HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-18-2002 ARC Minutes
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTUAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 18, 2002
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Zeljka Howard, Jim Lopes, David Smith, Rob Schultz, and
Chairperson Charles Stevenson.
Absent: Commissioners Allen Root and Michael Boudreau.
Staff: Associate Planner Philip Dunsmore and Recording Secretary Irene Pierce.
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was accepted as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, SLO, commented that she is not happy with
what is on the agenda.
There were no further comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 21 Zaca Lane: ARC 144-02; Review of a new industrial building; C-C-S zone; Zaca
Creek Development, applicant.
Associate Planner Philip Dunsmore presented the staff report recommending final
approval to the project based on findings and subject to conditions. He noted there is
no outdoor break area for employees and felt they could incorporate one within the
creek setback.
Commr. Lopes asked if there are any lights in addition to the wall lights.
Planner Dunsmore replied no.
Commr. Smith questioned if the use has the potential to be noisy.
Planner Dunsmore replied it could have the potential to be noisy.
George Mitchell, 3211 Broad Street #205, explained that 20,000 square feet is
warehouse space, and the remainder is a combination of warehouse and
manufacturing. He concurred with the recommended conditions. He mentioned the
issue of lighting and explained that photometrics were run on this project, resulting in no
significant differences between the amounts of light. He stated if the lights were placed
lower on the wall, more lights would be needed.
ARC Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 2
Commr. Lopes noted the staff’s condition is to eliminate any off-site glare and asked if
the photometric study ensured the 20-foot height would avoid off site glare.
Mr. Mitchell replied that he could not guarantee that glare would be completely
eliminated.
Commr. Lopes questioned if another material could be used that would be as affective
as a masonry wall for noise.
Mr. Mitchell replied that a masonry wall is the most effective for noise.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, commented that more vehicle pollution is not
needed in this beautiful area and suggested putting in another mobile home park
because of the shortage of housing for senior citizens.
Sondra Cascadon, SLO, commented they live adjacent to the proposed project and
asked if there would be increased activity and if the lighting will shine on their property?
Ms. Cascadon asked what the length of the building would be.
Mr. Mitchell replied the building will be approximately 300-feet long and 35-feet tall.
Bryan (inaudible) replied to the comment about increased traffic and stated only one
employee would be added so there would not be an increase in traffic.
Mr. Mitchell noted the trees are located to screen the building. He explained the light is
a rectangular light that goes against the building; the light does shine down and would
be seen from a distance.
There were no further comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Lopes asked if there could be a proposal for a type of fence that would provide
equal sound barrier as the masonry wall?
Planner Dunsmore replied yes.
Commr. Lopes asked if this would be going to the Planning Commission for a Use
Permit?
Planner Dunsmore replied this would be going through the Administrative Use Permit
Hearing process (Zoning Hearing Officer), not the Planning Commission.
ARC Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 3
Commr. Lopes questioned if the issues of hours would be decided at the Use Permit
hearing.
Planner Dunsmore replied yes.
Chairperson Stevenson expressed a concern that there is a noise issue between
residential and industrial commercial. He noted he would support a masonry wall.
Commr. Smith suggested that the landscaping be on the residential side to visually
screen the wall.
Chairperson Stevenson suggested an employee break area be provided with at least
five to six tables.
Vice-Chair Schultz commented on whether the north elevation needs more articulation
over that door.
Chairperson Stevenson responded that it is a warehouse and the front is articulated
nicely.
Commr. Lopes commented that he would prefer parking lot lighting that should be
pullouts and planters to replace the lower wall back lights. He suggested the roll-up
doors not be on the side of the mobile home park and should be facing the interior of
the project with the two roll up doors in between suites A & B on the north side.
Planner Dunsmore noted that the Fire Marshall suggested additional openings for fire
emergencies.
Chairperson Stevenson asked if the project has adequate tree planters.
Planner Dunsmore replied the tree planter is shown at the back of the parking lot rather
than an island configuration.
Commr. Lopes felt southernmost planter is not a very effective area to plant a tree.
Planner Dunsmore replied the tree planters are more likely to be on the islands and that
area is more likely to have shrubs.
Chairperson Stevenson asked if the roll up doors would be used primarily for deliveries.
Mr. Mitchell replied it would be used for deliveries like UPS.
Vice-Chair Schultz questioned the need for two rollup doors directly across from one
another.
Mr. Mitchell explained because it is a big building and they would not want to have to
carry items through the building.
ARC Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 4
There was discussion about the noise that the roll up doors would create.
Commr. Lopes moved they grant final approval to the project based on the findings and
subject to the conditions in the staff report, with the following changes: Condition 4, add
a sentence that requires landscaped planters adjacent to the building on the parking
isles next to the building; Condition 5 to provide dense shrubbery or small tree
landscaping along the south perimeter designed to grow at least 16 to 20 feet in height;
Condition 11 to state that outdoor eating/break area shall be provided and at the ratio
one picnic table for 5,000 square feet, at locations such as the creek corridor or near
building entrances; Condition 12. Trash enclosure should be located on the northern
interior side of the proposed building; Condition 13 to provide a revised building entry
design for suite A at the northeast corner to highlight the entry in a similar fashion to the
other building entrees for the project; Condition 14 to relocate the roll-up doors to the
west side of the building and the flood plane could be adjusted accordingly; and
Condition 15. The roll-up doors on the south side of the building are limited to a
maximum of two doors at the location of the proposed loading dock area and the other
two doors shall be eliminated or relocated to other areas of the building. Seconded by
Commr. Howard.
Commr. Smith requested an amendment to address the landscaping and proposed that
it be located on the mobile home side of the masonry sound wall, and the planting be as
close together as possible.
Chairperson Stevenson questioned who would be responsible for maintaining this.
Vice-Chair Schultz noted he supports the whole motion except for relocating the roll up
doors and felt they should not be next to the creek.
Chairperson Stevenson concurred about the roll up doors and the noise they would
make.
There was much discussion on the relocation of the roll up doors.
AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Howard, Smith, Schultz, and Chairperson Stevenson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Root and Boudreau
ABSTAIN: None.
The motion carried 5-0.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
2. Staff
A. Agenda Forecast:
There was no agenda forecast.
ARC Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 5
3. Commission:
Vice-Chair Schultz questioned when the Costco project would be coming back.
Planner Dunsmore replied they hope to have a Draft EIR in three weeks.
A. Recent Project Review-Lessons Learned
Commr. Smith commented the presentation from Stephano Polyzoides was riveting.
Chairperson Stevenson expressed excitement from what he heard from Mr. Polyzoides’
presentation.
There was much discussion on Stephano Polyzoides presentation.
Chairperson Stevenson asked the Commission if they were interested in having another
joint meeting to discuss this presentation.
The commission expressed a support for this meeting.
ADJOURNEMENT:
With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. to
the next regular meeting scheduled for December 2, 2002, at 5:00 p.m. in Council
Hearing Room.
Respectfully submitted by
Irene E. Pierce
Recording Secretary