HomeMy WebLinkAboutARCMOD 173-00iiilillllllllllll IIII1IIII Icityr Of san WIs OBISPO
PLANNING APPLICATION
Community Development Department • 990 Palm Street o San Luis Obispo, California 93401 o (805)781-7172
Project Address am Assessors Parcel Numher(s): �/S tip f`r nl IZartc (_llzts —_._
What do you want t) dc? What is your final goal? a der rn�d�4zmEren _�_a�brovc[�
Applicant (Who is ;)top sing the project?):_(A _1--Day Phone:
,Applicant's Address_
(Representative (if any 7`i_ F4=__l tls Y/ �1�Ivnna• �'y •T of C Day Phone: .L '-N63 - tZ78
Representative Ali aSS L112?_J13t'._J�'r Nam• _�e(leve� I &M �fSoCx4 _
Property Owner (i' other than applicant):
Owner's Address --.—
Please send all correspondence to []the applicant
Property Owner Authorization
ev signing this applicationcc ily that l have reviewed this completed
application and the al'.lached rr sterial and I cons aril to its filing. agree to allow
the Community Deveopment Department to duplicate and distribute plans to
interested persons as it diet em,ines is necessary for the processing of the
application.
Signed Uare
Permission to Access Property
This section is to be completer by the property owner andlor occupant'. who
controls access to the. property Toadegoatelye✓aluatemanvproject
proposals Community Devp1i dent Deaartment Staff, Commissioners and City
Council Members wile have to yain acce ss to the exterior of the real property in
order to adequately review and report on the proposed project. Yoursignature
below certifies that you agree to give the City permission to access the project
site from 8a.m. t05 p.m.Mon-.ay through Frio as part ofthe normal review
of this planning application
Date
CHECK REVIEw APPLICATION ND. FEE PAID
O Rezoning/PD
❑ Use Permit
O Variance
M ARC Revle:w
❑ Env. Review
❑ Subdivision
17 GPAmerdrrent
❑ Annexation
17 Other
Application fee paid t.
❑ the applicant D tht representative lithe property owner.
Received by. ___
Date,
Phone:
[] the property owner.
By signing this application I certify that the i nformation provided is accurate. I
understand the City might not approve what I'm applying for, or might set
conditions of approval. I agree to allow the Community Development
Department to duplicate and distribute plans tc interested persons as it
dat-mLimes is necessary forthe processing of the application.
sigirpe / / Date
Interior Inspection Contact Information
Occasionally, Community Development Department Staff may need access
to one or more buildings on the project site. If this is the case, Staff will use
the contact Information below to arrange an appointment.
Name:
Address:
Day
Notes file: __.
X
Department of Commun, :weloprnent
Planning Application
Project Address
1540 FROOIN :;ANCH Parcel # 053-510-009
—_
Project Title
Legal Description
CY SLO PM 56 82 PAR 2
Zoning 1-q
---------------- Zoning 2 --_ -
PropertyOwnerTWISSELMAN
CATIHEiRINE A ETAI_
In Care Ot
% A MADONN __-__-------- - --- -
Owner Address
284 HIG_UERASLO--_--_-_--___—_------- - --
284 __--_-------- - -_-_-_ - --
CA 93401 4215
Applicant Name
COSTCO WHOLESALE, TODD BARTOK Day Phone(949)724.0025
Address
17300 RFDHIL_AVE, SUITE 230, IRVINE, CA 92014
Representative JEFFRE`( WIL_SON Day Phone(425)463-2000
Address 1110112TH A'JENUE NE SUITE 500 BEELLEVUE, WA 98004
Send correspondence to App'iica,nt; Owner;
Application made pursuant to Chap er/Section _-_., <I_.,_LC:� C+:.
Planning Services Summary
Application k Type of Application
U 173-00 Allow an aprm 140,000 sq. ft. warehouse
store end mer, ber-only fueling center
ER 173-00 Evaluate the E ivironerientad impacts
associated Wit'[ project developmert
ARC '.73-00 Review deslgi e for warehouse store and
service statlor prefeCt.
MOD -73-00 Review of mo ification to app,oved ARC'
design
Received By PAM RICCI
Fee Paid by Applicant (4229) Re (.560)
Assigned planner PHIL DUNSM( RE
Hearings ARC Arch. Ri vigw Commission 04/23,'03
ER PC Heart g 04/23/03
ARC Arch, Fie view Commission 05/05/03
U PC.Hearirq OT09/03
ARC/,Arch. R(✓ew Commission 08/18/03
ER,, PC Heart (I )9/24/03
U PC Heanir 09)24/03
ARC Awh. Re view Commissicn 12/15/03
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San LEAS Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 7 81-'7172
of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
Received Fee
11/13/00 $1,620
11/13/00 $1,234
11/13/00 $1,375
04/21/04 $560
Total fees $4,789
Gi Cj/ Of Sd11 Us OBISpO
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
December 19. 2003
Todd Bali
Costco Whoieaale
17300 Redhill Avenue
Suite 230
Irvine, CA 926 4
SUBJECT: 4RC 173-00: 1540 Froorn Ranch
Architectural review of designs for a proposed warehouse store including
a service station and site improvements
Dear Mr. Barton:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of December 15, 2003, granted final
approval to yol ir project design, subject to the following findings and conditions.
Findings
The proposed project will be consistent with the City's Community Design Guidelines for
large retail projects since the design contains discrete elements that breath; up the mass of
the building. Architectural features and substantial landscape at the building elevations
add to the effect, furthering consistency with the guidelines.
2. The proposed scale and design of the building will be compatible to the site since it does
not block views to the surrounding hillsides, and the building design is scaled to other
buildings within the vicinity. This is because the proposed construction has a significant
setback from Los Osos Valley Road, and the building is a similar mass and scale to the
existing Hume Depot building.
3. Allowing the wall sign area to exceed the maximum size standards as imposed by the Sign
Regulations is appropriate for this building since the signs are compatible to the building's
scale, and the signs are appropriate considering the building's significant setback.
Additional y, no freestanding signs will be on the site, and the overall amount of signage will
be comparable, or less thanother large retail uses within the City.
4. The project is consistent with the City's Guidelines for establishment of a Marge retail store
since the project proposes a maximum parking ratio of one space for every 200 square feet
of gross floor area, and the project meets the maximum size standard of 140,000 square
feet. Adaltionally, the project has; acquired approval of the necessary Use Permit: that is
required for retail stores greater than 45,000 square feet.
5. If the proji,!ct is developed in accordance with the Final EIR, the Use Permit conditions and
the oonditons found below, the project will have a less than significant impact on the
��The City of Sam Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the. Deaf (805) 781-7410.
ARC 173-00, 1640 Fr'oon
Page 2
environment, and meet the City's standards for construction with a scenic corridor as
specified w thin the City's Circulation Element.
Conditions
The project is subject to the following conditions of approval, in addition to Use Permit
conditions of approval and code requirements as found within Resolution 9503, and Final
EIR mitigation measures as found within Resolution 9503.
2. Approval of Architectural Review is subject to final approval of the project Use Permit as
specified within Resolution 9503. Resolution 9503 does not become effective until a
resolution repealing or modifying the prohibition of concurrent sales of motor fuel and
alcoholic beverages is approved by the City Council.
3. Unless suited otherwise in the following conditions of approval, the project exhibits
including site plans, elevations, and architectural details, landscape plan, and photometrics
diagrams shall become conditions of approval.
4. The site landscape plan for the parking lot area shall be adjusted to ne-corifigure tree
planters, c. add additional tree planters, to gain general compliance with the City's parking
and driveway standards. For parking aisles that contain 10 or more consecutive spaces in
a row, a planter shall be adjusted or an additional planter added, so that no more than 6 or
8 spaces ,n a row acre without a tree planter. Tree planters for these locations may be
smaller diamond shaped planters and do not have to be as large as other proposed
planters. The final landscape plan is to be approved by the Community Development
Director.
5. Construction drawings shall identify the location and height of all rooftop equipment. A
section drawing and line of site analysis shall be provided in order to show how the rooftop
equipment will not be visible from Los Osos Valley Road, or from the second story window
of residential properties to the west.
6. A permit application for signs shall be submitted as a separate construction permit.
Allowed signs will include one wall sign for the entrance canopy of 200 square feet, and
one wall sign for the northwest elevation, not to exceed 300 square feet. Wall signs are to
be 3 dimensional, painted, aluminum letters with lighting limited to overhead architectural
"gooseneci<" lighting. Other signs for the building include signs that indicate the location of
uses on the building. These signs include "Tire Installation" at 45 square feet, "Tire Sales"
at 27 square feet, and "Receiving" at 24 square feet. No freestanding, monument, or pole
signs shal, be allowed on or off site unless utilized for traffic directional l signs, and not
containing store logos or colors.
The food court on the northeast elevation shall be designed to have a roof plane that meets
or breaks the height of the parapet wall. This may be accomplished by raising the roof of
the food court, or lowering the height of the parapet at this location, if it does not result in
the visibility of roof mounted equipment.
8. The emergency exit door architectural features shall be raised to meet the height of the
parapet roof, or the parapet may be lowered to meet the height of these elements, if it does
ARC 173-00,1F40Frooi
Page 3
not result n the visibility of roof mounted equipment as viewed from adjacent residential
properties
9. A pedestrian path shall be provided as a linkage to DeVaul Ranch. The pathway shall
allow pedestrians to travel from DeVaul Ranch Road to the Costco site pedestrian path that
leads to the main entrance, from the north end of the property. The path shall be
constructed prior to occupancy of the store.
10. All oirn site and off -site landscape, as shown on Landscape Concept Plan dated Nov. 17,
2003, shall be completed prior to occupancy of the store, unless a bond has been issued
for the installation of such landscape.
11. Size of landscape nursery stock shall be as specified on the Landscape Concept Plan
dated Nov, 1 7, 2003, with the exception of Canary Island Pines and Redwoods at the
northeast and southeast elevations„ which shall be 36" box size trees. Redbuds and
smaller trees at these elevations shall also be 24" box size trees.
12. A continuc:,us landscape planter that contains trees and shrubs consistent with Visual
Resources mitigation measure #3 shall be installed adjacent to the ga.s station. •44m
p;oposed-I<midseapelAar:�-ma�f require r e ' M4N&
13. Bioswale wind associated landscape shall be installed prior to occupancy of building as
shown on plans.
14. Bicycle lockers shall be installed and secured as shown on the site plan for long-term
bicycle storage prior to occupancy of the building. Short-term bicycle parking shall be
provided as shown on the plans, and shall be approved by the Public Works Department
for style, design and placement of racks.
15. Parking lot pole lights shall not exceed 24 feet in height, as measured from the bottom of
the light fixture to the ground, and shall be designed with full cutoff shielded light fixtures
with light output not to exceed 10-foot candles„ or as provided in the preliminary
photornetr_s diagram.
16. The parking lot pole lights shall be an architectural design that complements the
building elevation. A mission style lighting or similar is acceptable. The Righting
design sulomittat found within the ,August 18, 2003; concept drawings (with the
exception of height) is appropriate.
17. Shorter si igle fixture lights shall be utilized for the perimeter of the site.
maximum height of lights at the perimeter shall be 20 feet, including
foundatior
The
the concrete
18. Bollard ligl sting shall be incorporated into the 2 pedestrian pathways that bisect the parking
lot.
19. All outdoor lighting fixtures, including wall -mounted lights and gas station canopy Righting,
shall be designed Wth full -cutoff shielded fixtures consistent with Visual Resources EIR
mitigation measure #'s 9 and 10. All faces of the building with public frontage shall utilize
lighting that complements the architecture of the building. Complete lighting details shall be
ARC 173-00 1'40 FtoC 11
Page 4
reviewed rnd approved prior to approval of the construction permit. The height of the wall
pack lighting may be Lip 'to 14 feet on the southeast, northeast, and southwest elevations,
while the northwest elevation shall be limited to a height of 10 feet for wall pack lights.
20. Upon installation of all exterior lighting, and prior to occupancy of the building, the lighting
shall be analyzed for consistency with the approved photometrics plans. Non-compliance
lighting shall be adjusted or removed in order to protect the aesthetic quality of the site and
the residential neighborhood from unnecessary glare. Parking lot pole: lights shall be
turned off between 10 pm and 6 am, 7 days a week, however bollard lighting and wall pack
lighting miy remain on 24 hours, 7 days a week.
21. An expansion of the fueling center beyond the proposed six -island configuration shall
require review and approval by the Architectural Review Commission. The proposal shall
include additional landscape to rernain in compliance with project mitigation measures.
22. Permanent signs shall be placed at each corner of the building (or an appropriate location
on the site) ?to warn delivery vehicles of the residential neighborhood, prohibiting truck
access at the rear o1the site on 'the driveway adjacent to the residential neighborhood.
The rear criveway must remain open in order to allow fire and emergency access.
23. The applicant shall acknowledge that an entrance road to the property fronting Los Osos
Valley Road, northwest of the Costco property, noted as future development on the plans,
is subject to additional improvements including, but not limited to, an entry driveway that
will align with Garcia Drive at Los Osos Valley Road.
The decision of the Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the
action. Any person aggrieved by the decision may file an appeal. Appeal forms are available in the
City Clerk's office, or on the City's website (slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $100, and
must accompany the appeal documentation.
While the City's water allocation regulations are in effect, the Architectural Review
Commission's approval expires after three years if construction has not started, unless the
Commission Designated a different time period. On request, the Community Development
Director may c,irant a single one-year extension.
If you have qurestions, please contact Phil Dunsmore at 805-781-7522.
Siince�rely.
`
Pamela Ricci, AICP
Senior Planner
Community Development
cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office
Jeffrey tAiilson, 1 110 112t° Avenue NE, Suite 500, Bellevue, WA 98004
Catherine Twisselman, Etal„ C/O A. Madonna, 284 Higuera, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
ARC Minutes
June 7, 20124
Page 2
Discussion focused on allowing projecting signs in the Tourist Commercial (C T) zone,
and include language for when and where roof signs may be appropriate and the
required find ngs for approval.
Commr. Boudreau moved to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance
u dating the Cily's Sicpi Regulations with the following changes: 1) Include ojel cting
signs as_an allowed sip n twee in the Tourist -Commercial (C-T) zone; and 2) Provide
additional_ language for roof signs on page 30 that states, "Roofs halving interestinq
architectural_ or uni Ue features may be considered for signs where findinc s found in
Section_15.4;1_610_A numbers 2,34 4 can be made." Seconded by Cornmr. Howard.
AYES: Commrs. Boudrraau, (Howard, Root, Lopes, and Stevenson
NOES: Commr. Smith
ABSENT: Commr. Wilhelm
ABSTAIN,: None
The motion r,arried on a 5:1 vote.
2. 1540 Froom Ranch Way. ARC MOD 173-00; Review of modification to an ARC -
approved design; C-R zone; Costco Wholesale, applicant. (Phil Dunsmore)
Associate P anner Tyler Corey presented the staff report recommending final approval
to some of tt io requested modifications, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
Jeff Wilson, Mulvaney G2 Architects, Belvue, Washington, expressed disagreement
with two items in the report, explained why they requested the modification, and
described the proposed materials.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were io comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
The Cornm.ssion felt they could approve three of the four requested project
modification . The proposed terra. Gotta colored tile accent band on the east and north
building ele,.ations and change to the column widths at the front of the building was
supported a>; submitted. The request to substitute scored concrete with colored asphalt
at the front (f the store and site entry from Froom Ranch Way was approved with one of
the proposed colors modified from "slate" to "concrete gray" to blend with color tones
used for pedestrian areas throughout the project. The Commission could not support
the requested change to the roof elements and directed the applicant to work with staff
on alternatives 10 screen the bakery roof vents proposed on the southwest roof element.
Two alterna:ives that were offered by the ARC were: 1) to expand the southwest corner
roof element to screen the proposed bakery roof vents, and 2) Install a chimney on the
southwest rc of element that would be large enough to accommodate the: roof vents.
ARC Minutes.
June 7, 2004
Page 3
Commr. Boudreau moved approval of three of the four requested project modifications
excluding_the_request to change the roof features, based on findings and sub ei ct to
conditions noted_Seconded by Commr. Howard.
AYES: -;ornmrs. (Boudreau, Howard, Root, Lopes, Smith, and Stevenson
NOES: VOne
ABSENT: Dorrimr. Wilhelm
ABSTAIN: Vone
The motion c rried on a 6: 0 vote.
3.. 1041 Mill Street. ARC E3-04; Review of a mixed -use office/residential project; O
zone; Mill Street Partners applicant. (Phil Dunsmore)
Associate Planner Tyler Corey presented the staff report and asked the Commission to
review the preliminary design concept and offer direction to the applicant and staff on
the building design, site plan and parking layout.
George Garc a, Garcia Architecture and Design, gave a PowerPoint presentation of the
proposed pr:rject and offered an explanation on the building design.. site plan and
parking layot:t.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were r o comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:,
The Commission reviewed the site plan and building elevations and provided feedback
on the design. The general theme of the comments was positive. All Commissioners
agreed that the site layout and mixed -use component was good, however some of the
Commissioners felt the project was not compatible with the surrounding development or
consistent with the Community Design Guidelines.
Commr. Howard supported the project and stated that the neighborhood is in transition
and the project could 'serve as an example to future redevelopment of other properties
in the area.
Commissior sir Root liked the research and thought that went into the project and
suggested tl iat there be more articulation on the building elevations that introduce some
circular or rounded features. He also supported the roof garden design.
Commissioner Boudreau staked that form follows function and that he can support the
bold statem mt.
Commissioner Lopes did not support the project in the proposed location and suggested
modificatior 3 to the front (Mill Street) building elevation.
June 10.?00,
Todd Bartok
Costco Wholc Sale
17300 Redhill Ave. Ste, 230
Irvine, Ca 92( 14
SUBJECT: ,,RC MOD ° 73-0(1, 1540 Froom Ranch 'Way
I ieview of modification to an ARC -approved design
Dear Mr. Bart, dc.
The Architect% ral Revie)A Commission, at its meeting of June 7, 2004, approved three
of the four t 3quested projecri modifications based on the following findings and
conditions:
Findings
1. The prop )sed modifications to add tile banding, adjust the entry columns and
change tf e parking lot surfacing from scored concrete to colored asphalt are
consisten. with the C.Jty's Community Design Guidelines for large retail projects
since the design changes do not result in significant changes to the appearance of
the butdii ig
2. Changes :o the rooflower featuro s are not consistent with the Community Design
Guidelines since the elimination of the backside of the roof feature will create an
undosirable false appearance.
3. When approved accor6ng to staff recommendations, the modifications are
consisten` with the project EIR and approved Use Permit.
Conditions
The approval of the architectural modification does not modify the project ARC
conditticm as approved 12 15-0,3, nor does it modify the Use Permit conditions of
approval and code requirements as found within Resolution 9503 and Final EIR
miticlatiori measures as found within Resolution 9503.
2. This rnod fica.tion allows the use of tile banding on the building, minor column width
changes 'or the tire center entry on the east building elevation and use of colored
aspnal � s .ubs- iitute for scored concrete at the front of the store and '.site entry
from fro )in Flancho Way with one of the proposed colors modified from "slate" to
"concrete gra',I", consistent wilh the ARC modification package dated April 19,
arlm
3. The four sided root elements or, the building's tower features shall be maintained
as origins lly a{.proved by the ARC on 12-15-03.
4. The Ifire,, rne,:.hanic:al roof vents proposed to penetrate the southwest tower roof
shall be : creened with an additional roof element feature or combined into a single
chimney subject to the approval of the Community Development Director.
The decision )f the Cornrnission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10
days of the a ;tiori. Any person aggrieved by the decision may file an appeal. Appeal
forms are ays lable in the City Clerk's office, or on the City's website (www.stocity.org).
The fee for filii ig an appeal is $100.00, and must accompany the appeal documentation.
While the Cil � s water allocation regulations are in effect, the Architectural Review
Commission's approval expires after three years if construction has not started, unless
the Commiss on designated a different time period. On request, the Community
Development Director may grant a single one-year extension.
If you have qL, Dstions, please cr,:rntact Phil Dunsmore at 781-7522.
Sincerely,
` r
Pamela Ricci, AICF'
Senior Plannc
Community D(welopmerd
cc. County of SL.O Assessor's Office
Project File
Jeffrey Nilson, 1'110 1 121t' Avenue NE, Ste. 500, Bellvue, Wa 98004
Cathon ie Twisseiman, 284 Higuera, San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401