HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-16 ARC Agenda PacketCity of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Agenda
Architectural Review Commission
Monday, September 12, 2016
5:00 pm REGULAR MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Greg Wynn
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root, Angela Soll,
Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chair Greg Wynn
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: At this time, the general public is invited to speak before the
Commission on any subject within the jurisdiction of the Architectural Review Commission that
does not appear on this agenda. Although the Commission will not take action on any item
presented during the Public Comment Period, the Chair may direct staff to place an item on a
future agenda for formal discussion.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Architectural Review Commission meeting of July 18, 2016 and August 1, 2016
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Note: Any court challenge to the actions taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be
limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public hearing. If you wish to speak,
please give your name and address for the record.
1.3175 Violet Street. ARCH-3370-2016: Review of a new affordable housing project within the
Serra Meadows development Lot 108 that consists of four new buildings that includes 36 units
and a request to reduce the street yard to 10 feet for a portion of the building along Violet
Street, where 15 feet is normally required, in accordance with Mitigated Negative Declaration
San Luis Obispo - Regular Meeting Agenda of September 12, 2016 Page 2
ER-120-13 City Council Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series); R-3-SP zone; San Luis Obispo
Non-Profit Housing Corporation, applicant. (Kyle Bell)
2. 2102 Broad Street. ARCH-2764-2016; Modification of an approved plan (ARCMI 29-12) for
construction of an addition to a single-family dwelling, to replace the demolished portion of
the dwelling with new construction and add a third floor, including an exception from the six
foot fence and wall height limits to allow a portion of a wall to be 10 feet in height; C-N zone;
Samuel Clemons, applicant. (Walter Oetzell)
COMMENT & DISCUSSION
1. STAFF
a. Agenda Forecast
ADJOURNMENT
APPEALS: Any decision of the Architectural Review Commission is final unless appealed to the
City Council within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission
may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development
Department, City Clerk’s office, or on the City’s website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an
appeal is $281 and must accompany the appeal documentation.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s
Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf (805)781-7107.
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, July 18, 2016
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday, July
18th, 2016 at 5:08 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by ARC Liaison Doug Davidson.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Allen Root, and Angela Soll.
Absent: Commissioners Amy Nemcik, Vice – Chair Suzan Ehdaie , and Chair Greg Wynn
Staff: Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, and Recording
Secretary Brad T. Opstad
Director Davidson called for Commissioner to volunteer to preside as Standing Chair;
Commissioner Andreen obliged.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 570 Higuera Street. ARCH-2699-2016: Review of the remodel and rehabilitation of the
Historic Master List Golden State Creamery and the construction of the new 2,880 square
foot commercial building with off-site parking within the downtown historic district with
a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-D-H zone; Creamery, LLC,
applicant.
Planner Cohen discussed the project’s background from the initial proposal in April of 2015
through its modification and subsequent CDD Director approval, the building’s redevelopment in
the 1970’s and its historical significance as a unique site of milk production.
Nancy Hubbard spoke as a Project Manager & Applicant Representative; discussed working with
staff to achieve the ideal blend of retaining natural site features, while providing low-impact retail
functionality for tenants and improved safety & feasibility for pedestrian traffic.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for July 18, 2016 Page 2
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
In response to Commissioner Curtis’ inquiry, Applicant-Owner Pat Arnold indicated the plan to
upgrade tenant roster signage found at the Higuera entrance.
In response to Commissioner Soll’s public correspondence-generated inquiry, Mr. Arnold
indicated that restaurant deliveries are done during daylight hours and limited to when Sysco is
able to deliver to its clients.
Acting Chair Andreen voiced consideration of removing the “Cows” mural; Owner Arnold
reported the mixed reviews of the complex’s tenants and indicated there would be a collaborative
effort among them as to what should replace it once it is over-painted.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Ursula Bishop, San Luis Obispo, indicated that the project is in no condition to warrant approval;
requested that the “pedestrian plaza” is better defined; voiced that the bordering neighborhood was
not adequately considered, given that it will be severely impacted by noise and parking issues.
Mark Johnson, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns with building five being proposed that
includes storefront roll-up windows and running the risk of becoming a bar or nightclub.
Mary Mitchell, San Luis Obispo, discussed the insufficient provision of parking downtown and its
subsequent impact on Dana Street; stated multiple concerns for the lack of protection from the
downtown character suffering deepened encroachment of a nightclub scene.
D. Kesting, Sunnyvale, questioned the historical value of the site, concurring with the previously
voiced Public Comments which insisted upon consideration on parking, and urging need for a
parking analysis report that better prepares tenants for impending success.
Dixie Cliff, San Luis Obispo, complemented the project’s aesthetic sensibility but lobbied for
maintaining the current mural; voiced concerns about the parking situation as it affects the
downtown’s entirety.
Mary White, San Luis Obispo, stated that noise & parking are an existing problem in the
neighborhood and especially on weekends; voiced escalating concern that the automobile
vandalism and crime of the last five years will worsen with the project’s traffic.
Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, suggested that the developers should look less at maximizing
absolute profit and consider writing a contractual stipulation into its lease agreement prohibiting
building five from becoming a nightclub.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for July 18, 2016 Page 3
COMMISSION DELIBERATION
Planner Cohen and Deputy Director Davidson addressed the Public concerns of continuous
nightclub development further down Higuera, through discussion of the stringent process and
heavy scrutiny which dining establishments would undergo in a license-maximized area of City.
Commissioner Root voiced support of articulation on the proposed building’s exterior be better
than corrugated metal on sides and roofline with no relief except for some signage and doorframes;
advocated for noise & nuisance conditions while also conditioning delivery times.
Commissioner Curtis voiced concern for the use of roll-up doors on building five given the
uncertainty as to the nature of the tenants who would occupy the space in the future and questioned
the type of doors at this location.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROOT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SOLL, the Commission approved the remodel and rehabilitation of the Historic Master List
Golden State Creamery and the construction of a new 2,880 square foot commercial building with
off-site parking within the Downtown Historic District; with a Categorical Exception of
Environmental review; with the addition of the following Conditions: A.) Applicant shall provide
more articulation on Building #5 by breaking up the corrugated metal siding with other materials
and/or color; B.) Roll-up doors on Building #5 shall be closed at 9 p.m. on Sundays & weekdays
and no later than 10 p.m. on weekends; C.) Applicant shall maintain the mural (“Cows”) until the
new public art project is approved; and D.) Deliveries shall be both prohibited before 7 a.m. and
occur on Higuera Street to the extent feasible; with Condition #6 to read “The applicant shall pay
in-lieu fees for 15 16 parking spaces; and with the acceptance of the Cultural Heritage Committee
recommendation, on the following 4:0:0:3 roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Andreen, Curtis, Root, and Soll
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Nemcik, Vice-Chair Ehdaie, and Chair Wynn
AGENDA FORECAST
Deputy Director Davidson provided the Agenda Forecast:
August 1st: Conceptual Review of 71 Palomar
August 15th: Sign regulations on two (2) mixed-use projects
Deputy Director Davidson indicated that an enforcement case was filed on the Quiky Car Wash,
as it pertained to its rooftop signage.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for July 18, 2016 Page 4
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:17 p.m.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2016
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, August 1, 2016
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
August 1, 2016 at 5:03 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by Chair Greg Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root, Angela Soll,
Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chair Greg Wynn
Absent: None
Staff: Principal Planner Tyler Corey, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, and Recording
Secretary Brad T. Opstad
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Lydia Mourenza, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding the process of City staff using
agenda correspondence to submit additional materials to the Agenda Packet and prior to the Public
Hearing.
Peter Crough, San Luis Obispo, made two requests for the Commission to consider, namely to
cancel tonight’s Hearing or at least limit the scope toward gathering more information from
interested parties. Mr. Crough argued that any Conceptual Review process should refrain from
providing guidance to the Applicant until all relevant data has been collected as part of the record.
Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, requested that the Commission urges those who speak on an item
to identify themselves and their affiliation with the project. Ms. Small stressed protection of the
neighborhoods and residents as her primary objective.
Cheryl McLean, San Luis Obispo, questioned prematurity of any project that comes before ARC
purview without CEQA in place.
Chair Wynn commented that staff has instructed Advisory Bodies in the past that any request for
having speakers identify themselves at the podium is issued out of courtesy and not out of a
demand. Chair Wynn provided the background on how Agenda Correspondence is entered into
the record and how staff is highly diligent in this respect.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 2
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Consideration of Minutes for the ARC Regular Meeting of June 6, 2016:
NOTE: Per July 21, 2016 correspondence from City Clerk to ARC, the June 6, 2016
Minutes approved on July 11, 2016 contained an unintentional omission of the
Consideration of Minutes section; hence, Action was required to re-consider and
Approve the amended minutes.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROOT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
NEMCIK, the ARC Minutes of June 6, 2016 were approved with aforementioned amendment
following 6:0:1:0 vote:
AYES: Root, Nemcik, Curtis, Soll, Ehdaie, Wynn
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Andreen
ABSENT: None
Consideration of Minutes for the ARC Regular Meeting of June 20, 2016:
AMENDMENT: Page 1, Consideration of Minutes, Amendment, to read “…expressed
concerns regarding potentially significant traffic impacts…” and “…water supply in
the long-term, given recurring drought conditions.”
AMENDMENT: Page 1, Consideration of Minutes, Action, insert statement under
votes to read: “Commissioner Curtis stated that he was abstaining due to his objection
to the new action minutes approach.”
AMENDMENT: Page 3, third paragraph, to read: “…”objections to the project’s height
based on view shed obstructions and voiced a litany of further number of other
objections, including the Applicant’s once again not responding to Commission’s
majority direction, concerns regarding traffic impacts and water supply &
availability.”
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SOLL, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER ROOT, the ARC Minutes of June 20, 2016 were approved as
amended on the following 6:0:1:0 vote:
AYES: Soll, Root, Curtis, Nemcik, Ehdaie, Wynn
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Andreen
ABSENT: None
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 3
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 71 Palomar Avenue. ARCH-2193-2015; Conceptual architectural review and preliminary
feedback for the rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, and repositioning of the Master List Historic
Sandford House and the construction of a 33-unit multi-family residential project. No final
action is being requested; R-4 zone; LR Development Group, applicant. (Rachel Cohen)
Commissioner Andreen acknowledged that she had consulted with the City Attorney’s Office to
determine that she had no conflict of interest on Item #1, considering she had previously resided
on Serrano Drive. Planner Corey clarified that the Commission will not make a final action
fortheproposed project.
Planner Cohen presented the staff report and requested feedback for the Applicant on the multi-
family project; summarized the background, following the June 27th CHC Recommendations for
the revised project; displayed a PowerPoint presentation with an aerial view of the site and other
project highlights, including the three directional items pertaining to scale & massing, material &
architectural elements and the landscaping plans.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Commissioner Andreen questioned whether the Commission should consult the Community
Design Guidelines for infill projects in addition to Multi-Family Design Guidelines; requested that
the balconies, porches and patios be indicated on the PowerPoint presentation.
Commissioner Curtis commented on the Commission’s difficulty in proceeding on the conceptual
level without possessing complete information; expressed concern that he’d been denied access to
correspondence e-mails received by staff; questioned whether, relocated structures qualify as
historic landmarks.
Planner Cohen responded that supplemental information regarding the relocation of the Sandford
House and the project’s architectural materials would be included in the final review packet.
Commissioner Nemcik inquired about any existing parking requirements; Vice-Chair Ehdaie
raised question pertaining to the potentiality of subterranean parking in the project’s layout.
Chair Wynn cited the City Attorney’s response memorandum, regarding any overt suggestions
that scheduling a Conceptual Review Hearing would violate purpose of CEQA; concurred with
Commissioner Curtis that any specific discussion on landscaping and tree removal at this Hearing
would be premature.
Commissioner Andreen opined that providing any analysis, discussion, or meaningful feedback
on structure placement and scale borders on impossible without the input of a Tree Report.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 4
Commissioner Soll made a Motion to delay the Public Hearing until further notice from arborists
and receipt of other environmental information; Commissioner Curtis seconded; discussion
ensued.
Commissioner Soll mentioned that the City Arborist had contributed a memorandum to the record,
Commissioner Andreen agreed that the tree removal issue was a predominant concern, but she was
also having uncertainties regarding the structure’s architectural style; Commissioner Root
concurred in regards to the Public Hearing being premature and agreed to continuing to a date
uncertain; Commissioner Nemcik opined that she would be comfortable providing
recommendations on two directional items other than landscaping, in part because future
deliberation of final plans; Vice-Chair Ehdaie shared that the purpose of any Public Hearing is to
provide a forum where all sides are aired as part of the information collection process; Chair Wynn
concurred with Commissioners Nemcik & Ehdaie and stated that the public process in this case
would be best served through testimony with no formal action taken, suggesting that any
discussion on landscape issues could be postponed.
A motion made by Commissioner Soll, seconded by Commissioner Curtis, to continue to a date
uncertain until relevant information is gathered for which ARC can make final decision failed on
the following 3:4:0:0 roll call vote:
AYES: Soll, Curtis, Andreen
NOES: Root, Nemcik, Ehdaie, Wynn
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Root indicated he was swayed to change his vote by the three Commissioners who
voiced the reasons behind their motion-dissenting opinions.
Commissioner Andreen disclosed that ex partie correspondence had been sent directly to only
some of the Commissioners from Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) Member James Papp which
paraphrased what had occurred at pertinent CHC Hearing from his perspective; disclosed that she
had also received ex partie communication from Alan Cooper lobbying against the project. Chair
Wynn voiced that he had received the same ex partie communiques.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Thom Jess, Founding Partner, Arris Studio Architects, presented a PowerPoint presentation on the
applicant’s responses to the scale & massing, architectural elements, and directional items.
Vice Chair Ehdaie inquired about the unit number reduction toward reducing scale and its relation
to R-4 land use.
Commissioner Andreen inquired whether the applicant agreed that the Sandford House is
representative of an Agrarian-style architecture and whether the applicant felt that they had
adequately complied with the In-Fill Compatibility Guidelines.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 5
Commissioner Root inquired whether the Applicant would be requesting exceptions for the
project.
Chair Wynn inquired about bedroom sizes and the number of leases expected in regards to the
floor plan layout.
Commissioner Soll inquired about rental properties related to affordable housing and if the
proposed project meets density requirements.
Commissioner Curtis inquired about the number of affordable housing units in the complex.
Commissioner Andreen inquired about the consistency of traditional setback patterns within the
neighborhood; inquired about setbacks of upper floors in the Building Height Guidelines.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jerry Rioux, San Luis Obispo, spoke as Executive Director of SLO County Housing Trust Fund in
support of project.
Lydia Mourenza, Peter Crough, Bob Mourenza, Roberto Monge, Jody Vollmer, Elizabeth
DeHaan, Al Lipper, Kit Gould, Johna Vacanti, Betsy Schwartz, Diana Schmiett, Richard Schmidt,
and Mary French, San Luis Obispo, spoke as neighboring residents to, and in opposition of the
project; voiced various concerns including: the overburdened parking situation in neighborhood;
the dormitory-style design and the fallacy that it’s designed as a multi-family dwelling; the general
ruination of the cultural landscape; the magnitude of the proposal for historic site doing nothing to
retain residential environment; and the impacts to neighborhood wellness through severe influx of
student traffic.
Corliss Campbell, San Luis Obispo, wished to speak on wildlife habitats impacted by tree removal.
Ms. Campbell indicated she would provide commentary at the next Public Hearing.
Victor Johnson, San Luis Obispo, spoke as President of Delta Tau Corporation; shared the
backstory of a longtime ownership and increased preservation efforts during the tenure, and the
non-factual popular narrative regarding the history of the trees.
Carolyn Smith, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the high rate of party noise complaints filed with
SLOPD every year; urged for in-depth noise study to be rendered on project; advocated for on-site
resident manager to be conditioned as requirement for project.
Joseph Abrahams, San Luis Obispo, spoke of his own residential neighborhood being fortunate
enough to contain a student population amenable to civilized living; shared the statistic that student
housing units now tend to become overcrowded with students who own automobiles.
James Lopes, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the scheduling process regarding Public Hearings,
specifically to the faulty reporting of the unit number reduction between the respective CHC and
ARC Reviews; advocated for reducing density to R-2 or R-1.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 6
Farid Shahid, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the proposed project, as means of bringing
more adequate supply of housing due to the current demand.
Grant Robbins, San Luis Obispo, spoke as Cal Poly alumnus and local employer who on behalf of
college graduates desire to evolve out of college rentals and into more professional domiciles.
Lisa Combs, San Luis Obispo, shared that, although appreciative of the Palomar neighborhood
concerns, is cognizant of the desperate need for housing in City; voiced that the project meets all
criteria and complies with City standards; indicated support of the proposed project.
Tayler Simpson, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the proposed project as a local professional,
whose biggest challenge to date is finding an adequate place to live.
Suzanne Knapp, San Luis Obispo, spoke against the idea of cutting down the 45 heritage trees and
against a student population.
Bob Nastase, San Luis Obispo, shared insight from multiple years as a developer that with Cal
Poly continuing to grow, and with no provision for student housing, students will continue to
gravitate toward established residential communities to live.
Tyler Beaty, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the increasing rent for local housing and the need for
affordable housing for college alumni who wish to stay in the community.
Salem Ahmed, San Luis Obispo, commented on the standard of living being in decline, while
market rates rise for residences in the City; spoke in support of the proposed project.
Enrique Ivers, San Luis Obispo, indicated that untruths exist related to the comments being made
about the proposed project, specifically to Cal Poly’s obligation to build housing for its students.
Mila Vujovich-LaBarre, San Luis Obispo, voiced that she had hoped for the hearing to have been
continued; commented on the lack of transparency for the proposed project; encouraged
developers to pursue public-private partnerships with Cal Poly; noted the lack of water availability
given climate change.
Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, spoke as the neighborhoods’ advocate in support of Ramona-
Luneta families and against developers’ misleading practices.
Cheryl McLean, San Luis Obispo, opined that the site serves as a buffer between student, senior
and family demographics that need to be preserved as a cultural landscape.
Danny Sullivan, San Luis Obispo, indicated that longtime City homeowners do not comprehend
the complexities which Cal Poly graduates undergo in search of affordable housing.
Chair Wynn offered ten-minute recess.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 7
COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION
Chair Wynn reiterated the Commission consensus, noting that it was premature for direction for
landscaping, without adequate information.
The Commission provided added direction which suggested conducting analyses with a broader
perspective beyond tree removal and would specifically address the area’s habitat, biology, its
view sheds, wildlife corridor, and the proposed green screen wall in an area without planters.
Chair Wynn suggested that any changes to the development would return to a Cultural Heritage
Committee Meeting and allow for recommendations prior to any review by the Commission.
The Commission discussed the general material palette, whether materials and combinations were
appropriate, and their overall relation to the compatibility with the Sandford House.
Commissioner Root provided direction in regards to the Applicants, considering the durability and
maintainability of the presented selected materials.
On a Motion by Commissioner Soll, Seconded by Commissioner Root, the Commission voted
unanimously to conduct the Hearing past 9:00 P.M.
Chair Wynn provided direction in regards to reducing the bedroom count and building height,
especially closest to Luneta Drive.
The Commission discussed the articulation of north wall requiring variation beyond the smooth
stucco between windows, wider walkways for increased room for pedestrian circulation, and
maintaining the symbiosis created when the lower buildings are subservient to the Sandford House.
Applicant Jess indicated he received all informational direction and required no further
clarification.
By consensus, the Commission provided no formal action and feedback to staff and Applicant
through previously mentioned deliberations and discussion.
COMMENT & DISCUSSION
Commissioners Andreen and Root commented respectively on the Hearing process being less than
ideal at certain points, but that it was ultimately invaluable, balanced, collaborative, and well-
conducted by Chair Wynn.
Principal Planner Corey provided the Agenda Forecast:
August 15th: Southtown 18 (560 Higuera), a mixed-use project at former site of Hometown
Nursery and next to Creamery on flag lot parcel; a mixed-use project at 1259 Laurel Lane; and the
Sign Regulations Update & Study Session
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for August 1, 2016 Page 8
September 12th: Serra Meadows, the Affordable Housing site at 408 Prado Road proposed by
Housing Authority
September 19th: Joint CHC & ARC Hearing on Bishop Street Studios, the rehabilitation proposal
of the Transitions Mental Health Association; ARC Review of 22 Chorro Street, a mixed-use
project t corner of Foothill Boulevard.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:21 p.m.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2016
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of a new affordable housing project within the Serra Meadows development Lot
108 that consists of four new buildings that includes 36 residential units and a request to reduce the
street yard to 10-feet for a portion of the building along Violet Street, where 15-feet is normally
required, in accordance with Mitigated Negative Declaration ER-120-13 City Council Resolution No.
10512 (2014 Series).
PROJECT ADDRESS: 3175 Violet Street BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7524
E-mail: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-3370-2016 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) which approves the project,
based on findings, and subject to conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant San Luis Obispo Non-Profit
Housing Corporation
Complete Date August 3, 2016
Zoning R-3-SP
General Plan Medium-High Density
Residential within the
Margarita Area Specific Plan
Site Area 1.39 acres (60,548 s.f.)
Environmental
Status
Mitigated Negative
Declaration ER-120-13 City
Council Resolution No.
10512 (2014 Series)
SUMMARY
The applicant, Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo (HASLO), is proposing to construct a new
affordable housing project to provide the required affordable housing for the Serra Meadow
Development (Tract #2342 & #2353). The project consists of four new buildings ranging between
two and three stories that include 36 residential units (one unit dedicated for caretakers quarters),
within the Margarita Area Specific Plan. The project has been designed to be consistent with the
Community Design Guidelines (CDG) and the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP). The applicant
is requesting a street yard setback reduction of 5-feet for a portion of one of the buildings along Violet
Street, where a street yard setback of 15-feet is normally required, no other exceptions are requested
as part of this application.
Meeting Date: September 12, 2016
Item Number: 1
ARC1 - 1
ARCH-3370-2016
3175 Violet Street
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Margarita Area Specific
Plan (MASP), Community Design Guidelines (CDG) and applicable City policies and standards.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Information/Setting:
Site Size 60,548 sq. ft. (1.39 acres)
Present Use & Development Vacant
Land Use Designation Medium-High Density Residential (R-3-SP) within the Margarita Area
Specific Plan
Topography Elevation: Min. 172 feet; Max. 221 ft.
Slope: 13.6% slope
Access From Plum Street & Violet Street
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: R-3-SP (Vacant, proposed Single Family Residence)
East: R-2-SP (Single Family Residences)
South: R-3-SP (Single Family Residences)
West: R-3-SP (Vacant)
2.2 Project Description
A summary of the significant project features are included below (Attachment 2, Project
Description):
1. Site Plan: Four new buildings that range in height between two and three stories;
36 residential units, 35 units affordable plus a caretaker’s quarter
35 foot maximum height
44 parking spaces (Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.040K)
2. Design: Spanish style that includes the following details and materials;
White stucco with decorative accent tile
Recessed windows and arched openings
Concrete S-Tile roof with exposed fascia
2.3 Project Statistics
Item Proposed 1 Standard 2
Setbacks
Violet Street 10 feet 15 feet
Plum Street 15 feet 15 feet
Rear Yard 10 feet 10 feet
Side Yard 13 feet 30 feet
Max. Height of Structure(s) 35 feet 35 feet
Max. Building Coverage (footprint) 21.6% 60% (R-3)
Density 37.44 37.53 3
Parking Spaces 44 36 4
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans submitted 7/26/2016
2. Margarita Area Specific Plan
3. Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.90
4. Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.16.040K
ARC1 - 2
ARCH-3370-2016
3175 Violet Street
Page 3
3.0 BACKGROUND
The project site is part of the Serra Meadows development, approved by the City Council on April
15, 2014 which included Condition #48 dedicating Lot 108 to fulfill the affordable housing
requirement of the development of Tract 2342 and Tract 2353 (Attachment 5, City Council Resolution
No. 10512 (2014 Series).
The project site was conceptually reviewed by the ARC, on March 21, 2016, where the ARC
considered several discussion items related to the project design, including the following (Attachment
4, Conceptual Review & Minutes);
1. Concerns for the reduced setbacks for the three-story structures along the front yard and side
yard.
2. Concerns related to the maximum height of the structures as related to the building design.
3. Concerns related to the proposed parking lot for compliance with Site Planning & Other
Design Details for Parking Facilities.
After the ARC conceptual review on March 21, 2016 the applicant revised the project to comply with
the maximum height requirements and limit the request for a setback reduction for only a small
portion of Building 3 along Violet Street (Attachment 3 Project Plans). The applicant increased the
amount of parking on site by seven parking spaces above the minimum requirement. The project
design has been revised to preserve privacy and reduce concerns related to direct overlook toward the
adjacent lower density residences by;
Eliminating balconies along Violet & Plum Streets
Providing additional landscaping along Violet and Plum Street for slope retention and
screening
Providing greater setbacks along Plum Street
Variations in building heights from two to three stories for structures along the street frontage
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed development must be consistent with the requirements of the General Plan, Zoning
Regulations, and applicable design standards of the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) and
Community Design Guidelines (CDG). Staff has evaluated the project’s consistency with relevant
requirements and has found it to be in substantial compliance, as discussed in this analysis.
4.1 Consistency with the MASP and CDG
The intent of the development standards identified in the MASP are to implement the Specific
Plan’s vision of pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods consisting of a mix of land uses and a variety
of housing types. The MASP identifies the Spanish architectural style as appropriate for all land
uses within the Margarita Area and encourages flexibility in design with an emphases on details
and construction materials leading to environmentally superior projects, including higher density
and increased affordability.
Site Plan: The CDG state that site planning should create a pleasant, comfortable, safe, and distinct
place for residents. New development should respect the privacy of adjacent residential uses
through appropriate building orientation and structure height (CDG, Chapter 5.4A). Multi-family
housing should create a pleasant comfortable place for residences without the project “turning its
back” on the surrounding neighborhood.
ARC1 - 3
ARCH-3370-2016
3175 Violet Street
Page 4
The proposed layout of the project site provides for efficient use of the available site area and
existing topography by maximizing the number of residential units for the site, concealing
required parking behind structures. The site plan provides outdoor courtyard space and adequate
landscaping between the structures and parking areas. The site provides sufficient access and
internal circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. The project’s parking area is not a dominant
visual element of the site and is screened by buildings that are oriented toward the street providing
private outdoor space interior to the project site for the residential units that respect the privacy
of the adjacent lower density residential structures. The buildings along the Plum Street frontage
have also been oriented with greater setbacks than what is required.
Building Design: The CDG state that multi-family housing should be derived from architectural
styles in the surrounding neighborhood, and should be designed to ensure that the height and bulk
of higher density projects do not impact adjacent lower density residential areas (CDG, Chapter
5.4C). Structures with greater heights may require additional setbacks along the street frontage so
they do not visually dominate the neighborhood. A structure with three or more attached units
should incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent scale.
The project has been designed with a Spanish architectural style that is consistent with the MASP
that include features such as; stucco walls, low slope roof, mission tile, recessed exterior window
faces, and arched openings. The structures demonstrate consistent use of colors, materials, and
detailing throughout all elevations of the building. The design utilizes vertical wall articulation,
offsets, and recessed windows to relieve the form and mass of the building. All elevations are
visually interesting and receive interesting architectural treatments that enhance views of the
structures from all views on and off site.
The maximum height of each building within the project ranges between 25 feet and 35 feet,
where 35 feet is the maximum height allowed for the R-3-SP zone. The buildings along the street
frontage have been designed with building height variations between two and three stories and
oriented in such a way that the portions of the structure with a larger mass have been provided
with a greater setback from the street to reduce the visual dominance of the structures within the
neighborhood.
ARC1 - 4
ARCH-3370-2016
3175 Violet Street
Page 5
4.2 Consistency with the Zoning Regulations and MASP
Density: The applicant is requesting a density bonus of 35 percent consistent with Zoning
Regulations Chapter 17.90 Affordable Housing Incentives. The site, zoned R-3-SP, has an
allowed density of 27.8 units based on the site’s net acreage (20 units per acre). The applicant is
proposing to utilize a density bonus that would increase the total number of density units to 37.53
(27 units per acre). The MASP limits the locations of density bonuses within Residential
Development Areas due to the need of consistency with the County Airport Land Use Plan;
density bonuses are only available in the areas identified in Figure 5 of the MASP. On April 20,
2016 the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) held a pre-application review and unanimously
determined that the proposed density bonus for the project site was consistent with the ALUP.
(http://slocounty.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=2296&meta_id=318015)
Setbacks: The MASP Table 3-B requires a 15-foot setback for the front yard in the Medium-High
Density Residential Zone (R-3-SP). The applicant is requesting to reduce the required street yard
along Violet Street for a portion of Building 3 to 10-feet where 15-feet is normally required, due
to topographic constraints on the project site. Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.20E states that
the director may allow street yards to be reduced to 10-feet for structures, the intent of street yards
is to help determine the pattern of building masses and open areas within neighborhoods and
provide landscape beauty, air circulation, views and exposure to sunlight. The proposed setback
reduction for Building 3 will not alter the overall character of the neighborhood or the streets
appearance because the reduction is for a minor portion of the structure surrounded by open
landscaping and will not deprive any adjacent property of views or reasonable solar access.
Parking: The Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.060K (Low-income housing parking) provides
alternative parking requirements for a project that provides exclusively very low or low-income
housing based on one car and one bicycle space per dwelling unit. Section 17.90.040K also
provides the opportunity for the parking requirements to be met by tandem parking. Total required
parking for the project includes 36 vehicle parking spaces and 36 bicycle spaces, the project
provides 44 vehicle parking spaces on site, and 36 bicycle parking spaces.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On October 12, 2004, the City Council certified the Final Program EIR for the Margarita Area
Specific Plan through Council Resolution 9615 (2004 Series).
On April 15, 2014, the City Council adopted the Tiered Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ER-120-13) which addressed the changes and revisions to Tract #2342 & #2353. The
City Council Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series) incorporates all revised mitigation measures and
supersedes in their entirety the previously approved mitigation measures approved by Council
Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series). The City Council Resolution No. 10512 includes Condition #48
which requires that Lot 108 of Tract #2353 is to be dedicated for affordable housing to provide for
the required affordable units for both Tract #2342 & #2353. The project is consistent with the adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration, all mitigation measures adopted as part of the MASP EIR and
Subsequent Tiered MND that are applicable to the proposed project are carried forward and applied
to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the impacts that were previously identified.
ARC1 - 5
ARCH-3370-2016
3175 Violet Street
Page 6
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The requirements of the other departments are reflected in the attached Draft Resolution as conditions
of approval and code requirements, where appropriate.
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
7.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
7.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Zoning
Regulations, Margarita Area Specific Plan or Community Design Guidelines.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Project Description
3. Reduced Project Plans
4. ARC Conceptual Review March 21, 2016 Staff Report and Minutes
5. City Council Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Included in Commission member portfolio: project plans
Available at ARC hearing: color/materials board
Website Link to MASP: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4070
ARC1 - 6
RESOLUTION NO. ARC-XXXX-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING A NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECT THAT CONSISTS OF FOUR NEW BUILDINGS THAT
INCLUDE 36 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE
STREET YARD TO 10 FEET FOR A PORTION OF THE BUILDING
ALONG VIOLET STREET, WHERE 15 FEET IS NORMALLY
REQUIRED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION ER-120-13 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 10512
(2014 SERIES), AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS DATED SEPTEMBER 12, 2016 (3175 VIOLET STREET
ARCH-3370-2016)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on April 15,
2014, approving the proposed revised map and modified conditions of Vesting Tentative Tract
Map 2353 adopted through City Council Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series) originally approved
through City Council Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series) pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
MOD/TR/ER 120-13, Mangano Homes Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on March 21, 2016, for the purpose of considering a conceptual review of the
project, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-2663-2016, SLO Non-Profit Housing
Corp., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Airport Land Use Commission of the County of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Board of Supervisors Chambers of the County Government
Center, 1055 Monterey Street, Room D170, San Luis Obispo, California, on April 20, 2016, which
determined that the proposed density bonus is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan, pursuant
to a proceeding instituted under, HASLO Project, SLO Non-Profit Housing Corp., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on September 12, 2016, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-
3370-2016, SLO Non-Profit Housing Corp., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has
duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of the
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 7
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 2
City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project (ARCH-3370-2016), based on the following findings:
1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or
working at the site or in the vicinity because the project will be compatible with site
constraints and the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The project is consistent with the Housing Element because the project provides a variety of
residential types, sizes, and styles of dwellings (HE 5.4). The project supports Housing
Element Policies related to inclusion and expansion of affordable housing units within the
City (HE 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 7.1, 7.2, and 8.1)
3. The project is consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element policy 4.4.3 because
the project promotes higher-density, compact housing to achieve more efficient use of public
facilities and services and to improve the City’s jobs/housing balance.
4. The project is consistent with the Margarita Area Specific Plan because the project site is one
of two sites dedicated to provide a minimum of 40 affordable dwellings within the housing
tracts of the western enclave of the Margarita Area (Tract 2343, 2353, & 2428).
5. The design of the project is consistent with the Community Design standards of the Margarita
Area Specific Plan and has been designed in accordance with the Spanish architectural style
which is an appropriate architectural style for all land use types within the Margarita Area.
The project design incorporates articulation, massing, and a mix of color/finish materials that
are compatible with the neighborhood and complementary to other development within the
immediate vicinity.
Density Bonus
6. The proposed project will provide quality affordable housing consistent with the intent of
Chapter 17.90 of the Municipal Code, and the requested density bonus and reduction to site
development standards is necessary to facilitate the production of affordable housing units.
7. The Margarita Area Specific Plan limits the locations of density bonuses within Residential
Development Areas due to the need of consistency with the County Airport Land Use Plan,
density bonuses are only available in the areas identified in Figure 5 of the Plan. On April 20,
2016 the Airport Land Use Commission held a pre-application review and unanimously
determined that the proposed density bonus for the project site was consistent with the Airport
Land Use Plan. The proposed density bonus of 35 percent is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Element 2.4.2 for providing density bonuses on a receiving site within an expansion
area.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 8
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 3
Building Height, Mass and Scale
8. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project will not negatively alter the overall
character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because the site is physically suited
for the proposed type of development allowed in the R-3-SP zone. The project is consistent
with the Community Design Guidelines because the development is designed in a manner
that does not deprive reasonable solar access to adjacent properties by providing greater
setbacks than what is required for majority of the buildings mass along the street frontage that
also incorporates vertical and horizontal wall plan offsets that provide high-quality and
aesthetically pleasing architectural design.
9. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project is necessary to provide additional dwelling
units to be dedicated affordable for “low & very low” income households.
Setback Exception
10. The setback reduction will not constitute a grant of special privilege of an entitlement
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity as the setback reduction
is consistent with the development pattern of adjacent properties with the similar zoning
which allow 10-foot street yard setbacks for front porches.
11. Granting of the five foot setback reduction for Building 3 will not alter the overall character
of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because the proposal is minor and the setback
reduction will allow reasonable development of the project site.
12. The project will not deprive adjacent properties of reasonable solar access because the portion
of the structure requiring a setback reduction will cast no greater shadow as the highest point
of the structure is setback from the property line of the closest adjacent structure greater than
what is required by the setback/height requirements of the Margarita Area Specific Plan. No
useful purpose would be realized by requiring full setbacks because no significant fire
protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are anticipated.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. On October 12, 2004, the City Council certified the
Final Program EIR for the Margarita Area Specific Plan through Council Resolution 9615 (2004
Series). On April 15, 2014 the City Council adopted the Tiered Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration (ER-120-13) which addressed the changes and revisions to Tract #2342 &
#2353. The City Council Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series) incorporates all revised mitigation
measures and supersedes in their entirety the previously approved mitigation measures approved
by Council Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series). The City Council Resolution No. 10512 includes
Condition #48 which requires that Lot 108 of Tract #2353 is to be dedicated for affordable housing
to provide for the required affordable units for both Tract #2342 & #2353. The project is consistent
with the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, all mitigation measures adopted as part of the
MASP EIR and Subsequent Tiered MND that are applicable to the proposed project are carried
forward and applied to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the impacts that were previously
identified.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 9
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 4
SECTION 3. Action. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in
the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
2. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC. A separate, full-size
sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all
conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as sheet number 2. Reference
shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed.
Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of
approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed
appropriate.
3. The project shall comply with all mitigation measures and conditions, applicable to the
project site, established under City Council Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series).
4. In order to qualify for the parking requirements established in the Zoning Regulations Section
17.16.060K (Low-Income Housing Parking) the proposed residential units are limited to “low
& very low” income households. To provide housing for “moderate” income households the
applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the parking requirements provided in Chapter
17.90 of the Zoning Regulations or request an Alternative Incentive for parking requirements.
5. Continued affordability provisions shall be developed to assure units remain affordable to
residents that earn low and very low incomes. The continuance of affordability shall be
subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of
building permits.
6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide the project’s Covenants,
Conditions & Restrictions (CC & R’s) to demonstrate compliance with notification
requirements related to noise associated with the San Luis Obispo Airport, as discussed b y
the Airport Land Use Commission on April 20, 2016, to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.
7. The applicant shall submit building plans that include a trash enclosure design that is finished
with high quality materials to match the architecture of the project buildings; design of the
enclosure is subject to the Community Design Guidelines and to the satisfaction of the
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 10
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 5
Community Development Director.
8. The project shall be constructed to meet the maximum outdoor and indoor noise exposure
levels of Noise Element Table 1 (60 dB for outdoor activity areas and 45 dB for indoor
spaces).
9. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be as shown on the
color elevation submitted with Architectural Review application.
10. The proposed stucco walls shall have a smooth, hand-troweled or sand finish appearance, to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. This shall be noted on plans
submitted for a building permit.
11. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating the type of
materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall
include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related
window features.
12. Plans submitted for construction permits will include elevation and detail drawings of all
walls and fences. Fences, walls, and hedges will comply with the development standards
described in the Zoning Regulations (§17.16.050 –Fences, Walls, and Hedges).
13. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting, shall be
included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be
clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall-
mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the
building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets
on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to insure that light
is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation
standards contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations.
14. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal
of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly
show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any
condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a
building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen
them. A line-of-sight diagram shall be included to confirm that proposed screening will be
adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements.
15. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with
corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 11
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 6
16. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown
on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction
plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as
determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20
feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities
Director, the back flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street
yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate
by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such
equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community
Development Directors.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development Department
17. Projects involving the construction of new structures requires that complete frontage
improvements be installed or that existing improvements be upgraded per city standard. MC
12.16.050
18. The building plan submittal shall include the dimensions and bearings for all property lines
for reference.
19. The building plan submittal shall show the existing driveway approach to be abandoned and
replaced with curb and gutter per City Engineering Standards.
20. The new driveway approaches shall be designed to comply with current standards. The
current City and ADA standard requires a 4’ accessible sidewalk extension behind the ramp.
21. The building plan submittal shall show and dimension the 60’ right-of-way width for both
Violet St. and Plum St. on the site plan. Show the 30’ dimension of the centerline to property
line, 18’ centerline to face of curb, and 12’ from face of curb to property line dimensions for
reference.
22. The building plan submittal shall show the development of the driveway and parking areas to
comply with the Parking and Driveway Standards for dimension, maneuverability, slopes,
drainage, and materials. Alternate paving materials are recommended for water quantity
and/or quality control purposes and in the area of existing or proposed trees and where the
driveway or parking area may occur within the dripline of any tree. Alternate paving material
shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.
23. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Company. The
respective refuse storage area and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics,
safety, and functionality. The design of the trash enclosure shall show compliance with
Engineering Standards 1010.B for drainage requirements.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 12
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 7
24. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. All existing and
proposed utilities along with utility company meters shall be shown. Existing underground
and overhead services shall be shown along with any proposed alterations or upgrades.
Services to the new structures shall be underground. All work in the public right-of-way shall
be shown or noted.
25. The building plan submittal shall verify the location of all existing utilities stubbed into the
site in accordance with the approved Tract 2353 Improvement Plans. Any existing utility
connections that are not proposed to be used shall be abandoned per City Engineering
Standards.
26. The building plan submittal shall show the separation between the recycled water hydrant and
driveway approach off of Plum Street to be in compliance with City Engineering Standards
and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and the Utilities Department.
27. The building plan submittal shall show the recycled water landscape meter and service to be
installed per City Engineering Standards and to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department and the Utilities Department.
28. The building plan submittal shall show the location of the fire service lateral, double-check
assembly, and fire department connection (FDC) on the site utility plan. Show the location
of the fire riser room and interior fire riser in accordance with the ARC approvals and/or the
Planning Divisions architectural guidelines. Provide access to the fire riser and appurtenances
in accordance with the UFC and as approved by the Fire Marshal. Clarify to the satisfaction
of the Fire Marshal whether an FDC should be provided at the double-check assembly or on
the building.
29. This development shall comply with the Waterway Management Plan. The building plan
submittal shall include a final drainage report in accordance with the Waterway Management
Plan Volume III, Drainage Design Manual and the Post Construction Stormwater
Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The drainage
report shall consider the upslope historic drainage tributary to the property that may need to
be accepted and conveyed along with the improved on-site drainage.
30. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage and erosion control
plan. The grading and drainage plan shall show existing structures and grades located within
15’ of the property lines in accordance with the grading ordinance. The plan shall consider
historic offsite drainage tributary to this property that may need to be accepted and conveyed
along with the improved on-site drainage. This development may alter and/or increase the
storm water runoff from this site or adjoining sites. The improved or altered drainage shall
be directed to the street and not across adjoining property lines unless the drainage is conveyed
within recorded easements or existing waterways.
31. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater
Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for redeveloped
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 13
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 8
sites. Include a complete Post Construction Stormwater Control Plan Template as available
on the City’s Website.
32. An operations and maintenance manual will be required for the post construction stormwater
improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building permit application and
shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance. A private stormwater
conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection
approvals.
33. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all
storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading or
excavations result in land disturbance of one or more acres. Storm water discharges of less
than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also requires
a permit. Permits are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General
Construction Activity Permit, the owner(s) of land where construction activity occurs must
submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to the State
Regional Water Quality Control Board. An application is required to the State Board under
their recently adopted Stormwater Multi-Application, Reporting, and Tracking System
(SMARTS).
34. The building plan submittal shall include a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) for reference. Incorporate any erosion control measures into the building plans as
required by the Board, identified in the SWPPP, and in accordance with Section 10 of the
city’s Waterways Management Plan. The building plan submittal shall include reference to
the WDID number on the grading and erosion control plans for reference.
35. The building plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed street trees. One 15-gallon
street tree is required for each 35 linear feet of frontage. Tree species and planting
requirements shall be in accordance with City Engineering Standards.
Utilities Department
36. The site is within the City’s Water Reuse Master Plan area and landscape irrigation for the
project shall utilize recycled water with a separate metered water service to the existing
recycled water line located at the intersection of Plum and Aster streets. The irrigation system
shall be designed and operated as described consistent with recycled water standards in the
City’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use, including the requirement that sites utilizing
recycled water require backflow protection on all potable service connections. Sheet P8 shows
four potable water metered connections which will require backflow devices. Three sets of
irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Building Department for review during the City’s
building permit review process.
37. The applicant proposes to utilize an existing recycled water wharf head location on the City’s
existing recycled water distribution main for a new metered connection. An isolation valve
shall be installed on the 4” recycled water main at the intersection of Aster and Plum streets.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 14
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16
3175 Violet Street, ARCH-3370-2016
Page 9
38. Project shall include a master water meter with privately owned sub-meters provided for each
unit. The sub-meters shall be read by the property management and each unit billed according
to water use.
Code Requirements
Utilities Department
1. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and dust
control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 17.07.070.C of the City’s Municipal
Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction Water Permit program.
Information on the program is available at:
http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5909
Building Division – Community Development Department
2. Verify plans clearly show the applicable codes for this project. The adopted codes are the
2013 CA Building Codes and the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
3. New buildings citywide shall incorporate the following construction methods and materials:
Ignition resistant exterior wall coverings; Fire sprinkler protection in attic areas (at least one
“pilot head”); Ember resistant vent systems for attics and under floor areas, protected eaves,
and Class ‘A’ roof coverings as identified in the California Building Code Chapter 7A.
On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner _____________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of September, 2016.
_____________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 15
Attachment 2
ARC1 - 16
Attachment 2
ARC1 - 17
Attachment 2
ARC1 - 18
Attachment 2
ARC1 - 19
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
TI
T
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
PR
O
J
E
C
T
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
OW
N
E
R
:
HO
U
S
I
N
G
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
T
Y
O
F
S
L
O
48
7
L
E
F
F
S
T
R
E
E
T
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
M
I
C
H
A
E
L
B
U
R
K
E
PH
O
N
E
:
8
0
5
.
5
9
4
.
5
3
3
0
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
/
C
I
V
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
R
/
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
:
RR
M
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
37
6
5
S
.
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
T
E
.
1
0
2
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
D
A
R
I
N
C
A
B
R
A
L
PH
O
N
E
:
8
0
5
.
5
4
3
.
1
7
9
4
MO
D
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
R
O
M
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
A
R
C
•
R
E
D
U
C
E
D
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
H
E
I
G
H
T
O
F
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
S
.
H
E
I
G
H
T
EX
C
E
M
P
T
I
O
N
I
S
N
O
L
O
N
G
E
R
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
.
•
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
2
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
O
F
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
O
N
LO
W
E
R
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
A
N
D
O
N
P
L
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
.
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
RE
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
F
R
O
M
1
5
’
T
O
1
0
’
R
E
M
A
I
N
O
N
U
P
P
E
R
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
AN
D
T
H
E
R
E
A
R
Y
A
R
D
W
I
T
H
M
I
N
I
M
A
L
I
M
P
A
C
T
T
O
S
I
T
E
A
N
D
N
O
VI
S
U
A
L
I
M
P
A
C
T
T
O
T
H
E
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
.
•
I
N
C
R
E
A
S
E
O
F
O
N
S
I
T
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
W
I
T
H
A
N
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
O
F
(5
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
T
A
L
L
S
.
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
H
A
D
(
3
7
)
R
E
G
U
L
A
R
PA
R
K
I
N
G
S
T
A
L
L
S
A
N
D
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
S
C
H
E
M
A
T
I
C
H
A
S
(
4
0
)
RE
G
U
L
A
R
S
T
A
L
L
S
W
I
T
H
(
2
)
T
A
N
D
E
M
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
T
A
L
L
S
.
•
B
U
L
K
I
S
R
E
D
U
C
E
D
W
I
T
H
U
P
P
E
R
S
T
O
R
Y
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
S
A
N
D
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
O
F
F
S
E
T
S
.
R
O
O
F
A
R
T
I
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
A
I
D
S
I
N
B
U
L
K
RE
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
.
•
I
N
C
R
E
A
S
E
D
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
P
R
I
V
A
C
Y
W
I
T
H
N
O
B
A
L
C
O
N
I
E
S
AL
O
N
G
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
O
R
P
L
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
.
•
I
N
C
R
E
A
S
E
D
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
P
R
I
V
A
C
Y
W
I
T
H
R
E
V
I
S
E
D
U
N
I
T
DE
S
I
G
N
T
O
R
E
D
U
C
E
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
I
Z
E
S
A
L
O
N
G
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
AN
D
P
L
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
.
T
H
I
S
I
N
C
L
U
D
E
S
L
I
V
I
N
G
R
O
O
M
S
W
I
T
H
LA
R
G
E
R
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
F
A
C
I
N
G
T
H
E
C
O
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
A
N
D
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
S
WI
T
H
S
M
A
L
L
E
R
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
F
A
C
I
N
G
T
H
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
.
•
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
I
N
G
A
L
O
N
G
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
A
R
E
F
U
L
L
Y
C
O
N
S
I
D
E
R
E
D
WI
T
H
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
S
I
N
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
S
A
N
D
AD
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
T
R
E
E
S
A
N
D
S
H
R
U
B
S
A
L
O
N
G
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
A
N
D
PL
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
F
O
R
S
L
O
P
E
R
E
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
S
C
R
E
E
N
I
N
G
.
•
H
I
G
H
L
E
V
E
L
O
F
D
E
T
A
I
L
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
R
A
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
S
P
A
N
I
S
H
ST
Y
L
E
E
L
E
M
E
N
T
S
I
N
C
L
U
D
I
N
G
R
A
F
T
E
R
T
A
I
L
S
,
I
R
O
N
W
O
R
K
,
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
V
E
N
T
S
,
A
R
C
H
E
D
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
E
L
E
A
B
R
O
A
T
E
D
CH
I
M
E
N
Y
T
O
P
S
.
VI
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
PR
O
J
E
C
T
S
T
A
T
I
S
T
I
C
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
A
D
D
R
E
S
S
:
MA
S
P
T
R
A
C
T
2
3
5
3
,
L
O
T
1
0
8
,
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
AP
N
:
05
3
-
4
3
3
-
0
5
1
LO
T
S
I
Z
E
:
1.
3
9
A
C
R
E
6
0
,
5
4
8
.
4
S
F
ZO
N
I
N
G
:
R-
3
-
S
P
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
C
Y
:
R-
2
,
B
TY
P
E
O
F
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
:
VB
AL
L
O
W
E
D
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
U
N
I
T
:
20
/
A
C
R
E
AL
L
O
W
E
D
D
.
U
.
P
E
R
L
O
T
S
I
Z
E
:
20
X
1
.
3
9
A
C
R
E
=
2
7
.
8
D
U
AF
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
D
.
U
.
B
O
N
U
S
:
35
%
2
7
.
8
D
U
X
1
.
3
5
=
3
7
.
5
3
D
U
UN
I
T
&
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
U
N
I
T
P
E
R
S
L
O
Z
O
N
I
N
G
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
1
0
A
.
1
:
(
9
)
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
*
0
.
6
6
=
5
.
9
4
D
.
U
.
(
1
8
)
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
*
1
.
0
0
=
1
8
.
0
0
D
.
U
.
(
9
)
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
*
1
.
5
0
=
1
3
.
5
D
.
U
.
3
6
T
O
T
A
L
U
N
I
T
S
3
7
.
4
4
D
.
U
.
AV
E
R
A
G
E
S
I
T
E
C
R
O
S
S
S
L
O
P
E
-
S
L
O
Z
O
N
I
N
G
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
1
0
A
.
2
:
4
9
’
V
E
R
T
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
T
A
N
C
E
/
3
6
0
’
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
D
I
S
T
A
N
C
E
1
3
.
6
%
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
C
R
O
S
S
S
L
O
P
E
PA
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
P
E
R
S
L
O
Z
O
N
I
N
G
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
6
0
K
:
1
C
A
R
S
P
A
C
E
P
E
R
U
N
I
T
:
3
6
S
P
A
C
E
S
R
E
Q
’
D
1
B
I
K
E
S
P
A
C
E
P
E
R
U
N
I
T
:
3
6
S
P
A
C
E
S
R
E
Q
’
D
PA
R
K
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
:
4
0
R
E
G
U
L
A
R
S
T
A
L
L
S
2
T
A
N
D
E
M
S
T
A
L
L
S
1
A
C
C
E
S
S
I
B
L
E
&
1
V
A
N
A
C
C
E
S
S
I
B
L
E
4
4
C
A
R
S
P
A
C
E
S
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
T
O
T
A
L
O
N
S
I
T
E
(
+
1
8
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
S
A
V
A
I
L
A
B
L
E
A
L
O
N
G
P
L
U
M
&
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
T
O
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
)
3
6
B
I
K
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
RE
Q
U
I
R
E
D
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
S
P
E
R
M
A
S
P
T
A
B
L
E
4
:
F
R
O
N
T
(
V
I
O
L
E
T
)
:
1
5
F
T
R
E
A
R
:
1
0
F
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
I
D
E
(
P
L
U
M
)
:
1
5
F
T
PR
O
V
I
D
E
D
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
S
:
F
R
O
N
T
:
1
0
F
T
(
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
)
R
E
A
R
:
1
0
F
T
(
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
)
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
I
D
E
:
1
5
F
T
S
I
D
E
:
P
E
R
R
2
Z
O
N
E
MA
X
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
:
35
’
-
0
”
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
:
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
:
+
/
-
3
3
’
-
7
”
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
:
+
/
-
2
5
’
-
0
”
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
:
+
/
-
2
9
’
-
0
”
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
:
3
5
’
-
0
”
M
A
X
LO
T
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
:
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
+/
-
1
3
,
1
0
0
S
F
(
2
1
.
6
%
)
PA
V
I
N
G
+/
-
2
2
,
4
5
0
S
F
(
3
7
.
1
%
)
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
+/
-
2
5
,
0
0
0
S
F
(
4
1
.
3
%
)
EN
E
R
G
Y
C
O
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
:
10
0
%
N
E
T
Z
E
R
O
F
O
R
C
O
M
M
O
N
U
S
E
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
&
S
I
T
E
L
I
G
H
T
I
N
G
WI
T
H
A
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
A
G
E
O
F
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
E
N
E
R
G
Y
U
S
E
S
O
F
F
S
E
T
.
TH
I
S
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
S
D
E
S
I
G
N
E
D
I
N
A
C
C
O
R
D
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
MA
R
G
A
R
I
T
A
A
R
E
A
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
S
L
O
Z
O
N
I
N
G
RE
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
T
H
E
S
E
P
L
A
N
S
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
M
P
L
Y
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
2
0
1
3
CA
L
I
F
O
R
N
I
A
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
O
D
E
.
PR
A
D
O
R
D
1
0
1
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
LO
T
1
0
8
PR
O
J
E
C
T
S
I
T
E
PR
O
J
E
C
T
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
TH
E
P
R
O
P
O
S
A
L
I
S
T
O
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
3
6
U
N
I
T
S
I
N
F
O
U
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
S
ON
T
H
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
I
T
E
W
H
I
C
H
I
S
Z
O
N
E
D
R
-
3
,
M
E
D
I
U
M
H
I
G
H
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
.
3
5
O
F
T
H
E
3
6
U
N
I
T
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
L
O
N
G
T
E
R
M
AF
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
R
E
N
T
A
L
S
A
T
O
R
B
E
L
O
W
T
H
E
C
I
T
Y
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
F
O
R
V
E
R
Y
L
O
W
,
L
O
W
A
N
D
M
O
D
E
R
A
T
E
HO
U
S
E
H
O
L
D
S
,
A
N
D
O
N
E
U
N
I
T
W
I
L
L
A
C
C
O
M
M
O
D
A
T
E
A
N
O
N
-
SI
T
E
M
A
N
A
G
E
R
.
T
H
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
S
P
R
O
P
O
S
I
N
G
A
R
A
N
G
E
O
F
DI
F
F
E
R
E
N
T
T
Y
P
E
S
O
F
U
N
I
T
S
I
N
C
L
U
D
I
N
G
(
9
)
O
N
E
-
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
S
,
(
1
8
)
T
W
O
-
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
S
,
A
N
D
(
9
)
T
H
R
E
E
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
S
.
TH
E
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
C
R
E
A
T
E
S
A
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
L
Y
F
O
C
U
S
E
D
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
WI
T
H
I
N
W
A
R
D
L
Y
F
A
C
I
N
G
B
U
L
D
I
N
G
S
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
T
O
A
C
O
M
M
O
N
CO
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
.
A
S
P
A
N
I
S
H
S
T
Y
L
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
T
Y
L
E
H
A
S
BE
E
N
S
E
L
E
C
T
E
D
C
O
N
S
I
S
T
E
N
T
W
I
T
H
M
A
S
P
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
U
I
D
E
L
I
N
E
S
.
TH
I
S
S
T
Y
L
E
W
I
T
H
I
T
S
R
E
C
T
A
N
G
U
L
A
R
F
O
R
M
S
,
S
T
I
L
L
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
AR
T
I
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
V
A
R
I
E
D
R
O
O
F
F
O
R
M
S
A
N
D
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
E
T
A
I
L
I
N
G
.
WI
T
H
T
H
E
C
I
T
Y
’
S
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
H
O
U
S
I
N
G
I
N
C
E
N
T
I
V
E
S
,
3
6
PA
R
K
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
S
A
R
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
T
O
B
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
,
1
P
E
R
E
A
C
H
UN
I
T
.
T
H
E
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
I
T
E
I
S
O
V
E
R
P
A
R
K
E
D
A
T
4
0
R
E
G
U
L
A
R
PA
R
K
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
S
,
I
N
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
T
O
2
T
A
N
D
E
M
S
P
A
C
E
S
A
N
D
2
RE
Q
U
I
R
E
D
A
C
C
E
S
S
I
B
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
.
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
I
S
B
E
I
N
G
PR
O
V
I
D
E
D
A
T
T
H
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
A
M
O
U
N
T
O
F
3
6
S
P
A
C
E
S
.
TH
I
S
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
I
S
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
I
N
G
A
N
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
TH
E
F
R
O
N
T
A
N
D
R
E
A
R
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
S
.
A
P
O
R
T
I
O
N
O
F
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
I
S
E
N
C
R
O
A
C
H
I
N
G
I
N
T
O
T
H
E
R
E
A
R
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
A
N
D
P
O
R
T
I
O
N
OF
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
I
S
E
N
C
R
O
A
C
H
I
N
G
I
N
T
O
T
H
E
F
R
O
N
T
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
AL
O
N
G
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
.
T
H
E
P
R
O
M
I
N
A
N
T
C
O
R
N
E
R
O
F
V
I
O
L
E
T
AN
D
P
L
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
A
S
W
E
L
L
A
S
T
H
E
F
U
L
L
L
E
N
G
T
H
O
F
P
L
U
M
ST
R
E
E
T
,
W
O
U
L
D
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
T
H
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
1
5
F
O
O
T
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
.
SH
E
E
T
I
N
D
E
X
P1
T
I
T
I
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
P2
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
P3
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
P4
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
P5
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
O
P
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
U
R
V
E
Y
P6
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
P7
P
R
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
P8
P
R
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
P9
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
P1
0
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
P1
1
S
I
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
P1
2
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
P1
3
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
P1
4
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
P1
5
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
P1
6
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
&
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
P1
7
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
&
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
P1
8
S
I
T
E
F
U
R
N
I
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
P1
9
C
O
L
O
R
&
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
B
O
A
R
D
N LO
0 1
KE N E R
/
T E.
1
02
0 1 L
VI
E
W
O
F
C
O
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
0
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P2
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
RE
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
VI
E
W
O
F
C
O
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
1
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P3
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
RE
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
VI
E
W
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
E
N
T
R
Y
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
2
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P4
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
RE
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
VI
E
W
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
F
R
O
M
V
I
O
L
E
T
&
P
L
U
M
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
3
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P5
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
O
P
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
U
R
V
E
Y
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
4
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P6
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
1 C
e
n
t
r
a
l
c
o
u
r
t
y
a
r
d
f
e
a
t
u
r
i
n
g
a
d
r
y
c
r
e
e
k
b
e
d
w
i
t
h
b
o
u
l
d
e
r
s
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
pl
a
c
e
s
t
o
s
i
t
a
n
d
g
a
t
h
e
r
.
2
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
f
o
r
6
h
a
n
g
i
n
g
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
s
,
2
s
e
t
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
o
t
a
l
.
3
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
f
o
r
6
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
s
.
,
2
s
e
t
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
o
t
a
l
.
4 *
U
R
X
Q
G
Á
R
R
U
F
R
P
P
X
Q
L
W
\
F
R
P
P
R
Q
D
U
H
D
Z
L
W
K
U
H
Q
W
D
O
R
I
À
F
H
P
H
H
W
L
Q
J
UR
R
P
V
O
D
X
Q
G
U
\
I
D
F
L
O
L
W
L
H
V
5
7U
H
O
O
L
V
I
U
D
P
L
Q
J
W
K
H
E
X
L
O
G
L
Q
J
6
$
V
H
U
L
H
V
R
I
V
K
R
U
W
U
H
W
D
L
Q
L
Q
J
Z
D
O
O
V
F
U
H
D
W
L
Q
J
S
O
D
Q
W
H
U
V
À
O
O
H
G
Z
L
W
K
GU
R
X
J
K
W
to
l
e
r
a
n
t
p
l
a
n
t
s
.
7
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
t
a
i
r
w
a
y
l
i
n
k
i
n
g
t
h
e
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
c
o
u
r
t
y
a
r
d
t
o
t
h
e
c
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
9L
R
O
H
W
6
W
U
H
H
W
3
O
X
P
6
W
U
H
H
W
8
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
r
a
s
h
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
.
9
'U
L
Y
H
W
K
U
R
X
J
K
Y
H
K
L
F
X
O
D
U
F
L
U
F
X
O
D
W
L
R
Q
H
V
W
D
E
O
L
V
K
H
V
À
U
H
D
F
F
H
V
V
SI
T
E
P
L
A
N
0
20
40
SC
A
L
E
:
1
”
=
2
0
’
(
2
4
X
3
6
s
h
e
e
t
)
10
N
we
l
l
a
s
l.H WL
Q
J
U RX
J
K
W
e r
o
f
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
BUILDING
2
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
1
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
30
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
T1
20
T2
21
22
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9
S1
0
S1
1
S1
2
S1
3
S1
4
S1
5
S1
6
S1
7
S1
8
Pl
u
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
V
i
o
l
e
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
4
7
5
9
9
6
15
’
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
10
’
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
BB
/
P
9
BB
/
P
9
AA
/
P
9
AA
/
P
9
1
1
2
2
3
3
8
8
1
5
’
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
1
0
’
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
ZO
N
E
D
M
E
D
I
U
M
HI
G
H
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
ZO
N
E
D
M
E
D
I
U
M
HI
G
H
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
SI
N
G
L
E
FA
M
I
L
Y
RE
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
,
TY
P
I
C
A
L
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
N
G
L
E
FA
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
,
TY
P
I
C
A
L
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
5
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P7
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
N
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
6
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P8
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
7
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P9
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
0
20
40
SC
A
L
E
:
1
”
=
2
0
’
(
2
4
X
3
6
s
h
e
e
t
)
10
N
T
h
e
i
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
w
i
l
l
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
:
D
r
i
p
a
n
d
b
u
b
b
l
e
r
i
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
a
p
p
l
y
w
a
t
e
r
a
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
l
y
t
o
t
h
e
p
l
a
n
t
r
o
o
t
z
o
n
e
s
DW
D
U
D
W
H
W
K
D
W
L
W
F
D
Q
L
Q
À
O
W
U
D
W
H
W
R
L
P
S
U
R
Y
H
L
U
U
L
J
D
W
L
R
Q
H
I
À
F
L
H
Q
F\
L
o
w
s
p
r
i
n
k
l
e
r
h
e
a
d
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
e
r
e
n
e
e
d
e
d
t
o
a
p
p
l
y
w
a
t
e
r
u
n
i
f
o
r
m
l
y
a
n
d
s
l
o
w
l
y
.
2
Y
H
U
V
S
U
D
\
D
Q
G
H
Y
D
S
R
U
D
W
L
R
Q
Z
L
O
O
E
H
P
L
Q
L
P
L
]
H
G
D
Q
G
P
D
W
F
K
H
G
S
U
H
F
L
S
L
W
D
W
L
R
Q
U
D
W
H
Q
R
]
]
O
H
V
Z
L
O
O
EH
X
V
H
G
Z
L
W
K
L
Q
H
D
F
K
F
R
Q
W
U
R
O
Y
D
O
Y
H
D
Q
G
F
L
U
F
X
L
W
$
Z
H
D
W
K
H
U
E
D
V
H
G
V
H
O
I
D
G
M
X
V
W
L
Q
J
L
U
U
L
J
D
W
L
R
Q
F
R
Q
W
U
R
O
Z
L
W
K
D
U
D
L
Q
V
K
X
W
R
I
I
G
H
Y
L
F
H
Z
L
O
O
E
H
in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
.
T
h
e
i
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
w
i
l
l
b
e
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d
b
y
a
t
i
m
e
c
l
o
c
k
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
a
d
j
u
s
t
ru
n
t
i
m
e
s
b
y
d
a
t
a
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
f
r
o
m
r
a
i
n
a
n
d
E
T
s
e
n
s
o
r
s
.
T
h
e
w
a
t
e
r
i
n
g
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
b
a
s
e
d
u
p
o
n
p
l
a
n
t
n
e
e
d
s
,
s
o
i
l
t
y
p
e
,
s
l
o
p
e
,
a
n
d
s
e
a
s
o
n
.
,U
U
L
J
D
W
L
R
Q
Z
L
O
O
E
H
V
F
K
H
G
X
O
H
G
W
R
D
Y
R
L
G
Z
D
W
H
U
L
Q
J
G
X
U
L
Q
J
U
D
L
Q
D
Q
G
IU
H
H
]
H
H
Y
H
Q
W
V
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
w
i
l
l
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
r
e
c
y
c
l
e
d
w
a
t
e
r
f
o
r
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
i
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
i
s
n
o
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
it
s
w
a
t
e
r
u
s
e
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
d
e
c
l
a
r
e
d
d
r
o
u
g
h
t
e
m
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
.
To
t
a
l
L
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
A
r
e
a
:
2
5
,
0
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
MA
W
A
G
a
l
l
o
n
s
:
3
8
5
,
8
9
5
.
0
0
(
5
1
5
.
9
0
M
A
W
A
U
n
i
t
s
)
ET
W
U
G
a
l
l
o
n
s
:
1
7
4
,
2
8
9
.
9
2
(
2
3
3
.
0
1
E
T
W
U
U
n
i
t
s
)
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
3
1
3
1
5
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
7
1
7
1
6
DR
Y
C
R
E
E
K
B
E
D
PL
A
N
T
E
R
A
R
E
A
S
W
I
T
H
S
T
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
24
”
-
3
6
”
B
O
X
S
P
E
C
I
M
E
N
T
R
E
E
S
I
N
F
O
C
A
L
A
R
E
A
S
TR
E
E
S
&
S
H
R
U
B
S
F
O
R
S
L
O
P
E
R
E
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
/
S
C
R
E
E
N
I
N
G
TR
E
L
L
I
S
W
I
T
H
V
I
N
E
S
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
B
O
U
L
D
E
R
S
PE
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
S
T
A
I
R
W
A
Y
W
I
T
H
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
P
I
L
A
S
T
E
R
S
SE
E
D
E
D
A
G
G
R
E
G
A
T
E
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
E
S
D
R
Y
C
R
E
E
K
B
E
D
IN
T
E
R
L
O
C
K
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
P
A
V
E
R
S
A
T
D
R
I
V
E
I
S
L
E
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
R
E
E
G
R
A
T
E
S
TE
X
T
U
R
E
D
C
O
L
O
R
E
D
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
E
A
T
W
A
L
L
S
DR
O
U
G
H
T
T
O
L
E
R
A
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
S
F
O
R
E
R
O
S
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
ST
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
S
/
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
S
BI
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
CO
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
SL
O
P
E
M
O
U
N
D
S
O
F
S
Y
N
T
H
E
T
I
C
T
U
R
F
F
O
R
P
L
A
Y
PL
A
N
T
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
LE
G
E
N
D
A
N
D
N
O
T
E
S
ME
T
H
O
D
O
F
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
WA
T
E
R
U
S
E
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
V
I
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
PL
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
W
a
t
e
r
u
s
e
c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
m
e
e
t
t
h
e
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
’
s
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
O
r
d
e
r
N
o
.
B
-
2
9
-
1
5
b
y
u
s
i
n
g
4
5
.
1
7
%
o
f
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
A
n
n
u
a
l
A
p
p
l
i
e
d
W
a
t
e
r
A
l
l
o
w
a
nc
e
.
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
8
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
0
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
PL
A
N
T
P
A
L
E
T
T
E
+
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
Th
e
p
l
a
n
t
p
a
l
e
t
t
e
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
s
a
m
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
o
f
d
r
o
u
g
h
t
t
o
l
e
r
a
n
t
p
l
a
n
t
s
(
<
8
0
%
)
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
r
e
m
a
i
n
d
e
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
f
o
r
p
l
a
n
t
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
ra
t
e
w
a
t
e
r
(
>
2
0
%
)
.
7K
H
V
H
O
H
F
W
H
G
S
O
D
Q
W
V
F
R
X
S
O
H
G
Z
L
W
K
W
K
H
H
I
À
F
L
H
Q
W
L
U
U
L
J
D
W
L
R
Q
V
\
V
W
H
P
S
U
R
S
R
V
H
G
R
Q
S
U
H
Y
L
R
X
V
V
K
H
H
W
Z
L
O
O
P
H
H
W
R
U
H
[
F
H
H
G
W
K
H
V
W
D
W
H
·
V
U
H
T
X
L
U
H
P
H
Q
W
V
V
H
W
I
R
U
W
K
L
Q
W
K
H
0
R
G
H
O
:
D
W
H
U
(
I
À
F
L
H
Q
W
/
D
Q
G
V
F
D
S
H
2
U
G
L
Q
D
Q
F
H
Re
f
e
r
t
o
s
h
e
e
t
P
1
0
f
o
r
s
p
e
c
i
e
s
l
i
s
t
a
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
r
e
e
s
,
s
h
r
u
b
s
,
g
r
a
s
s
e
s
,
p
e
r
e
n
n
i
a
l
s
,
a
n
d
g
r
o
u
n
d
c
o
v
e
r
s
.
DR
Y
C
R
E
E
K
B
E
D
TR
E
E
L
L
I
S
W
I
T
H
V
I
N
E
S
DR
O
U
G
H
T
T
O
L
E
R
A
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
B
O
U
L
D
E
R
S
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
E
A
T
W
A
L
L
W
I
T
H
B
O
U
D
L
E
R
S
ED
I
B
L
E
C
O
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
T
S
SP
E
C
I
M
E
N
F
L
O
W
E
R
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
S
I
N
F
O
C
A
L
A
R
E
A
S
IN
T
E
R
L
O
C
K
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
P
A
V
E
R
S
SE
E
D
E
D
A
G
G
R
E
G
A
T
E
P
A
V
I
N
G
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
2
9
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
1
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
SI
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
0
20
40
SC
A
L
E
:
1
”
=
2
0
’
(
2
4
X
3
6
s
h
e
e
t
)
10
N
SI
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
A
A
SI
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
B
B
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
U
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
VI
O
L
E
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
RE
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
RE
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
ZO
N
E
D
M
E
D
I
U
M
-
HI
G
H
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
ZO
N
E
D
M
E
D
I
U
M
HI
G
H
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
0
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
2
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
P
A
T
I
O
P
A
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
BE
D
R
O
O
M
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
BE
D
R
O
O
M
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
1
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
LI
V
I
N
G
LI
V
I
N
G
LI
V
I
N
G
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
P
A
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
LI
V
I
N
G
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
DI
N
I
N
G
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
D
I
N
I
N
G
D
I
N
I
N
G
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
1
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
-
F
i
r
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
1
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
1
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
-
S
e
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
2
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
1
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
-
T
h
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
3
FI
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
R
I
S
E
R
R
O
O
M
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
1
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
3
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
3
5
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
9
.
5
'
BU
I
L
D
IN
G
1
AV
E
ER
A
G
E
N
A
T
U
RA
L
G
R
AD
E
8
'
-
0
"
T
Y
P
9
'
-
0
"
T
Y
P
1
0
'
-
0
"
T
Y
P
G R OU
ND
F
L
OO
R
R
S E CO
ND
F
L
OO
R
T
H
I
R
D
F
L
OO
R
TH
I
R
D
F
L
OO
R
P
L
A
T
E
+
/
-
3
3
'
-
7
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0 "
A1
.
2
Fr
o
n
t
El
e
e va
t
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g 1
2
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0 "
A 1.
2
Le
f t
E
l
e
v
a a ti
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g 1
3
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0 "
A 1.
2
R i g ht
E
l
e
va
t
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g 1
5
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0 "
A1
.
2
R ea
r
E
le e va
t
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g 1
4A1
.
2
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
1 Fr
o
n
t
Pe
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
1
F
r
o
n
t
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
1 1
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
2
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
4
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
P
A
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
LI
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
KI
T
C
H
E
N
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
1
LI
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
LI
V
I
N
G
L
I
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
KI
T
C
H
E
N
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
2
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
-
F
i
r
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
1
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
2
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
-
S
e
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
2
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
2
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
-
T
h
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
3
FI
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
R
I
S
E
R
R
O
O
M
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
3
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
5
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
3
5
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
1 98
.5 '
B
U IL
D
IN
G
2
2 A
V
E
R
A
G E
N
A
T
U RA
L
G RA
D
E
+
/
-
2
5
'
-
0
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0"
A 2.
2
Fr
o
n
t
El
e
Fr
o
nt
El
e
ev
a
t
i
o
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
2
e va
t
io
n
Bu
il
d
in
g
2
2 2
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0"
A 2.
2
R ea
r
E
le
v
v at
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g 2
4
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0"
A 2.
2
Le
f
t
El
e
v
Le
f
t
E
l
e
v
va
t
i
o
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
2
va
t
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
2
3 3
1
/8
"
=
1
'
-
0"
A 2.
2
Ri
g
ht
E
l
e e va
t
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
in
g
2
5
A2
.
2
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g 2 2 F
r
o
n
t
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
1
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
4
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
6
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
&
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
PA
T
I
O
PA
T
I
O
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
2
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
D
I
N
I
N
G
LI
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
PA
T
I
O
P
A
T
I
O
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
DI
N
I
N
G
3
5
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
I
M
U
M
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
19
5
'
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
N
A
T
U
R
A
L
G
R
A
D
E
+
/
-
2
9
'
-
0
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
F
i
r
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
1
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
S
e
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
2
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
T
h
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
3
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
F
r
o
n
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
5
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
L
e
f
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
6
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
R
e
a
r
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
7
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
R
i
g
h
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
8
A3
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
3
-
F
r
o
n
t
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
4
FI
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
R
I
S
E
R
R
O
O
M
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
5
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
7
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
&
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
3
5
'
-
0
"
M
A
X
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
8
'
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
N
A
T
U
R
A
L
G
R
A
D
E
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
PA
T
I
O
CO
M
M
O
N
AR
E
A
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
PA
T
I
O
P
A
T
I
O
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
KI
T
C
H
E
N
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
LI
V
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
DI
N
I
N
G
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
,
2
S
T
O
R
Y
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
F
r
o
n
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
5
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
R
e
a
r
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
7
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
R
i
g
h
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
6
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
L
e
f
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
8
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
F
i
r
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
1
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
S
e
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
2
1
/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A0
0
A
4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
T
h
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
3
A4
.
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
4
-
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
4
FI
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
R
I
S
E
R
R
O
O
M
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
6
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
8
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
SI
T
E
F
U
R
N
I
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
-
T
I
L
E
R
O
O
F
EX
P
O
S
E
D
R
A
F
T
E
R
T
A
L
E
S
EX
P
O
S
E
D
F
A
S
C
I
A
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
I
R
O
N
W
O
R
K
GU
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
TA
L
L
A
N
D
N
A
R
R
O
W
WI
N
D
O
W
S
W
I
T
H
M
U
N
T
I
N
S
RE
C
E
S
S
E
D
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
WI
T
H
A
N
G
L
E
D
S
I
L
L
AC
C
E
N
T
T
I
L
E
O
N
S
T
A
I
R
R
I
S
E
R
S
WO
O
D
A
R
C
H
E
D
D
O
O
R
AR
C
H
E
D
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
W
I
T
H
AN
G
L
E
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
S
C
U
P
P
E
R
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
W
A
L
L
T
I
L
E
WR
O
U
G
H
T
I
R
O
N
W
I
T
H
G
R
I
L
L
WI
T
H
R
E
C
E
S
S
E
D
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
WA
L
L
C
A
P
OR
N
A
T
E
W
A
L
L
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
CU
R
V
E
D
S
T
A
I
R
W
A
L
L
AR
C
H
E
D
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
S
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
V
E
N
T
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
7
MA
S
P
A
F
F
O
R
D
A
B
L
E
L
O
T
1
0
8
|
P1
9
JU
L
Y
2
5
,
2
0
1
6
01
7
2
-
0
1
-
R
S
1
5
|
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
CO
L
O
R
&
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
B
O
A
R
D
1.
5R
R
À
Q
J
B
o
r
a
l
B
a
r
c
e
l
o
n
a
C
a
s
a
G
r
a
n
d
e
B
l
e
n
d
-
1
B
C
C
S
6
4
6
4
2.
S
t
u
c
c
o
:
M
e
r
l
e
x
P
-
1
0
0
G
l
a
c
i
e
r
W
h
i
t
e
3.
A
c
c
e
n
t
P
a
i
n
t
/
E
n
t
r
y
&
D
o
o
r
:
Sh
e
r
w
i
n
W
i
l
l
i
a
m
s
S
W
6
0
8
2
C
o
b
b
l
e
B
r
o
w
n
4.
G
u
t
t
e
r
s
:
RG
S
G
u
t
t
e
r
s
R
u
s
t
i
c
B
r
o
w
n12
3
4
6
7
5 5.
W
i
n
d
o
w
S
t
y
l
e
:
M
i
l
g
a
r
d
i
n
W
h
i
t
e
6.
E
n
t
r
y
D
o
o
r
S
t
y
l
e
7.
L
i
g
h
t
S
t
y
l
e
-
M
a
x
i
m
,
M
o
d
e
l
8
6
3
9
3
B
Z
,
N
i
g
h
t
S
k
y
C
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
A
R
C
1
-
3
8
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Conceptual architectural review of a new, three-story affordable housing project with
36 residential units.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 408 Prado Road BY: Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7524
E-mail: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-2663-2016 (Conceptual) FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION
Continue the project to a date uncertain with direction to staff and the applicant on items to be
addressed in plans submitted for final approval.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted plans (Attachment 3) for conceptual review for the subject site located
at 408 Prado Road. The proposed project includes the construction of a four new, three-story
Spanish Style residential structures with a total of 36 affordable residential units composed of one-
bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units.
Staff has conducted an analysis of the conceptual project (Section 2.0) and provided directional
items (Section 6.0) for consideration and discussion by the Architectural Review Commission
(ARC) with the purpose of providing feedback to the applicant prior to finalizing plans and
returning for final approval.
Applicant SLO Non-Profit Housing Corp.
Representative Michael Burke, HASLO
Submittal Date January 22, 2016
Zoning R-3-SP, Medium-High Density
Residential within the Margarita
Area Specific Plan
General Plan Medium-High Density Residential
Site Area 60,548 square feet (~1.39 acres)
Environmental
Status
Final plans for the proposed
project will likely require further
environmental analysis.
Meeting Date: March 21, 2016
Item Number: 2
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 39
ARCH-2663-2016 (Conceptual)
408 Prado Road
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The purpose of conceptual review before the ARC is to offer feedback to the applicant as to whether
the project design is headed in the right direction before plans are further refined for final review.
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines, Margarita Area Specific Plan, and applicable City standards.
2.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
Staff has used the Community Design Guidelines (CDG), Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP)
and Zoning Regulations to review the proposed project and created a set of draft directional items
(Section 6.0) to be used as a basis for discussion about the project. The following highlights key
elements of the site and building design that the ARC should discuss and provide direction to staff
and the applicant.
ARC Discussion Items: The ARC should consider the following concerns:
1. Site Planning: CDG Chapter 5.4A states that site planning for multi-family housing should
create a pleasant comfortable place for residences without the project “turning its back” on
the surrounding neighborhood.
ARC Directional Item #1: The ARC should consider the project’s site plan for compliance
with Residential Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Housing Design (CDG 5.4 A).
2. Building Design. The project is surrounded by single family neighborhoods, and CDG 5.4C
states that care in design should ensure that the height and bulk of higher density projects do
not impact adjacent lower density residential areas. Structures with greater heights may
require additional setbacks along the street frontage so they do not shade adjacent properties
or visually dominate the neighborhood. A structure with three or more attached units should
incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent scale.
ARC Directional Item #2: The ARC should consider the project design’s compliance with
Residential Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Project Architecture. (CDG 5.4 C)
3. Setbacks. The MASP Table 3-B requires a setback for the side yard consistent with the R-2
zone and a 15 foot setback for the front yard in the Medium Density Residential Zone (R-3-
SP). The project proposes a 10 foot setback along the front yard for portions of the project
design. The applicant is also requesting a side yard reduction of 10 feet along one of the side
yards.
ARC Directional Item #3: The ARC should discuss concerns for the reduced setbacks for
the three story structure along the front yard and side yard. (MASP Table 3-B & Zoning
Regulations Table 3)
4. Building Height. The maximum building height is determined by the Zoning Regulations
(Table 5.5 Maximum Height by Zone) for the R-3 zone at 35 feet. The applicant is
requesting a height exception of approximately 3 feet for two of the proposed buildings on
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 40
ARCH-2663-2016 (Conceptual)
408 Prado Road
Page 3
the south side of the property, due to the average natural slope of the property.
ARC Directional Item #4: The ARC should discuss concerns related to the maximum height
of the structures as it relates to the building design.
5. Parking. Long, monotonous parking drives and large undivided parking lots are
discouraged. The length of a parking court should not exceed the width of eight adjoining
stalls. Large scale multi-family projects should have internal streets designed as if they were
pleasant public streets, with comprehensive streetscapes including sidewalks, and planting
strips between curb and sidewalk with canopy trees. Planters shall be placed after each six
parking spaces in any row, and at the ends of each row of parking spaces.
ARC Directional Item #5: The ARC should consider the proposed parking lot for
compliance with Site Planning & Other Design Details for Parking Facilities. (CDG 6.3 C,
D, & E)
3.0 AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The applicant is requesting a density bonus of 35% consistent with Zoning Regulations Chapter
17.90 Affordable Housing Incentives. The MASP limits the locations of density bonuses within
Residential Development Areas due to the need of consistency with the County Airport Land Use
Plan, density bonuses are only available in the areas identified in Figure 5. The Airport Land Use
Commission (ALUC) is currently updating the Airport Land Use Plan. The proposed project has
been scheduled for a pre-application review to determine if the proposed location is appropriate for
density bonus in accordance with the updated plan.
The applicant has requested the proposed exceptions for setbacks and maximum building height
though the City’s affordable housing incentive program. All proposed incentives shall be considered
by the City Council consistent with Chapter 17.90.
4.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Information needs and comments from the other departments were provided to the applicant team
separately.
5.0 ALTERNATIVES & RECOMMENDATION
4.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
4.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design Guidelines.
6.0 DIRECTIONAL ITEMS
Continue the project to a date uncertain with the following directional items and application
requirements (Attachment 1):
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 41
ARCH-2663-2016 (Conceptual)
408 Prado Road
Page 4
Directional Items
1. The ARC should consider the project’s site plan for compliance with Residential Design
Guidelines for Multi-Family Housing Design.
2. The ARC should consider the project design’s compliance with Residential Design
Guidelines for Multi-Family Project Architecture.
3. The ARC should discuss concerns for the reduced setbacks for the three story structure
along the front yard and side yard.
4. The ARC should discuss concerns related to the maximum height of the structures as related
to the building design.
5. The ARC should consider the proposed parking lot for compliance with Site Planning &
Other Design Details for Parking Facilities.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Application requirements and code requirements
2. Vicinity Map
3. Reduced Project Plans
4. Serra Meadows Site Matrix
5. MASP Community Design Standards
Included in Commission member portfolio: project plans
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 42
Architectural Review Commission Minutes
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
March 21, 2016
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Allen Root, Patricia Andreen, Amy Nemcik, Angela Soll,
and Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie
Absent: Commissioner Ken Curtis and Chair Greg Wynn
Staff: Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, Assistant
Planner Kyle Bell, Associate Planner Marcus Carloni, and Recording
Secretary Brad T. Opstad
CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Ehdaie called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Commissioner Nemcik proposed the following amendment to the Architectural Review
Commission Meeting Minutes of October 19, 2015:
1) Insertion on Page 6, fifth paragraph: “are a good idea but does not believe they
would…”
Commissioner Andreen proposed the following amendment to the Architectural Review
Commission Meeting Minutes of February 8, 2015:
1) Page 4, fifth paragraph, first sentence revised to read: “Commissioner Andreen
shared her belief that 20% approximately 30% reduction in parking gets ahead
of habits and realities of community-living;”
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREEN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
ROOT to approve both sets of the Minutes, as amended, passed unanimously 5:0.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
None.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 43
Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 21, 2016
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 2223 Monterey Street. ARCH-2363-2015; Review of hotel project with 55 rooms
and a recreational vehicle park with 23 RV/Airstream trailer spaces with
associated parking and site improvements on the Master List Historic Motel Inn
property. Project includes a 10% parking reduction request and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact which will be reviewed by the
Planning Commission; C-T-S zone; Motel Inn, L.P., applicant.
Deputy Director Davidson introduced Associate Planner Carloni to provide the Staff
Report presentation of the Motel Inn project.
Applicant Representative, Damian Davis of Studio Design Group Architects,
commended Staff for their explanation of project’s evolution; explained design feature
decision to shift seven hotel doors towards, and six doors away from, creekside.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
In response to Commissioner Andreen’s inquiries, Associate Planner Carloni indicated
he was unaware of any plans for screens on entrance doors for ventilation; indicated
that doors were strictly planned to be oriented differently and would not substantially
impact traffic flow from the walkway; recognized that entrances per Ordinance 1130
considerations were a functional issue for Planning Commission (PC) than design issue
in ARC purview but reminded that Staff was looking for feedback to inform PC’s
decision.
In response to Commissioner Root’s inquiry, Associate Planner Carloni stated that the
discrepancy between Planning Division’s Condition 4 of Resolution and the Project
Statistics Table per Maximum Height of Structure will be updated to match the “as
conditioned with project.”
In response to Commissioner Root’s second inquiry, Applicant Representative Davis
indicated that Public Art question had not been addressed, that Applicant would pay the
in-lieu fees and would also remain open to further consideration.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Vice Chair Ehdaie mentioned that one piece of correspondence had been received by
Staff from David and Sandy Garth, residents on San Luis Drive, in support of the
project.
Cliff Branch, San Luis Obispo, shared views that the site has been vacant for an
inordinate amount of time, voicing support of the proposed project.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 44
Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 21, 2016
Page 3
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
In response to Commissioner Root and Commissioner Nemcik’s inquiries, Associate
Planner Carloni displayed PowerPoint site plan comparisons which incorporate new
creek views and indicate different side-loaded entrances for guests; pointed out that
side entrances still exist in the new plan and half of them have been shifted toward
creek.
Commissioner Andreen initially opined that because additional openings had been
newly created, the project was no longer in technical compliance with the ordinance that
protects adjacent creek neighbors from noise, none of the properly noticed neighbors
were on hand to voice concerns, voiced that she could support design change.
Commissioner Root suggested that any potential noise concerns are driven less by the
orientation of the doorways than by the number of occupied rooms; indicated he was
pleased with the new iteration.
In response to Commissioner Nemcik’s inquiry, Applicant Representative Davis
established that the placement of entrances on different building faces was important as
guest and unit privacy was compromised in the plans calling for side-by-side doors ten
(10) feet apart.
Commissioner Andreen motioned to approve the Cultural Heritage Committee’s finding
of consistency with the historic preservation of the project, the recommendation to the
Planning Commission that they adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt the
ordinance that the project is consistent with Community Design Guidelines and
Ordinance 1130. Commissioner Soll recommended the addition of highlighted
consideration, per ARC concern, of both the balcony attached to Suites 41 & 42 and the
RV site’s picnic tables; Commissioner Andreen accepted recommendation as part of the
Motion.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDREEN, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER SOLL, the Commission approved the Cultural Heritage Committee’s
finding of consistency with historic preservation; approved making the recommendation
to the Planning Commission that they adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Ordinance 1130 and the ordinance indicating project is consistent with Community
Design Guidelines; approved the additional recommendation to Planning Commission to
place emphasis on consideration of both the balcony attached to suites 41 & 42 and
recreational vehicle site’s picnic tables. Motion passed 5:0:0:2 on the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Andreen, Soll, Root, Nemcik, Ehdaie
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Curtis, Wynn
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 45
Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 21, 2016
Page 4
2. 408 Prado Road. ARCH-2663-2016; Conceptual architectural review of 36
affordable housing units on Lot 108 within Serra Meadows; R-3-SP zone; San
Luis Obispo Non-Profit, applicant.
Assistant Planner Bell provided an overview of staff’s recommendation and indicated
ARC’s purview was to review project for consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines in the Margarita Area Specific Plan; provided PowerPoint slides displaying a
contextual map of the project, documentation of the project description, and an outline
of five (5) directional items of potential concern as they pertain to guideline compliance,
reduced setbacks, maximum height of structures and design details for parking facilities.
Scott Smith, Executive Director of Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo (HASLO)
provided updates on other HASLO projects that had previously appeared in front of
Commission and introduced Architect Scott Martin to make presentation.
Project Architect Scott Martin, RRM Design Group, provided documentation guiding the
workforce housing project; showed graphics of the site plan and discussed request for
slight height increase for lowest building on hill; disclosed project is requesting more
density than what is allowed in Airport Land Use Plan.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Commissioner Andreen shared concern that the R-3 development may not effectively
function as part of Serra Meadows if impenetrable to neighbors; Architect Martin
indicated Applicant would seek as many pedestrian penetrations into the site as
possible.
In response to Commissioner Nemcik’s inquiry, Architect Martin explained that side yard
exceptions are being requested due to a need for deepened footing where dramatic
grading has occurred; Planner Bell responded that the request, within affordable
incentive allowances, is for a five (5) foot reduction providing for a ten (10) foot yard all
around property along street front.
In response to Commissioner Root’s inquiries, Architect Martin suggested a bus stop
internal to and on western edge of site and mentioned that a major pedestrian
connection would be walking distance down Violet; endorsed the interior street concept
as a better alternative to placing a parking lot next to residential homes; confirmed that
the 12% grade of driveway is steep, but that 15% is maximum for emergency services,
so maintained that project envisions same corner to be primary access.
In response to Acting Chair Ehdaie’s inquiries, Architect Martin responded that project’s
idea of prominently framing primary entry with buildings that provide community space
and public functions would serve as a de facto neighborhood meeting spot identifier;
detailed goal of creating senses of ownership through delicate balance in and resident
progression through public, semi-public and private spaces.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 46
Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 21, 2016
Page 5
In response to Commissioner Soll’s inquiries, Architect Martin pointed out that
residential access points are through front doors; indicated project is heavily considering
solar possibilities, stated that parking area allows for two-way traffic and both plazas are
intended for community gathering spaces.
In response to Commissioner Andreen’s inquiry, Architect Martin shared that Applicant
has planned for open parking; fielded Commissioner Andreen’s encouragement to
research storage space outside units as valid feedback while pointing out area on site
plan that shows potential for bicycle parking.
In response to Commissioner Nemcik’s inquiry, Architect Martin noted that Applicant
has considered pavers and colored concrete for parking paving differentiation material,
but remains open to suggestion.
In response to Commissioner Andreen’s inquiry, Architect Martin responded that the
anticipation is for residential children to feed regional park system and linear parks
along Margarita, envisioning site as a natural setting and as part of a developing
neighborhood as opposed to a stand-alone project implementing a controlled, over-
articulated recreational area. Commissioner Andreen opined that kids require hard
surface in safe environment beyond the parking area.
In response to Acting Chair Ehdaie’s inquiry regarding the breaking down of parking into
smaller lots embedded with the buildings, Architect Martin reported that the alternative
was the park-along-street concept; indicated that breaking up parking means more
circulation, more asphalt, less landscape, and less building.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Robert DeVries, San Luis Obispo, commented as a pilot that site is directly under
departure area for northern air traffic and, being at highest elevation, will be in receipt of
most noise, so suggested increased building insulation; reported that there is no
designated place for children to play in area and the park pictured in presentation is a
clearance area high in grass and under PG&E high-tension wires.
Cliff Branch, San Luis Obispo, spoke as longtime developer in the County and disclosed
he has family with non-refundable deposit invested in property proximal to project site;
informed that 12% slope is in straight line with Aster that will need to be carved out of
area; voiced concern that with a 10-foot setback and three-story building, attention is
needed to view angles on homes yet to be built; commented that the most prominent
site in area is scheduled for highest-density housing which generates multiple issues.
Annie Shanks, San Luis Obispo, spoke as resident of Serra Meadows; voiced struggle
with concept of affordable housing and its relationship to structure planned for top of hill,
three stories seeming inordinately high for the site; questioned whether “affordable
housing” indicated homes for sale or for rent and wondered if residents within would be
part of Serra Meadows HOA.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 47
Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 21, 2016
Page 6
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
HASLO Executive Director Smith stated that the units are planned as rentals, citing that
it is much more difficult to market housing for sale to the $35K-$45K annual income
range.
Acting Chair Ehdaie and Commissioner Andreen requested qualification on Public
Comment’s HOA question; HASLO Executive Director Smith stated that HASLO would
retain ownership and management of HOA membership via the functioning of an
employee who will live onsite and report on it to HASLO directly.
Deputy Director Davidson informed that the affordable housing parking requirement and
the zoning ordinance for affordable housing are written as basically one space per two-
bedroom unit; suggested Commission discuss each of the five (5) Directional Items in
roundtable fashion along with additional comments not already broached.
Commissioner Soll spoke favorably on the courtyard area and commented that further
landscaping would be important to reduce massing of building from perspective of
neighborhood below.
Commissioner Nemcik suggested Applicant consider angled parking and one-way
directional as means of not having to request exception.
Per maximum height of structures as it relates to building design, Commissioner
Andreen indicated she would reject request for additional three (3) feet out of hand but it
would still be more important to consider how added dimension would impact
appearance from neighborhood’s perspective; Assistant Planner Bell responded to
Acting Chair Ehdaie’s question by stating that these types of exception requests are
different from standard exceptions insofar as they work as incentives in affordable
housing scenarios.
Assistant Planner Bell explained that the building requesting the three feet is the same
as the adjacent one in terms of style and layout but its measurements are altered from
maximum height based on where it’s located on slope; Commissioners Root, Nemcik
and Ehdaie indicated they would favor granting this exception; Vice Chair Ehdaie
indicated support of the height exception, while reminding the Applicant that increasing
the setback as much as possible to alleviate the overlook issue would be optimal.
Per the proposed parking lot for compliance with site planning: Commissioner Root
shared opinion that the use of alternative paving, surrounding landscaping and
circulation warrants the design in this direction while insisting on criteria of planters
every six spaces would not make it work as well; Commissioner Nemcik shared belief
that insufficient parking issue needs to be addressed; Commissioner Andreen indicated
that it is more important to maximize parking and the strict enforcement of every sixth
planter rule would infringe on it; Commissioner Soll commended alternative paving;
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 48
Minutes Architectural Review Commission Meeting of March 21, 2016
Page 7
Acting Chair Ehdaie shared opinion that the parking design works in terms of balance
between maximizing affordable housing with its allowable parking.
Commissioner Andreen voiced strong endorsement for Applicant to place more
emphasis on consideration of children living in neighborhoods that support young
families and make provisions for places for them to play safely.
AGENDA FORECAST
Deputy Director Davidson provided the schedule itinerary for April:
April 4th: Oath of Office for the re-appointed Commissioner Nemcik; Election of
Chair and Vice-Chair; BMW dealership re-location to Calle Joaquin; re-design of four (4)
single-family residences at 323 Grand; back deck of SLO Brew’s new location on
Higuera
April 18th: 71 Palomar; two commercial-industrial buildings on Via Esteban and
at 179 Cross
ADJOURNMENT
Vice Chair Ehdaie adjourned the meeting at 7:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Brad T. Opstad
Recording Secretary
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 49
RESOLUTION NO. 10512 (2014 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING A REVISED VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AND
MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2353
MOD /TR/ER 120 -13; 408 PRADO ROAD)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on March 12, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application
MOD /TR/ER 120 -13, Mangano Homes Inc., applicant, for the purpose of considering a request
for a revised tentative map and to amend conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map
2353 for an approximately 30 -acre site located on the north side of Prado Road, east of South
Higuera Street; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the
revised tentative tract map and proposed modified conditions of Vesting Tentative Tract Map
2353, as well as the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on April 15,
2014, for the purpose of considering the proposed revised map and modified conditions of
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2353 originally approved through City Council Resolution No.
9777 (2006 Series); and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of the
Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the
following findings in support of the request to revise the tentative tract map and modify
conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2353:
1. The proposed condition modifications are reasonably necessary to allow for the construction
of Prado Road improvements to serve the Western Enclave Development in the Margarita
Area Specific Plan given financing considerations and projected traffic levels.
R 10512
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 50
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 2
2. The design of the revised vesting tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan
because the proposed subdivision respects existing site constraints (slope, creeks, wetlands,
significant trees), improves drainage conditions, will incrementally add to the City's
residential housing inventory, result in parcels that meet density standards, and will be
consistent with the density and lot sizes established by the Margarita Area Specific Plan.
3. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development allowed in the R -1 -SP, R-
2-SP, and O -SP zones.
4. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of
property within) the proposed subdivision.
5. The City Council finds that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment as documented in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project
with incorporation of the mitigation measures and monitoring program being incorporated
into the project, as listed herein in Section 2. The proposed modifications to conditions do
not conflict with approved mitigation measures and are consistent with previous
environmental studies for the extension of Prado Road.
6. Several Environmental Impact Reports have been certified that included the Prado Road
extension, including the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements, the 2000 Amendment to
the Circulation Element, and the Airport and Margarita Specific Plans. These EIRs have
analyzed the impacts associated with adding the road to the circulation system and
Circulation Element and its current alignment. Project specific impacts were addressed in
each environmental document prepared for Vesting Tract Maps.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City Council adopted the project's Mitigated
Negative Declaration on March 7, 2006, which incorporated mitigation measures and monitoring
programs into the project. In addition, the Tiered Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration prepared for the current revisions request (ER- 120 -13) brings forth additional
mitigation measures for impacts related to traffic. The following mitigation measures will
supersede in their entirety the previously approved mitigation measures approved by Council
Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series). The following mitigation measures incorporate the originally
approved mitigation measures that are still applicable to this project along with the changes
necessitated by the proposed revisions to the project.
Mitigation Measures:
Reduction of Light and Glare
1. In order for MASP /AASP EIR Mitigation Measure LU -7.1 as implemented by the MASP to
be carried through to lot- specific development stage, a lighting plan that demonstrates
compliance with Community Design Section 3.3 Lighting requirements of the MASP shall
be submitted with other required plans for both the residential and commercial components
of the project to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Commission (ARC).
The lighting plan shall propose specific measures to limit the amount of light trespass
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 51
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 3
associated with development within the project area including shielding and /or directional
lighting methods to ensure that spillover light does not exceed 0.5 foot - candles at adjacent
property lines.
Monitoring Program: The ARC will review development plans for both the
residential and commercial components of the project. City staff, including
Planning and other departments, will review plans to assure that all of the ARC's
requirements related to lighting and compliant with the MASP provisions have
been incorporated into working drawings. City building inspectors will be
responsible for assuring that all lighting is installed pursuant to the approved
lighting plan.
Preparation and Implementation of "Comprehensive Biological Mitigation Program"
2. Mitigation for wetland impacts. Mitigation for wetland impacts will be through a
combination of on- and off -site mitigation, approved by the City, the DFW and the Army
Corps of Engineers. Further, in compliance with the MASP /AASP EIR, the adjacent VTM
2342 proposes the creation of Lot 64 in an area designated by the MASP for "Open Space -
Riparian" for the express purposes of achieving some of the necessary wetlands replacement
mitigation area, as well as preservation of related biological habitat benefits.
3. Mitigation for Impacts to Sensitive Species. None of these species are expected to be difficult
to establish. City staff will work with the project sponsors in developing the details of the
effort. Congdon Tarplant. Create compensating habitat in a suitable off -site location
approved by the City.
4. Mitigation for Impacts to Other Nesting Birds. Undertake surveys prior to initiation of
construction activities; avoid construction activities within 100 feet of active nest sites, or
within 300 feet for raptor nests, until after young have fledged.
5. Off Site Mitigation for Wetland Impacts. A further component of the biological mitigation
program is the applicant's proposal to acquire (by fee, easement, or eminent domain) lands
outside the bounds of the Western Enclave (designated by the MASP as "Open Space
Riparian" lands). The targeted property (lying south of Prado Road and owned by Prado Park
LLC) is a low lying area that already naturally collects some area run -off and provides
valuable habitat for certain special concern and R - T -E (rare, threatened, and endangered)
species, and thus is beneficial to retain in its natural state. Pre - development run -off has
resulted in seasonal flooding of Prado Road due to the currently deficient
collection/distribution system to this natural drainage area south of Prado Road. The Western
Enclave applicants propose to acquire this off -site property designated for open space use by
the MASP and utilize it beneficially for biological mitigation as well as a detention basin for
pre- and post - Western Enclave development generated run -off. It is proposed that this basin
be enhanced to accommodate the greater project - generated and pre - project run -off flows, and
to increase its habitat value in the long term. The basin is proposed to be held and maintained
by a Home Owners Association (HOA) established initially for the Western Enclave area,
and perhaps ultimately for the entire MASP as stipulated be done by the MASP.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 52
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 4
Monitoring Program: Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall
contact the City Natural Resource Manager for review and approval of the final
lot and street design to assure that on -site natural resources are protected and
preserved to the greatest extent required by the mitigation measures and
consistent with requirements of the MASP and MASP I AASP EIR. Said design
shall also be consistent with approvals required subsequent to this Tentative Map
from State Dept. of Fish and Game and Army Corps of Engineers. Prior to any
site preparation or construction activities, the applicant shall also initiate and
complete for approval by the City pre- construction surveys for nesting birds and
adhere to performance standard specified in the mitigation. Provisions for
required off -site mitigation shall be coordinated with and approved by the City
Natural Resource Manager prior to recordation of the Final Map. Periodic field
inspections by City Staff during construction will be necessary to assure site
development conforms to mitigation measures and conditions of approval.
Preparation of Phase II Archaeological Subsurface Survey
6. In order to achieve complete mitigation for the archaeological resource found on the subject
site, this survey is required if the site cannot be avoided. The Phase II survey is to determine
if significance criteria of CEQA and /or NRHP are met. The survey must be completed and
results submitted to City for determination whether mitigation measures below, as specified
in EIR, are needed.
1) A data recovery program consisting of archaeological excavation to retrieve the
important data from the archaeological site;
2) Development and implementation of public interpretation plans for both prehistoric
and historic sites;
3) Preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction of' historic structures
according to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties;
4) Construction of new structures in a manner consistent with the historic character of
the region; and
5) Treatment of historic landscapes according to the Secretary of Interior Standards for
Treatment of Historic Landscapes.
If the project involves a federal agency, and is therefore subject to a MOA, the inventory,
evaluation, and treatment processes will be coordinated with that federal agency to
ensure that the work conducted will also comply with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act.
Preparation and Implementation of a "Construction- Related Hazardous Materials
Management Plan"
7. As stipulated in the MASP / AASP EIR, this would be a plan identifying, when they are
known, site /development - specific construction activities that will involve the hazardous
materials. The plan shall be prepared before construction activities begin that involve
hazardous materials and shall discuss proper handling and disposal of materials used or
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 53
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 5
produced onsite, such as petroleum products, concrete, and sanitary waste. The plan will also
outline a specific protocol to identify health risks associated with the presence of chemical
compounds in the soil and /or groundwater and identify specific protective measures to be
followed by the workers entering the work area. If the presence of hazardous materials is
suspected or encountered during construction- related activities, the project proponent will
cause Mitigation Measure HAZ -1.2 to be activated. Mitigation Measure HAZ -1.2 states:
The project proponent will complete a Phase I environmental site assessment for each
proposed public facility (e.g. streets and buried infrastructure). If Phase 1 site assessments
indicate a potential for soil and/or groundwater contamination within or adjacent to the road
or utility alignments, a Phase H site assessment will be completed. The following Phase H
environmental site assessments will be prepared specific to soil and/or groundwater
contamination.
a. Soil Contamination. For soil contamination, the Phase II site assessment will
include soil sampling and analysis for anticipated contaminating substances. If
soil contamination is exposed during construction, the San Luis Obispo Fire
Department (SLOFD) will be notified and a work plan to characterize and
possibly remove contaminated. soil will be prepared, submitted and approved.
b. Groundwater Contamination. For groundwater contamination, the Phase H
assessment may include monitoring well installation, groundwater sampling, and
analysis for anticipated contaminating substances. If groundwater contaminated
by potentially hazardous materials is expected to be extracted during dewatering,
the SLOFD and the Central Coast RWQCB will be notified. A contingency plan to
dispose of contaminated groundwater will be developed in agreement with the
SLOFD and Central Coast RWQCB. "
Monitoring Program: The "Construction- Related Hazardous Materials
Management Plan" will be required to be submitted to the City Community
Development Department and Fire Department for review prior to
commencement of any site preparation or construction work involving hazardous
materials. No site preparation or construction work may commence before said
plan has been approved by the City. Any site work commenced without City
approval of said Plan will be subject to "Stop Work" (cease and desist) orders as
may be issued under the authority of the City Fire Department.
Preparation and Implementation of an "Operations- Related Hazardous Materials
Management Plan"
8. As stipulated in the MASP/ AASP EIR, this would be a plan prepared by a project proponent
identifying hazardous materials management practices as might be required by state and local
laws and regulations regarding delivery, use, manufacture, and storage of any such regulated
materials might be present On site for any operations- related activities. This plan would
identify the proper handling and disposal of materials uses or produced onsite, such as
petroleum products, concrete, and sanitary waste. By the filing of said Plan, the City Fire
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 54
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 6
Department will be on notice to provide regular and routine fire and life - safety inspections to
determine compliance with applicable health and safety codes.
Monitoring Program: The "Operations- Related Hazardous Materials Management
Plan" will be required to be submitted by a project proponent to the City
Community Development Department and City Fire Department for review prior
to the establishment of any operations - related activities.
Air Quality
9. AQ -1 Fugitive Dust Control Measures. The proposed project shall implement the
following dust control measures so as to reduce PM 10 emissions in accordance with
SLOAPCD requirements.
a) Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b) Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be
required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non - potable) water
should be used whenever possible;
c) All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed;
d) Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities;
e) Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non - invasive
grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;
f) All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the APCD;
g) All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as
soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
h) Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
i) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114;
j) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets,
or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
k) Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used
where feasible;
1) All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 55
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 7
m) The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20
percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include
holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and
telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance
Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
10. AQ -2 Construction Equipment. The proposed project shall implement the following
emissions control measures so as to reduce diesel particulate matter in accordance with
SLOAPCD requirements.
Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's
specifications;
Fuel all off -road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (non -taxed version suitable for sue off - road);
Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or
cleaner off -road heavy -duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off -Road
Regulation;
Use on -road heavy -duty trucks that meet the ARB's 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on -road heavy -duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-
Road Regulation;
Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g.
captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative
compliance;
All on and off -road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes.
Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind
drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive
receptors;
Electrify equipment when feasible;
Substitute gasoline - powered in place of diesel - powered equipment, where
feasible; and
Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on -site where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or
biodiesel.
11. AQ -3 Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan. The applicant shall prepare an Asbestos Dust
Mitigation Plan in accordance with the requirements set for by ACTM to ensure that
asbestos does not create a significant health risk to construction workers and sensitive
receptors. The Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan shall be implemented at the beginning and
maintained throughout the duration of the construction or grading activity. The Asbestos
Dust Mitigation Plan must specify dust mitigation practices which are sufficient to
ensure that no equipment or operation emits dust that is visible crossing the property
line, and must include one or more provisions addressing each of the following topics.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 56
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 8
A. Track -out prevention and control measures which shall include:
1. Removal of any visible track -out from a paved public road at any
location where vehicles exit the work site; this shall be
accomplished using wet sweeping or a HEPA filter equipped
vacuum device at the end of the work day or at least one time per
day; and
2. Installation of one or more of the following track -out prevention
measures:
i. A gravel pad designed using good engineering practices to
clean the tires of exiting vehicles;
ii. A tire shaker;
iii. A wheel wash system;
iv. Pavement extending for not less than fifty (50) consecutive feet
from the intersection with the paved public road; or
v. Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
B. Keeping active storage piles adequately wetted or covered with tarps.
C. Control for disturbed surface areas and storage piles that will remain
inactive for more than seven (7) days, which shall include one or more of
the following:
1. Keep the surface adequately wetted;
2. Establishment and maintenance of surface crusting sufficient to
satisfy the test in subsection (h)(6);
3. Application of chemical dust suppressants or chemical stabilizers
according to the manufacturers' recommendations;
4. Covering with tarp(s) or vegetative cover;
5. Installation of wind barriers of fifty (50) percent porosity around
three (3) sides of a storage pile;
6. Installation of wind barriers across open areas; or
7. Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
D. Control for traffic on on -site unpaved roads, parking lots, and staging
areas which shall include
1. A maximum vehicle speed limit of fifteen (15) miles per hour or
less; and
2. One or more of the following:
i. Watering every two hours of active operations or sufficiently
often to keep the area adequately wetted;
ii. Applying chemical dust suppressants consistent with
manufacturer's directions;
iii. Maintaining a gravel cover with a silt content that is less than
five (5) percent and asbestos content that is less than 0.25
percent, as determined using an approved asbestos bulk test
method, to a depth of three (3) inches on the surface being used
for travel; or
iv. Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 57
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 9
E. Control for earthmoving activities which shall include one or more of the
following:
1. Pre - wetting the ground to the depth of anticipated cuts;
2. Suspending grading operations when wind speeds are high enough
to result in dust emissions crossing the property line, despite the
application of dust mitigation measures;
3. Application of water prior to any land clearing; or
4. Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
F. Control for Off -Site Transport. The owner / operator shall ensure that no
trucks are allowed to transport excavated material off -site unless:
1. Trucks are maintained such that no spillage can occur from holes
or other openings in cargo compartments; and
2. Loads are adequately wetted and either:
i. Covered with tarps; or
ii. Loaded such that the material does not touch the front,
back, or sides of the cargo compartment at any point less
than six inches from the top and that no point of the load
extends above the top of the cargo compartment.
G. Post Construction Stabilization of Disturbed Areas. Upon completion of
the project, disturbed surfaces shall be stabilized using one or more of the
following methods:
1. Establishment of a vegetative cover;
2. Placement of at least three (3.0) inches of non - asbestos - containing
material;
3. Any other measure deemed sufficient to prevent wind speeds of ten
10) miles per hour or greater from causing visible dust emissions.
H. Air Monitoring for Asbestos (If Required by the SLOAPCD).
1. If required by SLOAPCD, the plan must include an air - monitoring
component.
2. The air monitoring component shall specify the following:
i. Type of air sampling device(s)
ii. Siting of air sampling device(s);
iii. Sampling duration and frequency; and
iv. Analytical method.
I. Frequency of Reporting: The plan shall state how often the items specified
in subsection (e)( 5)(B), and any other items identified in the plan, will be
reported to the district.
Transportation /Traffic
The mitigation measures listed below will mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant
level. Mitigation Measures T -01, T -02, & T -03 are new recommended mitigation measures,
while Mitigation Measure T -04 is from prior MND ER 66 -05.
12. T -01 Impact Fees. The applicant shall pay traffic impact fees that are in effect at the
time of building permit issuance. If at the time of building permit issuance the City's
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 58
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 10
TIF has not been amended to accommodate the improvements to the South
Higuera/Prado and South Higuera/Tank Farm intersections as identified in the traffic
study performed by Central Coast Transportation Consulting dated January 6, 2014, or
Prado Road has not been connected to Broad Street, the applicant will be responsible for
paying a pro rata share of said improvements subject to approval of the City's Public
Work Director.
13. T -02 Traffic Mitigation. The subdivider shall re- stripe the southbound left turn lane
and install pedestrian countdown heads at the South Higuera/Prado intersection as
identified in the traffic study performed by Central Coast Transportation Consulting
dated January 6, 2014.
14. T -03 Margarita Neighborhood. Pursuant to the Margarita Area Specific Plan, traffic
volume and speeds shall be monitored after development. Prior to final map recordation,
the Subdivider shall deposit a faithful performance security in the amount of $130,000 to
retain a qualified traffic consultant to conduct traffic counts and speed measurements on
Margarita Avenue and on streets within and in the vicinity of the subdivision. The
counts and measurements will be conducted one -year after final occupancy of complete
build -out of the subdivision or acceptance of public improvements, whichever occurs
later. The locations of the counts and measurements shall be approved by the Public
Works Director. If the traffic volumes or speeds exceed City standards, the $130,000
security will be retained by the City to guarantee that Subdivider installs additional
City- approved traffic calming measures to reduce volume and speeds to comply with
City standards.
Monitoring Program:
Community Development and Public Works staff will oversee impact fee payments,
traffic consultant counts and measurements, and review required restriping plans.
15. T -04 Preparation and Implementation of "Traffic Reduction Program." In order
for MASP /AASP EIR Mitigation Measure T -2.1 adopted with the certification of the
MASP /AASP EIR in conjunction with the approval of the AASP in August, 2005 (Ref.
City Council Resolution No. 9726, 2005 Series) to be brought forward to this site specific
project stage, a transportation demand management program that demonstrates reduction
of peak period travel by single- occupant vehicles shall be required of any employer
within the subdivision with 25 or more employees. Said program shall incorporate all
reasonably feasible measures or techniques, including those listed in the MASP /AASP
EIR/General Plan Circulation, that encourage alternate modes other than single- occupant
vehicles as the primary mode of transportation to the workplace and to travel during non -
peak times.
Monitoring Program:
Each business owner, upon employment of 25 or more employees, shall immediately
prepare and submit, obtain approval from the City Public Works Director and
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 59
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 11
implement the provisions of a Traffic Reduction Plan which demonstrates reduction of
peak period travel consistent with requirements of the City General Plan Circulation
Element Policies and Programs. City Staff shall periodically inspect the business to
observe and assure that reduction techniques approved by the City are in place and
adhered to by the business. Staff shall take any corrective or enforcement actions
authorized by law to achieve compliance.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby approves the revised tentative tract map
and requested modifications to conditions of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2353. The following
conditions will supersede in their entirety the previously approved conditions approved by
Council Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series) on March 7, 2006, and the amended conditions
approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 5565 -11 on September 28, 2011. The
following conditions incorporate the originally approved conditions that are still applicable to
this project along with the changes necessitated by the proposed revisions to the project.
Streets:
The subdivider shall construct full improvements on the north half of Prado Road along the
frontage of each phase of the final map. The improvements on the north half shall include a
minimum of two lanes of Prado Road, bike lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, storm
drainage, landscaping, street lights, and a center median. The subdivider shall provide a
minimum of one lane and a bike lane on the south half of Prado Road. The subdivider shall
reconstruct deficient pavement on the south half of Prado Road to provide sufficient structural
support for long -term use as approved by the Public Works Director. The improvement plans
for Prado Road shall be based on final design drawings for the MASP build -out of Prado Road to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
a. Appropriate transitions, as approved by the Public Works Director, shall be provided
between the new improvements and the existing improvements, including access to
existing driveways. Access to existing driveways may be restricted to right -in
right -out as approved by the City.
b. Access to the Damon - Garcia property east of Tract 2353 shall be provided at a
location approved by the City and property owners.
c. The subdivider may submit a reimbursement proposal for the costs associated with
the design and construction of the north half of Prado Road. Subject to final approval
by the City, the proposal may include fee credits and /or other appropriate
mechanisms that may be applied against Margarita Area Add On Transportation
Impact Fees and Margarita Area Specific Plan Add On Park Impact Fees as
development occurs.
d. Prior to final map recordation, the property owner shall enter into an agreement
waiving his /her /their rights to oppose formation of an assessment district to fund the
portion of the MASP transportation improvements which are not funded by MASP
transportation impact fees. The agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
shall run with the land. In lieu of the agreement, prior to map recordation the
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 60
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 12
property owner may pay an amount approved by the City to cover their share of the
unfunded amount.
e. Prior to final map recordation, the subdivider shall submit a separate irrevocable offer
of dedication for public street purposes for all connecting streets to provide access
from VTM 2428 to Prado Road. The offer will be recorded in the event that the Tract
2353 public improvements have not yet been accepted by the City, but access is
needed for VTM 2428.
f. Prior to map recordation, the subdivider shall submit exhibits for Council
consideration of a plan line for Prado Road across the properties on the south side of
Prado Road to ensure development on the south side adheres to the ultimate
right -of -way of Prado Road.
2. Margarita Area Specific Plan Impact Fees, as adopted by the City of San Luis Obispo, shall
be paid prior to issuance of each building permit, subject to any approved reimbursement
agreements.
3. The public improvement plans for VTTM 2353, VTTM 2428 and VTTM 2342 shall
consider the proposed or required phasing to be completed by the combined development
known as Margarita Area Specific Plan western enclave. The public improvement plans for
each subdivision shall include any offsite improvements as considered necessary by the
Director of Public Works to provide a reasonable transition between the subdivisions in the
case that one project is developed before another. The scope of required improvements shall
be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Pursuant to Section 16.20.110
of the City Municipal Code, the subdivider may be eligible for reimbursement for
improvements that are in excess of the construction required for the subdivision, including,
but not limited to storm drainage, sewer, water and power.
4. The final subdivision design and improvements shall comply with the Margarita Area
Specific Plan and all other City of San Luis Obispo Design Standards, Engineering
Standards and Standard Plans and Specifications. The subdivision improvement plans and
the Prado Road improvement plans shall be approved by the City prior to final map
recordation.
5. The final design, location, and number of traffic calming measures including bulb -outs,
choke - downs, tabletops, roundabouts, neck - downs, etc. Shall be reviewed and approved by
the Public Works Director. Plans submitted for review shall include a truck turning diagram
demonstrating a truck's ability to negotiate the traffic calming features. Additional or
alternative traffic control measures may be required to comply with' the Specific Plan
objective to "foster traffic volumes and speeds that will be compatible with the
neighborhood."
6. The tentative map is amended as follows:
a. The tract boundary shown on the tentative map is not correct. The final map shall
reflect the correct tract boundary, lot sizes, and Prado Road dedications.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 61
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 13
b. Delete Margarita Avenue from the 60' right -of -way typical street section and add
Aster Street.
c. The typical street section for Margarita Avenue and Prado Road shall be in
conformance with the MASP, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Director.
d. Width of the bike /ped trails shall be as approved by the Public Works Director.
e. Alley easements are to be measured to the back of curb.
f. The alley width across Lots 1 and 2 shall be a minimum of 24'
g. The alley width serving Lots 46 to 49 and Lot 134 shall be a minimum of 20'.
h. A 15' PUE and Street Tree easement is required along all commercial frontage.
i. Lots 1 through 6 are incorrectly labeled as single- family on the Lot Table.
j. A bulb -out shall be provided at the intersection of Aster and Ceanothus.
k. Directional arrows on the section lines for the CMU walls and Gravity Walls are
facing the wrong direction.
1. The final configuration of the Margarita roundabout shall be as required by the Public
Works Director.
m. Driveways and alleys in the vicinity of the roundabout median islands shall be
relocated to provide unimpeded left turn ingress /egress. Shared driveways may be
required to meet this requirement.
7. The subdivision design shall include directional curb ramps wherever possible. The
inclusion of bulb -outs at directional curb ramp locations is encouraged to decrease the
roadway width to be crossed by a pedestrian.
8. The subdivision design shall include curb extensions at locations where on- street parking
needs to be restricted for sight visibility reasons.
9. The subdivider shall dedicate easements and construct alleys and streets to full -width
adjacent to all lots being created in each phase.
10. Common areas, landscaped parkways and Class I pathways (other than Prado Road) shall be
owned and maintained in perpetuity for public use by a Homeowner's Association. Water
meters for common landscape areas including but not limited to parkways, medians,
roundabouts and pathway corridors are subject to water impact fees and shall be paid for by
the subdivider.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 62
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 14
11. All lots with alley access shall have vehicular access denial shown on the map for the public
streets fronting those lots, including Lots 46, 47, 48, 49, and 134.
On & Off -Site Improvements:
12. With respect to all off -site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the Subdivider(s)
shall either:
a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or interest
in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or,
b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to
acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the
property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise its power of
eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462.5 to do so, if
necessary. Subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of
such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation.
Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney.
If condemnation proceedings are required, the Subdivider shall submit, in a form
acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding the property to be
acquired.
1) Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land
Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State of
California;
2) Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee;
3) Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of obtaining
such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity to accompany
the appraiser during any inspection of the property or acknowledge in writing that
they knowingly waived the right to do so;
4) Copies of all written correspondence with off -site property owners including
purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the appraised
price.
5) Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer approval,
the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the anticipated costs,
as determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation proceedings. The City
does not and cannot guarantee that the necessary property rights can be acquired
or will, in fact, be acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and
would have to be followed.
13. The final subdivision design shall incorporate stormwater quality Best Management
Practices (BMPs) with the most current edition of the Engineering Standards, shall be
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 63
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 15
designed to treat the stormwater runoff from all developed surfaces excluding rooftops but
including all private and public streets, and shall be subject to the approval of the City
Engineer.
14. The final design of any stormwater detention or treatment facilities shall incorporate all
recommendations from the final geotechnical report into the design of said facilities. The
final geotechnical report shall address the effect, if any, of detaining stormwater in close
proximity to the existing soil contamination.
15. The design of any stormwater facilities shall be in compliance with the Waterway
Management Plan Drainage Design Manual requirement for construction.
16. The subdivider shall secure the rights for the regional stormwater detention basin in a form
acceptable to the Bureau of Real Estate and the City prior to or concurrently with the
recordation of the first final map. The stormwater detention basin shall be
privately- maintained. Should the subdivider be unsuccessful in acquiring the rights to the
basin for storm drainage capacity, the subdivider shall revise the map and plans to
accommodate appropriately -sized on -site detention of stormwater pursuant to the City's
Waterway Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. Alternately, the City may elect, but
is not obligated, to secure the rights on behalf of the public. All costs associated with
securing said rights, including any necessary eminent domain process, shall be borne by the
subdivider.
17. To the degree feasible, shared driveways shall be utilized to reduce the number of driveway
curb cuts in the subdivision and increase the provision of on- street parking.
18. When a Class 1 bicycle path provides access across a public street, choke - downs, curb
ramps, and signage shall be provided and the street crossing shall be designed to direct
pedestrians across the roadway in a perpendicular manner.
19. Prior to final map approval, details of the proposed roadway choke -downs shall be provided.
Choke -downs adjacent to open space corridors shall be lengthened to include the entire
length of the open space corridor.
20. Prior to final map approval, the landscaped roundabout proposed at the terminus of
Margarita Avenue shall be designed to comply with Caltrans Standards Design Information
Bulletin 80 and FHWA roundabout guidelines and address pedestrian and bicycle crossing
areas. The proposed roundabout shall be landscaped and maintained by the homeowner's
association.
21. Due to the potential circulation conflicts given the lot's proximity to the proposed
roundabout, the subdivider shall dedicate vehicular access rights to the City of San Luis
Obispo for proposed Lot 32 onto Cherry Lane and said access restriction shall be shown on
the Final Map.
22. The final map shall include an irrevocable offer of dedication to the public for road purposes
across that portion of Lot 6 as necessary to provide an alternative alignment of Prado Road
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 64
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 16
to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Said offer and final map shall recognize
access restrictions to Prado Road from Lot 6.
23. Prior to final map approval, Aster Street shall be designed and constructed to comply with
City standards which at a minimum include half - street improvements plus 12 feet. Off -site
improvements, temporary construction easements or slope bank easements may be required
in order to complete the necessary improvements.
24. Prior to final map approval, the design and location of the bus pullouts on Junipero Way
shall be coordinated with Tract 2342 and approved by the Public Works Director. Plans
submitted for review shall include a bus turning diagram demonstrating a bus's ability to
negotiate the turnout. The final design shall also include bus stop improvements and indicate
how access to adjacent parcels is provided. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Director, the eastbound bus pullout shall be located on Junipero Way west of Cherry Lane
and the westbound bus pullout shall be located on Junipero Way east of Cherry Lane.
25. The Prado Road cross section shall be designed to comply with the MASP. The metric
conversions shall be as approved by the Public Works Director.
26. Private alleys shall be designed for use by emergency vehicles and garbage trucks and shall
be located within a public access easement. Sewer and storm drain lines within the private
alleys shall be privately- maintained. The subdivider shall show the alleys within a public
access easement on the Final Map.
27. Vehicular access rights along Prado Road shall be dedicated to the City.
28. The subdivider shall install private street lighting along the private internal streets per City
standards and off -site public street lighting along Prado Road leading to and from the
development, as determined by the Director of Public Works. All public street lighting on
Prado Road and on the other public streets shall be LED lighting per the most current or
interim City standards. The public street lighting installed by the developer shall include the
luminaires as well as all wiring and conduit necessary to energize the light standards from
PG &E's point of service.
Water, Sewer & Utilities:
29. The subdivider's engineer shall submit water demand and wastewater generation
calculations so that the City can make a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting
infrastructure.
30. Water meters shall be grouped in manifold pairs wherever possible, to the satisfaction of the
Utilities Engineer.
31. The water mains, sewer mains, and sewer force mains when attached or included with a
bridge, shall be sleeved and encased within the bridge structure or located above the lowest
point so as to protect the pipelines from the high water flow.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 65
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 17
32. Sewer backwater valves may be required on some lots. The subdivider's engineer shall
apply the City's criteria to the design to determine which lots will need backwater valves on
the sewer laterals, per City and UPC standards.
33. In areas where the pressure in the water system exceeds 80 psi, the service line shall include
a pressure regulator downstream of the water meter, where the water service enters the
building.
34. The sewer and water mains shall be located approximately 6' on either side of the street
centerline. All final grades and alignments of all public water, sewer and storm drains
including service laterals and meters) are subject to modifications to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director and Utilities Engineer.
35. The subdivision layout and preliminary utility plans shall include provisions for irrigating
common areas, parks, detention basins, and other large landscape areas with recycled water.
Appropriately sized reclaimed water mains shall be designed and constructed from the
City's trunk system to these irrigation areas. If other use areas exist beyond the proposed
subdivision, the mains shall be appropriately sized to provide for future use areas and
extended to the boundary of the tract. If reclaimed water is not available at the time the
recycled water is needed, the system shall be designed and constructed to reclaimed water
standards, and temporarily connected to the City's potable water system in the area of the
anticipated connection to the reclaimed water system.
Grading & Drainage:
36. The final grading plan shall include provisions to comply with the soils engineer's
recommendations, including mitigating cut slopes, debris flows uphill of the lots and truck
access. The soils engineer shall supervise all grading operations and certify the stability of
the slopes prior to acceptance of the tract and /or issuance of building permits.
37. Clearing of any portion of the existing creek and drainage channels, including any required
tree removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be to done the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director, Corp. of Engineers and the Department of Fish & Game. Certain
trees may require safety pruning by a certified Arborist as determined by the City Arborist.
Homeowners' Association:
38. The subdivider shall submit CC &R's with the Final Map that establishes a Homeowner's
Association (HOA). The HOA shall include the mandatory annexation of Tract 2342 and
Tract 2353. The HOA shall provide for maintenance of all common area drainage channels,
on -site and /or sub - regional drainage basins and conveyance improvements and the
Margarita median landscaping and trail network. The CC &R's shall be approved by the City
and shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the Final Map. A Notice of
Annexation or other appropriate mechanism to annex Tract 2353 into the HOA, including
all associated common area and the regional drainage basin, shall be recorded concurrently
with the map.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 66
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 18
39. Prior to map recordation, the Serra Meadows Business - Professional Office Association shall
enter into an agreement with the Serra Meadows Residential Homeowners' Association to
pay their prorata share of the cost to maintain the regional storm drain basin and related
facilities. The Agreement for Drainage Easement and Maintenance of Storm Water
Detention Basin between the Residential HOA and the Professional Office Association shall
be revised to specifically include the regional basin and appurtenances.
40. Prior to map recordation, the subdivider shall (a) reach an agreement with the property
owners of Prado Park LLC south of Prado Road and the property owners of VTM 2428
regarding use and maintenance of the regional basin, or (b) demonstrate to the city that they
have exhausted all reasonable efforts to reach an agreement. If an agreement cannot be
reached, these property owners will need to demonstrate to the city's satisfaction how they
will provide storm drainage mitigation, open space maintenance, and wetland mitigation
through their own subdivision design and maintenance association.
41. The Homeowners' Association (HOA) shall maintain all that portion of Lot 64 of Tract 2342
and the regional basin south of Prado Road. Maintenance responsibilities shall include
maintenance of any cut or fill slopes required to make the swale and berm. The storm
drainage system within the private streets shall be privately owned and maintained by the
HOA (to be included in CC &R's). Those open space areas that accommodate trails intended
for public use shall be maintained for public access in perpetuity.
42. Subdivider shall prepare conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC &R's) to be approved by
the City. The CC &R's shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the Final
Map. The CC &R's shall contain the following provisions that pertain to all lots:
a. Creation of an HOA or annexation into an HOA, if one exists.
b. No parking except in approved, designated spaces.
c. No change in city - required provisions of the CC &R's without prior City approval.
d. Provision for all of the maintenance responsibilities outlined in various conditions.
e. Provision for common driveway use, access, and maintenance for those lots with
shared access.
43. Prior to map recordation, the CC &R's shall be amended and /or supplemental CC &R's
created to address the following:
a. Include Lots 39 and 134 as residential lots.
b. Remove Lot 39 as a common area lot.
c. Include the new alley serving Lots 46 through 49 and Lot 134 as common area.
d. Include a maintenance plan for the regional basin.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 67
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 19
e. Indicate who will be responsible for maintaining the gravity wall drainage lines in the
back and side yards of the private lots. These lines are continuous drain lines that
cross from lot to lot, so there needs to be some continuity in regards to maintenance.
f. Specifically include maintenance of the bike /pedestrian pathways by the HOA within
Lots 45 and Lots 131 -133 in Exhibit E, Chart of Maintenance Obligations.
g. Revise Exhibit E to include "Sewer Collection and Storm Drain Lines in Alley
Easement Areas" as being maintained by the HOA.
h. Revise Exhibit E to include the parkway adjacent to Lots 5 and 6 to be maintained by
the Professional Office Association.
Paths /Open Space:
44. The multi -use paths should be 12 feet in width as called for in the Specific Plan, however,
the Natural Resource Manager and Public Works Director may approve a narrower path in
locations that will only be used by pedestrians only or where environmental conditions
warrant a narrower path based on in- the -field consideration.
45. Final design (including materials, location, width, bridging and lighting) of pathways shall
be reviewed and approved by the Natural Resources Manager and Public Works Director.
46. Class I path crossings at public streets should be perpendicular to the street. A cross section
should be developed to show transition of path up to the roadway crossing. Choke -downs
and signage shall be provided and crossing shall be designed to direct pedestrians to cross
the roadway in a direct perpendicular manner.
Air Quality:
47. All activities associated with construction and operation for the subdivision map shall
comply at all times with all current APCD Rules and Regulations as applicable, including
but not limited to PM -10, NOX emissions, Best Available Control Technologies,
construction activity management plans, and phasing techniques
Housing Programs:
48. To provide the required affordable units for both Tentative Tract 2342 & 2353, Lot 108, the
R -3 zoned affordable housing site, shall be dedicated to the Housing Authority prior to, or in
conjunction with the recording of Phase 2 of Tract 2353. If the Housing Authority cannot
move forward with a project at the time that the project would be set to be built out, they
could formally pass on the opportunity thereby providing an option for another entity to
develop the site with an affordable project, subject to the review and approval of the
Community Development Director. Improvement plans for Phase 2 of Tract 2353 shall
include complete access and infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, and utilities) to serve the
Housing Authority site. Additional affordable housing requirements will be required if the
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 68
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 20
average residential unit size of the entire Tract 2353 exceeds 2,000 square feet as per Table
2A of the City Housing Element.
Planning Requirements:
49. Bulb outs at `T' intersections need to be added to the straight leg "crossing the `T "' and
elongated such that pedestrian crossings are at 90 degrees to the opposing bulb out
transitions for the intersecting street leg.
50. Bulb -outs shall be provided at alley access points to street to provide line of sight where red
curbing would otherwise be needed.
51. Development of lots adjacent to El Camino Estates or the proposed VTM #2428 where pad
elevations differ by four or more feet shall be limited to single -story development and
increased rear yard setbacks of a minimum of 10 feet, or equivalent design techniques that
maximize privacy protection for the adjacent lot as approved by the Architectural Review
Commission.
52. For lots with slope banks 3:1 or steeper adjacent to the property line and drainage structures
in the rear yards, the subdivider shall designate the entire slope bank as a slope easement to
be maintained by the HOA. A deed restriction shall be placed on all lots with this situation
so that a 6 foot high privacy fence shall be installed and maintained at the top of the slope
53. All lighting within the subdivision shall comply with the lighting standards contained in the
San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines and as further stipulated in the Mitigation
Measures listed below.
54. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the Margarita Area Specific Plan and
County Airport Land Use Plan, the property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the
benefit and protection of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and
the San Luis Obispo County Airport via an avigation easement document prior to the
recordation of the final map.
55. In the event archaeological resources are discovered in conjunction with a construction
project, all activities shall cease and the Community Development Department shall be
notified so that the procedures required by state law may be applied.
56. New development shall implement all feasible measures to minimize the use of
conventional energy for space heating and cooling, water heating and illumination by means
of proper design and orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure.
57. As set forth in the Margarita Area Specific Plan, there shall be a minimum setback of 157
feet for new single family residential units from the centerline of Prado Road. Proposed
Live /Work units may be located within the 157 -foot setback from Prado Road (60 dB noise
contour) subject to compliance with all of the requirements of the Sound Level Assessment
from David Lord of 45 dB dated 9- 14 -11.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 69
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 21
58. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the City and /or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding against the City and /or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside,
void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto,
including but not limited to environmental review. The City shall promptly notify the
subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding.
59. For interior streets (not Prado Road), a 15 -foot public street yard shall be allowed for homes
and a 20 -foot street yard for garages with doors facing the public street. Per the Margarita
Area Specific Plan, front porches are allowed to have a 10 -foot setback.
60. The subdivider shall provide an appropriately sized recycled water main from the end of the
existing main in Margarita Avenue north on Cherry Lane to the north boundary of the tract
to serve the project's linear park landscape irrigation as well as the adjacent VTM 2428.
Code Requirements:
1. Traffic impact and water and wastewater impact fees are required to be paid as a condition of
issuance of building permits.
2. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any connection to the City water
system if the property includes an active well.
3. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all
storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading and
excavation results in land disturbance of five or more acres. Storm water discharges of less
than five acres, but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also
require a permit. Permits are required until the construction is complete to be covered by a
General Construction Activity Permit; the owner(s) of land where construction activity
occurs must submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NO I) form, with the appropriate fee, to
the State Water Board.
4. The subdivision design shall comply with the City's grading ordinance.
5. Street trees shall be planted along the private street per City Standards (the number of trees is
determined by one tree per 35 linear feet of street frontage).
6. All boundary monuments, lot comers and centerline intersections, BC's, EC's, etc., shall be
tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used and a
tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map. All
coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. An electronic file
containing the appropriate data compatible with AutoCAD (Digital Interchange Format,
DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be submitted to the City
Engineer.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 70
Resolution No. 10512 (2014 Series)
Page 22
7. Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the California Fire Code (CFC). Access roads
shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical
clearance of 13' 6 ". Access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
loads of a 60,000 pound fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide
all - weather driving capabilities. All cul -de -sacs shall be minimum 40 foot radius.
8. Approved address numbers shall be placed on all new buildings in such a position to be
plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. Numbers shall be a minimum
of 5" high x' "stroke and be on a contrasting background. [UFC 901 .4.4].
9. Water supplies and fire hydrants shall be provided in accordance with applicable articles of
the CFC. An approved water supply capable of providing the required fire flow for fire
protection is required. The fire flow shall be determined using applicable Appendices of the
CFC.
10. Fire protection systems shall be installed in accordance with the CFC and the California
Building Code. An approved NFPA system will be required for this project.
11. Fire hydrants shall be spaced per SLO -FD Guidelines (placement with Fire Department
approval) and shall be capable of supplying the required fire -flows.
Upon motion of Council Member Ashbaugh, seconded by Vice Mayor Christianson, and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Carpenter, Vice Mayor Christianson and
Mayor Marx
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Council Member Smith
The foregoing resolution was adopted this
15th day of April 2014.
rX
Mayor Ja
r
arx
0hristine
D AS M:
Dietrick
City Attorney
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 71
Meeting Date: September 12, 2016
Item Number: 2
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of the modification of an approved plan (ARCMI 29-12) for construction
of an addition to a single-family dwelling; to replace the demolished portion of the
dwelling with new construction and add a third floor.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2102 Broad St BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
Phone: 781-7593
E-mail: woetzell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-2764-2016 FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the project, based on findings, and subject
to conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant Sam Clemons
Representative Keith Hall
Submittal Date July 27, 2016
General Plan Neighborhood Commercial
Area Plan South Broad Street Area Plan
Zoning Neighborhood
Commercial (C-N)
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt
(CEQA Guidelines §15303 –
New Construction of Small
Structures)
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted a request for modification of architectural review application
ARCMI 29-13, which permitted the construction of a two-story addition to a single-family
dwelling at 2102 Broad Street. That application, along with an Administrative Use Permit for the
addition, was approved in June 2012, subject to several conditions (see Figure 1 and
Attachment 4). The new addition stands partially completed on the site at this time.
ARC2 - 1
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 2
As construction of the addition
progressed, the applicant found it
infeasible to retain the original
dwelling and demolished it. A new
design was submitted, replacing the
demolished original dwelling with
new construction, and adding a third
floor to the new building (Figure 2).
The Commission reviewed the
project plans on June 20th, 2016,
(Attachment 5) and continued
consideration of the item to a future date, providing direction about modifications to the project
design to address inconsistencies with development standards and design guidelines:
1. Reduce building height
2. Reduce the height of privacy walls and provide additional visual interest
3. Reduce the use of metal siding as an exterior material.
4. Herald the entry.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Commission’s role is to review the revised project plans prepared by the applicant in response
to the Commission’s direction, and to evaluate the project’s consistency with the City’s General
Plan, Zoning Regulations and Community Design Guidelines.
2.0 SITE AND PROJECT INFORMATION
The project site is on the east side of Broad Street, about 150 feet south of Chorro Street, in a
Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zone, on a Nonconforming Lot (due to substandard area and
width). It was previously developed with a single-family dwelling, now demolished, and a
replacement dwelling is under construction. There are no significant natural features on the site.
The proposed project replaces the original (demolished) dwelling and adds a third story to the
building, resulting in a three-story single-family residence. More detailed information about the
Figure 1: Original design (ARCMI 29-13) approved June, 2012
Figure 2: Modified design, reviewed by ARC June 20, 2016
ARC2 - 2
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 3
site, setting, and project design is provided in the June 20th, 2016 staff report prepared for the
project (Attachment 5).
3.0 PROJECT EVALUATION
3.1 Changes in response to direction
Plans for this project were reviewed for consistency with the General Plan, development standards
in the City’s Zoning Regulations, and the City’s Community Design Guidelines (see June 20th
ARC Agenda Report, Attachment 5). The overall project design remains the same, with changes
made in response to the directional items provided to the applicant by the ARC to address
inconsistencies with several standards and guidelines. This report discusses and evaluates those
changes in Section 4.0 (Response to Directional Items) below.
3.2 Changes to northerly wall surface
A significant change has been made in the detailing of the northerly building wall surface. Semi-
open balcony railing on the second level and clear glass railing on the third level have been
replaced with solid wall railing and an extensive application of horizontal redwood slats across
three wall surfaces. At the building corners, the slats extend from the second level up to the third
level, creating a box form around these wall surfaces (see Figure 4).
Figure 4: North building elevation: before (left); modified (right)
Figure 3: Current design, revised in response to ARC direction
ARC2 - 3
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 4
As depicted in the character renderings, the overall effect appears rather heavy, particularly at the
corners, and monotonous in its extent along the entire wall surface. Community Design Guidelines
address the articulation of building elevations:
The City encourages well-articulated, but not cluttered building elevations. Large
roof and wall planes unrelieved by shadow or texture interest are generally not
acceptable. However, too many elevation details can overwhelm, and appear
awkward, gaudy, and/or chaotic. (§ 2.2 (B))
A condition of approval is suggested (Condition 2) in the draft resolution (Attachment 1), requiring
that the use of redwood slats on these elevations be substantially reduced and limited to sparing
use as an accent material and for required deck or balcony railing where necessary, and that the
columns they form at the building corners be eliminated.
4.0 RESPONSE TO DIRECTIONAL ITEMS
Directional Item 1: Reduce building height
In its previous design, the building was 38 feet in height, exceeding the maximum 35-foot height
limit for the C-N Zone. The Commission provided direction on reducing building height:
Reduce the height of the building to comply with the building height limit
applicable to the C-N Zone, and to achieve consistency with the scale and height
of adjacent buildings and those in the immediate neighborhood. If the third floor
is retained, modify its design and its relationship to the building's lower levels to
better integrate it into the form and character of the building.
The maximum height of the building has been
lowered to 35 feet, the maximum building height
permitted in the C-N Zone (Zoning §17.16.040,
Table 5.5). The third floor has been retained and
integrated into the overall form and character of
the building by carrying the stucco wall and
overhang up through the third floor (see Figure 5).
While the resulting form will be somewhat larger
than adjacent structures and others currently
existing in the vicinity, the Commission noted in
its June 20th discussion that the building is
consistent with the height and scale expected of
new development in the area, particularly within
the Railroad District area to the east. As an
example, the Junction, a recently approved mixed-
use project 225 feet to the east of the site, is three stories and 35 feet in height.
Figure 5: South elevation
ARC2 - 4
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 5
Directional Item 2: Reduce the height of privacy walls and provide additional visual interest
A 10-foot high solid, unrelieved block privacy wall extends around the southerly and easterly
boundaries of the site, in excess of the 6-foot height limit for walls and fences within Other Yards
(Zoning § 17.16.050 (B) (2)). The Commission provided direction on the height of the wall and
the need for additional visual interest:
Reduce the height of the block privacy wall to conform to the maximum height
limits described in Zoning Regulations § 17.16.050 (A). Between the dwelling and
car wash, the wall may be taller, not to exceed 10 feet in height, to provide
additional screening for noise reduction and privacy.
The height of the “10’ Block Privacy Wall” has not been lowered (see Site Plan, Sheet AR-0.1,
Note N32 04 A3). The wall still exceeds the 6-foot height limit for walls and fences within Other
Yards. No additional visual interest has been provided. Two conditions of approval (Conditions 3
and 4) have been included in the draft resolution (Attachment 1) to address this concern. They call
for elimination of the non-conforming sections of the wall (in excess of 6 feet in height), except
where the dwelling is adjacent to the car wash, where the wall may be 10 feet high to provide
additional screening for noise reduction and privacy. They also require that design elements, such
as texture variations, shallow pilasters, or offsets be employed to provide visual interest to the wall.
Directional Item 3: Reduce the use of metal siding as an exterior material.
The previous project design included extensive use of patterned metal siding on the southerly
building wall, which did not enhance compatibility, continuity, or harmony with the qualities of
the surrounding neighborhood, where wood and plaster are the predominant materials. Direction
was provided on the use of metal siding:
Substantially reduce the use of the patterned metal siding on building walls, using
it sparingly as an accent material that is complementary to the wood and plaster
surfaces, and not as a primary surface material. Wood and masonry materials
that enhance the compatibility, continuity, and harmony between the project and
the surrounding neighborhood are encouraged, for consistency.
Patterned metal siding has been entirely removed from the design of the building walls. Smooth
stucco now extends the full height of the building, with redwood screening providing a
complementary accent.
Directional Item 4: Herald the entry
The entry, as proposed, was found to be too subtle, and not consistent with design guidance
encouraging a clearly visible entry providing a transition between the streetscape and a project’s
indoor private spaces. Direction was provided on improving the entry area:
Design the entry to the building to draw attention to, and highlight, the entry
area, and to provide a transition into the interior of the site, consistent with
Community Design Guidelines § 5.5 (A.3).
ARC2 - 5
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 6
Character renderings of the revised project design depict a semi-open horizontally-oriented wood
fence section composed of spaced redwood slats at the building entry, with a wood entry door
recessed into the entry space (see Figure 6). This modified design draws attention to this area, and
it “reads” much more clearly as a point of entry to the building, while providing the desired privacy
and noise attenuation. It also ties the entry into the overall design by echoing the pattern of the
wood screen on the south building wall.
5.0 CONCLUSION
Changes made to the design of the project have addressed all of the Commission’s directional
items, apart from direction regarding the block wall, which is addressed by suggested conditions
of project approval. Similarly, a condition of approval is suggested to address the use of redwood
slat detailing on the northerly building elevations. With those changes and conditions, staff finds
that the project conforms to applicable development standards and is consistent with the City’s
Community Design Guidelines, as set out in the attached draft resolution.
6.0 CONCURRENCES
Project plans have been reviewed by the Building & Safety Division, and the Fire, Public Works,
and Utilities Departments. Comments from these departments have been incorporated into the draft
resolution as conditions of approval and code compliance notes.
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
7.1 Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the City’s General Plan,
Zoning Regulations, or Community Design Guidelines.
7.2 Continue the project to a date uncertain with the directional items
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity Map
3. Project Plans
4. Prior Approvals (A & ARCMI 29-12)
5. ARC Agenda Report and Minutes (June 20, 2016)
Included in Commission member portfolio: Project plans
Figure 6: Original entry design (left); revised entry (right)
ARC2 - 6
RESOLUTION NO. ####-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL TO THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A NEW THREE-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING, INCLUDING AN
EXCEPTION FROM FENCE HEIGHT LIMITS, AT 2102 BROAD STREET
(NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-N) ZONE; FILE #ARCH-2764-2016)
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director granted approval for the
construction of a two-story addition to the front of an existing single story residence at 2102
Broad Street on June 22, 2012, under application ARCMI 29-12; Sam Clemons, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on June 20, 2016, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application
ARCH-2764-2016, Samuel Clemons, applicant, to consider a modification of the design
approved under ARCMI 29-12, and continued consideration of the project to a future date,
providing direction about modifications necessary to conform to applicable development
standards and to achieve consistency with the City’s Community Design Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on September 12, 2016, for the purpose of reviewing the revised project
design; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has
duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission
of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to application ARCH-2764-2016, modifying application ARCMI 29-13, based on the
following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the policies of the City’s General Plan
applicable to development in the Neighborhood Commercial area. The proposed dwelling
replaces an existing dwelling on the site. It has been designed to be compatible with the
character of the neighborhood, as required by Policy 2.3.9 (Compatible Development) of the
Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan, to conform to applicable development
standards, and to be consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines. An exception
allowing greater height for a portion of the proposed block wall enhances compatibility
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 7
Resolution No. ARC ####-16 Page 2
2102 Broad; ARCH-2764-2016
between the proposed dwelling and the adjacent car wash by providing privacy for the
occupants, and noise and visual separation, while avoiding an undesirable barrier wall that
would isolate the project, as directed by Policy 2.3.11 (Residential Project Objections) of the
Land Use Element.
2. As conditioned, the project conforms to the standards and limitations set forth in the City’s
Zoning Regulations. The density of development is within the allowable limit, the structure is
set back from property lines to provide adequate separation, air circulation, and solar
exposure, and required parking is provided in an appropriate location on the site and in
conformance to minimum dimensions.
3. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the City’s Community Design
Guidelines (CDG) applicable to residential development. At three stories in height, and using
smooth stucco and wood as predominant surface materials, it has been designed to be
compatible in scale and character with existing adjacent buildings and those in the immediate
neighborhood (CDG § 5.3 (A)), and is also compatible with the scale of development in the
Railroad District area adjacent, to the east, of the site.
4. As conditioned, an exception to height standards for fences and walls (Zoning Regulations
§ 17.16.050 (F)) is appropriate. Additional wall height is necessary for a portion of the
proposed block privacy wall, to provide privacy and noise separation between the proposed
dwelling and the adjacent existing car wash (Condition 3). No public purpose would be
served by strict compliance with the fence and wall height limits, as the exception allows a
minor 4-foot increase in wall height over a limited portion of the privacy wall. There is also a
landscape planter area on the car wash side of the wall that provides for partial screening of
the wall by landscaping.
5. The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). It involves construction of a single-family residence, a small structure,
as described in CEQA Guidelines § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures).
SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to application ARCH-2764-2016, with incorporation of the following conditions and
code compliance notes:
Conditions
Planning
1. Conformance to approved plans. Final project design and construction drawings submitted
for a building permit shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by
the ARC. A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a
building permit that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as
Sheet Number 2. Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 8
Resolution No. ARC ####-16 Page 3
2102 Broad; ARCH-2764-2016
requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping,
or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review
Commission, as deemed appropriate.
2. Redwood slats on building elevations. The north, west, and east building elevations shall be
modified by substantially reducing the use of redwood slats to avoid overwhelming the wall
surfaces. Use of the redwood slats shall be limited in their application as an accent material
that is complementary to the building’s cement plaster surfaces and wood accent details, and
for required deck or balcony railing where necessary, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director. The columns formed at the building corners by the
redwood slats shall be eliminated.
3. Privacy wall – Height. The proposed block privacy wall shall be limited to 6 feet in height, in
conformance with Zoning Regulations § 17.16.050, except for the portion of the wall
between the proposed dwelling and the adjacent car wash.
4. Privacy wall – Visual interest. The proposed block privacy wall shall provide additional
visual interest, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, by incorporation
of appropriate decorative techniques or features, such as texture variations or additional
articulation using shallow pilasters or offsets.
Public Works
5. Projects involving the construction of new structures, the addition of dwelling units, or the
substantial remodel of existing structures requires that complete frontage improvements be
installed or that existing improvements be upgraded per city standard. (SLOMC 12.16.050)
6. The building plan submittal shall show the existing driveway approach to be altered or
upgraded to comply with current standards. Current city engineering standards and ADA
standards require a 4’ accessible sidewalk extension behind the ramp.
7. The building plan submittal shall show the location, extent and nature of all proposed site
retaining walls or wall and fence combinations.
8. The building plan submittal must include a complete site utility plan. All existing and
proposed utilities along with utility company meters must be shown. Existing underground
and overhead services must be shown along with any proposed alterations or upgrades.
Services to the new structures must be underground. All work in the public right-of-way
must be shown or noted.
9. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage and topo plan. The
grading and drainage plan shall show existing structures and grades located within 15’ of the
property lines in accordance with the grading ordinance. The plan shall consider historic
offsite drainage tributary to this property that may need to be conveyed along with the
improved on-site drainage. This development will alter and/or increase the storm water
runoff from this site. The improved or altered drainage shall be directed to the street and not
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 9
Resolution No. ARC ####-16 Page 4
2102 Broad; ARCH-2764-2016
across adjoining property lines unless the drainage is conveyed within recorded easements or
existing waterways.
10. The building plan submittal must show one additional street tree in a tree well in the
sidewalk, as required by the City’s Engineering Standards. The city arborist must approve
tree species and planting requirements. Street trees are required at a rate of one 15-gallon
street tree for each 35 linear feet of frontage.
11. Tree protection measures must be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The
City Arborist must review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to
commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist must approve
any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of trees. A
city-approved arborist must complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures
must be shown or noted on the building plans. Contact the City Arborist at 781-7023 to
review and to establish any required preservation measures to be included with the building
permit submittal.
Utilities
12. The property’s existing sewer lateral to the point of connection at the City main must pass a
pipeline video inspection (visual inspection of the interior of the pipeline), including repair or
replacement, as part of the project. The pipeline video inspection shall be submitted during
the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the Utilities Department
prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Additional information is provided below related to
this requirement:
a. The pipeline video inspection shall be submitted on USB drive and shall be in color.
b. The inspection shall be of adequate resolution in order to display pipe.
c. Material submitted shall include the project address and a scaled plan of the building and
the lateral location to the connection at the City sewer main.
d. The inspection shall include tracking of the pipeline length (in feet) from the start of the
inspection to the connection at the City sewer main.
e. It is optional to provide audio on the report to explain the location, date of inspection, and
pipeline condition observations.
Indemnification
13. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 10
Resolution No. ARC ####-16 Page 5
2102 Broad; ARCH-2764-2016
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and City shall fully cooperate in the
defense against an Indemnified Claim.
Code Compliance Notes
Building & Safety
1. The scope of work constitutes new construction of a single family residence and shall be
identified as such at the time of building permit application submittal.
2. Construction of the proposed dwelling must comply with 2013 Building Code § § 705A and
706A regarding Roofing and Vents.
Fire
3. This project must comply with the partial requirements of the 2013 California Residential
Code, Section 327, regarding materials and construction methods for exterior wildfire
exposure. Cut sheets for any proposed attic, eve, or sub-floor vents must be provided with
final plans submitted for construction permits to complete this project. All vents must be
constructed from noncombustible materials.
4. Final plans submitted for construction permits to complete this project must show a Class-A
fire-rated roof assembly, and must show that all exterior siding and eves will be non-
combustible.
5. The Title Sheet of final plans must note that the building will require an NFPA 13-D fire
sprinkler system. As such, the water meter may require upsizing.
On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner _____________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of September, 2016.
_____________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 11
C-S-H
PF-H
C-S-H
C-N
R-2
R-2
C-N
C-N
C-N
C-N
R-2
C-R-SFR-2
PF
C-N
C-N
B
R
O
A
D
SA
N
T
A
B
A
R
B
A
R
A
BRANCH
CH
O
R
R
O
VICINITY MAP ARCH-2764-20162102 Broad St ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
ARC2 - 12
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
-
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
S
h
e
e
t
A
R
-
T
-
1
:
C
o
l
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
V
i
e
w
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
3
AR
-
T
-
1
Ti
t
l
e
S
h
e
e
t
10
1
1
5
ar
-
t
-
1
t
i
t
l
e
s
h
e
e
t
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
--
-
-
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
M
a
p
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Ow
n
e
r
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
Ad
d
r
e
s
s
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
Ap
n
00
3
-
7
4
8
-
0
2
8
ZO
N
E
:
C-
N
(
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
c
o
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
)
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
:
R3
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
T
y
p
e
:
VB
LO
T
S
I
Z
E
:
.1
1
a
c
.
(
4
,
8
3
2
s
q
f
t
)
LO
T
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
:
Al
l
o
w
e
d
=
75
%
m
a
x
(
3
,
6
2
4
s
q
f
t
)
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
=
2,
4
7
7
s
q
f
t
SE
T
B
A
C
K
S
:
Fr
o
n
t
=
5'
Si
d
e
=
5'
Ba
c
k
=
5'
HE
I
G
H
T
:
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
=
35
'
(
s
t
e
p
p
e
d
w
i
t
h
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
e
e
el
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
de
p
i
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
h
e
i
g
h
t
)
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
=
3
5
'
PA
R
K
I
N
G
:
Re
q
u
i
r
e
d
=
2
s
p
a
c
e
s
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
=
1
(
E
)
g
a
r
a
g
e
+
2
(
N
)
g
a
r
a
g
e
s
=
3
Wo
r
k
o
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
w
i
l
l
o
c
c
u
r
u
n
d
e
r
s
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
.
T
h
e
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
w
o
r
k
un
d
e
r
t
h
i
s
p
e
r
m
i
t
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
i
s
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
t
o
a
s
P
h
a
s
e
2
.
S
e
e
b
e
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
de
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
RE
L
A
T
E
D
W
O
R
K
(
n
o
t
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
i
s
p
e
r
m
i
t
r
e
v
i
e
w
)
:
1.
P
h
a
s
e
1
:
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
1
,
8
6
8
s
f
t
w
o
s
t
o
r
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
as
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
S
L
O
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
#
2
7
7
7
7
2.
A
s
b
e
s
t
o
s
A
b
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
:
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
o
f
A
s
b
e
s
t
o
s
c
o
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
i
n
t
h
e
(E
)
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
b
y
a
l
i
c
e
n
s
e
d
a
b
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
3.
D
e
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
:
d
e
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
6
0
7
s
f
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
u
n
d
e
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
#
P
L
D
E
M
O
-
1
8
4
7
-
2
0
1
5
SC
O
P
E
O
F
W
O
R
K
T
H
I
S
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
:
1.
P
h
a
s
e
2
:
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
2
,
2
0
3
s
f
3
s
t
o
r
y
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
(E
)
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
o
b
e
d
e
m
o
l
i
s
h
e
d
(
s
e
e
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
w
o
r
k
)
.
T
h
i
s
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
w
i
l
l
be
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
P
h
a
s
e
1
(
s
e
e
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
w
o
r
k
)
t
o
f
o
r
m
a
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
i
n
g
l
e
Fa
m
i
l
y
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
.
P
h
a
s
e
2
w
i
l
l
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
t
h
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
b
e
l
o
w
.
S
e
e
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
A
r
e
a
C
a
l
c
s
h
e
e
t
T
1
f
o
r
a
d
e
t
a
i
l
e
d
l
i
s
t
i
n
g
o
f
s
p
a
c
e
s
a
n
d
a
r
e
a
s
.
a.
2
c
a
r
G
a
r
a
g
e
,
E
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
,
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
b.
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
M
a
s
t
e
r
S
u
i
t
e
c.
3
r
d
f
l
o
o
r
L
i
v
i
n
g
,
K
i
t
c
h
e
n
,
D
i
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
d
e
c
k
Sh
e
e
t
I
n
d
e
x
Sh
e
e
t
Nu
m
b
e
r
Sh
e
e
t
T
i
t
l
e
Ti
t
l
e
S
h
e
e
t
AR
-
1
.
1
1
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
S
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
P
l
a
n
Si
t
e
AR
-
T
-
1
AR
-
1
.
2
2
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
S
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
P
l
a
n
AR
-
1
.
3
3
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
S
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
P
l
a
n
AR
-
2
.
2
E
a
s
t
&
W
e
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
AR
-
0
.
1
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
Ar
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
A
r
e
a
C
a
l
c
.
AR
-
2
.
1
N
o
r
t
h
&
S
o
u
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
CB
-
0
.
1
C
o
l
o
r
B
o
a
r
d
Co
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
L
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
P
l
a
n
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
Ju
n
e
2
2
,
2
0
1
2
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Re
v
i
e
w
o
f
t
w
o
-
s
t
o
r
y
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
f
r
o
n
t
o
f
a
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
i
n
g
l
e
-
s
t
o
r
y
,
s
i
n
g
l
e
-
f
a
m
i
l
y
re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
De
a
r
M
r
.
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
:
On
J
u
n
e
2
2
,
2
0
1
2
,
I
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
d
y
o
u
r
p
l
a
n
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
a
t
w
o
-
s
t
o
r
y
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
f
r
o
n
t
o
f
a
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
si
n
g
l
e
-
s
t
o
r
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
a
t
2
1
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
i
n
t
h
e
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
(
C
-
N
)
z
o
n
e
.
Th
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
s
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
1
,
6
1
5
s
q
u
a
r
e
-
f
o
o
t
,
t
w
o
-
s
t
o
r
y
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
f
r
o
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
60
7
s
q
u
a
r
e
-
f
o
o
t
,
o
n
e
-
b
e
d
r
o
o
m
s
i
n
g
l
e
-
f
a
m
i
l
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
.
T
h
e
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
of
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
i
n
g
l
e
-
f
a
m
i
l
y
re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
t
o
m
a
t
c
h
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
s
t
y
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
o
n
e
in
t
e
g
r
a
l
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
.
A
f
t
e
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
p
l
a
n
s
,
I
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
m
i
n
o
r
a
n
d
w
i
l
l
n
o
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
re
v
i
e
w
b
y
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
(
A
R
C
)
.
Y
o
u
r
p
l
a
n
s
a
r
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
,
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
an
d
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
:
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
s
1.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
w
i
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
d
e
t
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l
t
o
t
h
e
h
e
a
l
t
h
,
s
a
f
e
t
y
,
a
n
d
w
e
l
f
a
r
e
o
f
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
l
i
v
i
n
g
o
r
w
o
r
k
i
n
g
a
t
th
e
s
i
t
e
o
r
i
n
t
h
e
v
i
c
i
n
i
t
y
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
i
s
a
n
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
u
s
e
a
t
t
h
e
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
t
h
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
i
s
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
w
i
t
h
s
i
t
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
c
a
l
e
a
n
d
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
.
2.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
P
l
a
n
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
f
o
r
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
it
i
s
i
n
s
c
a
l
e
a
n
d
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
s
t
h
e
p
r
i
v
a
c
y
a
n
d
s
o
l
a
r
a
c
c
e
s
s
o
f
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
i
n
g
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
(
L
U
E
2
.
2
.
1
0
)
.
3.
A
s
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
e
d
,
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
i
s
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
i
n
s
c
a
l
e
,
s
i
t
i
n
g
,
d
e
t
a
i
l
i
n
g
,
c
o
l
o
r
,
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
w
i
t
h
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
n
t
h
e
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
.
4.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
i
t
i
s
a
n
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
a
l
l
s
i
d
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
n
d
d
e
s
i
g
n
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
.
5.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
Z
o
n
i
n
g
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
i
t
m
e
e
t
s
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
-
N
z
o
n
e
.
6.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
e
x
e
m
p
t
f
r
o
m
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
u
n
d
e
r
C
l
a
s
s
3
2
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
5
3
3
2
)
,
I
n
f
i
l
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
,
o
f
t
h
e
C
E
Q
A
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
.
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
1.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
h
a
l
l
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
b
y
U
s
e
P
e
r
m
i
t
A
2
9
-
1
2
.
2.
A
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
c
h
e
c
k
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
t
h
a
t
i
s
i
n
f
u
l
l
c
o
n
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
p
l
a
n
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
a
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
.
3.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
a
n
d
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
c
o
l
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
l
i
g
h
t
e
n
e
d
t
o
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
w
i
t
h
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
i
n
g
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
.
P
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
a
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
h
a
l
l
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
a
n
d
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
ex
t
e
r
i
o
r
c
o
l
o
r
s
a
m
p
l
e
f
o
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
a
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
.
4.
P
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
a
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
h
a
l
l
c
a
l
l
o
u
t
t
h
e
c
o
l
o
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
o
f
a
l
l
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
su
r
f
a
c
e
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
n
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
C
o
l
o
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
a
s
s
h
o
w
n
o
n
th
e
c
o
l
o
r
s
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
b
o
a
r
d
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
M
i
n
o
r
o
r
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
e
x
c
e
p
t
a
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
#
3
a
b
o
v
e
.
5.
P
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
a
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
h
a
l
l
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
/
o
r
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
de
t
a
i
l
s
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
.
A
l
l
p
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
s
h
o
w
n
o
n
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
t
h
e
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
o
f
o
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
.
6.
A
n
y
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
s
h
o
w
n
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
a
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
do
w
n
w
a
r
d
-
f
a
c
i
n
g
,
f
u
l
l
y
r
e
c
e
s
s
e
d
,
a
n
d
s
h
i
e
l
d
e
d
t
o
a
v
o
i
d
l
i
g
h
t
t
r
e
s
p
a
s
s
a
n
d
a
d
v
e
r
s
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
t
o
vi
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
n
i
g
h
t
s
k
y
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
7
.
2
3
o
f
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
My
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
i
s
f
i
n
a
l
u
n
l
e
s
s
a
p
p
e
a
l
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
i
n
1
0
c
a
l
e
n
d
a
r
d
a
y
s
o
f
th
e
d
a
t
e
o
f
t
h
i
s
l
e
t
t
e
r
.
A
n
y
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
g
g
r
i
e
v
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
m
a
y
f
i
l
e
a
n
a
p
p
e
a
l
.
A
p
p
e
a
l
f
o
r
m
s
a
r
e
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
i
n
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
.
T
h
e
f
e
e
f
o
r
f
i
l
i
n
g
a
n
a
p
p
e
a
l
i
s
$
2
6
1
a
n
d
m
u
s
t
ac
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
t
h
e
a
p
p
e
a
l
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
f
i
r
s
t
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
Re
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
d
a
t
e
.
I
f
a
n
a
p
p
e
a
l
i
s
f
i
l
e
d
,
y
o
u
w
i
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
b
y
m
a
i
l
o
f
t
h
e
d
a
t
e
a
n
d
t
i
m
e
of
t
h
e
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
.
Th
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r
'
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
e
x
p
i
r
e
s
a
f
t
e
r
t
h
r
e
e
y
e
a
r
s
i
f
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
n
o
t
st
a
r
t
e
d
.
O
n
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
t
h
e
e
x
p
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r
ma
y
g
r
a
n
t
a
s
i
n
g
l
e
,
o
n
e
-
y
e
a
r
e
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
.
If
y
o
u
h
a
v
e
a
n
y
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
,
o
r
i
f
y
o
u
n
e
e
d
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
,
p
l
e
a
s
e
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
M
a
r
c
u
s
C
a
r
l
o
n
i
a
t
(
8
0
5
)
78
1
-
7
1
7
6
.
Si
n
c
e
r
e
l
y
,
Pa
m
R
i
c
c
i
,
A
I
C
P
Se
n
i
o
r
P
l
a
n
n
e
r
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
cc
:
C
o
u
n
t
y
o
f
S
L
O
A
s
s
e
s
s
o
r
'
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
Ar
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
C
h
a
i
r
Br
y
a
n
R
i
d
l
e
y
P.
O
.
B
o
x
1
8
1
0
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
6
AR
-
1
.
4
R
o
o
f
P
l
a
n
LP
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
4
5'-0"
5'-0"
9
'
-
8
1
2
"
6
"
4
8
'
-
5
3
4
"
13
'
-
4
"
1
2
"
5
'
-
0
"
1
4
'
-
0
"
1
0
'
-
8
"
1
1
'
-
4
"
1
4
'
-
8
"
6r
@
7
"
=
3
'
-
6
"
A-
0
.
1
4
A-
4
.
1
3.
2
Fire H
y
d
r
a
n
t
± 115
'
Fire H
y
d
r
a
n
t
± 240
'
D0
2
2
1
A
1
N3
3
4
0
A
1
E3
3
7
0
A
1
R3
3
5
1
A
1
E0
2
2
1
B
1
E3
3
1
2
A
4
E0
2
2
0
A
1
E3
2
0
4
A
1
E0
2
2
1
A
2
N3
2
0
4
A
3
N3
2
9
0
P
1
E0
2
2
1
A
1
E0
1
0
2
A
1
E0
1
0
2
A
3
E0
2
2
1
B
2
N0
2
2
1
B
2
E0
1
0
2
A
3
D0
2
2
1
A
2
E0
1
0
2
A
4
N2
3
8
1
A
3
N2
3
8
1
A
2
N2
3
8
1
A
1
N3
2
9
0
P
1
N3
2
9
0
P
1
N1
3
1
1
P
1
N1
3
1
1
P
2
N3
2
1
4
A
1
AR
-
0
.
1
Si
t
e
P
l
a
n
10
1
1
5
ar
-
0
.
1
s
i
t
e
p
l
a
n
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
--
-
-
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
1
1/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
AR
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
DE
M
O
L
I
S
H
&
R
E
M
O
V
E
-
S
H
O
W
N
D
A
S
H
E
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
D
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
D0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
D0
2
2
1
A
1
-
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
U
N
D
E
R
D
E
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
PE
R
M
I
T
#
1
8
4
7
-
2
0
1
5
D0
2
2
1
A
2
-
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
O
U
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
U
N
D
E
R
D
E
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
PE
R
M
I
T
#
1
8
4
7
-
2
0
1
5
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
E
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
E0
1
-
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
E0
1
0
2
A
1
-
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
E0
1
0
2
A
3
-
(E
)
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
S
N
E
S
S
E0
1
0
2
A
4
-
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
A
S
H
I
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
:
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
T
E
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
E0
2
2
0
A
1
-
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
E0
2
2
1
A
1
-
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
E0
2
2
1
A
2
-
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
L
I
N
E
E0
2
2
1
B
1
-
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
P
E
R
P
E
R
M
I
T
2
7
7
7
7
,
S
H
O
W
N
W
I
T
H
L
I
G
H
T
SH
A
D
I
N
G
E0
2
2
1
B
2
-
L
I
N
E
O
F
D
E
C
K
A
B
O
V
E
P
E
R
P
E
R
M
I
T
2
7
7
7
7
E3
2
-
S
I
T
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
E3
2
0
4
A
1
-
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
8
"
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
W
A
L
L
E3
3
-
U
T
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
E3
3
1
2
A
4
-
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
1
"
W
A
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
E3
3
7
0
A
1
-
P
G
&
E
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
NE
W
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
N
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
N0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
-
N0
2
2
1
B
2
-
L
I
N
E
O
F
N
E
W
D
E
C
K
A
B
O
V
E
N1
3
-
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
-
N1
3
1
1
P
1
-
SW
I
M
S
P
A
,
S
E
E
P
O
O
L
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
N1
3
1
1
P
2
-
SW
I
M
S
P
A
E
Q
U
I
P
T
M
E
N
T
N2
3
-
H
V
A
C
-
N2
3
8
1
A
1
-
FU
J
I
T
S
U
A
O
U
3
6
R
L
X
F
Z
1
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
U
N
I
T
,
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
P
E
R
MA
N
U
F
A
C
T
U
R
E
R
S
I
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
.
N2
3
8
1
A
2
-
FU
J
I
T
S
U
A
O
U
2
4
R
L
X
F
Z
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
U
N
I
T
,
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
P
E
R
MA
N
U
F
A
C
T
U
R
E
R
S
I
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
.
N2
3
8
1
A
3
-
FU
J
I
T
S
U
A
O
U
1
2
R
L
F
C
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
U
N
I
T
,
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
P
E
R
MA
N
U
F
A
C
T
U
R
E
R
S
I
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
N3
2
-
S
I
T
E
N3
2
0
4
A
3
-
1
0
'
B
L
O
C
K
P
R
I
V
A
C
Y
W
A
L
L
N3
2
1
4
A
1
-
F
I
R
E
P
I
T
N3
2
9
0
P
1
-
PL
A
N
T
E
R
,
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
IN
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
N3
3
-
U
T
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
N3
3
4
0
A
1
-
N
E
W
G
A
S
M
E
T
E
R
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
-
S
H
O
W
N
D
A
S
H
E
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
R
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
R3
3
-
U
T
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
R3
3
5
1
A
1
-
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
A
S
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
,
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
5
ph
a
s
e
2
ph
a
s
e
1
ph
a
s
e
2
ph
a
s
e
1
11
22
33
44
abcd
66
55
abcd
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
44
7
s
q
.
f
t
.
55
s
q
.
f
t
.
31
s
q
.
f
t
.
38
s
q
.
f
t
.
38
s
q
.
f
t
.
38
s
q
.
f
t
.
70
s
q
.
f
t
.
50
s
q
.
f
t
.
23
2
s
q
.
f
t
.
18
0
s
q
.
f
t
.
76
s
q
.
f
t
.
gl
a
s
s
wa
s
h
e
r
wi
n
e
co
o
l
e
r
6'
-
0
"
7'
-
2
"
5'
-
2
"
6"
5'
-
6
"
1
'
-
0
"
6
'
-
4
"
7
'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
1'
-
2
"
22
'
-
8
"
11
'
-
6
"
7'
-
0
"
16
'
-
6
"
2
1
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
6
"
1
'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
13
'
-
0
"
7'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
7
'
-
4
"
1'
-
1
0
"
9'
-
0
"
1'
-
1
0
"
9'
-
0
"
1'
-
1
"
6'
-
0
"
2
1
'
-
8
"
4'
-
4
"
1
4
'
-
6
"
2
"
E0
2
2
1
B
1
AR
-
1
.
1
1s
t
F
l
o
o
r
Sc
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
P
l
a
n
10
1
1
5
ar
-
1
.
1
1
s
t
f
l
o
o
r
s
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
p
l
a
n
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
20
1
6
-
0
5
-
1
0
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
1
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
Sc
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
1
s
t
F
l
o
o
r
P
l
a
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
E
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
E0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
:
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
T
E
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
E0
2
2
1
B
1
-
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
P
E
R
P
E
R
M
I
T
2
7
7
7
7
,
S
H
O
W
N
W
I
T
H
L
I
G
H
T
SH
A
D
I
N
G
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
6
ph
a
s
e
2
ph
a
s
e
1
ph
a
s
e
2
ph
a
s
e
1
11
22
33
44
abcd
66
55
abcd
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
28
8
s
q
.
f
t
.
13
4
s
q
.
f
t
.
68
s
q
.
f
t
.
30
0
s
q
.
f
t
.
18
8
s
q
.
f
t
.
33
s
q
.
f
t
.
15
6
s
q
.
f
t
.
11
8
s
q
.
f
t
.
26
1
s
q
.
f
t
.
84
s
q
.
f
t
.
UP88
s
q
.
f
t
.
26
s
q
.
f
t
.
4'
-
0
"
16
'
-
6
"
7'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
4
"
3'
-
4
"
1'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
14
'
-
1
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
5
'
-
1
0
"
8
"
1
0
'
-
0
"
1
0
'
-
0
"
4
'
-
0
"
3'
-
4
"
1
'
-
0
"
6
'
-
6
"
1
4
'
-
6
"
7
'
-
0
"
4
'
-
0
"
35
'
-
0
"
7"
10
'
-
1
0
"
21
'
-
2
"
5'
-
1
"
11
'
-
0
"
12
'
-
6
"
2
9
'
-
0
"
5'
-
9
"
1
'
-
6
"
3
3
'
-
0
"
67
'
-
8
"
4'
-
4
"
6'
-
0
"
7"
10
'
-
4
"
6'
-
0
"
5
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
6
"
2
1
'
-
6
"
E0
2
2
1
B
1
N0
6
1
5
A
1
N0
6
4
0
A
1
N0
5
5
2
A
2
AR
-
1
.
2
2n
d
F
l
o
o
r
Sc
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
P
l
a
n
10
1
1
5
ar
-
1
.
2
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
s
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
p
l
a
n
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
20
1
6
-
0
5
-
1
0
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
(p
r
i
n
t
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
)
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
1
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
Sc
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
2
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
P
l
a
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
E
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
E0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
:
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
T
E
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
E0
2
2
1
B
1
-
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
P
E
R
P
E
R
M
I
T
2
7
7
7
7
,
S
H
O
W
N
W
I
T
H
L
I
G
H
T
SH
A
D
I
N
G
NE
W
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
N
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
N0
5
-
M
E
T
A
L
N0
5
5
2
A
2
-
ME
T
A
L
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
,
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
S
T
Y
L
E
W
I
T
H
O
W
N
E
R
.
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
+4
2
"
F
R
O
M
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
,
G
U
A
R
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
N
O
T
H
A
V
E
OP
E
N
I
N
G
S
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
T
O
T
H
E
R
E
Q
D
.
G
U
A
R
D
HT
.
W
H
I
C
H
A
L
L
O
W
P
A
S
S
A
G
E
O
F
A
4
"
D
I
A
.
S
P
H
E
R
E
.
N0
6
-
W
O
O
D
,
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
S
&
C
O
M
P
O
S
I
T
E
S
N0
6
1
5
A
1
-
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
D
E
C
K
I
N
G
A
S
S
E
L
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
O
W
N
E
R
N0
6
4
0
A
1
-
RE
D
W
O
O
D
S
L
A
T
S
C
R
E
E
N
W
/
M
A
H
O
G
A
N
Y
S
T
A
I
N
,
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
2.
1
/
A
-
4
.
1
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
7
11
22
33
44
abcd
66
55
abcd
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
23
4
s
q
.
f
t
.
24
6
s
q
.
f
t
.
72
s
q
.
f
t
.
70
s
q
.
f
t
.
35
0
s
q
.
f
t
.
13
5
s
q
.
f
t
.
4'
-
0
"
7'
-
6
"
9'
-
0
"
21
'
-
1
"
5'
-
9
"
4
'
-
4
"
1
5
'
-
6
"
20
'
-
6
"
26
'
-
1
"
5
'
-
0
"
1
3
'
-
1
1
"
7
'
-
6
"
3
1
'
-
6
"
67
'
-
8
"
1'
-
6
"
2
'
-
6
"
6'
-
0
"
7
'
-
6
"
2
'
-
6
"
1
'
-
0
"
3"
6'
-
1
"
3'
-
6
"
2'
-
5
"
16
'
-
8
"
67
'
-
8
"
7'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
19
'
-
5
"
2'
-
6
"
19
'
-
9
"
7'
-
6
"
2'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
9'
-
0
"
7
"
2
'
-
2
"
1
4
'
-
6
"
1
0
'
-
0
"
6
'
-
6
"
1
'
-
0
"
3'
-
4
"
3'
-
4
"
6
"
N2
2
1
4
A
1
N0
7
0
0
A
1
N0
6
1
5
A
1
N0
6
4
0
A
1
AR
-
1
.
3
3r
d
F
l
o
o
r
Sc
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
P
l
a
n
10
1
1
5
ar
-
1
.
3
3
r
d
f
l
o
o
r
s
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
p
l
a
n
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
20
1
6
-
0
5
-
1
0
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
1
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
Sc
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
3
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
P
l
a
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
NE
W
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
N
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
N0
6
-
W
O
O
D
,
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
S
&
C
O
M
P
O
S
I
T
E
S
N0
6
1
5
A
1
-
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
D
E
C
K
I
N
G
A
S
S
E
L
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
O
W
N
E
R
N0
6
4
0
A
1
-
RE
D
W
O
O
D
S
L
A
T
S
C
R
E
E
N
W
/
M
A
H
O
G
A
N
Y
S
T
A
I
N
,
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
2.
1
/
A
-
4
.
1
N0
7
-
T
H
E
R
M
A
L
&
M
O
I
S
T
U
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
-
N0
7
0
0
A
1
-
L
I
N
E
O
F
R
O
O
F
A
B
O
V
E
N2
2
-
P
L
U
M
B
I
N
G
-
N2
2
1
4
A
1
-
IN
F
I
N
I
T
Y
L
I
N
E
A
R
D
R
A
I
N
S
-
A
S
-
6
5
O
R
S
I
M
I
L
A
R
,
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
P
E
R
MA
N
U
F
A
C
T
U
R
E
R
S
I
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
8
11
22
33
44
abcd
66
55
abcd
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
4'
-
0
"
6
'
-
0
"
6
'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
N0
1
1
0
A
2
1/
4
:
1
2
N0
7
7
1
A
1
N0
7
3
1
A
1
1/
4
:
1
2
N0
1
1
0
A
1
N0
1
1
0
A
3
N0
7
7
1
B
1
N0
7
7
1
B
1
N0
7
7
1
C
1
N0
1
1
0
A
4
N0
1
1
0
A
3
N0
1
1
0
A
4
AR
-
1
.
4
Ro
o
f
P
l
a
n
10
1
1
5
ar
-
1
.
4
r
o
o
f
p
l
a
n
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
--
-
-
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
1
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
Ro
o
f
P
l
a
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
NE
W
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
N
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
N0
1
-
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N0
1
1
0
A
1
-
L
I
N
E
O
F
W
A
L
L
B
E
L
O
W
S
H
O
W
N
D
A
S
H
E
D
N0
1
1
0
A
2
-
PR
I
O
R
T
O
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
M
A
X
R
O
O
F
H
E
I
G
H
T
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
R
K
E
D
U
S
I
N
G
A
S
T
O
R
Y
P
O
L
E
A
N
D
V
E
R
I
F
I
E
D
B
Y
A
S
U
R
V
E
Y
O
R
N0
1
1
0
A
3
-
L
I
N
E
O
F
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
B
E
L
O
W
N0
1
1
0
A
4
-
L
I
N
E
O
F
L
O
W
E
R
W
A
L
L
A
T
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
O
F
F
S
E
T
N0
7
-
T
H
E
R
M
A
L
&
M
O
I
S
T
U
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
-
N0
7
3
1
A
1
-
BU
I
L
T
U
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
,
F
O
U
R
P
L
Y
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
A
P
P
L
I
E
D
M
E
M
B
R
A
N
E
SY
S
T
E
M
W
I
T
H
M
I
N
E
R
A
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
C
A
P
S
H
E
E
T
.
T
O
T
A
L
W
E
I
G
H
T
IN
C
L
U
D
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
:
2
6
0
L
B
S
/
S
Q
U
A
R
E
,
C
L
A
S
S
A
F
I
R
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
.
N0
7
7
1
A
1
-
G
U
T
T
E
R
N0
7
7
1
B
1
-
D
O
W
N
S
P
O
U
T
N0
7
7
1
C
1
-
R
A
I
N
D
I
V
E
R
T
E
R
S
T
R
I
P
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
1
9
A-
3
.
1
2.
6
A-
3
.
1
1.
2
5
A-
3
.
2
4.
4
+3
5
'
-
0
"
Ba
s
e
A
l
l
o
w
.
B
l
d
g
H
t
.
3
5
'
-
0
"
-1
'
-
0
"
Av
e
.
F
i
n
.
G
r
a
d
e
1
'
-
0
"
0'
-
0
"
To
p
o
f
(
E
)
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
S
l
a
b
N0
9
2
0
A
5
N0
9
2
0
A
1
N0
8
5
0
A
1
N0
8
1
0
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
5
N0
9
2
0
A
3
N0
2
2
1
A
2
N0
7
3
1
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
1
5'
-
0
"
1
1
'
-
0
"
+1
1
'
-
0
"
2n
d
F
F
1
2
'
-
0
"
+2
3
'
-
0
"
3r
d
F
F
8
'
-
3
"
N0
5
5
2
A
2
8'
-
6
"
Se
t
b
a
c
k
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
@
2
9
'
H
t
.
1'
-
3
"
N0
2
2
1
A
3
+3
1
'
-
3
"
T.
O
.
P
l
.
3
'
-
6
"
3
'
-
6
"
AR
-
2
.
1
No
r
t
h
&
S
o
u
t
h
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
10
1
1
5
ar
-
2
.
1
n
o
r
t
h
&
s
o
u
t
h
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
1
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
So
u
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
2
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
No
r
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
00
-
F
O
O
T
N
O
T
E
00
-
TH
E
S
E
N
O
T
E
S
H
A
V
E
B
E
E
N
G
E
N
E
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
P
A
R
T
O
F
A
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
MA
S
T
E
R
N
O
T
E
L
I
S
T
.
T
H
E
N
U
M
E
R
I
C
I
D
E
N
T
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
F
O
R
E
A
C
H
IN
D
I
V
I
D
U
A
L
N
O
T
E
I
S
U
N
I
Q
U
E
A
N
D
C
O
N
S
I
S
T
E
N
T
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
O
U
T
TH
E
S
E
T
.
N
O
T
A
L
L
N
O
T
E
S
A
P
P
E
A
R
O
N
E
A
C
H
S
H
E
E
T
.
NE
W
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
N
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
N0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
-
N0
2
2
1
A
2
-
MA
X
.
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
F
O
R
Z
O
N
E
C
-
N
P
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
OB
I
S
P
O
2
0
1
4
Z
O
N
I
N
G
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
N0
2
2
1
A
3
-
BA
L
C
O
N
Y
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
I
N
T
O
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
Y
A
R
D
A
L
L
O
W
E
D
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
SL
O
Z
O
N
I
N
G
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
2
0
.
D
.
5
.
B
N0
5
-
M
E
T
A
L
N0
5
5
2
A
2
-
ME
T
A
L
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
,
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
S
T
Y
L
E
W
I
T
H
O
W
N
E
R
.
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
+4
2
"
F
R
O
M
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
,
G
U
A
R
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
N
O
T
H
A
V
E
OP
E
N
I
N
G
S
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
T
O
T
H
E
R
E
Q
D
.
G
U
A
R
D
HT
.
W
H
I
C
H
A
L
L
O
W
P
A
S
S
A
G
E
O
F
A
4
"
D
I
A
.
S
P
H
E
R
E
.
N0
5
7
3
A
1
-
GU
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
,
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
S
T
Y
L
E
W
I
T
H
O
W
N
E
R
,
W
I
T
H
A
T
O
P
RA
I
L
4
2
"
M
E
A
S
U
R
E
D
V
E
R
T
I
C
A
L
L
Y
A
B
O
V
E
T
H
E
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
WI
T
H
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
S
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
T
O
T
H
E
R
E
Q
D
.
GU
A
R
D
H
T
.
W
H
I
C
H
D
O
N
O
T
A
L
L
O
W
P
A
S
S
A
G
E
O
F
A
4
"
D
I
A
.
SP
H
E
R
E
N0
6
-
W
O
O
D
,
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
S
&
C
O
M
P
O
S
I
T
E
S
N0
6
4
0
A
1
-
RE
D
W
O
O
D
S
L
A
T
S
C
R
E
E
N
W
/
M
A
H
O
G
A
N
Y
S
T
A
I
N
,
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
2.
1
/
A
-
4
.
1
N0
7
-
T
H
E
R
M
A
L
&
M
O
I
S
T
U
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
-
N0
7
3
1
A
1
-
BU
I
L
T
U
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
,
F
O
U
R
P
L
Y
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
A
P
P
L
I
E
D
M
E
M
B
R
A
N
E
SY
S
T
E
M
W
I
T
H
M
I
N
E
R
A
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
C
A
P
S
H
E
E
T
.
T
O
T
A
L
W
E
I
G
H
T
IN
C
L
U
D
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
:
2
6
0
L
B
S
/
S
Q
U
A
R
E
,
C
L
A
S
S
A
F
I
R
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
.
N0
8
-
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
S
-
N0
8
1
0
A
1
-
D
O
O
R
A
S
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
D
N0
8
5
0
A
1
-
W
I
N
D
O
W
A
S
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
D
N0
9
-
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
-
N0
9
2
0
A
1
-
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
3
C
O
A
T
C
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
S
T
E
R
:
S
T
E
E
L
T
R
O
W
L
SM
O
O
T
H
F
I
N
I
S
H
,
O
N
S
E
L
F
F
U
R
R
I
N
G
M
E
T
A
L
L
A
T
H
O
V
E
R
T
Y
V
E
K
ST
U
C
C
O
W
R
A
P
O
V
E
R
P
L
Y
W
O
O
D
.
W
H
E
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
O
V
E
R
WO
O
D
B
A
S
E
S
H
E
A
T
H
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
A
S
E
C
O
N
D
"
I
N
T
E
R
V
E
N
I
N
G
LA
Y
E
R
"
O
F
T
Y
V
E
K
W
A
T
E
R
-
R
E
S
I
S
T
I
V
E
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
O
R
G
R
A
D
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
P
A
P
E
R
.
W
H
E
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
O
V
E
R
M
E
T
A
L
L
A
T
H
O
R
W
I
R
E
LA
T
H
S
T
U
C
C
O
T
O
B
E
A
P
P
L
I
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
H
R
E
E
C
O
A
T
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
PE
R
C
R
C
R
7
0
3
.
6
.
2
.
C
O
L
O
R
:
"
W
O
O
D
S
M
O
K
E
"
G
L
I
D
D
E
N
G
L
N
4
0
N0
9
2
0
A
3
-
S
C
O
R
E
P
L
A
S
T
E
R
N0
9
2
0
A
5
-
SP
A
C
E
D
W
O
O
D
S
L
A
T
S
,
O
V
E
R
4
'
X
8
'
S
M
O
O
T
H
C
E
M
E
N
T
B
O
A
R
D
,
OV
E
R
T
Y
V
E
K
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
W
R
A
P
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
2
0
a
b
c
d
N0
8
5
0
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
5
E0
7
3
1
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
1
E0
2
2
1
A
4
+3
5
'
-
0
"
Ba
s
e
A
l
l
o
w
.
B
l
d
g
H
t
.
3
5
'
-
0
"
-1
'
-
0
"
Av
e
.
F
i
n
.
G
r
a
d
e
0'
-
0
"
To
p
o
f
(
E
)
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
S
l
a
b
1
'
-
0
"
1
1
'
-
0
"
1
2
'
-
0
"
+2
3
'
-
0
"
3r
d
F
F
+1
1
'
-
0
"
2n
d
F
F
5'
-
0
"
+3
1
'
-
3
"
T.
O
.
P
l
.
8
'
-
3
"
a
N0
5
5
2
A
2
N0
9
2
0
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
1
N0
9
2
4
A
1
N0
1
1
0
A
2
E0
2
2
1
A
4
N0
7
7
1
A
1
N0
9
2
0
A
5
-1
'
-
0
"
Av
e
.
F
i
n
.
G
r
a
d
e
0'
-
0
"
To
p
o
f
(
E
)
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
S
l
a
b
3
5
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
0
"
+2
3
'
-
0
"
3r
d
F
F
+3
1
'
-
3
"
T.
O
.
P
l
.
+1
1
'
-
0
"
2n
d
F
F
5'
-
0
"
1
1
'
-
0
"
1
2
'
-
0
"
8
'
-
3
"
Ba
s
e
A
l
l
o
w
.
B
l
d
g
H
t
.
Re
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
A
v
g
.
N
a
t
.
G
r
a
d
e
AR
-
2
.
2
Ea
s
t
&
W
e
s
t
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
10
1
1
5
ar
-
2
.
2
e
a
s
t
&
w
e
s
t
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
d
w
g
--
-
-
Cl
e
m
o
n
s
Re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Sa
m
C
l
e
m
o
n
s
co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
cl
i
e
n
t
:
sh
e
e
t
n
a
m
e
:
sh
e
e
t
n
u
m
b
e
r
:
da
t
e
/
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
:
fi
l
e
:
jo
b
n
o
:
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
o
:
CO
P
Y
R
I
G
H
T
--
-
-
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
9
3
4
0
1
--
-
-
--
-
-
pl
b
d
-
2
1
4
5
-
2
0
1
5
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
21
0
2
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Ca
--
-
-
1
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
Ea
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
2
1/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
We
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
2'
4
'08
'
20
1
6
-
0
2
-
1
1
/
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
l
A
r
c
h
R
e
v
i
e
w
20
1
6
-
0
6
-
2
9
A
R
M
o
d
R
e
v
f
o
r
A
R
C
M
t
g
RE
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
00
-
F
O
O
T
N
O
T
E
00
-
TH
E
S
E
N
O
T
E
S
H
A
V
E
B
E
E
N
G
E
N
E
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
P
A
R
T
O
F
A
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
MA
S
T
E
R
N
O
T
E
L
I
S
T
.
T
H
E
N
U
M
E
R
I
C
I
D
E
N
T
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
F
O
R
E
A
C
H
IN
D
I
V
I
D
U
A
L
N
O
T
E
I
S
U
N
I
Q
U
E
A
N
D
C
O
N
S
I
S
T
E
N
T
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
O
U
T
TH
E
S
E
T
.
N
O
T
A
L
L
N
O
T
E
S
A
P
P
E
A
R
O
N
E
A
C
H
S
H
E
E
T
.
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
E
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
E0
2
-
S
I
T
E
S
U
R
V
E
Y
:
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
T
E
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
E0
2
2
1
A
4
-
MA
X
.
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
F
O
R
Z
O
N
E
C
-
N
P
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
OB
I
S
P
O
2
0
1
4
Z
O
N
I
N
G
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
E0
7
-
T
H
E
R
M
A
L
&
M
O
I
S
T
U
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
E0
7
3
1
A
1
-
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
O
O
F
NE
W
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
S
H
O
W
N
S
O
L
I
D
(
N
O
T
E
S
W
/
N
P
R
E
F
I
X
)
-
N0
1
-
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N0
1
1
0
A
2
-
PR
I
O
R
T
O
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
M
A
X
R
O
O
F
H
E
I
G
H
T
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
R
K
E
D
U
S
I
N
G
A
S
T
O
R
Y
P
O
L
E
A
N
D
V
E
R
I
F
I
E
D
B
Y
A
S
U
R
V
E
Y
O
R
N0
5
-
M
E
T
A
L
N0
5
5
2
A
2
-
ME
T
A
L
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
,
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
S
T
Y
L
E
W
I
T
H
O
W
N
E
R
.
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
+4
2
"
F
R
O
M
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
,
G
U
A
R
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
N
O
T
H
A
V
E
OP
E
N
I
N
G
S
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
W
A
L
K
I
N
G
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
T
O
T
H
E
R
E
Q
D
.
G
U
A
R
D
HT
.
W
H
I
C
H
A
L
L
O
W
P
A
S
S
A
G
E
O
F
A
4
"
D
I
A
.
S
P
H
E
R
E
.
N0
7
-
T
H
E
R
M
A
L
&
M
O
I
S
T
U
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
-
N0
7
7
1
A
1
-
G
U
T
T
E
R
N0
8
-
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
S
-
N0
8
5
0
A
1
-
W
I
N
D
O
W
A
S
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
D
N0
9
-
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
-
N0
9
2
0
A
1
-
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
3
C
O
A
T
C
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
S
T
E
R
:
S
T
E
E
L
T
R
O
W
L
SM
O
O
T
H
F
I
N
I
S
H
,
O
N
S
E
L
F
F
U
R
R
I
N
G
M
E
T
A
L
L
A
T
H
O
V
E
R
T
Y
V
E
K
ST
U
C
C
O
W
R
A
P
O
V
E
R
P
L
Y
W
O
O
D
.
W
H
E
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
O
V
E
R
WO
O
D
B
A
S
E
S
H
E
A
T
H
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
A
S
E
C
O
N
D
"
I
N
T
E
R
V
E
N
I
N
G
LA
Y
E
R
"
O
F
T
Y
V
E
K
W
A
T
E
R
-
R
E
S
I
S
T
I
V
E
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
O
R
G
R
A
D
E
D
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
P
A
P
E
R
.
W
H
E
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
O
V
E
R
M
E
T
A
L
L
A
T
H
O
R
W
I
R
E
LA
T
H
S
T
U
C
C
O
T
O
B
E
A
P
P
L
I
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
H
R
E
E
C
O
A
T
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
PE
R
C
R
C
R
7
0
3
.
6
.
2
.
C
O
L
O
R
:
"
W
O
O
D
S
M
O
K
E
"
G
L
I
D
D
E
N
G
L
N
4
0
N0
9
2
0
A
5
-
SP
A
C
E
D
W
O
O
D
S
L
A
T
S
,
O
V
E
R
4
'
X
8
'
S
M
O
O
T
H
C
E
M
E
N
T
B
O
A
R
D
,
OV
E
R
T
Y
V
E
K
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
W
R
A
P
N0
9
2
4
A
1
-
EX
T
E
R
I
O
R
S
T
U
C
C
O
2
6
G
A
G
U
E
M
I
N
.
M
E
T
A
L
W
E
E
P
S
C
R
E
E
D
IN
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
N
O
T
L
E
S
S
T
H
A
N
4
"
A
B
O
V
E
F
I
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
O
R
N
O
T
L
E
S
S
TH
A
N
2
"
A
B
O
V
E
P
A
V
E
D
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
S
P
E
R
C
B
C
2
5
1
2
.
1
.
2
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
3
A
R
C
2
-
2
1
10115
CB-0.1 Color Board.dwg
Color Board
Clemons Residence2102 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo Ca ----
1. Single Ply flat roofing is concealed by the parapet curb and is not visible from the street or close structures.
2. Flexible flashing beneath plaster is proposed as an alternate to a traditional painted metal coping.
3. 3-coat cement plaster: steel trowel smooth finish, walls, parapet, soffit
4. Plaster color : "wood smoke" Glidden GLN40
5. Spaced Redwood slats with a mahogany stain, over smooth cement board.
6. Redwood Wood screen with mahogany stain
7. Black Metal & Cable Railing
8. Black frame windows, doors and glass panel with black metal frame sectional overhead garage door
9. Spaced Redwood slats with a mahogany stain Entry Arbor/Screen
10. Spaced Redwood slats with a mahogany stain Entry Gate
7
2
1
8
2
3
5
1
3
5
CB-0.1
----PLBD-2145-2015 PLBD-2145-2015
2016-06-29 / AR Mod Rev for ARC Mtg
9
5
8
3
4
4
6 7
5
5
6
10
4
ATTACHMENT 3
ARC2 - 22
June 6, 2012
Sam Clemons
2102 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 29-12: 2102 Broad Street
Dear Mr. Clemons:
On Friday, June 1, 2012, I conducted a public hearing on your request for a Use Permit to
allow construction of a two story addition to the front of an existing single story single-
family residence in the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) zone at the above-listed
location.
After reviewing the information presented, I have approved your request, based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings
1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons living or
working at the site or in the vicinity because the residence is an established use at
the subject location and the proposed addition is compatible with site constraints
and the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The proposed addition is consistent with General Plan policies for compatible
development because it is in scale and character with the neighborhood and
respects the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings (LUE 2.2.10).
3. The proposed project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations because it meets
density and property development standards for the C-N zone.
4. The project is exempt from environmental review under Class 32 (Section 15332),
Infill Development Projects, of the CEQA Guidelines.
Conditions
1. A building plan check submittal that is in full conformance with submitted project
plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted for review and
approval of the Community Development Department.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 23
A 29-12 (2102 Broad Street)
Page 2
2. Any exterior lighting shall be shown on plans submitted for a building permit and
shall be downward-facing, fully recessed and shielded to avoid light trespass and
adverse impacts to visibility of the night sky consistent with Chapter 17.23 Night
Sky Preservation of the City’s Zoning Regulations.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a construction staging
plan for review and approval of the Community Development Department.
4. The property shall contain one residence with one kitchen. A “Conditions of Use of
Structure” agreement shall be recorded prior to building permit issuance to ensure
compliance with this requirement.
Code Requirements
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only. They
serve to give the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to
the project. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be
identified during the plan check process. The project will be subject to all codes and
requirements in effect at the time of building permit application.
1. The property’s existing sewer lateral to the point of connection at the City main
must pass a video inspection, including repair or replacement, as part of the project.
The CCTV inspection shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process
for review and approval by the Utilities Department.
My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within 10 days of the
action. Any person aggrieved by the decision may file an appeal. Appeal forms are
available in the Community Development Department or on the City’s website
(www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $261 and must accompany the appeal
documentation.
If you have any questions, please call Marcus Carloni at (805) 781-7176.
Sincerely,
Doug Davidson
Hearing Officer
cc: SLO County Assessor’s Office
Bryan Ridley
Stalwork, Inc.
P.O. Box 391
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-0391
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 24
June 22, 2012
Sam Clemons
2102 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Subject: ARCMI 29-12 (2102 Broad Street)
Review of two-story addition to the front of an existing single-story,
single-family residence
Dear Mr. Clemons:
On June 22, 2012, I reviewed your plans to construct a two-story addition to the front of
an existing single-story residence located at 2102 Broad Street in the Neighborhood
Commercial (C-N) zone.
The project proposes construction of a 1,615 square-foot, two-story addition to the front
of the existing 607 square-foot, one-bedroom single-family residence. The façade of
the existing single-family residence will be reconstructed to match the contemporary
style of the proposed addition, creating one integral residence. After reviewing the
plans, I determined that the project is minor and will not require review by the
Architectural Review Commission (ARC). Your plans are approved, based on findings
and subject to the following conditions:
Findings
1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the residence is an
established use at the subject location and the proposed addition is compatible
with site constraints and the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The proposed addition is consistent with General Plan policies for compatible
development because it is in scale and character with the neighborhood and
respects the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings (LUE 2.2.10).
3. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines
because the proposed residence is compatible in scale, siting, detailing, color, and
overall character with adjacent buildings in the neighborhood.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 25
ARCMI 29-12 (2102 Broad Street)
Page 2
4. The project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines because it is an
integral addition with all sides of the residence using the same materials and
design details.
5. The project is consistent with the City’s Zoning Regulations because it meets
density and property development standards for the C-N zone.
6. The project is exempt from environmental review under Class 32 (Section 15332),
Infill Development Projects, of the CEQA Guidelines.
Conditions
1. The project shall comply with conditions of approval established by Use Permit
A 29-12.
2. A building plan check submittal that is in full conformance with submitted project
plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted for review and
approval of the Community Development Department.
3. The proposed primary and secondary colors shall be lightened to maintain
compatibility with neighboring structures. Plans submitted for a building permit
shall include a primary and secondary exterior color sample for review and
approval of the Community Development Department.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all
proposed building surfaces and other improvements on elevation drawings.
Colors and materials shall be as shown on the colors and materials board
submitted with the Minor or Incidental Architectural Review application, except as
provided in condition #3 above.
5. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a complete landscaping plan
and/or provide details of existing landscaping. All planting shown on the approved
landscaping plan shall be installed prior to the release of occupancy.
6. Any proposed exterior lighting shall be shown on plans submitted for a building
permit and shall be downward-facing, fully recessed, and shielded to avoid light
trespass and adverse impacts to visibility of the night sky consistent with Chapter
17.23 of the Zoning Regulations.
My decision is final unless appealed to the Architectural Review Commission within 10
calendar days of the date of this letter. Any person aggrieved by the decision may file
an appeal. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department .
The fee for filing an appeal is $261 and must accompany the appeal documentation.
Appeals will be scheduled for the first available Architectural Review Commission
meeting date. If an appeal is filed, you will be notified by mail of the date and time of
the hearing.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 26
ARCMI 29-12 (2102 Broad Street)
Page 3
The Community Development Director’s approval expires after three years if
construction has not started. On request prior to the expiration of the original approval,
the Community Development Director may grant a single, one-year extension.
If you have any questions, or if you need additional information, please contact Marcus
Carloni at (805) 781-7176.
Sincerely,
Pam Ricci, AICP
Senior Planner
Development Review
cc: County of SLO Assessor’s Office
Architectural Review Commission Chair
Bryan Ridley
P.O. Box 1810
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 27
Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
Item Number: 3
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of the modification of an approved plan (ARCMI 29-12) for construction
of an addition to a single-family dwelling, to replace the demolished portion of
the dwelling with new construction and add a third floor.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2102 Broad St BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
Phone: 781-7593
E-mail: woetzell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-2764-2016 FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to the applicant on the height and scale of the proposed new residence and
continue consideration of the project to a date uncertain.
SITE DATA
Applicant Sam Clemons
Representative Keith Hall
Submittal Date May 13, 2016
Complete Date May 13, 2016
General Plan Neighborhood Commercial
Specific Plan South Broad
Zoning Neighborhood
Commercial (C-N)
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt
(CEQA Guidelines §15303 –
New Construction of Small
Structures)
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted a request for modification of architectural review application
ARCMI 29-13, which permitted the construction of a two-story addition to a single-family
dwelling at 2102 Broad Street. That application, along with an Administrative Use Permit for the
addition, was approved in June 2012, subject to several conditions (see Attachment 3). As
construction of the addition progressed, the applicant found it infeasible to retain the original
portion of the dwelling and it has been subsequently demolished. The approved addition stands
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 28
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 2
partially completed on the site at this time. The modified design replaces the demolished original
portion of the dwelling with new construction, and adds a third floor to the building.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Commission’s role is to review the revised project for consistency with the City’s General
Plan, Zoning Regulations and Community Design Guidelines.
2.0 SITE INFORMATION/SETTING
The project site is on the east side of Broad Street, about 150 feet south of Chorro Street, in a
Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zone. The subject parcel is a Nonconforming Lot, as it does
not meet minimum area or width requirements for the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zone
(see Table 1: Site Information). It was previously developed with a single-family dwelling,
which has been demolished, and a replacement dwelling is under construction. There are no
significant natural features, apart from landscape planters along the street frontage.
The site is within a wedge-shaped portion of the block between Broad and Santa Barbara, which
comes to a point at the intersection of those streets. The surrounding area is characterized by a
mix of residential and commercial uses. North of the site, along Broad, are single- and multi-
family residential structures, many of which accommodate commercial uses. Adjacent to the
project, for example, is a building with a chiropractor office and two dwellings. South and west
of the site, the character is more strongly commercial, including a car wash, restaurants, and a
liquor store and cocktail lounge, and retail shops. To the east of the site is the back side of
appliance and furnishing stores (Pacific Energy Co. and Brooks Woodcraft) along Santa Barbara
Avenue, within the Railroad Historic District.
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
3.1 Project Description
The proposed project replaces the original, demolished, portion of a recently-expanded single-
family dwelling, and adds a third story to the building, resulting in a three-story single-family
residence. The living room, dining room, and kitchen have been relocated to the new third floor,
with a new bathroom. A large master bedroom, with a new master dressing room, master
Table 1: Site Information
Site Area ± 4,830 sq. ft. (6,000 sq. ft. minimum in C-N)
Site Width ± 55 ft. (60 ft. minimum in C-N)
Present Use & Development One single-family dwelling
(demolished, replacement under construction)
Topography Flat: ± 5% cross slope; gentle rise in NE direction
Access From Broad Street: Driveway into site
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Neighborhood Commercial (C-N); Personal Services, Office
South and East: Service Commercial & Historical Preservation
(C-S-H); Appliance Stores, Furnishings and Antiques
West: Neighborhood Commercial (C-N); Retail, Restaurants
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 29
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 3
bathroom, and laundry area are on the second floor, with the second bedroom and bathroom. The
den has been relocated to the second floor. At the ground level, the garage is expanded to
provide two additional parking spaces (for three spaces in total), and a new entertainment room,
exercise room, and garage storage room have been added.
The original design of the approved addition, which is already under construction, alternated
smooth-troweled cement plaster with cedar wood screen wall surfaces. The cement plaster has
been retained on the lower levels, except along the second-floor parapet and building wall of the
south building elevation, which are proposed to be covered in black metal siding.1 Cedar wood
screen walls have been eliminated. Redwood is used as a contrasting accent feature, and the new
third floor is sided entirely in redwood slats with mahogany stain, over smooth cement board. A
sloped standing seam metal roof with attached photovoltaic panels tops the structure. A 10-foot
block privacy wall will be extended around the southern and eastern borders of the property.
4.0 PROJECT EVALUATION
Plans for this project have been reviewed for consistency with the General Plan , development
standards in the City’s Zoning Regulations, and with guidance provided in the City’s Community
Design Guidelines. As proposed, the project is not fully consistent with applicable standards and
guidelines, and inconsistencies are identified and discussed in this report. Items of note include
the proposed site walls, exterior surface materials and detailing, and the height and scale of the
structure.
Staff recommends that the Commission provide direction to the applicant on the application of
design standards and guidelines to the proposed project and continue review of the project to a
date uncertain. Staff has developed several directional items to guide the Commission’s review
of the project.
1 Character renderings of the project suggest the parapet and south walls are finished with smooth plaster, however,
the project Color Board specifies metal siding for these surfaces.
Figure 1: Original design of addition left; New (proposed) design right
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 30
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 4
3.1 Development Standards
The proposed project is consistent with most development standards with the exception of wall
and building height limits, as discussed below. According to density calculations described in
Zoning Regulations § 17.16.010, the site supports a maximum residential density of 1.33 density
units. Project plans depict two bedrooms within the expanded dwelling, with a density unit value
of 1.00, within the allowed density for the site. Adequate yards are provided, and building
coverage is within maximum limits for the C-N Zone. Three parking spaces are provided, where
only 2 are required, and all are covered within a garage.
Table 2: Project statistics
Proposed (1) Ordinance
Standard (2) Note
Street Yard (Broad) 10 ft. 10 ft. Building integrated wall
Other Yards
North 14 ft. 10 ft. To max. building height
East 5 ft. 5 ft. Small projection (deck)
South (levels 1,2) 8 ft. 5 ft To 24 ft. high
South (level 3) 10.5 ft 9.5 To 32’ high
Building Height (max) 38 ft.–2 in. 35 ft. Variance required for a building
taller than 35 feet.
Building Coverage 51% 75%
Parking Spaces 3 2
Notes:
(1) Project plans; (2) Zoning Regulations and Subdivision Regulations
Building height. The building rises to just over 38 feet in height. This exceeds the maximum
35-foot height limit in the C-N Zone. The roof includes building-integrated photovoltaic panels
(Figure 3). Zoning Regulations allow components of a solar energy system to extend not more
than 10 feet above the maximum building height (§ 17.16.040).
Solar panels are integrated into the building roof, which is supported by building walls that
extend beyond the maximum building height (by about a foot) where they meet the bottom of the
roof. This design does not meet the intent of allowing additional height for solar energy systems.
Figure 2: Roof line at top of building, exceeds height limit
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 31
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 5
The allowance was not intended to permit additional building
height when a roof includes building-integrated solar panels.
The height of the building, including the roof, must be reduced
to comply with the maximum height limit (35 feet) for the C-N
Zone. As discussed below, further reduction in height is also
necessary for consistency with Community Design Guidelines
related to building scale, massing and neighborhood
compatibility.
Walls. The project includes 10-foot tall block walls (Figure 4) enclosing the area in front of the
entertainment room on the west side of the building, and extending along the southerly and
easterly property lines. Project renderings suggest that these will be plastered, and have the
appearance of being integrated into the building form.
If walls are attached to a building, they are not allowed to encroach into required yards (Zoning
Regulations § 17.16.050 (C) (2)). Within required yards, they are subject to height limitations set
forth in Zoning Regulations Chapter § 17.16. Wall height is measured from the adjacent grade
along the lower side, at the base of the wall. Fences or walls may be located on a retaining wall,
in which case their combined height is not to exceed 9 feet (Zoning § 17.16.050 (E.2)).
A screening wall exists along the southerly border of the property, adjacent to the Sunset Car
Wash (Figure 5). Taller screening is appropriate at this boundary, given its location at the border
of a commercial zone. However, special attention should be paid to the design and materials used
for screening, to achieve a result that provides adequate noise reduction and privacy without
creating a towering effect over the neighboring property. The height of the block wall should be
lowered so that the combined height of the retaining wall and the block wall does not exceed 9
feet from the lower side, consistent with wall height limits.
Figure 3: Solar Panels
Figure 4: Block walls
Figure 5: Wall along southerly boundary
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 32
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 6
Additional height to enhance screening between the dwelling and the neighboring car wash is
appropriate. A Fence Height Exception (FEX 77-09) was granted in 2009 to allow a tall wood
fence, not to exceed 9.5 feet in height, along the boundary with the car wash, for noise reduction
and privacy. Similarly, taller screening in this area should be allowed, but that portion above 6
feet from grade should be limited to a material that appears less permanent in nature than
concrete block, such as wood, in combination with landscaping (for example, screening hedges
on the interior side of the wall).
3.2 Community Design Guidelines
The City’s Community Design Guidelines (CDG) provide guidance for residential project
design. The building proposed for this project exhibits an interesting architectural character using
quality materials, but there are several elements of the project that are inconsistent with
applicable guidelines. These inconsistencies are especially apparent in the height of the building,
it relation to the street and surroundings, and details related to exterior finish materials. These
inconsistencies are discussed below, along with directional items to address them.
New single-family homes on infill lots are to comply with certain standards for Infill
Development:
Infill development should be compatible in scale, siting, detailing, and overall
character with adjacent buildings and those in the immediate neighborhood. This
is crucial when a new or remodeled house is proposed to be larger than others in
the neighborhood. When new homes are developed adjacent to older ones, the
height and bulk of the new construction can have a negative impact on adjacent,
smaller scale buildings. (CDG § 5.3 (A.1)).
Scale and height. As discussed above, the proposed building rises three stories, to just over 38
feet in height, exceeding the maximum height limit in the C-N Zone. Surrounding buildings are
an eclectic mix of residential and commercial structures one and two stories in height. For
reference, the nearby City Fire Station No. 1 rises to 35 feet at its highest point, but the majority
of the building mass is between 18 and 24 feet in height.
Figure 6: Addition under construction, in context
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 33
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 7
The addition that was approved for this site, which is currently under construction and shown in
Figure 5 above, is 25.5 feet in height. This height is consistent with that of taller apartment and
commercial buildings in the neighborhood. (Figure 6). The building is now already prominently
visible over surrounding structures from other vantage points at higher elevations of the City
(e.g. at Rachel and Florence, due east of the site, across the railroad tracks, see Figure 7). An
additional story would cause the building to be overly-prominent and out of scale and character
with the site and surrounding development.
Fences and Walls. In addition to being unusually tall, the proposed block privacy wall (Figure 8)
extends along the southern and eastern site boundary without break or relief. Design guidelines
suggest offsets and landscaping to avoid a monotonous effect:
Long, monotonous fences or walls should be avoided. Fences and walls should be
offset at least every 10 feet. Landscaping should be installed in offset areas where
appropriate. Landscaping along fences and walls should be coordinated with the
street tree planting scheme. (CDG § 6.1 (B.3))
The design of the proposed privacy screening should be modified for greater consistency with
this guideline.
Exterior Finish Materials. Community Design Guidelines provide guidance on exterior finish
materials:
The thoughtful selection of building materials can enhance desired neighborhood
qualities such as compatibility, continuity, and harmony. The design of infill
residential structures should incorporate an appropriate mixture of the
predominant materials found in the neighborhood. Common materials in San Luis
Obispo are smooth, troweled, or sand-finished stucco, wood, horizontal
clapboard siding, shingles, brick, and stone. (CDG § 5.3 (E))
Figure 7: Addition (2 stories) under construction (seen from Rachel and Florence)
Figure 8: Block walls
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 34
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 8
The original design of the approved addition alternated smooth-troweled
cement plaster with cedar wood screen wall surfaces. Plaster and wood
are also the primary materials used in the new design. However, the
southerly building wall and the parapet feature along the top of the second
level is proposed to be finished with metal siding (Figure 9), with a
horizontal pattern, rather than the original cement plaster.
Wood and plaster are common materials used for residential development
in the vicinity of the site, but horizontal metal siding is not. While metal
is found in a handful of more industrial buildings in the Railroad District
to the north and east, masonry and wood predominate on commercial and
residential structures in the vicinity of the site. The use of metal siding on
this building would not enhance compatibility, continuity, or harmony
with the qualities of the surrounding neighborhood, and should be
eliminated for greater consistency with design guidelines for exterior
materials.
The horizontal orientation of the metal siding also lends a strong patterning to the south building
elevation that is considerably more active than the subdued plaster surface of the original design.
The City encourages well-articulated, but not cluttered building elevations. Large
roof and wall planes unrelieved by shadow or texture interest are generally not
acceptable. However, too many elevation details can overwhelm, and appear
awkward, gaudy, and/or chaotic. (CDG § 2.2 (B))
Repetition of this horizontal pattern by the wood balcony railings, redwood wood screen, and
horizontal wood siding on the upper-floors provides an amount of relief and visual interest on
this elevation that may be overly exuberant (Figure 10).
Figure 9: Metal siding
Figure 10: Exuberant horizontal patterning (South Elevation)
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 35
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 9
Entries. Entries are an important element of the design
residential development:
All houses should have their primary entrance
facing and clearly visible from the street, with a
front porch or verandah encouraged to provide a
transition between the public space of the
streetscape and the indoor private space of the
house. (CDG § 5.5 (A.3)
The main entry to the dwelling is on the south wall of
the building, behind the privacy wall. A wood gate is the
only clue to the presence of the entry. A trellis, arbor, or
other site feature, along with landscaping, should be employed to draw attention to, and
highlight, the entry area, and to provide a transition into the interior of the site.
5.0 DIRECTIONAL ITEMS
Directional Item 1: Reduce building height
Reduce the height of the building by eliminating the third floor to comply with the building
height limit applicable to the C-N Zone, and to achieve consistency with the scale and height of
adjacent buildings and those in the immediate neighborhood. The proposed building height does
not conform to height limitations in Zoning Regulations and at three stories is not consistent with
Community Design Guidelines related to compatible building scale and massing.
Directional Item 2: Reduce the height of privacy walls and incorporate aesthetically
pleasing materials.
Reduce the height of the block privacy wall to conform to the maximum height limits described
in Zoning Regulations § 17.16.050 (A). The limit is 6 feet high in an “Other Yard.” Where the
wall is located on top of a retaining wall, the combined height of the block wall and the retaining
wall may not exceed 9 feet, as measured from adjacent grade on the lower side of the retaining
wall, in conformance with Zoning Regulations § 17.16.050 (E).
Between the dwelling and car wash, additional screening may be incorporated into the privacy
wall design, for noise reduction and privacy, consistent with the prior fence height exception
granted for the property. Limit the height of any additional screening so that the wall and
additional screening together do not exceed 9.5 feet in height, as measured from adjacent grade
along the lower side of the wall, at its base (on the subject site).
For any additional screening provided (above a 6-foot height), use materials with a less
permanent appearance, such as wood. Landscaping that provides a naturalistic detail (for
example, hedges and trees) is also appropriate for noise reduction and privacy. Maintain
landscaping between the block wall and the top of the existing car wash screening wall. Offset
fences and walls at least every 10 feet and use landscaping in offset areas where appropriate,
consistent with Community Design Guidelines § 6.1 (B.3).
Figure 11: Subtle building entry
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 36
ARCH-2764-2016 (2102 Broad)
Page 10
Directional Item 3: Eliminate metal siding
Eliminate the use of patterned metal siding on this building. Wood and masonry materials that
enhance the compatibility, continuity, and harmony between the project and the surrounding
neighborhood are encouraged, for consistency with Community Design Guidelines § 5.3 (E).
Directional Item 4: Entries
Employ landscaping and appropriate site features, such as trellises or arbors, to draw attention to,
and highlight, the entry area, and to provide a transition into the interior of the site, consistent
with Community Design Guidelines § 5.5 (A.3).
5.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Project plans
3. Prior Approvals (A & ARCMI 29-12)
Included in Commission member portfolio: Project plans
Available at ARC hearing:
Project plans originally approved under ARCMI 29-12
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 37