Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-23-2015 CHC MinutesSAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES February 23, 2015 ROLL CALL: Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Thom Brajkovich, Patti Taylor, Victoria Wood, Vice -Chair Jaime Hill, and Chair Bob Pavlik Absent: Committee Member Platt Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: Chair Pavlik inquired about the number of project units shown on the agenda versus the number of project units shown in the staff report for hearing item 2. Senior Planner Dunsmore confirmed that 69 units is the correct number. The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of January 26, 2015, were approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments from the public. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 1. 2881 Broad Street. HIST- 0554 -2014; Continued review of historic status of a potentially Contributing historic property; R -2 -S zone; Dustin Pires, applicant. (Phil Dunsmore) Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Cultural Heritage Committee adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council add the property at 2881 Broad Street to the Contributing List of Historic Resources. Dustin Pires and Eric Newton, applicants, offered a presentation focused on plans for redevelopment of the property and noted that a plaque could be installed to summarize the history of the site and the brick could be used in aspects of the new project. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Emily Francis, SLO, property resident living next to the property on Perkins Lane, voiced concern that it would be difficult to develop the property logically with the house remaining in the center of the lot. CHC Minutes February 23, 2015 Page 2 Paula Carr, SLO, voiced concern that the City's treatment of this property may set a precedent for similar properties on the periphery of town, and noted that the report missed out on details like the clinker brick and historical context. Bob Vessely, SLO, noted that the condition of the home should not be confused with the property's integrity as a historical resource and that the Historic Preservation Ordinance historic significance criteria is what should be used for evaluation and other proposals and ideas for the site are not relevant. There were no further comments from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Member Taylor inquired about the metrics for determining the historical significant of people associated with the property and had noted concerns that more information should be provided to make that determination. Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, noted that generally historically significant persons should be evaluated on a basis of their important early contributions. Brian Leveille, Senior Planner, summarized the Historic Preservation Ordinance criteria for Historic Significance — Persons. Chair Pavlik stated that the Committee may still want additional information, however the project had been before the CHC multiple times and that a decision should be rendered in consideration of the applicants to move the item forward to Council for a final decision. He also reminded the Committee that the Committee's decision should only be based on the Historic Preservation Ordinance criteria and does not include consideration of the proposed project or difficulty in rehabilitating the structure or new development plans. Committee Member Baer commented that the Committee must rely on all available information when rendering its decision; commented on the subjectivity of measuring historical persons significance. Vice -Chair Hill stated that the property, in its current state, is not indicative of the historical significance of the site, and that intermittent occupancy by historically important individuals does not, in itself, lend the property significance. Committee Member Brajkovich stated that the property is a historical remnant in an area that is losing its historical resources; concurred that the research presented may not be exhaustive. He stated he has personally worked on rehabilitating historic buildings that were in very poor condition, and that with effort the work can be done. He voiced support for the properties inclusion on the Contributing list. Committee Member Wood voiced opposition to the idea of the house as a Contributing resource. CHC Minutes February 23, 2015 Page 3 There were no further comments made from the Committee. On motion by Committee Member Taylor, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council add the property at 2881 Broad Street to the Contributing List of Historic Resources. AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Pavlik, Taylor NOES: Committee Members Hill, Wood RECUSED: None ABSENT: Committee Member Platt The motion passed on a 4:2 vote. 2. 2120 Santa Barbara Avenue. ARC 96 -14; Review of a mixed -use project with 49 dwelling units and 1,200 square feet of commercial space; C -S -H zone; Pat Arnold and Damien Mavis, applicants. (Phil Dunsmore) Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Cultural Heritage Committee adopt a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission find that the project is consistent with the Railroad District Plan and approve the design of the project subject to additional directional items which he outlined. Damien Mavis, Heather Wiebe, and Stephen Rigor, applicants offered a presentation and responded to Committee Member inquiries regarding architectural details and site planning. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Lea Brooks, SLO, neighboring property owner, stated that bicycle racks would be a critical part of project design that appear to be missing. Myron Amerine, SLO, voiced support for the project and its walkability and bicycle compatibility. He noted that the architectural treatment could be enhanced and scale reduced from the point of view of the railroad side. There were no further comments made from the public. In response to public comment, Senior Planner Dunsmore noted that bicycle racks are planned for the project. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Member Brajkovich voiced support for the project; inquired whether the potential historical significance of the small to be demolished had been examined. Senior Planner Dunsmore responded that the site has no known historical resources and that an evaluation was not necessary. CHC Minutes February 23, 2015 Page 4 Committee Member Wood noted that there is no entryway on the project's Santa Barbara Avenue frontage; Rigor responded that the doors are placed closest to project parking. Committee Member Wood voiced concern about the inclusion of corrugated metal; voiced support for the project overall. Vice -Chair Hill opined that entry doors on Santa Barbara Street will be imperative; voiced support for the project as otherwise presented. Committee Member Brajkovich concurred. Committee Member Baer voiced support for the project. Chair Pavlik inquired whether windows would be operable; Rigor responded that residential windows would be operable, while commercial windows would be sealed. There were no further comments made from the Committee. On motion by Vice -Chair Hill, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to adopt a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission find that the project is consistent with the Railroad District Plan and approve the design of the project subject to additional directional items as outlined in the staff report, and further revised as follows: 2. Refine the window designs for the Gn,-r meFGial . eFfieR Af the bu lcliRg at the Santa Berber a ue elevatlonand consider the use of divided light windows, a taller bulkhead, transom windows, and other features that complement the Railroad District Plan. 4. Adjust height and detail of the tower features on the south elevation to comply with 35 -foot maximum height limit. 6._ Reevaluate the inclusion of Pedestrian entryways on Santa Barbara Avenue. AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Hill, Pavlik, Taylor, Wood NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Committee Member Platt The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff a. Senior Planner Leveille gave a summary of upcoming agenda items. CHC Minutes February 23, 2015 Page 5 4. Committee Chair Pavlik noted the upcoming Mayor's Quarterly Advisory Body Meeting and California Preservation Conference; announced that his final CHC meeting will take place in March 2015. Committee Member Brajkovich inquired whether any efforts have been made to change the CHC from a Committee to a Commission. Senior Planner Leveille stated that he wasn't aware of any activity in that regard. Brajkovich noted his intent to recuse himself from the hearing of his own project at the next meeting. Committee Member Wood commented on the CHC's previous decision on January 26, 2015, to move the project adjacent to the Del Monte Cafe forward to the ARC. She noted concern that the item should not have been moved forward without the CHC's concerns being fully addressed in regard to the project's scale. Vice -Chair Hill noted that the CHC's action to recommend approval of the item included a condition to evaluate the impact of the proposed structure's scale and mass on adjacent and nearby historic buildings. Vice -Chair Hill left the Chamber at 7:20 p.m. Committee Member Wood inquired about recent Mills Act webinar. Senior Planner Leveille summarized the training. He also mentioned potential upcoming training with Winter and Company for the CHC and ARC. Vice -Chair Hill returned to the Chamber at 7:25 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Erica Inderlied Recording Secretary Approved by the Cultural Heritage Committee on March 23, 2015- Lauri6 Thomas Administrative Assistant III