Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-10-2014 ARC MinutesSAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES February 10, 2014 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Steven Hopkins, Anthony Palazzo, 1 Position Vacant, Vice -Chair Greg Wynn, and Chairperson Michelle McCovey -Good Absent: None Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Planning Technician Walter Oetzell, Landscape Architect and EIR Visual Consultant Bob Carr, and Recording Secretary Kyle Bell ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: D.K. Philbin requested to make a general comment about Item # 2 because he needed to leave early. He requested that the ARC keep in mind the neighborhood cohesion when discussing aesthetics of the project. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 309 Madonna Road. ARC 84 -13; Review of new building for Buffalo Wild Wings; C -R -PD zone; Blazin Wings, Inc., applicant. (Walter Oetzell) Walter Oetzell, Planning Technician, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission adopt the draft resolution granting final approval to the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions. Senior Planner Ricci added that the staff recommends that the applicant use the individual faced brick veneer shown on the submitted materials board, rather than the panelized wall system reviewed at the meeting. Vice -Chair Wynn asked about the new conditions to be added to the resolution and where they are included in the resolution. Planning Technician Oetzell explained that the added Public Works conditions are numbered 11 and 12 and relate to the upgrade of the radial curb ramp and repairs to, or replacement of, frontage improvements. Vice -Chair Wynn commented on the differences in the cornice design between the front elevation shown in the PowerPoint presentation and perspective views in the Commissioners' packets. ARC Minutes February 10, 2014 Page 2 Rick Hallenbeck, architect, clarified the perspective view shows the cornice design correctly. He also provided a photo of an installation of the panelized brick which he shared with the ARC. Commr. Hopkins asked about the rationale for the material change. Rick Hallenbeck responded that the initial design is the panelized brick and he wanted the ARC to consider it for this project. Commr. Curtis asked about the orientation of the building and the rationale for having the entrance to the building being on the opposite side from the parking. Rick Hallenbeck responded that initially they oriented the building toward the parking, and as a request from staff, they rotated the building to have the entrance on the same side as the Applebee's next door so that they both faced the street. PUBLIC COMMENTS: D.K. Philbin clarified that the entrance to the Applebee's was on the side of the building near the side street (El Mercado). COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Wynn stated that he was not a fan of the panelized brick material, and that he thought the added signs under the patio canopy and the front elevation take -out sign were small and acceptable as part of the overall sign program. Commr. Palazzo commented that he would have preferred to see more outdoor window detailing in the plans and did not support the use of the panelized brick. Commrs. Hopkins, Ehdaie, and Curtis commented that they agreed with Vice Chair Wynn's comments. Commr. Palazzo expressed concerns about the design of the Buffalo Wild Wings building being too generic. Pam Ricci added that the applicant had worked with staff to make modifications to the siting, architectural details, and colors of the building to better comply with the City's Community Design Guidelines. On motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded by Commr. Ehdaie to adopt the draft resolution granting final approval to the probect deli n with the following modifications to conditions (6:0): a. Add the following sentences to the end of condition No. 2: "The south elevation of the building shall be clad with the individual faced brick veneer CHC Muddux — Monterey Bay Flashed ") shown on the approved materials board. A panelized wall system reviewed at the meeting imitating the appearance of brick shall not be used as exterior cladding. ARC Minutes February 10, 2014 Page 3 b. Delete the second sentence of Condition No. 3. AYES: Commrs. Ehdaie, Hopkins, Palazzo, Curtis, Wynn, and McCovey -Good NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. The Commission took a five - minute break at 5:40 p.m. Commrs. Palazzo and Curtis recused themselves from participation in the discussion of Item No. 2. Commr. Palazzo had a conflict as his firm does work for the School District and Commr. Curtis lives within 500 feet of the project site. 2. 1642 Johnson Avenue. ARC 56 -08; Review of the Aesthetics Section of the Johnson Avenue Housing Project EIR and project design guidelines; R -2 zone; San Luis Coastal Unified School District, applicant. (Pam Ricci) Pam Ricci, Senior Planner, provided an overview of the project and EIR process, and Bob Carr, Landscape Architect and EIR Visual Consultant, discussed the methodology of the analysis included in the Visual Section of the EIR. Staff closed the presentation by reiterating that the goal of the meeting was to obtain comments and feedback on the Aesthetics Section of the EIR and to focus on Mitigation Measure AES -3(a) to provide suggestions on additions or changes. Commr. Hopkins asked about the requirements in the mitigation measure and when those modifications would be reflected in the elevations and photo simulations of the designs for the project. Pam Ricci replied that, after certification of the EIR, a specific project design would need to return for final approval by the ARC and plans would need to include all of the required information for final review. Carol Florence, representative, emphasized that this is a pre - conceptual design for the site and noted the applicant has requested that the EIR public review period be extended to allow for more analysis and information to be considered. She also discussed how the City's plans and policies support this type of project. She noted that the applicant was in agreement with the mitigation measures and that they hoped to save site trees. Jonathan Watts, architect, explained the rationale behind the orientation of the project on the site. He also commented on the architecture of the building and how it complements the style of the area and how the colors blend with the hillside. Vice -Chair Wynn questioned the discussion of some of the project details included in the design guidelines mitigation measure if the project was just a concept at this point. ARC Minutes February 10, 2014 Page 4 Jonathan Watts responded that the Commission can provide feedback on the EIR mitigation measures such as color choices to reduce the project scale. Vice -Chair Wynn asked about rationale of the zone of the project and if the project reflects the maximum build out of the project site. Carol Florence responded that they started with single - family development and out of concern for sprawl and the City's desire for higher density, the project team decided upon R -4 zoning in response to those concerns. Pam Ricci noted that the EIR found that there were significant visual impacts associated with project development, but that the impacts could be mitigated to be less -than- significant with the recommended mitigation measures. Commr. Hopkins asked Bob Carr about the visual impact thresholds and how the team determined whether or not the impacts were significant. Bob Carr noted that the thresholds for visual impacts were complex and based on a variety of factors including prominence of views, duration of views, and numbers of residents affected by the views. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Dia Hurd expressed that she feels that the EIR is overlooking what the neighborhood needs and that its references to scale focus too much on larger buildings such as the hospital and school. Ron Tilley, expressed concern about this type of development neighboring an R -1 zone, and that the development looks like Cal Poly housing. He also expressed concerns with slope stability and recommended the undergrounding of utilities. Lanny Hernandez stated that the project is a pig and that no amount of cosmetics will change it from being a pig and no amount of dressing up the project will change it from the impact it will have on the neighborhood. Steve Sicanoff noted that the Draft EIR has made the surrounding homes impossible to sell at this point due to the uncertainty of the pending project. He suggested that the project move closer to the school and away from the neighborhoods and be greatly downsized. He expressed concern that the City is valuing the patch of grass for preservation more than the character of the neighborhood. He mentioned that the project looks like something they would build over at Cal Poly. Dave Kuykendall shared that the project blocks a lot of the views from Johnson, and the mitigation of the project is an attempt to deal with a problem and not solve the problem. John Kerr stated that the aesthetics, scale, and style of the project should focus on something that complements the character of the neighborhood. ARC Minutes February 10, 2014 Page 5 Donald Avery shared that the neighborhood has currently has a really nice view and this project needs to be scaled down to respect that. He noted that Fixlini is often used as hiking trail to connect to trails and neighborhoods and the project needs to take the view points from the trails into consideration. He added that he is offended that the grass patch is being prioritized more than the neighborhood. Dick Paul explained that it is difficult for the public to perceive the project due to the conceptual designs and that they don't know what to expect from what actually may develop there. Wendy Brown expressed concerns about the zone changes from R -2 to R -4 and that, in comparison, there are not any R -4 projects downtown. She shared that she believes that there could be a better project that would be beautiful at a smaller scale. Paul Abbott expressed that he is in favor of the City pursuing high- density housing and that the site is good for development; although, he feels that the density of this project is not appropriate for this site, and that there are unique views in this area that need to be preserved. Paul Gabriel stated that he is entirely against the project, and that there needs to be an entry point from San Luis Drive since Fixlini Street will not suffice as the only entrance to be able to handle that kind of traffic. He noted that the project is too tall and the views around the site need to be preserved. He mentioned that the project is being crammed in the corner of the site and that there is plenty of room to spread out onto the site. He concluded that the project and the zone change do not fit the neighborhood. Eric Meyer shared that he feels it may be easier to move the needle grass than to develop such large and tall buildings on the site. He mentioned the nearby La Loma Adobe and that its proximity to the site needs to be part of the EIR evaluation. He suggested that an R -2 zone could meet the profit that the school is looking for and be a better fit for the neighborhood. Jed Hazeltine shared that he feels the project is an abomination. He expressed concern about light pollution from the site at night that might affect the neighborhood or the hiking trails. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Pam Ricci explained that the Commission's purview is to comment on the Aesthetics section of the Draft EIR and discuss whether the proposed mitigation measures are adequate to offset visual impacts. Vice -Chair Wynn asked staff why the ARC was scheduled to go first before the Planning Commission on this project. Pam Ricci replied that the ARC meeting was scheduled first to provide feedback on the visual analysis included in the Aesthetics section of the EIR to the Planning Commission. ARC Minutes February 10, 2014 Page 6 Commr. Hopkins stated that the mitigation measures do not fully address the impact of the project scale at this site. Commr. Ehdaie supported AES -3(a) without the inclusion of Item "b" since she believed that the buildings did not need more articulation between units. Vice -Chair Wynn agreed with Commr. Hopkins that the mitigation measures were not sufficient to offset the visual impacts of project development on the site. However, he suggested that additional wording be added to the preamble of Mitigation Measure AES -3(a) to require sections and a digital model along with plans and elevations for ARC review. He added that the EIR analyze the glare and "lantern" aspects of the current design. He noted that it is important that the project focus on preserving viewsheds. Chair McCovey -Good agreed with Commr. Ehdaie's comment that Item "b" be stricken from Mitigation Measure AES -3(a). She added that the allowed project color palette not be restricted to just dark earth colors (Item 'T), and that retaining walls don't need to be limited to having a stone surface (Item "h "). She concurred with Vice Chair Wynn about the importance of maintaining view corridors. She noted that the potential impacts to historic sites and buildings near the project need to be evaluated in the EIR. Commr. Ehdaie asked if some off -site mitigation could be done to offset impacts to the needle grass habitat. Pam Ricci replied that an alternative in the EIR looks at this. Vice -Chair Wynn added that the project mitigation is too specific on a color scheme and that some light colors might be more appropriate. Commr. Hopkins asked if there was a way that the Commission could express their concerns regarding the appropriateness of the project for the area. Pam Ricci added that the staff can forward the meeting minutes to the Planning Commission, so they have a chance to see the public comment from the ARC. She summarized that the ARC concluded that the EIR mitigation measures did not fully offset the project's visual impacts and that an alternative footprint for the project, specifically allowing some encroachment into the purple needle grass meadow, should be explored further; the ARC agreed with this synopsis. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff: a. Agenda Forecast Pam Ricci gave an agenda forecast of upcoming projects. ARC Minutes February 10, 2014 Page 7 4. Commission: The Commission had a general discussion about projects in the Broad Street corridor, specifically mentioning the remodel of the old Mazda dealership for offices and the church building at 2747 Broad Street as a single - family house. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Kyle Bell Recording Secretary Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on March 3, 2014. Cori Ryan Supervising Administrative Assistant