HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-16-2018 - Item 1 - Lopes1
Tonikian, Victoria
From:Scott, Shawna
Sent:Monday, April 16, 2018 8:24 AM
To:Purrington, Teresa; Tonikian, Victoria
Cc:Davidson, Doug
Subject:FW: April 16, 2018 hearing: 3249 Broad Street
Please see below, public correspondence for Architectural Review Commission, Meeting 4/16/18, Item #1 –
ARCH-3530-2016 (3249 Broad), Broad Street Collection.
Thank you,
Shawna Scott
Associate Planner
Community Development
919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E sscott@slocity.org
T 805.781.7176
slocity.org
From: James Lopes <
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 10:48 PM
To: Advisory Bodies <advisorybodies@slocity.org>
Cc: Davidson, Doug <ddavidson@slocity.org>; Scott, Shawna <sscott@slocity.org>; Allan Cooper
<
Subject: April 16, 2018 hearing: 3249 Broad Street
Architectural Review Commission
Chairperson Root and Commissioners:
I am asking you to require a return to the original design with changes that meet the former ARC direction. This project
now looks very compromised and faddish.
The front facades directly adjacent to Broad Street convey too much transparency and very limited, uncomfortable
public space. The City should show the applicant how to place a motel next to a 40+ mph arterial highway, with noise
and physical protection of guests and housing residents along the frontage. This location is where south‐bound drivers
really speed up going downhill, and it is really noisy.
Parking should be placed under a podium building, so that more of the site can be used for guest and resident
recreation.
2
I hope that you will require less use of the corrugated tin siding, especially where it is used within the site to wrap entire
units. This current stylistic fad is not compatible with the materials in the vicinity or city; it is only accommodated in the
Railroad Historic District. It should be used very sparingly as small accents, not on entire building walls.
I want to commend the former ARC decision, which gave direction to the applicant to make major changes in the
project:
"Directional Item #5: The ARC directed the applicant to revise the plans to provide more physical
articulation, variety, interest, consistency, identity, and sense of place, and revise the north and south‐
facing elevations. a. Provide variety on building façade, to include building heights and window
alignment. Provide more physical and textural variety. b. Provide different window types and window
pattern arrays to reduce monotony. c. Provide more shadow‐play on the south‐east external elevation
d. Consider provision of additional decks for visual interest. e. Consider making some units larger and
some roof decks smaller. f. Consider dropping down Lots 1 and 7. g. Consider a uniform color for the
awnings. Additional awnings or weather shield encouraged at live/work entrances."
As you can see, not all of the direction was followed. For instance, the windows now are just as monotonous in their
consistent pattern and materials, but they now are too large. If this design is accepted, the window patterns should be
varied, and discussion should be given to the south‐facing heat gain within these units, which may drive up the use of air
conditioning, or create discomfort inside.
The project looks like a mini‐mall because the use of cheap‐looking commercial materials conveys the impression of a
non‐residential project. This project is across from the very professional, well‐dressed project fronted by Lemos. A
similar use of quality materials, rather than corten steel or tin siding, should be expected. The applicant should return to
the original design scheme and just meet the ARC direction with more variety and interest.
Lastly, this project apparently does not meet the city requirements for usable outdoor parklet or recreation space, to
serve motel guests in their private setting, and for housing residents in a common area and recreation facility. Again,
the project looks like a mini‐mall because it conveys nothing about a motel, resort, or housing project. The parking area
should be reduced ‐ it should actually be under a podium building ‐ and this project should have courtyards and common
green areas.
Thank you for considering my comments.
James Lopes
San Luis Obispo