HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-15-2015 ARC Draft Minutes of 06-01-15DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
June 1, 2015
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root,
Angela Soll, Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chairperson Greg Wynn
Absent: None
Staff: Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore, Associate Planner Marcus Carloni, and
City Clerk Anthony Mejia
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: The minutes of May 18, 2015, were approved as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 279 Bridge Street. ARCH-0286-2014; Design review of three shell buildings
(including a caretaker quarters) totaling approximately 24,000 square feet, with
associated site improvements. Project includes a creek setback exception request
for addition of a pre-fabricated bridge across Meadow Creek. Project also includes
review of an environmental determination which incorporates measures to reduce
potential impacts to a less-than-significant level; M zone; Devin Gallagher,
applicant.
Associate Planner Carloni presented the staff report, recommending that the
Commission continue review of the building designs and site layout to a date uncertain
with direction to the applicant on project revisions, grant approval for the proposed
creek-crossing bridge, and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, based on findings
and subject to conditions which he outlined. Mr. Carloni clarified that the environmental
document was being presented for adoption prior to approval of project uses in order to
commence the approval process for the bridge, allowing site access.
Commrs. Nemcik, Commr. Soll and Vice-Chair Edhaie commented on potential
concerns relating to the building’s roll-up doors, particularly those facing residential
uses.
Devin Gallagher, Applicant, New Zealand, summarized the history of the project; noted
constraints relating to the creek.
Draft ARC Minutes
June 1, 2015
Page 2
Jim Duffy, project architect, SLO, made a presentation; summarized the vision for the
project site as a neighborhood destination with high-quality architecture.
John Knight, project planner, summarized project constraints and potential mitigations,
particularly relating to noise impact upon neighboring residences.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Judy Nielsen, neighboring resident, SLO, inquired as to the purpose of discussing the
disposition of loading docks and bay doors at a time when future building uses are
undetermined.
Seth McCormick and Justin Slade, neighboring property owners, SLO, commented on
the impact this project and their project, which is under construction, would have on
each other; spoke in support of the project’s architectural styling; spoke in opposition to
the site layout, particularly relating to the proximity of Building A to their residential uses.
Fred Kessler, nearby resident, SLO, spoke in opposition to the project; noted concern
about obstruction of access to open space and the impact of noise and light pollution
upon residential uses.
Gina Cindrich, nearby resident, SLO, spoke in support of the project’s architectural
styling; noted concern about obstruction of views and public access to open space, and
negative noise impacts upon residential uses.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
In response to concern from Commr. Curtis regarding the ability to limit future uses,
Associate Planner Carloni commented that future conditions or a recorded agreement
may be applied to the project, and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration may be
amended if needed.
Chair Wynn, Commr. Root, and Commr. Curtis spoke in opposition to limiting uses by
deed restriction.
Commr. Curtis spoke in opposition to the environmental document’s applicability to the
whole site, the uses for which were as-yet known, and lack of binding effect upon future
owners.
On motion by Commr. Root, seconded by Commr. Nemcik, to adopt a resolution
granting approval for the proposed creek-crossing bridge, and adopting the project’s
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn
NOES: Commr. Curtis
Draft ARC Minutes
June 1, 2015
Page 3
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 6:1 vote.
Commr. Root spoke in support of the architectural styling in general; noted concern
about the proposed wood siding; spoke in support of relocating the roll-up doors and
trash enclosure, and ensuring open space access for the public.
Commr. Nemcik spoke in support of the proposed location of the roll-up doors, so long
as sound impacts are adequately mitigated, and enclosing refuse areas; spoke in
opposition to clustering of buildings.
Commr. Curtis spoke in support of the project’s architectural styling, moving building A
farther away from residential uses, the size of the caretakers’ quarters,
enclosing/relocating loading docks and trash areas; noted no objection to the proposed
location of the roll-up doors; noted concern about offset of any vegetation removed from
the creek.
Commr. Andreen felt the roll-up doors and trash enclosures need to be relocated and
spoke in support of redesigning to protect views and privacy.
Commr. Soll spoke in support of the project’s architectural styling, minimizing all
impacts to neighboring residential uses, and relocating building A to protect views;
noted no objection to the proposed location of the roll-up doors.
Vice-Chair Edhaie spoke in support of the project’s architectural styling, moving building
A farther away from neighboring residences, and enhancing connections between
residential uses and open space areas.
Chair Wynn spoke in support of the project as presented; commented that attenuation
of sound and uses was unnecessary due to the site’s zoning and other intensive uses in
the area.
On motion by Commr. Andreen, seconded by Commr. Curtis, to continue the project’s
design review to a date uncertain, with the following direction to the applicant:
1. Relocate Building A to be further from adjacent residential uses in order to
preserve views from the 215 Bridge Street project and providing additional
buffering from the proposed commercial building.
2. Relocate loadings docks and trash enclosures as far away as possible from
adjacent residential uses. Loading docks should be provided on the north side
of the proposed buildings or between clustered buildings to buffer noise from
adjacent residential uses.
Draft ARC Minutes
June 1, 2015
Page 4
3. Revise the site plan to include one parking lot tree per every six parking
spaces in any row, and at the ends of each row of parking spaces per parking
and driveway standards.
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion carried on a 7:0 vote.
The Commission recessed at 7:35 p.m. and reconvened at 7:45 p.m. with all members
present.
2. 2120 Santa Barbara Avenue. ARCH-0917-2015; Review of a mixed-use project
with 69 multi-family units and 3,000 square feet of retail space; C-S-H zone;
Covelop Management, Inc., applicant.
Chair Wynn announced his recusal due to a professional conflict of interest and left the
meeting.
Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending approval of
the project design based on findings and subject to conditions which he outlined.
Steve Rigor, project architect, summarized the history of the project and revisions to the
proposal in response to recent direction from the Planning Commission and Cultural
Heritage Committee.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Glen Matteson, San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum, commented that applicants and
staff have taken steps to address the Museum’s concern about the impact of the project
upon their neighboring property, particularly relating to access.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commrs. Andreen and Soll spoke in support of the project design.
Commr. Curtis noted concern about the lack of vertical articulation of the project’s north
elevation and the mansard roof; noted desire to see taller tower components as in
previous iterations of the design, better-incorporated roof lines and improved pedestrian
context.
Commr. Root noted support for the design overall; noted desire for further vertical
articulation.
Draft ARC Minutes
June 1, 2015
Page 5
Commr. Nemcik noted desire for taller tower components as in previous iterations of the
design, as well as improved horizontal articulation of tower locations.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie concurred; spoke in support of the project in general.
There were no further comments from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Andreen, seconded by Commr. Nemcik, to adopt a resolution
approving the design of the project, based on findings and subject to conditions
contained in staff’s report, with the following revisions:
A. Greater horizontal articulation shall be applied to the easternmost building
tower, such that it resembles the towers on the west end of the project.
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll
NOES: Commr. Curtis
RECUSED: Commr. Wynn
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 5:1 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast
Senior Planner Dunsmore gave a forecast of upcoming agenda items; noting a
joint Architectural Review Commission – Cultural Heritage Committee design
workshop to be held June 10-11, 2015.
4. Commission:
The Commission discussed a potential change to its July 2015 schedule.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary