was not anticipated that the Planning Commission would discuss these issues. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if native palms were proposed. Mr. Hamrick replied yes. Commr. Schultz asked how tall the climbing apparatus would be. Mr. Kennedy replied around 30-feet. Chairperson Stevenson commented on staff’s recommendation of improving water quality from the parking lots and storm water run-off issues. He noted he would like to see best management practices implemented and referred staff and the applicant to a publication on the subject. Mr. Hamrick stated they would be open to this. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bill Almus, Unocal Representative, stated he supports the project as described in the staff report. He stated their interest in this project is related to their extensive land holdings along Tank Farm Road. He introduced Mike Rendina, the professional geologist that has worked on this project on behalf of Unocal for the last 10 years. Chairperson Stevenson asked if Unocal is the current owner of this property. Mr. Almus replied no. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if the contamination is part of the easement that Unocal has. Mr. Almus replied that the contamination parallels an old pipeline that runs under Tank Farm Road. Kim Hatch, Steven Pults and Associates, stated that all the projects he has been involved with on Tank Farm Road have been set back away from the plume. He stated it has been easier to deal with the construction and it has not affected the design qualities of the projects. Chairperson Stevenson discussed the setback from Tank Farm Road to the Weyrich Building. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 12 The public comment was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Vice-Chair Lopes noted the staff report suggests that the clubhouse be moved closer to Long Street, but that he disagreed with this approach. He stated that the different elements of the site plan work as a group and shouldn’t be separated. He suggested clustering the palm trees instead of spacing them, and that each tree well in the parking lot could accommodate two or more trees. Commr. Boudreau asked if the restrooms in the small building are open to everyone, and questioned whether or not a fence is proposed. Mr. Hamrick noted a Health Department requirement that there must be a fence around the pool. Commr. Rawson complimented the applicant on the project. He asked the applicant about alternatives to screen the pool from wind and to provide additional solar access to the pool area. Commr. Novak asked if the applicant had any objection to solar heating the pool. Mr. Kennedy replied they would go that route if it is economically feasible. Chairperson Stevenson commented on the bicycle parking and noted that the long-term parking does not refer to the bike lockers. Mr. Hamrick explained the area is covered. Planner Codron said that he would do additional research on the code requirement for long term bicycle parking for when the project returns to the ARC. Chairperson Stevenson suggested eliminating the last two vehicle parking spaces at the northeast corner of the parking lot so there is more back-up room. Commr. Lopes moved to grant schematic approval based on findings and subject to conditions as noted in the ARC Action Letter. Seconded by Commr. Howard. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Howard, Novak, Boudreau, Schultz, Rawson, and Stevenson NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The motion carried 7-0. 6. 1429 Osos Street. ARC 97-01; Review of rehabilitation and addition to an existing house, construction of a studio apartment, and request for reduced side yard from 5- feet to 2-feet 4-inches; R-2-H zone; Keith Godfrey, applicant. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 13 Associate Planner Codron presented staff report recommending final approval to the project with a reduced side yard, based on findings and subject to conditions as noted in the staff report. Keith Godfrey, applicant, stated he needs this approval to complete his project. Commr. Boudreau asked if the materials and textures are going to be the same as they are now. Mr. Godfrey replied yes. Commr. Rawson asked if the original roofing was wood shingles. Mr. Godfrey replied they are, but are in poor condition, which is why he is attempting to get this approval before winter. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if there is a redwood tree next door. Mr. Godfrey replied there is one on the property line, just off the corner of the building. He noted he was in agreement with all conditions except for the parking. He stated he would be willing to put landscaping there, but didn’t know if he wanted it to be a requirement. Commr. Rawson asked if it was his intention to match the studio to the main house. Mr. Godfrey replied he does not want them to look like the old ones. Commr. Novak asked if he is proposing the same exterior colors. Mr. Godfrey replied yes. Commr. Rawson noted there are no overhangs on the addition, and the original house has overhangs on the rake and the eaves. Mr. Godfrey stated the Fire Department wanted them to eliminate the overhang on the 2-foot setback. Chairperson Stevenson stated that he appreciated that he was not trying to mimic the back unit, but he would like to see some features carried over that connect the two projects. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Joe Macarial, son-in-law to the next-door neighbor, opposed the setback reduction from 5 feet to 2 feet. After much discussion there was no longer a discrepancy on the property line issue. The public hearing was closed. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 14 COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Boudreau moved to grant final approval to the project, and to reduce the side yard based on the findings and subject to the conditions noted in the staff report, with Condition 5 added: “Additional architectural detailing, such as eaves, shall be added to the rear unit, to the approval of the Community Development Director.” Seconded by Commr. Rawson. Planner Codron noted condition 2 should be corrected from one-bedroom to two- bedroom. AYES: Commrs. Boudreau, Rawson, Novak, Schultz, Howard, Lopes, and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: None The motion carried 7-0. 7. 936 Fuller Road. ARC 126-01; Review of three home designs for a residential subdivision; R-1-SP zone; Carole Carlson, applicant. Associate Planner Michael Codron presented staff report recommending schematic approval with direction on building design, wall/fencing treatment and landscaping. Chairperson Stevenson asked where there is a three-car garage situation with a requirement that there will not be more than 26-feet of pavement. He asked if there are recommendations for some other material. Planner Codron replied that it is problematic when there is a three-car garage and the minimum setback is 20-feet setback, making it difficult to do anything in this area. Commr. Novak asked if lot 14 is the retention basin? Associate Planner Codron replied yes. Commr. Novak asked if it is a dual use facility. Planner Codron replied it is adjacent to a creek and it is not dual use. Steve Puglisi, project architect, stated the maximum height of fences on the linear parkway is 6-feet. He said he has never seen a requirement where rear yard landscaping plans must be prepared. He noted there will be six more color schemes. He also noted the driveway widths are shown being 5.5 meters in width, and the maximum width recognized by the engineering standards is 5 meters. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if the garages are going to be stained or coated. Mr. Puglisi replied they are going to be painted. ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 15 Vice Chair Lopes noted houses that have substantial garage frontage dominate the project. Mr. Puglisi stated the greatest consideration in the design layout was the marketing aspect. The opportunity for three-car garages was the solution. Carole Carlson, applicant, stated their research indicates that 60% of the buyers will want to convert the third garage parking space to a bedroom/home office, and this would eliminate that single door. The window provides more of a residential frontage. She stated this is offered as an option to the buyer. Mr. Puglisi stated that the garage/bedroom option is anything but an afterthought. Vice-Chair Lopes noted there could be a parking problem if there is an extra bedroom or a rental unit added. Ms. Carlson stated it is generally used for a home office or a den, rather than a bedroom. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Boudreau noted the right elevation looks like a little portal. Mr. Puglisi stated it is a little portal, and it has a roof over it. Chairperson Stevenson suggested a darker gray color in a similar material for the driveway. Vice-Chair Lopes suggested having a parkway between the curb and the sidewalk so the fruit trees could be planted close to the street rather than in the front yard. Mr. Walters stated the Public Works Department wouldn’t allow this. Planner Codron stated the City standard is the street tree easement and the utility easement is behind the sidewalk and the curb. There was much discussion on the sidewalk and tree issue. Commr. Rawson moved to grant final approval, based on findings consistent with alternative 3 and to have colors and materials returned to staff for final approval; modify condition 11 to read that the driveway shall comply with engineering standards; add condition 12 that the wainscot material and details shall be continued around the sides of the building and continue back to the point of the side yard fencing. Modify condition ARC Minutes November 19, 2001 Page 16 3 to read” the developers/property owners shall submit a prototypical landscape plan. Seconded by Commr. Howard. AYES: Commrs. Rawson, Howard, Novak, Boudreau, Lopes, Schultz, and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: None The motion carried 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irene E. Pierce Recording Secretary