HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-11-2017 ARC Agenda Packet
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo
Agenda
Architectural Review Commission
Monday, September 11, 2017
5:00 pm
REGULAR MEETING
Council Hearing
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Greg Wynn
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Amy Nemcik, Brian Rolph, Allen Root, Richard Beller,
Vice-Chair Angela Soll, and Chair Greg Wynn
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: At this time, the general public is invited to speak before the
Commission on any subject within the jurisdiction of the Architectural Review Commission that
does not appear on this agenda. Although the Commission will not take action on any item
presented during the Public Comment Period, the Chair may direct staff to place an item on a
future agenda for formal discussion.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Regular Architectural Review Commission Meetings of July 10, July 17, and
August 7, 2017.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Note: Any court challenge to the actions taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be
limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public hearing. If you wish to speak,
please give your name and address for the record.
1. 435 Marsh Street, 1210 and 1218 Carmel Street. ARCH-0652-2017: Review of a new four-
story mixed-use development that includes eight residential units and approximately 1,100
square-feet of commercial space with associated tree removals, and a 20% mixed-use parking
reduction. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review; C-R zone; Renton
Partners, LLC, applicant. (Kyle Bell)
Architectural Review Commission Agenda Page 2
2. 1135 Santa Rosa Street. ARCH-0722-2017: Review of requested modifications to
application ARCH-0846-2015, to allow elimination of a bulkhead feature and changes to
approved building colors on a remodeled commercial building (exempt from environmental
review); C-D zone; 33 Tons, LLC, applicant. (Walter Oetzell)
COMMENT & DISCUSSION
1. STAFF
a. Agenda Forecast
ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission is scheduled for
Monday, September 18 , 2017 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San
Luis Obispo, California.
APPEALS
Any decision of the Architectural Review Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council
within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an
appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department,
City Clerk’s office, or on the City’s website (www.slocity.org). The appropriate appeal fee must
accompany the appeal documentation.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this
agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a
disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such
requests to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, July 10, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
July 10, 2017 at 5:01 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Amy Nemcik, Brian Rolph, Allen Root, Vice-Chair Angela Soll, and
Chair Greg Wynn.
Absent: Commissioner Richard Beller
Staff: Community Development Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rachel
Cohen, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell. Other staff members presented reports or
responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 35 Prado Road (25, 29, 35, 41, 43, & 45 Prado Road). ARCH-0653-2017: Conceptual
architectural review of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Water Resource Recovery Facility
(WRRF) Upgrade Project that includes new discharge requirements, increased capacity,
replacement of aging infrastructure, maximized recycled water production and incorporated
interpretive features and public amenities; PF zone, City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Associate Planner Rachel Cohen started the staff report presentation, and introduced
discussion items to the Commission.
Applicant Representative Dave Hix, Deputy Director of Wastewater of the Utilities
Department of the City of San Luis Obispo continued the staff report, presenting
questions to Commission. Program Manager for Water Systems Consulting Jeff Szytel,
and Principal Jeff McGraw and Architect Jean von Bargen Root, both with MWA
Architects, were introduced.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 10, 2017 Page 2
Assistant Design Project Manager Jennifer Phillips from CH2M, gave a presentation of
the overall site plans.
Architect Jean von Bargen Root from MWA Architects, gave a presentation on her
work on the project, highlighting community asset goals, and the “Learning Center”
portion of the project.
Applicant Representative Dave Hix responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Public Comments:
Ben Kulick, San Luis Obispo, commented on colors and designs – commended
architects on design.
-- End Public Comment –
The Commission discussed the proposed conceptual design and provided direction to
the Applicant team and staff.
2. 1135 Santa Rosa Street. ARCH-0722-2017: Review of requested modifications to
application ARCH-0846-2015, to allow elimination of a bulkhead feature and change
approved building colors on a remodeled commercial building (exempt from environmental
review); C-D zone, 33 Tons, LLC, applicant.
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell presented the staff report, and outlined the details of
the original project approval granted by the Commission, discussed the Notice of
Violation that was sent to the applicant about observed violations of conditions of
project approval, and responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Applicant Ben Kulick, Stalwork, Inc. provided a report on the colors of the building,
and supplied pictures of the building, discussing bulkheads and other features of the
building and nearby buildings. He spoke of this project’s comparison with the
architecture of surrounding buildings.
Applicant Ben Kulick and Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell responded to Commission
inquiries.
Public Comments:
Chair Wynn acknowledged receipt of five written correspondence items.
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, speaking on behalf of himself and James Lopes,
expressed that the colors previously approved by the Architectural Review Commission
recognize more appropriately the effects of climate change.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 10, 2017 Page 3
David Walker, San Luis Obispo, likened the diversity of architecture in the city to
Barcelona and London, and commended the architect on the use of colors on the
project.
Bryan Ridley, resident of San Luis Obispo and architect on the project with Stalwork,
Inc., referenced the City’s Community Design Guidelines in explaining his support of
the current design, materials, and colors of the project.
Russ Brown, San Luis Obispo and Chair of Save Our Downtown, referenced
communication from Alan Cooper and others from the Save Our Downtown
association, requested the Commission reject the request for changes, and maintain the
original color approved by the ARC.
Rachel Drake, San Luis Obispo, inquired about the details behind the change in color
from the originally agreed-upon plans.
-- End Public Comment –
Commission discussion followed.
ACTION: MOTION BY CHAIR WYNN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROLPH,
CARRIED 5-0-1, with Commissioner Beller absent, to continue the project to a date
uncertain, but no longer than 120 days, and to direct the applicant to work with staff
toward a solution that would be more consistent with the original project approval,
using appropriate complementary building colors to reduce the perceived massing of
the building, and to provide a human-scale element for variety and interest along the
Marsh Street frontage similar to the approved cut-tile bulkhead.
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
Deputy Director Davidson provided an agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:16 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Architectural Review
Commission is -scheduled for Monday, July 17, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing
Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2017
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, July 17, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
July 17, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Richard Beller, Brian Rolph, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root (arrived at 5:02
p.m.), Vice-Chair Angela Soll, and Chair Greg Wynn.
Absent: None.
Staff: Deputy Director of Community Development, Associate Planner Shawna Scott, and
Planning Technician Kip Morais. Other staff members presented reports or responded
to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BELLER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
NEMCIK, CARRIED 5-0-1 to approve the minutes of the Architectural Review Commission
meetings of April 17th and May 1, 2017.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 570, 578, 590 Marsh &581 Higuera Streets. ARCH-2213-2015: Architectural review of a
new mixed-use project that includes three, four-story structures with a request for a
maximum height of 59.5 feet. The project includes 19,792 square feet of commercial space,
62 residential units, 36 hotel rooms, and a two-level underground parking garage with 136
parking spaces, as well as a request for a new driveway approach to the parking garage
along on Nipomo Street. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review.; C-
D zone, The Obispo Company, applicant. (Rachel Cohen) This item is to be continued to a
date uncertain.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 17, 2017 Page 2
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR SOLL, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROLPH,
CARRIED 6-0 to continue the item to a date uncertain.
2. 3825 South Higuera. ARCH-0605-2017: Conceptual architectural review and preliminary
feedback on a proposed beer garden concept including a brewery, restaurant, and outdoor
seating area, which would be constructed using re-purposed sea trains and would displace
existing parking spaces adjacent to the Tribune building; no final action is being requested;
M-SP Zone (Higuera Commerce Park Specific Plan); John Belsher and DTJ Development,
LLC, applicant. (Shawna Scott)
Commissioner Beller disclosed ex-parte communication with applicant John Belsher.
Associate Planner Shawna Scott presented an in-depth staff report and responded to
Commission inquiries.
Applicant Representative Jenny Emerick provided an overview of the conceptual plan.
Tim Crawford, Access Engineering Group, responded to Commission inquiries.
Public Comment:
Ron Sedbury expressed concerns regarding potential impacts on the surrounding residential
area.
---End of Public Comment---
Commissioner Beller suggested adding features in front of the sea trains to create a unified
larger scale project consistent with the surrounding development; encouraged the applicant
to consider the space path relations between two containers, and look at the
Bonetti/Tribune area holistically (heights, shapes).
Commissioner Rolph stated concerns with the color scheme and encouraged the applicant
to consider stacking the sea trains.
Commissioner Nemcik spoke in favor of the conceptual plan, and suggested re-purposing
the sea trains in an innovative way.
Commissioner Root encouraged use of a subtle and sophisticated color scheme; do not
camouflage the sea trains; suggested a consistent industrial theme throughout the site;
stated a second level could be an option with connecting elements to provide shade and
reduce the box-like corners.
Commissioner Soll encouraged compatible colors, and noted that false fronts are
undesirable.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 17, 2017 Page 3
Chair Wynn encouraged the applicant to define certain areas (back of house, trash, etc.),
provide circulatory details; expressed interest in seeing pedestrian scale; stated additional
sidings and facades could be appropriate with textures or perforated metals; encouraged the
applicant to be true to the industrial nature of the site; suggested exploring the option of
sawtooth units on the street-front.
3. 313 and 315 Madonna Road. ARCH-0568-2017: Review of the façade remodel of an
existing commercial building located at 313 and 315 Madonna, including new landscaping
and loading dock reconfiguration, with a categorical exemption from environmental review;
C-R-PD zone; The Kroenke Group, applicant. (Kip Morais)
Project Architect James Van Hooser joined the meeting via conference call.
Assistant Planner Kip Morais, presented the staff report with use of a PowerPoint
presentation and responded to Commission inquiries.
Robert Green, Columbia, Missouri, SLO Promenade representative, provided a brief
presentation, outlining the history of the site.
Project Architect James Van Hooser provided detailed information regarding the
project design.
Public Comments:
None.
Chair Wynn closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Beller expressed concerns regarding the façade on the west and
southwest corner; encouraged the applicant to reference the City’s Community Design
Guidelines for direction on articulation; suggested the applicant create a more robust
outside space with a destination feel, avoiding billboard-like signage; encouraged
storefronts with bike lock areas.
Project Architect Van Hooser stated a desire for balance between good development
and design; suggested a pullback to increase seating areas and adding a canopy for
shading.
Following a brief discussion, Chair Wynn and Commissioner Beller volunteered to
form a subcommittee to support additional conditions, directing the applicant to explore
additional opportunities at the Sprouts corner entry; encouraged the applicant to
incorporate deeper recesses and secondary uses on the west façade.
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 17, 2017 Page 4
ACTION: MOTION BY CHAIR WYNN; SECONDED BY ROLPH, CARRIED 6-0 TO
APPROVE THE PROJECT WITH ADDED CONDITIONS:
a. Reformat numbering of conditions in the resolution
b. Modify language of Condition #28 to encourage the applicant to do the Letter
of Map Revision
c. Add condition to encourage additional southside shading
d. Add condition directing applicant to return to an ARC subcommittee and
Deputy Director of Community Development to review the south and west
elevations and chamfer clip at Sprouts to consider additional entry opportunities
and review circulation concerns and billboard signage and canopy structure.
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
Deputy Director Davidson provided an agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:56 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Architectural Review
Commission is scheduled for Monday, August 7, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., in the location, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2017
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, August 7, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
August 7, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Richard Beller, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root, and Chair Greg Wynn
Absent: Commissioner Brian Rolph and Vice-Chair Angela Soll
Staff: Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, and Planning
Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen. Other staff members presented reports or responded to
questions as indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
--End of Public Comment--
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BELLER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
WYNN, CARRIED 4-0-2, to approve the minutes of the Architectural Review Commission
meeting of June 5, and June 19, 2017, as amended:
June 19, 2017, page 2: strike “fiberglass” from Chair Wynn’s comments.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 1101 Monterey Street, and 1144 Higuera Street. ARCH-0371-2017: Architectural review
of a new three-story, mixed-use project that includes 21,198 square feet of office space,
2,985 square feet of retail space, and 2,195 square feet of restaurant space. The applicant is
requesting off-site parking, a temporary parking lot with 21 spaces, and a 50% parking
reduction that includes a shared parking reduction, a mix of uses parking reduction, a
reduction for additional bicycle parking, and a parking reduction for implementing a
Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP), with a categorical exemption from
environmental review; C-R zone; PEDP, Inc., applicant. (Rachel Cohen)
Associate Planner Rachel Cohen presented an in-depth staff report with use of a PowerPoint
presentation and responded to Commissioner inquiries, and made note of corrections to
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of August 7, 2017 Page 2
Resolution: changes to overall project and restaurant square footage, and to Utilities Section
No. 35.
Applicant Representative, Carol Florence, summarized the project;
Applicant Representative, Architect Scott Martin, described that project uses Downtown
Design Guidelines and architectural influences from existing buildings in San Luis Obispo.
Applicant Representative, Associate Planner Emily Ewer, clarified changes to Condition 35
and Condition 12.
Public Comments:
Fred Vernacchia
Nick Tompkins.
--End of Public Comment--
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROOT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
NEMCIK, CARRIED 4-0-2 to adopt the Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the San Luis
Obispo Architectural Review Commission approving a new three-story project that includes
21,198 square feet of office space, 2,985 square feet of retail space, and 2,195 square feet of
restaurant space with shared off-site parking, a temporary parking lot, and a 50% parking
reduction that includes a shared parking reduction, a mix of uses, parking reduction, a reduction
for additional bicycle parking, and a parking reduction for implementing a Transportation
Demand Management Plan (TDMP), with a Categorical Exemption from Environmental Review,
1101 Monterey & 1144 Higuera (ARCH-0371-2017)” with the following amendments:
Project Description: Overall square-footage to be changed to 30,543 square feet, and restaurant
square-footage to be changed to 4,016 square feet
Condition 35. Utilities Department to update.
Condition 6. Add “All rooftop equipment and screening shall be diminished in scale and color to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.”
Condition 12. Add “(s)” to “extension.”
Condition 14. Add “The yearly report submitted to the City each year shall include a review of
bicycle parking usage and an evaluation of best practices. The TDMP should encourage
incentives (e.g. free bus passes, additional vacation time for biking, carpooling or taking transit,
etc.) to promote alternative modes of transportation outside of single occupant vehicles.”
Add Condition: “Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window detailing that
provides shadow, articulation, and dimension to the building facade such as, but not limited to
recessed windows, awnings, lintels and/or sills to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.”
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of August 7, 2017 Page 3
Add Condition: “Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating
the type of materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans
shall include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other
related window features.”
2. 363 Santa Rosa Street. ARCH-0572-2017: Architectural review of a new car wash facility,
with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-T zone; Uhm, LLC, applicant.
(Kyle Van Leeuwen)
Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen presented an in-depth staff report with use of a
PowerPoint presentation.
Applicant, George Garcia, summarized the project and provided a PowerPoint presentation
including updated site renderings.
Public Comments:
None.
--End of Public Comment--
Commission discussion followed.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BELLER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
ROOT, CARRIED 4-0-2 to adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the San Luis Obispo
Architectural Review Commission approving the development of a new car wash facility with a
Categorical Exemption from Environmental Review. 363 Santa Rosa Street, ARCH-0572-2017”
with the following amendments:
Condition 6. “Proposed wall signage shall be no larger than 30 75 square feet.”
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
Deputy Director Davidson provided a brief agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:29 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Architectural Review
Commission is scheduled for Monday, August 21, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing
Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
Respectfully submitted by,
Jennifer Hooper
Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2017
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Item Number: #1
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of a four-story mixed-use development that includes eight residential units
and approximately 1,100 square feet of commercial space with associated tree removals, and a
20% mixed-use parking reduction. The project is categorical exemption from environmental
review.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 435 Marsh Street & BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
1210, 1218 Carmel Street Phone Number: 781-7524
e-mail: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0652-2017 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 Renton Partners, LLC
Representative Ten Over Studio
Complete Date August 17, 2017
Zoning C-R
General Plan General Retail
Site Area ~0.31 acres
Environmental
Status
Categorically exempt from
environmental review under
CEQA Guidelines section
15332 (In-Fill Development
Projects)
SUMMARY
The project applicant, Renton Partners, LLC, is proposing to demolish an existing non-historic
building and construct a new four-story mixed-use building with commercial/retail at the ground
level (1,100 sq. ft.) and eight residential units to be subdivided for individual sale under the
Minor Subdivision application SBDV-0936-2017, located within the Commercial Retail (C-R)
zone at the corner of Marsh & Carmel Streets. The project has been designed to be consistent
with the Community Design Guidelines (CDG) and is requesting a 20% mixed-use parking
reduction, no other exceptions have been requested as part of this application.
ARC1 - 1
DD
ARCH-0652-2017
435 Marsh Street
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the General Plan, Zoning
Regulations, Community Design Guidelines, and other applicable policy documents.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
Site Information/Setting
Site Size ~0.31 acres
Present Use & Development Retail Commercial, formally occupied by Landis Auto Service
Topography Relatively Flat
Access Marsh Street & Carmel Street
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: C-R (Offices and Restaurant)
South: R-4 (Multi-family & Single Family Residences)
East: C-R (Offices)
West: C-R (Car Wash and Auto Repair)
Project Description
A summary of significant project features includes the following (Attachment 2, Reduced Project
Plans):
1. Site Plan: New four-story mixed-use building (22,434 sq. ft.), with parking garages
interior to the site.
• Eight residential units
• Two commercial/retail tenant spaces (1,100 sq. ft.)
• Ficas tree removal
• 20% mixed-use parking reduction
2. Design: Mission architectural design that includes the following details and materials;
• Two new commercial entrances oriented toward Marsh Street
• Design features included; upper level balconies, detailed cornices, concrete
bulkheads, aluminum clad storefront systems, detailed columns and glass storefronts
• Materials include; Stucco, Mission style roof tile with exposed faux rafter beams,
decorative tile trim along entrances,
Project Statistics
Item Proposed 1 Ordinance Standard 2
Street Yard setback 0 feet 0 feet
Side Yard Setbacks 5.75 feet 0 feet
Max. Height of Structure(s) 42 feet 45 feet
Coverage (buildings & paving) 46% 100%
Density 11 11.1
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.67 3.0
Parking Spaces 21 (20% parking reduction) 26
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans
2. City Zoning Regulations
ARC1 - 2
ARCH-0652-2017
435 Marsh Street
Page 3
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed improvements must conform to the standards and limitations of the Zoning
Regulations and Engineering Standards, and be consistent with applicable CDG. Staff has
evaluated the project against relevant standards and guidelines and found it to be in substantial
compliance, as discussed in this analysis.
Consistency with the Community Design Guidelines
The CDG establish the intent of the development objectives for commercial projects that
consider San Luis Obispo’s small town scale and demonstrate sensitivity to the design context of
the surrounding area. The CDG establish the intent of the development standards for infill
development projects to be compatible in scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with
adjacent buildings and those in the immediate neighborhood.
Site Plan: The CDG state that site planning should create a pleasant, comfortable, safe, and
distinct place for residents. New development should respect the privacy of adjacent residential
uses through appropriate building orientation and structure height (CDG 5.4A). New
development should provide a transition between the street and the project through definition of
the building entries, walkways and landscaping (CDG 2.1D).
The project orients the commercial uses along Marsh Street and provides residential units on the
upper levels. The applicant has proposed to provide majority of the residential parking within the
individual garages and parking for the commercial uses on the ground level accessed from
Carmel Street. The project would consolidate the existing driveways on both Marsh and Carmel
Streets to one driveway on Carmel Street. The project’s parking area is not a dominant visual
element of the site and is screened by a structure that is oriented toward the major street frontage.
Building Design: A building’s design should provide a sense of human scale and proportion.
Horizontal and vertical wall articulation should be expressed through the use of wall offsets,
recessed windows and entries, awnings, full roofs with overhangs, second floor setbacks, or
covered arcades. (CDG 3.2). Designs should demonstrate a consistent use of colors, materials,
and detailing throughout all elevations of the building. Elevations which do not directly face a
street should not be ignored or receive only minimal architectural treatment (CDG 3.1.B.3).
The structure demonstrates consistent use of colors, materials, and detailing throughout all
elevations of the building. The design utilizes vertical wall articulation, offsets, and recessed
windows to relieve the form and mass of the building. The project includes pedestrian-scale
features including storefront windows, planter boxes, light fixtures, and balconies. All elevations
are visually interesting and receive interesting architectural treatments that enhance views of the
structures from all views on and off site1.
1 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5, Section 5.4 C.1: Façade and roof articulation. A structure with three
or more attached units should incorporate wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent scale. Changes in wall
planes and roof heights, and the inclusion of elements such as balconies, porches, arcade, dormers, and cross
gables can avoid the barracks-like quality of long flat walls and roofs.
ARC1 - 3
ARCH-0652-2017
435 Marsh Street
Page 4
Street Trees: The applicant has requested removal of one large ficus street tree, located on Marsh
Street, to “reinforce the architectural rhythm of the primary building façade,” and to provide a
consistent urban landscape with the planting of six new street trees (two along Marsh Street and
four along Carmel Street). The City Arborist recommended that the ficus tree remain, due to its
healthy condition, and this species’ ability to withstand heavy pruning. The City Arborist has
reviewed the project plans and recommends Conditions No. 33 and 34 which require that the
project construction plans address any necessary foundation design to accommodate the root
system of the tree, and coordination regarding tree protection and trimming practices.
ARC Discussion Item #1: Based on the City Arborist’s review of the project and tree
removal request, it is Staff’s recommendation to retain the existing ficus street tree. The
ARC should discuss 1) the applicant’s request to remove the ficus tree and the City
Arborist’s recommendation to retain the tree and 2) proposed Conditions No. 32 and 33
(Attachment 1). If the ARC disagrees with the City Arborist’s recommendation and
approves removal of the ficus street tree, the Tree Committee will consider the
applicant’s request pursuant to the Tree Ordinance2.
Trash Enclosure: The CDG state that required trash enclosures should be located away from
public streets and primary building entrances so that their use does not interfere with on-site
parking or circulation areas, and adjacent uses. The trash enclosure has been located along
Carmel Street adjacent to the driveway. Condition No. 4 requires design improvements to the
trash enclosure as viewed from the public right-of-way by requiring the enclosure to be designed
with high quality materials to match the architecture of the project3.
Consistency with the Zoning Regulations
The project design complies with building setbacks, lot coverage, density, and building height
requirements for the Commercial Retail (C-R) zone (see Section 2.0 Project Statistics). The
Zoning Regulations 17.08.72 Mixed Use Projects state that the design of mixed use projects shall
consider potential impacts on adjacent properties and designed compatible with the adjacent and
surrounding residential neighborhood.
Parking: The project requires 26 vehicle parking spaces (20 spaces for eight residential units and
6 spaces for 1,100 square feet of commercial space – based on a request for a more intensive use
requirement of 1/200 rather than 1/300). The applicant is requesting a 20% parking reduction,
resulting in the provision of 21 vehicle spaces onsite. The project qualifies for a parking
reduction of 20% because the project includes commercial and residential uses and it is
2 Tree Ordinance Section 12.24.090.E.2.c: If architectural review is required for the development, the architectural
review commission shall approve or deny the application: (1) If the city arborist has recommended denying the
application and the architectural review commission has approved the appli cation, the tree committee shall
review the architectural review commission’s decision.
3 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 6.1F.3 Miscellaneous Design Details. If space constraints or excessive
site slope mandate that a trash/recycling enclosure be installed in a street yard, then it should be: located so it
gates do not face the street; finished with high quality materials to match the architecture of the project
buildings; and utilize surrounding landscaping to further screen and enhance its appearance. Screening
techniques such as trailing vines on walls, berming along side and rear walls, and overhead trellises are all
encouraged.
ARC1 - 4
ARCH-0652-2017
435 Marsh Street
Page 5
anticipated that the times of peak parking demand would not coincide4, parking is adequate for
the proposed project and all uses on-site. Condition No. 6 includes a requirement that the
property owner must submit a running total of the site’s parking requirements and hours of
operation with the submittal of any building permit for tenant improvements, and/or each
business license.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In -Fill Development Projects; Section 15332
of the State California Environmental Quality Act (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 a developed property and is served
by required utilities and public services. The project has been reviewed by the City Public Works
Department, Transportation Division, and no significant traffic impacts were identified, based on
the size and location of the project.
5.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Comments from the other City departments have been incorporated into the Draft Resolution as
conditions of approval.
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, Zoning
Regulations, Community Design Guidelines, or other policy document.
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Reduced Project Plans
Available at the Community Development Department: Project Plans
Available at ARC Hearing: Colors and Materials Board
4 Zoning Regulations Sections 17.16.060.B and C: Where two or more uses share common parking areas, the total
number of parking spaces required may be reduced by up to 10% with approval of an administrative use permit
and by approving an administrative use permit, the Director may reduce the parking requirement for projects
sharing parking by up to 20%, in addition to the sh ared parking reduction, for a total maximum parking
reduction of 30%, upon finding that the times of maximum parking demand from various uses will not coincide.
ARC1 - 5
RESOLUTION NO. ARC-XXXX-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
FOUR-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES EIGHT
RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND APPROXIMATELY 1,100 SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH ASSOCIATED TREE REMOVALS, AND A
20% MIXED-USE PARKING REDUCTION. THE PROJECT IS
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
SEPTEMBER 11, 2017 (435 MARSH, 1210 & 1218 CARMEL STREETS
ARCH-0652-2017)
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 August 21, 2017, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0652-
2017, Renton Partners, LLC, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has
duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of the
City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project (ARCH-0652-2017), based on the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project will be compatible with site
constraints and the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element for this location since the
project proposes to construct a mixed-use building that includes commercial/retail and
residential uses that can be utilized for such uses envisioned by the General Commercial
District.
3. The proposed project is consistent with Land Use Element policies 2.3.6 (Housing &
Businesses) and 3.8.5 (Mixed Uses), because the project provides residential dwellings within
a commercial district that is appropriate and compatible with the existing neighborhood.
4. The project is consistent with the Housing Element because the project provides a variety of
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 6
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 2
residential types, sizes, and style of dwellings (HE Goal 5), and encourages the development
of housing above ground-level commercial uses (HE 5.3).
5. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines by
providing a variety of architectural treatments that add visual interest and articulation to the
building design that complements the design and scale of the existing structures in the
surrounding neighborhood (CDG, Chapter 5.4).
6. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines by
providing a variety of architectural treatments that add visual interest and articulation to the
building design that complements the design and scale of the existing structures on-site, and
by providing clearly defined customer entrances.
7. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations for Mixed-Use Projects
(Section 17.08.072), since the proposed building design complies with design and
performance standards for mixed-use development and is consistent with all property
development standards including height, coverage, and setbacks for the Commercial Retail
(C-R) zone.
8. The proposed project complies with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060 A.,
Parking Space Requirements, in that it satisfies the intent of that section which is "...to
minimize the area devoted exclusively to parking and drives when typical demands may be
satisfied more efficiently by shared facilities." Moreover, the project satisfies the requirement
for a mixed-use parking reduction in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.16.060 C.,
because the times of maximum parking demand from the proposed uses will not coincide.
9. The proposed parking reduction will be safe, and will not be detrimental to the surrounding
area or cause a decline in quality of life because the project is located proxi mate to adjacent
uses such as retail, restaurants, offices, employment, and auto services, which are in close
proximity to a transit stop allowing for alternative modes of transportation such as walking,
biking, or taking public transportation.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it consists of the
redevelopment of the project site consistent with policies and standards applicable to development
within a General Retail area, on a site less than five acres in size, with no value as habitat for
endangered, rare, or threatened species, as described in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332
(Infill Development). The site is within City limits and is served by City utilities and public
services. Based on the location, size, and area and quantity of commercial and residential
components of the development, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects
related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code
requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 7
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 3
additional requirements applicable to the project. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC)
hereby grants final approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC (ARCH-0652-2017). 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 approvals listed as sheet number 2.
Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are
addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions
of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as
deemed appropriate.
2. Demolition of the existing building shall not commence until a permit has been issued by the
building official. The applicant shall comply with Municipal Code Chapter 15.04
Construction and Fire Prevention Regulations, Appendix Chapter A2 Demolition and Moving
of Buildings, including but not limited to, the following: the applicant shall provide evidence
that for a period of not less than 90 days from date of permit application, the building was
advertised in a local newspaper on at least 3 separate occasions not less than 15 days apart,
as available to any interested person to be moved, and submit historic documentation for the
structure.
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the
color and material board submitted with Architectural Review application.
4. The trash enclosure located along Carmel Street shall be design with high quality materials
to match the architecture of the project and screened with large shrubs and/or trees, subject
to the approval of the Community Development Director. The applicant shall incorporate a
trellis over the trash enclosure in order to screen from overlook; design of the trellis is subject
to the Community Design Guidelines and to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director.
5. The storage area for trash and recycling cans shall be screened from the public right-of-way.
The subject property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner at all times; free of
excessive leaves, branches, and other landscape material. The applicant shall be responsible
for the clean-up of any landscape material in the public right-of-way.
6. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking
calculations for the property. Parking calculations shall be provided upon the submittal of
business license applications and Planning and Building permits for tenant changes or
improvements. Parking calculations for the subject location shall be updated to include the
minimum required parking spaces per tenant space with application of the 20% parking
reduction.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 8
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 4
7. All parking spaces must be available for common use and not exclusively assigned to any
individual use, required residential parking may be reserved, but commercial parkin g must
be made available for guests or overflow from residences.
8. Final plans shall clearly depict the location of all required short and long-term bicycle parking
required for commercial uses, plans submitted for construction permits shall include bicycle
lockers or interior space within each residential unit or parking area for the storage of at least
two bicycles per unit. Sufficient detail shall be provided about the placement and design of
bike racks and lockers to demonstrate compliance with relevant Engineering Standards and
Community Design Guidelines, to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Community
Development Directors.
9. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path/parking lighting,
shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures
shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All
wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a
graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets on the submitted
building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to insure that light is directed
downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation standards
contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations.
10. Noise reduction – Interior noise levels: Plans submitted for construction permits to complete
the project will clearly indicate and describe the noise reduction measures, techniques, and
materials used to reduce noise levels for the portion of the project along Marsh Street that is
exposed to elevated noise levels, as indicated in Figures 4 and 5 of the Noise Element of the
General Plan, to acceptable levels, as described in Figure 1 of the Noise Element. Measures,
techniques, and materials used to reduce noise levels shall be as described in the Standard
Noise Package for achieving a noise level reduction of 25 dB, from the City’s Noise
Guidebook, or equivalent alternative measures, techniques, and materials.
11. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating the type of
materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall
include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related
window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high quality materials for the windows
that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible with the neighborhood
character, to the approval of the Community Development Director.
12. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With
submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building,
which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If
any condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted
for a building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen
them. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be
adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 9
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 5
13. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees
with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
14. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown
on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction
plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as
determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20
feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities
Director, the back flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street
yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate
by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such
equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community
Development Directors.
15. Any new proposed signage shall be reviewed by the Planning Division to ensure
appropriateness for the site and compliance with the Sign Regulations. Signage shall
coordinate with building architecture and the type of land use. No channel letters with plex
faces or metal cabinet signs are allowed. The Director may refer signage to the ARC if it
seems excessive or out of character with the project.
16. The Architectural Review Commission’s approval of this project shall expire after three years
if construction has not started. On request, the Community Development Director may grant
a single, one-year extension.
Engineering Division – Community Development Department
17. Projects involving the construction of new structures requires that complete frontage
improvements be installed or that existing improvements be upgraded per city standard. MC
12.16.050
18. The building plan submittal shall show an 8’ clear pedestrian path of travel void of all
sidewalk obstructions along the Marsh and Carmel Street sidewalk in order to meet pedestrian
level of service thresholds required for this area.
19. The project is located in the Mission Style Sidewalk District of downtown. The building plan
submittal shall show the Marsh Street frontage to be upgraded in accordance with the Mission
Sidewalk District of downtown per city engineering standards.
20. The building plan submittal shall show a new curb ramp to comply with current ADA and
City Engineering Standard #4440. The current city and ADA standard requires a 4’ accessible
sidewalk extension behind the ramp. The curb ramp shall be constructed in the Mission Style.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 10
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 6
21. The building plan submittal shall show a bulb-out at the intersection along Marsh and Carmel
Street per city engineering standards in accordance with the Downtown Concept Plan and to
the satisfaction of the Planning Division and Public Works Department.
22. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. All existing and
proposed utilities along with utility company meters shall be shown. Existing underground
and overhead services shall be shown along with any proposed alterations or upgrades.
Services to the new structures shall be underground. All work in the public right-of-way shall
be shown or noted.
23. The building plan submittal shall show the existing utility pole along Carmel Street to be
removed or relocated and overhead utility wires placed underground to the satisfaction of the
serving utility companies and the City.
24. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Compan y. The
respective refuse storage area and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics,
safety, and functionality. Drainage from the trash enclosure shall comply with the City
Engineering Standard 1010.B regarding water quality treatment prior to discharge to the
storm drain system or gutter.
25. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading and drainage plan for this
project. The plan shall show the existing and proposed contours and/or spot elevations to
clearly depict the proposed grading and drainage. Show and label the neighboring high point
elevation or grade break at the yard areas and drainage arrows to show historic drainage and
any run-on. Show all existing and proposed drainage courses, pipes and structures; indicate
the size, type and material.
26. The building plan submittal shall show new sumped catch basins per City Engineering
Standard 3355 to accommodate the new bulb-out design.
27. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater
Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for redeveloped
sites. Include a complete Post Construction Stormwater Control Plan Template as available
on the City’s Website.
28. An operations and maintenance manual will be required for the post construction stormwater
improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building permit application and
shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance. A private stormwater
conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection
approvals.
29. This property is located within a designated flood zone as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate
Map (FIRM) for the City of San Luis Obispo. As such, any new structures shall comply with
all Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements and the city’s Floodplain
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 11
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 7
Management Regulations per Municipal Code Chapter 17.84.
30. This property is located in an AE flood zone. The buildings and building service equipment
shall be elevated or flood-proofed to at least one foot above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE).
The final BFE determination shall be based on the most upstream building face. Additional
freeboard to 2’ above the BFE may result in additional savings on flood insurance and is
encouraged. The garages may be “wet” floodproofed to 1’ above adjacent grade if elevating
the garage finished floors is infeasible or impractical.
31. The elevators construction shall be detailed in the building permit plan submittal in
accordance with the Floodplain Management Regulations and FEMA Technical Bulletin
TB4-2010. The garages, storage, and areas of building access shall be “wet” flood-proofed
with flood-resistant materials in accordance with adopted standards.
32. The City Arborist does not support the proposed Ficus street tree removal. Unless otherwise
approved, the building plan submittal shall include complete tree protection plan and certified
arborist report to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The City Arborist shall review and
approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to commencing with any demolition,
grading, or construction. The City Arborist shall approve any safety pruning, the cutting of
substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of trees. A city-approved arborist shall
complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be clearly shown or
noted on the building plans.
33. Unless otherwise approved for removal, the Ficus tree preservation measures may include
building floor plan modifications, custom foundation detailing, and modified soils engineer
recommendations for site preparation.
34. The building plan submittal shall show the proposed new 15-gallon street trees with tree
wells, grates and guards in accordance with city engineering standards. Tree species and
planting requirements shall be per City Engineering Standards.
Utilities Department
35. Each unit shall be provided with an individual public water meter, and shall meter banks shall
be in an area accessible by the city per the engineering design standards.
36. A new sewer lateral shall be installed per the engineering design standards into the existing
sewer main along Carmel Street.
37. A new 8” water main shall be constructed along the frontage of the property, and shall connect
from Marsh Street to Pacific Street.
Housing Division – Community Development Department
38. To satisfy the City’s Inclusionary Housing Requirements, applicant shall either pay
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 12
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
435 Marsh, 1210 & 1218 Carmel Streets, ARCH-0652-2017
Page 8
Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fees equal to 5% of building valuation or dedicate affordable
housing unit(s) consistent Table 2 of the General Plan Housing Element.
Indemnification
39. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemn ified
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in
the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner _____________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 11th day of September, 2017.
_____________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 13
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
CL
I
E
N
T
RE
N
T
O
N
P
A
R
T
N
E
R
S
,
L
L
C
C
/
O
J
I
M
R
E
N
D
L
E
R
16
3
6
G
A
R
D
E
N
S
T
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
re
n
d
l
e
r
j
i
m
@
g
m
a
i
l
.
c
o
m
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
TE
N
O
V
E
R
S
T
U
D
I
O
53
9
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
.
,
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
80
5
.
5
4
1
.
1
0
1
0
CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
J
O
E
L
S
N
Y
D
E
R
jo
e
l
s
@
t
e
n
o
v
e
r
s
t
u
d
i
o
.
c
o
m
CI
V
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
WA
L
S
H
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
97
9
O
S
O
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
U
I
T
E
1
4
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
80
5
.
3
1
9
.
4
9
4
8
X
1
0
1
CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
M
A
T
T
W
A
L
S
H
ma
t
t
@
w
a
l
s
h
e
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
.
n
e
t
MA
R
S
H
&
C
A
R
M
E
L
M
I
X
E
D
-
U
S
E
TE
N
O
V
E
R
S
T
U
D
I
O
5 39
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
.
, S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
, C
A
9
3
4
0
1
80
5.
5
4
1
.
1
0 1 0
CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
J
O
E
L
S
N
Y
D
E
R
j oe
l
s
@ te
n
o
v
e
r
s
t
u
d
i
o
.
c
o
m
C IV
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
WA
L
S H
E
N
G IN
E
E
R
I
N
G
9 79
O
S
O
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
UI
T
E
1
4
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
PO
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
80
5
.
3
1 9.
4 9 4 8 X
1
0 1
CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
M
A
T
T
W
A
L
S
H
ma
t
t
@
w
a
l
s
h
e
n
g in
e
e
r
i
n
g .n
e
t
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 14
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 15
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
EN
E
R
G
Y
C
O
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
Ma
r
s
h
&
C
a
r
m
e
l
M
i
x
e
d
U
s
e
i
s
p
r
i
m
a
r
i
l
y
w
a
l
k
-
u
p
t
o
w
n
h
o
m
e
s
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
ca
p
i
t
a
l
i
z
e
o
n
p
a
s
s
i
v
e
e
n
e
r
g
y
.
T
h
i
s
a
r
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
d
u
c
e
s
t
h
e
d
e
m
a
n
d
o
f
he
a
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
c
o
o
l
i
n
g
l
o
a
d
s
b
y
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
t
i
n
g
i
n
t
e
r
i
o
r
e
g
r
e
s
s
h
a
l
l
w
a
y
s
,
a
n
d
ma
x
i
m
i
z
e
s
t
h
e
l
i
g
h
t
a
n
d
a
i
r
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
t
o
t
h
e
u
n
i
t
s
.
A
l
l
t
h
e
u
n
i
t
s
h
a
v
e
t
h
e
a
b
i
l
-
it
y
t
o
h
a
v
e
c
r
o
s
s
-
b
r
e
e
z
e
f
o
r
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
c
o
o
l
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
a
s
o
u
t
h
-
f
a
c
i
n
g
c
o
u
r
t
y
a
r
d
to
m
a
x
i
m
i
z
e
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
d
a
y
l
i
g
h
t
t
o
t
h
e
u
n
i
t
s
.
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
I
N
F
O
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
:
T
Y
P
E
V
A
,
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
E
D
.
1
H
R
F
I
R
E
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
T
W
.
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
N
D
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
U
S
E
S
.
1/
2
H
R
F
I
R
E
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
T
W
.
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
U
N
I
T
S
.
BR
E
A
K
D
O
W
N
B
Y
F
L
O
O
R
:
FI
R
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
6
1
5
0
S
F
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
M
1
1
0
0
S
F
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
R
-
2
1
6
3
4
S
F
G
A
R
A
G
E
U
3
4
1
4
S
F
SE
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
6
6
3
2
S
F
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
R
-
2
6
6
3
2
S
F
TH
I
R
D
F
L
O
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
6
3
7
0
S
F
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
R
-
2
6
3
7
0
S
F
FO
U
R
T
H
F
L
O
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
3
2
8
2
S
F
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
R
-
2
3
2
8
2
S
F
TO
T
A
L
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
2
2
,
4
3
4
S
F
UN
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
A
T
4
T
H
F
L
O
O
R
1
,
9
8
6
S
F
BR
E
A
K
D
O
W
N
B
Y
T
Y
P
E
:
2-
S
T
O
R
Y
,
2
-
B
D
C
O
N
D
O
M
I
N
I
U
M
:
L
I
V
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
1
,
4
3
1
S
F
U
N
C
O
V
’
D
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
3
6
0
S
F
4-
S
T
O
R
Y
3
-
B
D
T
O
W
N
H
O
M
E
:
L
I
V
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
*
:
2
,
0
1
8
S
F
U
N
C
O
V
’
D
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
:
2
1
1
S
F
G
A
R
A
G
E
:
5
0
4
S
F
*I
N
C
L
U
D
E
S
A
L
L
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
P
A
T
I
O
S
A
N
D
D
E
C
K
S
,
A
N
D
E
N
C
L
O
S
E
D
C
I
R
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
PA
R
K
I
N
G
I
N
F
O
GE
N
E
R
A
L
R
E
T
A
I
L
=
1
1
0
0
/
2
0
0
=
6
(2
)
2
-
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
S
=
4
(6
)
3
-
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
S
=
1
5
GU
E
S
T
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
1
P
E
R
5
U
N
I
T
S
=
1
TO
T
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
’
D
:
2
6
-
2
0
%
M
I
X
E
D
-
U
S
E
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
:
2
1
PA
R
K
I
N
G
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
=
2
1
MO
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
@
1
:
2
0
=
1
15
%
B
I
K
E
R
E
Q
’
D
:
3
(5
0
%
S
H
O
R
T
T
E
R
M
;
4
0
%
L
O
N
G
T
E
R
M
)
=
2
S
H
O
R
T
,
1
L
O
N
G
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
TO
T
A
L
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
:
1
1
D
U
(6
)
3
-
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
=
9
(2
)
2
-
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
=
2
IN
D
E
X
PR
O
J
E
C
T
I
N
F
O
1
CO
N
T
E
X
T
U
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
2
DE
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
C
1
.
0
(
3
)
GR
A
D
I
N
G
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C
2
.
0
(
4
)
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
C
3
.
0
(
5
)
SE
C
T
I
O
N
S
&
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
C
4
.
0
(
6
)
SE
C
T
I
O
N
S
&
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
C
4
.
1
(
7
)
SE
C
T
I
O
N
S
&
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
C
4
.
2
(
8
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
9
PL
A
N
T
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
&
I
M
A
G
E
S
1
0
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
W
A
T
E
R
U
S
E
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
1
1
AR
C
H
’
L
D
E
M
O
P
L
A
N
1
2
SI
T
E
P
L
A
N
1
3
SI
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
1
4
SI
T
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
1
5
FL
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
1
6
-
1
9
RO
O
F
P
L
A
N
2
0
EL
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
2
1
-
2
5
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
2
6
MO
D
E
L
I
M
A
G
E
S
2
6
-
3
1
VI
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
SI
T
E
AD
D
R
E
S
S
:
4
3
5
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
(
+
1
2
1
0
&
1
2
1
8
C
A
R
M
E
L
)
AP
N
:
0
0
3
-
5
1
2
-
0
1
7
&
0
0
2
LO
T
S
I
Z
E
:
1
3
,
4
4
2
.
5
S
F
/
.
3
1
A
C
R
E
S
CU
R
R
E
N
T
T
O
T
A
L
L
O
T
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
:
4
,
6
8
1
S
F
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
T
O
T
A
L
L
O
T
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
:
6
,
6
3
3
S
F
AL
L
O
W
E
D
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
:
1
0
0
%
AL
L
O
W
E
D
F
.
A
.
R
.
3
.
0
ZO
N
I
N
G
:
C
-
R
AV
E
R
A
G
E
S
L
O
P
E
:
0
%
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
:
3
6
/
A
C
R
E
HE
I
G
H
T
L
I
M
I
T
:
4
5
’
OC
C
U
P
A
N
C
Y
U
S
E
:
M
,
(
R
E
T
A
I
L
)
&
R
-
2
(
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
A
P
T
S
.
)
PR
O
J
E
C
T
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
Ma
r
s
h
&
C
a
r
m
e
l
M
i
x
e
d
U
s
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
s
a
n
e
w
2
2
,
4
3
4
S
F
4
-
s
t
o
r
y
m
i
x
e
d
-
u
s
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
e
co
r
n
e
r
o
f
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
.
a
n
d
C
a
r
m
e
l
S
t
.
T
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
c
o
m
p
r
i
s
e
d
o
f
t
w
o
n
e
w
c
o
n
d
o
m
i
n
i
u
m
s
,
si
x
n
e
w
t
o
w
n
h
o
m
e
s
a
n
d
n
e
w
s
t
o
r
e
f
r
o
n
t
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
a
t
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
.
T
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
si
t
u
a
t
e
d
i
n
a
‘
U
’
s
h
a
p
e
.
T
h
e
b
a
s
e
o
f
t
h
e
‘
U
’
f
r
o
n
t
s
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
.
w
i
t
h
r
e
t
a
i
l
a
t
t
h
e
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
an
d
(
2
)
2
-
s
t
o
r
y
c
o
n
d
o
m
i
n
i
u
m
s
a
b
o
v
e
,
f
o
r
a
t
o
t
a
l
o
f
t
h
r
e
e
s
t
o
r
i
e
s
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
.
T
h
e
l
e
g
s
of
t
h
e
‘
U
’
a
r
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
c
a
l
w
i
n
g
s
c
o
m
p
r
i
s
i
n
g
t
h
r
e
e
t
o
w
n
h
o
m
e
s
t
y
l
e
u
n
i
t
s
e
a
c
h
.
T
h
e
s
e
u
n
i
t
s
ha
v
e
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
g
a
r
a
g
e
s
o
n
a
n
i
n
t
e
r
i
o
r
c
o
u
r
t
,
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
l
y
h
i
d
d
e
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
v
i
e
w
,
w
i
t
h
ve
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
a
c
c
e
s
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
o
p
e
n
e
n
d
o
f
t
h
e
‘
U
’
.
T
h
e
s
i
x
t
o
w
n
h
o
m
e
s
a
r
e
3
-
s
t
o
r
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
a
re
c
e
s
s
e
d
4
t
h
s
t
o
r
y
p
u
l
l
e
d
b
a
c
k
1
1
’
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
8
’
-
4
”
u
n
d
e
r
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
h
e
i
g
h
t
l
i
m
i
t
.
Th
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
p
u
s
h
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
m
o
s
t
e
n
d
o
f
t
h
e
l
o
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
4
5
’
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
f
r
o
m
th
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
o
t
h
e
s
o
u
t
h
.
W
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
i
s
4
5
’
b
u
f
f
e
r
i
s
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
.
Th
e
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
i
s
a
c
o
n
t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
S
a
n
t
a
B
a
r
b
a
r
a
s
t
y
l
e
t
h
a
t
l
e
n
d
s
i
t
s
e
l
f
w
e
l
l
t
o
a
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
of
g
r
a
n
d
e
r
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
f
r
o
n
t
f
a
ç
a
d
e
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
.
a
n
d
s
c
a
l
i
n
g
d
o
w
n
t
o
ro
w
h
o
u
s
e
s
t
y
l
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
w
a
l
k
u
p
s
a
l
o
n
g
C
a
r
m
e
l
.
T
h
i
s
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
w
i
l
l
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
f
i
v
e
c
u
r
b
c
u
t
s
wi
t
h
o
n
e
,
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
b
y
s
i
x
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
.
a
n
d
r
e
m
o
v
e
o
n
e
t
r
e
e
t
o
b
e
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
b
y
si
x
n
e
w
s
t
r
e
e
t
t
r
e
e
s
.
PR
O
J
E
C
T
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
CA
L
I
F
O
R
N
I
A
C
O
D
E
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
PAGE 1
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 16
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
4.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
M
.
D
.
P
R
A
C
T
I
C
E
5.
S
E
L
F
-
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
C
A
R
W
A
S
H
7.
M
U
L
T
I
-
F
A
M
I
L
Y
8.
A
U
T
O
S
A
L
E
S
B
U
S
I
N
E
S
S
CO
N
T
E
X
T
U
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
N
T
S
1.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
U
T
O
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
B
U
S
I
N
E
S
S
O
N
S
I
T
E
3.
R
E
A
L
T
Y
B
U
S
I
N
E
S
S
6.
S
I
N
G
L
E
-
F
A
M
I
L
Y
H
O
U
S
E
N
PAGE 2
2.
A
T
T
O
R
N
E
Y
A
T
L
A
W
B
U
S
I
N
E
S
S
SI
T
E
R-
4
C-
S
C-
R
7
6
8
5
4
3
2
1
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 17
DE
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
DE
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
:
TO
P
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
U
R
V
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
GE
N
E
R
A
L
L
E
G
E
N
D
DE
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
DATE SUBMITTAL 161011 COORDINATION SETDEVELOPMENT PLANS 435 MARSH - MIXED USE 435 MARSH ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 APN: 003-512-017 DEMOLITION PLAN C1.0
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 18
A
P
N
0
0
3
-
5
1
2
-
0
0
3
AP
N
0
0
3
-
5
1
2
-
0
1
8
FF
1
7
8
.
5
3
FF
1
7
8
.
7
1
FF
1
7
8
.
8
6
FF
1
7
9
.
2
3
FF
1
7
9
.
2
7
F
F
1
7
9
.
3
5
FF
1
7
8
.
0
7
FF
1
7
8
.
2
3
FF
1
7
8
.
2
9
GR
A
D
I
N
G
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
GR
A
D
I
N
G
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
:
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
GR
A
D
I
N
G
L
E
G
E
N
D
GE
N
E
R
A
L
L
E
G
E
N
D
ST
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
:
100 98 DATE SUBMITTAL 161011 COORDINATION SETDEVELOPMENT PLANS 435 MARSH - MIXED USE 435 MARSH ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 APN: 003-512-017 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C2.0
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 19
A
P
N
0
0
3
-
5
1
2
-
0
0
3
AP
N
0
0
3
-
5
1
2
-
0
1
8
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
DR
Y
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
N
I
T
A
R
Y
S
E
W
E
R
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
:
ST
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
:
WA
T
E
R
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
:
GR
A
D
I
N
G
L
E
G
E
N
D
GE
N
E
R
A
L
L
E
G
E
N
D
ST
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
:
WA
T
E
R
L
E
G
E
N
D
:
SA
N
I
T
A
R
Y
S
E
W
E
R
L
E
G
E
N
D
:
100 98 DATE SUBMITTAL 161011 COORDINATION SETDEVELOPMENT PLANS 435 MARSH - MIXED USE 435 MARSH ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 APN: 003-512-017 UTILITY PLAN C3.0
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 20
FL
O
W
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
L
I
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
W
I
T
H
S
U
B
D
R
A
I
N
1
STANDARD VALLEY GUTTER DETAIL 2
AD
A
A
C
C
E
S
S
I
B
L
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
G
U
T
T
E
R
D
E
T
A
I
L
3
8"
N
Y
L
O
P
L
A
S
T
I
N
L
I
N
E
D
R
A
I
N
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
G
R
A
T
E
4
PERVIOUS PAVEMENT SECTION 5DATE SUBMITTAL 161011 COORDINATION SETDEVELOPMENT PLANS 435 MARSH - MIXED USE 435 MARSH ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 APN: 003-512-017 SECTIONS AND DETAILS C4.0
MO
D
I
F
I
E
D
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 21
DATE SUBMITTAL 161011 COORDINATION SETDEVELOPMENT PLANS 435 MARSH - MIXED USE 435 MARSH ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 APN: 003-512-017 SECTIONS AND DETAILS C4.1
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 22
DATE SUBMITTAL 161011 COORDINATION SETDEVELOPMENT PLANS 435 MARSH - MIXED USE 435 MARSH ST. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 APN: 003-512-017 SECTIONS AND DETAILS C4.2
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 23
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
N
PAGE 9
R
E
C
Y
C
L
E
T
R
A
S
H
E
E
H
H
L
E
E
E
S
H
H
S
S
S
S
S
S
L
L
C
C
A
S
S
S
C
C
C
C
A
A
Y
C
C
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
A
A
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Y
Y
R
R
Y
Y
R
R
R
R
R
R
C
C
Y
Y
C
C
T
T
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
T
T
E
C
E
E
E
E
E
T
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
S
S
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
E
E
E
E
E
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
.
CA
R
M
E
L
S
T
.
AD
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
57
'
-
7
"
25
'
-
0
"
25
'
-
0
"
3
8
'
-
3
"
(1
)
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
C
U
S
M
I
C
R
O
C
A
R
P
A
ST
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
A
N
D
RE
P
L
A
C
E
D
W
I
T
H
(
6
)
N
E
W
PL
A
T
A
N
U
S
M
E
X
I
C
A
N
A
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
TO
T
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
:
6
9
4
S
F
1.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
F
O
R
T
R
A
S
H
EN
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
A
N
D
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
O
N
S
I
T
E
.
2.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
F
O
R
A
L
L
SE
T
B
A
C
K
S
A
N
D
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
S
.
(N
)
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
58
3
5
S
F
PA
R
K
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 24
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
PL
A
N
T
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
A
N
D
I
M
A
G
E
S
MI
X
I
C
A
N
S
Y
C
A
M
O
R
E
SW
E
E
T
S
H
A
D
E
YA
R
R
O
W
KI
N
N
I
K
I
N
N
I
C
K
C
A
L
I
F
O
R
N
I
A
L
I
L
A
C
A
F
R
I
C
A
N
I
R
I
S
SI
S
K
I
Y
O
U
B
L
U
E
F
E
S
C
U
E
D
E
E
R
G
R
A
S
S
V
V
A
R
I
E
G
A
T
E
D
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
F
L
A
X
QT
Y
BO
T
A
N
I
C
A
L
N
A
M
E
/
C
O
M
M
O
N
N
A
M
E
2
H
y
m
e
n
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
f
l
a
v
u
m
/
S
w
e
e
t
s
h
a
d
e
Si
z
e
:
2
5
`
-
4
0
`
t
a
l
l
x
1
5
`
-
2
0
`
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
.
4
-
.
6
6
P
l
a
t
a
n
u
s
m
e
x
i
c
a
n
a
`
A
l
a
m
o
`
T
M
/
M
e
x
i
c
a
n
S
y
c
a
m
o
r
e
Si
z
e
:
6
0
`
t
a
l
l
x
4
0
`
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
.
4
-
.
6
NO
T
E
:
T
h
i
s
v
a
r
i
e
t
y
o
f
P
l
a
t
a
n
u
s
i
s
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
e
t
o
Pl
a
t
a
n
u
s
a
c
e
r
i
f
o
l
o
a
p
e
r
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
A
r
b
o
r
i
s
t
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
.
QT
Y
BO
T
A
N
I
C
A
L
N
A
M
E
/
C
O
M
M
O
N
N
A
M
E
15
A
c
h
i
l
l
e
a
m
i
l
l
e
f
o
l
i
u
m
`
M
o
o
n
s
h
i
n
e
`
/
Y
a
r
r
o
w
Si
z
e
:
2
`
-
3
`
t
a
l
l
a
n
d
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
.
1
-
.
4
5
A
r
c
t
o
s
t
a
p
h
y
l
o
s
u
v
a
-
u
r
s
i
/
K
i
n
n
i
k
i
n
n
i
c
k
Si
z
e
:
1
`
t
a
l
l
x
3
`
-
6
`
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
<
.
1
1
C
e
a
n
o
t
h
u
s
x
`
D
a
r
k
S
t
a
r
`
/
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
L
i
l
a
c
Si
z
e
"
6
`
-
8
`
t
a
l
l
a
n
d
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
=
<
.
1
13
D
i
e
t
e
s
v
e
g
e
t
a
/
A
f
r
i
c
a
n
I
r
i
s
Si
z
e
:
3
`
-
4
`
t
a
l
l
a
n
d
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
.
1
-
.
4
10
F
e
s
t
u
c
a
i
d
a
h
o
e
n
s
i
s
`
S
i
s
k
i
y
o
u
B
l
u
e
`
/
S
i
s
k
i
y
o
u
B
l
u
e
F
e
s
c
u
e
Si
z
e
:
1
`
-
2
`
t
a
l
l
a
n
d
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
=
<
.
1
6
M
u
h
l
e
n
b
e
r
g
i
a
r
i
g
e
n
s
/
D
e
e
r
G
r
a
s
s
Si
z
e
:
4
`
-
5
`
t
a
l
l
x
4
`
-
6
`
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
.
1
-
.
3
2
P
h
o
r
m
i
u
m
c
o
o
k
i
a
n
u
m
`
B
r
o
n
z
e
B
a
b
y
`
/
V
a
r
i
e
g
a
t
e
d
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
F
l
a
x
Si
z
e
:
3
`
-
4
`
t
a
l
l
a
n
d
w
i
d
e
WU
C
O
L
S
P
F
:
.
1
-
.
3
TR
E
E
S
SH
R
U
B
S
PAGE 10
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 25
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
W
A
T
E
R
U
S
E
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
TO
T
A
L
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
E
D
A
R
E
A
:
6
9
4
S
F
0D
[
L
P
X
P
$
S
S
O
L
H
G
:
D
W
H
U
$
O
O
R
Z
D
Q
F
H
&
D
O
F
X
O
D
W
L
R
Q
V
I
R
U
1
H
Z
D
Q
G
5
H
K
D
E
L
OL
W
D
W
H
G
/
D
Q
G
V
F
D
S
H
V
(
Q
W
H
U
Y
D
O
X
H
L
Q
3
D
O
H
%
O
X
H
&
H
O
O
V
7D
Q
&
H
O
O
V
6
K
R
Z
5
H
V
X
O
W
V
0H
V
V
D
J
H
V
D
Q
G
:
D
U
Q
L
Q
J
V
&O
L
F
N
R
Q
W
K
H
E
O
X
H
F
H
O
O
R
Q
U
L
J
K
W
W
R
3
L
F
N
&
L
W
\
1
D
P
H
6D
Q
/
X
L
V
2
E
L
V
S
R
1
D
P
H
R
I
&
L
W
\
(7
R R
I
&
L
W
\
I
U
R
P
$
S
S
H
Q
G
L
[
$
(7
R
L
Q
F
K
H
V
\
H
D
U
(Q
W
H
U
W
R
W
D
O
O
D
Q
G
V
F
D
S
H
L
Q
F
O
X
G
L
Q
J
6
/
$
/$
I
W
(Q
W
H
U
6
S
H
F
L
D
O
/
D
Q
G
V
F
D
S
H
$
U
H
D
6/
$
I
W
5H
V
X
O
W
V
0$
:
$
(
7
R
[
[
>
[
/
$
[
6
/
$
@
*
D
O
O
R
Q
V
&
X
E
L
F
)
H
H
W
+
&
)
$
F
U
H
I
H
H
W
0
L
O
O
L
R
Q
V
R
I
*
D
O
O
R
Q
V
0$
:
$
F
D
O
F
X
O
D
W
L
R
Q
L
Q
F
R
U
S
R
U
D
W
L
Q
J
(
I
I
H
F
W
L
Y
H
3
U
H
F
L
S
L
W
D
W
L
R
Q
2
S
W
L
R
Q
D
O
(7
R R
I
&
L
W
\
I
U
R
P
$
S
S
H
Q
G
L
[
$
(7
R
L
Q
F
K
H
V
\
H
D
U
/D
Q
G
V
F
D
S
H
$
U
H
D
/$
I
W
6S
H
F
L
D
O
/
D
Q
G
V
F
D
S
H
$
U
H
D
6/
$
I
W
7
R
W
D
O
D
Q
Q
X
D
O
S
U
H
F
L
S
L
W
D
W
L
R
Q
(Q
W
H
U
(
I
I
H
F
W
L
Y
H
3
U
H
F
L
S
L
W
D
W
L
R
Q
(
S
S
W
L
Q
\
U
R
I
W
R
W
D
O
D
Q
Q
X
DO
S
U
H
F
L
S
L
W
D
W
L
R
Q
5H
V
X
O
W
V
0$
:
$
(
7
R
(
S
S
W
[
[
>
[
/
$
[
6
/
$
@
*
D
O
O
R
Q
V
&
X
E
L
F
)
H
H
W
+
&
)
$
F
U
H
I
H
H
W
0
L
O
O
L
R
Q
V
R
I
*
D
O
O
R
Q
V
(V
W
L
P
D
W
H
G
7
R
W
D
O
:
D
W
H
U
8
V
H
(T
X
D
W
L
R
Q
(7
:
8
(
7
R
[
[
>
3
)
[
+
$
,
(
6
/
$
@
(Q
W
H
U
Y
D
O
X
H
V
L
Q
3
D
O
H
%
O
X
H
&
H
O
O
V
7D
Q
&
H
O
O
V
6
K
R
Z
5
H
V
X
O
W
V
0H
V
V
D
J
H
V
D
Q
G
:
D
U
Q
L
Q
J
V
(Q
W
H
U
,
U
U
L
J
D
W
L
R
Q
(
I
I
L
F
L
H
Q
F
\
H
T
X
D
O
W
R
R
U
J
U
H
D
W
H
U
W
K
D
Q
,U
U
L
J
D
W
L
R
Q
(
I
I
L
F
L
H
Q
F
\
'
H
I
D
X
O
W
9
D
O
X
H
3O
D
Q
W
:
D
W
H
U
8
V
H
7
\
S
H
3
O
D
Q
W
)
D
F
W
R
U
/R
Z
0H
G
L
X
P
+L
J
K
6/
$
+\
G
U
R
]
R
Q
H
3O
D
Q
W
:
D
W
H
U
8V
H
7
\
S
H
V
O
R
Z
P
H
G
L
X
P
KL
J
K
3O
D
Q
W
)
D
F
W
R
U
3
)
+\
G
U
R
]
R
Q
H
$U
H
D
+
$
I
W
3
)
[
+
$
I
W
/R
Z
/R
Z
/R
Z
6/
$
6X
P
5H
V
X
O
W
V
0$
:
$
(
7
:
8
*
D
O
O
R
Q
V
(7:8FRPSOLHVZLWK0$:$
&
X
E
L
F
)
H
H
W
+
&
)
$
F
U
H
I
H
H
W
0
L
O
O
L
R
Q
V
R
I
*
D
O
O
R
Q
V
PAGE 11
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 26
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
DE
M
O
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
N
1.
(
E
)
C
U
R
B
C
U
T
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
2.
(
E
)
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
3.
(
E
)
C
A
R
P
O
R
T
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
4.
(
E
)
F
E
N
C
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
5.
(
E
)
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
,
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
O
U
T
,
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
6.
(
E
)
T
R
E
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 12
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 27
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
SI
T
E
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
1.
(
N
)
6
’
T
A
L
L
G
A
T
E
;
M
E
T
A
L
2.
(
N
)
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
S
O
N
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
.
T
O
B
E
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
I
N
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
5
’
X
5
’
T
R
E
E
G
R
A
T
E
.
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
8
’
C
L
E
A
R
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
T
H
O
F
T
R
A
V
E
L
F
R
O
M
F
A
C
E
O
F
T
R
E
E
(
A
S
S
U
M
E
2
’
D
I
A
M
E
T
E
R
T
R
E
E
)
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
.
S
E
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
F
O
R
T
Y
P
E
.
3.
(
E
)
T
R
E
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
4.
(
N
)
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
B
O
V
E
5.
(
N
)
P
E
R
V
I
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
R
S
.
S
E
E
C
I
V
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
S
6.
(
E
)
C
U
R
B
W
/
6
’
F
E
N
C
E
A
B
O
V
E
7.
(
N
)
2
S
H
O
R
T
T
E
R
M
B
I
K
E
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
,
1
L
O
N
G
T
E
R
M
B
I
K
E
L
O
C
K
E
R
8.
1
0
’
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
E
Q
U
A
L
T
O
A
D
J
.
P
R
O
P
.
E
R
T
Y
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
9.
(
N
)
2
D
U
M
P
S
T
E
R
B
I
N
S
(
8
3
”
X
5
9
”
)
-
I
N
4
’
T
A
L
L
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
.
N
O
T
E
6
T
O
W
N
H
O
M
E
S
T
O
H
A
V
E
I
N
D
I
V
I
D
U
A
L
T
R
A
S
H
B
I
N
S
I
N
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
G
A
R
A
G
E
S
10
.
(
N
)
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
11
.
(
N
)
W
O
O
D
C
L
A
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
S
.
S
E
E
C
I
V
I
L
F
O
R
U
S
E
W
I
T
H
W
A
T
E
R
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
.
12
.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
G
A
R
A
G
E
E
N
T
R
I
E
S
,
T
Y
P
.
O
F
6
.
13
.
(
N
)
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
S
O
N
C
A
R
M
E
L
S
T
.
T
O
B
E
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
I
N
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
4
’
X
4
’
T
R
E
E
G
R
A
T
E
.
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
8
’
C
L
E
A
R
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
T
H
O
F
T
R
A
V
E
L
F
R
O
M
F
A
C
E
O
F
T
R
E
E
(
A
S
S
U
M
E
2
’
D
I
A
M
T
E
R
T
R
E
E
)
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
.
S
E
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
F
O
R
T
Y
P
E
.
14
.
(
N
)
B
U
L
B
-
O
U
T
P
E
R
C
I
V
I
L
15
.
(
N
)
C
U
R
B
C
U
T
P
E
R
C
I
V
I
L
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
N
PAGE 13
(3
)
4
-
S
T
O
R
Y
T
O
W
N
H
O
M
E
S
(2
)
2
-
S
T
O
R
Y
CO
N
D
O
M
I
N
I
U
M
S
(3
)
4
-
S
T
O
R
Y
T
O
W
N
H
O
M
E
S
(N
)
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
58
3
5
S
F
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
.
CA
R
M
E
L
S
T
.
95
'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
1 2 "
41
'
-
1
"
20
'
-
0
"
75
'
-
0
"
95
'
-
0
"
5
'
-
9
"
3
4
'
-
0
"
3
4
'
-
1
"
1
4
'
-
6
"
8
2
'
-
7
"
2
9
'
-
4
"
2
4
'
-
0
"
2
9
'
-
2
1
2
"
1
1
'
-
6
"
1
5
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
0
"
21
'
-
1
"
4
8
1
9
32
6
5
10
MC
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
1
11
11
3
'
-
6
"
7
R
E
C
Y
C
L
E
T
R
A
S
H
101.3'
MC
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
1
14
15
PA
R
K
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
12
AD
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
4
AD
A
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
1
PA
R
K
I
N
G
3
RE
S
.
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
6
PA
R
K
I
N
G
2
RE
S
.
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
7
RE
S
.
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
8
RE
S
.
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
9
10
'
-
3
"
8'-0"
C
L
E
A
R
11
8
'
-
0
1
2
"
1
'
-
5
"
8
'
-
0
"
C
L
E
A
R
13
OV
E
R
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
PA
R
K
I
N
G
5
4
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 28
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
SI
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
.
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
SI
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
C
A
R
M
E
L
S
T
.
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
PAGE 14
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 29
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
CA
R
M
E
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
1
6
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
4
2
'
-
0
"
4
5
'
-
0
"
H
E
I
G
H
T
L
I
M
I
T
3
6
'
-
8
"
1
5
'
2
7
'
P
.
L
.
P
.
L
.
4'
T
A
L
L
T
R
A
S
H
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
.
C
L
A
D
IN
S
T
U
C
C
O
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
CO
L
O
R
O
F
(
N
)
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
PAGE 15
+(,*+7/,0,7
3/
3
/
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 30
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
FI
R
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
/
3
2
”
-
1
’
N
1.
(
N
)
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
B
O
V
E
2.
F
I
R
E
R
I
S
E
R
R
O
O
M
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 16
N
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 31
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
SE
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
/
3
2
”
-
1
’
N
PAGE 17
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 32
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
TH
I
R
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
/
3
2
”
-
1
’
N
1.
R
O
O
F
B
E
L
O
W
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 18
LO
O
R
P
L
A
N
”
1’
N
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 33
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
FO
U
R
T
H
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
/
3
2
”
-
1
’
N
1.
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
E
D
G
E
B
E
L
O
W
2.
R
O
O
F
B
E
L
O
W
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 19
OO
R
P
L
A
N
N
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 34
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
RO
O
F
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
/
3
2
”
-
1
’
N
PAGE 20
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 35
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
EL
E
V
A
T
O
R
T
O
W
E
R
2643523282
1
10
9
24 6 11
14
10
9
12
13
9
8
7
29
12'-6"9'-0"9'-0"3'-6"8'30'-6"11'-6"42'-0"45'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT
1
1
'
3'-0"P.L.
P
.
L
.
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
11
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
A
N
O
P
Y
,
W
/
W
O
O
D
12
.
3
’
T
A
L
L
B
U
L
K
H
E
A
D
,
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
13
.
B
U
I
L
T
-
I
N
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
14
.
I
N
S
E
T
M
E
T
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
15
.
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
T
R
I
M
16
.
W
O
O
D
D
E
C
K
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
17
.
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
18
.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
D
O
O
R
19
.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
,
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
20
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
L
A
D
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
21
.
W
O
O
D
C
L
A
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
22
.
W
O
O
D
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
23
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
A
W
N
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
24
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
25
.
G
L
A
Z
E
D
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
D
O
O
R
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
26
.
F
A
U
X
B
E
A
M
27
.
G
A
R
A
G
E
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
28
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
W
/
I
N
S
E
T
W
O
O
D
P
A
N
E
L
29
.
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
30
.
D
R
Y
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
@
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
W
E
T
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
@
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
1
’
A
B
O
V
E
B
F
E
I
N
A
C
C
O
R
D
A
N
C
E
W
/
F
E
M
A
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
1.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
A
C
C
E
N
T
C
O
L
O
R
2.
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
R
O
O
F
T
I
L
E
3.
S
O
F
F
I
T
R
O
O
F
W
/
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
F
A
U
X
R
A
F
T
E
R
B
E
A
M
4.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
C
O
L
O
R
5.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
R
N
I
C
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
6.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
J
U
L
I
E
T
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
7.
6
’
T
A
L
L
M
E
T
A
L
G
A
T
E
8.
W
A
L
L
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
S
C
O
N
C
E
9.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
10
.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
D
O
O
R
S
W
/
F
U
L
L
G
L
A
Z
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 21BFE: 182.00’
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 36
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
CA
R
M
E
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
11
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
A
N
O
P
Y
,
W
/
W
O
O
D
12
.
3
’
T
A
L
L
B
U
L
K
H
E
A
D
,
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
13
.
B
U
I
L
T
-
I
N
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
14
.
I
N
S
E
T
M
E
T
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
15
.
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
T
R
I
M
16
.
W
O
O
D
D
E
C
K
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
17
.
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
18
.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
D
O
O
R
19
.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
,
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
20
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
L
A
D
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
21
.
W
O
O
D
C
L
A
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
22
.
W
O
O
D
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
23
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
A
W
N
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
24
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
25
.
G
L
A
Z
E
D
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
D
O
O
R
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
26
.
F
A
U
X
B
E
A
M
27
.
G
A
R
A
G
E
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
28
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
W
/
I
N
S
E
T
W
O
O
D
P
A
N
E
L
29
.
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
30
.
D
R
Y
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
@
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
W
E
T
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
@
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
1
’
A
B
O
V
E
B
F
E
I
N
A
C
C
O
R
D
A
N
C
E
W
/
F
E
M
A
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
1.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
A
C
C
E
N
T
C
O
L
O
R
2.
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
R
O
O
F
T
I
L
E
3.
S
O
F
F
I
T
R
O
O
F
W
/
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
F
A
U
X
R
A
F
T
E
R
B
E
A
M
4.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
C
O
L
O
R
5.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
R
N
I
C
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
6.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
J
U
L
I
E
T
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
7.
6
’
T
A
L
L
M
E
T
A
L
G
A
T
E
8.
W
A
L
L
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
S
C
O
N
C
E
9.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
10
.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
D
O
O
R
S
W
/
F
U
L
L
G
L
A
Z
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 22
BF
E
:
1
8
2
.
0
0
’
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 37
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
SO
U
T
H
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
11
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
A
N
O
P
Y
,
W
/
W
O
O
D
12
.
3
’
T
A
L
L
B
U
L
K
H
E
A
D
,
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
13
.
B
U
I
L
T
-
I
N
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
14
.
I
N
S
E
T
M
E
T
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
15
.
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
T
R
I
M
16
.
W
O
O
D
D
E
C
K
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
17
.
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
18
.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
D
O
O
R
19
.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
,
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
20
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
L
A
D
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
21
.
W
O
O
D
C
L
A
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
22
.
W
O
O
D
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
23
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
A
W
N
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
24
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
25
.
G
L
A
Z
E
D
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
D
O
O
R
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
26
.
F
A
U
X
B
E
A
M
27
.
G
A
R
A
G
E
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
28
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
W
/
I
N
S
E
T
W
O
O
D
P
A
N
E
L
29
.
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
30
.
D
R
Y
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
@
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
W
E
T
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
@
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
1
’
A
B
O
V
E
B
F
E
I
N
A
C
C
O
R
D
A
N
C
E
W
/
F
E
M
A
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
1.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
A
C
C
E
N
T
C
O
L
O
R
2.
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
R
O
O
F
T
I
L
E
3.
S
O
F
F
I
T
R
O
O
F
W
/
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
F
A
U
X
R
A
F
T
E
R
B
E
A
M
4.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
C
O
L
O
R
5.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
R
N
I
C
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
6.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
J
U
L
I
E
T
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
7.
6
’
T
A
L
L
M
E
T
A
L
G
A
T
E
8.
W
A
L
L
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
S
C
O
N
C
E
9.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
10
.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
D
O
O
R
S
W
/
F
U
L
L
G
L
A
Z
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 23
BF
E
:
1
8
2
.
0
0
’
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 38
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
DR
I
V
E
C
O
U
R
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
-
L
O
O
K
I
N
G
W
E
S
T
(
L
O
O
K
I
N
G
E
A
S
T
,
S
I
M
.
)
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
11
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
A
N
O
P
Y
,
W
/
W
O
O
D
12
.
3
’
T
A
L
L
B
U
L
K
H
E
A
D
,
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
13
.
B
U
I
L
T
-
I
N
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
14
.
I
N
S
E
T
M
E
T
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
15
.
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
T
R
I
M
16
.
W
O
O
D
D
E
C
K
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
17
.
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
18
.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
D
O
O
R
19
.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
,
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
20
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
L
A
D
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
21
.
W
O
O
D
C
L
A
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
22
.
W
O
O
D
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
23
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
A
W
N
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
24
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
25
.
G
L
A
Z
E
D
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
D
O
O
R
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
26
.
F
A
U
X
B
E
A
M
27
.
G
A
R
A
G
E
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
28
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
W
/
I
N
S
E
T
W
O
O
D
P
A
N
E
L
29
.
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
30
.
D
R
Y
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
@
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
W
E
T
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
@
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
1
’
A
B
O
V
E
B
F
E
I
N
A
C
C
O
R
D
A
N
C
E
W
/
F
E
M
A
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
1.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
A
C
C
E
N
T
C
O
L
O
R
2.
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
R
O
O
F
T
I
L
E
3.
S
O
F
F
I
T
R
O
O
F
W
/
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
F
A
U
X
R
A
F
T
E
R
B
E
A
M
4.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
C
O
L
O
R
5.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
R
N
I
C
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
6.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
J
U
L
I
E
T
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
7.
6
’
T
A
L
L
M
E
T
A
L
G
A
T
E
8.
W
A
L
L
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
S
C
O
N
C
E
9.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
10
.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
D
O
O
R
S
W
/
F
U
L
L
G
L
A
Z
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 24BFE: 182.00’
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 39
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
WE
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
11
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
A
N
O
P
Y
,
W
/
W
O
O
D
12
.
3
’
T
A
L
L
B
U
L
K
H
E
A
D
,
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
13
.
B
U
I
L
T
-
I
N
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
14
.
I
N
S
E
T
M
E
T
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
15
.
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
T
R
I
M
16
.
W
O
O
D
D
E
C
K
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
17
.
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
18
.
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
D
O
O
R
19
.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
,
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
20
.
M
E
T
A
L
C
L
A
D
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
21
.
W
O
O
D
C
L
A
D
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
22
.
W
O
O
D
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
23
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
M
E
T
A
L
A
W
N
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
24
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
25
.
G
L
A
Z
E
D
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
D
O
O
R
S
,
B
L
A
C
K
26
.
F
A
U
X
B
E
A
M
27
.
G
A
R
A
G
E
D
O
O
R
,
B
L
A
C
K
28
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
W
/
I
N
S
E
T
W
O
O
D
P
A
N
E
L
29
.
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
T
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
30
.
D
R
Y
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
T
O
B
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
@
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
W
E
T
F
L
O
O
D
P
R
O
O
F
@
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
1
’
A
B
O
V
E
B
F
E
I
N
A
C
C
O
R
D
A
N
C
E
W
/
F
E
M
A
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
1.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
A
C
C
E
N
T
C
O
L
O
R
2.
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
R
O
O
F
T
I
L
E
3.
S
O
F
F
I
T
R
O
O
F
W
/
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
F
A
U
X
R
A
F
T
E
R
B
E
A
M
4.
S
T
U
C
C
O
-
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
C
O
L
O
R
5.
S
T
U
C
C
O
C
O
R
N
I
C
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
6.
W
I
N
D
O
W
W
/
J
U
L
I
E
T
B
A
L
C
O
N
Y
7.
6
’
T
A
L
L
M
E
T
A
L
G
A
T
E
8.
W
A
L
L
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
S
C
O
N
C
E
9.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
W
I
N
D
O
W
,
B
L
A
C
K
10
.
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
C
L
A
D
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
D
O
O
R
S
W
/
F
U
L
L
G
L
A
Z
I
N
G
,
B
L
A
C
K
KE
Y
N
O
T
E
S
PAGE 25
BF
E
:
1
8
2
.
0
0
’
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 40
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
AW
N
I
N
G
S
&
C
A
N
O
P
I
E
S
SW
6
2
5
8
T
R
I
C
O
R
N
B
L
A
C
K
DE
C
K
S
&
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
S
WO
O
D
S
T
A
I
N
SW
3
5
0
7
R
I
V
E
R
W
O
O
D
ST
U
C
C
O
-
A
C
C
E
N
T
LA
H
A
B
R
A
,
X
-
8
3
0
C
L
A
Y
BU
L
K
H
E
A
D
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
-
S
M
O
O
T
H
F
I
N
I
S
H
ST
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
-
F
I
R
E
S
T
O
N
E
UN
A
C
L
A
D
,
A
N
O
D
I
Z
E
D
A
L
U
M
.
BL
A
C
K
B
A
T
C
H
TE
R
R
A
C
O
T
T
A
R
O
O
F
T
I
L
E
MU
L
T
I
C
O
L
O
R
E
D
DE
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
T
I
L
E
T
R
I
M
TB
D
-
S
I
M
I
L
A
R
T
O
A
B
O
V
E
ME
T
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
SW
6
2
5
8
T
R
I
C
O
R
N
B
L
A
C
K
LA
R
G
E
W
A
L
L
S
C
O
N
C
E
HI
N
K
L
E
Y
1
3
4
4
1
L
I
G
H
T
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
18
”
T
A
L
L
L
E
D
F
L
U
S
H
M
O
U
N
T
DA
R
K
S
K
Y
W
A
L
L
S
C
O
N
C
E
W
/
FR
O
S
T
E
D
G
L
A
S
S
S
H
A
D
E
BL
A
C
K
SM
A
L
L
W
A
L
L
S
C
O
N
C
E
HI
N
K
L
E
Y
1
8
3
0
1
L
I
G
H
T
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
14
.
5
”
T
A
L
L
DA
R
K
S
K
Y
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
W
A
L
L
SC
O
N
C
E
SA
T
I
N
B
L
A
C
K
ST
U
C
C
O
-
M
A
I
N
B
O
D
Y
LA
H
A
B
R
A
,
X
-
7
3
E
G
G
S
H
E
L
L
PAGE 26
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 41
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
PAGE 27
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 42
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
CA
R
M
E
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
PAGE 28
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 43
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
DR
I
V
E
W
A
Y
A
P
P
R
O
A
C
H
O
F
F
C
A
R
M
E
L
PAGE 29
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 44
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
DR
I
V
E
C
O
U
R
T
PAGE 30
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 45
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
RO
O
F
D
E
C
K
S
O
N
C
A
R
M
E
L
PAGE 31
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 46
805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com SET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION All dimensions to be verified on site MARSH & CARMEL MIXED-USE 435 MARSH STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA DATE: 08/16/2017
RO
O
F
D
E
C
K
S
O
N
M
A
R
S
H
PAGE 32
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
2
ARC1 - 47
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Item Number: 2
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Continued review of requested modifications to application ARCH-0846-2015, to
allow elimination of a bulkhead feature and change approved building colors on a
remodeled commercial building.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1135 Santa Rosa St. BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
Phone: 781-7593
E-mail: woetzell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0722-2017 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the draft resolution denying the requested changes to approved building colors and design,
based on findings of inconsistency with applicable General Plan policies and Community Design
Guidelines.
SITE DATA
Applicant 33 Tons, LLC
Representative Ben Kulick, Stalwork, Inc.
Submittal Date June 12, 2017
General Plan General Retail
Zoning Downtown-Commercial (C-D)
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt
(CEQA Guidelines §15301.
Existing Facilities)
SUMMARY
The applicant, 33 Tons, LLC, has submitted a request to modify the application
ARCH-0846-2015, under which the remodeling and expansion of a commercial building at
1135 Santa Rosa was approved. The modifications requested are: a change in the building’s
approved colors; and elimination of a cut-tile bulkhead feature that was proposed along the
bottom of wall surfaces along the Marsh Street side of the building (see Attachment 3).
ARC2 - 1
dd
ARCH-0722-2017 (1135 Santa Rosa)
Page 2
The project was first reviewed by the Commission on May 18, 2015, and approved on
July 6, 2015,1 subject to several conditions including the following:
Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit
shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC.
[…]. 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. (Condition 1).
In completing the project, the approved design and colors were changed without approval,
contrary to the terms of Condition 1 of project approval. The building color was changed to a
single shade of grey which did not match the color scheme approved by the Commission , and a
cut-tile bulkhead feature on the Marsh Street side of the building was not installed (see Figure 1).
A Notice of Violation (Attachment 5) was sent to the property owner on May 19, 2017 as a
courtesy warning, seeking voluntary correction of the observed violations. The applicant
requested that the Commission consider approval of the proposed modifications to the approved
design and colors, in order to allow retention of the single-color scheme and elimination of the
cut-tile bulkhead feature.
On July 10, 2017, the Commission reviewed
the proposed changes and continued
consideration of the request to a future date
(Attachment 4). Direction was provided to the
applicant to work with staff toward a solution
that would be more consistent with approved
colors and design, using appropriate base and
accent colors to provide differentiation and
articulation of building forms that would
reduce the perceived massiveness of the
building, to maintaining and a human-scale
element for variety and interest along the
Marsh Street frontage.
In response to this direction, the applicant has concluded that no such solution can be reached,
stating in subsequent communication (Attachment 7) that, among other points, the building is, on
the whole, consistent with applicable Community Design Guidelines, and that no applicable
guideline requires or suggests multiple colors for buildings, or covers articulation and detail of
wall surfaces.
1 Minutes of prior meetings are provided in Attachment 4 (Project Approvals). Prior Agenda Reports are
available in the Architectural Review Commission Document Archive on the City’s website:
www.slocity.org/government/advisory-bodies/agendas-and-minutes/architectural-review-commission/
Figure 1: Remodeled building, as completed
ARC2 - 2
ARCH-0722-2017 (1135 Santa Rosa)
Page 3
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Commission’s role is to review the proposed changes to the approved design and colors for
consistency with the City’s Community Design Guidelines and with conditions of project
approval, and decide whether the modifications may be approved.
2.0 SITE LOCATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The site is located at the northwest corner of Marsh and Santa Rosa Streets at the edge of the
Downtown-Commercial (C-D) Zone, across the street from Cheng Park, a small “pocket park,”
with office and commercial buildings in the vicinity. The site was developed with a two-story
commercial building originall y constructed in 1982 as a bank branch. The remodeling project,
reviewed and approved under application ARCH-0846-2015, and completed in April, 2017,
expanded the building within the existing building footprint, transforming it into a more
rectangular, contemporary design (see Figure 2), and adding two residential units on a new third
floor. The approved project has a two-color scheme consisting of alternating lighter and darker
shades of grey, and a cut-tile bulkhead on the south elevation, along a portion of the Marsh Street
frontage.
3.0 EVALUATION OF CHANGES
Evaluation of this request is focused on determining whether the proposed changes in design and
colors are consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines. Applicable design guidance
for projects downtown is provided in Chapter 2 (General Design Principles) and Chapter 4
(Downtown Design Guidelines) of the document.
3.1 Colors and building design
As mentioned in the Project Description above, the approved color scheme employs two
complementary shades of grey as the primary building colors: a lighter shade called “Oyster
Figure 2: Rendering of project, depicting approved color scheme
ARC2 - 3
ARCH-0722-2017 (1135 Santa Rosa)
Page 4
Haze” and a darker shade named “City Loft” (see Figure 3). These complementary colors
provide differentiation and articulation of the building’s component forms that lessened the
perceived massiveness of the building as a whole.
The project was instead completed using a single color, a darker shade of grey described as
“Custom Merlex Blend.” Its application as a single-color scheme results in a monolithic
appearance that lacks the contrast, relief, and visual interest evident in the approved two-color
scheme. Wood wall surfaces and window glass area on building elevations seen from Santa Rosa
and Higuera provide a measure of contrast and visual interest, but the building exhibits a notably
heavier, more massive appearance when viewed from Marsh Street, at the southwest corner of
the building (Figure 3). The articulation of building forms provided by the contrasting shades of
the approved colors is lost, which affects the balance and rhythm among these forms. General
Plan policies set expectations for the quality and design of new development in the City,2 which
are set out in greater detail in the City’s Community Design Guidelines. Guidance on balance,
articulation, and massing, is provided in Chapter 2 of Community Design Guidelines:
Keep building elements in proportion. Proportion, continuity, harmony,
simplicity, rhythm and balance should prevail in building design. Building
elements should be balanced and in proportion to one another. (§ 2.2 (A))
Strive for interest, not clutter. The City encourages well-articulated, but not
cluttered building elevations. Large roof and wall planes unrelieved by shadow or
texture interest are generally not acceptable… (§ 2.2 (B))
Pay attention to details. Attention to detailing, and emphasis on vertical and
horizontal articulation, are encouraged as tools to visually reduce the apparent
mass of a building. (§ 2.2 (C))
2 See Land Use Element Polices 12.3 and 4.20.6
Figure 3: Approved color scheme (left); color, as completed (right)
ARC2 - 4
ARCH-0722-2017 (1135 Santa Rosa)
Page 5
Specific guidelines for development downtown are provided in Chapter 4, including guidance on
careful attention to finish materials to enrich a building’s character and avoid monotony:
Finish materials. The exterior materials of downtown buildings involve several
aspects including color, texture, and materials. (§ 4 (D) (1))
3.2 Bulkhead
Approved project plans included a cut-stone bulkhead feature along the Marsh Street side of the
building (Figure 4), and this feature was not installed on the completed building. The applicant
requests that the Commission approve the elimination of this feature, describing it as contrary to
the honest use of materials; as a “stuck-on” treatment not fitting with the style of the building,
and mimicking a flood control feature not required on this site (see item 2, Attachment 3).
Design guidelines identify bulkheads as a desirable element of a commercial building façade,
particularly in the downtown area, that should be prominent and visible.3 They are described as a
base from which windows rise, and are common elements on downtown buildings, including
several in the surrounding area. A suitable decorative element incorporated into the wall surface,
consistent with the building’s contemporary style, and consistent with guidelines for honest use
of authentic materials and treatments4 would provide variation and visual interest, as encouraged
by Community Design Guidelines:
Wall surfaces. Wall surfaces, particularly at the street level, should be varied and
interesting, rather than unbroken and monolithic, because blank walls discourage
pedestrian traffic. This can be achieved in a number of ways including: […]
Constructing the facade with small human scale materials such as brick or
decorative tile along bulkheads… (§ 4.2 (C) (5))
3 See Community Design Guidelines § 4.2(C)(7)
4 See Community Design Guidelines § § 1.4(A)(1) & 2.2(D)
Figure 4: Bulkhead feature, as approved (left); missing on completion (right)
ARC2 - 5
ARCH-0722-2017 (1135 Santa Rosa)
Page 6
4.0 CONCLUSION
Changes proposed by the applicant to the approved colors and building design are not consistent
with applicable Community Design Guidelines. The modified color scheme results in a building
that is perceptibly heavier and more massive, as seen approaching it along Marsh Street. Its
monolithic appearance has lost the balance and rhythm between building forms that the approved
colors provided. Omission of the cut-tile bulkhead eliminates a small human scale, pedestrian-
oriented, element that is a common, and encouraged, element on buildings within the downtown
area. It is recommended that the Commission deny the request for changes to approved colors
and project design.
5.0 ALTERNATIVE
5.1 Approve the requested modifications to color and project design, based on findings of
consistency with the City’s Community Design Guidelines.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This application is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). It involves minor alteration of an existing structure, as described in CEQA
Guidelines § 15301 (Existing Facilities).
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity Map
3. Applicant’s Summary of Requests for Modification
4. Project Approvals (Meeting Minutes and Resolution 1013-15)
5. Notice of Violation (May 23, 2017)
6. Approved Project Renderings (June, 2015)
7. Applicant’s Response to ARC Direction of July 10, 2017
ARC2 - 6
RESOLUTION NO. ####-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A REQUEST TO MODIFY APPROVED COLORS
AND PROJECT DESIGN, AS APPROVED UNDER ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
APPLICATION ARCH-0846-2015, FOR A REMODELED COMMERCIAL BUILDING
AT 1135 SANTA ROSA STREET
(DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (C-D) ZONE; FILE #ARCH-0722-2017)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission granted approval for the remodeling
of a commercial building, and an addition of a third floor with two new dwellings, to the building
located at 1135 Santa Rosa Street, on July 6, 2015 (Resolution No. ARC-1013-15), under
application ARCH-0846-2015; 33 Tons, LLC, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room (Room 9) of City Hall, 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California, on July 10, 2017, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
application ARCH-0722-2017, 33 Tons, LLC, applicant, to consider modification of the
application ARCH-0846-2015, including requested changes to approved colors and elimination of
a bulkhead feature from the project design, and continued consideration of the request to a date
uncertain, providing direction to the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room (Room 9) of City Hall, 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California, on September 11, 2017, to further consider the requested changes to
approved colors and elimination of a bulkhead feature from the project design; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has
duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of
the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby denies application
ARCH-2764-2016, based on the following findings:
1. The requested changes to approved colors and project design are not consistent with the
policies of the City’s General Plan that call for projects to meet the City’s expectation for the
quality and design of new development as (Land Use Element Policy 12.3), and for street
facades that include architectural details which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalks
(Land Use Element Policy 4.20.6). The proposed new monochromatic building color scheme
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 7
results in a building that is perceptibly heavier and more massive, as seen approaching it along
Marsh Street, losing the balance and rhythm among building forms that the approved color
scheme provides, contrary to the intent of Community Design Guidelines used in the review
of proposed development projects. Elimination of the cut-tile bulkhead feature along the Marsh
Street façade removes from the project design an architectural detail that is encouraged for
sidewalk appeal (Land Use Element Policy 4.20.6) and by Community Design Guidelines.
2. The requested modifications are not consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines.
The proposed new monochromatic building color scheme results in the loss of articulation and
of balance and rhythm between building forms that the approved color scheme provided,
causing the building to appear perceptibly heavier and more massive, as seen approaching it
along Marsh Street. The resulting appearance does not exhibit the harmony, rhythm, and
balance sought by guidance provided in § 2.2 (A), the articulation encouraged by § 2.2 (B), or
the attention to detail and emphasis on articulation to visually reduce the apparent mass of a
building called for in § 2.2 (C). The proposed elimination of the cut-tile bulkhead removes a
small human-scale element that provides variation and interest to the wall surface at the Marsh
Street level, contrary to the intent of § 4.2 (C) (5) encouraging such variation and interest.
3. The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). It involves minor alteration of an existing structure, as described in
CEQA Guidelines § 15301 (Existing Facilities).
SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby denies application
ARCH-2764-2016, a request to modify application ARCH-0846-2015.
On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 11th day of September, 2017.
_____________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
ATTACHMENT 1
ARC2 - 8
C-D
O
O
C-R
C-D
C-D
O
C-R
O
C-D-H
C-D
C-D
PF
MARSH
HIGUE
R
A
S
A
N
T
A
R
O
S
A
O
S
O
S PACIF
I
C
VICINITY MAP ARCH-0722-20171135 Santa Rosa ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
ARC2 - 9
Architectural Review Commission
Request for Modification
1135 Santa Rosa
Summary of Requests for Modification
1) Resolution No. ARC‐1013‐15
Corrective Action: Obtain approval from the Community Development Director or Architectural Review
Commission for the change of colors on the building
Approval Request:
The building color accurately reflects the color and style of neighboring properties and is the approximate
same color saturation as the ARC approved color. Architectural colors should be selected and appropriate
for the design intent, architecture, and time period of construction. Building colors that do no prove
successful are easily modified in the future. 1135 Santa Rosa is innovative and fully compatible with the
surrounding buildings. See complete package, presentation, and support.
2) Resolution No. ARC‐1013‐15
Corrective Action: Obtain approval from the Community Development Director or Architectural Review
Commission for the change in material [Bulk Head Removal]
Approval Request:
Modify ARC conditions to eliminate the bulkhead on the Marsh street elevation.
Justification:
1) Per Guidelines: “Materials should be used honestly.” A bulkhead is for flood control. This building
is not in a FEMA flood zone.
2) Per Guidelines: “Materials should be used honestly.” Applying a bulkhead to one elevation does
not serve the purpose of flood control.
3) Per Guidelines: “Artificial or decorative façade treatments, where one or more unrelated
materials appear stuck on to a building should be avoided.” This material is stuck on and is an
unrelated material.
4) The bulkhead is does not fit with the architectural style of the building and this feature is not a
historic feature of San Luis Obispo, but a recently applied element to new buildings per flood
control to serve a SPECIFIC purpose not required on this building. This element is a FEMA
requirement not required in anyway on this building. This feature is not historic nor is this
building in a historic zone.
3) Resolution No. ARC‐1013‐15
Corrective Action: Obtain approval from the Community Development Director or Architectural Review
Commission for the visible rooftop equipment or modify the placement of roof‐mounted equipment so that
it is not visible, or provide screening to conceal the equipment from view of public streets, and neighboring
properties, consistent with Community Design Guidelines § 6.1 (D).
Approval Request:
No modification requested. Mechanical screening is being installed.
ATTACHMENT 3
ARC2 - 10
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
July 6, 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 Phil Dunsmore, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, and
Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: The minutes of June 15, 2015, were approved as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 1135 Santa Rosa Street. ARCH-0846-2015; Continued review of the remodeling
of and addition to an existing commercial building, including the addition of two
dwellings on the third floor. The project is categorically exempt from CEQA; C-D
zone; 33 Tons, LLC, applicant.
Senior Planner Dunsmore introduced the item, noting that it had been continued from
the May 18, 2015, meeting. Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff
report, recommending that the Commission continue the item to a date uncertain with
specific direction to modify the project design.
Bryan Ridley, project architect, summarized the history of the project; noted changes
made to the proposal subsequent to the prior hearing; emphasized the factors lending
the project its compatibility with surroundings and Community Design Guidelines.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
The following individuals spoke in support of the project, noting its positive impact upon
the corner of Santa Rosa and Marsh Streets and the surrounding area, and commenting
that the proposed project is a significant improvement upon the building currently at the
site:
Debby Nicklas, SLO;
David Walker, SLO;
Jeff Wolcott, SLO;
Alan Iftiniuk, SLO;
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 11
ARC Minutes
July 6, 2015
Page 2
Jim Agee, SLO;
Barbara Agee, SLO;
Kenyon Tsao, SLO;
Carla Walker, SLO;
Jay Beck, SLO;
Steve Owens, SLO;
Ping Tsao, SLO;
Ian Parkinson, SLO;
Kevin Okimoto, SLO;
Jory Brigham, SLO;
Paul Prins, Atascadero;
Mark Thompson, SLO;
Dionne Avaki, SLO;
Dan Copp, SLO;
Ron Barbieri, SLO;
Scott and Julia Starkey, SLO;
Su Tsao, SLO;
Karl Lepper, SLO.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Andreen noted concern that the project has not fully complied with downtown
design guidelines for a project on the edge of downtown; thanked members of the public
for attending; noted support for windows as proposed.
Commr. Curtis spoke in support of changes to the proposal made since the previous
hearing; commented that various elevations seem to have differing window patterns;
noted concern about the use of dark colors such as the gray stone. Curtis spoke in
support of widening windows for increased transparency at sidewalk level and adding
emphasis to the entrance.
Commr. Root noted no objection to there being no entrance on Marsh Street; spoke in
support of allowing eclectic styling; noted to desire to see additional articulation of
exterior walls such as cornices.
Commr. Nemcik spoke in support of the pedestrian scaling; commented that the
proposal appears consistent with design guidelines; noted readiness to approve with
conditions; noted support for windows as proposed.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie spoke in support of changes made to the proposal since the previous
hearing; concurred with Commr. Curtis’s comments regarding color palette and window
transparency; noted readiness to approve with conditions.
Chair Wynn spoke in support of greater transparency of windows at the ground level ;
noted support for the eclectic style and entry door interior to the site.
There were no further comments from the Commission.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 12
ARC Minutes
July 6, 2015
Page 3
In response to inquiry from the Commission, applicant Bryan Ridley agreed to work with
staff to resolve sound attenuation measures relating to balcony depth, contained in
Condition 7.
On motion by Vice-Chair Ehdaie, seconded by Commr. Soll, to adopt a resolution
approving the project based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff
report, with the following revisions:
A. Finding 2. shall be revised to read “[…] applicable to projects in the downtown
commercial zone” rather than “[…] applicable to commercial projects.”
B Condition 2. shall be modified to indicate that the applicant is strongly
encouraged to widen the three windows at sidewalk level along the building’s
Marsh Street frontage, in order to increase transparency.
C. Condition 3. shall be revised to read “Provide additional articulation along the
Marsh Street elevation at the stucco/plaster walls to enhance the shadow
pattern, to the satisfaction of staff.”
D. Condition 5. shall be eliminated.
E. Condition 6. shall be eliminated.
AYES: Commrs. Ehdaie, Soll, Root, Nemcik, Wynn, Curtis, and Andreen
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
2. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast
Senior Planner Dunsmore gave a forecast of upcoming agenda items, noting a
joint meeting with the Cultural Heritage Committee to be held July 13, 2015.
3. Commission:
Chair Wynn requested that Commission meeting minutes from 2015 be made
available in the City records archive on the website.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 13
ARC Minutes
July 6, 2015
Page 4
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on July 20, 2015.
Laurie Thomas
Administrative Assistant III
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 14
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
May 18, 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 Phil Dunsmore, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen,
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: The minutes of May 4, 2015, were approved as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 1135 Santa Rosa Street. ARCH-0846-2015; Review of the remodeling of an
existing commercial building, including the addition of two dwellings on the third
floor; C-D zone; 33 Tons, LLC, applicant.
Senior Planner Dunsmore noted public comment that had been received and distributed
to Commissioners prior to the meeting. Chair Wynn noted correspondence received
directly from Dean Miller.
Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
Commission adopt a resolution granting final approval to the project, based on findings
and subject to conditions which he outlined.
Bryan Ridley, project architect, SLO, summarized the history of the site and project,
noting a desire to work with staff to refine design details such as signage and
landscaping, and responded to Commission inquiries.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
David Brodie, SLO, commented on the high visibility of the building’s location; stated
that its design lacks any characteristics tailored to fit the San Luis Obispo area.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 15
ARC Minutes
May 18, 2015
Page 2
Dixie Cliff, SLO, noted the importance of constructing and retaining noteworthy works of
architecture and San Luis Obispo; opined that the proposed design would benefit from
emulating architectural details of neighboring buildings.
Jim Duenow, SLO, spoke in opposition to the proposed design; noted the tall, planar
faces and generic feel of the design.
Frances Gibbs, SLO, inquired as to the applicant’s plan for maintaining wood features
proposed for the exterior of the building; noted similar features in the area that appear to
be deteriorating.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Andreen spoke in opposition to the design as presented; noted concerns
relating to generic styling, lack of harmony with surrounding buildings and downtown
context, lack of façade articulation, and lack of pedestrian context.
Commr. Curtis spoke in opposition to the design as presented; noted concerns relating
to upper-story massing, the lack of integration with street frontage, lack of traditional
design elements, lack of vertical articulation, and the non-conformity of wood siding with
Community Design Guidelines.
Commr. Nemcik spoke in opposition to the design as presented; noted concerns about
lack of pedestrian context, lack of conspicuous entryways, and the lack of delineation
between commercial and residential spaces; expressed approval of the building’s
massing.
Commr. Root spoke in opposition to the design as presented; noted concerns about the
height of the site wall, wood siding, general lack of articulation on all sides, lack of
pedestrian access, lack of downtown context, and about the need to attenuate
residential noise intrusion amplified by third-story overhangs.
Commr. Soll spoke in opposition to the design as presented; noted concerns about
pedestrian access, lack of conspicuous entryways, lack of integration with street
frontage, and lack of neighborhood and downtown context.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie spoke in opposition to the project in its proposed location; noted the
landmark, focal nature of the site; noted concern about the lack of downtown context,
lack of delineation between commercial and residential uses, and lack of visual access
into commercial uses; spoke in support of contemporary styling.
Chair Wynn spoke in opposition to the design as presented; noted concern about lack of
conformity to Community Design Guidelines requiring “small-town scale” and avoidance
of “boxy” styling; lack of downtown context; lack of articulation on all sides; lack of
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 16
ARC Minutes
May 18, 2015
Page 3
transparency and visual access into commercial uses; lack of pedestrian scale, and the
height of the site wall.
There were no further comments from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Andreen, seconded by Commr. Root, to continue the project to a
date uncertain, and encourage the applicant to return for conceptual review of a
substantially redesigned proposal addressing the following:
Incorporate pedestrian scale
Relate to the downtown context
Avoid the use of boxy forms
Reconsider the scale and mass of the building
Consider the use of traditional design elements with commercial/residential
delineation
Incorporate a third-story setback to reduce apparent mass
Decrease height of site wall at parking area
Address maintenance of wood siding or incorporate an alternate material
Incorporate street-oriented, more accentuated pedestrian entrances
Increased transparency at lower floor
Address potential of acoustic bounce from third-story overhang
Address design integrity in conformity with Community Design Guideline
3.1.A.3
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
The Commission recessed at 6:08 p.m. and reconvened at 6:14 p.m. with all members
present.
2. 3000 Calle Malva. ARCH-0592-2014; Continued review of 18 single-family home
designs and approval of concept designs for future homes with an approved
addendum of environmental impact; R-1 zone; Margarita Ranch SLO, LLC,
applicant.
Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
Commission adopt a resolution approving the project, based on findings and subject to
conditions which she outlined. Staff noted the Commission’s previous review of the
project and distributed a revised resolution incorporating conditions resulting from the
Commission’s previous direction.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 17
ARC Minutes
May 18, 2015
Page 5
a. Add the following Finding: Finding #5: Design of the previously approved
subdivision warrants an adjustment to 11 lots within the Planned Development
where garages are not recessed in accordance with Section 2.2.5 of the
Margarita Area Specific Plan.
b. Add the following Finding: The lot width and overall design of the previously
approved subdivision severely limits the opportunities for house designs that
include front porches that extend in front of garages, therefore an adjustment to
the requirements of the specific plan is warranted.
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Root, Soll, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast
Senior Planner Dunsmore gave a forecast of upcoming agenda items.
4. Commission:
Commr. Root noted concern about the predicament posed by ultra-modern styles
being presented for approval, in that they are unlikely to stand the test of time.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on June 1, 2015.
Laurie Thomas
Administrative Assistant III
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 18
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 19
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 20
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 21
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 22
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 23
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 24
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, July 10, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
July 10, 2017 at 5:01 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Amy Nemcik, Brian Rolph, Allen Root, Vice-Chair Angela Soll, and
Chair Greg Wynn.
Absent: Commissioner Richard Beller
Staff: Community Development Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rachel
Cohen, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell. Other staff members presented reports or
responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 35 Prado Road (25, 29, 35, 41, 43, & 45 Prado Road). ARCH-0653-2017: Conceptual
architectural review of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Water Resource Recovery Facility
(WRRF) Upgrade Project that includes new discharge requirements, increased capacity,
replacement of aging infrastructure, maximized recycled water production and incorporated
interpretive features and public amenities; PF zone, City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Associate Planner Rachel Cohen started the staff report presentation, and introduced
discussion items to the Commission.
Applicant Representative Dave Hix, Deputy Director of Wastewater of the Utilities
Department of the City of San Luis Obispo continued the staff report, presenting
questions to Commission. Program Manager for Water Systems Consulting Jeff Szytel,
and Principal Jeff McGraw, and Architect Jean von Bargen Root, both with MWA
Architects, were introduced.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 25
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 10, 2017 Page 2
Assistant Design Project Manager Jennifer Phillips from CH2M, gave a presentation of
the overall site plans.
Architect Jean von Bargen Root from MWA Architects, gave a presentation on her
work on the project, highlighting community asset goals, and the “Learning Center”
portion of the project.
Applicant Representative Dave Hix responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Public Comments:
Ben Kulick, San Luis Obispo, commented on colors and designs – commended
architects on design.
-- End Public Comment –
The Commission discussed the proposed conceptual design and provided direction to
the Applicant team and staff.
2. 1135 Santa Rosa Street. ARCH-0722-2017: Review of requested modifications to
application ARCH-0846-2015, to allow elimination of a bulkhead feature and change
approved building colors on a remodeled commercial building (exempt from environmental
review); C-D zone, 33 Tons, LLC, applicant.
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell presented the staff report, and outlined the details of
the original project approval granted by the Commission, discussed the Notice of
Violation that was sent to the applicant about observed violations of conditions of
project approval, and responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Applicant Ben Kulick, Stalwork, Inc. provided a report on the colors of the building,
and supplied pictures of the building, discussing bulkheads and other features of the
building and nearby buildings. He spoke of this project’s comparison with the
architecture of surrounding buildings.
Applicant Ben Kulick and Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell responded to Commission
inquiries.
Public Comments:
Chair Wynn acknowledged receipt of five written correspondence items.
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, speaking on behalf of himself and James Lopes,
expressed that the colors previously approved by the Architectural Review Commission
recognize more appropriately the effects of climate change.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 26
DRAFT Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of July 10, 2017 Page 3
David Walker, San Luis Obispo, likened the diversity of architecture in the city to
Barcelona and London, and commended the architect on the use of colors on the
project.
Bryan Ridley, resident of San Luis Obispo and architect on the project with Stalwork,
Inc., referenced the City’s Community Design Guidelines in explaining his support of
the current design, materials, and colors of the project.
Russ Brown, San Luis Obispo and Chair of Save Our Downtown, referenced
communication from Alan Cooper and others from the Save Our Downtown
association, requested the Commission reject the request for changes, and maintain the
original color approved by the ARC.
Rachel Drake, San Luis Obispo, inquired about the details behind the change in color
from the originally agreed-upon plans.
-- End Public Comment –
Commission discussion followed.
ACTION: MOTION BY CHAIR WYNN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROLPH,
CARRIED 5-0-1, with Commissioner Beller absent, to continue the project to a date
uncertain, but no longer than 120 days, and to direct the applicant to work with staff
toward a solution that would be more consistent with the original project approval,
using appropriate complementary building colors to reduce the perceived massing of
the building, and to provide a human-scale element for variety and interest along the
Marsh Street frontage similar to the approved cut-tile bulkhead.
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
Deputy Director Davidson provided an agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:16 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Architectural Review
Commission is -scheduled for Monday, July 17, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing
Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2017
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 27
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 28
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 29
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 30
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 31
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
6
ARC2 - 32
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
6
ARC2 - 33
1
Oetzell, Walter
From:Ben Kulick <ben@stalwork.com>
Sent:Wednesday, July 12, 2017 4:53 PM
To:'Greg Wynn'
Cc:Davidson, Doug; Dietrick, Christine; Ansolabehere, Jon; Oetzell, Walter; Oetzell,
Walter; 'Greg Coates'; Carla Walker; jay@stalwork.com
Subject:ARC Hearing
Attachments:Santa Rosa 1135 CDG Matrix.xlsx; SLO Downtown Mapping 15.0605.pdf
Greg:
Thank you for chairing the meeting Monday regarding our ARC application.
Below is a list of information pertaining to the 1135 Santa Rosa Project and I would appreciate you ensuring that
ARC understands what the guidelines do and do not contain. I believe rendering a decision on the project has
fallen out of the appropriate guidelines.
Multiple representations were made to Chapter 3 which does not apply to Downtown buildings, including the staff
report presented to you. This is actually erroneous information and not applicable.
Items in Chapter 3 (NOT APPLICABLE):
Chapter 3 ‐ Commercial and Industrial Project Design The commercial areas outside of the Downtown, and the
City’s manufacturing/industrial areas present special urban design challenges. The present character of these areas
reflects both the architectural styles of nonresidential, automobile‐oriented development that were predominant
when most of the structures in each area were built, and various modernization and renovation efforts thereafter.
This Chapter provides guidelines for new and renovated commercial and industrial structures outside of the
Downtown.
NOT APPLICABLE
1) Avoidance of box‐like forms
2) Variety of siding materials
3) Design Details: These may include varying colors, reveals, an external wainscot or bulkhead at the
building base to reduce apparent bulk, cornices and parapet details, and moldings
4) Façade articulation
5) Building walls should incorporate the same quality and level of detail of ornamentation on each elevation
visible from a public right‐of‐way
6) The architectural style, and the shape and massing of neighboring structures
7) The exterior colors of a building are as important as the materials in determining how people think
about the building and its surroundings. Colors should be compatible with the existing colors of the
surrounding area but need not duplicate existing colors
8) Accent colors should be used thoughtfully and complement the base color or a variation of its hue,
either weaker or stronger
9) The use of muted tones for the structure's base color is recommended. Color should not be used as an
attention getting device
10) A structure with a pitched roof, or pitched roofs over key building elements can sometimes project a more
small town image and reinforce the pedestrian orientation that is prominent in many parts of San Luis
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 34
2
Obispo. Structures with flat roofs and parapets can be appropriate with special attention to the wall‐to‐
parapet juncture, and to cornice details.
11) A building’s design should provide a sense of human scale and proportion. Horizontal and vertical wall
articulation should be expressed through the use of wall offsets, recessed windows and entries, awnings,
full roofs with overhangs, second floor setbacks, or covered arcades. See Figure 3‐3
12) Neighborhood compatibility. In designing a building, it is important to analyze the areas surrounding the
building site to find elements of compatibility that can be used in a new design
13) Avoid “boxy” structures with large, flat wall planes by articulating building forms and elevations to
create interesting rooflines, building shapes, and patterns of shade and shadow
These items were referred to regularly at last night's ARC meeting incorrectly and inappropriately as these
standards are completely inapplicable. I ask you to please make it clear to ARC NONE of the above criteria are
applicable to this project.
Chapter 4 ‐ Downtown Design Guidelines (APPLICABLE)
1) Multi‐story buildings are desirable because they can provide opportunities for upper floor offices and
residential units, and can increase the numbers of potential customers for ground floor retail uses, which
assists in maintaining their viability. (AKA massing and LARGE buildings are encouraged, not discouraged.
Please make that clear.)
2) Tall buildings (between 50 and 75 feet) shall be designed to achieve multiple policy objectives, including
design amenities, housing and retail land uses. NOT APPLICABLE SUB‐SECTIONS
a. Maintain the distinction between the first and upper floors by having a more transparent ground
floor. On upper floors, consider using windows or other architectural features that will reinforce
the typical rhythm of upper story windows found on traditional commercial buildings and
provide architectural interest on all four sides of the building; NOT APPLICABLE
b. Use roof overhangs, cornices, dentals, moldings, awnings, and other decorative features to
decrease the vertical appearance of the walls; NOT APPLICABLE
c. Use recesses and projections to visually divide building surfaces into smaller scale elements; NOT
APPLICABLE
d. Use color to visually reduce the size, bulk and scale of the building; NOT APPLICABLE‐ Please
make it very clear to ARC this section is 100% not applicable.
e. Consider the quality of natural and reflected light in public spaces within and around the project
site and choose materials and colors to enhance lighting effects with respect to available solar
exposure. NOT APPLICABLE
3) Overall character. In general, buildings should have either flat or stepped rooflines with parapets, AND
ESSENTIALLY FLAT FACADES. (This was been referenced in every ARC meeting on this project, downtown
buildings are actually REQUIRED to be boxes with flat facades, please make this clear. By guideline
buildings should be zero set back on all sides)
4) Dividing the facade into a series of display windows with smaller panes of glass;
5) Providing traditional recessed entries; and
6) Storefront windows should not begin at the level of the sidewalk, but should sit above a base, commonly
called a “bulkhead,” of 18 to 36 inches in height (NO STOREFRONT ON MARSH) (ARC had us lower the
windows, rendering a bulkhead inappropriate, including against guideline)
7) Finish materials. The exterior materials of downtown buildings involve several aspects including color,
texture, and materials. Materials with integral color such as smooth troweled plaster, tile, stone, and
brick are encouraged
8) Exterior plaster (smooth troweled preferred). (This finish has been continuously and repeatedly
criticized by the ARC. Smooth Trowel is the only material in section 4 listed as preferred. Please correct
ARC on the guidelines and stress the importance of removing their personal opinions.)
9) Cut stone, rusticated block (cast stone), and precast concrete
10) Clear glass windows
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 35
3
11) The following exterior finish materials are considered inappropriate in the downtown and are
discouraged: Mirrored glass and heavily tinted glass Windows with false divisions (i.e., a window
where the glass continues uninterrupted behind a surface mounted mullion) Vinyl and aluminum siding
Painted or baked enamel metal awnings Rough “Spanish lace” stucco finish Plywood siding
Corrugated sheet metal Corrugated fiberglass Split face concrete block Exposed concrete block
without integral color.
12) Windows. Windows that allow pedestrians to see the activities within the ground floors of downtown
buildings are important in maintaining the pedestrian orientation of the downtown. Ground floor
windows adjacent to sidewalks encourage pedestrians to linger, while extensive blank walls do not.
13) Awnings. Awnings should be retained and/or incorporated where feasible and compatible with the
storefront.
14) Other details. A number of other details should be incorporated into exterior building design to add a
degree of visual richness and interest while meeting functional needs. These details include such items as:
a. Light fixtures, wall mounted
b. Balconies, rails, finials, corbels, plaques, etc.
c. Crafted artworks.
In our review of the meeting I don’t believe a single design element was referenced to the appropriate guideline
nor was a specific guideline by chapter and letter referenced in the meeting. Specific wording from the guidelines
WAS referenced and ALL from the wrong chapter. This project is not in a historical zone and those design
parameters are completely irrelevant as well. This requires correction and training for your commission by city
staff and the chairperson.
There is absolutely NO guideline requiring or suggesting multi‐color buildings. Actually quite the contrary. What
the ARC “thinks” looks better has absolutely nothing to do with the application of the guidelines. ARC should be
corrected on this and refer to the guideline. There is not a SINGLE reference in a section that governs this building
in reference to multiple colors. NOT ONE.
Additionally the majority focus of the meeting was on a zero set back side of the building. This should be a solid
uninterrupted wall by GUIDELINE. Any articulation or detail what so ever is actually outside of guideline. This
elevation is not in public view by rule, it borders another zero set back property. Please clarify this with the
committee. Asking for color or thinking this wall surface lacks articulation or detail is not in ARC privy and the
standard is a flat continuous wall.
I have attached a design matrix to exhibit the building meeting not some, but every single applicable guideline.
This is the process ARC should review, not personal preferences. Also attached is a downtown map that clearly
shows the uniqueness of this building site. You will NOTE not one criteria is color. This is because this is not a
guideline.
I respectfully request you call another ARC meeting and approve the project “as‐is” in light of the committee’s
misapplication of standards.
I was also disappointed that the ARC requests renderings and photos of neighboring properties on a routine basis. I
supplied photos at the hearing. As you may or may not be aware, your committee did not look at them. I believe
this is disrespectful to the applicant. This comment was made to me by most of the audience members. I surely
noticed as well.
Thank you Greg.
STALWORK, INC.
CONSTRUCTION + DESIGN
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 36
4
License #948012
P.O. Box 391
San Luis Obispo, California 93406
O 805.542.0033
F 805.542.0837
ben@stalwork.com
www.stalwork.com
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 37
1135 Santa Rosa - R
e
m
o
d
e
l
+
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
6
/
5
/
2
0
1
5
Community Design
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
M
a
t
r
i
x
SECTION GUIDELINE
Y
E
S
N
O
N
O
T
E
S
4.2.AStreet orientation. Bui
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
n
t
h
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
a
t
t
h
e
b
a
c
k
of the sidewalk unles
s
s
p
a
c
e
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
i
s
t
o
b
e
used for pedestrian f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
p
l
a
z
a
s
,
c
o
u
r
t
y
a
r
d
s
,
o
r
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
areas.
N
A
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
d
a
p
t
s
a
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
i
t
s
i
n
h
e
r
i
t
e
d
f
o
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
~
5
'
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
'
s
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
n
d
~
1
5
'
f
r
o
m
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
'
s
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
,
w
h
i
c
h
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
a
1
0
'
n
o
-
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
.
4.2.B Height, scale. Multi-s
t
o
r
y
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
d
e
s
i
r
a
b
l
e
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
y
c
a
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
opportunities for upp
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
u
n
i
t
s
,
a
n
d
c
a
n
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
the numbers of poten
t
i
a
l
c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s
f
o
r
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
r
e
t
a
i
l
u
s
e
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
assists in maintaining
t
h
e
i
r
v
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
.
X
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
t
h
r
e
e
s
t
o
r
i
e
s
t
a
l
l
w
h
i
c
h
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
a
t
t
h
e
t
h
i
r
d
f
l
o
o
r
.
4.2.B Multi-story buildings
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
a
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
s
e
c
o
n
d
o
r
t
h
i
r
d
l
e
v
e
l
t
o
maintain a street faça
d
e
t
h
a
t
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
o
f
development, maintai
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
h
e
i
g
h
t
s
a
t
t
h
e
sidewalk edge.
X
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
a
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
a
t
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
c
o
r
n
e
r
s
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
.
T
h
e
3
r
d
f
l
o
o
r
,
b
y
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
,
i
s
r
e
d
u
c
e
d
t
o
8
1
%
o
f
t
h
e
f
l
o
o
r
b
e
l
o
w
.
T
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
o
f
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
i
s
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
.
4.2.B.1 The height and scale
o
f
n
e
w
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
a
l
t
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
shall fit within the con
t
e
x
t
a
n
d
v
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
s
c
a
l
e
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
provide human scale
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
.
X
N
o
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
.
H
u
m
a
n
s
c
a
l
e
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
i
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
s
i
z
i
n
g
o
f
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
,
m
a
t
u
r
e
t
r
e
e
s
,
s
i
t
e
w
a
l
l
s
,
a
n
d
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
i
t
e
e
n
t
r
i
e
s
.
4.2.B.1.a In no case may the
h
e
i
g
h
t
o
f
a
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
t
t
h
e
b
a
c
k
o
f
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
e
x
c
e
e
d
t
h
e
width of the adjoining
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
X
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
m
e
t
.
R
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
i
s
7
0
'
w
i
d
e
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
h
e
i
g
h
t
i
s
4
0
'
.
4.2.B.1.b New buildings that a
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
l
y
t
a
l
l
e
r
o
r
s
h
o
r
t
e
r
t
h
a
n
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
shall provide appropri
a
t
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
.
X
N
o
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
C
o
r
n
e
r
s
a
r
e
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
f
r
o
m
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
W
a
y
s
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
.
4.2.B.1.c For new projects adj
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
o
f
Historic Resources th
e
r
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
a
h
e
i
g
h
t
e
n
e
d
s
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y
t
o
t
h
e
m
a
s
s
a
n
d
scale of the significan
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
N
A
N
o
t
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
,
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
e
n
o
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
o
n
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
o
f
H
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
.
4.2.B.1.d The project provides
u
p
p
e
r
s
t
o
r
y
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
f
r
o
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
a
ç
a
d
e
along the street consi
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
L
U
E
P
o
l
i
c
y
4
.
1
6
.
4
.
P
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
above 50 feet should
b
e
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y
s
o
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
e
u
p
p
e
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
walls are not visible t
o
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
’
s
frontage
X
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
5
0
'
t
a
l
l
.
N
o
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
p
e
r
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
-
3
4.2.B.2 New buildings shall
n
o
t
o
b
s
t
r
u
c
t
v
i
e
w
s
f
r
o
m
,
o
r
s
u
n
l
i
g
h
t
t
o
,
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
-
o
w
n
e
d
gathering places incl
u
d
i
n
g
,
b
u
t
n
o
t
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
t
o
,
M
i
s
s
i
o
n
P
l
a
z
a
,
t
h
e
J
a
c
k
House gardens, and
Y
C
L
C
C
h
e
n
g
P
a
r
k
.
I
n
t
h
e
s
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
n
e
w
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
shall respect views of
t
h
e
h
i
l
l
s
,
f
r
a
m
i
n
g
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
o
b
s
c
u
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
.
X
L
i
n
e
o
f
s
i
g
h
t
f
r
o
m
Y
C
L
C
C
h
e
n
g
P
a
r
k
t
o
d
i
s
t
a
n
t
m
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
s
i
s
w
e
s
t
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
,
n
o
o
b
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
.
4.2.B.3 New buildings shoul
d
n
o
t
s
h
a
d
e
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
l
y
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
o
f
M
a
r
s
h
,
Higuera or Monterey
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
a
t
n
o
o
n
o
n
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
s
t
.
X
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
o
n
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
l
y
s
i
d
e
o
f
M
a
r
s
h
,
n
o
s
h
a
d
i
n
g
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
t
o
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
l
y
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
.
4.2.B.4 Tall buildings (betw
e
e
n
5
0
a
n
d
7
5
f
e
e
t
)
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d
t
o
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
multiple policy objecti
v
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
m
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
,
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
e
t
a
i
l
land uses.
N
A
N
o
t
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
n
o
t
a
"
t
a
l
l
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
"
a
s
i
t
i
s
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
5
0
'
t
a
l
l
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
u
s
e
s
t
o
m
e
e
t
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
p
o
l
i
c
y
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
.
4.2.B.5.a Utility boxes for pho
n
e
,
c
a
b
l
e
,
e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
,
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
g
a
s
,
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
and/or other services
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
a
l
o
n
g
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
l
l
e
y
s
,
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
building, or in a sub-g
r
a
d
e
v
a
u
l
t
.
X
P
G
&
E
d
i
s
a
l
l
o
w
s
v
a
u
l
t
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
i
r
t
r
a
n
s
f
o
r
m
e
r
s
,
a
c
u
t
-
s
t
o
n
e
e
n
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
i
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
i
n
c
o
n
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
6
.
1
.
G
.
2
.
O
t
h
e
r
u
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
a
r
e
s
c
r
e
e
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
v
i
e
w
a
n
d
a
r
e
n
o
t
v
i
s
i
b
l
e
f
r
o
m
p
u
b
l
i
c
v
i
e
w
.
4.2.B.5.b Location of backflow
p
r
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
d
e
v
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
f
i
r
e
s
p
r
i
n
k
l
e
r
r
i
s
e
r
m
u
s
t
b
e
identified on project p
l
a
n
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
located inside the buil
d
i
n
g
,
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
C
o
u
n
t
y
H
e
a
l
t
h
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
requirements.
X
B
a
c
k
f
l
o
w
p
r
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
d
e
v
i
c
e
i
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
i
n
a
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
l
o
s
e
t
,
a
n
d
i
s
c
o
n
c
e
a
l
e
d
f
r
o
m
v
i
e
w
.
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 38
4.2.B.5.c Minimum sidewalk w
i
d
t
h
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
8
-
f
e
e
t
c
l
e
a
r
o
f
o
b
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
pedestrians (furniture
,
n
e
w
s
r
a
c
k
s
,
s
t
r
e
e
t
t
r
e
e
s
e
t
c
.
)
a
c
r
o
s
s
1
0
0
%
o
f
t
h
e
project frontage.
X
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
a
r
e
~
1
0
'
i
n
w
i
d
t
h
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
t
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
.
A
s
a
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
f
o
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
t
h
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
~
5
'
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
n
d
~
1
6
'
f
r
o
m
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
.
4.2.B.5.d Service access to th
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
l
o
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
should not exceed 20
%
of the project frontag
e
o
n
a
n
y
f
a
c
i
n
g
s
t
r
e
e
t
.
X
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
c
c
e
s
s
i
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
v
i
a
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
a
l
l
e
y
,
0
%
o
f
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
.
4.2.C Façade design. New
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
m
o
d
e
l
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
t
o
r
e
f
r
o
n
t
windows, doors, entri
e
s
,
t
r
a
n
s
o
m
s
,
a
w
n
i
n
g
s
,
c
o
r
n
i
c
e
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
architectural features
t
h
a
t
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
,
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
c
o
p
y
i
n
g
their architectural styl
e
.
X
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
o
n
t
e
x
t
i
s
e
c
l
e
c
t
i
c
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
r
n
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
s
,
a
n
d
i
s
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
n
o
t
c
o
m
p
o
s
e
d
o
f
t
h
e
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
.
T
h
e
n
e
a
r
b
y
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
w
h
i
c
h
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
t
h
e
s
e
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
"
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
s
"
b
y
a
n
y
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
.
S
e
e
a
l
s
o
4
.
2
.
D
.
1
4.2.C.1 Overall character. In
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
,
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
e
i
t
h
e
r
f
l
a
t
o
r
s
t
e
p
p
e
d
rooflines with parapet
s
,
a
n
d
e
s
s
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
f
l
a
t
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
.
W
a
l
l
s
w
i
t
h
r
o
u
n
d
o
r
curvilinear lines, or la
r
g
e
p
o
i
n
t
e
d
o
r
s
l
a
n
t
e
d
r
o
o
f
l
i
n
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
b
e
avoided.
X
R
o
o
f
i
s
f
l
a
t
,
a
n
d
s
t
e
p
s
o
c
c
a
s
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
.
F
a
c
a
d
e
s
a
r
e
e
s
s
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
f
l
a
t
a
n
d
a
r
e
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
b
y
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
w
i
d
t
h
p
l
a
n
e
s
t
h
a
t
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
a
n
d
c
h
a
n
g
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
p
e
r
4
.
2
.
4
.
d
4.2.C.2 Proportions in relati
o
n
t
o
c
o
n
t
e
x
t
.
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
consideration of the c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
(
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
o
f
h
e
i
g
h
t
t
o
width) of existing adja
c
e
n
t
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
t
h
e
r
h
y
t
h
m
,
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
spacing of their existi
n
g
d
o
o
r
a
n
d
w
i
n
d
o
w
o
p
e
n
i
n
g
s
.
X
N
o
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
a
s
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
.
A
s
a
l
a
r
g
e
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
s
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
c
o
n
t
e
x
t
,
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
a
r
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
d
a
t
t
h
e
e
a
s
t
,
s
o
u
t
h
,
a
n
d
w
e
s
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
w
e
s
t
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
a
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
.
T
h
e
3
r
d
f
l
o
o
r
,
b
y
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
,
i
s
r
e
d
u
c
e
d
t
o
8
1
%
o
f
t
h
e
f
l
o
o
r
b
e
l
o
w
.
4.2.C.3 Storefront rhythm. A
n
e
w
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
a
c
a
d
e
t
h
a
t
i
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
t
o
b
e
m
u
c
h
"wider" than the existi
n
g
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
divided into a series
o
f
b
a
y
s
o
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
,
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
b
y
c
o
l
u
m
n
s
o
r
masonry piers that fr
a
m
e
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
,
d
o
o
r
s
a
n
d
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
s
.
C
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
reinforcing a facade r
h
y
t
h
m
h
e
l
p
s
t
i
e
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
v
i
s
u
a
l
l
y
a
n
d
provides pedestrians
w
i
t
h
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
t
o
m
a
r
k
t
h
e
i
r
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
d
o
w
n
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
.
N
A
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
f
a
ç
a
d
e
o
n
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
a
s
i
t
i
s
a
r
e
m
o
d
e
l
a
n
d
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
N
o
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
a
r
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
.
P
e
r
A
R
C
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
h
e
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
w
e
r
e
e
x
p
a
n
d
e
d
t
o
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
.
A
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
o
r
i
e
n
t
e
d
w
i
n
d
o
w
w
a
s
a
d
d
e
d
f
a
c
i
n
g
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
e
n
t
r
y
.
4.2.C.4 Individual storefront
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
.
S
t
o
r
e
f
r
o
n
t
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
o
v
e
r
p
o
w
e
r
t
h
e
building façade, and
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
c
o
n
f
i
n
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
a
r
e
a
f
r
a
m
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
piers and the lintel ab
o
v
e
,
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
c
l
a
s
s
i
c
“
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
”
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
e
.
N
A
"
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
"
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
p
a
r
c
e
l
s
w
i
t
h
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
z
e
r
o
l
o
t
l
i
n
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
T
h
i
s
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
i
t
e
a
n
d
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
o
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
f
i
t
t
h
a
t
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
.
4.2.C.5 Wall surfaces. Wall
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
,
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
l
y
a
t
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
l
e
v
e
l
,
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
varied and interesting
,
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
u
n
b
r
o
k
e
n
a
n
d
m
o
n
o
l
i
t
h
i
c
,
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
b
l
a
n
k
walls discourage ped
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
.
X
W
a
l
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
a
t
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
l
e
v
e
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
l
a
r
g
e
w
i
n
d
o
w
o
p
e
n
i
n
g
s
,
d
e
c
k
o
v
e
r
h
a
n
g
s
,
a
w
n
i
n
g
s
,
a
n
d
h
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
w
o
o
d
s
i
d
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
b
a
n
k
v
a
u
l
t
p
r
e
v
e
n
t
s
t
h
e
c
o
r
n
e
r
f
r
o
m
b
e
i
n
g
m
o
r
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
l
y
p
o
r
o
u
s
.
4.2.C.5.a Dividing the facade i
n
t
o
a
s
e
r
i
e
s
o
f
d
i
s
p
l
a
y
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
w
i
t
h
s
m
a
l
l
e
r
p
a
n
e
s
o
f
glass.
X
P
e
r
A
R
C
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
h
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
c
h
e
m
e
w
a
s
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
n
e
w
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
,
g
r
o
u
p
i
n
g
s
,
a
n
d
s
u
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
i
n
t
o
s
m
a
l
l
e
r
h
u
m
a
n
s
c
a
l
e
p
a
n
e
s
o
f
g
l
a
s
s
.
4.2.C.5.b Constructing the fac
a
d
e
w
i
t
h
s
m
a
l
l
h
u
m
a
n
s
c
a
l
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
b
r
i
c
k
o
r
decorative tile along
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
s
.
X
P
e
r
A
R
C
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
d
e
c
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
c
u
t
-
s
t
o
n
e
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
w
a
s
a
d
d
e
d
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
,
w
h
i
c
h
t
i
e
s
-
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
c
u
t
-
s
t
o
n
e
s
i
t
e
a
n
d
s
i
g
n
w
a
l
l
s
.
T
h
e
h
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
c
l
e
a
r
-
s
e
a
l
e
d
w
o
o
d
a
t
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
h
u
m
a
n
s
c
a
l
e
a
n
d
t
e
x
t
u
r
e
,
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
a
r
o
u
n
d
t
o
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
a
n
d
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
n
t
r
i
e
s
.
4.2.C.5.c Providing traditional
r
e
c
e
s
s
e
d
e
n
t
r
i
e
s
.
X
T
h
e
m
a
i
n
e
n
t
r
y
i
s
r
e
c
e
s
s
e
d
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
e
n
t
r
y
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
m
o
r
e
p
r
o
m
i
n
e
n
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
r
e
c
e
s
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
.
4.2.C.5.d Careful sizing, plac
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
o
f
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
.
X
S
i
g
n
a
g
e
i
s
c
a
r
e
f
u
l
l
y
s
i
z
e
d
a
n
d
p
l
a
c
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
n
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
s
o
n
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
c
a
l
e
d
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
t
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
.
4.2.C.6 Doorways. Doorways
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
c
e
s
s
e
d
X
T
h
e
m
a
i
n
e
n
t
r
y
i
s
r
e
c
e
s
s
e
d
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
e
n
t
r
y
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
m
o
r
e
p
r
o
m
i
n
e
n
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
r
e
c
e
s
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
.
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 39
4.2.C.7 Bulkheads. Storefron
t
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
b
e
g
i
n
a
t
t
h
e
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
t
h
e
sidewalk, but should
s
i
t
a
b
o
v
e
a
b
a
s
e
,
c
o
m
m
o
n
l
y
c
a
l
l
e
d
a
“
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
,
”
o
f
1
8
to 36 inches in height
.
B
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
designed as promine
n
t
a
n
d
v
i
s
i
b
l
e
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
a
c
a
d
e
s
,
a
n
d
should be treated sen
s
i
t
i
v
e
l
y
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
appearance of the bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
D
e
s
i
r
a
b
l
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
f
o
r
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
f
a
c
i
n
g
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
those already commo
n
i
n
t
h
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
:
o
r
n
a
m
e
n
t
a
l
g
l
a
z
e
d
t
i
l
e
i
n
d
e
e
p
r
i
c
h
hues, either plain or
w
i
t
h
M
e
d
i
t
e
r
r
a
n
e
a
n
o
r
M
e
x
i
c
a
n
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
s
;
d
a
r
k
o
r
l
i
g
h
t
marble panels; an
d
p
r
e
-
c
a
s
t
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
X
P
e
r
A
R
C
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
d
e
c
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
c
u
t
-
s
t
o
n
e
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
w
a
s
a
d
d
e
d
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
,
w
h
i
c
h
t
i
e
s
-
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
c
u
t
-
s
t
o
n
e
s
i
t
e
a
n
d
s
i
g
n
w
a
l
l
s
.
4.2.D Materials and archit
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
.
W
h
i
l
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
h
a
v
e
a
variety of materials a
n
d
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
,
s
e
v
e
r
a
l
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
t
h
e
m
e
s
i
n
these aspects of desi
g
n
i
n
t
h
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
h
a
v
e
h
e
l
p
e
d
t
o
d
e
f
i
n
e
i
t
s
distinctive character.
X
S
e
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
s
u
b
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
i
n
m
o
r
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
t
h
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
t
h
e
m
e
s
.
4.2.D.1 The exterior materia
l
s
o
f
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
s
e
v
e
r
a
l
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
including color, textur
e
,
a
n
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
c
o
l
o
r
s
u
c
h
a
s
smooth troweled plas
t
e
r
,
t
i
l
e
,
s
t
o
n
e
,
a
n
d
b
r
i
c
k
a
r
e
e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
.
I
f
t
h
e
building's exterior des
i
g
n
i
s
c
o
m
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
d
,
w
i
t
h
m
a
n
y
d
e
s
i
g
n
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
,
t
h
e
wall texture should be
s
i
m
p
l
e
a
n
d
s
u
b
d
u
e
d
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
i
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
d
e
s
i
g
n
is simple (perhaps m
o
r
e
m
o
n
o
l
i
t
h
i
c
)
,
a
f
i
n
e
l
y
t
e
x
t
u
r
e
d
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
patterned masonry, c
a
n
g
r
e
a
t
l
y
e
n
r
i
c
h
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
'
s
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
.
X
M
a
n
y
o
f
t
h
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
c
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
w
h
i
l
e
n
o
t
c
o
m
m
o
n
,
t
h
e
w
o
o
d
s
i
d
i
n
g
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
i
s
v
e
r
y
r
i
c
h
i
n
c
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
t
e
x
t
u
r
e
,
a
n
d
i
s
s
c
a
l
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
,
e
x
t
e
n
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
t
o
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
i
t
e
e
n
t
r
i
e
s
.
4.2.D.1 Materials should co
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
o
s
e
o
n
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
N
A
N
o
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
.
The following materia
l
s
a
r
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
f
o
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
downtown.-Exterior plaster (smo
o
t
h
t
r
o
w
e
l
e
d
p
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
)
-Cut stone, rusticated
b
l
o
c
k
(
c
a
s
t
s
t
o
n
e
)
,
a
n
d
p
r
e
c
a
s
t
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
-New or used face-bri
c
k
-Ceramic tiles (bulkh
e
a
d
o
r
c
o
r
n
i
c
e
)
-Clapboard (where ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
)
-Glass block (transo
m
)
-Clear Glass windows
X
U
s
e
d
(
s
m
o
o
t
h
t
r
o
w
e
l
e
d
)
U
s
e
d
(
b
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
a
n
d
s
i
t
e
/
s
i
g
n
w
a
l
l
s
)
U
s
e
d
(
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
i
v
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
s
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
c
l
e
a
r
s
e
a
l
e
d
c
e
d
a
r
)
U
s
e
d
The following exterior
f
i
n
i
s
h
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
r
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
i
n
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
i
n
t
h
e
downtown and are di
s
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
:
-Mirrored glass and h
e
a
v
i
l
y
t
i
n
t
e
d
g
l
a
s
s
-Windows with false d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
-Vinyl and aluminum
s
i
d
i
n
g
-Painted or baked en
a
m
e
l
m
e
t
a
l
a
w
n
i
n
g
s
-Rough “Spanish lace
”
s
t
u
c
c
o
f
i
n
i
s
h
-Plywood siding-Corrugated sheet m
e
t
a
l
-Corrugated fiberglas
s
-Split face concrete bl
o
c
k
-Exposed concrete
b
l
o
c
k
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
c
o
l
o
r
X
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
N
o
t
U
s
e
d
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 40
4.2.D.2 Storefront remodelin
g
o
f
t
e
n
c
o
v
e
r
s
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
d
e
c
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
,
o
r
r
e
t
a
i
n
s
them only as visual “l
e
f
t
o
v
e
r
s
.
”
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
b
e
w
a
s
t
e
d
i
n
remodeling efforts. If
e
n
o
u
g
h
r
e
m
a
i
n
,
t
h
e
y
c
a
n
b
e
r
e
s
t
o
r
e
d
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
e
original design. If onl
y
a
f
e
w
r
e
m
a
i
n
,
t
h
e
y
c
a
n
b
e
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
a
s
d
e
s
i
g
n
features in a new stor
e
f
r
o
n
t
.
I
n
e
i
t
h
e
r
c
a
s
e
,
t
h
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
o
f
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
t
o
a
façade should grow o
u
t
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
t
r
a
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
a
n
d
c
r
e
a
t
e
a
harmonious backgrou
n
d
t
h
a
t
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
e
s
t
h
o
s
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
.
N
A
N
o
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
t
r
a
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
f
o
r
r
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
d
a
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
1
9
8
0
'
s
.
4.2.D.3 Doors and storefront
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
o
f
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
n
d
h
a
v
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
a
n
d
ornament appropriate
t
o
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
w
a
l
l
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
X
A
l
u
m
i
n
u
m
f
r
a
m
e
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
a
n
d
d
o
o
r
w
i
t
h
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
f
r
a
m
e
s
a
r
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
s
m
o
o
t
h
t
r
o
w
e
l
e
d
c
e
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
s
t
e
r
.
4.2.D.4 Windows that allow
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
t
o
s
e
e
t
h
e
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
s
of downtown building
s
a
r
e
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
i
n
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
orientation of the dow
n
t
o
w
n
.
G
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
encourage pedestria
n
s
t
o
l
i
n
g
e
r
,
w
h
i
l
e
e
x
t
e
n
s
i
v
e
b
l
a
n
k
w
a
l
l
s
d
o
n
o
t
.
N
A
T
h
i
s
s
i
t
e
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
f
o
r
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
u
s
e
v
i
a
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
v
e
U
s
e
P
e
r
m
i
t
,
i
n
p
a
r
t
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
o
f
t
h
e
l
o
w
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
a
n
d
a
c
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
t
h
i
s
i
s
n
o
t
a
f
r
e
q
u
e
n
t
l
y
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
k
e
d
s
i
t
e
b
y
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
.
G
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
a
r
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
,
a
n
d
e
x
t
e
n
s
i
v
e
b
l
a
n
k
w
a
l
l
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
.
A
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
b
a
n
k
v
a
u
l
t
p
r
e
v
e
n
t
s
a
d
d
i
n
g
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
a
t
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
.
P
e
r
A
R
C
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
h
e
g
r
o
u
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
w
e
r
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
i
n
h
e
i
g
h
t
f
o
r
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
.
4.2.D.5 Awnings should be r
e
t
a
i
n
e
d
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
w
h
e
r
e
f
e
a
s
i
b
l
e
a
n
d
compatible with the st
o
r
e
f
r
o
n
t
.
X
A
l
a
r
g
e
a
w
n
i
n
g
e
x
t
e
n
d
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
n
t
r
y
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
/
e
n
t
r
y
.
A
w
n
i
n
g
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
o
c
c
u
r
w
h
e
r
e
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
a
r
e
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
e
d
.
4.2.D.6 Other details. A nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
i
n
t
o
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
building design to ad
d
a
d
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
v
i
s
u
a
l
r
i
c
h
n
e
s
s
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
w
h
i
l
e
meeting functional ne
e
d
s
.
X
P
e
r
A
R
C
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
i
v
e
w
a
l
l
m
o
u
n
t
e
d
l
i
g
h
t
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
s
,
b
a
l
c
o
n
y
r
a
i
l
i
n
g
s
,
a
n
d
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
m
e
t
a
l
w
o
r
k
a
t
w
a
l
l
c
a
p
s
a
n
d
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
i
l
l
s
f
o
r
d
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
s
h
a
d
o
w
l
i
n
e
s
.
4.2.E Public spaces, plaza
s
a
n
d
c
o
u
r
t
y
a
r
d
s
.
P
u
b
l
i
c
s
p
a
c
e
s
o
n
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
s
i
t
e
s
should be designed a
s
e
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
b
y
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
pedestrian amenities
s
u
c
h
a
s
b
e
n
c
h
e
s
a
n
d
f
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
s
,
and by continuing the
p
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
.
N
A
N
o
t
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
.
T
r
a
n
s
i
e
n
t
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
a
r
e
a
l
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
a
t
t
h
i
s
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
n
e
a
r
t
h
e
c
r
e
e
k
.
W
h
i
l
e
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
c
a
n
b
e
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d
v
i
a
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
m
e
a
n
s
,
b
e
n
c
h
e
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
f
u
r
n
i
t
u
r
e
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
i
s
t
o
o
m
u
c
h
o
f
a
n
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
.
A
t
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
n
t
r
y
s
i
d
e
b
e
n
c
h
e
s
a
r
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
w
h
e
r
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
c
a
n
b
e
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
.
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 41
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 42
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 43
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 44
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 45
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 46
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC2 - 47