Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-06-2015 ARC Draft Minutes of 06-15-15DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 15, 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, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: The minutes of June 1, 2015, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 1234 Broad Street. ARCH-0856-2015; Continued review of façade remodel for brewery, restaurant, and retail lease spaces, with a categorical exemption from CEQA; C-D zone; 1234 Broad Street, LLC, applicant. Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission adopt a resolution granting final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions, which he outlined. Dustin Pires and Trevor Miller, applicant representatives, summarized changes made to the project following previous Commission direction; noted a preference for a rectilinear façade design rather than one expressing the building’s barrel roof shape. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Hileri Shand, neighboring resident, noted concerns about noise impacts relating to proposed uses, including roll-up doors proposed along Pacific Street, and about street congestion resulting from delivery trucks. Bryan Ridley, SLO, spoke in support of the project and the applicant’s proposed design; noted that Community Design Guidelines discourage curved roof forms. Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 2 Amy Kardel, adjacent property owner, spoke in support of the project with proposed rectilinear façade; commented that taller corner elements will screen roof equipment and not exceed the height of nearby buildings. James Lopes, SLO, spoke in support of a curved roof shape on the Broad Street elevation; commented that the applicant’s wholly rectilinear proposal appears faddish and mimics some corporate chain designs. Diane Duenow, SLO, spoke in support of staff’s recommendation for a façade expressing the curved roofline; spoke in opposition to the inclusion of horizontal wood siding. Russ Brown, Chair of Save our Downtown, spoke in support staff’s recommendation. Rodessa Newtown, applicant representative, SLO, spoke in support of the project with a rectangular Broad Street roofline. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to inquiry from Commr. Andreen, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that eight feet is staff’s preference for sidewalk clearance around uses such as sidewalk dining, but that six-foot clearance may be acceptable as a minimum for “pinch points.” Commr. Andreen spoke in support of a curved roofline for the Broad Street façade; noted desire to see the height and visual impact of the corner tower element reduced as much as possible without exposing rooftop equipment. Commr. Curtis spoke in support of altering the material and color of the corner tower element, rather than its height, to make it less visually dominant, and in support of a curved-roof Broad Street façade; spoke in opposition to the use of horizontal wood siding and metal for the bulkhead. Commr. Root spoke in support of a curved roofline for the Broad Street façade if the “truth” window were to be eliminated; commented that the height and material of the corner tower element is not necessarily a problem so long as the color is lightened and a “backstage” effect from other vantage points is avoided; suggested that the top of the corner be further articulated with a cornice or similar element. Commr. Nemcik spoke in support of the applicant’s proposal for a rectilinear Broad Street façade, and a bulkhead surrounding the building. Vice-Chair Ehdaie concurred; requested confirmation from staff that nominal use of metal siding elements is not in conflict with Community Design Guidelines. Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 3 Chair Wynn spoke in support of an arched roofline along Broad Street, extending bulkheads around the building, utilizing lighter-colored, high-quality horizontal metal siding for the corner lower element, and lowering the height of and increasing articulation of the corner tower element. Commr. Soll spoke in support of a Broad Street façade expressing the building’s barrel roof shape and lowering the corner tower element; spoke in opposition to the use of metal siding downtown. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Vice-Chair Ehdaie, seconded by Commr. Nemcik, to adopt a resolution granting final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: A. High-quality, light-colored horizontal metal siding shall be utilized for the corner tower element. B. The bulkhead shall extend around all sides of the building. C. Applicant shall work with staff to lower the height of the corner tower element as much as feasible without exposing rooftop equipment. D. The corner tower element shall include articulation in the form of a cornice or similar element at the top. AYES: Commrs. Ehdaie and Nemcik NOES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Root, Soll, and Wynn RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion failed on a 2:5 vote. Eric Newton, applicant representative, clarified that if the Broad Street façade is curved to express the building’s barrel roof, it will mean the loss of some windows and the re- articulation of the corner tower element. On motion by Commr. Andreen, seconded by Commr. Soll, to adopt a resolution granting final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: A. High-quality, light-colored horizontal metal siding shall be utilized for the corner tower element. B. The bulkhead shall extend around all sides of the building. C. Applicant shall work with staff to lower the height of the corner tower element as much as feasible without exposing rooftop equipment. D. The corner tower element shall include articulation in the form of a cornice or similar element at the top. E. The Broad Street façade shall express the shape of the building’s barrel roof. Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 4 AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Root, Soll, and Wynn NOES: Commrs. Ehdaie and Nemcik RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 5:2 vote. The Commission recessed at 6:33 p.m. and reconvened at 6:38 p.m. with all members present. 2. 1921 Santa Barbara Avenue. ARCH-0521-2014; Review of four live/work units and a small commercial suite in the Railroad Historic District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed to be adopted for this project; C-S-H zone; Garcia Family Trust, applicant. Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission continue the item with direction to the applicant on project modifications for consistency with the Railroad District Plan and Community Design Guidelines. Dunsmore summarized previous hearings of the project before the Cultural Heritage Committee and resulting changes to the project. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere clarified for the record that Cultural Heritage Committee Member Wood was found to have had a conflict of interest relating to the project property, but was not recused from the Committee’s deliberation on the project as would have been appropriate. George Garcia, applicant, summarized revisions to the project; noted desire to preserve the historical use of the property as live-work. Jaime Hill, Cultural Heritage Committee Chair, summarized the Committee’s deliberations on the project; clarified that while the Committee found the project to be consistent with the Railroad District Plan, additional concerns remained about massing, scale, and the interfacing of residential and non-residential uses. Assistant Planner Oetzell distributed copies of Resolution CHC-1004-15, adopted at the Committee’s January 26, 2015, meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: James Papp, Cultural Heritage Committee Member, SLO, commented that staff’s proposed project mitigation measures did not adequately address impacts to the bungalow scale of the neighborhood or inconsistencies with the Railroad District Plan. Ty Vinke, neighboring resident, noted concern about project massing, size, and apparent inconsistency with Community Design Guideline goals for design quality and preservation of neighborhood character. Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 5 Debbie Collins, neighboring property owner, spoke to the importance of the character of the neighborhood; commented that a two-story project would be more appropriate for the location. Daniel Shaw, nearby property owner, noted concern about project massing and footprint; noted General Plan policies prescribing the protection of residential uses when commercial uses are proposed in the vicinity. Alex Elliott, nearby property owner, read into the record comment from Cameron and Julie W atts, neighboring property owners, noting concern about impacts to privacy. Elliott noted concerns about the effects of setting detrimental precedent. Jason Browning, SLO, noted concern about the project’s apparent inconsistency with General Plan and Railroad District Plan; commented that mass and scaling have been a public concern since the project’s inception but have not been addressed. Josie Grady, SLO, noted concern about project size and the reinstatement of upper- story decks; commented that parking reduction will contribute to existing parking problems within the Railroad District. Don Ray, nearby resident, noted concern about project height, size, and massing; commented that conceptual elevations do not adequately convey the real-life impact of the proposed structure. Linda White, SLO, noted General Plan Policy 2.3.3, which states that protection of residential atmosphere shall be made a priority; commented that project size, mass, and scale are not compatible with surroundings. Sandra Rowley, Chair of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, commented that maximums and minimums should not be treated as standards, in that the minimum is sometimes insufficient, and vice versa; noted concern about noise impacts from roof decks. Cory O’Keefe, SLO, spoke in support of the project; commented that it reflects elements of the Railroad Square and represents a type of housing that is in demand. Matt Sansone, SLO, spoke in support of the project; commented that change is inevitable and acceptable given good design; opined that the project is consistent with elements of the Railroad Square. John Grady, SLO, distributed exhibits and comment into the record; noted objection to the reinstatement of proposed decks without Cultural Heritage Committee approval; spoke in opposition to the project based on scale and lack of cohesiveness with the Railroad District Plan. There were no further comments from the public. Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 6 COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to inquiry from Commr. Andreen, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that the views protected in the Railroad District Plan are views of historic district features, and views from the railroad right-of-way. Commr. Andreen noted concern about the potential for overlook issues to impact neighboring residential uses; spoke in support of the “flipped” building footprint; spoke in support of members of the Cultural Heritage Committee attending the hearing and speaking to their own recommendations. Commr. Curtis noted concern that the design has incorporated most of its design elements from newer railroad-themed elements of the Railroad District, rather than the actual prevailing historic character of the District. Curtis noted concerns about height, mass, overall incompatibility of design and the impact of parking reductions; requested that future staff reports referring to provisions of the Railroad District Plan include excerpts from the plan. Commr. Root commented on the conflicting interests of the project and the neighbors; noted sensitivity to protecting residential uses, as well as the importance of infill development and satisfying housing demand. Commr. Nemcik commented that the size of the proposed project is in conflict with the Commission’s key objective of ensuring the quality of life for residents. Commr. Soll spoke in support of contemporary design and meeting demands for this type of housing; noted the importance of protecting the scale and character of historic neighborhoods. Vice-Chair Ehdaie noted concern about incompatibility with the historical features of the surrounding neighborhood; spoke in support of the project aesthetic in general but not for the proposed location. On motion by Commr. Andreen, seconded by Commr. Root, to continue the meeting past 9:00 p.m. AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Chair Wynn noted the difference between the historical identities of the east and west sides of Santa Barbara; spoke in support of the project aesthetic overall; noted support for parking reductions and the inclusion of roof decks as proposed; commented on the Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 7 limited scope of the Cultural Heritage Committee’s tools for addressing many urban issues. There were no further comments from the Commission. On a motion by Chair Wynn, seconded by Vice-Chair Ehdaie, to continue the item with the following direction to the applicant on project modifications for consistency with the Railroad District plan and Community Design Guidelines: 1. Provide two bicycle parking spaces for Unit B, in conformance with Table 5 of § 17.16.060(C) of the Zoning Regulations, and five additional bicycle parking spaces to further reduce the demand for vehicle parking. 2. Further articulate the wall planes of the building’s south elevation, closer to Santa Barbara Street. 3. Emphasize the entries to the live/work units using wall recesses, roof overhangs, canopies, arches, columns, signs, and similar architectural features to call attention to their importance. 4. Revised design shall minimize overlook into residential properties and document how it is accomplished. 5. Consider methods of orienting and screening upper decks and balcony space to minimize impacts to the privacy of adjacent residences and their outdoor living areas and evaluate City policies for compliance. 6. Verify use of enhanced paving to connect parking areas to building entries, and clearly delineate walkways by changes in the color or texture of paving materials. 7. Verify compliance with City’s parking and driveway standards. 8. Redesign the solid waste collection area enclosure so that it allows for adequate maneuvering space through the parking area, is completely screened, and so that containers are arranged in a conveniently-accessible manner, in compliance with the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services. 9. Provide solid waste bins in conformance with the requirements of the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services. If exceptions are necessary to accommodate special circumstances, complete a Conditional Exception Application for review by the Community Development, Public Works, and Utilities Departments. 10. Adjust the scale, mass and height of the building for increased neighborhood compatibility consistent with Historic Preservation Program Guidelines 3.2.1 and Community Design Guidelines Section 5.3.a. 11. Consider the appropriateness of the design for compliance with the Railroad District Plan in reference to the West side of Santa Barbara Street. AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Draft ARC Minutes June 15, 2015 Page 8 COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff: a. Agenda Forecast Senior Planner Dunsmore noted that the July 6, 2015, meeting may be cancelled. 4. Commission: ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Erica Inderlied Recording Secretary