Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-2002 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTUAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2002 ROLL CALL: Present: Commrs. Zeljka Howard, Allen Root, Jim Lopes, and Chairperson Charles Stevenson. Absent: Commrs. Michael Boudreau, Mark Rawson, Rob Schultz. Staff: Deputy Community Development Director Michael Draze, Associate Planner Michael Codron, and Recording Secretary Irene Pierce. Allen Root was sworn in as a new Commissioner for the ARC by Lee Price, City Clerk. ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES: The Commission had a unanimous vote to have all Commissioners present before approving or amending the minutes of February 4, 2002. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Josephine Malone, SLO, commented on the graphics of the Design Guideline and noted that the process will be here when they move forward on the graphic regulation. 1. Citywide. ARC 42-00; Review of Chapter 5 of the Airport Area Specific Plan; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. Deputy Community Development Director Michael Draze presented the staff report to discuss the revised version of Chapter 5 (Community Design) of the Airport Area Specific Plan. The Commissioners made individual comments on the Airport Area Specific Plan. Vice-Chair Lopes commented on page 5-17 and suggested some guidance on what preference the City has on providing pedestrian walkways between sites. There was discussion on easements between walkways. Commr. Howard suggested they change the language to “walkways should be provided”. Vice-Chair Lopes commented on page 5-19, and suggested highlighting the policy for protecting scenic view. He also suggested that the visual cone be measured at 60% instead of 50% on 5-20. There was much discussion on what the percentage should be with the visual cone along Tank Farm Road and where the cone should be taken from. The Commissioners concurred on the 60% visual cone threshold from across the street. Vice-Chair Lopes suggested the same 60% on Broad Street. He also suggested a paragraph be added to note that there be additional features such as plant materials in ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 2 medians and parkways on 5-23. He suggested taking out “as seen from” on 5-20, under th Tank Farm. He commented on 5-3 (4 bullet) that says “are” discouraged rather than “should be” discouraged. Chairperson Stevenson commented about the site design on 5-13 and suggested they put nd people in the illustrations. He commented on 5-41 (2 bullet) that a parenthesis be added that says except for additional height. Commr. Howard moved to recommend the Airport Areas Specific Plan, Chapter 5 (Design Standards) as modified, be recommended to the Planning Commission. Seconded by Vice-Chair Lopes. AYES: Commrs. Howard, Lopes, Root, and Chairperson Stevenson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commrs. Rawson, Schultz, Boudreau ABSTAIN: None. The motion carried 4-0. 2. 1128 Garden Street. ARC MOD 20-01; Review of changes to an approved mixed-use building; C-C-H zone; Robert and Dora Carpenter, applicants. Associate Planner Michael Codron presented the staff report, recommending approval of the building modifications, based on findings, and subject to one condition. Vice-Chair Lopes asked staff if they were approving the parapet and not the finial. Planner Codron explained that staff is not recommending that the finial be retained. Thomas Brajkovich, project architect, explained the main changes are to eliminate the roof terrace, except for the stairway, which would maintain the roof access and simplify the parapet at the top, as well as changing the front elevation. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if the applicant agrees with the staff’s recommendations. Mr. Brajkovich replied yes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Howard expressed that she liked the project, but preferred the original. Chairperson Stevenson asked if the doors are the same material as proposed before. Mr. Brajkovich replied yes. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 3 Vice-Chair Lopes asked if they are aluminum. Mr. Brajkovich replied yes. Vice-Chair Lopes moved that they approve the building modifications based on the findings and subject to the condition list in the staff report. Seconded by Commr. Root. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Root, Howard, and Chair Stevenson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commrs. Rawson, Schultz, and Boudreau. ABSTAIN: None. The motion carried 4-0. 3. 1541, 1545, 1549, 1553 and 1563 Huckleberry Street. ARC MOD 26-00; Review of a modification to add decks to an approved ARC design, and possible building height exception; R-1-SP zone; R.W. Hertel, applicant. Associate Planner Michael Codron presented the staff report, recommending approval of the revised landscape plans at the rear of lots 27 through 31 in Tract 1750, per ARC direction. Chairperson Stevenson questioned the project architect on the wood lattice structure that would be supporting this project and asked if there is a better material they could recommend. He asked who would be maintaining the space below. Planner Codron suggested that it could be added to the Homeowners Associations requirements. Michael Cripe, Oasis Associates, explained what kind of material the lattice is made of and noted he would like to stay away from plastic materials. He explained they would like it to match the other wood items on the house and the plant material would take over. Chairperson Stevenson asked if the lattice would be painted. Mr. Cripe replied it would be painted to match the house. Mr. Cripe explained there is a portion of the fence that would be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Vice-Chair Lopes asked what kind of trees are in the row. Mr. Cripe replied Quercus suber. Vice-Chair Lopes suggested there be some Sycamore trees in the configuration instead of the Liquidambars. Chairperson Stevenson suggested they have some language that is recorded with the property so there would be reference in this preliminary hearing that would indicate their responsibility to maintain the landscaping in a healthy condition and the replacement of trees that is necessary to assure the goal. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 4 Planner Codron replied this would be more affective than a three-year review. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Root commented on the lattice fencing and asked what the mechanism would be to keep it from falling down or falling away from the building. Mr. Cripe explained it is structurally designed to last 16 years. Vice-Chair Lopes asked how they are attached. Mr. Cripe explained they are pinned on the bottom. Chairperson Stevenson noted the key to structurally sound lattice is that it is properly assembled and attached, which could split the wood fairly easy if the nails were too close together. It is essential to also have proper painting on it to protect it from drying out. Vice-Chair Lopes moved to approve the revised landscape plan at the rear elevations of house designs on lots 27 through 31 based on the findings and subject to the conditions in the staff report, with the addition of Condition 5: Plant material for the vine shall be an evergreen aggressive type of vine with varied colored choices between properties; and add condition 6: The trellis shall be painted to match the wall color and the applicant shall plant four Sycamore trees in place of Liquidambars, as previously approved, to keep from blocking the views of the houses. Seconded by Commr. Howard. Chairperson Stevenson added an amendment to the motion to have a condition that the landscaping be maintained in a healthy condition on what the number and type of plant material specifies and should be replaced as necessary. Planner Codron stated the developer shall enter into a covenant agreement with the City to provide for maintenance of landscaping as approved by the ARC. The motion maker and the seconder agreed to the amendment. AYES: Commr. Lopes, Howard, Root, and Chairperson Stevenson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commr. Rawson, Schultz, and Boudreau. ABSTAIN: None. The motion carried 4-0. 4. 1600 Madonna Road. ARC MOD 17-02; Review of a modification to eliminate chimneys from the house plans for the De Tolosa Ranch Subdivision; SLO Estates, Inc., applicant. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 5 Associate Planner Michael Codron presented the staff report, recommending approval of the request based on findings and subject to conditions of approval, including a condition to retain chimneys on certain building elevations. Commr. Howard asked if any of the models where the chimneys would remain could use wood. Planner Codron replied there is a potential, but the chimneys are not real or functional. Chairperson Stevenson explained that the air quality standards require that if you have an actual burning device, it must achieve a certain amount of efficiency. Commr. Root noted if they were to install a device that would burn some kind of fuel in the future, they would need to obtain biffs. Hamish Marshall, representative, explained that when the plans were submitted in 1999, he did not realize that there could be no wood burning fireplaces in San Luis Obispo. He explained it would be very difficult to keep them from a building standpoint and expressed they would either build all of them with the chimneys or request they approve all the plans without them. Chairperson Stevenson noted the elevation is a continuation of a wall with a turn, and in the wall projection is a firebox. Commr. Howard questioned if the firebox would fit into the chimney structure as designed. Mr. Marshall replied yes. He explained when they went through the original ARC approval, many things were added to the façade to enhance the elevations. The chimneys were never a part of the elevation design on these homes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made by the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Chairperson Stevenson commented that chimneys are a subtle element that design and add to the homes. He expressed his preference and suggested they leave all of them. Vice-Chair Lopes asked why the applicant felt it is an all or nothing situation. Mr. Marshall explained they do not want to be monitoring whether a chimney is being put in a wrong home; this production is more like an assembly line. Commr. Howard asked how much of a saving would the elimination of the chimney be to the cost of a unit. Mr. Marshall replied around $75,000 for all of them. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 6 Vice-Chair Lopes asked how much would the fireplace heating system cost. Mr. Marshall replied around $690.00. Commr. Root asked if they are tied into the ductwork. Mr. Marshall replied yes, they are. Commr. Howard commented if it is an all or nothing, she would recommend they keep the chimneys for design purposes. Commr. Root asked if there would be a roof jack. Mr. Marshall explained there would be a roof jack on a two story structure. Commr. Root commented that he would like to see them keep all the chimneys. Vice-Chair Lopes suggested they support staff’s recommendation. Vice Chair Lopes moved to keep the chimneys for plans 1 & 4, and adding on 3. The motion failed for lack of a second. Commr. Howard moved to deny the proposal. Seconded by Commr. Root. AYES: Commr. Howard, Root, and Chairperson Stevenson. NOES: Vice-Chair Lopes. ABSENT: Commrs. Rawson, Schultz, and Boudreau. ABSTAIN: None. The motion carried 3-1. 5. 254 Santa Rosa Street. ARC MOD 32-00; Review of a modification to change an existing monument sign to a pole sign; C-T zone; Jim Pfeil and Tom Murrell, applicants. Associate Planner Michael Codron presented the staff report recommending the ARC approve the project to retain the existing monument sign and to allow one new projecting sign to be located on an existing light pole. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if the existing sign blocks views or site distances. Planner Codron explained he did not know if it blocks views or site distances. He distributed a line-of-site diagram and explained how it shows the required visibility to vehicles at the intersection. George Garcia, Garcia Architecture & Design, explained the project was previously approved in April of 2000. The existing monument sign received approval by the ARC for its location, and was approved by the Traffic Engineer. The two-foot setback was questioned, and it was recommended they pull back another three-feet. He explained the proposal they came up with is a replacement of the monument sign with the pole sign. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 7 Chairperson Stevenson questioned if they considered not having the ARCO/AM/PM component, and only have the prices listed. Mr. Garcia explained they are trying to reduce the incorporation of signs and felt it more appropriate to add multiple signs. Commr. Root commented that the roof pitch on the canopy over the pumps is different from the pitch on the signs. He felt that if they were coordinated, they would read better. Vice-Chair Lopes asked if would be acceptable to locate the top sign at the front of the canopy, in line with the canopy columns. Mr. Garcia explained the current location provides clear visibility to vehicles traveling north and nothing would obstruct it. Commr. Root felt the problem with the existing sign is that the landscaping obscures the prices. Chairperson Stevenson asked if they considered moving the current monument sign to the location that is shown in alternative 2. Mr. Garcia explained that part of the problem is they are dealing with a berm issue and it uses a large portion of the site. Chairperson Stevenson felt that the tile base would work as a monument sign. Mr. Garcia felt the monument sign is too long for the location. Vice-Chair Lopes felt the vertical approach could work. Chairperson Stevenson stated this gas station has an extremely large canopy that draws attention to this site and felt an additional sign is not needed. Vice-Chair Lopes suggested having a taller monument. Chairperson Stevenson suggested a monument sign that would meet the current standards in the location where alternative two is shown, noting that an exception might be needed. Planner Codron explained that 6-feet is the maximum height for a monument sign, but it is typical with service stations that larger heights are approved because of the flexibility related to the price sign. Commr. Howard asked how the architect felt about a pole sign. Mr. Garcia replied that he wants the ARC’s opinion. Planner Codron noted that service stations are allowed to have two signs. Tom Murrell, applicant, stated the monument sign is primarily for identification of the business. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 8 Chairperson Stevenson commented he would like to focus on what is necessary to provide information to the driver on gas prices. There was much discussion on the height and setback of the monument sign. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Howard asked what the minimum would be if all the signs were to meet the requirements, the parapet base was as high as necessary, the diamond on the side was reduced, and a flatter pitch created. Mr. Garcia explained it isn’t an issue of area. Commr. Howard commented that it is visually imposing. She asked if the existing sign would be allowed to stay. Planner Codron replied no. Vice-Chair Lopes commented that the monument sign would work if it were going to be in the front setback, and suggested a finding be made that the sign will not interfere with visibility. Commr. Howard asked the applicant if they feel the height should be 3-feet 4-inches in order to have the base so vehicles don’t cover the gas prices. Mr. Garcia replied yes. Vice-Chair Lopes moved to approve the revised monument sign to be located north of the Santa Rosa driveway approaching the location shown at the top photo received at this meeting; that the sign shall have a maximum height of 7-feet tall and shall have terracotta tile cap and the same gable pitch as the gable on the canopy; shall have the company identification as well as pricing; the height of the sign shall be measured from the drive isle behind the curb at the back of the planter; and add a finding that because the sign is located approximately 6-feet behind the sidewalk, it will not interfere with visibility required for safety of vehicle and pedestrian circulation. There was no seconder. Commr. Howard asked if the base would be only a foot high. Vice-Chair Lopes explained the base would be one or two feet high. Commr. Root suggested that one of the monuments be removed. Vice-Chair Lopes commented that the motion would need to include the existing monument sign. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 9 Chairperson Stevenson felt the idea of having a monument sign on Oak Street is good if it is away from the corner. Vice-Chair Lopes amended the motion to require the existing monument sign remain. Planner Codron noted that retention of the existing monument sign could be a condition of approval. Commr. Root commented that he would support that amendment with the provision that they are allowed to have a second sign. There was much discussion on the height, location, and the berm on the existing sign. Chairperson Stevenson commented he would like to see some design on this signage. Planner Codron suggested they list three to four criteria on what the Commission would like to see on the projecting sign. Chairperson Stevenson felt the monument sign on the corner should be set back further by eliminating the pricing. Planner Codron asked where the monument sign would be placed on the corner. Chairperson Stevenson replied 6-feet back from the sidewalk. The motion died for lack of a second. After much discussion on the height, location, berm, and blockage of gas prices on the monument sign, another motion was made. Vice-Chairperson Lopes moved to continue this item to a date uncertain to request the applicant to revise the sign proposal to comprise two signs; a monument sign at the corner of Santa Rosa and Oak Streets and be located at least 5-1/2 feet from back of the sidewalk and no taller than 6-feet when measured from the concrete drive isle at the back of the planter. This monument sign would have a gable identical to the gable on the canopy and the monument sign would identify the company and business with no pricing. The second sign would be a full-mounted sign for pricing and would have decorative bracketing to compliment the character and style of the building, and be in scale with the sign. The pole sign would be no greater than 28-square feet in size. Seconded by Commr. Root. Chairperson Stevenson suggested that the sign say Arco and also have the prices. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Root, Howard, and Chairperson Stevenson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commr. Rawson, Schultz, and Boudreau. ABSTAIN: None. The motion carried 4-0. ARC Minutes April 1, 2002 Page 10 6. 864 Santa Rosa Street. ARC 21-02; Review of signage and other building and site improvements to the City’s Community Center; PF zone; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. This item was continued to April 15, 2002, without discussion. 7. 640 Higuera Street. ARC 31-02; Review of a new public art sculpture to be placed on a public parcel in the downtown; C-C-H zone; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant This item was continued to April 15, 2002, without discussion. Chairperson Stevenson suggested that election be postponed until there is a full commission. All Commissioners agreed. The Commission had discussion on upcoming workshops and lessons learned. Seeing no further business before the Commission the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for April 15, at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Respectfully submitted by Irene E. Pierce Recording Secretary