Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/18/1994, 2 - ARC 18-94: APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S (ARC'S) APPROVAL OF A FOUR-APARTMENT PROJECT ON THE NORTHERLY END OF RACHEL STREET. ����iul�g�I�Ylllll�l"IZuulll City of San WIS OBISPO MEETING DATE: d COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NUMBER: FROM: Arnold .Jonas Community Development Director BY: Judith Lautner ssociate Planner SUBJECT: ARC 18-94: Appeal of the Architectural Review Commission's (ARC'S) approval of a four-apartment project on the northerly end of Rachel Street. CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution denying the appeal, and approve the project as revised, finding that the design and scale of the project are compatible with existing buildings in the neighobrhood. DISCUSSION Background The City Council first reviewed this appeal on May 24, 1994, and continued it for 60 days, with direction to the applicant. The plans were revised and the Council heard it again on July 19, 1994. The Council continued the project again, with additional direction. The applicant has again submitted revised plans, responding to this direction, and is asking for approval of the project. EVALUATION 1. The project now contains two two-bedroom apartments. At the July 19 meeting, the Council directed the applicant to return with revised plans showing two two-bedroom dwellings rather than four one- bedroom units. The applicant has done this. Each dwelling is 1, 254 square feet in area, and no lofts are included. The buildings have a similar footprint to the duplex design seen at the previous hearing, but are smaller (1,254 SF vs 1, 397 SF) and about 6' lower in absolute height from sea level. 2. The driveway. As noted previously, the parking and driveway standards say that lots with more than six spaces but fewer than 20, with a two-way driveway, require a minimum driveway width of 161 . The plans show a 12' driveway. Exceptions to parking and driveway standards are granted by the Community Development Director, or, by extension, any approving body. The Architectural Review Commission approved an exception in this case, during its review of the original project, to save the existing tree on the south side of the entrance, and to limit the total amount of paving on the site. One Councilmember has stated a concern with the narrow driveway, and suggested that it be widened beyond the tree. The applicant is willing to make this change, if so directed by the Council. 3 . The parking spaces. The two-bedroom configuration requires fewer parking spaces than the duplex arrangement. Specifically, a two- bedroom dwelling requires two parking spaces while two one-bedroom dwellings require a total of three. The total number of spaces required is: 02 ���� ►�IIIII�I�I���IUI MY Of San 1U IS OBISPO NiiS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ARC 18-94 2006 Rachel Street Page 2 1 studio @ 1 space = 1 3 2-bedroom @ 2 spaces = 6 TOTAL REQUIRED: 7 spaces Nine spaces are provided. Therefore, the number of spaces provided exceeds that required. ALTERNATIVES The Council may approve the appeal, thereby denying the project. Findings for denial must be made. The project may be denied because of design concerns, if those concerns cannot be mitigated by further changes to the project. The Council may deny the appeal, thereby approving the project, with modifications to the design other than those submitted. The Council may direct the applicant to return to the ARC with a favorable recommendation on the revised plans. The Council may continue action. Direction should be given to staff, the applicant, and appellant. Attached• Resolutions Vicinity map Minutes - April 4 ARC meeting Appeal letter Environmental initial study Minutes - July 19 CC meeting In packet: Revised Plans Resolution A RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY APPROVING THE ADDITION OF APARTMENTS TO A LOT CONTAINING TWO DWELLINGS, AT THE NORTH END OF RACHEL STREET (ARC 18-94). BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings That this council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicant's request for approval of four apartments (ARC 18-94), the appellants' statements, the Architectural Review Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed project will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity. 2. An initial study of environmental impacts was prepared by the Community Development Department on September 12, 1990, that describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Community Development Director has reviewed the environmental initial study and granted a Negative Declaration of environmental impact, with mitigation. The initial study concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, subject to the mitigation measure being incorporated into the project, and the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration and finds that it reflects the independent judgement of the City Council. 3. The design and scale of the project, as revised, are compatible with other buildings in the neighborhood. SECTION 2. Appeal denied. The appeal of the Architectural Review Commission's action is hereby denied, and the project as revised for the October 18, 1994 hearing is hereby approved as submitted. On motion of seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: . ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this _ day of , 1994. �-3 Resolution No. (1994 Series) ARC 18-94: 2006 Rachel Street Page 2 Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: i ey Resolution B RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY DENYING APPROVAL OF FOUR APARTMENTS ON THE NORTH END OF RACHEL STREET (ARC 18-94) BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public testimony, the applicant's and appellants' statements, and the Architectural Review Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed apartment project design will be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity because (COUNCIL STATE REASONS). SECTION 2. The appeal is hereby approved and the proposed apartment design is denied. On motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1994. Mayor a-S Resolution No. (1994 Series) ARC 18-94: 2006 Rachel Street Page 2 ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: City Attorney ,2-�o vRCUP '2 06 Ell �> STREETti a Ate, 16 -1 \ A — 3 W c a x _ Inn G/05 W ° `. s i� W ••,c+e•ao�j li oR-2 �_ „.w.. . ty , ,S •ate J-13-L 2 W - /�, ��Vii- .T' e: 'i L': T4•i.' •Y t: •p `� RACHEL COU's tRT 's all 00. Cv '--�� --�;,;,�;-�i • is 1z ft_ S •'s= :';:' FLORENCE s 71% oil n Own. .a. ' ;%fit .�•�• r f" �t CSS. R-2—S S • -,- -• - • -- -- —[ W aws • ROURf�M •:: . . -- ILI -2- m R-] ARC Minutes April 4, 1994 Page 3 2. ARC 18-94: 2006 Rachel Street. An appeal of the Community Development Director's action approving a four-unit apartment complex; R-2 zone; Kathy Dang, applicant, Anker Molver & Georgia Sanford, appellants. Commr. Farrell stepped down because of a conflict of interest. Judy Lautner, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the commission deny the appeal and grant final approval as submitted or with conditions. Chuck Crotser, architect, discussed the previous review. He noted that the lofts had been an issue previously and said he had reduced the size and height even further from the plans that were in the packet. The lofts are 220-230 square feet and the overall height of the building is about 20'. Kathy Dang, applicant, said that she liked the site. She said her brother lives in the house and she wants her family to live there also. She talked to the neighbors and many of them don't have any objection to the project. She said she believes the design will be attractive to couples. Georgia Sanford, 2027 Swazey Street, explained that she is concerned about the view of Terrace Hill and the height of the lofts. She wondered if it would be possible to provide the space elsewhere, maybe a basement instead of increasing the building height to accommodate the lofts. She was concerned about noise and exhaust from increased traffic, and thought a solid wood fence and foliage around the property might help. She said she is not opposed"to more units, although she prefers earth-sheltered homes. She felt that some increase in density is better than spreading out over agricultural land. Dave Fosse, 2056 Rachel, said that the project was well-conceived and had been , approved once. He felt the owners are quality people and bought the property with the understanding that they could do this project. It seems unreasonable to him that the property owners should have to go through this process again. He said the opposition does what they want with their property but oppose what other people want to do. Pete Evans, 2040 Rachel, submitted a letter in opposition and said that it contained "facts and emotional outbursts." He said the neighborhood suffered from previous development attempts. He was glad to hear that Kathy Dang planned to live there. He stated that it was almost-luck that anyone heard about this project He noted that it was difficult to get final ARC approval the first time. He reiterated some concerns from his letter. He said there is a serious question about accuracy of the slope calculations since the slope of nearby property is higher. He preferred a height limit above street level to �-8 ARC Minutes April 4, 1994 Page 4 prevent obstruction of viewscape of the hill. He noted that there are many evergreens proposed but two proposed deciduous trees in back could perhaps be changed to evergreens. According to a previous staff report a number of trees were removed. He wondered if they had been replaced. He pointed out that the size of the units is larger than other one bedroom units in the area. The neighborhood contains basically single homes that are all different. He prefers the units to be different from each other and feels they are incompatible with the surroundings. George Chans, 434 Swazey, said he lives with his grandfather and they do not oppose the project. He agreed with what David said and some of what Pete said. It is an older neighborhood and he prefers the older homes, although he would like to reconstruct his house to look nicer. He felt the development is okay. Anker Molver, 2022 Rachel, said he has lived there for two years and likes the older neighborhood. It has been a quiet street because it is a dead-end street. He has made improvements and changes to his property, and although he did expect some additional units at 2006 Rachel, he never thought there would be six units. When the street abandonment took place it added land to the site. According to the plans, he thinks it looks like more than 60% coverage of the property. He expressed concerns about the slope. Also, he asked about the trees. He considered the lofts to be rooms that will be used for additional bedrooms. He thought the parking spaces adequate in number but difficult to maneuver. He expressed concern that people would fill the garage with other things and park their cars outside. He thought the buildings would stagger up the hill and be visually prominent. He would like to see the colors muted. Commr. Combrink agreed with the previous staff report about removal of the lofts. He felts they cause problems with scale and compatibility in the neighborhood. The neighbors have a feeling for what is happening. The building could be lowered since there is plenty of room downstairs. He felt it is right on the edge of density limits. 'He thought it is important to reduce the height and noted that since it is on a steep slope there is.not a lot of useable open space. Commr. Joines agreed with Commr. Combrink that several points add up to an issue. She thought it would be nice to have four true cottages that were small, contained units. It could be unique. She felt that one color choice makes the development look larger. She suggested using more variety in colors and perhaps use natural siding that will weather. She was concerned about the amount of paving and would like to see some variety, maybe turfstone•to allow some greenery. She said ten spaces seems like a lot of parking. She wondered how visible these units would be from town. Commr. Aiken said he considered the neighbors concerns. He respected their input but was not completely sympathetic. He had seen similar projects that blend well in the site. a-9 ARC Minutes April 4, 1994 Page 5 He cited the Binns Court-Ella Street project as a good example. Those units are more cottage-like, but each one does have a loft. The project was recognized by the Obispo Beautiful Association. He felt it is an appropriate use and liked the project as is. He also wanted to see variety in the paving. Commr. Mandeville said she felt it was hard to change radically what the previous commission approved. She recommended approval as submitted. Commr. Regier recognized concern about the quality of the neighborhood. He preferred to see the lofts eliminated and would also like to see the units more cottage-like. He agreed that there should be some variety in paving. He asked if a wall or fence or bike racks had been proposed. Commr. Illingworth said he had voted for the project the first time and he still supports it. He wanted to see the colors varied and some variety in the paving. Kathy Dang commented on the parking. Her brother and his wife park right in front of the property. She stated the studio is too small for her. Her boyfriend's grand piano won't even fit in the living room. Chuck Crotser said a six-foot high wood fence has been proposed along the southerly side. They would like to leave the other sides open so there is more of a natural blending into the hill. He felt they could provide bicycle racks although tenants usually prefer to put their bikes near their units. He thought the porch area could be enlarged to accommodate tenant bicycles and perhaps but a bike rack for guests near the trash enclosure. He thought the comments on colors and paving were good. He liked variety himself, and said, unit A is duplicated and unit B is also duplicated. They are detached, skewed on different angles and he thinks they will look different. The lofts have gone from 29' high down to 20' in height. He felt it is a good scale. He asked if there is'a need to redesign the project, would the commission consider a single or two-building project over what they have presented? Commr. Combrink moved to continue action on the project with direction to: 1) reduce the height of the buildings by removing the lofts, 2) provide a variety of paving materials in the parking area, 3) provide at least one inverted U-rack for bicycle parking at the entrance to the four units, 4) vary the colors. Commr. Joines seconded the motion. Commr. Joines suggested an amendment that the recommendation to remove the lofts be withdrawn. ,2-/0 ARC Minutes April 4, 1994 Page 6 The amendment was denied. The original motion was brought back. Chuck Crotser asked that if the recommendation were to remove the lofts that the project not be continued. He would like to see an approval or denial so they could move forward. It would be a major redesign to eliminate the lofts. AYES: Combrink, Regier NOES: Aiken, Mandeville, Joines, Illingworth ABSENT: Farrell The motion failed. Commr. Joines felt the commission should work with the applicant on the loft issue. Commr. Mandeville moved to deny the appeal and grant final approval with direction to return to staff with the following: 1) variety in the paving, 2) additional bike parking, 3) variety in color; and to consider modifying materials and details to achieve a "cottage feel". Commr. Aiken seconded the motion. AYES: Mandeville, Aiken, Illingworth NOES: Combrink, Joines, Regier ABSENT. Farrell The motion fails. Commr. Joines wanted to give Chuck Crotser leeway in changing design elements. Commr. Mandeville moved for final approval to return to the commission with variety in paving materials and colors, additional bicycle parking, and modifications to materials and details to achieve a "cottage feel". - Commr. Aiken seconded the motion. AYES: Mandeville, Aiken, Joines, Illingworth . NOES: Combrink, Regier ABSENT. Farrell The motion passed. 3. ARC 127-93: 147 Los Cerros. A request for review of landscaping plans for a new house on a sensitive site; R-1-PD zone; Burt & Virginia Polin, applicants. III City OSAn WIS OBISPO 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 •San Luis Obispo,CA 93403-8100 APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL In accordance with the'appeals Procedure as authorized by TWO I. Chapter 120 of the San Luis Obispo Muutl4WCode,the understgnedherebyappeaisfromthedectlsionOf p }g (Ig'gg1 rendered on 9 which decision consisted of the follawing (t.e. set forth factual situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal. Use additional sheets as needed): PfP ro val 0� ./�Pfs a+ P004 ;64 *. DPT�i is o F a ff r0ValUwe%ter aPPrOPPrias npss of PRol PCT RECEIVEI_ APR 1 31994 crn of SAN LUIS oe�sao cowYanm Y DffWL0Pr,�. The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with: on F /9 v P10 DATE&TIME AEML RECE M: Appellant Narnefritle +� i V L eprese e aeLa&chef SY- APR 1 2 1994 Mdres c z CITY r�ERK Phone • /D�Sri A-i►(. Original to City perk Caiendared for. �-�'�- 9-r Copy to Afthistrathre Officer Co the*following department(s): rf• 9,0A140<caK city of san lues osispo ]A INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SITE LOCATION 2006 Rachel APPLICATION NO. 28-90 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addition of four one-bedroom detached apartments to a lot containing a two-bedroom apartment and a studio apartment, on Rachel Street, at the intersection with Jennifer. APPLICANT Al Michels STAFF RECOMMENDATION: X NEGATIVE DECLARATION X MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED PREPARED BY Judith Lautner, Associate Planner DATI$eptember 71 1990 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTfN: DATE 12150 SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS L DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING R.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALSNONE ............................................... B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH.. NONE ....................................... C. LAND USENONE ................................................................. D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .............. .... NONE* .......... . . E. PUBLICSERVICES ....... ........... NONE ....................... . F. UTILITIES............... NONE* G. NOISE LEVELS .... ....... .... NONE ..... ....... H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS 6 TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... NONE* L AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... NONE J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ............................................... NONE* IL PLANT LIFE............................. NONE L ANIMALUFE........................................................... NONE M. ARCHAEOLOGICAUlHISTORICA! ................................................... NONE* N. AESTHETIC .............................. NONE O. ENERGYIRESOURCE USE ...................... ............... NONE P. OTHER ................................................................. NONE RL STAFF RECOMMENDATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WITH MITIGATION *SEE ATTACHED REPORT se a-/3 ER 28-90 2006 Rachel Street DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project is the construction of four one-bedroom apartments at the rear of a lot containing one 2-bedroom apartment and one studio apartment. The lot is on the lower slopes of Terrace Hill, is rectangular, and is 0.35 acres in area. A five-foot-wide pedestrian easement exists along the northerly property line, half of a ten-foot-wide easement that allows public access to Terrace Hill. The site slopes upward from the street at about 15%. Six trees exist on the lot: five bottlebrush, and one California pepper. This side of Rachel contains primarily single-family homes. The surrounding area contains single homes and apartments. POTENTIAL IMPACTS Transportation and Circulation The project will generate an average of 26 trips per day, or a high of 37 trips per day, according to estimates obtained from data by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. Peak hour evening traffic generation is expected to be from 3 to 4 trips. Traffic counts taken during May 1989, supplemented with estimates of traffic generated by the construction of 24 condominiums on Terrace Hill and proposed construction of 19 condominiums on Florence ("Fairview Station") result in an estimate of 431 trips per day on Rachel Street. The project would add up to 37 trips per day, for a total of 468 trips per day. According to criteria established by the Urban Land Institute, this volume of traffic is within the range expected for local streets. The additionhl 37 trips that could be generated by the project are expected to be noticeable to residents, but will not cause the street to be "traffic-dominated". Conclusion: Not significant. Utilities Water: The city is currently in a. drought situation, and has adopted an ordinance to control water use, both in existing projects and in new development. The ordinance ensures that no projects are built that worsen the load on the city's water supply. The regulations will also limit issuance of building permits after the drought period is passed, and are expected to mitigate water-use impacts ER 28-90 2006 Rachel Street Page 2 at that time. The project will not, therefore, have any significant negative impact on the city's water supply. Conclusion: Not significant. Geologic and Seismic Hazards and Topographic Modifications The site slopes upward from the street, at about 15%. The grading regulations say that the topography of a site proposed. for development shall remain substantially in its natural state. To meet this requirement, on a site with an average cross slope of 15%, 40% of the site, exclusive of building area, is to remain in its natural state. The plan does not appear to meet this requirement. Conclusion: May be significant. Mitigation measure: 1. The grading plan shall be redesigned to meet the 40% criteria, or an exception must be granted by the City Council. Plant life Five trees previously existed on the site, in a row to the north of the two-bedroom dwelling. Three of these trees have been removed, and two others may have to be removed to allow construction of the project. Trees may be removed if approved by the City Arborist and Architectural Review Commission. Notification is required for these tree removals, and replacement trees are normally required. Conclusion: Not significant. Current tree regulations are adequate to address impacts from tree removals. Aesthetic The homes will form the edge of development against the hillside. As such, they will be visible to persons viewing Terrace Hill from several parts of town. The city's general plan sets standards for hillside lots to assure that the buildings _do not block views or draw attention to themselves. Thede standards include stepping foundations up the hillside and using colors and materials that are compatible with natural hillside materials. For one-bedroom apartments, the buildings are large, over 800 square feet, and tall, reaching 29 ' from the garage level to the �l< ER 28-90 2006 Rachel Street Page 3 upper roof line. Materials include half-scored concrete block for the garage and foundations, horizontal hardboard siding, and cedar shingles. The materials can be finished to blend into the hillside. However, the height and size should be diminished as much as possible. It appears that the lower levels can be dug into the hillside more than they are, and the loft areas can be removed. The apartments are subject to review by the Architectural Review Commission, which is charged with assuring that buildings adhere to hillside standards. That commission has reviewed the project once, and has addressed esthetic concerns by asking that the lofts be removed, the windows simplified, and the homes be set into the hillside more, if possible. Conclusion: Not significant. Architectural review should assure that esthetic concerns are addressed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact, with the following: Mitigation measure: 1. The grading plan shall be redesigned to meet the 40% criteria, or an exception must be granted by the City Council. City Council Meeting Page 5 Tuesday, May 24, 1994 - 7:00 P.M. 3. APPEAL - 2006 RACHEL STREET (File No. 407) Council considered an appeal by Pete Evans of an Architectural Review Commission action to approve a four-apartment project at 2006 Rachel Street; Kathy Dang, applicant. Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director, reviewed the agenda report. Woody Combrink, ARC Co-Chair, said although the ARC approved the project, there was some concern regarding the lofts. Frank Randise,2000 Rachel Street, approved of the project because it will provide affordable housing. Pete Evans, Rachel Street, appellant, said the proposed apartment project would be imposing on the neighborhood and was concerned with zoning and appropriateness of use. Kathy Dang, applicant, said she wanted to continue with the project and gave the addresses of property owners who support her development. Chuck Crotser, the applicant's architect, said the project was well within the zoning regulations and urged Council to support the project. Anker Molver. 2022 Rachel, expressed his opposition to the project. Lucinda Nichols, 1901 Henry, said the neighborhood was very much opposed to the project. George Chang, 2034 Swazey, communicated his concerns about growth in San Luis Obispo but was not opposed to the proposed project. Mayor Pinard closed the public hearing. The Council debated the issue of the lofts and other rooms that might be converted to bedrooms and exceed zoning density. City Attorney Jorgensen told Council that the project was consistent with the R-2 zoning and general plan for R-2 neighborhoods. Chuck Crotser,the architect, asked Council for clarification of what the options are in providing lofts in R-2 projects. Pete Evans, the appellant, said that lofts were not the point, but that the project was not compatible with the neighborhood. Woody Combrink, Vice Chair of the Architectural Review Commission, said the commission needed some direction on how 1Q handle the issue of extra rooms and lofts until the policy is more clearly defined. Chuck Crotser suggested that he could eliminate one or more lofts and work with the ARC on what they would feel comfortable with as a compromise. City Council Meeting Page 6 Tuesday, May 24, 1994- 7:00 P.M. Moved by Romero/Roalman to continue the appeal for a period of 60 days and direct applicant to work with staff to deal with issues brought before the Council tonight; motion carried (4-1; Council Member Rappa voting no). 4. APPEAL- 109 DEL SUR (File No. 407) Assistant City Clerk Kim Condon told Council that Item No. 4 on tonight's agenda, a public hearing to appeal a use permit for a second dwelling at 109 Del Sur Way, had been withdrawn by the appellant. Moved by Settle/Romero to accept withdrawal; motion carried (5-0). 5. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT (File No. 463) A public hearing was scheduled to consider amendment to the Zoning Regulations to simplify processing, add and change definitions, clarity wording and format, and make minor changes to development standards. (Continued from 4/11/94.) Moved by Romero/Settle to continue this item to Tuesday, May 31, 1994; motion carried (5-0). 6. BANNER POLICY (File No. 805) A public hearing was scheduled to consider revising the banner policy to eliminate all banners at Mission Plaza, provide a broader definition of events and limit banners to the announcement of events only. (Continued from 4/19/94.) Moved by Romero/Settle to continue this item to Tuesday, May 31, 1994; motion carried (5-0). 7. ORCUTT ROAD SETBACK LINE AMENDMENT (File No. 537) A public hearing was scheduled to consider adopting a revised setback line for Orcutt Road, between Broad Street and the SPRR, and limiting vehicular access to two locations on the south side of Orcutt Road, between Broad Street and the SPRR. (Continued from 4/19/94.) Moved Romero/Settle by to continue this item to Tuesday, May 31, 1994; motion carried (5-0). 8. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (File No. 537) A. CITYWIDE NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGY/AUGUSTA STREET PEDESTRIAN SAFETY Council considered pedestrian safety devises on Augusta Street near Sinsheimer Elementary School. Mike McCluskey, Public Works Director explained the need to adopt a strategy for neighborhood traffic management planning and how the need for pedestrian crossing facilities on August Street had been brought to staff's attention by the Sinsheimer School. Mayor Pinard asked for comments from the public. 49440 City Council Meeting Page 5 Tuesday, July 19, 1994-7:00 PM Moved by Settle/Raooa to introduce to print Ordinance No. 1268 amending Section 5.44.060(E)of the Mobil Home Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance to clarify that automatic adjustments to rent shall not be Included in base space rent for the purpose of determining CPI increases; motion carried (4-0-1, Council Member Romero not participating). 3. APPEAL-2006 RACHEL (File No. 407) Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Pete Evans of an Architectural Review Commission decision to approve a four-unit apartment project at 2006 Rachel; Kathy Dang,applicant (continued from 5/24/94). Arnold Jonas. Community Development Director, reviewed the proposed project. Mayor Pinard declared the public hearing open. Michael Woltman. 1040 San Carlos Dr.,stated the project would have a negative impact on the safety and character of the neighborhood. Pete Evans. Appellant, stated the development was not consistent with the General Plan, and would have significant negative impacts on the neighborhood. Chuck Croster, representing Kathy Dang, the applicant, stated the density and aesthetics were carefully planned to mix with the neighborhood. Allen Michaels. 1973 San Luis Dr.,stated he was the original owner of the property and supported the project. Dave Foosi. 2056 Rachel, spoke in favor of the project. Jack Artuso. 1604 Morro#1R,supported the project and stated the surrounding neighborhoods were very dense. Mayor Pinard declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Romero/Rapoa to adopt a resolution denying the appeal, amended to require a two-way drive past the tree with 10 parking spaces required; motion was lost (2-3, Council Member Roalman, Vice Mayor Settle and Mayor Pinard voting no). Council discussed project alternatives. Moved by Settle/Roalman to continue this item to the next available meeting, upholding the appeal, and direct staff to explore with applicant two 2-bedroom units similar to plans presented this evening; motion carried (3-2, Council Members Rappa and Romero voting no). r 4. APPEAL- FARMERS' MARKET (File No. 407) Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Gregory Campbell of a Business Improvement Board decision to deny his application to participate in Thursday Night Farmers' Market (continued from 7/7/94). Lynn Block, Administrator of the Business Improvement Association (BIA), reviewed the appeal. DATE ITEM # .3Fnr ,eas: � IECE1VEi Sa�3 Luis 0r;''DD, C3ir;C:,-na 9;4Di awl S05 5417 3-_:f OCT 1 21994 , l; 505,5-;-0532 1� OUNCIL CDD DIR C OF SAN LUIS OBISJ VAo ❑ FiNDIR „E•.UMrVDFWl it 4O ❑ FIRE CHIEF j October 11, 1994 F10FI+JEY n �tV D I R �CLEr!CrL7IC; ❑ rOLICECHF City Councilu IvMiCi TEAM U REC OR City of San Luis Obispo READ 1:14 F: ❑ UTIL MR I 990 Palm Street �CfL 0 ;:E5 ,D i R San Luis Obispo, CA ,. .,�, RE : 2006 Rachel Street We are submitting revised plans for the above project,for Kathy Dang, N which we believe respond to the specific wishes of the Council which we A 5 S e C I A 7 E 5 understood to be: A,Chaevure fnrerror Desisn 1. Reduce density fnwonmenralGraph,r The new construction is limited to 2-two bedroom units. (2.0 equivilant units) as compared to the previously approved scheme of 4-one Cheder Cmtser,Architeel bedroom units. (2.68 equivilant units).Lofts have been eliminated. PlemRaeemeke.,MMA. 2. Reduce development on the upper portion of the proper The upper two units have been eliminated,therefore providing an additional 28'-30' of open space. Since our initial planning for this property, begun back in 1990, we've tried to create a well designed project without requesting any exceptions to standards or regulations.The originally approved project was designed to comply with all zoning requirements including the density limit. Since the appeal of the originally approved project, we have presented four alternatives in hopes of satisfying the wishes of the Council as well as meeting our client's goals for her property. Alternate#1 -Leave original project "as is",but remove lofts. Apparent benefit:Eliminate any question as to the use of the loft as an additional bedroom; slight reduction in overall building height. Alternate#2- Create 4 one-bedroom detached"low-rise units",without lofts Apparent benefit : Same as Alternate#1; also additional reduction in building height of 6-8' feet. Alternate#3 - Create 2 one-bedroom duplexes, without lofts Apparent benefit :Eliminate any question as to the use of the loft as an additional bedroom; also elimination of building mass on the upper portion of the hill (additional 25'-26'of open space). Alternate#4- Current proposal : 2 two-bedroom units Apparentb nefit : See above -e OCT 1 ;- 1994 :�iti CLEi�r. .OGISP••. , Apr L • , jk F5' Although the most recent proposal is not Kathy's preferred choice,it is satisfactory,and we would hope that you also find this solution acceptable. We look forward to working with the ARC in working out the details of our proposal,but we must first come to conclusion on this issue of density. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 46LI l Na ss0CIAres 4r.h,:e,hrte Charles Crotser, AIA Ixefio:°e`'0° E:,, �:r.e.�:al G,a;r,ri Charles Crosser,Architect Pierre Rademaker,M.F.A. l I E I Y. • _Y 1 V. m •I r __ r J I '�. �- 1�7�=•t9�-moi ..I.- 'N'IN°rpy .. .J I I Y, O V e� 3 i .5 N - r -� •�. UQ IIII'' u w T - N Y L� V ---------------- ._ y ` , r J O � a o 0 a� 1 • I � r Y r, IL Ul _• S N Z 1 � p x / Z i � d FI 111 w C = UU 14 15