Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-18-2003 ARC Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 18, 2003 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Greg Wilhelm, Allen Root, Michael Boudreau, Jim Lopes, David Smith, and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: Commissioner Zeljka Howard Staff: Associate Planners Pam Ricci and Phil Dunsmore ACEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, expressed appreciation to the ARC for the hard work they do for the community. There were no further comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 2005 Dalidio Drive. ARC PR 108-02; Conceptual review of a proposed Macy’s department store; SLO Marketplace Assoc. LLC, applicant. Associate Planner Pamela Ricci presented the staff report requesting preliminary comments on the building design. Chairperson Stevenson clarified that the Commission previously reviewed the preliminary concept plan for the Marketplace project and has not made any final decisions. He noted that feedback had been provided, and that there would be another opportunity for the Commission to comment in more detail. He explained the streetscape that is shown would not necessarily be the final plan. Planner Ricci noted that prior to the previous project being submitted, the applicant held a series of design charettes to get input on what the public felt would be an appropriate architectural style for the design of the shopping center. Commr. Lopes questioned if there was a concept document for the center as a result of the workshops. Planner Ricci explained that comments had been received which have been incorporated into the applicant’s project description booklet and noted there is an excerpt from the booklet attached to the agenda report that discusses building design. Commr. Lopes asked if Macy’s or Lowe’s is on separate property from the rest of the center. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 2 Planner Ricci replied that presently it is shown as a single property, but explained there have been discussions about creating individual lots. She also mentioned that she had received a letter from Don Dollar stating his concerns with big box stores and suggesting that the scale of these buildings appear as small as possible while not blocking views. Bill Bird, project developer, mentioned the proposed elevation reflects some of the changes and recommendations that were previously made by the ARC. He pointed out that when looking at development projects and enclosed malls, which is what Macy’s has historically been, there is typically a design theme for the mall itself, but noted that each department store has its own separate identity. Bruce Quisno, Macy’s architect, explained they are here to get a better understanding of what the City wants in this project in relation to the Community Design Guidelines. He requested that the ARC critique the current design. He mentioned that they prefer having their own identity for their stores and explained how they came up with the proposed building design. Commr. Smith questioned if there are any permit problems that would prevent them from putting in windows. Chairperson Stevenson questioned what the Macy’s letter height is on each side of the building. Mr. Quisno replied that the proposed sign is 5 feet high. Chairperson Stevenson noted the building is 40 feet high with two stories. Commr. Lopes questioned if this is a unique design or a Macy’s “standard” that they have done elsewhere. Mr. Quisno explained that historically, Macy’s stores are large-scale stores and noted this is a smaller store concept, which is a prototype and a very new concept. PUBLIC COMMENTS: MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, supported Macy’s coming to San Luis Obispo. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: There was discussion on different design alternatives that were offered by the applicants. Mr. Bird noted that Macy’s did not want to have parking on the north side and identified the new location. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 3 There was discussion on the parking issue. The Commission was supportive on how the trellis casts shadows on the building and how it also breaks up the mass of the building. Commr. Wilhelm expressed support for the first proposal, noting the building seems provocative and very honest in terms of the use of materials. He felt solution number 1 could be made a part of the village and felt staff should address whether they want a provocative design embraced by these other buildings, or if they want it to be monochromatic and singular in quality. Commr. Root concurred with the comment about it being provocative. He mentioned the design should be timeless and not “trendy”. He expressed support for alternative 2- a, but suggested pulling some of the elements back to make it blend with the other structures. He recommended a glazed tile detail repetitively across the front of the building and some brighter earth colors. He felt the recessed entry could be played up with lights and sculptural elements. Commr. Boudreau concurred with many of Commissioner Wilhelm’s comments about the initial design. He felt that it was a sophisticated design and it does not need a lot of windows, but noted that site context was also important. He commented that the farther away the building is from anything else, the more it allows for some independence in the design. He expressed support for elevation 2-a. Commr. Lopes agreed that this building has a unique appearance and fresh architecture that brings forward classic modern styles. However, he felt it also conveys some of the problems people have with modern styles in that they can be seen as uninviting or impersonal. He felt this evokes the early sixties, which he had hoped not to see again. He felt they could change some of the classic designs to convey what Macy’s sophistication is about. He concurred with staff on their review of the building in terms of its consistency with the guidelines. He mentioned that he would be looking for articulation to be very extensive and noted the guidelines speak to using landscaping to break up facades. Commr. Smith expressed his preference for option 1-a. He suggested adding trim to the cornices. He felt that there needed to be some consistency with building designs at the center without having them all look identical. He recommended adding greenery to help visually break up wall planes. Chairperson Stevenson commented that his first reaction was that the design is not an appropriate fit for San Luis Obispo. He noted this is a fairly constrained site, which adds to the difficulty of creating the kinds of insets and pop outs that the guidelines discuss. He mentioned this was one of the ARC’s main discussion points when they brought forward the Design Guidelines and stated they did not want buildings that were just rectangular. He felt the tall verticality of the building in close proximity to the street was also a concern. He suggested eliminating one or two parking bays so they could come out a little further with the building. He felt the need for additional separation of the building from the street by landscaping, and recommended adding a building entrance ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 4 facing towards Dalidio Drive. He felt there should be more communication between the design teams to accomplish more continuity with the other buildings. He mentioned if landscaping were placed in certain clusters, it could help reduce the apparent massive size of the building. He expressed support for alternative 1-a with the gable elements. 2. 2085 Harris Street. ARC 198-02;Review of the demolition of a studio dwelling and addition of a new duplex on a site with an existing single-family residence; R-2 zone; Jay Ferriol, applicant. Associate Planner Pam Ricci presented the staff report recommending final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. There were no comments made from the applicant. PUBLIC COMMENTS: MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, supported the project, provided it is for a family or for five or fewer unrelated people. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Smith commented there was direction for outdoor living space and noted it has not been done, so he could not support the project. Commr. Lopes moved final approval to the project based on the findings and subject to the conditions in the staff report, with the following text added to Condition 1: “Pans shall clarify that the openings in the upper ends of gables are intended as vents and not as windows. Amend Condition 4 to read: Cementatious siding shall be used at all gable ends, instead of the proposed T1-11, with a preference for a vertical siding; and the following conditions added: 7. Low walls or solid fences shall be added to the site plan between parking spaces and the adjacent outdoor use areas to provide privacy for tenants. 8. The proposed palm tree shall be moved to be within 5 feet of the rear fence to provide a more usable outdoor area. 9. A street tree shall be added to the front yard area. 10. The front house and the new building shall be painted in compatible colors. 11. The fascias and moldings of the new building shall be consistent on all sides. 12. Provide sound attenuation between the stairwell to the rear unit and the front unit’s bedroom. Seconded by Vice-Chair Boudreau. AYES: Commrs. Lopes, Boudreau, Wilhelm, Root, and Stevenson NOES: Commr. Smith ABSENT: Commr. Howard ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 5:1 vote. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 5 3. 825 Capitolio Way. ARC 82003; Review of an addition, remodel, and site changes to an existing commercial building; M zone; Mark Coudray, applicant. Associate Planner Philip Dunsmore presented the staff report recommending final approval to the project based on findings and subject to conditions. Warren Hamrick, Project Architect, explained how the building would be divided, voiced acceptance with the conditions of approval, and expressed willingness to provide the additional four bicycle parking spaces if necessary. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Vice-Chair Boudreau moved final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to the conditions in the staff report; with Condition 3 amended to require 14 bicycle spaces instead of 10 spaces. Seconded by Commr. Smith. The Commission offered individual comments. AYES: Commrs. Boudreau, Smith, Wilhelm, Root, Lopes, and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Howard ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 6:0 vote. 4. 1540 Froom Ranch Way. ARC 173-00; Conceptual review of design for a new warehouse and service station; Costco Wholesale, applicant. Associate Planner Philip Dunsmore presented the staff report requesting the Commission review the revised plans for the Costco warehouse store and fueling center and offer direction and comment, with the applicant to return with a final design plan following certification of the EIR by the City Council. Commr. Wilhelm asked about rounding the curb at the northeast corner of the building and wondered if they are referring to a quarter-turn radius or simply rounding the points of connection. Planner Dunsmore explained discussion at a previous meeting was about rounding of the whole featured route, not the actual curb feature. Commr. Lopes noted the drainage plan shows a severe cut in the hill behind Costco and wondered if that is occurring on the same property that is dedicated to the City. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 6 Planner Dunsmore replied no, it is a separate lot behind the Costco lot. Commr. Lopes questioned the ownership of the vacant lot. Planner Dunsmore replied that Mr. Madonna would retain ownership. He explained that the EIR addresses that lot as “not a building site”, however it will be used for a portion of the drainage swale and basin. Todd Bartok, Costco Representative, addressed questions pertaining to driving operations behind the warehouse and loading dock hours. th Jeffery Wilson, Mulvaney G2 Architects, 1110 112 Ave. Bellevue, Washington, reviewed some of the changes that were made since the last ARC meeting. He noted that the western drive has been modified to reduce the width down to 24-feet so they could add an additional six feet into the landscape buffer adjacent to the DeVaul Ranch property. He explained by doing this they are able to have a maximum slope from the property line of 2:1 at the worst-case scenario. He noted they have maintained a 20- foot buffer between the driveway road and the building so they could have several tiers of landscaping. He mentioned they have not come up with specific details on how to control the traffic at the western drive access, but noted they would work with the Fire Department to ensure access is restricted, consistent and compatible with the Fire Department. Mr. Bartok referred to the site plan to give a brief explanation on the drive for the trucks and where they would access. Mr. Wilson noted that some significant changes were made in the parking lot of the drive isle so there would be adequate truck circulation on the eastern side of the building. He mentioned the screen wall on the eastern side has been increased to 16 feet high and the radius has been widened at that corner so there could be additional planters to buffer this area. There was discussion on the pedestrian access through the parking lot. Commr. Root asked how often are 700 spaces utilized for a store this size. Mr. Bartok replied typically during the peak seasons, 700 spaces are utilized. There was much discussion about parking spaces. Gregory Nowell, Project Landscape Architect, gave a brief overview of changes made to the landscape plan, explaining that they clustered the trees around the cart corrals and will plant Australian Willows. Chairperson Stevenson noted how strong the winds are in this area and explained the selection of trees needs to be chosen carefully. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 7 Mr. Nowell replied that the selections that the Commission recommended are good and noted an orchid tree is being used along the perimeter for the permanent screening adjacent to the DeVaul property. Along the southern property line, a combination of Redwoods and Canary Island Pines will be used to provide a dense screen. He explained what kind of surface would be used for the sidewalks. There was discussion on reducing the size of the trellis and increasing the landscaping in the north elevation. Chairperson Stevenson commented on previous discussions that signing at this location be moved. He noted the Costco sign in that location presents a problem. Mr. Bartok requested that they would explore some alternatives to bring back to the ARC. He noted it is very critical for Costco to keep its sign on the building wall. There was much discussion on the Costco sign. Chairperson Stevenson suggested that the identification sign be located out by the road. Mr. Bartok replied that Costco does not use pylon or monument signs and explained that Costco does not need to advertise at the street since the building has adequate, visible signage on it. He noted that Mitigation Measure 4 under Visual Resource indicates that a mural was suggested to go along the wall facing Home Depot as a form of the mandatory artwork, and requested that they put money into the fund to do something nicer. John Baylee, Project Designer, gave a brief rendition of the design and architecture of the building. Commr. Root asked what the roof tile size would be. Mr. Baylee responded that they would use 16-inche tiles. PUBLIC COMMENTS: MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, requested that no alcohol sales occur at the service station. Michael Sullivan, SLO, expressed some concerns with the site plan and felt that the cut and the retaining wall at the rear of the building, as proposed, would not be consistent with the General Plan Guidelines that require a more natural slope. He suggested moving the building slightly forward, and expressed concerns with how the drainage pattern and the bio swale will work. He noted there is no plan for bicycles and wondered what path he would take so he could safely avoid conflicts with cars and where he would be able to park his bike. He commented on the number of parking spaces that are required and felt there could be a compromise reached on the actual number of parking spaces. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 8 There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Chairperson Stevenson commented that the City Council has put a cap on the number of parking spaces required, and noted the applicant is not being directed to go lower than what they are allowed. He felt there should be a clear indication on how the drainage would be handled so the water will be clean when it gets to the creek. He felt the bike access is more important for employees than it would be for customers. He mentioned the focus should be on the appearance of the grading, which should be done in a natural grade format. Chairperson Stevenson expressed a concern that if the top of cut is higher than the building, there will be some issues; but if it is below the building, it could be landscaped and graded in a more natural fashion. Commr. Wilhelm noted the map is showing it as a 2:1 bank along that entire rear margin. There was much discussion on the grading plan and the consensus of the Commission was to wait until they are able to see a full size-grading plan. Commr. Lopes noted that the City Guidelines encourage something of a more natural form to site and grading and to minimize visibility. He commented on the issue of pedestrian access and suggested entering the site from DeVaul along the adjacent property line. He felt a sidewalk along the main route is a good idea and suggested a parkway between the curb and sidewalk. Commr. Wilhelm commented that his preference for the DeVaul connection would be along the northwest property line, which is about 26-feet wide. He also suggested a serpentine sidewalk meandering with landscaping on both sides of the sidewalk. Commr. Root commented that the bicycle access is important to provide inspiration, not as a main feature. He suggested a small feature where the two pedestrian access lines intersect. Commr. Boudreau expressed support on the pedestrian access and the relation between Costco and Home Depot. He liked the idea of connecting Costco and Home Depot and exiting onto LOVR, and suggested cooperating with adjacent property owners to get a walkway to LOVR. Chairperson Stevenson suggested a soft radius in front of the entrance to encourage cars not to cut close to that front. The Commission made comments on the landscaping. Commr. Lopes commented that his perception of landscaping would be to reflect the backdrop of the hills by using a species that are evergreen and rounded shapes and try ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 9 to bring the hills down to the site. He suggested using Redwoods and Canary Island Pines, and possibly other kinds of shade trees to achieve screening the building. The Commission made comments on the architectural design. Commr. Wilhelm supported the Clay tile roofing material. He noted that the portholes on the corner are important elements with plank infill. He suggested veneer on the outside of the building, and a treatment of stack fieldstone in clay to pick up the hues of the roof. Commr. Lopes asked about the color of the tile. Mr. Bartok replied that it will be lighter than the sample, and will pick up more browns. Commr. Wilhelm commented that he likes the roof cornice, but suggested that it be more singular. Commr. Lopes supported a thicker, taller cornice and suggested a darker color. Commr. Wilhelm felt that if they go to monochromatic, the wall would look too long. Commr. Boudreau disagreed and supported the delineation of depth and shadow, and felt the single color would help it to fade away. Commr. Root expressed support for the brown band and split face. He felt the porthole might be a site for a small mural. Commr. Boudreau complimented the design, noting it shows more detail than the renderings that are shown. He supported the reduced parapet, the two renderings on the top and the accent of the back, and felt the wood should stay as it is. Commr. Lopes suggested that the combination of the portholes be some wall area rather than just a doorframe. He commented that the building has a very long facade, but the building is still very elegant from all sides. There was much discussion about the architectural design of the linear wall facing LOVR. Chairperson Stevenson felt the building looks fine the way it is, but landscaping could soften it and break up the long linear wall. Commr. Smith liked the color of the tower and the contrast of the stone, but felt it is a little deceptive because it looks like an old water tower design. Chairperson Stevenson commented on how well articulated the applicants have been and expressed an appreciation to all the effort. He suggested one more arch for extra seating in the food service area. ARC Minutes August 18, 2003 Page 10 Mr. Baylee replied they could move the building back towards the northwest corner rather than shortening the trellis. Chairperson Stevenson responded that would be okay. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 5. Staff: A. Agenda Forecast: Planner Dunsmore gave an agenda forecast of upcoming items. 6. Commission: ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for September 2, 2003, 2003, at 5:00 p.m. in Council Hearing Room. Respectfully submitted by Irene E. Pierce Recording Secretary