HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-20-2016 ARC Item 1 - Staff Report Attachment 08
May 11, 2016
Intermountain Management, LLC
Dave Raymond, Director of Construction
2390 Tower Drive
Monroe, LA 71201
Subject: ARCH-1098-2015: 1301 Calle Joaquin
Review of New Hotel
Dear Mr. Raymond:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of May 2, 2016, continued action on
your project to a date uncertain with the following directional items:
1. Reduce the height of the structure and provide additional vertical and horizontal
stepping to: provide more visibility of distant ridgelines and hills as seen from off-
site locations; minimize the boxy shape of the structure; and, increase the project’s
compatibility with the size, scale, height, and massing of proximate existing
structures and agricultural operations on Calle Joaquin Road and Los Osos Valley
Road (please note some Commissioners’ comments included a request to lower the
structure to three stories and/or approximately 30 feet in height).
2. Provide more visual articulation by adding definition around windows, such as
lintels to create more shadow lines.
3. Provide a more unified exterior wall color scheme, and minimize the use of colors to
provide visual articulation.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (805) 543-7095 extension 6811 or
sscott@swca.com.
Sincerely,
Shawna Scott
Consulting Planner
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 2
cc: County of SLO Assessor’s Office
Myhre Group Architects
Philip Stewart, AIA, NCARB
620 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 500
Portland, Oregon 97204
RRM Design Group
Tim Walters, Principal, Engineering
3765 S. Higuera Street Suite 102
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
HFP LTD A CA LP
508 Auto Center Drive
Claremont, CA 91711
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Continued review of a four-story, 114-unit extended stay hotel and associated hotel
amenities and Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental review.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1301 Calle Joaquin BY: Shawna Scott, Contract Planner
Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner
Phone Number: 805-781-7574
Email: rcohen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-1098-2015 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend that the Architectural Review Commission adopt the draft Resolution (Attachment 1),
which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions, and adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (Attachment 9). Staff recommends that the ARC continue review of the
applicant’s proposed signage plan based on the applicant’s response to directional items specific to
signage, and Staff’s subsequent review. Staff recommends that the ARC review the preliminary
signage plan, and provide direction to staff and applicant for either further review by the ARC or
the Planning Director.
SITE DATA
Applicant Intermountain Management,
LLC; Myhre Group Architects
Representative Tim Walters, RRM Design
Group
Submittal Date March 19, 2015
Complete Date August 5, 2015
Zoning C-T-SF
General Plan Tourist Commercial
Site Area 2.84 acres
Environmental
Status
Mitigated Negative
Declaration recommended for
adoption (circulated for public
review August 22, 2015).
SUMMARY
Meeting Date: May 2, 2016
Item Number: 1
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 2
The City has received an application for Architectural Review of a 69,293-square foot, four-story,
114-unit extended stay hotel. The ARC conceptually reviewed the project on July 7, 2014, and
provided 14 directional items (refer to Attachment 8). The applicant responded to the ARC’s
directional items, and the ARC continued review of the project on October 5, 2015 (refer to
Attachment 7). Based on ARC’s review of the project, and consideration of public comment
regarding the project, 10 directional items were provided for the applicant. Staff has reviewed the
applicant’s resubmittal, which includes revised elevations and architectural renderings, revised
landscaping plan, and an updated shading study (Attachment 3). In addition, third-party photo-
simulations and a shading study were prepared (Attachment 5). Staff finds that the revised plans and
supporting information generally comply with ARC direction as well as the City’s Community
Design Guidelines, and applicable City regulations, and is recommending approval. Staff has
prepared an Initial Study, which resulted in a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and staff is
recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC continued the project on October 5, 2015, and provided 10 directional items (discussed in
section 3.0 below). The ARC’s role is to review the applicant’s response to ARC direction and the
response’s consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and applicable City standards. The
ARC is also tasked with the review and adoption of the project’s environmental document, in this
case a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Information/Setting
The project site is currently vacant and is located within the Tourist Commercial zone within the
Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Special Focus area (C-T-SF), per the General Plan Land Use
Element 1. The parcel was created by a previous subdivision, was graded, and supports drainage
easements. The nearly level project site does not support any significant vegetation and no trees
are present. The project site is bordered to the southeast by Calle Joaquin Road and U.S.
Highway 101.
1 Special Focus Areas are defined in the Land Use Element as areas that present opportunities to develop customized
land use approaches or special design implementation to enhance their appearance and achieve their respective
development potential.
Site Size 2.84 acres
Present Use & Development Vacant
Land Use Designation Tourist Commercial
Access Calle Joaquin Road
Surrounding Use/Zoning Northwest: C-R, C/OS-20 & C-S-PD; vacant, auto dealerships,
Prefumo Creek Commons
Northeast: C-T-SF & C/OS-20; vacant, City Farm
Southwest: C-T-SF, C-S, & C-S-S; vacant, auto dealerships, Motel
6, Bear Valley Center, AAA Insurance Center, America’s Tire
Southeast: C/OS-20; Calle Joaquin, U.S. Highway 101, Bob Jones
bike path (southeast of U.S. Highway 101)
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 3
2.2 Project Description
1)Site Plan
The project consists of a 69,293-square foot, four-story, 114-unit extended-stay hotel on a
2.84-acre parcel accessed from Calle Joaquin. The structure is setback approximately 90 feet
from the edge of Calle Joaquin, and separated by landscaping and parking areas (refer to
Attachment 3, Revised Project Plans, prepared by Mhyre Group Architects and dated
February 10, 2016).
2)Building Layout
The building footprint will be 18,390 square feet, and hotel room types will include:
a.studio and accessible studio (40 units);
b. double queen and accessible double queen (54 units);
c.one bedroom and accessible one bedroom (13 units); and
d. two bedrooms and accessible bedrooms (7 units).
Hotel amenities would include:
a.outdoor swimming pool, fire pits, and barbeque patio within an approximately 5,000-
square foot fenced enclosure;
b. guest laundry room;
c.fitness room;
d. breakfast buffet room with tables and serving areas and breakfast patio; and
e.meeting/multi-purpose room.
3)Architectural Features, Materials and Colors
Proposed building includes the following architectural features, materials and colors:
a.an extended, generally rectangular form that includes wall offsets along all
elevations, and covered entryways;
b.stucco-finished walls in varying muted colors (tans and greens);
c.stone veneer;
d.flat roofing of varying heights with fiberglass cornice and metal parapet cap;
e.aluminum framed windows with varying pane sizing and framing; and
f.wood framed canopy and trellises stained to match the window frames and metal
cornice.
4)Signage
Refer to section 3.3.3 (Signage and Flags).
5)Parking and Hardscape
117 parking spaces would be located along the northwestern, northeastern, and eastern sides
of the building (refer to Table 1 below). The parking lot would consist of asphalt paving,
and permeable pavement parking stalls.
6)Landscaping
The project includes 48,455 square feet of landscaped area. Landscaping includes: a variety
of trees (ranging in height from 20 to 80 feet at maturity); shrubs and groundcover; turf
areas; shade-tolerant shrubs; and bio-infiltration and vegetated swales. The landscaping plan
incorporates predominantly native, drought-tolerant species (Attachment 3, sheet L1).
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 4
Table 1: Zoning Regulations
Item Proposed 1 Ordinance Standard 2
Setbacks 18-foot street yard 10-foot street yard
Max. Height of Structure 45 feet 45 feet
Max. Height of
Fence/Wall
Combined retaining wall (3 feet)
and noise wall (6 feet above
ground elevation)
6 feet (within side yard)
8 feet (outside yard)
9 feet (measured from lower
side)
Building Coverage 15 percent 75 percent
Parking Spaces
117 vehicular spaces
6 motorcycle spaces
8 bicycle spaces
118 vehicular spaces
6 motorcycle spaces
8 bicycle spaces
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans
2. City Zoning Regulations
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
3.1 ARC Directional Items
On October 5, 2015, the ARC reviewed the project plans, and provided 10 directional items
to be incorporated into plans submitted for final approval (Attachment 3, Sheets A1, A2, A3,
A4, A5, and L1). The paragraphs below identify the directional items and the applicant’s
response and staff’s analysis of the applicant’s submittal.
Directional Item #1: Contact and work with Central Coast Grown, City Farm-San Luis
Obispo to provide their site plan within the project plans for consideration of adjacent
farming activities (e.g. tractor routes, dirt roads, structures, and etc.).
Response to Directional Item #1: The applicant contacted Central Coast Grown, and
met representative Steven Marx on November 18th, 2015. At that time, the applicant
presented their findings regarding the projected shadow impact on the City Farm, located
approximately 300 feet to the north of the hotel’s north elevation. Following the
meeting, the applicant toured the City Farm with Mr. Marx, and learned about additional
future plans including a planned farm stand, pergola, and school program. Following the
meeting, Mr. Marx summarized the meeting in an email (refer to Attachment 6). At the
initial meeting, Mr. Marx requested that a third-party consultant conduct a shading
study, which was supported by the applicant, in addition to the third-party prepared
photo-simulations requested by the ARC. Primary concerns expressed by Mr. Marx
included the effects of the project on the City Farm and future farm stand including
shading and changes to the existing views as seen from the City Farm.
The applicant added the BMW dealership into their computer model and updated their
shadow studies and animated visual simulations (refer to Attachment 3, Solar Study). In
addition to the applicant-provided information, the City Farm was provided with the
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 5
third-party photo-simulations and shading study (Attachment 5). Upon review of these
materials, Mr. Marx noted that shading from the proposed structure would not be a
problem for the City Farm. Mr. Marx continued to express concern regarding the photo-
simulations, primarily focused on views as seen from the City Farm and proposed
farmstand location.
Conclusion: The applicant complied with this directional item by meeting with and
continuing to coordinate with Mr. Marx regarding the proposed project and its effect on
the City Farm. As noted above, previous concerns regarding shading on City Farm crops
and orchards were addressed, as the shading studies did not show that the structure
would adversely affect crop growth (refer to Attachment 3, Solar Study and Attachment
5, Shading Study). Staff finds that while the third-party prepared photo-simulations do
not include a specific viewpoint from the City Farm, one of the viewpoints (Attachment
4, View 01), shows the southbound viewpoint from a location near Calle Joaquin Road
and the City Farm. This view provides an approximately representative view that would
be experienced by workers and visitors to the City Farm. As seen from the City Farm,
the proposed project and the adjacent BMW dealership building would obscure views of
the Irish Hills.
Directional Item #2: Provide an additional shading analysis, which shall show shading on
the winter solstice from sunrise to sunset. The shading analysis shall assess shading by both
structural elements and landscape trees.
Response to Directional Item #2: As shown in the applicant’s shading study
(Attachment 3, Solar Study) the proposed hotel structure and adjacent BMW structure
would cast a shadow on the southwest portion of the City Farm near Prefumo Creek on
December 21 during early morning hours (7:30 AM/8:00 AM). The structure’s shadow
would recede onto the project site by 9:00 AM. The applicant’s study assumes a flat
region, and the structure in the study was created from the applicant’s computer modeled
elevations. The tree line shown in the applicant’s shading study is based upon the revised
landscape plan (Attachment 3, Sheet L1) and assumes trees at full maturity reaching 40-
45 feet in height. The applicant’s shadow study shows that both the proposed landscape
trees would cast a shadow on a portion of the City Farm located to the northwest during
morning hours on the winter solstice.
Shadow studies were also provided by a third-party consultant (refer to Attachment 5,
Shading Study). These shadow studies are consistent with the applicant’s modeling. As
noted above, the City Farm reviewed this shading study and did not express concerns.
The third-party consultant also studied the sun path on June 21, which demonstrates that
shadows cast by the proposed hotel would have no impact on the City Farm on the
summer solstice.
Conclusion: Staff finds the submitted shadow studies addresses ARC’s directional item
#2, and also resolve concerns identified by the City Farm by showing that the shading
would not significantly affect crop production.
Directional Item #3: Provide additional information on the landscaping plan, including the
location of specific species, tree height at the time of initial planting and at maturity, and
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 6
rate of growth (how many years to reach maturity). Consider including larger trees upon
initial planting efforts. Contact Ron Combs, City Arborist, at (805) 781-7023, for additional
information regarding species that would grow well and survive on the subject property.
Response to Directional Item #3: The applicant’s original landscape plan dated July
24, 2015 identified the location, species, and height of proposed trees, and identified
shrub and groundcover species (refer to Attachment 4, Sheet L1). The applicant’s
Landscape Architect, Chris Dufour with RRM design, worked with the City Arborist,
Ron Combs to provide an updated landscape plan, which includes tree species, spacing,
location, initial planting box or gallon size, rate of growth, and height (refer to
Attachment 3, Sheet L1). The plan shows shorter trees along the northern property line,
at the request of the City and the ARC, to minimize shade impacts upon the City Farm.
The revised landscape plan shows the use of 24-inch box and 15-gallon specimens,
which range between 6 to 11 feet in height upon initial planting. The height of these
trees at maturity (6 to 20 years, depending on the species) would range between 15 and
80 feet. The applicant intends to plant larger box trees, if available.
Conclusion: The applicant’s revised landscape plan includes and addresses the
information requested by the ARC, as identified in directional item #3, and incorporates
information from the City Arborist regarding species that would grow well on the project
site.
Directional Item #4: Review and provide additional design modifications to address
improving neighborhood compatibility, such as additional stepping down of the building
(especially as the building approaches the City Farm), to provide a visual transition from
the proposed project to neighboring properties, including current and anticipated future
development.
Response to Directional Item #4: The applicant reviewed this directional item, and
responded that stepping the building down across the long elevation facing north would
require the loss of 16 rooms, which would create a large economic impact to the
performance of the hotel. The applicant generated an animation to study the change in
impact from two different angles and concluded that this revision would not measurably
improve the farm’s view toward the southern hills, particularly if or when a structure
building is built between the hotel and the farm (i.e. proposed BMW dealership). The
applicant’s visualizations indicate that a structure located on the lot between the
proposed hotel and the City Farm would block some views of the hotel as seen from a
close perspective. Viewpoints from the City Farm, approximately 200 feet from the City
Farm’s southern boundary, would provide views of the hotel structure in addition to the
ridgeline of the Irish Hills to the south. The applicant provided visual animations
showing both a full and partial fourth floor , which do not show a significant change in
the visual appearance of the hotel as seen from the City Farm, particularly due to the
adjacent structure, which would block some views of the hotel when looking south.
Comparative still shot views of the animations as seen from the City Farm are presented
below. Figure 1 shows the full top floor, and Figure 2 shows the removal of
approximately 16 rooms from the top floor on the northern facing side of the proposed
hotel. The applicant will present the full visual animation during their presentation.
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 7
Figure 1: Applicant visual of hotel with full top floor.
Figure 2: Applicant visual of hotel with partial top floor.
Conclusion: As noted above, while the applicant provided animated simulations
showing the partial removal of the fourth floor (stepping down to the north), revised
elevations were not provided as requested by the ARC and recommended by staff. The
applicant notes that this change would create a significant economic impact on the
project. The applicant has not sufficiently responded to directional item #4 and the ARC
should discuss if the project should provide additional stepping and reduction in
massing, particularly adjacent to the City Farm.
Directional Item #5: Address neighborhood compatibility in regard to scale and massing,
including existing and future development and improvements along Calle Joaquin and on
the City Farm.
Response to Directional Item #5: The four currently vacant lots on Calle Joaquin,
including the project site, are zoned Commercial Tourism (C-T) zone with a Special
Focus overlay permitting auto dealerships. The applicant’s study of pre-existing uses on
C-T zoned properties in the City indicate that of the approximately 50 commercial lots
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 8
zoned C-T, 29 are hotels and the remainder are generally small retail businesses. Given
the current property values, it is reasonable to expect at least one of the remaining three
developable lots proximate to the project site would support a hotel development. The
applicant provided an exhibit showing these adjacent uses (two hotels, two auto
dealerships) in largely conceptual, blocky form (Attachment 3, Compatibility Massing
Study).
It is anticipated that the height, massing, and scale of a conceptual second hotel would be
similar to the proposed project given the dimensional standards and allowances in the
zoning code. The auto dealership buildings are shown in the approximate center of each
respective lot, and are assumed to be approximately 25 feet in height, and have a
building footprint similar in size to existing auto dealerships located off of Los Osos
Valley Road.
Conclusion: Staff finds that the applicant has submitted materials addressing
neighborhood compatibility in response to directional item #5, which presents a unique
situation in that the land to the north and northwest currently consists of vacant land and
agricultural crops and the land uses to the south and southwest consist of auto
dealerships, a smaller-scale motel, retail tire business, and other commercial retail
businesses. The scale and mass of proposed and potential future development on these
C-T zoned lots are anticipated to be generally consistent with what is allowed in the
Zoning Regulations, which will be different than the agriculturally-related uses and
structures on the City Farm. The proposed BMW dealership to the north would provide
some visual transition, due to the location and lower height of the structure.
Directional Item #6: Provide articulation and openings, including potentially increasing the
size of windows to break up the blank wall planes, especially the wall facing Calle Joaquin
and the wall located toward the middle of the structure.
Response to Directional Item #6: As shown in the submitted revised elevations,
windows have been added to the blank wall planes that are formed by the steps in the
building, and the size of the windows has been increased compared to the previously
reviewed plans (refer to Attachment 3, Sheet A5, East and West Elevations).
Comparative views of the East and West Elevations are shown in Figure 3 (July 2015)
and Figure 4 (Revised January 2016) below.
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 9
Figure 3: East and West Elevations, July 2015 Plans. Figure 4: East and West Elevations, Revised.
Conclusion: Staff finds that the applicant has adequately responded to directional item
#6 by providing additional and larger windows on the wall planes facing Calle Joaquin.
Directional Item #7: Contact San Luis Garbage and provide their written confirmation that
the location of the trash and recycling enclosure is acceptable.
Response to Directional item #7: San Luis Garbage's approval letter, included with the
applicant’s submittal, confirms their review of the proposed plans, and no concerns were
identified (refer to Attachment 3, Letter from San Luis Garbage dated April 29, 2015).
Conclusion: The location of the trash and recycling enclosure in the southwest corner of
the project site has not changed since San Luis Garbage reviewed the proposed plans on
April 29, 2015. Therefore, the applicant has sufficiently responded to directional item #7
by providing the letter from San Luis Garbage.
Directional Item #8: Provide a third-party visual study demonstrating the appearance of the
building from multiple views including Highway 101. The study should include an
assumption of potential development on neighboring properties.
Response to Directional Item #8: The City retained a third-party visual consultant,
TenOver, to prepare photo-simulations of the proposed project and adjacent
development. TenOver used the applicant’s plans, photos of the project site and
surrounding context as seen from representative views along the Highway 101 corridor
and Calle Joaquin, story poles, and computer modeling to simulate the structure.
Information regarding the proposed BMW dealership to the northeast was used to
generate a simulation of this adjacent use, and assumptions regarding anticipated future
development, such as an additional hotel and car dealership, were applied to the
simulations.
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 10
Conclusion: Consistent with directional item #8, the applicant funded the preparation of
third-party photo-simulations, which include simulations of the proposed hotel project
and adjacent development (refer to Attachment 5).
Directional Item #9: Include additional dust control mitigation measures considering
sensitivity to neighboring farming activities.
Response to Directional Item #9: The applicant has stated that they will minimize
activities on the construction site that produce dust during periods of high winds in
addition to following the measures outlined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The
prevailing winds from the mountains blow from the northwest toward the southeast;
therefore, construction dust on the site will generally blow away from the farm, not
toward it. The applicant intends to continue coordinating dust control mitigation with
neighboring properties including the San Luis Farm.
Conclusion: Dust mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration
are compliant with measures identified by the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control
District. Consistent with the applicant’s stated intentions, staff has included an additional
condition of approval for the ARC’s consideration to further address dust generated
during construction:
Proposed Condition #14: Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall
show the placement of straw bales and/or temporary wind barrier fencing along the
northern-facing property boundaries. The straw bales and wind barrier fencing shall be
maintained in functional condition for the duration of grading and ground disturbing
activities, and shall be removed following completion of grading and ground disturbing
activities and stabilization of loose soil by proposed paving and vegetation. Soil
stockpiles shall be covered when not in use.
The applicant’s stated intentions supplemented by an additional condition identified by
staff, complies with directional item #9.
Directional Item #10: Clarify the use of "sand" finished stucco, referenced in condition #3.
The use of spray on stucco may be appropriate above 30 feet.
Response to Directional item #10: The applicant states that a three-coat stucco system
is proposed for the project. “Spray-on” stucco is an Exterior Insulated Finish System or
EIFS (comprised of a layer of plaster over a foam-insulated wall), which is not proposed
for this project. The exterior stucco is proposed to have two finishes: one a smooth
troweled finish and a rough or 'sanded' finish. The rough finish would be similar to the
finish of the Hampton Inn and Suites located to the south of the project site. The intent is
for both plaster finishes to be stucco, and to not be a spray-applied finish that is typically
installed over an EIFS system.
Conclusion: The applicant’s response above responds to directional item #10 by
clarifying the proposed use of stucco on the structure.
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 11
3.2 General Plan
3.2.1 Conservation and Open Space Element
Applicable scenic and viewshed protection policies are identified in the Conservation and
Open Space Element and Circulation Element (refer to Attachment 7 for additional
discussion of these policies).
The applicant provided photo-simulations (see Attachment 3, sheet SC), and the Initial
Study considers and addresses this potential impact, and determined that impacts would be
less than significant with mitigation (see Attachment 9, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Section 1 Aesthetics). As noted above, additional visual simulations were
prepared by a third-party consultant to supplement the documentation provided previously to
the ARC (refer to Attachment 5).
3.2.2 Land Use Element Special Focus Area
The Land Use Element (LUE) identifies the project site and three adjacent lots as the Calle
Joaquin Auto Sales “Special Focus Area”, and the project site is subject to LUE Policy 8.11
specific to this area 2. The proposed project is an allowable use within the Tourist
Commercial designation. Property to the northeast is Conservation/Open Space and
designated for agricultural development. Currently the property is managed by City Farm
and supports irrigated row crops and stormwater management. The County Agricultural
Commissioner’s Office reviewed the project, and did not identify any significant concerns
regarding land use compatibility3. The updated shading studies, provided by both the
applicant and a third-party consultant (at the request of the applicant) (refer to Attachment 3,
Solar Study and Attachment 5, Shading Study), demonstrate that the project would not
adversely affect crop production on the City Farm. The proposed project would be visible
from the northbound and southbound travel lanes of U.S. 101 and Calle Joaquin, in addition
to adjacent properties including the City Farm (refer to Attachment 7, ARC Staff Report
October 5, 2015 and Attachment 9, Initial Study for additional information). Additional
third-party visual simulations from the approximate location of the northbound travel lanes
show the project and adjacent potential future development (Attachment 5, View 02 – Step
3) and just the proposed project (Attachment 5, View 02 – Step 4).
3.3 Community Design Guidelines
3.3.1 Architectural Style
Architectural design guidelines identified in the CDG (Part B.1 of Section 3.1) are assessed
in the previous staff report (refer to Attachment 7, ARC Staff Report October 5, 2015). As
2 Land Use Element Policy 8.11(Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area) discusses the land use designation of the subject site
and states that “These four vacant lots are suitable for commercial mixed use and other uses described under the
Tourist Commercial designations. Portions of the site may be appropriate for use as auto sales, depending on market
demand. Development of this area must address preservation of and transition to the agricultural parcels/uses to the
northwest; connectivity to the Dalidio Ranch area; viewshed preservation; and treatment as a gateway to the City
visible from Highway 101.”
3 “The proposed project appears to be adequately buffered from adjacent ag [sic] land based on the building location,
room orientation, and landscaping represented on the plan. Development on remaining lots should be similar.
Disclosure of the County’s Right-to-Farm Ordinance is recommended” (Lynda Auchinachie 2014).
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 12
previously noted, the project maintains features of its trademarked design, and also
incorporates natural-appearing exterior features. The design of the proposed hotel varies
from, but is not incompatible with nearby development including several hotels and
commercial developments, which incorporate a variety of both trademarked and locally
compatible architectural styles. Therefore, the project is generally consistent with this
guideline.
3.3.2 Form, Mass, and Rooflines
The project’s consistency with Parts B.4, B.5, B.7, and B.8 of Section 3.1 (CDG) is assessed
in the previous staff report (refer to Attachment 7, ARC Staff Report October 5, 2015). As
discussed above, additional guidance was provided by the ARC regarding form and mass,
which the applicant responded to in part (refer to Response to Directional Items #4, #5, and
#6, above).
3.3.3 Signage and Flags
Table 2: Sign Regulations
Item Proposed Ordinance Standard (Sign
Regulations)
Number of signs Three Two
Max. cumulative area (sf) Wall mounted signs: 300 sf 200
Max. Height
North and south elevations: 43
feet above grade, above fourth
floor windows
East elevation: 33 feet above
grade, above third floor windows
25 feet above grade, highest
point of the second story,
unless applicant’s request for
exception is granted
Wall sign location
North and south elevations: above
main ground floor entry doors
East elevation (highway-facing):
no public entry.
Signage is only allowed on wall
planes supporting a public
entrance; an exception may be
granted by the community
development director1
Illumination
Channel lettering
Internally illuminated
Daytime: teal and red
Night: white and red
Hazardous glare prohibited
Shielded light source
Dark background with light
lettering
Monument Sign Size: 20 square feet
Height: 5 feet
Maximum size: 24 square feet
Maximum height: 6 feet
Flag pole One flag pole
30 feet in height
One flag pole allowed
45-foot height limit
1 Exception may be granted “in circumstances where the purpose and intent of these regulations is maintained
and where the orientation of the public entrance to a building is such that the sign would not have sufficient
visibility from the public right-of-way to provide for adequate identification of the business or use”
Staff recommends that the ARC continue review of the applicant’s proposed signage plan
based on the applicant’s response to directional items specific to signage, and staff’s
subsequent review. Staff recommends that the ARC review the preliminary signage plan,
ARCH-1098-2015 (1301 Calle Joaquin)
Page 13
and provide direction to staff and applicant for either further review by the ARC or the
Planning Director. Recommended directional items include:
a.Provide an exhibit showing the monument sign, complete with stone base, and
showing dimensions, colors (day and night), materials, and method of illumination
and treatment. Consider providing push through or some varied dimension to the
lettering.
b.Clearly identify dimensions of all signage lettering including height and depth.
c.Avoid use of white lighted lettering during night-time hours.
These items are identified as Condition of Approval No. 12 (Attachment 1, Draft
Resolution).
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Public Draft Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is recommended for adoption
(Attachment 9). The MND finds that with incorporation of mitigation measures, potential impacts to
aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas
emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation
and traffic will be less than significant. A summary of the potential impacts and recommended
mitigation measures is presented in Attachment 7 (ARC Staff Report, October 5, 2015) (refer to
Attachment 9, Initial Study, for the complete environmental document).
5.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The requirements of the other City departments are reflected in the Conditions of Approval.
6.0 ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design Guidelines.
6.2 Continue the project to a date uncertain with directional items.
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1.Draft Resolution
2.Vicinity Map
3. Applicant Response Letter, Revised Project Plan Set, Attachments
4. Applicant July 2015 Plan Set
5.Third-party photo-simulations and shading study
6. Correspondence from City Farm
7.Directional Items, Minutes, and Staff Report, October 5, 2015 ARC meeting
8. Minutes, July 7, 2014 ARC meeting
9.Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
10. Applicant’s proposed signage plan
Provided to Commissioners: Full size project plans
Available at ARC Hearing: Colors and Materials Board, Applicant Animated Visual Simulations
NOTE: Attachments not attached; refer to Attachments to June 20, 2016 staff report.
DRAFT Minutes
Architectural Review Commission
Regular Meeting
Monday, May 2, 2016
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission was called to
order on Monday, May 2, 2016 at 5:04 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Allen Root, Amy Nemcik, Ken Curtis, Patricia Andreen,
Angela Soll and Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie
Absent Chair Greg Wynn
Staff Present: Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, Contract Planner
Shawna Scott, Assistant Planner Kyle Bell, Associate Planner Marcus Carloni,
and Recording Secretary Brad T. Opstad
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREEN, SECOND BY
COMMISSIONER SOLL, the Minutes of March 21, 2016 were approved, as amended (Page 6,
sixth paragraph, first sentence to read: “Per maximum height of structures as it relates to building
design, Commissioner Andreen indicated she would not reject request for additional three (3)
feet out of hand, but…” on the following 5:0:1:1 vote:
AYES: Andreen, Soll, Root, Nemcik, Ehdaie
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Curtis
ABSENT: Wynn
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
None.
By consensus, the Commission re-ordered the Public Hearing Items such that Item 3 would
precede Item 2.
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Architectural Review Commission Minutes of May 2, 2016- DRAFT Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1) 1301 Calle Joaquin. ARCH-1098-2015; Continued review of a four-story, 114-unit
extended stay hotel and associated hotel amenities and Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental review.
Consulting Planner Shawna Scott provided background on this project, noting that this is
the third presentation to the ARC of the project, and summarized the Staff Report and
Recommendations. Deputy Director Davidson indicated that Staff wished to provide an
option to the ARC to consider a request for a sign exception in the future.
Philip Stewart, Myhre Group Architects, representing the Applicant, provided an
overview of the status of directional items provided by the ARC to the Applicant on July
7, 2014. In addition, he showed two animation-video simulations.
Commission questions followed regarding changes to the project plans. Planner Scott
indicated that the Applicant was still requesting four stories.
PUBLIC COMMENT
San Luis Obispo residents Mila Vujovich-LaBarre, Steven Marx (representing Central
Coast Grown), and Carolyn Smith voiced objections citing concerns regarding negative
impacts to water resources and traffic; and visual impacts of the hotel on various
locations of the City Farm, especially those nearest the freeway.
---End of Public Comments---
Commission discussion and feedback to Staff followed.
Commissioner Andreen expressed difficulty in reconciling neighborhood compatibility as
defined in Finding #3 of the draft Resolution. Commissioner Curtis stated that he is not
convinced the proposed project would preserve the ability of City Farm to conduct
productive agriculture. Commissioner Nemcik suggested that the signage plan return to
ARC for further consideration. Commissioner Soll voiced concerns relating to
neighborhood compatibility with City.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie indicated support of project.
A motion was made and seconded to not approve the project and send it back to the
Applicant with directions for further revisions. Discussion ensued. Commissioners Root
and Curtis discussed the options between outright denial of the project and their
preference for reinforcing directions to the Applicant for revisions to the project.
Commissioner Curtis proposed the item be continued.
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Architectural Review Commission Minutes of May 2, 2016- DRAFT Page 3
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREEN, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER CURTIS, the Commission rejected the adoption of the resolution to
approve the new 114-unit hotel, including adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration,
and provided the following direction to the Applicant, on a 4:2:1 roll call vote:
1. Reduce the height of the structure and provide additional vertical and horizontal
stepping to: provide more visibility of distant ridgelines and hills as seen from
offsite locations; minimize the boxy shape of the structure; and, increase the
project’s compatibility with the size, scale, height, and massing of proximate
existing structures and agricultural operations on Calle Joaquin Road and Los
Osos Valley Road (please note some Commissioners’ comments included a
request to lower the structure to three stories and/or approximately 30 feet in
height).
2. Provide more visual articulation by adding definition around windows, such as
lintels to create more shadow lines.
3. Provide a more unified exterior wall color scheme, and minimize the use of colors
to provide visual articulation.
AYES: Andreen, Curtis, Soll, Root
NOES: Nemcik, Ehdaie
ABSENT: Wynn
2) 2245 Higuera Street. ARCH-2734-2016; Review of a new mixed use building comprised
of commercial and office space with two residential units, which includes a request for a
street yard setback exception and a 30% mixed-use parking reduction, with a categorical
exemption from environmental review; C-S-MU zone; 245 Higuera, LLC, applicant.
Assistant Planner Bell passed around a materials board and provided the Staff Report.
Applicant Representative Joel Snyder, Ten Over Studio, shared the firm’s vision for
implementation of the Mid-Higuera Enhancement Plan (MHEP) and responded to
Commission questions about parking, the consistency of corrugated metal siding
appearance, and the application of a variance in this zone.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Shad Perlich, San Luis Obispo, owner of Traditional Tattoo (adjacent business to north of
project), voiced support of project but shared concern about ensuring the preservation of
his business during construction.
---End of Public Comment---
In response to Commissioner Andreen’s inquiry, Deputy Director Davidson indicated that
Commission could apply a condition for requiring existing businesses open during
construction signage, but would not really need to because normal inspection processes
would cover that once permits are issued.
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Architectural Review Commission Minutes of May 2, 2016- DRAFT Page 4
Commission discussion ensued with a focus on the configuration of the roof and angled
walls, the space between the project’s side entrance and the entrance of Traditional
Tattoo, the length of the carport wall, and signage.
Staff confirmed that signage will be submitted for Staff review and any exceptions
requested per sign regulations will be presented to the ARC at a later date. Commissioner
Andreen commented that the project is exactly what was envisioned in the MHEP and
suggesting signage that reflects the “edgy” style of the building.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SOLL, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER CURTIS, the Commission adopted a Resolution approving the
development of the new mixed-use building, including commercial, office and residential,
including a 30% shared/mixed-use parking reduction, with a categorical exemption from
environmental review, subject to Resolution Findings, on the following 6:0:1 roll call
vote:
AYES: Soll, Curtis, Andreen, Root, Nemcik, Ehdaie
NOES: None
ABSENT: Wynn
Acting Chair Ehdaie called for short recess.
3) Neighborhood Compatibility Study Session. GENP-1876-2015; Study session to review
progress and provide feedback on implementation of General Plan Land Use Element
Program 2.13 regarding neighborhood compatibility (new homes proposed to be within
existing neighborhoods).
Associate Planner Carloni provided the Staff Report and update on the study session
process.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Sandra Rowley, San Luis Obispo, expressed disappointment there had been only one
workshop, which she was unable to attend, and urged Staff to develop more outreach in
another neighborhood.
---End of Public Comment---
Commission discussion ensued. Deputy Director Davidson summarized the primary
points of feedback:
1. Request to hold an additional workshop in another neighborhood;
2. Consideration of a design threshold;
3. Consideration of overlay districts;
4. Consideration of the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) as approach;
5. Limitations on size of residence’s second story to be smaller than the footprint;
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Architectural Review Commission Minutes of May 2, 2016- DRAFT Page 5
6. Consideration of the policy or standard about any new development being tied to a
percentage of the average structure;
7. Development of “Goal Approach” with policies and bullets listed;
8. Development of Commissioner Curtis’ idea about Specifics (overlay, FAR, second-
floor setback, reduction in size) as accompanied by a set of guidelines;
9. Reinforcement of the overall premise of being more specific both in text and the
reliance on graphics telling more of the story than extensive paragraphs.
Agenda Forecast:
May 16th: Project at 2881 Broad Street; small commercial-industrial project on corner of Via
Esteban & Sacramento
June 6th: Five (5) residential-units project at 135 Ferrini; large mixed-use project in Broad Street
Area on Caudill; request by Crown Castle to replace existing traffic signals and light poles in the
right-of-way with wireless facilities
ADJOURNMENT
Acting Chair Ehdaie adjourned the Meeting at 8:18 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brad T. Opstad
Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION XX/XX/2016
_________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk