Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPre App Comment Letter (2) September 28, 2018 (Sent via Email) San Luis Obispo Repertory Theater c/o Kevin Harris 888 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Pre-Application Meeting PRE-1686-2018 - Pre-Application review Pre-application review of a new performing arts theater, the SLO Repertory Theatre To Whom It May Concern: On August 23, 2018, the applicant team of SLO Repertory Theater and representatives of the City’s Departments met to discuss the subject project. Attached are notes from the meeting discussion as well as additional notes from the individual departments. Questions from the Applicant: 1. If the parking garage project is delayed, and we would like to move forward ahead of it, are we really going to have to re-do all the EIR stuff? Why? Would most of that just be re-working already attained data? A Final EIR has been certified for the project which included the development of the SLO Repertory Theatre. The site has not been rezoned yet and the plan is for the City to move forward with the zone change, use permit and architectural design of the parking garage in the Spring as one package. If SLO Rep wanted to start now, then they would have to take the request for a zone change, use permit and design on their own. This would impact parking which is discussed next. 2. How will parking requirements be handled? Obviously, none will occur on site, but can/will we get a break on in-lieu fees? The project will be required to either provide parking or pay an in-lieu fee. The City in the past has had a specific in-lieu fee for Community Partners. Parking for a theatre is one space per 350 square feet of gross floor area. An additional parking reduction may be requested up to 10% with the Parking Demand Study. 3. We critically need the roll up access doors on the south and north sides. A theatre can't really function without this kind of access. How can this be accommodated? We really only need these access points available occasionally. Could this be conditioned, such as delivery trucks are only allowed certain days/hours? We don't see use of these doors as creating more "traffic: per se. PRE-1686-2018 Page 2 610 Monterey It would be helpful to see on plans how these loading areas are accessed. Are curb- cuts needed? Can some kind of access control (bollards, for ex.) be included at the driveway off Monterey? Can the access off of Monterey be done from curbside parking lane with access across the sidewalk and plaza area instead of a driveway with trucks backed into the site? It appears from the plans that along Monterey Street that there is an area for vehicles to get out of the lane of traffic. Will the parking meters be removed from in front of the theatre? Can the driveway on Monterey be designed to be more visually pleasing? Landscape feature or decorative pavement, for example. Something to complement and accent the front of the theater. 4. The current draft EIR mentions a zoning designation of PF, but the development requirements for this zone show 15 ft. setbacks and 25-35 ft. height limits. Other parking garages, we understand, were zoned commercial and our designs have zero setbacks and 40+ ft heights. Yes, front yard setback is 15 feet. In this particular case the project is being designed around an oak tree that is required to stay and thus the variation to the setback can be supported. Also, the Final EIR was based on the overall project, including the theatre, to have deviations in the setback requirement, building heights and site coverage. 5. My understanding of the accessibility codes, based in experience with other jurisdictions, is that the only exterior accessible, wheelchair ramp required is at the main entrance. All other exterior exits can be stairs and/or pedestrian ramps up to 1 in 8 in slope. This is critical to our design in a number of ways. We suggest obtaining a report from a Certified Access Specialist (CASp) to determine accessibility compliance. 6. What’s the plan for the BEE BEE statue on MORRO STREET outside of the theatre now? Is the City planning on moving that to the new site? If not, what would be best way to begin the discussion of any public art components in our site plan? There are no plans at this time to move the BeeBee Statue. T he project would be required to contribute to the Public Art Fund or provide public art on site. 7. What portion of the sidewalk and Stairs at the Corner of Monterey and Nipomo will be saved during Demolition? The ARC/PC submittal shall clarify the limits of the existing granite retaining wall and stairs. Clarify whether they are proposed for re-use or if historic fabric will be retained on site. 8. How will the demolition of the existing structures be handled if the project is phased? The demolition of the structures on the site would need to go through the demolition process which includes making them available to the public to move and relocate. The demolition would be the responsibility of SLO Rep as a part of the project, but it is likely that there could be some negotiation with the City about this. PRE-1686-2018 Page 3 610 Monterey 9. What are the requirements for saving the Oak Trees? What type of material can be placed over the root zone at the Oak Trees? The ARC/PC submittal shall include a certified arborist report that includes tree protection measures that can be reviewed by the City Arborist for the Coast Live Oak/Quercus agrifolia tree (front yard) and Redwood/Sequoia sempervirens tree (back yard). 10. Are the driveways allowed in the current locations on both Monterey Street and Nipomo Street? Yes, 1- driveway shown on Nipomo is acceptable. Plans should clarify the functionality of the proposed driveway on Monterey Street and provide a driveway approach. (Both driveways may require managed access restrictions). 11. What type of drainage will be allowed if the Access Roll Up Door on the North Sid e of building is below grade? Can we pump storm water from this area with a duplex pump? Yes, Stormwater water can be pumped, but site design needs to elevate above flood zone. The ARC/PC submittal shall define the flood zone and call out the BFE. 12. What off-site improvements are going to be required? Can the City provide off site design parameters? How are we tapering our proposed improvements into existing? The ARC/PC submittal shall show existing & proposed site improvements. Clarify limits of extents of public improvement including sidewalk, curb and gutter. The proposed public improvements (sidewalk, curb and gutter) can’t be over the existing water main. This part of the City requires mission style sidewalk and there is discussion regarding a bulb-out at the intersection of Nipomo and Monterey. Continue to communicate with Transportation about the design of the off-site improvements. 13. Are we going to be under-grounding all utilities? Undergrounding of dry utilities (PG&E and communication) will be done per engineering standards. 14. How will the Storm Water Control Plan be handled? Are we responsible for only our portion of the project? Do we need to show a plan on how the entire project must be in compliance? The project will be responsible for handling it’s own stormwater control plan, but there may be an opportunity in the discussions with the City to collaborate with the parking structure to address stormwater together. Additional Department Comments Planning Review Rachel Cohen rcohen@slocity.org (805)781-7574 PRE-1686-2018 Page 4 610 Monterey 1. The project will be subject to the new zoning regulations. You can review the regulations online here: http://www.slocity.org/government/department- directory/community-development/planning-zoning/zoning/zoning-regulations- update. 2. The project will require review by the Cultural Heritage Committee, Architecture Review Commission and Planning Commission. Engineering Development Review Hal Hannula hhannula@slocity.org (805)781-7201 3. Street Lights: a. There is an existing street light on Monterey. This is shown on the demo plans C2 Sheet 2. Confirm this will be protected in place or replaced/relocated per City standards. b. Demo Plans C2 Sheet 2 also identified street light on Nipomo currently installed on a PG&E pole. If utilities are underground, this light will be to be installed on a Type 15 pole per City Standards. (This may fall in the parameter of the Parking structure development). 4. Preserve or reutilize the rock at the site that is currently used for retaining and near the stairs. 5. ARC/PC submittal shall include an overall proposed and existing site plan, including adjacent properties and future City parking structure. 6. ARC/PC submittal shall include complete utilities and utility company meters. 7. Clarify the use of the open space underneath the existing Oak tree in the front yard. 8. ARC/PC submittal shall clarify timing between City Parking Structure, include any transition plan between the two. 9. ARC/PC submittal shall clarify proposal for Solid waste management, including solid, recycle and green waste. 10. ARC/PC submittal shall show pedestrian loading and unloading zones and commercial loading zones. 11. ARC/PC shall clarify if downsloping area at the basement area will be in the flood zone or allow flood water to enter this area. 12. ARC/PC shall provide drainage report and stormwater report strategy. 13. ARC/PC submittal shall distinguish between concrete, adobe and granite walls. Revise the architectural, civil, and landscape plans to all agree. Clarify whether historic PRE-1686-2018 Page 5 610 Monterey material fabric is proposed for reuse and will be retained on the site. 14. Topo Survey, Demo., grading, architectural plans shall all agree as applicable. 15. ARC/PC submittal shall Delineate all trees within the property 3” or greater for removal or retention. Include the diameter and correct tree species. Identify all off-site trees with tree canopies or roots located within the area of grading or construction. Tree canopies should generally be shown to scale for reference. 16. Provide a Certified Arborist report to the City Arborist for the Coast Live Oak/Quercus agrifolia tree (front yard) and Redwood/Sequoia sempervirens tree (back yard) Building and Safety Division Tina Slusher tslusher@slocity.org (805)781-7157 17. Buildings and other structures whose primary occupancy is public assembly with an occupant load greater than 300 shall be structurally designed as Risk Category III. 18. Note: Any building plans submitted after 2020 will be subject to 2019 Building Codes. 19. ARC/PC submittal shall show compliance with accessibility regulations. Show accessible path of travel to all interior and exterior functional areas. 20. ARC/PC submittal shall include a complete occupancy and exiting analysis. Include analysis of basement level areas. Transportation Review Jennifer Rice jrice@slocity.org (805) 781-7058 21. Verify if Mission Tile is required for perimeter improvements. 22. Note: need to determine required street improvements includes their fair share of modifications required under the traffic study. 23. Traffic Impact Fees are required. 24. Parking In-Lieu fees are required if parking is not included as part of the project. Utilities Review Miguel Barcenas mbarcenas@slocity.org (805)781-7507 25. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards effective at the time the building permit is obtained, and shall have reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure. PRE-1686-2018 Page 6 610 Monterey 26. If the basement requires dewatering due to shallow groundwater, a discharge permit will need to get process through our environmental compliance section. 27. Sewer and water mains are available along Monterey Street, but will need to review final plumbing calculations for capacity review. 28. Residential and commercial uses need to be separately metered. 29. MAWA and ETWU calculations will need to be provided for the proposed landscape plan. 30. Applicant should USA to confirm utility locations, but based on the site walk, a. Monterey: Currently it appears that the existing utilities along Monterey will not be in conflict with the proposed design, but recommend potholing for field verification prior to start of any grading operations. b. Nipomo: Utilities believes that on Nipomo the waterline (and other City utilities) will be outside of the proposed curb and gutter, however the plans do indicate that the waterline is under the proposed curb/gutter. If that is in fact the case, the water line will need to be relocated to be outside of the curb/gutter. The plans do not accurately layout existing conditions of the adjacent corner on Nipomo/Monterey. If the proposed sidewalk will be in line with the bulbout on that corner, the waterline should be clear of the curb/gutter. Applicant to confirm. c. There is another visible trench within the existing parking lane (that would be within the proposed sidewalk). We believe that services power as it looks to lead to a PG&E pole in front of the site. d. Palm: Potential/probably utility conflicts if widening the sidewalk. (This is in the parameter of the Parking Structure development, but FYI). e. The preference would be to underground all utilities. Fire Department Rodger Maggio rmaggio@slocity.org 781-7386 31. Show location of the following: Fire sprinkler lateral from main, fire protection backflow valve and fire department connection, Fire sprinkler riser room with exterior door access. PRE-1686-2018 Page 7 610 Monterey If you have any questions regarding the attached information, please contact me at (805) 781- 7574 or by email at rcohen@slocity.org. Sincerely, Rachel Cohen Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E rcohen@slocity.org T 805.781.7574 slocity.org