Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-06-2014 ARC MinutesSAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 6, 2014 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root, Vice -Chair Greg Wynn, and Chairperson Michelle McCovey -Good Absent: None Staff: Associate Planner Marcus Carloni, Contract Planner Jaime Hill, Planning Technician Kyle Bell, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as amended. Public comment on non - agenda items was moved to the beginning of the meeting, before the minutes. MINUTES: The minutes of September 8, 2014, were approved as presented. The minutes of September 15, 2014, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: Bob Lucas, SLO, stated that he addressed the Commission at the last meeting and he wanted to be sure that the two elements of the appeal he filed challenging the Administrative Use Permit for the proposed Monterey Hotel at 1845 -65 Monterey Street were discussed by the Commission. He stated that this appeal had two elements: 1) a challenge to the openings facing the San Luis Drive neighborhood and 2) a challenge to the size and mass of the hotel. He added that this appeal was never formally discussed at the ARC meeting as he thought it would be. The discussion of the hotel was continued to a date uncertain, and Mr. Lucas felt the issue of size and mass was deemed more appropriate for the Planning Commission so the interim directions to the applicants said nothing about that, leaving the applicants to work on the openings and noise attenuation without addressing whether the project fits the context of the neighboring commercial buildings. He stated he was also concerned that there was no acknowledgment from the ARC of any of the 15 letters sent to the Planning Department before the last meeting and around which the oral presentation was designed as a reminder of the major points made in the letters. He noted that it was later discovered that the Commissioners had been given some of those letters moments before the meeting despite the letters having been submitted at least 100 hours before the meeting. He stated that this and the short letter of direction given to the applicants left those who wrote the letters with concerns about whether their voices had been heard ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 2 and valued during that meeting. He added that he is now alerting the Commission that more information about size and mass will be sent from the neighbors. There were no further comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 3080 Rockview Place. ARC 202 -13; Design review of nine two -story single - family residences and associated improvements in a common - interest subdivision. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was previously adopted by the Planning Commission; R -2 -S zone; Covelop, Inc., applicant. (Marcus Carloni) Contract Planner Hill presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft Resolution, which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions. Commr. Wynn recused himself and left the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: The Commissioners were in consensus for acceptance of the articulation changes made for the front entries of Unit C as presented at the hearing. Commr. Curtis stated the units would look better without the deck supports and he does not agree that having the supports go down to the ground is a characteristic of mid - century modern design. He added that the supports look awkward and are not consistent with the rest of the architecture. Commr. Root agreed with Commr. Curtis but noted that tying the decks into the building can make waterproofing problematic. He added that there might be another way to do the posts to take away the pedestrian looking column. Commr. Nemcik suggested pulling the support post on the right back to be in line with the wall. Commr. Root stated that he likes that idea. Commr. Ehdaie agreed with Commr. Curtis in terms of aesthetics and expressed concern about the sturdiness of the posts should they be hit by cars going in and out of the garages under the deck. Commr. Nemcik noted that the posts will look better with landscaping. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 3 Commr. Andreen stated that the posts are not a deal breaker and the design has a nice aesthetic, but the applicant might be able to come with something better for the deck supports. Commr. McCovey -Good stated she likes the way the deck plays off the roof eaves and suggested pulling both back to line up with the wall leaving a small portion of the deck cantilevered. Associate Planner Carloni suggested the following wording: "The applicants shall explore alternatives for the deck supports subject to the approval of the Community Development Director." Commr. Root suggested a small awning be placed over the secondary door of Lot 2, Associate Planner Carloni stated that staff would support this awning addition. Commr. Root asked if the entries were switched on Lot 2, would that unit have a private open space. Associate Planner Carloni stated that Lot 2 does have a yard other than the one facing the street. He noted the need to modify a condition to request the awning with the goal of making this side entrance look more like the other unit facing the street. Commr. Curtis supported the addition of the awning on Lot 2 while Commr. Root suggested that this be done on all the units. Associate Planner Carloni summarized the possible changes to conditions. There were no further comments made from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Andreen, seconded by Commr. Nemcik, recommending adoption of the Draft Resolution, which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to the conditions and changes to those conditions as listed below: 1. Revise condition #6 to read "The final landscape and hardscape plan for Lot 1 shall be designed to highlight the entrance to this structure from Rockview, subject to the final approval of the Community Development Director. The short entrance walls shall be modified to one of the more neutral body colors, rather than an accent color. 2. Both the building entries for Unit C shall be further articulated with a) a 5' x 3' awning over the front entry, and b) addition of a smaller weather - protected awning for the side entries. 3. The applicant shall explore alternative deck support design, subject to the final approval of the Community Development Director. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 4 AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, McCovey -Good, Nemcik, and Root NOES: None RECUSED: Commr. Wynn ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. Commr. Wynn returned to the meeting. 2. 1300 Madonna Road. ARCH - 0071 -2014; Request to review modifications to the Laguna Village Shopping Center sign program for new proposed tenant signs and new monument signs with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C -C zone; Laguna Village Shopping Center, applicant. (Kyle Bell) Planning Technician Bell presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the draft resolution approving the modifications to the sign program including a new proposed canopy sign and approving the proposed shopping center identification signs, based on findings, and subject to conditions of approval. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Andreen stated that the canopy looks nice, the Grocery Outlet sign is attractive, the monument signs look much better, and she agrees with staff that the curved stone walls are enhanced by the Laguna Village lettering. She added that her main concern is reducing the size of the 99 logo sign. There was consensus for approval of the blade signs. Pierre Rademaker, applicant representative, stated that the blade signs are dark anodized aluminum with white lettering and there will be no corporate logos. The project architect stated that the 99 square foot version of the 99 logo wall sign has been approved by the store but he can probably get a little more of the purple shaved off of the sides. Associate Planner Carloni stated that staff likes the 80 square foot version of the sign. Commr. Wynn stated that the "99" is the main part of the sign and he favors the staff recommendation. He added that "99" was chosen by the corporation for their logo so any problems with that belong to the corporation. He noted that the monument sign is what gets people into the center, and, after that, the colors identified with a store lead customers to that store more than the lettering. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 5 Commr. Curtis agreed with Commr. Wynn. Commr. Root suggested looking at the proportionality on the tower. Commr. Wynn stated that he had thought of that but the fuchsia becomes a huge banner of color, reducing the importance of the letters. Commr. Ehdaie agreed with Commr. Wynn. Commr. Curtis supported centering this sign on the tower.. Commr. Andreen agreed and added that the "wings" have to be reduced in width to give emphasis to the letters. The architect stated the sign would be reduced to 48 square feet if the lettering and color are made proportional. Commr. Andreen stated that, if this is true, then the sign should have a bigger bullseye if the size is reduced. Associate Planner Carloni stated that, based on the discussion, staffs choice would be the 80 square foot version with the purple portion of the sign being limited. Mr. Rademaker stated that this will look stupid. Commr. Wynn stated that this is a big sign on a much smaller space than Spencer's and he is concerned about the increasing size of signs and the demand for bigger and bigger signage. Commr. Root suggested numerals 48" tall and everything else proportional around that. Commr. Wynn supported letting staff work out the proportions, knowing that the Commission wants as little purple as possible. Commr. Curtis stated he disagrees with this compromise and prefers a 3'6" tall sign with 48 square feet. The other Commissioners supported the 48" height for lettering. Associate Planner Carloni suggested amended wording stating that "the 99 Cent store sign letter height shall not exceed 48" while keeping proportion with the 99 Cent letters and the sign shall be centered on the tower.." He noted the 25' height limit could be deleted. Commr. Wynn stated that the colors are what are most important and he supported the staff proposal for reduction in size of the Grocery Outlet sign. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 6 Commr. Root stated he is recommending a compromise for the canopy sign: reduce the height a little and lift it off the ridge of the canopy so it would look less bulky. The architect noted that there would be 40% more red on the sign if this was done. Mr. Rademaker noted that lifting it up would give somewhere for vines to grow. Randy Poltl stated that his main concern is letter height. Commr. Wynn supported Commr. Root's proposal because it maintains the height of the sign although the size is reduced. He suggested leaving it up to the applicant as to whether to lift the sign or not. Commr. Ehdaie stated it was good either way. Commr. Curtis stated that the staff recommendation is to reduce the size of the letters and that this sign does not need to be so big because the entry signs let you know that the store is there. Commr. Andreen stated she likes raising the sign and reducing it a bit in size and that, with the canopy and vines, it will not look too clunky. Commr. Wynn stated that staff prefers 36" letters so 48" is a compromise with the option to leave the height but lift the bottom of the sign off the ridge, letting it be a sign rather than an architectural element. He added that 125 square feet is acceptable and will allow more red, similar to the wall sign. Associate Planner Carloni suggested wording stating that the top ridge of the sign be left at the current height and the backer for the canopy sign shall not exceed 48" and the applicant may consider raising the bottom of the sign, subject to the final approval of the Community Development Director. Commr. Wynn stated he is not a huge fan of a 13' monument sign. Commrs. Andreen, Nemcik and Root supported the 13' height. Associate Planner Carloni stated the staff position that, beyond precedent setting, a sign of this height and width may appear as a wall at the back of the sidewalk. Commr. Andreen stated that 13' does look big but 10' looks a little stumpy so maybe it should be 12'. Commr. Nemcik supported the 13' height because the sign is located away from the driveway entrance and she supported the removal of the red between the two posts which makes it look more open. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 7 Commrs. Wynn and McCovey -Good supported the 12' height. Associate Planner Carloni suggested this wording: "Freestanding sign shall not exceed 12 feet from adjacent grade and the applicant should consider widening the sign width to create shadow." There were no further comments made from the Commission. On a motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded by Commr. Andreen, recommending adoption of the draft resolution approving the modifications to the sign program including a new proposed canopy sign and approving the proposed shopping center identification signs based on findings, and subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. Revise condition #1 to read "The overall height of the canopy sign is not to exceed 48 inches ". And "The total square footage of signs for the major tenant in Building C is not to exceed 136 square feet ". 2. Revise condition #2 to read "The overall letter height for the major tenant in Building D is not to exceed 48 inches ". And "The sign area shall not exceed 50 square feet ". 3. Revise condition #3 to read "Lower the total height of the signs to a maximum of 12 feet ". 4. Delete condition #4, and add new condition that reads, "The applicant shall modify the sign program to include language of the driveway entry signs that includes; dimensions, locations, and the details of the push through halo illumination of the signs ". AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Ehdaie, McCovey -Good, Nemcik, Root, and Wynn NOES: Curtis RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:1 vote 3. 1126 Marsh Street. ARC 144 -14; Review of designs for seven attached three - story single - family residences fronting Marsh Street with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C -R zone; MFI Limited, applicant. (Marcus Carloni) Associate Planner Carloni presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the draft resolution which approves the project based on findings, and subject to conditions. Stephen Peck, his own company, two architects from RRM, Associate Planner Carloni noted two modifications to the Draft Resolution: 1) Delete Whereas #3 on page ARC 3- 6 of the agenda packet and 2) delete the last two sentences from Condition 6 on page ARC 3 -7. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 8 PUBLIC COMMENTS: David Brodie, SLO, stated that this development is on the edge of downtown and needs to be evaluated with that in mind. He stated it would be good to have a physical model of the massing in relation to the surrounding, not just the adjacent buildings. He noted that there are two categories of buildings in central areas: focus buildings and background buildings. He added that a focus building should have a community orientation which means this project does not qualify with his standard even though the design is striving to be a focus building, while the old French hospital does qualify. He stated that the project has two good points: it is housing and the breakdown of the masses is good, but unfortunately, it does it too much and it is too busy. He stated there is a need to restrict the types of businesses that could be in these houses and a need to consider where trash cans will be located and how the buildings will be served by the garbage trucks. He also expressed concern about the potential for construction of temporary structures on the roof, making the building 6 -10 feet higher. He requested that the possibility of having lighting close to the stairways be considered. Bob Schrage, SLO, stated he lives across the street and supports the project as being the best yet proposed for this location. Rob Rossi, SLO, stated this is a good use for the site. He added that the detailing could be simplified but the key thing is to make sure there is depth to the detailing. He stated that faux cornices were used on the Warden Building above the level where they could be touched and they look fine and they could also be used on this project. He stated he disagrees with Condition 10 about the tandem parking being used only for employees, and with Conditions 11 and 12 in relation to the parking lot on Parcel 8. He noted that the dumpsters seen on the property are from adjacent properties. He noted that the Bank of American building is outdated and he would like to redevelop that lot. He stated that the project townhomes do have height but that future projects will go to similar or greater heights on Higuera Street properties. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Associate Planner Carloni stated that there will be covenants on the ground level bedroom /home offices and that any future commercial businesses in these homes (i.e. mixed -use) must meet parking requirements. He noted that the ground floor could be used as a home office with a Home Occupation Permit. He added the homes will either have individual trash containers or a common trash enclosure, and structures on the roof would require building permits. He stated that Condition 10 is intended to avoid public parking on that lot and "as it continues to be a parking /of' could be added to the wording. Mr. Rossi stated that the individual parking spaces are leased out and they are self - policing so he does not want it limited to employees only. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 9 Commr. McCovey -Good suggested changing "employee" to "private." Associate Planner Carloni suggested "Shall be used as a private parking lot, rather than parking for the general public." Commr. Andreen stated that this is beautiful project and she does not think it has to be dumbed down. She supported keeping it sophisticated and noted that there will be sophisticated buyers who want these homes. She added that the applicant should not design away from this level of quality and we may find our tastes are raised a little by buildings like this. She stated she is reluctant to give too much flexibility on design changes and would rather identify the types of changes needed. Commr. Curtis stated the he appreciates and agrees with the applicant about attached townhouses. He noted that the quality is very high but some simplification would be acceptable as shown in the latest design, but he is not sure about changes in materials, such as brick, to something unknown. He stated that his only concern is he wished the applicant could have solved the problem of lowering the ground floor so it is not higher than the old French hospital and would be more in scale with the overall neighborhood and the bungalows across the street. He noted that these homes are more like brick row houses rather than brownstones which are characterized by shorter staircases. He stated that he likes the differentiation of units although there may be too much vertical articulation. He added that, overall, he is pleased with the project and thinks it is in general conformance with the standards. Commr. Ehdaie stated that she likes the design and it complies with the design guidelines. Commr. Root stated he agrees with most of the comments made by his fellow Commissioners but noted the need to be judicious about changes to the details. Commr. Nemcik agreed with Commr. Root and added that the level of simplification shown in the handout from the applicant is the most she would like to see in simplification. Commr. Wynn stated that the project is a gorgeous product but he has some issues he would like the applicant to consider and then return to the Commission with the results of that consideration: 1) Brownstones have stairs less than a full flight and here the stairs are pushed back too far or the building is pushed forward too much. He asked the Commissioners to look at the differences between the Title Sheet on page ARC 3- 11 and Al on page ARC 3 -24 and noted that more of the stairs are shown in A10. He stated that having the stairs on the southwesterly side to show more of the details would make for a prettier view for those driving on the one -way Marsh Street. 2. There might be room to push the buildings down a little on the front, excluding the garages at the back. 3. The floor of each home is 10" higher or lower than the neighboring home and maybe the homes should be grouped at the same level, such as a 3 -2 -3 grouping so the rooftop banding would make those homes relate more to each other and provide more overall rhythm. He noted the design was done with emphasis on facades but there ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 10 needs to be consideration for neighboring units. 4. The rear elevation is flatter than the front and needs more articulation. 5. The southwest elevation is a complete blank wall that could be softened. 6. Pushing the buildings down by reducing the height of each floor just a little would be more sensitive to the old French hospital. He supported recommending conceptual approval now and continuance to a date uncertain. Andy Mangano, Applicant, stated the design is the way it is because other things would not work, an answer is needed tonight, a lot of time has been spent on the design, and he would rather see it be turned down so he can appeal to the City Council. He noted that the flexibility requested for materials is about a weight problem and the need to make some elements lighter. Commr. Wynn stated that he understands but with a little more work and resolution, this quality project can be even better. Mr. Mangano stated he cannot do things like making the ceilings any lower. Commr. Wynn stated it is frustrating to hear it is either this as presented or nothing.. He added that when the Commission makes a recommendation, it is to help improve a project. Mr. Mangano stated that if the Commission wants changes, then staff should be given flexibility. He added that he cannot add windows and /or other articulation on the blank side because of buildling code requriements and added that a building could be built right up to it and the articulation would never be seen. Associate Planner Carloni stated that, with clear direction, staff could deal with Commr. Wynn's ideas. On motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded bV Commr. Ehdaie, to continue the meeting past 9 p.m. AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, McCovey -Good, Nemcik, Root, and Wynn NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Andreen stated she trusts staff to work with applicant but her concern is the need to give guidance and direction on how much reduction in the design the Commission would find acceptable. She noted it is such a good project, there might be a tendency to overwork it. She stated she would prefer to give approval tonight. Commrs. Nemcik, Wynn, and Root agreed it would be better to make a decision tonight. ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 11 Commr. Curtis stated that he thinks it will take longer to get on the City Council agenda for an appeal than it will to come back to the Commission and, with everybody thinking it will be a great project with some small further refinements, he does not understand why the applicant objects to a continuance. Commr. Root stated that the applicants have complied with community guidelines, and the Commission can address Commr. Wynn's concerns now and while other concerns can be dealt with at the staff level. The commission discussed modifications to the design that would be subject to the final approval of the Community Development Director. There were no further comments made from the Commission. On a motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded by Commr. Andreen, to recommend adoption of the draft resolution which approves the project based on findings, and subject to conditions includina the followina amendments: 1. Delete the 4th whereas statement and the last two sentences of condition #6 which were inadvertently added to the resolution. 2. Revise condition #10 to read "As it continues to be a parking lot, the proposed reoriented tandem parking spaces shall be used as a private parking lot rather than parking for the general public." 3. Add conditions 15 through 20a. AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, McCovey -Good, Nemcik, Root, and Wynn NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 4. Staff: a. Agenda Forecast by Associate Planner Carloni: • October 20, 2014 —Cal Trans relocation to 2885 S. Higuera Street; Conceptual review for a mixed use project in Miner's parking lot; Residential Care Facility proposal for 467 Hill Street; Monterey Hotel (tentative) • November 3, 2014 - -ARC budget goals, Conceptual review for public market at the Long - Bonetti Ranch; Faux - calyptus wireless telecommunications tree at 805 Morrison; proposal for a mixed use building next to Wells Fargo at Broad and Marsh (this project will likely not be on this agenda). ARC Minutes October 6, 2014 Page 12 5. Commission: • Commr. Andreen stated that people send correspondence and never know if the Commissioners receive it so she would like letters to be acknowledged at the meetings so their receipt would get in the minutes. Associate Planner Carloni stated that staff is working to digitize agenda correspondence and letters will be sent via email to the Commissioners. • Commr. Wynn stated that it would be good for Commissioners to have a Commission City email address. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on October 6, 2014. Lau ie Thomas Administrative Assistant III