HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-15-2016 Item 13 Appeal filed by Camille Small 1144 Chorro Street Meeting Date: 11/15/2016
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW
COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING
COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, LOCATED AT 1144 CHORRO STREET,
WHICH INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR A MARQUEE SIGN AND OTHER
EXCEPTIONS FROM THE SIGN REGULATIONS (ARCH-3773-2016).
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution that denies the appeal of the Architecture Review Commission’s approval of
the remodel of an existing commercial structure which includes a request for a marquee sign and
other exceptions from the Sign Regulations, thereby granting final approval to the project based
on findings of consistency with the General Plan, Sign Regulations, Community Design
Guidelines and applicable City standards; subject to conditions as set forth in Attachment A.
SITE DATA
Applicant Jeremy Pemberton, Discovery
San Luis Obispo
Appeal Date October 13, 2016
Zoning C-D-H (Downtown Historic
District)
General Plan General Retail
Site Area ~16,710 square feet
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt from
environmental review under
Section 15332 (Existing Facilities)
of the CEQA Guidelines.
DISCUSSION
The applicant, Jeremy Pemberton, has proposed to modify plans for the previously approved
exterior remodel of the existing commercial structure located at 1144 Chorro Street, including a
request for a marquee sign. The ARC unanimously approved the project on October 3, 2016
which received an appeal, filed by Camille Small, on October 13, 2016, as discussed in the
analysis below.
Background
On June 22, 2015, the CHC unanimously found the project consistent with the Historic
Preservation Guidelines for construction in a Historic District subject to findings and conditions
of CHC Resolution No. 1008-15 (Attachment F, CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes).
13
Packet Pg. 504
On July 20, 2015, the ARC unanimously approved the project and found it consistent with the
Community Design Guidelines and CHC Resolution for construction in the Downtown Commercial
District, with direction to the applicant to come back to the ARC on a future date with a sign
package that includes a marquee sign, subject to findings and conditions of ARC Resolution No.
1014-15 (Attachment G, ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes).
On September 1, 2016, the applicant submitted modifications to the previously approved design that
included a sign package with exceptions, per ARC direction (Attachment E, Project Plans).
On October 3, 2016, the ARC unanimously approved the project and found it consistent with the
Sign Regulations and Community Design Guidelines, subject to findings and conditions of ARC
Resolution No. 1021-16 (Attachment C, ARC Staff Report & Meeting Minutes).
On October 13, 2016, Camille Small, the appellant, filed an appeal of the ARC’s decision to
approve the project, specifically concerning the Marquee sign (Attachment D, Small Appeal Letter)
Project Information/Description
The applicant has requested a new marquee sign and a sign package including several exceptions
from the Sign Regulations. The sign package includes exceptions for the number of signs
allowed per tenant space, two raised letter signs that are not a sign type identified in the Sign
Regulations, and the number of signs on one building elevation. A summary of the sign package
is provided below:
1. Signs: sign package includes five signs, see Section 2.3 Project Statistics
Back-lit logo cut out of metal panels
Raised metal channel letters and logo with blue neon lighting
Raised metal letters attached to metal awning on both street elevations
Marquee sign with LED ambient lighting surround and neon decorative lighting
Sign Type Proposed Area 1 Ordinance 2 Illumination style
Metal Logo sign 55.5 square feet 100 Back-lit
Raised Logo sign 26.25 (Eliminated)3 ARC determination Blue neon
Raised Letter sign “Discovery” 87.75 (66)3 ARC determination Blue neon
Awning sign 1 7.5 25 Back-lit
Awning sign 2 23 25 Back-lit
Cumulative sign area 200 (152)3 200
Marquee 4 152 ARC determination Neon & LED Ambient
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans submitted 9/1/2016
2. Sign Regulations
3. Modified by the ARC Resolution 1021-16
4. The ARC excluded the marquee from the cumulative area and number of signage allowed
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION
At the June 20, 2015 public hearing, the ARC unanimously approved the project and directed the
applicant to provide a sign package to be returned to the ARC with direction to take advantage of
13
Packet Pg. 505
marquee areas to create a unique identity, and stated, “in support of being bold with a sign
package design a good design can justify a larger sign presence.”
On October 3, 2016, the ARC held a public hearing to review the architectural modifications to
the previously approved building design, that also included proposed signage of the commercial
building, located at 1144 Chorro Street. Staff evaluated the project and identified conditions and
discussion items for the ARC to consider in order to ensure the project is in substantial
compliance with the Community Design Guidelines and Sign Regulations.
ARC Discussion Item 1: The ARC should discuss whether the proposed Marquee sign is
appropriate with the Downtown Commercial District and other architectural elements of the
building façade, and establish the appropriate size, projection clearance, and illumination of the
sign.
The ARC found that the marquee sign in this location is appropriate because it identifies a
separate concert venue, one that sells tickets and is located on a downtown side street . The ARC
provided direction to amend the Resolution to address the design and horizontal clearance of the
marquee to be substantially integrated with the building recessed entry (Attachment A, Condition
No. 6). The ARC also amended the Resolution to require that all exterior lighting be designed as
dimmable and consistent with the Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Condition No. 8).
ARC Discussion Item 2: The ARC should discuss whether the proposed Raised Letter sign is
appropriate with other architectural elements of the building façade, and establish the
appropriate number and size of the Raised Letter sign.
The ARC provided direction to eliminate the raised logo sign above the entrance to the
restaurant, and provided an option for the applicant to replace the sign with two pedestrian scale
signs at the main restaurant entry (Condition No. 5). The ARC also provided a condition to
reduce the maximum area for the raised letter sign by 25%, to approximately 66 square feet
(Condition No. 7).
The ARC did not provide any direction or changes to the architectural modifications of the
commercial structure and unanimously approved the project, subject to the modified conditions.
APPEAL SUMMARY
On October 13, 2016, Camille Small, the appellant, filed an appeal of the ARC decision to
approve the project. The appeal form and supplemental letter express concerns that the proposed
signs are not consistent with downtown buildings. The supplemental letter recommends limiting
the maximum square footage to 200 square feet with the removal of the marquee sign, raised
letter sign, and logo signs. The letter states that the multiple sign exceptions constitute a grant of
special privilege toward the tenant and property owner.
Appeal Analysis
The following details the ARC’s decision to approve the proposed project and provides staff’s
13
Packet Pg. 506
response to the reasons for the appeal.
Marquee Sign: The appeal letter states that the marquee sign is not essential and is inconsistent
with downtown buildings which may result in establishing a precedent that could be replicated.
The Sign Regulations state that the ARC is responsible for determining the allowable sign area,
appropriate locations, and designs of any proposed marquee sign.
The ARC determined that the marquee sign is appropriate at this location and provided direction
to the applicant to further integrate the marquee into the design of the building. The approval of
the marquee sign does not constitute a grant of special privilege because the marquee is specific
to the concert venue, one that sells tickets and is located on a downtown side street which is
typical of other theater-like uses. The Sign Regulations do not preclude the ability for a similar
use to request a marquee sign, subject to review by the ARC for consistency with the
neighborhood based on the design and location of the marquee.
Raised Letter & Logo Signs: The appeal letter addresses a concern regarding the content of the
proposed logo signs as the letter states “Cocktail glasses do not represent a family friendly
downtown element.” The Sign Regulations Section 15.40.110 state that content will not be used
as a basis for determining whether or not a proposed sign may be permitted. The Sign
Regulations also state that any sign which does not comply with the design guidelines included
in Section 15.40.470, will be forwarded to the ARC for consideration. The proposed raised letter
and logo signs are not a sign type that is identified by the design guidelines established by the
Sign Regulations.
The ARC agreed with the staff recommendation to eliminate the raised logo sign in order to
reduce the cumulative effect of numerous signs close to each other. The ARC found that the
raised letter sign was appropriate at this location and restricted the size of the sign to be reduced
by 25% in total area.
Number/Area of Signs: The appeal letter states that the sign package should be limited to 200 sq.
ft. and modified to eliminate all proposed signage and replaced with a “conventional 170 sq. ft.
wall sign.” The Sign Regulations Section 15.40.460 allow up to four signs per tenant space
within the Downtown Commercial District with a maximum cumulative sign area of 200 sq. ft.
As a compromise for eliminating the raised logo sign and restricting the size of the raised letter
sign, the ARC provided an option for the applicant to replace the raised logo sign with two small
pedestrian scale signs along the entrance to the restaurant. This resulted in a maximum number
of six signs (including the two pedestrian level signs) for the tenant space with a cumulative area
of less than 200 sq. ft., excluding the marquee sign. Marquee signs are not a sign type identified
under the Sign Regulations. The ARC excluded the marquee sign from contributing to the
cumulative area and number of signage allowed for the tenant space.
CONCURRENCES
The project modifications and proposed signs have been reviewed by Building, Fire, Public
Works, Transportation, and Utilities staff. Their comments have been incorporated into the
13
Packet Pg. 507
resolution as conditions or code requirements, as appropriate.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt under Class 11, Accessory Structures; Section 15311 of the
CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of the construction of on premise signs on an
existing structure which will not have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which
found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Uphold the Appeal, thereby denying the project. The Council may uphold the appeal and
deny the application, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Community
Design Guidelines, Sign Regulations, and applicable City regulations (see Attachment B for
Resolution to uphold the appeal).
2. Continue the project and provide direction to the applicant to revise the project for
consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, Sign Regulations, or applicable City
regulations.
Attachments:
a - Resolution A
b - Resolution B
c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes
d - Appeal Letter
e - Project Plans
f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes
g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes
13
Packet Pg. 508
R _______
RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE
ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE
A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE,
LOCATED AT 1144 CHORRO STREET, WHICH INCLUDES A
REQUEST FOR A MARQUEE SIGN AND OTHER EXCEPTIONS FROM
THE SIGN REGULATIONS, WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AS REPRESENTED IN THE CITY
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
NOVEMBER 15, 2016 (1144 CHORRO, ARCH-3773-2016)
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee 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 June 22, 2015, and unanimously found the project consistent with Historic
Preservation Guidelines, subject to findings and conditions of CHC Resolution No. 1008-15
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-1376-2015, Discovery San Luis Obispo,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on July 20, 2015, unanimously approved the project, subject to findings and
conditions of ARC Resolution No. 1014-15 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-
1376-2015, Discovery San Luis Obispo, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
September 15, 2015 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under two appeals of the Planning
Commission’s action on July 22, 2015, the City Council unanimously denied both appeals and
granted final approval of the project (USE-1127-2015), subject to findings and conditions of City
Council Resolution No. 10669-15; 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 October 3, 2016, unanimously approved the exterior modifications and
sign package with exceptions, subject to findings and conditions of ARC Resolution No. 1021-16
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-3773-2016, Discovery San Luis Obispo,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, on October 13, 2016, Camille Small, the appellant, filed an appeal of the
Architectural Review Commission’s action on October 3, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
13.a
Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: a - Resolution A [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
November 15, 2016, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under APPL-4006-2016, Camille Small,
appellant; 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 duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at
said hearing, and
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 to deny the appeal of the Architectural Review Commissions decision, thereby granting
final approval to the project:
1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or
residing in the vicinity because the project will be compatible with site constraints and the
scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. Consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, the project incorporates
articulation, massing, and a mix of color/finish materials that are compatible with the
neighborhood and complementary to other development in the downtown core which is
consistent with the previous project approval (ARC Resolution No. 1014-15).
3. The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element policy for the downtown,
due to the continuous storefront along the sidewalk that includes recessed entries, dining
areas, and includes windows, signs, and architectural details which can be appreciated by
people on the sidewalks (LUE policy 4.20).
4. The proposed project is an adaptive re-use of the existing building that further increases the
existing buildings compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines by adding recessed
entryways and recessed outdoor dining areas.
5. The proposed marquee sign is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Sign
Regulations and will not result in visual clutter or constitute a grant of special privilege
toward the property or those in the vicinity, because the sign is of a superior design specific
to the concert venue which is typical of other theater like uses and is architecturally
compatible with affected structures and the character of surrounding development. The
marquee sign in this location is appropriate because it identifies a separate concert venue,
one that sells tickets and is located on a downtown side street.
6. As conditioned, the projection of the marquee sign to extend six feet and six inches over
the width of the public sidewalk is appropriate to provide visibility of the marquee sign as
seen from Higuera Street and Marsh Street.
13.a
Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: a - Resolution A [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 3
R ______
7. As conditioned, elimination of the raised logo sign above the entrance is consistent with the
intent of the Sign Regulations Section 15.40.110 to regulate the size, type and location of
signs to prevent the cumulative effect of numerous signs close to each other that can result
to be a detrimental impact which cannot be addressed in any way other than by limiting the
number and size of signs.
8. As conditioned, the sign exception to allow six signs where tenant spaces within the
Downtown Commercial District are normally limited to four signs (excluding the marquee
sign), is appropriate because the sign package will not result in visual clutter, and is
consistent with the intent of the Sign Regulations because the signage is designed to
achieve balanced composition and harmony with the building’s architecture that provides
equality and equity among sign owners in the neighborhood.
Section 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt under Class 11,
Accessory Structures; Section 15311 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of the
construction of on premise signs on an existing structure which will not have a significant effect
on the environment.
Section 3. Action. The City Council does hereby deny the appeal of the Architectural
Review Commission’s action to approve the proposed project, hereby granting final approval of
the application ARCH-3773-2016 for a remodel of an existing commercial structure located at
1144 Chorro Street, which includes a request for a marquee sign and other exceptions from the
sign regulations, subject to the following conditions:
Planning Department
1. The Owner/Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or its agents,
officers, or employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers, or employees, to attack, set aside, void, or annul, in whole or in part, the City's
approval of this project. In the event that the City fails to promptly notify the Owner/
Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding, or that the City fails to cooperate fully
in the defense of said claim, this condition shall thereafter be of no further force or effect.
2. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the
project plans approved by the ARC and the City Council. 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 included in this resolution as Sheet No. 2, and
shall also include all findings and conditions of CHC Resolution 1008-15, ARC Resolution
1014-15 & City Council Resolution No. 10669 (2015 Series). Reference should 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. Plans submitted for a sign permit shall substantially conform to the locations and sizes
shown on the sign package elevations. The Community Development Director shall have
13.a
Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: a - Resolution A [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 4
R ______
the authority to approve minor changes to the sign package that (1) result in a superior
design and appearance, and/or (2) address a construction design issue that is not substantive
to the Architectural Review approval.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall eliminate the Raised Logo sign over the
entrance of the business along the Chorro Street elevation, and may be replaced with two
pedestrian scale signs at the main entry, to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director.
5. Tenant signage shall be limited to a maximum of six signs for all types of signs,
including pedestrian scale logo signs, sandwich-board signs or larger window signs
(excluding the Marquee sign).
6. Plans submitted for a building permit shall limit the projection of the Marquee sign to be no
more than six feet and six inches over the width of the public sidewalk; the underside of the
Marquee sign shall be solid and substantially integrated with the building to the ceiling of
the recessed entry, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Chief
Building Official.
7. The Raised Letter sign (Discovery) shall be reduced in size to 75% of what has been
proposed with the submitted project plans dated August 31, 2016, approximately 66 square
feet.
8. Plans submitted for a sign permit shall call out the colors and materials of signage and shall
clearly indicate which portions of the signs do/do not illuminate. All proposed exterior
illumination including signage and the transom window panels shall be designed to be
dimmable with appropriate colors consistent with Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations
(Night Sky Preservation), to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The
portion of the marquee sign that is the marquee shall not be internally illuminated or
resemble an illumination style such as a cabinet sign which is prohibited downtown.
9. The proposed signage shall be designed so that illumination does not exceed ten foot -
candles measured at a distance of ten-feet from the sign, compliant with the City’s Sign
Regulations.
10. The proposed signage shall not be illuminated after the close of business.
Engineering Division – Community Development Department
11. The final building plan submittal shall include complete flood proofing details in
accordance with the revised building façade.
Transportation Division – Public Works Department
12. All sidewalk areas must maintain minimum clear passage width to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director.
13.a
Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: a - Resolution A [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 5
R ______
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of November 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
13.a
Packet Pg. 513 Attachment: a - Resolution A [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF THE
ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE
A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE,
LOCATED AT 1144 CHORRO STREET, WHICH INCLUDES A
REQUEST FOR A MARQUEE SIGN AND OTHER EXCEPTIONS FROM
THE SIGN REGULATIONS AS REPRESENTED IN THE CITY
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
NOVEMBER 15, 2016 (1144 CHORRO, ARCH-3773-2016)
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee 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 June 22, 2015, and unanimously found the project consistent with Historic
Preservation Guidelines, subject to findings and conditions of CHC Resolution No. 1008-15
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-1376-2015, Discovery San Luis Obispo,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on July 20, 2015, unanimously approved the project, subject to findings and
conditions of ARC Resolution No. 1014-15 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-
1376-2015, Discovery San Luis Obispo, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
September 15, 2015 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under two appeals of the Planning
Commission’s action on July 22, 2015, the City Council, unanimously denied both appeals and
granted final approval of the project (USE-1127-2015), subject to findings and conditions of City
Council Resolution No. 10669-15; 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 October 3, 2016, unanimously approved the exterior modifications and
sign package with exceptions, subject to findings and conditions of ARC Resolution No. 1021-16
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-3773-2016, Discovery San Luis Obispo,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, on October 13, 2016, Camille Small, the appellant, filed an appeal of the
Architectural Review Commission’s action on October 3, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
November 15, 2016, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under APPL-4006-2016, Camille Small,
13.b
Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: b - Resolution B [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
appellant; 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 duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at
said hearing, and
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 to uphold the appeal, hereby denying the project:
1. The project is inconsistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, because the
articulation, massing, and a mix of color/finish materials that are incompatible with the
neighborhood and adjacent development in the downtown core.
2. The projection of the marquee sign to extend six feet and six inches over the width of the
public sidewalk is inconsistent with the Sign Regulations for horizontal clearances.
3. The request for an exception is inappropriate because there are no exceptional or unusual
circumstances applying to the property which do not apply generally to properties in the
vicinity with the same zoning.
4. The marquee sign is inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the Sign Regulations which
constitutes a grant of special privilege or entitlement inconsistent with limitations applied
to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. The marquee sign is architecturally
incompatible with affected structures and the character of surrounding development.
5. The sign exceptions result in visual clutter that has a detrimental impact by the cumulative
effect of numerous signs close to each other which cannot be addressed in any way other
than by limiting the number and size of signs.
Section 2. Environmental Review. The proposed project is statutorily exempt from
environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15270 (Projects which are
disapproved).
Section 3. Action. Based on the above findings and evidence submitted in support
thereof, the City Council does hereby uphold the appeal denying the application ARCH-3773-
2016.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
13.b
Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: b - Resolution B [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 3
R ______
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of November 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
13.b
Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: b - Resolution B [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of modifications to a previously approved remodel of an existing commercial
structure (ARCH-1376-2015) which includes a request for a marquee sign and other exceptions from
the Sign Regulations, with a categorical exemption from environmental review.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1144 Chorro Street BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7524
E-mail: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: MOD/ARCH-3773-2016 VIA: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
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 Jeremy Pemberton
Discovery San Luis Obispo
Complete Date September 15, 2016
Zoning C-D-H (Downtown Historic
District)
General Plan General Retail
Site Area ~16,710 square feet
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt from
environmental review under
Section 15332 (Existing
Facilities) of the CEQA
Guidelines.
SUMMARY
The applicant, Discovery San Luis Obispo, is proposing to modify the previously approved exterior
remodel of an existing commercial structure located at 1144 Chorro Street. The applicant has also
proposed a new marquee sign and a sign package including several exceptions from the Sign
Regulations. The sign package includes exceptions for the number of signs allowed per tenant space,
two raised letter signs that are not a sign type identified in the Sign Regulations, and the number of
signs on one building elevation.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Zoning Regulations, Sign
Regulations, Community Design Guidelines (CDG) and applicable City policies and standards.
Meeting Date: October 3, 2016
Item Number: 2
13.c
Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
MOD/ARCH-3773-2016
1144 Chorro Street
Page 2
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Background
On June 22, 2015 the CHC unanimously found the project consistent with the Historic
Preservation Guidelines for construction in a Historic District subject to findings and conditions
of CHC Resolution No. 1008-15 (Attachment 3, CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes).
On July 20, 2015 the ARC unanimously approved the project and found it consistent with the
Community Design Guidelines for construction in the Downtown Commercial District subject to
findings and conditions of ARC Resolution No. 1014-15 (Attachment 4, ARC Resolution & Meeting
Minutes).
2.2 Project Description
A summary of the significant project features are included below (Attachment 2, Project Plans):
1. Design Modifications: exterior modifications include but not limited to;
New metal panel rain screen and metal awning with angled tie-rod supports
New sliding/stacking door panels
New board-form concrete entryway features
Steel patio railing with a brick base
Translucent panels (Frosted Acrylic) and new stucco elements
2. Signs: sign package includes five signs, see Section 2.3 Project Statistics
Back-lit logo cut out of metal panels
Raised metal channel letters and logo with blue neon lighting
Raised metal letters attached to metal awning on both street elevations
Marquee sign with LED ambient lighting surround and neon decorative lighting
2.3 Project Statistics
Sign Type Proposed Area 1 Ordinance 2 Illumination style
Metal Logo sign 55.5 square feet 100 Back-lit
Raised Logo sign 26.25 ARC determination Blue neon
Raised Letter sign “Discovery” 87.75 ARC determination Blue neon
Awning sign 1 7.5 25 Back-lit
Awning sign 2 23 25 Back-lit
Total sign area 200 200
Marquee sign 152 ARC determination Neon & LED Ambient
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans submitted 9/1/2016
2. Sign Regulations
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed development must be consistent with the requirements of the General Plan, Sign
Regulations, and Community Design Guidelines (CDG). Staff has evaluated the project and identified
several conditions and discussion items for the ARC to consider in order to ensure the project is in
substantial compliance with the CDG and Sign Regulations, as discussed in this analysis.
13.c
Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
MOD/ARCH-3773-2016
1144 Chorro Street
Page 3
3.1 Consistency with the Community Design Guidelines
The primary goal of the downtown design guidelines is to preserve and enhance the attractiveness
of the downtown to residents and visitors that encourages people to spend time, slow their pace,
and engage one another. The design of buildings will continue to play a crucial role in maintaining
this character and vitality. The CDG state that downtown storefront remodels should provide
storefront windows, entries, transoms, awnings, and other architectural features that complement
existing structures without copying their architectural style.
Building Design Modifications: The Downtown Historic District has a variety of architectural
styles but most structures appear to be constructed with high quality materials and attention to
detail. The contemporary design of the proposed modifications does not detract from defining
features of adjacent historic buildings or from other historic resources within the Downtown
Historic District, because the modifications have a limited scope, which do not change the
massing or overall architectural form of the structure. The character of the structure is also not
significantly altered with the proposed exterior modifications generally limited to what is required
for the updates to accommodate the outdoor seating areas and entry features. The contemporary
modifications will not pose an aesthetically jarring transition since the portions of the building
receiving the modern updates are adequately separated from nearby historic buildings.
Modifications from the previously approved plans on the west and south façades are shown and
described in the attached project plans (Attachment 2). The proposed colors and materials listed
on pages 12 and 13 of the project plans are consistent with building materials of the existing
building and buildings throughout Downtown. The proposed project remains compatible with
development projects in the downtown, and the project design further increases the existing
building compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines by adding transom windows,
awnings, decorative/recessed entryways and recessed outdoor dining areas (Figure 1).
3.2 Consistency with the Sign Regulations
The Sign Regulations are intended to protect and enhance the character of the community against
visual blight and the proliferation of signs, which can seriously detract from the pleasure of
observing the natural scenic beauty of San Luis Obispo. Signs have an important design
component and must be architecturally compatible with the character of surrounding
development. It is the intent of these regulations to regulate the time, place and manner under
which signs are permitted, and not the content of signage. Content shall not be used as a basis for
determining whether or not a proposed sign may be permitted.
Figure 1: Previously approved perspective (left) Proposed modified perspective (right)
13.c
Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
MOD/ARCH-3773-2016
1144 Chorro Street
Page 4
Number of Signs: The Sign Regulations Section 15.40.460 (Sign Standards by District) state that
the maximum number of signs per tenant space is limited to four within the Downtown
Commercial District. The applicant has proposed a total of six signs (including Marquee sign)
requiring an exception. Exceptions to the Sign Regulations are subject to Section 15.40.610
(Findings for Approval of an Exception) and granting an exception must be based on at least one
of the required findings1.
Staff unable to make the findings necessary to approve
three “wall signs” on one elevation and recommends
elimination of the Raised Logo sign to reduce the amount
of sign clutter on one building elevation (Figure 2). Sign
Regulations Section 15.40.110 state that the cumulative
effect of numerous signs close to each other has a
detrimental impact which cannot be addressed in any way
other than by limiting the number and size of signs.
Condition No. 4 has been included in the Draft Resolution
to eliminate the proposed Raised Logo sign over the
entrance of the business.
Marquee Sign: The Sign Regulations define a Marquee as: a building element that is part of a
permeant entryway and traditionally associated with theaters. A marquee sometimes includes a
projecting vertical sign which may extend above the cornice line of a building. The design and
allowable sign area for a marquee are determined by the ARC during the review of a proposed
building and/or marquee.
The proposed Marquee sign has been designed
consistent with other Marquee signs in the
Downtown District such as the Fremont
Theatre sign located at 1035 Monterey Street.
The sign includes a vertical element that
extends above the cornice line of the building
that has been framed by neon decorative
lighting and an LED ambient lighting surround
(Figure 3). No interior illumination is proposed
for the portion of the sign that is the marquee.
The Marquee sign is specific to the concert
venue which is typical of other theater like
uses. The Sign Regulations limit the maximum
horizontal clearance of a projecting sign to
two-thirds the width of the sidewalk or six feet
1 Sign Regulations Section 15.40.610: Findings for Approval of an Exception: C: The exception is consistent with the
intent and purpose of the sign regulations (see Section 15.40.110) and will not constitute a grant of special
privilege or entitlement inconsistent with limitations applied to other properties in the vicinity with t he same
zoning. D: The sign exception is for superior design will not result in visual clutter and is consistent with the intent
and purpose of theses Sign Regulations.
Figure 3: Marquee sign
Figure 2: Raised Logo sign
13.c
Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
MOD/ARCH-3773-2016
1144 Chorro Street
Page 5
whichever is less2. The Marquee sign projects into the public right-of-way six and a half feet
which exceeds the maximum allowed for an eight-foot sidewalk five feet and four inches (5’4”),
an exception is required to allow the proposed Marquee sign to project further than the minimum
horizontal clearance, subject to Section 15.40.610.
Staff recommends limiting the projection of the Marquee sign to be consistent with the threshold
of the Sign Regulations for horizontal clearances. Condition No. 6 has been included which limits
the projection of the Marquee sign to no more than two-thirds the width of the public sidewalk
(5’4”), to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. This would reduce the
projection of the sign from 6’6” to 5’4”.
Discussion Item 1: The ARC should discuss whether the proposed Marquee sign is
appropriate with the Downtown Commercial District and other architectural elements of the
building façade, and establish the appropriate size, projection clearance, and illumination of
the sign.
Raised Letter & Logo Signs: The Sign Regulations Section 15.40.480 states that any sign which
does not comply with the design guidelines included in Section 15.40.470, will be forwarded to
the ARC for consideration. The proposed Raised Letter and Logo signs are not a sign type that is
identified by the design guidelines established by the Sign Regulations (Figure 4). The applicant
is proposing to review the Raised Letter and Logo signs under the same requirements and
standards as wall signs. An exception would have been required to provide three wall signs on
one building face where the maximum number of wall signs is two per tenant space (excluding
the marquee sign). Since staff has recommended the elimination of the Raised Logo sign to avoid
visual clutter through Condition No. 4, this exception is no longer necessary.
Discussion Item 2: The ARC should discuss whether the proposed Raised Letter signs is
appropriate with other architectural elements of the building façade, and establish the
appropriate number and size of the Raised Letter sign.
Sign Exception: The sign exception to allow
five signs for a single tenant space where four
signs are normally allowed within the
Downtown Commercial District, is appropriate
because, as conditioned, the sign package will
not result in visual clutter or constitute a grant
of special privilege toward the property. The
exception is consistent with the required
findings of approval for an exception, because
the fifth sign is the Marquee sign which is of a
superior design that is architecturally
compatible with affected structures and the
character of surrounding development.
2 Sign Regulations Section 15.40.440: Clearance: The minimum horizontal clearance between a sign and the curb line
shall be 2 feet: the maximum projection over a public sidewalk shall be two-thirds (2/3) the width of the sidewalk or
6 feet, whichever is less.
Figure 4: Raised Letter & Logo signs
13.c
Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
MOD/ARCH-3773-2016
1144 Chorro Street
Page 6
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In -Fill Development Projects; Section 15332 of
the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for the land use
designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project site
occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no
value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species as the site is located on an existing
developed property. The approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to;
traffic because the project does not propose any parking on the site and utilizes existing
parking structures and multimodal transportation within the downtown;
noise levels do not exceed thresholds established in the City’s Noise Ordinance;
air quality does not exceed thresholds established by APCD Standards;
water quality because the site is an adaptive reuse of a commercial building and the site
can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
5.0 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.
6.0 ALTERNATIVES
6.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
6.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Sign Regulations,
Community Design Guidelines, or applicable City policies and standards.
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Reduced Project Plans
3. CHC Resolution 1008-15 & Meeting Minutes
4. ARC Resolution 1014-15 & Meeting Minutes
Included in Commission member portfolio: project plans
Available at ARC hearing: color/materials board
13.c
Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, October 3, 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,
October 3rd, 2016 at 5:02 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Greg Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Amy Nemcik, Allen Root, Angela Soll, Vice-Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and
Chair Greg Wynn
Absent: None
Staff: Community Development Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rebecca
Gershow, Assistant Planner Kyle Bell, Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen, and Recording
Secretary Brad T. Opstad
Chair Wynn noted the two remaining Commission seat vacancies and informed that a
recommendation had been forwarded to City Council for deliberation on at least one of the
replacements.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, discussed degradation of a tourist-destination starting with a
lack of sensitivity by developers to the City’s historic value.
PRESENTATIONS
P1. Leadership SLO Water Wise Demonstration Garden
Presentation of a drought-tolerant demonstration garden designed and installed on Morro Street
by volunteers from Leadership SLO Class 24.
City Associate Planner Gershow represented Leadership SLO Class #24 from 2015 in presenting
the Demonstration Garden legacy project across from the Utilities Department on Morro Street.
Chair Wynn provided suggestions for informational signage for the project.
13.c
Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 870 Industrial Way. ARCH-3144-2016: Review of a new two story industrial building that
includes 30,275 square-feet of industrial/warehousing space and a 10% parking reduction to
accommodate the expansion of the existing business, with a categorical exemption from
environmental review; M-S zone; Dave Schlossberg, applicant.
Associate Planner Bell presented the staff report, previewing the two-story industrial building
expansion and provided PowerPoint presentation with project description, contextual map, and
design renderings.
Commissioner Root inquired about the performance history of the bicycle parking spaces provided
for projects, which proposes them toward parking reduction requests.
Chair Wynn referenced Condition #24 and inquired about the proposed use of existing private
water well; inquired about the noise generation from within the facility as it pertains to a roll-up
door on an installation room as opened toward neighboring residences.
Commissioner Soll requested viewing of the landscape plan in ensuring that the requisite number
of trees would be planted in the parking area.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Thom Jess, Arris Studio Architects, and Dave Schlossberg, owner of Poly Performance, Inc.,
discussed the vacant portion of the current business site devoted to its proposed expansion.
Commissioner Root inquired whether there would be any mechanized communication system,
such as a conveyor, between the operation’s two buildings.
In response to Chair Wynn’s inquiry, Director Davidson suggested that the conflict over whether
or not an elevator was a Condition of Approval would be best handled by adding the words “or as
approved by the Chief Building Official” to Code Requirement #2.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a resident neighboring project site; indicated that the
Commercial-Industrial Zone in development has created a streetscape in which there is insufficient
lighting; spoke in favor of the project.
COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION
In response to Chair Wynn’s inquiry, Associate Planner Bell pointed out that the examples existed
of access to private wells being used for landscape watering specifically; indicated that reclaimed
water would have been required, had it been more immediately available to the site.
13.c
Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 3
Chair Wynn and Commissioners Root, Soll & Nemcik spoke in the support of encouraging
Applicant to consider further articulation to the long, flat walls. Owner Schlossberg discussed
having employed high, unadorned windows for allowing increased natural light.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR EHDAIE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
NEMCIK, the Architectural Review Commission adopted the Draft Resolution which approves
the project, with the following amendments:
A.) Code Requirement #2 to read: “Elevator access shall be provided to the second floor
offices in accordance with CBC 11-B-206.2.3 or as approved by the Chief Building
Official.”
B.) Condition #8 to read: “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. The Applicant is encouraged to provide additional articulation along the
elevations of the building. Plans shall include the materials and dimensions of all lintels,
sills, surrounds recesses and other related window features.”
on the following 5:0:0:0 vote:
AYES: Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, Wynn
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
2. 1144 Chorro Street. ARCH-3773-2016: Review of modifications to a previously approved
remodel of an existing commercial structure (ARCH-1376-2015) which includes a request for
a marquee sign and other exceptions from the Sign Regulations, with a categorical exemption
from environmental review; C-D-H zone; Discovery San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Associate Planner Bell provided staff report on the proposed modifications to the commercial
storefront; displayed PowerPoint slides which included background of the project review process
by both the Cultural Heritage Committee and the Architectural Review Commission; presented
two (2) Discussion Items pertaining to the proposed sign package modifications.
Chair Wynn suggested referring to the multiple signs in proposal by numbers to mitigate confusion
in discussion.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Jeremy Pemberton, Managing Partner of Discovery, and Scott Martin, RRM Design Group,
discussed the operational design of the of the project and the inclusion of the functional marquee
sign in the proposal.
13.c
Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 4
PUBLIC COMMENT
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, discussed how providing exceptions for the marquee signage can
only lead to unwelcome precedents being set; informed that Save Our Downtown supports Staff’s
recommendation to reduce number of signs in conformance with Sign Regulations.
Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, advocated for the citizenry to be able to hold on to that “degree
of special” that SLO possesses; voiced that she considers it audacious to compare proposed
marquee sign to that of the iconic Fremont Theatre.
COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION
Commissioner Nemcik commented favorably on the laser cutout of corten metal panel and less
favorably on the backlit faux-marquee element.
Commissioner Root suggested making the bowling ball & music notes logo more discrete;
commented on scale of raised letters of word “Discovery” and suggested its reduction by 30%.
Commissioner Soll commented that proposed signage does create a modicum of clutter when
considered cumulatively.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie inquired whether marquee sign was allowed under Community Design
Guidelines or Land Use Ordinance.
Chair Wynn voiced disagreement with Public Comment that approving marquee sign would
grant special privilege to Applicant; commented that extension of the marquee’s underside could
create an integrated solidity which would aesthetically enhance the streetscape; proposed
Conditioning the LED lighting of the illuminated backdrop of faux-marquee to be dimmable.
Applicant Representative Martin displayed a PowerPoint slide of another of the Applicant’s
Discovery venues with an alternatively-scaled “Discovery” sign.
The Commissioners voiced varying opinions on the appropriate dimensions for the marquee’s
projection.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROOT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SOLL, the Architectural Review Commission adopted the Draft Resolution which approves the
project, with the following amendments:
A.) Finding #5 to read: “The proposed marquee sign is consistent with the intent and purpose
of the Sign Regulations and will not result in visual clutter or constitute a grant of special
privilege toward the property or those in the vicinity, because the sign is of a superior
design specific to the concert venue which is typical of other theater-like uses and is
architecturally compatible with affected structures and the character of surrounding
development. The marquee sign in this location is appropriate because it identifies a
separate concert venue, one that sells tickets and is located on a downtown side street.”
13.c
Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 5
B.) Condition #4 to read: “Plans submitted for a building permit shall eliminate the Raised
Logo sign over the entrance of the business along the Chorro Street elevation , and may be
replaced with two pedestrian scale signs at the main entry, to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director.
C.) Condition #5 to read: “Tenant signage shall be limited to a maximum of six signs for all
types of signs, including pedestrian scale logo signs, sandwich-board signs or larger
window signs (excluding the Marquee sign).”
D.) Condition #6 to read: Plans submitted for a building permit shall limit the projection of the
Marquee sign to be no more than six feet and six inches over the width of the public
sidewalk; the underside of the Marquee sign shall be solid and substantially integrated
with the building to the ceiling of the recessed entry, to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director and Chief Building Official.
E.) Newly crafted Condition #7 to read: “The Raised Letter sign (Discovery) shall be reduced
in size to 75% of what has been proposed with the submitted project plans dated August
31, 2016, approximately 66 square feet.”
F.) Condition #8, formerly Condition #7, to read: “Plans submitted for a sign permit shall call
out the colors and materials of signage and shall clearly indicate which portions of the signs
do/do not illuminate. All proposed exterior illumination including signage and the transom
window panels shall be designed to be dimmable with appropriate colors consistent with
Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations (Night Sky Preservation), to the satisfaction of
the Community Development Director. The portion of the marquee sign that is the marquee
shall not be internally illuminated or resemble an illumination style such as a cabinet sign
which is prohibited downtown.
G.) With newly crafted and inserted Conditions, Condition #9 is the former Condition #8, and
so forth.
on the following 5:0:0:0 vote:
AYES: Root, Soll, Nemcik, Ehdaie, Wynn
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Chair Wynn instituted five-minute recess.
3. 1042 Olive Street. ARCH-2946-2016: Architectural review of a new four story mixed-use
building including ground floor commercial/retail space, and 17 extended stay hotel rooms,
including a request for a mixed use and shared parking reduction of 25%, with a categori cal
exemption from environmental review; C-T zone; Garcia Family Trust, applicant.
Director Davidson introduced Technician Van Leeuwen who provided Staff Report on the
proposed development on the vacant site.
Commissioner Nemcik inquired about the relocation of the trash enclosure.
In response to Vice-Chair Ehdaie’s inquiry, Director Davidson clarified that the parking statistics,
13.c
Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 6
in which the provisioned number of spaces exceed what is allowed, build in a flexibility for future
Uses that might require more parking.
Chair Wynn inquired about the potential offset for vertical-height tree growth outside of the
parking area.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
George Garcia, project architect, provided clarification on the trash enclosure being located in an
area to better accommodate trash company loaders; discussed background of design process and
displayed PowerPoint renderings of the project.
Commissioner Root inquired about the intended user market for the extended-stay concept.
Commissioner Soll inquired about the street trees on the site.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie inquired about the building access for overnight occupants; inquired about the
vertical living wall elements for controlled landscaping and their maintenance.
Chair Wynn inquired about the easement between the site and the neighboring Taco Bell parcel;
inquired about how to not value-engineer the green living wall, integral to the articulation, out of
the project.
PUBLIC COMMENT
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, indicated that Staff is misrepresenting the project as a hotel; shared
concern that design does not fit in the prevailing context of existing neighborhood.
Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, cited general principles of the “explicit” Community Guidelines
and indicated this building is inconsistent with the scale of the existing neighborhood context.
Gita Patel, San Luis Obispo, spoke as proprietor of neighboring Ramada Olive Tree Inn; shared
concerns that the project downgrades the existing businesses.
Matt Sansome, spoke in enthusiastic support about further development promoting growth in the
manner in which this project is being proposed with its modern elements.
COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION
Commissioner Root noted that the project is not requesting any exceptions; favored both the
expanded Use of the front-planted area and further building articulation in order to enliven its
facades.
Commissioner Soll voiced support for paying stricter attention to Community Guidelines;
indicated there is a lack of transition between project and its existing surroundings.
13.c
Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 7
Commissioner Nemcik concurred with Commissioner Soll and indicated that, while architecturally
elegant, the scale and massing are too oversized for the area’s context.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie voiced that the design might not befit the current area, but did allow that future
developments might point to this project as being an anchor toward inspiration.
Chair Wynn indicated that the scale of, and degree of articulation on, the project are both
appropriate according to Community Guidelines; voiced own struggle with what project should
specifically emulate in surrounding neighborhood; indicated this project could commence a trend
and become a landmark to which future proposals aspire; requested some consensus and direction
from Commission.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROOT, SECONDED BY CHAIR WYNN,
the Architectural Review Commission adopted the Draft Resolution which approves the project,
with the following amendments:
A.) Condition #5 to read: “The applicant shall submit building plans that include a trash
enclosure that shall have a minimum street yard setback of 25 feet along Olive Street be
designed and finished with high quality materials to match the architecture of the project
buildings; which shall be fully screened from upper stories with a trellis or other horizontal
cover; the design of the enclosure is subject to the Community Design Guidelines, to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
B.) Condition #6 to read: “Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and
materials of all proposed building surfaces and other improvements. Materials shall be
consistent with the color and material board submitted with Architectural Review
application. The ARC recommends that the applicant modify the proposed color palate to
include additional and/or more muted colors”
C.) Condition #7 added to read “The ARC recommends that the applicant explore the
possibility of incorporating a public art installation to the proposed development.”
D.) Condition #13 added to read “The final landscaping plan shall incorporate additional
landscaping, including tree types that provide full canopies near the street frontage
parking spaces and a landscaped island in the front parking area to break up the line of
parking.”
E.) Vice-Chair Ehdaie and Commissioners Nemcik & Soll provided recommendations for
new, additional Conditions pertaining to 1.) Increased transitional landscaping in 5-to-7-
foot area in front of property; 2.) Encouragement of Public Art inception over paying in-
lieu fees; 3.) Possibility of canopied trees installed within parking islands; and 4.)
Encouragement for re-visiting color palette scheme to satisfaction of CDD; both motion-
maker Root and seconding Wynn concurred.
on the following 3:2:0:0 vote:
AYES: Root, Wynn, Ehdaie
NOES: Nemcik, Soll
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
13.c
Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission for October 3, 2016 Page 8
COMMENT & DISCUSSION
Director Davidson provided the Agenda Forecast:
October 17th: Southtown 18 response to ARC direction; 2017-19 City Budget process goal-
setting.
November: Broad Street Collection, south of Crossroads @ Broad & Orcutt (3229 Broad Street);
399 Foothill mixed-use project; French Hospital Master Plan modification
Director Davidson informed that City Council would announce former Commissioner Ken Curtis’
replacement on or about October 18th; informed that December 19th is potential date for a last-of-
year ARC convening; speculated on further open dates for future meetings during holiday season
and first-of-new-year.
Commissioner Nemcik inquired about the possible reasons for projects requested by ARC to be
viewed in tandem, Southtown 18 & The Lofts @ Nipomo, would not be occurring; Director
Davidson informed of Cultural Heritage Committee’s having returned the latter back to Applicant
for complete revisions.
Informal discussion ensued on the Ikahn project at Taft & Kentucky Streets and State Assembly
Bill 1069 dealing with second dwellings on properties which has implications on City Ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:11 p.m.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2016
13.c
Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: c - ARC Staff Report & Draft Meeting Minutes [Revision 1] (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.d
Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: d - Appeal Letter (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.d
Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: d - Appeal Letter (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.d
Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: d - Appeal Letter (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.d
Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: d - Appeal Letter (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.d
Packet Pg. 535 Attachment: d - Appeal Letter (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
T1DATE: August 31, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPO1144 Chorro St.Title SheetSHEET INDEXT1 Title SheetA1 Approved Site PlanA2 Proposed Site PlanA3 Approved Ground Floor PlanA4 Proposed Ground Floor PlanA5 PerspectivesA6 ElevationsA7 ElevationsA8 ElevationsA9 Proposed Chorro Street SignsA10 Proposed Marsh Street SignsA11 Proposed Marquee SignA12 DetailsA13 Colors and MaterialsPROJECT DIRECTORYZONE CD-HGENERAL PLAN DISTRICT COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWNHILLSIDE DESIGN DISTRICT NOHIGH FIRE AREA NODEMO REVIEW STUDY AREA NOFLOOD ZONE AO 2’# OF STORIES 2PARCEL SIZE 16,710 SFLOT COVERAGE 15,222 SFCONSTRUCTION TYPE III BUSE RESTAURANT, BOWLING ALLEY, NIGHTCLUBOCCUPANCY A-2/A-3NUMBER OF STORIES 2BUILDING HEIGHT 24’-9”BASEMENT AREA 2,657 SFGROUND FLOOR AREA 15,254 SFSECOND FLOOR AREA 8,977 SFTOTAL GROSS AREA 26,888 SFPROJECT STATISTICSVICINITY MAPOWNER: Discovery San Luis Obispo 1144 Chorro St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact: Jeremy Pemberton Phone: (805)-252-1394 Email: jeremy@discoverymgmtgroup.comARCHITECT: RRM Design Group 3765 S.Higuera Street, Suite102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact: Pat Blote Phone: (805)-543-1794 Email: plblote@rrmdesign.comPROJECT ADDRESS: 1144 Chorro St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401APN NUMBERS: 002-427-012 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: $PRGLÀFDWLRQWRWKHDSSURYHGDUFKLWHFWXUDOUHYLHZ $5&+ WKDWLQFOXGHVDVLJQSDFNDJHSURSRVDORIVIZLWKDUHTXHVWIRUDQH[FHSWLRQLQRQHDGGLWLRQDOQXPEHURIVLJQVWKDQDOORZHGMarsh St.Higuera St.Chorro St. Garden St.13.e
Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 536
A1DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOApproved Site Plan 0816 32 48SCALE: 1”=16’ µ[µ6KHHW XXCHORRO STREETMARSH STREETHIGUERA STREETSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
PGESD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
TELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGSDWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTEL
ELEV.207.14ELEV.207.48ELEV.205.96ELEV.204.04W WX61144 CHORRO ST.(E) 2-STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGAPN #002-427-012(E) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE(E) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE(E) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE(E) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE(E) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE(E) DRIVEWAYPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE(E) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE(E) SERVICE ALLEY(E) SIDEWALK(N) SIDEWALKDN424389310'-0"3422213234725'-1 1/2"433369'-10"N53*06'13"E119.28'MN36*53'00"W140.18'MN36*52'36"W140.13'MN53*07'29"E119.30'M3311121213'-10"20'-8"14'-8 1/2"124141516TYP171819192060'-1"34'-11 1/2"18'-11 1/2"16'-0"21(N)CURB & GUTTERMISSION STYLE SIDEWALK(N) CURB & SIDEWALK(E) CURBTO REMAIN(N) CURB & GUTTERMISSION STYLE SIDEWALK(E) CURBTO REMAIN13(E) CURB TO REMAIN9'-1"6'-0"6'-3 1/2"2323242413.e
Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 537
A2DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOProposed Site Plan0510 20 30SCALE: 1”=10’ µ[µ6KHHW iWATERVAULTCHORROSTREETMARSHSTREETSIGSIGPGEPGEWMWMSDSDSD$$$7<3
3* (7<3 PGEPGEWM
([WHQWRI)RRWSULQW&KDQJH13.e
Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 538
A3DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOApproved Ground Floor PlanSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW 0 4 81624KEG COOLERDRY STORAGEOFFICELOCKERSCHEF'S COUNTERWARE WASHINGWAITER STATION COUNTER CHEF'S COUNTERFREEZERCOOLERJAN.BEVERAGE STATIONRPREP.FRCHORRO STREETMARSH STREETUPELEVLELEUPDNUPDUMBDUMBWAITERTERWA1UP234567DN(E) DRIVEWAYTO REMAIN181098313125666661122231514181915179'-10"OUTDOOR DINING---ENTRY---BAR---OUTDOOROUTDOOROUTDOORLOUNGE---MENSRESTROOMORR---WOMENSRESTROOM---CASHIER---KITCHEN---BOX OFFICEFICBOX OFF---EXIT ACCESS CORRIDOREXIT ACCESS CORRIDOR---(E) SERVICE ALLEYBOWLING LANES---2020CONCERT VENUE---1A4.012A4.01COATCOATCHECKK---ELEC.ROOM---259'-6"STAGE---EXITEXITEXITTEXITEXIT11OFFICEOFFICE---LOUNGE---CONCERTMAIN BAR---77781517EXITEXITEXITTEXITCONCERTSUPPORT BAR---LOUNGEU---KEG STORAGE +OOLIQUOR STORAGEKEG COOLERKEG COOLERTTTTTTTTTTOOOOOOOOTTTTTOTTOOOTOOOOTTTTTTTTTOTOOOOOOOOOTOTOTOG---6'-0"8'-4"242122+18" AFF+36" AFFFF205.63'FF205.63'CONC205.63'CONC205.54'(N) CONCO()204.46'FF204.48'(E) CONC()204.91'FFF204.92'FF205.01'(N) CONC()205.01'(N) CONC()204.16'3'-0"5'-0"11114'-0"4'-0"313233RAMP8% DOWNRAMP8% DOWNRAMP8% DOWNSLOPE4% DOWNFF = 0'-0"FF = 1'-5"FF = 1'-2"FF = 0'-0"FF = 1'-2"SLOPE1.5% DOWNFF = 0'-0"FF = 0'-0"INDOORLOUNGE---261613.e
Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 539
A4DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOProposed Ground Floor PlanSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW 0 4 81624DNDNDNDNDNDNDNUPDNUPDNDNUPUPUPCONCERTHALL115TICKETBOX-OFFICE113PRODUCTIONOFFICE116CONCERTLOBBY191WALK INREF145MECH180FOYER192WOMENS138MENS137MAINDINING120KITCHEN140LOUNGEPATIO121DININGPATIO122ELEV092DUMBWAITER093WHEELCHAIRLIFT091CONCERTHALL BAR135CORRIDOR091CORRIDOR193CORRIDOR193MAIN BAR130WALK INREF146MAINENTRY190FLOODGATESTORAGE181CASHIER151BOWLINGLOUNGE170BOWLINGLANES150COLDSTORAGE125MAINSTAGE110SERVERSTATION123HOSTSTAND124CORRIDOR196MERCHANDISE114ATM152FIRESPRINKLERRISERROOM18260" x 72"60" x 60"60" x 60"48" x 72"48" x 72"Covered Bike Parking. 0HWDO3DQHO7RZHUWRSURYLGHaccess through openings on HDFKVLGHDVVKRZQLQSODQ2SHUDEOH:LQGRZV5HIHUWRMarsh St. Elevation.13.e
Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 540
A5DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOPerspectivesProposed Chorro Street PerspectiveApproved Chorro Street Perspective13.e
Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 541
A6DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOElevations0’-0” G.F.10’-8” F.F.20’-0” T.O.P.21’-6” T.O.P.25’-1” T.O.P.SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW 0 4 8162425’-1” T.O.P.P.L.P.L.Proposed Chorro Street ElevationApproved Chorro Street ElevationApproved Chorro Street Elevation17860'-0"F.F.20'-00"T.O. PARAPET21'-66"T.O. PARAPET12111299(N) BRICK TO MATCH (E)IN STACKED BOND PATTERN(E) BRICK9'-2"9'-2"19224MARSHSTREET711116164331142526(N)SOFFIT27Palm to be removed. Subject to the required formal application for tree removal.13.e
Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 542
A7DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPO0 4 81624SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW Elevations2SHUDEOH:LQGRZV Cement Stucco to Match Chorro Elevation. See Color and Materials Board Page A110’-0” G.F.10’-8” F.F.20’-0” T.O.P.21’-6” T.O.P.25’-1” T.O.P.P.L.P.L.Proposed Marsh Street ElevationApproved Marsh Street Elevation(E) SERVICEALLEYCHORROSTREET380'-0"F.F.20'-0"T.O. PARAPET21'-6"T.O. PARAPET9'-3"1111109121228293029292929303030161482725’-1” T.O.P.13.e
Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 543
A8DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOElevationsFaded Painting Public Art Restore Location of Painting(Placeholder Location for Future) Speakeasy Entrance([LVWLQJ'RRU(QWUDQFH5DLVHGXSWRPDWFKH[LVWLQJJUDGH0 4 81624SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW ([LVWLQJ$OOH\3KRWRV0’-0” G.F.10’-8” F.F.20’-0” T.O.P.21’-6” T.O.P.25’-1” T.O.P.Proposed Alley Elevation25’-1” T.O.P.13.e
Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 544
A9DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOProposed Chorro Street Signs024 8 12SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW $OORZDEOH6LJQ6WDWLVWLFVZoning CD6LJQ7\SH$OORZHG $OO7RWDO1XPEHU$OORZHG 7HQDQW6SDFH0D[&XPXODWLYH$UHD 6)7HQDQWProposed Sign StatisticsCut-out Metal Logo Sign 1 = 55.5 S.F.Raised Logo Signs 1 = 26.25 S.F.Raised Letter Signs 3 = 118.25 S.F. Cumulative Area of Signs: 200 S.F. = 200 S.F. OKNumber of Signs: ! 1HHG([FHSWLRQAdditional Sign Feature Exception: See A11Marque Sign 1 = 152 S.F.Sign 4: Raised Letters $UHD ·µ[·µ 6)19’- 6” 4’- 6” 012 4 6SCALE: 1/2”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW Sign 5: Raised Letters $UHD ·µ[µ 6)11’-2” 8”024 8 12024 8 12Sign 3 : Raised Logo $UHD ·µ[·µ 6)Sign 1 : Cut Metal Logo $UHD ·µ[ · 6)SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW 3’-6” 5’-6” 7’-6”9’-11”Diagrammatic Section (Typical)Typical Letter and Logo LED illumination.Diagrammatic Section (Discovery Sign)1HRQ/HWWHULOOXPLQDWLRQ5DFHZD\VVKDOOKDYHPLQLPDOYLVXDOLPSDFWÀQDOURXWLQJDQGORFDWLRQVKDOOEHUHYLHZHGGXULQJEXLOGLQJSHUPLWLETTERLED Light Source(Letters shall be back lit)Typical Letter/Logo Section 5DLVHG0HWDO/HWWHUVZLWKDbolted connection)Metal Channel LettersSection (Bolted Connection)Blue Neon Tube Lighting inside Metal Channel Letter.13.e
Packet Pg. 545 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 545
A10DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOProposed Marsh Street Signs024 8 12SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW $OORZDEOH6LJQ6WDWLVWLFVZoning CD6LJQ7\SH$OORZHG $OO7RWDO1XPEHU$OORZHG 7HQDQW6SDFH0D[&XPXODWLYH$UHD 6)7HQDQWProposed Sign StatisticsCut-out Metal Logo Sign 1 = 55.5 S.F.Raised Logo Signs 1 = 26.25 S.F.Raised Letter Signs 3 = 118.25 S.F. Cumulative Area of Signs: 200 S.F. = 200 S.F. OKNumber of Signs: ! 1HHG([FHSWLRQAdditional Sign Feature Exception: See A11Marque Sign 1 = 152 S.F.Sign 6: Raised Letters $UHD ·µ[µ 6)34’ 6”8”13.e
Packet Pg. 546 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 546
A11DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOProposed Marquee on Chorro St.024 8 12024 8 12SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0” µ[µ6KHHW Marquee Section 6’-0”6’-6”6’-0” 12’-6” 8”12’-6” Marquee /HWWHULQJ$UHD ·[··[··[µ 6)LED Ambient LightingNeon Decorative Lighting6’-666666’-66’-66’-66’ 66’-66’-6’-66’ 66’-66’6’-66’-66’ 6666’-66’66’-6’-66’666’-666’ 66’-66’-66’-66’-’66’66666’66-6-666-6-6-6--6-66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666”””””””””””””””””13.e
Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 547
A12DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPODetailsDoor Track SystemBack-lit LettersCut Metal PanelBack-Lit Logo Cut out of Metal Panels·[·0HWDO3DQHOVSteel RailingBrick Base&&KDQQHO6WHHO$ZQLQJAngled Tie-Rod SupportsBoard Form Concrete TilesSliding Storefront DoorsMetal Finish0HWDO$ZQLQJ(Not To Scale)Multiple Sliding/Stacking Door Panels (Not To Scale)0HWDO3DQHO5DLQVFUHHQZLWK/RJR5HOLHI(Not To Scale)Metal Panel and Brick Base Patio Rail (Not To Scale)13.e
Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 548
A13DATE: August 5, 2016#0512-01-C016DISCOVERY - SAN LUIS OBISPOColor and MaterialsStorefrontBronze Anodized FinishTileBoard FormMetalPaintedTricorn BlackSW 6258External Wall Light FixtureGoose-neckBronze Anodized FinishCement StuccoPainted6ZLQJ%URZQSW 6046Cut Metal Panel %LJ6N\&DIH/RFDO([DPSOH Metal PanelTranslucent PanelsFrosted AcrylicMetal Awnings %LJ6N\&DIH/RFDO([DPSOH Brick Veneer ([LVWLQJ13.e
Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: e - Project Plans (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)Packet Pg. 549
13.f
Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.f
Packet Pg. 551 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.f
Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
MINUTES
June 22, 2015
ROLL CALL:
Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, James Papp, Vice-Chair
Thom Brajkovich, 2 Positions Vacant
Absent: Chair Jaime Hill
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Assistant Planner Kyle Bell, and Recording
Secretary Erica Inderlied
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: Minutes of May 26, 2015, were approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
DISCUSSION: Design Review Workshop – Feedback & Discussion
Senior Planner Leveille summarized the activities that took place at the joint Design
Review Workshop held for the Architectural Review Commission and Cultural Heritage
Committee on June 10-11, 2015.
Committee Member Baer commented that some of the presentation materials seemed
poorly planned or reproduced; noted that the inclusion of community members and
Council members added significantly to the value of the experience.
Committee Member Papp commented that the inclusion of CEQA and Secretary of
Interior Standards training would have been helpful. Papp noted his recent attendance
at an Architectural Review Commission meeting; stated that the presence of CHC
members at that meeting was well-received and effective.
The Committee discussed ways in which the Committee’s recommendations may be
more fully or usefully communicated to higher Advisory Bodies and the Council.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich commented that the workshop was valuable; stated that
increased advertisement of future workshops would be helpful for the public.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
1. 1144 Chorro Street. ARCH-1376-2015; Review of exterior building modifications
in the Historic Downtown District, with a categorical exemption from
environmental review; C-D-H zone; Discovery San Luis Obispo, applicant.
13.f
Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
Committee find the project consistent with the Historic Preservation Guidelines and
recommend that the Architectural Review Commission approve the project design
based on findings and subject to conditions which he outlined.
In response to Committee Member Papp, Senior Planner Leveille clarified that the
Committee’s purview includes recommendations regarding the use of specific materials,
when based on consistency with historical guidelines.
Mark Rawson, property owner representative, summarized the project to date; noted
that finding an appropriate use for the site has taken some time; clarified that the
amount of sidewalk dining encroachment varies depending on the width of available
sidewalk.
Jeremy Pemberton, applicant representative, summarized the various components of
the use proposed for the site and its target clientele; noted commitment to thorough
renovation and use and preservation of high-quality materials.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public.
COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
Committee Member Baer commented that the aesthetic appears somewhat dark
overall; noted that windows that extend to the ground, and the lack of upper-story
windows, appears to conflict with design guidelines. Member Baer spoke in support of
the inclusion of brick and zinc elements; noted that the effect of wood elements imparts
a dark look, and that the aesthetic appears incongruous with many surrounding
buildings.
Committee Member Papp spoke in support of the project as a sensitive treatment of the
building, removing stucco to expose brick and installing awnings along Marsh Street;
commented that the potential for façade improvements is quite limited by the existing
building construction, which is an example of a mid-century modern building, although
not a good one.
In response to inquiry from Committee Member Papp, Mr. Rawson clarified that the
plaques commemorating Riley’s Department Store employees would remain in place.
Senior Planner Leveille clarified that staff’s recommendation of the proposed
architectural styling was intended to avoid conjectural elements, and was made in
consideration of the scope of the project which includes a tenant improvement to
accommodate the change in use.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich spoke in support of the proposal as an adaptive re-use project;
commented that concerns about historic guidelines regarding the treatment of upper
fenestration, articulated roofing, etc., do not need to be an issue given the architecture
of the building.
13.f
Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
There were no further comments from the Committee.
On motion by Committee Member Kincaid, seconded by Committee Member Papp, to
find the project compatible with the Downtown Historic District and consistent with the
Historic Preservation Guidelines and recommend that the Architectural Review
Commission approve the project subject to recommended conditions of approval in the
draft resolution and including the following condition:
Directional Item #3. The plaques commemorating Riley store employees shall be
retained and the project shall include the use of authentic brick.
AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Kincaid, and Papp
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Committee Member Hill
The motion passed on a 4:0 vote.
2. 1053 Islay Street. ARCH-1170-2015; Review of remodel and addition behind a
residence that is a Contributing List Resource in the Old Town Historic District;
R-3-H zone; Lesa Jones, applicant. (Continued to a Date Certain – July 27,
2015)
Senior Planner Leveille noted that staff recommended continuation of consideration of
this application to the July 27, 2015, meeting of the Committee.
This item was continued by general consent of the Committee.
The motion passed on a 4:0 vote.
3. Staff
a. Agenda Forecast
Senior Planner Leveille gave a forecast of upcoming agenda items,
including a joint meeting of the Architectural Review Commission and
Cultural Heritage Committee scheduled for July 13, 2015, to review a
mixed-use project adjacent to the Jack House.
The Committee discussed the need to verify there will not be potential
conflicts of interest for the joint meeting that may arise from members’
involvement with the Jack House.
4. Committee
In response to inquiry from Committee Member Papp, Senior Planner Leveille
clarified that the Committee may make recommendations regarding issues such
as building height, if the recommendation can be made within the scope of the
13.f
Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Committee’s purview of the Historic Preservation Ordinance; and, he clarified
that the CHC’s scope was more limited with the recent action on the project at
1921 Santa Barbara Avenue because of a previous action of the CHC on the
project; and that it was an unusual project from a process standpoint.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary
13.f
Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: f - CHC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
13.g
Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
July 20, 2015
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root,
Angela Soll, Vice -Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chairperson Greg Wynn
Absent: None
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Senior Planner Jaime Hill, and Recording
Secretary Erica Inderlied
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: The minutes of July 6, 2015, were approved as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1, 12424 Los Osos Valley Road. ARCH - 1064 -2015; Review of the rebranding of an
existing ARCO gas station site to a Chevron gas station, including replacement of
the existing canopy and signage and minor building fagade modifications, with a
categorical exemption from environmental review; C -T & LOVR zones; Bruce
Sayahan, applicant.
Jaime Hill, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
Commission adopt a resolution approving the proposed replacement canopy and
signage and minor building fagade modifications, based on findings and subject to
conditions which she outlined.
In response to inquiry from Commr. Curtis, staff confirmed that the subject portion of
Los Osos Valley Road is a designated scenic corridor in the City's General Plan.
JR Beard, applicant representative, summarized the history of the project; noted the
rationale for increasing the canopy height and the need for a design package meeting
the requirements of the Chevron Corporation; added that staff's recommendation that
the canopy have a gabled, or hipped, roof would further add to the height of the
structure.
13.g
Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
ARC Minutes
July 20, 2015
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
James Lopes, SLO, spoke in support of staff's recommendation; noted concern about
the requirement for a gable roof and the potential for glare from site lighting; noted that
most other gas stations in the area utilize monument signs rather than pole signs.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Andreen spoke in support of eliminating the requirement for a gabled canopy
roof, and the use of neutral colors on the canopy.
Commr. Curtis spoke in support of staff's recommendations; commented that the project
is located in a scenic gateway to the City; spoke in support of the use of a monument
sign rather than a pole sign, reducing the height of the canopy to less than nineteen
feet, and eliminating the requirement for a gabled canopy roof. Curtis spoke in support
of modifying the colors of the building to match corporate colors, rather than making the
colors of the canopy neutral.
Commr. Soil spoke in support of a flat roof, neutral colors and lowered height for the
canopy, and the use of a monument sign rather than a pole sign.
Commr. Root spoke in support of a flat canopy roof and use of a monument sign
instead of a pole sign; noted opposition to the building and canopy having different color
schemes.
Commr. Nemcik spoke in support a flat roof for the canopy, the use of neutral colors for
the canopy, and reducing the canopy height to the height of the building.
Vice -Chair Ehdaie noted support of a flat canopy roof; spoke in support staff's
recommendation otherwise.
Chair Wynn spoke in support of allowing a flat canopy roof, lowering the canopy to
fifteen feet, utilizing a monument sign instead of pole sign, and matching the building
and canopy color schemes; requested that project conditions be modified to require
submittal of a photometric plan for new and existing lighting, for evaluation by staff for
compliance with codes.
There were no further comments from the Commission..
On motion by Vice -Chair Ehdaie, seconded by Commr. Soil to adopt a resolution
approving the proposed replacement canopy and signage and minor building fagade
modifications, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report,
with the following revisions:
13.g
Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
ARC Minutes
July 20, 2015
Page 3
A. Finding 6. shall_ be added to read "(To allow a monument sign: LOVR is a
scenic corridor, and a monument sign, if practicable, will be used in lieu of a
Ion sin to maintain the high visual gualities of the area.
B. Condition 3. shall be modified to read, "The applicant shall work with City
engineering staff on a monument sign design and location that will not interfere
with required intersection sight lines while complying with other regulatory
measures, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. If a
monument is found to not be practicable, then the pylon sign shall include _a
maximum of 72- square feet and two (2- sided) sign faces. The "Seattle's Best"
and "Extra Mile" signs shall be removed from the pylon ".
C. Condition 4. shall be modified to read, "The canopy and structure shall utilize a
harmonious neutral color aalette ."
D. Condition 5. The canopy roof shall be limited to 15 -foot clearance with the
minimum fascia depth-,practicable.
E. Condition 6. shall be added to read: "All LED light features along the fascia
shall be eliminated and canopy lighting limited to that necessary to meet state
and federal standards. Site photometrics_ shall be submitted with Building
Permit applications demonstrating site compliance (existing and proposed new)
with City Night Sky Standards, and confirmed on -site prior to finalization.
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
2. 1144 Chorro Street. ARCH- 1376 -2015; Review of exterior building modifications
to accommodate a new bowling alley, nightclub use, and restaurant in the Historic
Downtown Commercial zone, with a categorical exemption from environmental
review; C -D -H zone; Discovery San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Senior Planner Leveille introduced the item, summarizing the Cultural Heritage
Committee's review and recommendations made on June 22, 2015.
Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
Commission adopt a resolution which approves the project, based on findings and
subject to conditions which he outlined.
Mark Rawson, applicant representative, summarized the history of the project;
explained the structural rationale for narrow windows and poster frames along the
Marsh Street frontage.
13.g
Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
ARC Minutes
July 20, 2015
Page 4
Jeremy Pemberton, applicant representative, Morro Bay, summarized the vision for the
project and the variety of anticipated clientele; commented on the difficulty of
remodeling the existing structure into something compliant and aesthetically pleasing.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Chair Wynn requested that the sign package be returned to the Architectural Review
Commission for review; recommended that the applicants be bold in the treatment of
the marquee signage areas, reconsider extending the horizontal awning farther along
Marsh Street, and limit the glossiness of exterior colors.
Vice -Chair Ehdaie and Commr. Nemcik spoke in support of the project.
Commr. Root spoke in support of taking advantage of marquee areas to create a unique
identity; spoke in support of the project.
Commr. Soll spoke in support of the project, and of reducing the glossiness of exterior
colors and materials.
Commr. Andreen spoke in support of being bold with sign package design and noted
good design can justify a larger sign presence.
Commr. Curtis spoke in support of avoiding faux historical features and using "sleek,"
mid - century modern styling; noted concern regarding the negative impact of the "pop -
out" areas along the Chorro Street elevation, in particular, the potential to limit marquee
options.
Commr. Andreen left the meeting at 7:13 p.m.
There were no further comments from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Curtis, seconded by Commr. Root, to adopt a resolution
approving the project, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff
report, with the following revisions:
A. A condition shall be added directing that signage proposals and facade
revisions specifically the marquee, be returned to the Architectural Review
Commission for review.
B. Condition 8. shall be revised to eliminate inapplicable language relating to the
placement and treatment of backflow_preyenters or eliminated entirely.,
13.g
Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
ARC Minutes
July 20, 2015
Page 5
AYES: Commrs. Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commr. Andreen
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast
Senior Planner Leveille provided a forecast of upcoming agenda items.
4. Commission:
Commr. Root noted lack of familiarity regarding the code enforcement process and
how it relates to provisions of Architectural Review Commission approvals that are
altered without permission following construction.
Commr. Nemcik inquired as to the mechanisms behind the needed update to the
Community Design Guidelines.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on August 3, 2015.
Lau e Thomas
Administrative Assistant III
13.g
Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: g - ARC Resolution & Meeting Minutes (1495 : 1144 Chorro (APPL-4006-2016) Appeal)
Page intentionally left
blank.
THENewspaper of the Central Coast
MBUNE-
3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, Califon
In The Superior Court of The State of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
AD # 2765185
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
ss.
County of San Luis Obispo
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not
interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at
all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned
was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of
THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation,
printed and published daily at the City of San Luis
Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice
at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was
published in the above-named newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit;
NOVEMBER 5, that said newspaper was duly and
regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of
general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior
Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on
June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code
of the State of California.
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
(Sign4titire of Principal Clerk)
DATED: NOVEMBER 5, 2016
AD COST: $403.68
RECEIVED
NOV 9 9 21016
`ALO CITY CLERK
CM
8fM ❑TdLTB MII W
SAN LUIS OSISPO CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
The San Luis Obispo City Council invites
all interested persons to attend a public
meeting on Tuesday, November 15,
2016, at 4:00 p.m. in the City Hall Coun-
cil Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, relative to the follow -
N public hearing to consider adopting a res'
)Iut'on to approve on update
f o the
Public
Facilltles Financing i
ult
Area Specific Plan.
For moM InformallW. YOU are invited to
contact Doug Davidson of the City's Com-
munity Development Department at (805)
761.7177 or by ern all at dd9�ldsan6slo
The San Luis Obispo City Council invites
all interested persons to attend a public
meeting on Tuesday, November 15,
2016, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Coun-
cil Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
abiano. California, relative to the follow -
public hearing to consider an appeal of
e Architectural Review Commission's ap-
roval of the rehabilliatlon and adaptive re•
sa of the Sunny Acres building for t3 resi-
en1lal units, a community room and office
G; part of an affordable housing residential
are facility, the construction of 3 new res'•
ential structures that contain an addition
el 21 units (as part of the residential care
aclilty), and a Miligated Negative Declara-
Ion of EnVlydnmantal impact as represent-
ed In the City Councli agenda report and
1ttdchment15 dated November 15, 2016
;1600 Bishop Street, ARCH 3336-20161
210.3562.2016).
For more Information, you are invited to
contact Rachel Cohen 01 the City's Com-
munity Development geparlmerd at (805)
781-7674 or by email at rcohanQ_sl 1 .
orq.
REVIEW
an., teas=siaFra..uo b+uruaear
a*,l, p•Ie 0? TouueL:�l a,,•-1-6^ "'Vec10 u
0'II Cnsi j a 1! r;-Ijgjoul pnunoo All
0101 'u0rel.l: F'JI.I! �, LI.I J4 r1i i l L- L'=- ($QI
Te Ll' -.No s,;
1144 Chorro Street
APPL-4006-2016
Review of an appeal of the ARC’s decision to approve a remodel
of an existing commercial structure, located at 1144 Chorro
Street, which includes a request for a marquee sign and other
exceptions from the Sign Regulations (ARCH-3773-2016).
November 15, 2016
Appellant: Camille Small
Recommendation
2
Adopt a Resolution that denies the appeal of the ARC’s
decision of the project,thereby granting final approval of
the project based on findings and subject to conditions as
set forth in “Attachment A”
3
Background
CHC review –June 22, 2015
Storefront remodel in the Downtown Historic District
Unanimously recommended approval
ARC review –July 20, 2015
Storefront remodel in the Downtown Core
Unanimously approved the project
4
Meeting Minutes
ARC July 20, 2015 Meeting Minutes
“…requested that the sign package be returned to
the Architectural Review Commission”
“…take advantage of marquee areas to create a
unique identity”
“…in support of being bold with sign package design
and noted good design can justify a larger sign
presence”
5
Background
ARC review –October 3, 2016
Unanimously approved the project in terms of its consistency
with the Sign Regulations and Community Design Guidelines.
Modifications include;
Storefront remodel in the Downtown Core
Marquee sign
Review of sign types not identified in the Sign Regulations
Sign exceptions
6
Appeal –October 13, 2016
The appeal letter expresses concerns that the proposed
signs are not consistent with downtown buildings.
The letter recommends the removal of the marquee
sign,raised letter sign and logo signs.Limiting the
maximum cumulative area of all signs to 200 sq.ft.
The letter also states that the multiple sign
exceptions constitute a grant of special privilege
toward the tenant and property owner.
7
Marquee Sign
8
Discussion Item 1 –Marquee Sign
9
Staff provided Discussion Item 1 for the ARC to
establish the appropriate size,projection clearance,and
illumination of the marquee sign.
The ARC determined that the marquee sign is
appropriate at the subject location.
The approval of the marquee sign does not constitute
a grant of special privilege because the Sign
Regulations do not preclude the ability for a similar
use to request a marquee sign.
Horizontal Clearances –Marquee Sign
10
The Marquee sign projects into the public right-of-way
six and a half feet which exceeds the maximum allowed
for an eight-foot sidewalk five feet.
The ARC determined that the proposed horizontal
clearance of the marquee sign is appropriate to
provide visibility from Marsh and Higuera Streets.
Discussion Item 2 –Raised Signs
11
Staff provided Discussion Item 2 for the ARC to
establish the appropriate number and size of the
Raised signs.
The ARC eliminated the Raised Logo Sign and
provided an option for the applicant to replace the
sign with two pedestrian scale signs.
The ARC restricted the size of the Raised Letter sign
to be reduced by 25%in total area.
Raised Letter and Logo Signs
12
Summary
The ARC eliminated the Raised Logo sign and reduced the
size of the Raised Letter sign.
The ARC approved a sign exception to allow up to six
signs for the tenant space,including two pedestrian scale
signs (excluding the marquee sign).
The ARC determined the horizontal clearance of the
marquee sign of six feet and six inches is appropriate at
the subject location.
13
Summary
The ARC excluded the marquee sign from contributing to
the maximum cumulative area and number of signage
allowed for the tenant space.
The ARC approval of the marquee does not constitute a
grant of special privilege because it is specific to the
concert venue,typical of other theater-like uses.
14
Recommendation
15
Adopt a Resolution that denies the appeal of the ARC’s
decision of the project,thereby granting final approval of
the project based on findings and subject to conditions as
set forth in “Attachment A”
Logo cut out sign
16
Awning Signs
17
Conditions
18
Condition No.4:Plans submitted for a building permit shall eliminate the Raised
Logo sign over the entrance of the business along the Chorro Street elevation,and
may be replaced with two pedestrian scale signs at the main entry,to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
Condition No.5:Tenant signage shall be limited to a maximum of six signs for all
types of signs,including pedestrian scale logo signs,sandwich-board signs or
larger window signs (excluding the Marquee sign).
Condition No.6:Plans submitted for a building permit shall limit the projection of
the Marquee sign to be no more than six feet and six inches over the width of the
public sidewalk;the underside of the Marquee sign shall be solid and substantially
integrated with the building to the ceiling of the recessed entry,to the satisfaction of
the Community Development Director and Chief Building Official.
Condition No.7:The Raised Letter sign (Discovery)shall be reduced in size to
75%of what has been proposed with the submitted project plans dated August 31,
2016,approximately 66 square feet.
Conditions
19
Condition No.8:Plans submitted for a sign permit shall call out the colors and
materials of signage and shall clearly indicate which portions of the signs do/do not
illuminate.All proposed exterior illumination including signage and the transom
window panels shall be designed to be dimmable with appropriate colors consistent
with Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations (Night Sky Preservation),to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.The portion of the marquee
sign that is the marquee shall not be internally illuminated or resemble an
illumination style such as a cabinet sign which is prohibited downtown.
Condition No.9:The proposed signage shall be designed so that illumination
does not exceed ten foot-candles measured at a distance of ten-feet from the sign,
compliant with the City’s Sign Regulations.
Condition No.10:The proposed signage shall not be illuminated after the close of
business.
Perspective
20
Previous Morro Street
21
Chorro Elevation Modifications
22
Marsh Elevation Modifications
23
Evaluation –Exterior Modifications
24
The proposed modifications remain compatible with
development projects in the downtown.
The project further increases the existing building
compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines by
adding transom windows, awnings and
decorative/recessed entryways.
The contemporary modifications will not pose an
aesthetically jarring transition, since the building
modifications are adequately separated from nearby
historic buildings.
25
Site Plan
26
Site photos
27
Chorro Street (restaurant/bowling-alley entrance)
28
Chorro Street (Concert entrance)
29
View from Marsh Street
30
Storefront along Chorro Street
31
Storefront along Marsh Street
32
Intersection of Chorro and Marsh Street
33
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
Marsh Street -Proposed Exterior Rendering
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
Chorro Street -Proposed Exterior Rendering
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
”It’s going to deteriorate San Luis Obispo’s public image
and hurt tourism and its economic vitality”
“Jeremy and Joshua have been strong collaborators
with our organization driving increased tourism and
exposure to the marketplace”
Marlyss Auster
Executive Director
Visitors and Convention Bureau
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
“It’s going to be a public nuisance, causing noise and
neighborhood impacts.”
”The operators, Jeremy and Joshua Pemberton, have proven
their ability to provide high-quality, community-friendly
entertainment experiences in a safe manner while mitigating
noise and neighborhood impacts.”
Jeffrey Lambert, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Ventura
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
“we don’t need another new liquor license in the downtown corridor”
The liquor license is a type 47 liquor license, already
relocated from the downtown corridor, requiring food and
beverage service at all times allowing all ages during
operations.
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
”The operators have a blemished track record and the
project will be a drain on public services, specifically police
resources.”
”The staff and operations at Discovery Ventura have met or exceeded
expectations in their ability to service nightlife entertainment. Located in the
heart of a residential neighborhood, there were many potential risks related
to nightlife activity. There have been zero call for service and the operators
are in good standing with the city.”
Jeffrey Lambert, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Ventura
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
“the project is essentially receiving four bars for the price of one”
The project requires approximately $5 million invested to
provide the many services and products including
bowling, billiards, shuffleboard, karaoke, darts, foosball,
and a top of the line entertainment facility designed to
present world-class, national touring acts.
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
“we don’t need another bar, especially not a MEGA
bar”
It’s not a bar. It’s a multi-platform
entertainment facility designed to
service all members of the community.
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
“It’s going to be just another college bar”
The business model was designed and proven
successful in Ventura —not a college town.
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
It’s disguising itself as kid friendly, when in reality it’s just a
nightclub
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
•Wedding Reception:220 guests seated at round tables for dinner with live band performing for them with a small
dance floor in the concert hall.
•25 Year High School Reunion:125 guests exclusively using the second floor bowling lanes and gaming area
with buffet style dining and beverage service.
•Birthday Party:30 guests exclusively using the second floor lounge room with Karaoke and Billiards with full
service food and beverage menus.
•Corporate Private Dinner and Presentation:8 guests exclusively using the private dining room in the basement,
using state-of-the-art video conference technology to conduct their international business meeting with clients in
China.
•Comedy Club Night:60 guests enjoying live entertainment in the basement area with a comedy club style
experience.
•Chamber Mixer:75 guests enjoying the main lounge and bar area for the monthly mixer.
•Birthday Party:12 guests enjoying the private lane and billiard area on the first floor.
•General Public Use:150 guests seated for dining experiences,30 guests using the remaining 5 lanes on the first
floor.
SAMPLE EXPERIENCE ANTICIPATED ON A GIVEN NIGHT INCLUDES:
Discovery | Ventura
NW Exterior Elevation of Outdoor Dining Patio
Discovery | Ventura
SW Exterior Elevation of Outdoor Dining Patio
Discovery | Ventura
Discovery | Ventura
9 Lanes of Bowling | Lamella Style Roof Structure
Discovery | Ventura
Gaming Area with Shuffleboard, Billiards, & Foosball
Discovery | Ventura
Discovery | Ventura
Outdoor Dining Patio
Discovery | Ventura
Horseshoe Bar with Lounge & Patio Dining
Ahi Poke Stack with Hawaiian Cusabi Slaw
Discovery | Food Program
Gourmet Bacon Burger with Certified Angus Beef
Discovery | Food Program
Discovery | Food Program
Wood Fired Margarita Pizza with Homemade, Hand-Tossed Dough
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
Discovery | San Luis Obispo
Requested Hours of Operation
•Will the condition on the operation change the behavior of the community? Or can this facility help improve the conditions?
•The conditions will remove a sophisticated, late night dining option that is non
•Very unique model that requires a special use
”This project should not be penalized because a small number of
members of the community are worried about more night-club-type
bars, when the facility would do much more than that —providing
food and entertainment in addition to drinks late at night.”
Billy Riggs
Discovery | San Luis Obispo