Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-2014 PH2 PresentationPacific Courtyards (ARC 96-13) Appeals of Architectural Review Commission's design approval of a mixed-use project with 9 residential units & 8,000 square feet of offices. City Council - November 10, 2014 1 Recommendation Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 9) denying the appeals, and upholding the Architectural Review Commission's (ARC’s) action to approve the mixed-use project at 1327 Osos Street, based on findings, and subject to conditions. 2 Situation The ARC approved the project on September 8th. An appeal of the decision was filed by Alice Davis on September 18th. A second appeal was filed by Stewart and Diane Jenkins on September 18th. Appeals of ARC decisions are considered by the City Council. 3 Council’s Purview Uphold or deny the appeals of ARC’s design approval of the project. If appeals upheld, then the Council will need to make specific findings of inconsistency with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and Community Design Guidelines. Staff would return to City Council with the appropriate findings to uphold the appeals and deny the project. 4 Davis Appeal a.The project will negatively impact solar access to 1322 Morro Street. b.The plan has insufficient parking. c.Dead zones are created along the project’s streetscapes, especially on Morro Street. d.Fire safety is compromised by the design. e.Presentation materials such as bird’s eye views skew the visual impacts of the project. 5 Jenkins’ Appeal a.CHC’s recommendations for denial were overlooked. b.ARC ignored “requirements for proposed new development within a Historic District to provide for sizing, shaping, rhythm and styling of structures that incorporate the best examples of historic styling.” c.Removal of underground parking has floated massing on top of ground floor garages which removes human scale and ground floor living spaces which is incompatible with other development on Morro Street. 6 Staff’s Presentation Provide a brief project history. Describe setting & project approved by the ARC. Address appeal points with overviews of ARC meetings. Provide recommendation. 7 Project Review CHC – November 25, 2013 – reviewed earlier design of project. ARC – December 16, 2013 - conceptual architectural review. Planning Commission – April 9, 2014 - recommended City Council approve the zone change & tract map. City Council – June 10, 2014 – approved zone change & tract map. CHC – June 23, 2014 - review modified project design; recommended denial of the project based on inconsistency with Historic Preservation Program Guidelines & CDG. ARC – September 8, 2014 - final design review (continued from August 4, 2014 with 6 directional items). 8 Vicinity Map 9 Old Town Historical District Old Town Historic District Site 10 Mixed-Use Project Two separate buildings Podium oriented to Osos Street: 8,000 sq.ft. office on three levels Ground level parking 5 townhomes & 1-bdrm. Unit (affordable) Townhomes oriented to Morro Street. 3 townhomes – 2 levels of living over garages M o r r o O s o s 11 The proposed development plan reflects the approved zoning O s o s M o r r o 12 Document Guidance on Context Historic Preservation Program Guidelines New structures in historic districts should be architecturally compatible in terms of scale, massing, rhythm, detailing, materials & siting (3.2.1). Don’t need to imitate or copy historic structures(3.2.1). Should not sharply contrast with, significantly block public views of, or visually detract from, the historic architectural character of historically designated structures (3.2.2). 13 Document Guidance on Context Community Design Guidelines - 1.4 Goals for Design Quality and Character & 3.B.1 Architectural Style. Design with consideration of the site context in terms of the best nearby examples of massing, scale, and land uses when the site is located in a notable area of the city (for example, Downtown, Old Town). The goal is to preserve not only the historic flavor of the community but, equally important, its scale and ambiance. 14 12-16-13 ARC Conceptual Review – Continue with direction: Modify parking to be more functional. Provide additional horizontal and vertical articulation to the Osos Street elevation of the project to create a building massing and roof design that is more compatible with surrounding structures. Simplify materials palette & eliminate corrugated siding. Improve the pedestrian experience on both Morro and Osos Streets. Morro Street perspective Osos Street streetscape 15 8-4-14 ARC Final Review – Continue with direction: Modify the Osos Street elevations of the project as follows: a. Simplify the design; b. Play up the building entry; c. Look at more offsets of the third floor on the apartment side to better transition the building mass; d. Consider the elimination of the wood box on the left- hand side; and e. Provide less of a visual gap in the third floor level. 12-16-13 Osos streetscape 8-4-14 Osos streetscape 16 8-4-14 ARC Final Review – Continue with direction: Modify the Morro Street elevation of the project as follows: a.Further refine the design of the roof decks to create a more seamless transition from gable forms. b.Look at alternative locations for, or further reduce the sizes of, the roof decks to take into consideration privacy and overlook to adjacent neighbors. c. Provide larger roof overhangs to the gable end. d. Explore the idea of creating a yard area and more of a recess for the entry. 12-16-13 Morro perspective 8-4-14 Morro perspective 17 9-8-14 ARC Final Review – Osos Street 1.Design simplified. 2.Greater setback made adjacent to the Rio Bravo Apartments. 3.Wood box removed. 4.Central gap eliminated. 5.Gray cementitious siding is used for the wall surface above the garage entry. 6.Large, vertical set of divided window panes added on the left-hand side. 8-4-14 Osos Elevation 9-8-14 Osos Elevation 18 9-8-14 ARC Final Review - Morro Street a.Further refine the design of the roof decks to create a more seamless transition from gable forms; 1.Second and third levels stepped back. 2.Shed roofs extend gable form back to provide more integrated transition. 3.Shingle material uses on exterior of roof deck wall to blend in with roof form. d.Explore the idea of creating a yard area and more of a recess for the entry. 1.Fenced front yard created for unit facing street. Morro Street Bird’s Eye 8-4-14 Morro Street Bird’s Eye 9-8-14 19 9-8-14 ARC Final Review - Morro Street b.Look at alternative locations for, or further reduce the sizes of, the roof decks to take into consideration privacy and overlook to adjacent neighbors. 1.Roof decks reduced in area. 2.Planter boxes at the perimeter work to provide additional screening to the benefit of both residents and their adjacent neighbors. c.Provide larger roof overhangs to the gable end. 1.Revised plans contracted the walls about 1 foot which result in a deeper overhang. Morro Street Bird’s Eye 9-8-14 20 Parking Required Use Calculation Spaces Required 2-bedroom units 6 units x 2 spaces 12.0 3-bedroom units 2 unit x 2.5 spaces 5.0 1-bedroom unit 1 unit x 1.5 1.5 Guest (9 units) 1 space/5 units 1.8 Office 8,050 sf/300 26.8 TOTAL 47.1 Spaces Provided 34 21 Parking Layouts Plan reviewed by ARC Dec. 2013 Current site plan – eliminated 4 sets of tandem spaces & added 4 standard spaces Residential Pkg. – self- contained Guest & office parking – 28.6 required; 17 spaces provided 22 Planning Commission’s Parking Recommendation Supported 10% shared parking reduction & automobile trip reduction program. Use Calculation Spaces required Spaces provided Guest (9 units) 1 space/5 units 1.8 Office 8,050/300 = 26.8 26.80 Total 28.60 10% shared 28.6 x 0.1 = 2.86 - 2.86 25.74 Extra Bicycle 1 car space for 5 extra bicycles - 1.00 24.74 = 25 17; 8-space deficit 23 Applicant’s Trip Reduction Program (Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP)) TDMP includes supportable programs to reduce vehicle trips to the site. Approved program – includes provision of: 1) an on-site vehicle for workers to share; 2) car pool parking space; 3) common area shower facility; and 4) purchase of 8 bicycles for use by workers. 1.6 average vehicle ridership goal will be tracked through annual survey & report to the City. 24 Recommendation Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 9) denying the appeals, and upholding the Architectural Review Commission's (ARC’s) action to approve the mixed-use project at 1327 Osos Street, based on findings, and subject to conditions. 25