Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-07-2016 ARC Minutes,t Architectural Review commission Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES March 7, 2016 ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Amy Nemcik, Angela Soll, Vice -Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chair Greg Wynn Absent: Commissioner Allen Root Staff: Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen, Assistant Planner Kyle Bell, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere and Recording Secretary Brad T. Opstad CALL TO ORDER Chair Wynn called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m. and proposed the following changes to the agenda: 1) Consideration of Minutes to follow Public Hearings; and 2) reversed the order of Public Hearing Items 2 and 3. There were no objections. Commissioner Andreen announced she would step down from Item 2 due to a potential conflict of interest. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Higuera Street. Right_ of Way. Review of wireless telecommunication facility proposal to place antennas and associated equipment on existing or replaced traffic signal poles (total of 6) within the public right-of-way along Higuera Street between Carmel Street and Osos Street; C -D -H zone; Crown Castle Communication Inc., applicant. Chair Wynn announced that the Applicant was requesting a continuance. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ACTION: Upon a motion by Commissioner Andreen, seconded by Commissioner Soll, the Commission unanimously continued Item 1 by roll call vote: Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 7, 2016 Page 2 AYES: Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Soll, Root, Wynn NOES: None REFRAIN: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None ACTION: Upon a motion made by Commissioner Andreen seconded by Commissioner Soll to made motion to continue Item 1 to a date uncertain passed unanimously. 2. 128 Chorro Street. APPL-1974-2015; Continued review of an appeal of the Director's approval of a Guest Quarters permit. Revised project includes the requested approval of a side yard setback of four feet where five feet is normally required for an addition along the north property line. (GUST -1645-2015); Holly & Tony Garcia, applicant. Commissioner Andreen recused herself due to a potential conflict of interest (resides in the neighborhood). Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen provided the Staff report. He noted that the requested setback is minor in nature and consistent with the development pattern of neighborhood, and clarified that Finding #5 in Section 1 of the draft resolution should read "guest quarters have been moved to the western portion." Architect Frances Gibbs, on behalf of the Applicant, offered to respond to questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS Patricia Andreen, representing the neighborhood, reported that she had not had any discussions about this project with any of the Commissioners. She spoke in favor of the revised design and indicated that she had no objections to the setback reduction. She asked that if the Commission finds it appropriate, she would ask that it invoke tree protection measures and require the Applicant to protect vegetation and its roots during construction. COMMISSION DISCUSSION In response to questions from the Commission, Architect Gibbs indicated she had discussed vegetation -protection measures with the Applicant and noted they have no objections. She also confirmed that the skylight over the existing garage is operable. Commissioner Curtis indicated he saw no need for an exception to the setback and expressed objections to creating an additional non -conforming condition. He added that he thought it possible to design an addition that could conform to all the standards. Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 7, 2016 Page 3 Staff responded that the request for the exception to the setback was not an unusual request for that neighborhood. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NEMCIK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SOLL , the Commission adopted a Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Community Development Director's action to approve a guest quarters in the low- density residential zone, as amended (Condition #10: add protection of fence and vegetation during construction). Motion passed 4:1:1:1 on the following roll call vote: AYES: Nemcik, Soil, Ehdaie, Wynn NOES: Curtis RECUSED: Andreen ABSENT: Root 3. 40 Buena Vista Avenue. SDU-1521-2015; Review of a new single family residence in the R -1-S (Special Considerations Overlay) zone that includes a front yard setback and height exception, with a categorical exemption from environmental review; R -1-S zone; Lee J. Kraft, ETUX, applicant. Commissioner Andreen returned to the dais. Deputy Director Davidson introduced Assistant Planner Kyle Bell, who provided the in- depth Staff report. He emphasized that architectural review is required due to the Special Considerations Overlay (S -Overlay), which designates the location as a sensitive site due to the hillside development and announced that there are eight (8) vacant properties within vicinity that will undergo same process. Assistant Planner Bell informed the ARC that the City Council approved the Use Permit while denying proposed exceptions and has asked that the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) review the project and address the following issues: 1) traditional characteristics of neighborhood; 2) reflectivity of amount of glass; 3) appropriateness of rooftop deck; 4) visual appearance of support columns; 5) landscaping plans; and 6) prominence of structure as viewed from Highway 101. Assistant Planner Bell displayed Applicant -provided renderings to demonstrate the project design and responded to numerous Commission questions regarding exceptions to the Hillside Development Standards (HDS), street yard setback exceptions, landscaping plans, and the proposed rooftop deck and balconies. Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere pointed out the Applicant had made revisions to the project based on City Council direction, which resulted in the current proposed height and setback exceptions. Staff concluded that it is not unusual to request a height exception on a sloping lot as it is a significant constraint. Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 7, 2016 Page 4 Todd Smith, Canon, representing the Applicant, explained the nature and need for the height and setback exceptions. Applicant Jeff Kraft argued in favor of approving the project with the requested exceptions. PUBLIC COMMENT Chair Wynn reported that numerous correspondences have been received by Staff and Commission on this item and they are posted on the City's website. The following residents of San Luis Obispo voiced objections to the proposed project and urged denial, citing concerns about the size of the building footprint, issues with neighborhood compatibility, height and setback exceptions, landscaping plan, traffic and emergency access, impacts to the Highway 101 view shed, the rooftop deck and potential for noise: Naomi Hoffman Shirley Ready Robert Karger James Lopes Bill Cochran Pat Dellario Sandra Rowley, representing Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) Mila Vujovich-La Barre John Rogers, Canon, spoke in favor of the project. Applicant Jeff Kraft provided rebuttal arguments to community concerns. COMMISSION COMMENT Staff responded to additional questions from the Commission. Commission discussion followed specifically to address each of the six concerns the City Council directed the ARC to review and consider: Traditional architecture characteristics of neighborhood: Commissioner Andreen commented that although the style may not be what the neighbors would have selected, the contemporary style suitable for the hillside and not a basis for denial. Commissioner Ehdaie recommended a more subdued, neutral color scheme that would blend better with the nature of the hillsides. Commissioner Curtis indicated the modern approach is suitable for the particular site and added that the flat roof works fine whereas a gabled roof would accentuate mass and visibility. Commissioner Nemcik reiterated the community's desire for a smaller mass and noted that the clean lines of style contribute to that. Chair Wynn had no issues with the design's modernist box style. Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 7, 2016 Page 5 2. Reflectivity of the amount of glazing and Mass on the structure. Staff reported that the design guidelines stress minimizing the glazing to the furthest extent possible but because there is not a specific threshold, it comes down to compatibility and appropriateness more than percentage. Commissioner Andreen recognized that residences are built on such sites for views and unless there are safety concerns, the amount of glazing is suitable. Vice -Chair Ehdaie concurred. Commissioner Curtis observed that the residence will be an illuminated box on the hillside at night as seen from the scenic corridor freeway. Chair Wynn commented that this particular concern is similar to the issue of prominence and suggested binding them together in discussion. Commissioner Andreen indicated that prominence concerns are also tied to landscaping, having thought strongly about reducing prominence with trees. Vice -Chair Ehdaie wondered what reducing prominence on this project communicates about other prominent residences in the vicinity. Commissioner Curtis suggested the only feasible way to reduce prominence at night is to break up the continuous expanse of glass. Commissioner Nemcik shared she had no issue with glazing and that the rhythm and look are appropriate. Chair Wynn agreed that this structure is an illuminated box that will most certainly be seen from Highway 101 but concurs with Vice - Chair Ehdaie that there are already 5-6 other prominently -scaled homes on the hillside. 3. Appropriateness of rooftop deck: Commissioner Andreen stated she's conflicted between the concerns of neighbors and its proposed use for a play area for children. Commissioner Nemcik observed that the rooftop deck is the same as a yard. Commissioner Soll reiterated Staff's commentary that side and front decks already meet minimum outdoor area requirements. Commissioner Curtis offered that the distance from other residences will provide minimal noise. Chair Wynn, in support, stated that existent freeway noise outweighs potential cocktail party noise and a well-maintained deck can be a visually appealing improvement. Commissioner Andreen, citing Commissioner Nemcik's comments, indicated support to achieve quorum. Vice -Chair Ehdaie inquired whether it is in Commission purview to discuss use. Chair Wynn responded by indicating that the Council requested reviewing appropriateness, which is understood to include use. Commissioner Soll indicated she was unsupportive. 4. Visual appearance of support columns. Commissioner Andreen considered columns to be an improvement from the original conception. Commissioner Curtis stated that while it is generally unsightly to have houses up on stilts, enclosing the area below makes the structure appear more massive. A more appropriate option, he added, would to have it open. Commissioner Nemcik remarked piers are more appropriate and recommended the Commission address materials and mitigation improvements in the open area underneath the residence as part of motion. Commissioners Soll, Andreen Vice -Chair Ehdaie concurred. Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 7, 2016 Page 6 5. Landscaping plans: In response to Chair Wynn's inquiry, Deputy Director Davidson affirmed that Condition #6 is a reasonably comprehensive condition but if the Commission wishes to add language, Staff would accommodate it. Chair Wynn pointed out that the Condition itself is the appropriate place for three additional landscape plans: underneath the house, between the street and house, and the rooftop deck. Commission confirmed support by consensus. 6. Height exception: Chair Wynn shared that he would have used the same arguments and applied the same methodologies had he been working on this difficult site, reasoning that the lot was made a legal lot long ago and the rules changed later. He stated that he is inclined to move with Staffs direction in consideration of the give-and-take needed to make the project work on the hillside and commented that if no exception were granted, the City would end up with more destruction on the hillside. Commissioner Andreen agreed that her analysis would be the same. Commissioner Curtis voiced his opinion that it is not feasible to develop much differently on this lot than what is proposed without violating some other principles of hillside development. Commissioner Soil differentiated between the project on paper, which she would have difficulty approving, and the project as she views it situated on a legal lot. Vice -Chair Ehdaie commended the solutions in design and supported the exceptions. Commissioner Nemcik agreed with Staff's recommendations. Commission discussion followed regarding the color scheme. Commissioner Andreen requested a modification of the color palette to lighter earth tones. Other members of the Commission agreed. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREEN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS to adopt a Resolution approving a new single family residence in the R -1-S (Special Considerations Overlay) zone that includes a front yard setback and height exception with a categorical exemption from environmental review (40 Buena Vista Avenue), as amended (modify Condition #6 to stipulate that the landscaping plans shall address landscaping in front of the rooftop deck, between the residence and the street, and shall consider alternative materials beneath the cantilevered portion of the structure to minimize glare; add a new condition requiring the Applicant to submit a revised color/materials board that includes lighter neutral tones and a physical sample of the proposed glass subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and the ARC Chair; and to add a new Finding, as follows: "The project site contains difficult constraints (slope), the exceptions are minor in nature, and while they may have some impacts, they are the least detrimental to any of the options that allow for reasonable development of the site."). Motion passed on the following 6:0 roll call vote: AYES: Andreen, Curtis, Nemcik, Soil, Ehdaie, Wynn NOES: None REFRAIN: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Root Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 7, 2016 Page 7 CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES Commissioner Curtis proposed the following amendments to the Architectural Review Commission Meeting Minutes of February 1, 2016: 1) Insertion on Page 3, third paragraph: "provided to the ARC and the Airport..." 2) Correction on Page 5, second paragraph: strike "specific", change to "the proposed" 3) Insertion and Correction on Page 5, second paragraph, first sentence: "were truly representative of ; strike "a general" and change to "stated styles"; and strike "representation" and "historically". 4) Correction on Page 5, second paragraph, second sentence: strike "commented" change to "opined" ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NEMCIK, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS to approve the Minutes, as amended, passed unanimously 6:0. AGENDA FORECAST Deputy Director Davidson announced agenda items for the next two ARC Meetings, as follows: March 21: Motel Inn project; conceptual review of affordable housing component of Via Tuscano in Margarita Area. April 4: BMW relocation from LOVR to Calle Joaquin auto lot; 323 Grand Avenue previously ARC -reviewed, appealed to City Council and re -submitted; deck improvement project at relocated SLO Brew's 736 Higuera site; POSSIBLE: neighborhood signage with Public Works Wayfinding Program. ADJOURNMENT MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS, SECOND BY VICE -CHAIR EHDAIE, and carried 6:0 to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 7:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Brad T. Opstad Recording Secretary Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on April 18, 2016. Jo Paul Maier, CMC Assistant City Clerk