Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-07-2014 ARC MinutesSAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES July 7, 2014 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root, Vice - Chair Greg Wynn, and Chairperson Michelle McCovey -Good Absent: Commissioner Patricia Andreen Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Contract Planners Rachel Cohen and Shawna Scott, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: The minutes of June 16, 2014, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Chairperson McCovey -Good recused herself from participation in the discussion of Item No. 1 because her firm is part of the team preparing project plans, and left the meeting. 1. 890 Foothill Boulevard. ARC -S 27 -14; Review of master sign program for University Square; C -R -S zone; NKT Real Properties, LLC, applicant. (Rachel Cohen) Planner Cohen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the draft resolution approving the proposed Sign Program, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. Carol Florence, Principal Planner, Oasis Associates, representing the applicant, distributed a list of applicant requested condition changes that varied form the draft resolution that staff prepared, In response to an earlier question from Vice -Chair Wynn, she clarified that the freestanding identification sign that is part of the sign program adjacent to Carl's Jr. along Santa Rosa Street would replace the existing sign and would remain in the same location; she noted that the applicant has an agreement with Carl's Jr. allowing the sign at that location. Jack Fovell, CEO, Southwest Sign Company, stated that the applicant wanted to retain plex face channel signs in the sign program and provided an actual illuminated channel letter example at the meeting. He stated that the freestanding identification signs have a satin, rather than shiny aluminum finish and that only the lettering of each tenant panel is lit. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 2 Emily Ewer, Associate Planner, Oasis Associates, explained the applicant's case for allowing a new monument sign along Foothill Boulevard, and a rationale for why a larger available sign area for the major tenants would provide for more interesting sign designs, including the possibility of offset signs. Ms. Florence stated that an attempt will be made to center wall signs, but signs may be offset to the right or left if desired by individual tenants. She requested that the 16 foot height for the freestanding signs be retained due to the need for visibility above adjacent parked cars. She added that the smaller monument sign at Chorro and Foothill would give the two major tenants in Buildings 6 and 8 some recognition even though the buildings cannot be seen from the street. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Senior Planner Ricci noted that the applicant's list of condition changes was received at the meeting; therefore, staff did not have an opportunity to review it in advance of the meeting. She noted that the design of the freestanding signage is cleaner and more modern than the existing center signs, but staff found that the additional monument sign resulted in visual clutter and an unnecessary proliferation of signs along the street. Senior Planner Ricci responded to Commission questions and comments regarding the reasons for preparing sign programs for shopping centers and the sign standards of the underlying C -R zoning. She recommended an additional condition limiting signage to a maximum of 200 sf for Building 6, and a maximum of 150 sf for Building 8. Ms. Florence requested that, if total signage is limited to 200 sf for Building 6, the 36" maximum letter height be increased to 42" and that the three signs for Building 6 be allowed. Commr. Root stated that the staff report addresses letter height but not sign height. Senior Planner Ricci stated that staff felt both things needed to be restricted in the sign program. Commr. Root supported allowing a letter height with a maximum of 42 inches. Commr. Nemcik agreed, but noted that the sign program already contains this so a condition is not necessary. Commr. Ehdaie agreed. Commr. Curtis supported 36" lettering but wanted to eliminate the overall sign height. Vice -Chair Wynn noted that the Foothill Center signage is limited to 36 inches. Commr. Curtis stated that the difference is the major tenants will be new here but exist at the Foothill Center where taller signs are grandfathered in. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 3 Commr. Curtis supported eliminating the restriction on logo size and limiting letter size to 36 inches. Commrs. Wynn and Ehdaie agreed. Commr. Root stated that it is best to restrict the signage envelope. Vice -Chair Wynn stated that the consensus was to eliminate the condition restricting overall sign height for the major tenants. Senior Planner Ricci stated that, to address flexibility and not have mega letters, it is probably best to limit just the letter height and add that 100 sf is the maximum for one sign and the total signage shall not exceed 200 sf for Building 6. She added that a 200 sf maximum for Building 8 signage is too much and that maybe there should be a separate condition for Building 8 stating that the major sign can be 100 sf and a sign on the back of the building can be 50 sf. Commrs. Wynn and Curtis supported this. Vice -Chair Wynn summarized Commission support of the following for Major Tenants: • Wall signs shall not exceed 100 sf, with signage for Building 6 not to exceed 200 sf. • Lettering shall not exceed 36 inches. • The sign on the back of Building 8 shall not exceed 50 sf. Commrs. Nemcik, Ehdaie and Root supported 42" high letters. Senior Planner Ricci noted that such large lettering would set an undesirable precedent. Vice -Chair Wynn stated that his motion includes 36" letters. Commr. Curtis stated that the Foothill Square Shopping Center was not allowed to use individual plex face channel letters as an allowed type of sign in their recently approved sign program. Vice -Chair Wynn asked staff to describe their concerns with this type of signage. Senior Planner Ricci responded that it is the shiny plastic appearance of the letter faces and the cumulative impact of larger surface areas for faces and a row of letters. She noted that the example shown by the applicant team tonight has a narrow width but there can be a much larger letter surface. She noted that the City is trying to get rid of old- fashioned strip mall shiny, bright lettering. She suggested that the plex letter faces should have a matte finish and have either LED or neon internally illumination. Commr. Root added that only the face should be illuminated, not the sides. Vice -Chair Wynn, and Commrs. Root and Ehdaie agreed that Condition 2 could be deleted regarding limiting the allowable sign areas for Building 6. Vice -Chair Wynn stated that he supports Condition 4 requiring the removal of the proposed monument sign from the sign program and the corresponding Finding 4 about the proliferation of signs. Commr. Curtis agreed. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 4 Commr. Root supported the 16 -foot height for the freestanding signs because the sign design is open, the top portion is small, and there is a need to get the tenant names above the landscaping and parked cars. Vice -Chair Wynn suggested retaining Condition 3 to document that the design of the freestanding signs was as presented in the plans reviewed at this meeting and that the Director may refer the signage back to the ARC if future changes to the design are made. Senior Planner Ricci suggested adding a statement noting that ARC supports the design of the freestanding signs as submitted to the July 7, 2014, meeting. Vice -Chair Wynn supported this addition to the Resolution. There were no further comments made from the Commission. On motion by Vice-Chair Wynn, seconded by Commr. Curtis, to approve the Resolution with the following changes: 1) Modify Condition 1.a. (Buildings 6 & 8 Maior Tenant Signage) to read: I. Individual wall signs shall not exceed 100 square feet; 2. Total signage for Building 6 shall not exceed 200 square feet; 3. Total wall signage for Building 8 shall not exceed 150 square feet with a maximum rear wall sign area of 50 square feet." 2) Modify Condition 1.a.2. to read: "Individual letter height is not to exceed 36 inches." 3) Delete original Conditions 1.b.2., 1.c. & 2. 4) Add new condition 1_.c. to read: "LED or neon internally illuminated plex face individual letter sign types may be allowed provided that the sides are opaque." 5) Modify the original Condition 3 to read: "The ARC supported the two new freestanding identification signs reviewed at the July 7, 2014 meeting. The final version of the sign program shall be to the approval of the Community Development Director to confirm that the updated program is consistent with project conditions included in this resolution. The Director may refer the freestanding signage back the ARC if it seems inconsistent with the plans approved by the ARC on July 7 2014. AYES: Commrs. Curtis and Wynn NOES: Commrs. Ehdaie, Nemcik, and Root RECUSED: Commr. McCovey -Good ABSENT: Commr. Andreen The motion failed on a 2:3 vote, On motion by Commr. Root seconded bV Commr. Ehdaie to approve the Resolution with all of the changes included in the first motion above with the exception of Item # 2 regarding limiting the letter size for the major tenants (Buildings 6 & 8) to 36 inches. AYES: Commrs. Ehdaie, Nemcik and Root NOES: Commrs. Curtis and Wynn RECUSED: Commr. McCovey -Good ABSENT: Commr. Andreen ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 5 The motion passed on a 3:2 vote. Chairperson McCovey -Good returned to the meeting. 2. 1301 Calle Joaquin. ARC -C 184 -13; Conceptual review of a new hotel; C -S zone; Stan Jones, Intermountain Management, LLC, applicant. (Pam Ricci) Contract Planner Shawna Scott, SWCA Environmental Consultants, presented the staff report, recommending continuation of the project to a date uncertain with direction to staff and the applicant on items to be addressed in plans submitted for final approval. Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group, applicant representative, briefly described that the proposed rezoning would apply to all four undeveloped properties, and noted that the C -R zoning would allow for car dealerships, as well as accommodate a hotel on the project site. Philip Stewart, Myhre Group Architects Inc., project architect, described the motivations for the selected building footprint and architectural design and the various technical studies that had been conducted. He clarified that Intermountain Management is the project applicant and they also run the Hampton Suites Hotel nearby. He indicated that the project is considered a mid -scale hotel. a PUBLIC COMMENTS: Audrey Alfano, Alfano Motors, asked if the rezoning request would eliminate auto dealerships as an allowed use. Senior Planner Ricci stated that the C -R zone, one of the alternative zoning categories being considered, allows both car dealerships and hotels: Robert Zacks, SLO, asked for elaboration on best industry practices for building barriers to mitigate transmission of particulate matter. Philip Stewart responded that there are two systems: 1) a penetrable weather barrier using rain screens designed to provide a means for water exit, and 2) an air barrier system that is sealed so nothing gets out. Mr. Zacks asked how the parking equipment and storage areas would be screened. Mr. Stewart responded that the trash enclosure will be similar to a noise wall of 8" cement block finished with stone outside and plaster inside with a bumper guard. He noted that generator and transformer equipment will have similar screening. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Site Plan: Commr. Curtis asked if drainage easements shown along both sides of the property in the site plan benefit the City, and, if they are surface drainage ditches, do they provide constraints on site layout. He noted that there will be impervious surfaces on this site. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 6 Senior Planner Ricci clarified that the vegetated drainage swales are existing. Vice - Chair Wynn added this site was graded so the pad is elevated above the flood plain with surface drainage swales included and there is a larger retention basin downstream not shown on the site plan. Senior Planner Ricci stated that pervious paving and other LID measures can be utilized to offset stormwater impacts of development. Commr. Curtis asked if this constrains the site plan. Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group, stated that this does constrain the site plan. Mr. Stewart noted that there is flexibility with building siting in an east -west direction. Commr. Ehdaie suggested putting the parking lot at the back and moving the trash enclosure to the front so the trucks do not drive through the parking lot to the back. Mr. Stewart stated it is placed in the back out of sight and he has been putting concrete under asphalt to prevent the trucks from tearing up the pavement in his projects. Senior Planner Ricci noted that San Luis Garbage has to approve the location. Vice -Chair Wynn stated that the entry needs to be protected from wind. He noted that having a meeting space could qualify the hotel for a mixed use parking reduction. Commr. Curtis agreed with the consideration of a parking reduction and stated he would like to see permeable surfaces in the parking lot. He also noted he would like a horizontal offset in this long, rectangular building to break it up, perhaps by designing a jog which might provide some wind protection for the patio and pool. He stated he would like to see a visual analysis from the perspective of an auto driving north and south on 101 due to potential obscuring of the views. He suggested putting the garbage enclosure on the side toward the auto dealership. Senior Planner Ricci summarized the additional ARC directional items related to the site plan: consider further reduction in total parking, use permeable paving where feasible, and provide additional offsets in building footprint. Architectural Style: Vice -Chair Wynn suggested moving 2.a in the Recommendation to 3 Structural Height and Massing. He stated that at the final ARC examination, his comment would be that there is too much of the same thing and that stone rising 45 feet high is too much stone and that it is too big, too long, too bulky, with not enough variation. He noted that trying to mask it with varying materials that run from floor to parapet is not in keeping with the guidelines. He suggested using step backs and dropping units out to create variation. He stated more variety and articulation are needed, rather than a facade hiding vertical mass. Senior Planner Ricci stated that 2.a will be moved to 3. Commr. Root agreed with all the comments made by Vice -Chair Wynn. He added that the continuity of architectural style and details is important but that this project has allusions to several different styles. He stated he would prefer that just one style be embraced. He noted that the shed roofs could more closely match the porticos. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 7 Commr. Endaie stated that she wanted more detailing for lighting and landscaping. She suggested a gabled roof for the screening of the mechanicals on the roof. Mr. Stewart stated that changing the height of building elements works best with a flat roof. Chairprrson McCovey -Good stated she is fine with the screening elements but is more concerned about the vertical elements. Commr. Ehdaie asked if there is a way to introduce more variation for the windows, such as recesses. Structural Height and Massing: Commr. Curtis stated that there needs to be more articulation in overall height of the structure, and that some portions of the building should be three stories, rather than four. He also stated that there needs to be reconsideration of the lattice /trellis structures on the roof due to the potential for wind to cause noise. He supported anything that lowers the overall height. He stated that he likes the more articulated windows and the porte cochere, but that more could be done to draw attention to the front entry. He again noted that horizontal offset might be beneficial to protect the pool area from wind and break up the massing of the structure. He noted there could be more than one building. Mr. Montgomery stated that the offset idea may be workable but not multiple buildings. Mr. Stewart added that putting the pool, etc., in the middle of multiple buildings might be an operational problem. Exterior Colors and Materials: In response to a question by Commr. Root, Senior Planner Ricci stated that the wording of Directional Item 4.a. was to have the building materials blend in with its surroundings. Vice -Chair Wynn asked if "authentic" mean no cultured stone, which he does not consider authentic. He suggested stating that if materials like cultured stone are used, then the percentage of the envelope be limited to minimize inauthentic materials. Senior Planner Ricci suggested this wording Directional Item 4.a.: incorporate quality, authentic materials into the project design. Vice -Chair Wynn stated that if there is a style change, make it horizontal, not vertical. He noted that the community is going to be nervous about a tall, very long building. Commr. Curtis stated he would like to see white de- emphasized and used only for a very small portion of the building. He suggested natural earth tones that go with the stone. Mr. Stewart responded that whatever stone is used, the colors of the stucco will be derived from that. Senior Planner Ricci summarized: use natural earth tones and minimize white. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 8 Commr. Curtis stated he finds the very large swaths of stone difficult but he would not object to small vertical stone towers. On motion by Vice-Chair Wynn,. seconded by Commr. Curtis, to continue the project to a date uncertain with the followina directional items: 1. Site Plan a. Provide more information in future oroiect plans to show how common outdoor use areas such as the pool and patio on the north side are protected from noise and prevailing winds. b. Consider further reductions in the total amount of on -site parking provided and utilize permeable paving and other hardscapes where feasible. c. Provide additional offsets in the building footprint. 2. Architectural style a. Provide a consistent and cohesive architectural b, Use quality architectural materials and detailing which are authentic to the selected style. c. Show the depth and materials of veneers architectural features and details on wall planes. 3. Structural heiaht and massin a. Comply with maximum building height standard of 45 feet above grade. b. Incorporate measures to reduce the overall mass of the structure such as stepping (especially the wall facing the highway), variation in roof heights, and clarified depth and dimensions. c. Add step massing to the entry feature to herald it more. Consider the idea of creating a porte cochere (covered passageway). d. Look at possibly dividing the building space into separate structures or adding horizontal offsets to the building footprint. 4. Exterior colors and materials a. Incorporate guality, authentic materials into the project design_ b. Provide additional landscape screenina near noise attenuation barriers. c. Use natural earth tones for building colors and limit the use of pure white in the palette. �.__....�..e.. d. Provide a colors and materials board with actual samples reflecting the direction by the Architectural Review Commission. AYES: Commrs. Wynn, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, and McCovey -Good NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commr. Andreen The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 9 Mr. Montgomery stated that it is important to get a poll of the Commission about the parking lot location, in the front or back, because it is fundamental to the design of the project. Commr. Root preferred the trash enclosures to be right on the street. He stated he does not care if there is another row of parking in the front because it would be mitigated by landscaping. Chairperson McCovey -Good stated she would not want to see the building pushed back to create a giant parking lot in front. Commr. Root stated that if it makes the pool area and trash enclosure design better, he is in favor of a larger parking lot in front. Vice -Chair Wynn, Curtis, McCovey -Good, and Nemcik all stated the parking seems about right in the front. Senior Planner Ricci stated that this is also the view of the staff. Commr. Ehdaie stated she sees it differently and is concerned about the noise and moving the building away from 101 and Calle Joaquin. Mr. Stewart asked if having the dark wood -look window frames contrasting with the earth tones is the right approach. Vice -Chair Wynn stated it is totally appropriate and much preferred as a higher quality product. Commr. Ehdaie stated that she wants to see harmony and not a lot of contrast. She added she would not want black. There were no further comments made from the Commission. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff: a. Agenda Forecast - Pam Ricci provided a forecast for upcoming agendas. Vice - Chair Wynn noted that he will not be at the August 18th meeting. 4. Commission: a. The ARC suggested that staff advise applicants to arrive to the meeting on time and have their PowerPoint presentations loaded in advance to limit disruption and make the meetings run more efficiently. They also stated that detailed plan modifications and changes to recommended conditions be provided in advance of meetings or items could be continued to a later date to allow adequate time for both staff and the Commission to review the additional materials. ARC Minutes July 7, 2014 Page 10 b. Vice -Chair Wynn mentioned concerns regarding the cultured stone chimneys on the new SESLOC building and lack of mechanical screening on the flat portion of the two buildings next to Crossroads Deli. c. Commr. Curtis asked about the status of a mixed use project approved on Taft between Kentucky and California. Senior Planner Ricci stated it has been for sale for quite a while, but that the current owner may be interested in moving forward with a mixed -use project within the scale of what was approved. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on July 21, 2014. Laurie,/Thomas Administrative Assistant III