HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-6-14City of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Architectural Review Commission
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
AGENDA
Council Hearing Room
City Hall - 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
October 6, 2014 Monday 5:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Commrs. Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Amy Nemcik,
Allen Root, Vice-Chair Greg Wynn, and Chairperson Michelle
McCovey-Good
ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items.
MINUTES: Minutes of September 8 and September 15, 2014. Approve or amend.
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Commission about items
not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their
name and city of residence. Comments are limited to five minutes per person. Items
raised at this time are generally referred to the staff and, if action by the Commission is
necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
NOTE: Any court challenge to the action 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.
Any decision of the Architectural Review Commission is final unless appealed to the City
Council within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the
Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the
Community Development Department, City Clerk’s office, or on the City’s website
(www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $273 and must accompany the appeal
documentation.
1. 3080 Rockview Place. ARC 202-13; Design review of nine two-story single-family
residences and associated improvements in a common-interest subdivision. A
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was previously adopted
by the Planning Commission; R-2-S zone; Covelop, Inc., applicant. (Marcus
Carloni) (45 minutes)
2. 1300 Madonna Road. ARCH-0071-2014; Request to review modifications to the
Laguna Village Shopping Center sign program for new proposed tenant signs and
new monument signs with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-C
zone; Laguna Village Shopping Center, applicant. (Kyle Bell) (45 minutes)
Architectural Review Commission
Page 2
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and
activities. Please contact the City Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance.
3. 1126 Marsh Street. ARC 144-14; Review of designs for seven attached three-
story single-family residences fronting Marsh Street with a categorical exemption
from environmental review; C-R zone; MFI Limited, applicant. (Marcus Carloni)
(45 minutes)
COMMENT & DISCUSSION
4. Staff
a. Agenda Forecast
5. Commission
ADJOURNMENT
Presenting Planners: Kyle Bell and Marcus Carloni
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Design review of plans for nine (9) two-story single family residences and associated improvements in a common-interest subdivision on vacant property on the west side of Rockview Place. PROJECT ADDRESS: 3080 Rockview Place BY: Jaime Hill, Contract Planner Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone Number: (805) 781-7176 E-mail: mcarloni@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: ARC 202-14 FROM: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 5), which approves the
project, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant Covelop, Inc.
Representative Damien Mavis
Zoning R-2-S (Medium Density Residential,
Special Considerations)
General Plan Medium Density Residential
Site Area 31,479 square feet (0.7227 ac)
Application
Complete
Environmental
Status
February 7, 2014
Mitigated Negative Declaration will
be reviewed by City Council (ER 202-
14)
SUMMARY
The project is a nine-unit residential infill development with a small seasonal creek that flows
through the center of the site. Three of the units are on the Rockview side of the creek and the
other six lots are accessed by a new bridge. The applicant is requesting final design review
approval of the project by the ARC.
Other project entitlements needed to accommodate development include a subdivision and use
permit. On August 24, 2014, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
subdivision and use permit to the City Council. The Commission supported reconstruction of the
creek bank, a density bonus, and exceptions to property development standards. Following
review by the ARC, the City Council will be taking final action on the Use Permit to allow
development of a site with Special Considerations, Common Interest Subdivision, and Initial
Study.
Meeting Date: October 6, 2014
Item Number: 1
ARC1 - 1
ARC 202-13( 3080 Rockview Place)
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines (CDG). Relevant excerpts and standards from the CDG are included in the analysis
where pertinent.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Review/History
The project includes a common interest subdivision which provides for ownership of separate
units as well as interest in commonly owned areas that are managed and maintained via a joint
maintenance agreement. Within common interest subdivisions property development standards
including, but not limited to, density, yards, and coverage, apply with respect to both exterior
property limits and within each new lot. In addition to property development standards, each unit
must also comply with development standards specific to common interest subdivisions.
The Planning Commission first reviewed the project, including the subdivision, on May 14,
2014, and continued it to allow the applicant to bring the external setback on the south side of
Lot 1 into compliance with city standards, to explore providing a pedestrian access to the
neighboring Crossroads Commercial Center to the east, and to learn more about how ongoing
maintenance would occur under a Joint Maintenance Agreement.
On August 27, 2014, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised project and additional
information, and made findings recommending that the City Council approve the proposed
subdivision and Use Permit for development of a site with special considerations with requested
street, other yard and creek setback reductions, and tandem parking space (see Attachments 4 and
5, Planning Commission Staff Reports and Resolution).
2.2 Site Information/Setting
The L-shaped project site is vacant and consists primarily of non-native annual grassland. At the
center of the site is an un-vegetated drainage channel, which is classified in the General Plan as
“Perennial creek with degraded corridor, high encroachment, and difficulty in restoring”. The site
is located in an urbanized area of the City and is surrounded with multi-family zoned residential
buildings and commercial uses to the southeast.
ARC1 - 2
ARC 202-13( 3080 Rockview Place)
Page 3
2.2 Project Description
The 9-unit residential project includes the following significant features (Attachment 2, Project
Plans):
1. Eight detached two-bedroom single-family homes;
2. One designated moderate-income affordable unit – a three-bedroom single-family home
on Lot 5, entitling the project to a density bonus and one concession/incentive;
3. A small bridge designed to provide access to six lots (Parcels 4-9) which are across a
drainage channel;
a. Approximately 18 feet in span and located at the western extent of Lot 6. The
proposed grading and creek crossing remain similar to that from a previously
approved project on this site.
4. A common driveway and guest parking, decorative landscaping, and restorative plantings
in the constructed creek bank areas along the drainage channel;
5. Requests to allow reduced creek, street yard, and other yard setbacks, and tandem parking
in the street yard (pending final approval by the City Council).
The nine detached, single-family homes are located on individual parcels of approximately 3,500
square feet and are all two-story with attached single-car garages. There are three different
exterior building designs (A-D, with models B and D differing only internally, and model A
reversed to mirror image on Lot 1), which provides for an aesthetically cohesive development
without falling into monotony. Each home provides ground level private yards, private storage
within the garage, and laundry facilities on the upper sleeping level. Additionally, some models
provide additional outdoor space in upper level balconies (models A and C). A play of massing,
alternating materials, and accent colors are used to provide character and variety, while ensuring
longevity and ease of maintenance for these “affordable by design” homes.
Vehicle parking for each unit includes both one space within an attached garage and one
uncovered space. The uncovered parking space for Lot 1 has been proposed to be in tandem
within the required street yard. Garages are sized such that they can also provide enclosed, secure
Site Size 31,479.29 sf (0.7227 ac)
Present Use & Development Vacant ruderal land
Topography Less than 15% slope
Access Rockview Place
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2.
South/Southeast: Multi-family development zoned R-2 and
Crossroads commercial center zoned Service Commercial with
Planned Development Overlay (C-S-PD).
East: Residential development zoned Service-Commercial with
Special Considerations Overlay.
West: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2.
ARC1 - 3
ARC 202-13( 3080 Rockview Place)
Page 4
bicycle storage. In addition to private parking, the following guest parking is provided:
1. Two vehicle parking stalls (between Lots 4 and 5, and Lots 6 and 7), and
2. One motorcycle space (north of Lot 9), and
3. One short term bicycle rack just west of the bridge.
2.3 Project Statistics
Statistics
Item Proposed 1 Ordinance Standard 2
Street Yards 143 or 20 feet 20 feet
Other Yards Varies, see section 3.2 5 – 13 feet
Max. Height of Structure(s) 26-30 feet 35 feet
Density 10 density units 9.5 density units
Building Coverage (footprint) ~ 25% 50%
Parking Spaces (for residents) 2 per home 2 per home
Parking Spaces (for guests) 2 car + 1 motorcycle 2 car + 1 motorcycle
Landscaping Private, Common and Riparian n/a
Grading 1,500 CY Fill n/a
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans [dated 14.0807]
2. City Zoning Regulations
3. Street yard setback exception pending final City Council approval
4. Allowed Density = 0.6988 ac * 12 units/ac = 8.39 units. (Allowed 7.5% density bonus plus one
incentive/concession1) 8.39 units x 1.075 = 9.02 density units (allowed to round up to next
whole number per Section 17.90.040B) = 10 Density Units
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The following discussion provides an evaluation of the project’s consistency with applicable
guidance in the Community Design Guidelines (CDG). Overall, staff finds that the understated
contemporary design is appropriate in the context of the setting and in compliance with the CDG.
The analysis raises three main issues for the ARC to discuss:
1) Consider additional articulation of entries.
2) Look at alternative designs for deck supports.
3) Create enhanced landscape and hardscape treatments in Rockview street yards to entries
of Units 1 & 2.
3.1 Site Plan: Similar to other small-lot and condominium developments in the vicinity, Nine on
Rockview is designed so the majority of the homes would take access via a common driveway,
1 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040G and .060A: 1 affordable unit / 8 market rate units = 12.5% of the project
restricted, yielding a 7.5% density bonus. With greater than 10% of the total units restricted for families of
moderate income the developer is entitled to one incentive or concession.
ARC1 - 4
ARC 202-13( 3080 Rockview Place)
Page 5
while the home at the southwest corner of the property would front Rockview Place directly.
Short plaster walls utilizing each home’s accent color are depicted near the entries of the homes,
providing separation from the drive aisle and creating semi-enclosed porch areas (Attachment 2,
page A-2). Community Design Guideline policies for infill development (Section 5.3) encourage
new residential developments to continue existing neighborhood patterns, such as scale, siting
and orientation. Consistent with this direction, the proposed small lot homes are sited to create a
new small neighborhood with a distinctive presence, while also contributing to a continuous
streetscape consistent with the neighborhood pattern.
Private and guest parking have been dispersed through the project to be accessible to each unit
and to avoid a large expanse of parking. As encouraged in the Community Design Guidelines
(Section 5.4B Multi-Family and Clustered Housing, Parking and Driveways), the paved areas
will be concrete, with enhanced insets of pigmented or stained concrete that is stamped or saw
cut with a 4-foot grid pattern.
3.2 Building Design: Although the project has a more modern architectural style than
neighboring developments, staff finds the proposed placement and design of the residences to be
consistent with Community Design Guideline direction for multi-family architecture and
clustered housing design (Section 5.4C), which encourage new infill development to be similar
to existing development in terms of scale and massing, and to provide articulation through
changes in wall planes and roof articulation.
Pursuant to Planning Commission comments, the applicant has made several refinements to the
original building elevations and rooflines to introduce additional variety in surface planes and
material applications, and to provide more variety in massing on the site. The roof designs
employ modified shed profiles and the interior ceilings are pitched to supply volume to the
homes. The shed roofs rotate with the homes on-site, ensuring a varied communal roof scape.
Deep overhangs cast long and varied shadows across the wall planes, and aid in summertime
solar shading. Individual window awnings are located both for shading and visual emphasis. A
combination of horizontal sliding and casement windows respond to the rooms that they serve.
The nine two-story homes are composed of four different floor plans (models B and D differ only
internally, with the partition of a second level family room into a third bedroom and with model
A reversed to mirror image on Lot 1). The models employ two main organizational approaches
based on the location of the single-car garage (Attachment 2, project plans pages A-2 –A6); unit
A locates the garage and front door on the shorter transverse elevation, while units B/D and C
locate the garage and front door on the longer elevation. The garage is also used as a location for
changes in massing and material. The distribution of the different floor plans over the site creates
a varied street front rhythm from the entry on Rockview and down to the lower portions of the
site.
3.4 Building Entries: The entrance to each home is highlighted by a small overhang or short
masonry wall, and one of three accent colors. However, staff finds that the building elevations
ARC1 - 5
ARC 202-13( 3080 Rockview Place)
Page 6
might benefit from more articulation in wall planes through either recesses or pop-outs from
main wall surfaces to further highlight entries.
ARC Discussion Item: The ARC should discuss whether additional articulation to
further highlight the front entries is needed, particularly on unit C, where the entry
appears undistinguished on the large wall plane.
3.5 Balconies: Second story balconies on models A and C are accessed from the master
bedrooms to provide additional indoor-outdoor opportunities and also shade ground level
windows; wrapped in cedar they echo the materials of the site fencing. As currently designed, the
balconies are supported by slender posts, which could be eliminated if the balconies were instead
cantilevered, which may appear more consistent with the clean, modern design.
ARC Discussion Item: The ARC should discuss the design of the deck supports and
provide direction to the applicant and staff on whether any changes are warranted.
3.6 Street Yard Enhancements: Consistent with CDG guidance, the entry doors for Units 1 & 2
face the street. Staff feels that the streetscape of the project could be improved by a combination
of hardscape walkways and associated landscaping. Staff is recommending Condition No. 6 in
the draft resolution calling for this.
ARC Discussion Item: The ARC should discuss the proposed condition calling for
enhanced landscape and hardscape treatments in Rockview street yard to the entries of
Units 1 & 2.
3.3 Colors & Materials: A series of complementary body and accent colors has been used to
reinforce the massing variety while simultaneously allowing individual identity within a limited
palette. Each of the homes would be clad in three different shades of cement plaster, each a
varying gray tone, highlighting the various wall planes. A common accent color along the fascia
and garage door, in “bishop indigo”, offers a tasteful point of interest. To distinguish the
individual units and keep the neighborhood from falling into monotony, one of three accent
colors would be used for the homes exterior doors and awnings (Attachment 3, page A3 through
A6). A color and materials board with actual samples will be available at the hearing for review.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On May 7, 2014 the Community Development Director recommended a Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact, which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 14, 2014 and
again on August 27th. The City Council will take final action on the environmental determination
(Attachment 4 and 5).
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
ARC1 - 6
ARC 202-13( 3080 Rockview Place)
Page 7
In addition to conditions of approval related to the subdivision of the site recommended by the
Planning Commission, department conditions/code requirements have been included in the draft
ARC Resolution, included as Attachment 1.
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
7.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
7.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design
Guidelines.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft ARC Resolution
2. Vicinity map
3. Project Plans
4. Planning Commission staff report from May 14, 2014
5. Planning Commission staff report and Resolution from August 24, 2014
ARC1 - 7
RESOLUTION NO. ####-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION GRANTING FINAL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL OF 9
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES WITH ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED OCTOBER
6, 2014; 3080 ROCKVIEW PLACE (R-2-S ZONE; ARC 202-13)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public
hearings on May 14, 2014 and August 27, 2014, for the purpose of considering application
TR/A/ER 202-13, including a use permit to allow development of a site zoned Medium-Density
Residential with a Special Considerations overlay with a nine-unit Common Interest Subdivision
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a residential subdivision with exceptions to property
development standards, and a mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact, and
recommended that the City Council approve the project subject to findings and conditions, and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on October 6, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARC 202-13,
Covelop Inc., 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 the staff at said hearings.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of
the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project (ARC 202-13), based on the following findings:
1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or
residing in the vicinity since the proposed project is consistent with the intention of the site’s
Medium Density Residential zoning designation, and will be subject to conformance with all
applicable building, fire, and safety codes.
2. As determined by the Planning Commission in their recommendation to City Council, the
project components, including tentative tract map, affordable housing proposal, and
exceptions/concessions to property development standards are consistent with the General
Plan and Subdivision standards, and intention of the S-Overlay, as the project provides
quality compact housing while preserving natural site features and incorporating them as
amenities into the project.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 8
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 2
3080 Rockview Place, ARC 202-13
3. The project is consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines because the proposed
residences provide a cohesive cluster of compact independent living facilities while
maintaining sensitive site resources.
4. The project is compatible in scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with buildings in
the adjacent neighborhood, consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines.
5. The project’s design is consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines as it
provides for a cohesive cluster of homes with articulation and a mix of finish materials that
create shade and shadowing.
SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Community Development Department - Planning
1. All exceptions to setback standards and conditions of approval, including those required by
the City Council, mitigation measures and easements shall be shown on the final map,
subdivision improvements, and/or building plans, as applicable.
2. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the
project plans approved by the ARC. A separate full-size sheet shall be included in working
drawings submitted for a building permit that list all conditions, and code requirements of
project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed items as to
where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials,
landscaping or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or
Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate.
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements on elevation drawings. Plans shall clearly note that
all stucco surfaces are not a sprayed-on product and have a smooth hand-troweled or sand
finish appearance to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating the type of
materials for the window frames, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall include the
materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related window
features.
5. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a final landscaping plan for the project
site, including irrigation details. 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. Street trees species shall comply with City
standards.
a. Final driveway design (enhanced paving) shall be to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 9
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 3
3080 Rockview Place, ARC 202-13
6. The final landscape and hardscape plan for lots 1 and 2 shall be designed to highlight the
entrances to these structures from Rockview, subject to the final approval of the Community
Development Director
7. Building entries shall be further articulated through either recesses or pop-outs from the main
wall surface to further highlight the entry, subject to the final approval of the Community
Development Director.
8. The second floor balconies shall be cantilevered, removing the slender support posts from the
design.
9. Garages shall have automatic roll-up doors to prevent queuing of vehicles.
Community Development Department – Engineering
10. The building pad elevations and/or building finish floors shall be located a minimum of 1’
above the base flood elevation (BFE) as established in the project drainage report. The
proposed bridge, girders, and support structure shall be located a minimum of 1’ above the
BFE.
11. The development plan submittal shall include a final and updated project soils report that is
specific to this development. A reference to the previous report may be appropriate but the
updated report shall include any additional analysis, soils borings, testing, and
recommendations as is appropriate for the specific project.
12. The final soils report shall include analysis of the proposed grading, drainage, water quality
treatment BMP’s, and detention basin construction. The soils report shall include the review
and recommendations for the proposed bridge, channel grading and restoration.
13. The final drainage report shall incorporate the pertinent analysis from the original report
and/or shall include clear references and inclusion of the report in an appendix. The report
and plans shall include a summary of the 100-year flood elevations, safe over-flow
requirements and details from the upstream Alano Club parcels, detailed requirements of the
channel and downstream inlet upgrades, and downstream safe over-flow.
14. The applicant/developer shall provide information to the downstream property owners
regarding the areas of channel restrictions that have been identified in the drainage report.
15. The final plans and drainage report shall show and note compliance with City Engineering
Standards for water quality treatment of runoff from the drive aisles and uncovered parking
spaces. The treatment train shall be upgraded to show comparable performance to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department if the prescriptive requirements can’t be
reasonably met on this small site. Pervious paving materials and/or detention piping with
high capacity infiltrators might be considered as part of the final site design and stormwater
compliance solution.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 10
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 4
3080 Rockview Place, ARC 202-13
16. This project received the first discretionary development approvals prior to March 6, 2014 so
is not subject to the current stormwater regulations as promulgated by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board. The project is subject to the requirements for Interim Low Impact
Development as a Tier 3 project. The final plans and drainage report shall reflect compliance
with both the Interim LID standards and City Engineering Standards.
17. An operation and maintenance manual shall be provided for all components of the
stormwater system in conjunction with the approval of the development. A separate private
stormwater conveyance agreement shall be recorded in a format provided by the Community
Development Department.
18. The development plans shall include a complete site development and utility plan. The plans
shall show and honor the existing public sewer main and easement. Final designs in and
around the public sewer main shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the
Utilities Department, Public Works Department, and Community Development Department.
19. Development on the proposed lots will require that all wire utilities serving each parcel be
installed underground. Said underground wiring shall be completed with no net increase in
the number of wood utility poles located within the public right-of-way unless specifically
approved by the city and supplying utility companies.
20. The improvement plans shall show the location of the proposed mail receptacles or mailbox
unit (MBU) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the City Engineer. Provide a mailbox
unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling units in this development along with the existing
mailboxes or as required by the Post Master. Contact the Post Master at 543-2605 to
establish any recommendations regarding the number, size, location, and placement for any
MBU’s.
21. Any sewer lines which cross property lines shall be within easements which are clearly
shown for these purposes (Section 721.1 2013 CPC).
Fire Department
22. Any interior access driveways that are less than 28 feet in width shall be posted “No Parking
– Fire Lane” on both sides. Drive aisles less than 35 feet in width shall be posted on one side
only.
23. Provide water mains and city-standard fire hydrants to provide a minimum needed fire flow
of 1500 GPM for 2 hours to within 300 feet of the exterior walls of all proposed structures.
Fire hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet. The hydrant at the project entrance on
Rockview appears to meet this standard.
24. All structures shall be designed and built to CBC Chapter 7A ignition resistant construction
standards as modified by the City Fire Code.
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 11
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 5
3080 Rockview Place, ARC 202-13
25. Fire sprinklers conforming to NFPA 13D are required for each structure. At least one pilot
head in the attic is required.
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 6th day of October, 2014.
_____________________________
Pam Ricci, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
Attachment 1
ARC1 - 12
R-2-S
R-2-S
C/OS-40
R-2-S
C-S-PD
R-2-S
C-S-S
C-S-S
C-S-PD
R-3-PD
R-2-PD
C-S-S
C-S
C-S
R-2-S
C-C-S
R-2-PD
R-1-PD
R-1-PD
R-1-PD
B
R
O
A
D
R
O
C
K
V
I
EWPERKINSSWEENEY
ORCUTT
VICINITY MAP File No. 202-133080 Rockview ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
ARC1 - 13
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 14
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 15
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 16
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 17
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 18
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 19
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 20
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 21
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 22
Attachment 3
ARC1 - 23
231232
231
233xxxxxxxxxxx226'227'228'229'229'229'231'231'231'231'232'232'232'232'233'233'233'233'234'234'236'236'237'237'237'238'238'239'239'239'225'230'230'230'235'235'234
234
233
232
231
230
upup
u
p
up upupu
p
upup231232
231
233226'227'228'229'229'231'231'232'233'225'230'230'230'22 3232232232223223223322232332332222322232232323223223222232232232222222323223232232223222232322322323222222222322223222322322222323222232323232323232323323232333322322323332232232323222323232322332333332323333333332332232323232233232323232233232323232332323232222222
030'00'0'0'00'23223223233
303300000023030000030300303030003002303030303030000000230303330303030300030300000311231232311231231223131
222
1
2222222222222222222222222222'2'2'2'2'2'2222'222222'2'2'2'2222222222 '22222''22222'2'22222'22222222222222222222222222222
111112331311313133111311'11111''111121(E) 24" CALIFORNIA WALNUT TREETO BE REMOVED(E) BLACKBERRY. TRIM AS NEEDED TO COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN AND PRESERVE BALANCE IN PLACE.upupLAWNLAWNL-1Conceptual Landscape Plan Nine on Rockview Tract 3057, San Luis Obispo, CA November 26, 2013File Name: Firma_Rockview_Subdivision_21358 Last Date Modified: 2/7/14firmal a n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t sp l a n n i n g • e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t u d i e s187 Tank Farm Road, Suite 230, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401phone: 805.781.9800 fax: 805.781.9803LegendRiparian Vegetation Enhancement Area (See enlargement at right) 3,600 s.f. Front Yard Landscape Area (See enlargement at right) 3,785 s.f. Rear Yard Landscape Area (See enlargement at right) 6,234 s.f. Front and Rear Yard Landscape (1 gallon min.) Mulch all ground cover and planter areas with 2” minimum layer 'walk-on' bark. Arbutus 'Marina' / Strawberry TreeCassia leptophylla / Golden Medallion Tree Pistacia chinensis / Chinese Pistache Agave americana 'Medio-Picta' / Century Plant Agave 'Blue Glow' / Blue Glow Agave Anigozanthos (Hybrids) / Kangaroo Paw Trees (5 Gallon min.) Alnus rhombifolia / White Alder Platanus racemosa / California Sycamore Populus trichocarpa / Black Cottonwood Quercus agrifolia / Coast Live Oak Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area (1 gallon min.) Baccharis pilularis 'Pigeon Point' / Prostrate Coyote Brush Heteromeles arbutifolia / Toyon Myrica californica / Pacific Wax Myrtle Rhamnus californica 'Eve Case' / Coffeeberry Rosa californica / California Wild Rose 4" mulch layer under riparian trees on bank Retain existing vegetation in channel bottom. Plant the following plant materials at 1 per 25sf in the drainage channel (approx. 33 plants). Plant in groups of 3-5 at 3’ on center among existing vegetation. 10 Juncus patens (1 gallon) 13 Carex praegracilis (1 gallon) 10 Leymus triticoides (1 gallon) 21Proposed Plant Materials Proposed plant materials were reviewed and approved in July, 2008 by Molly Brown, Fire Inspector II, City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department and Dr. Neil Havlik, Natural Resources Manager, City of San Luis Obispo. Carex tumulicola / Berkeley Sedge Festuca 'Elijah Blue' / Elijah Blue Fescue Leymus condensatus 'Canyon Prince' / Canyon Prince Wild Rye Pennisetum 'Orientale' / Oriental Fountain Grass Aptenia cordifolia / Red Apple Arctostaphylos edmundsii 'Carmel Sur'/Carmel Sur Manzanita Senecio mandraliscae / Blue Chalk Sticks Rockview PlaceWater Conservation Concept Statement Planting & irrigation plans have been designed to conserve water. The following design techniques have been incorporated to achieve this goal. Irrigation System Design (Front & Rear Yards): Irrigation system to be a fully automatic underground system utilizing either low-precipitation spray heads, bubblers, or drip emitters, or a combination thereof. Irrigation hydrozones shall be separated with control valves and controller stations into appropriate and compatible zones. Matched precipitation spray heads have been utilized for efficient water application. Rain sensor override switches have been specified to limit irrigation during rainy season. Irrigation System Design (Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area): Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area to receive temporary drip irrigation to establish plant materials. Planting Design: Plant materials proposed are selected for their compatibility to climatic and site conditions, resistance to wind, and drought tolerance. All planters shall be mulched with a 2” minimum layer of organic mulch throughout, to retain soil moisture and reduce wind erosion. A variety of drought-tolerant ornamental plants have been selected for flower color, foliage texture and mature size to provide an attractive visual appearance. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Standards (WELO): Creek easement landscape area is 3,600 square feet total. Developer- installed landscape area is 10,018 square feet total. The requirements of the City of San Luis Obispo Water Efficient Landscape Standards (January 2010) are applicable and will be observed as the total landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (Refer to Section 17.87.020 A 1.) Site lighting Concept Statement Low height (bollard) light fixtures will be installed along pedestrian and parking areas (low voltage with LED lamps) and shielded to direct light downward.Scale: 1" = 10'-0"05'10'10'NorthSite Landscape Area Plan Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area Landscape PlanScale: 1" = 10'-0"05'10'10'NorthTypical Front & Rear Yard Landscape PlanScale: 1" = 20'-0"010'20'20'North Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 Lot 7 Lot 8 Lot 9 Attachment 3
ARC1 - 24
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 for a nine (9) lot common-interest
subdivision and a Use Permit to allow development on a site zoned Medium-Density Residential
with the Special Considerations overlay (R-2-S). PROJECT ADDRESS: 3080 Rockview Place BY: Jaime Hill, PMC Contract Planner Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone Number: 781-7176 E-mail: mcarloni@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: TR/A/ER 202-13 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract
Map 3057 and Use Permit A 202-13, and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact (Attachment 5, Draft Resolution), based on findings, and subject to
conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant Covelop, Inc.
Representative Damien Mavis
Zoning R-2-S (Medium Density Residential,
Special Considerations)
General Plan Medium Density Residential
Site Area 31,479 square feet (0.7227 ac)
Application
Complete
Environmental
Status
February 7, 2014
Mitigated Negative Declaration was
recommended by the Community
Development Department on May 7
2014 (ER 202-14)
SUMMARY
On February 10, 2014, the City received applications for a vesting tentative tract map, use permit,
architectural review, and environmental review to create a nine-unit common interest
subdivision. The project includes construction of nine single-family homes on individual lots
(including dedication of one unit as affordable to moderate-income households), a common
driveway and landscaping, and a small bridge designed to provide access to six lots (Lots 4-9),
which are across a drainage channel.
Meeting Date: May 14, 2014
Item Number: 3
for D.D.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 25
Following the review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council of the use
permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, Vesting Tentative Map
(VTM) 3057, and Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project will be forwarded to the
Architectural Review Commission (ARC). At that time the ARC will be asked to grant approval
of the site plan and home designs and exceptions to development standards, including reductions
in street yard , other yard, and creek setbacks, and a request to allow tandem parking in a street
yard . The staff report discusses in some detail the range of development exceptions requested,
but staff is recommending that the ARC take the final action on these exceptions since
refinements to the design continue to be discussed with the applicant that might lessen or
eliminate certain exceptions.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The project is VTM 3057 to create a residential common interest subdivision, and Use Permit A
202-13 to allow development on a site with the Special Considerations overlay zoning (R-2-S).
The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the
General Plan, Zoning, and Subdivisions Regulations, and make a recommendation to the Council
on approval of the subdivision, use permit, and environmental review. Relevant excerpts and
standards are included in the analysis where pertinent.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Information/Setting
The overall project site consists of ruderal vacant land (primarily non-native annual grassland).
At the center of the site is an unvegetated drainage channel, which is classified in the General
Plan as “Perennial creek with degraded corridor, high encroachment, and difficulty in restoring”.
The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City and is surrounded with multi-family
zoned residential buildings and commercial uses to the southeast. The project is approximately
1.5 miles from the end of San Luis Obispo Airport Runway 29, which is within the boundary of
Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP)1 Zone 6, but beyond Airport Noise Contours.
1 The ALUP allows for 12 front doors per acre. As measured to the center of the street right-of-way the site is
0.769ac / 12 unit/ac = 9.22 units, rounded down to 9 units.
Site Size 31,479.29 sf (0.7227 ac)
Present Use & Development Vacant ruderal land
Topography Less than 15% slope
Access Rockview Place
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2.
South/Southeast: Multi-family development zoned R-2 and
Crossroads commercial center zoned Service Commercial with
Planned Development Overlay (C-S-PD).
East: Residential development zoned Service-Commercial with
Special Considerations Overlay.
West: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 26
2.2 Project Description
The proposed project includes the following significant features:
1. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 for a nine-lot common interest subdivision;
2. Eight detached two-bedroom single-family homes;
3. One designated moderate-income affordable unit – a three-bedroom single-family home
on Lot 5 entitling the project to a density bonus and one concession/incentive;2
4. A small bridge designed to provide access to six lots (Parcels 4-9) which are across a
drainage channel;
5. A common driveway and guest parking, decorative landscaping, and restorative plantings
in the constructed creek bank areas along the drainage channel;
6. Requests to allow reduced creek, street yard, and other yard setbacks, and tandem parking
in the street yard.
The nine detached, single-family homes are all two-story with attached single-car garages. There
are three different exterior building designs (A-D, with models B and D differing only
internally), which provides for an aesthetically cohesive development without falling into
monotony. Changes in massing, materials and accent colors, together with the use of quality
natural materials, provide for distinctive compact home designs. Each home provides both
ground level private yards and upper level balconies, private storage within the garage, and
laundry facilities on the upper sleeping level.
Dedication of one unit as affordable entitles the project to a 7.5% density bonus and one
incentive/concession. The applicant has proposed to utilize these entitlements by adding an
additional bedroom to the dedicated affordable unit, and requesting flexibility with regards to
setbacks. As required of a new subdivision, the Planning Commission and City Council must
approve allowance of setback reductions, details of which will be reviewed by the ARC.
The proposed access bridge is approximately 18–feet in span and located at the western extent of
Lot 6. The proposed grading and creek crossing remain similar to those approved with the
previous version of the project.
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The following discussion provides an evaluation of the project for consistency with applicable
General Plan Policies and development standards. An earlier project at this site was approved in
2011, including a tentative parcel map creating four lots and a creek setback exception
(A/MS/ER 34-11). However a final map was not recorded and the applicants have since revised
the project.
2 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040G and .060A: 1 affordable unit / 8 market rate units = 12.5% of the project
restricted, yielding a 7.5% density bonus. With greater than 10% of the total units restricted for families of
moderate income the developer is entitled to one incentive or concession.
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 27
3.1 General Plan Consistency
The site is designated as “Medium Density Residential” on the General Plan Land Use Element
(LUE) map and the site is currently undeveloped. The General Plan anticipates compact
residential development on small lots, with some private outdoor space for each dwelling.
General Plan conformity is essential in reviewing all development applications. The City must
make a finding that a tentative map is or is not consistent with the General Plan. Based on staff’s
detailed review, the development proposal can be found consistent with numerous General Plan
policies. Those policies are listed below in order of importance to the project in bold print and
staff’s analysis follows in italics.
1. General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) Policy 2.2.11 (Site Constraints) states:
“Residential development shall respect site constraints such as property size and
shape, ground slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, native
vegetation, and significant trees”.
2. General Plan LUE Policy 2.2.8 (Natural Features) states: “Residential
developments should preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features,
such as land forms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and plants”.
Staff Analysis: The project is consistent with these policies, and is considered to be an
“acceptable” design according to Figure 8 of the COSE because the project, as
proposed, adequately respects existing constraints, preserves, and incorporates natural
site features as amenities, and enhances the degraded creek corridor.
The project includes restoring the existing drainage swale into a creek corridor, with a
re-contoured slope bank and native plant palette. The restoration plan was designed in
conjunction with the City’s Natural Resource Manager, who determined that the newly-
engineered 3:1 slope bank, together with a reduced creek setback for development, was
environmentally preferable to the alternative, which includes a more space-economical
2:1 slope with a standard 20-foot development setback. The more moderate 3:1 slope
grade is less susceptible to erosion and provides for greater site access for future
maintenance. Additionally, because of the current degraded state of the channel, there is
no native vegetation that would be affected with some creek setback encroachment. The
City’s Natural Resource Manager has recommended that at least a 10-foot setback from
the new top of bank should be maintained. The final site development plan, including
building footprints and creek setbacks, will be reviewed by the ARC.
3. General Plan LUE Policy 2.2.6 (Neighborhood Pattern) states: “All residential
development should be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical
features make this impossible, the new development should create new
neighborhoods.”
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 28
Staff Analysis: This section of Rockview Place has been developed with a mixture of
single family homes and small condominium and common-interest subdivisions, including
either small-lot detached or attached units. Consistent with other similar developments,
units fronting Rockview Place would address the street, while units at the interior of the
site would address one another. Their consistent architectural style, color palate and
landscape provides for a cohesive visual setting while adding to the neighborhood’s
visual setting.
4. General Plan HE Policy 4.2 (Mixed-Income Housing) states: “Include both
market-rate and affordable units in apartment and residential condominium
projects and intermix types of units. Affordable units should be comparable in
appearance and basic quality to market-rate units.”
5. General Plan HE Program (6.14 (Housing Production) states: “Encourage
residential development through infill development and densification within City
Limits and in designated expansion areas over new annexation of land.”
Staff Analysis: The project is consistent with these policies, restricting one of the nine
units as affordable to moderate-income households. The restricted unit, Lot 5/model d, is
comparable in appearance and basic quality to other units, and also includes a third
bedroom. Consistent with State Law and City policy, the applicant has utilized the
allowable density bonus to increase the bedroom count of the affordable unit (as
described in section 2.2 above). Given the unusual site configuration and significant
portion of the site dedicated to the restored creek channel, the project relies on reduced
setbacks to utilize all of the available density, and to provide for an affordable on-site
unit. The requested setback flexibility is appropriate as the one concession/incentive that
the project is entitled to under City Affordable Housing provisions (Zoning Regulations
Section 17.90.040G and .060A).
3.2 Consistency with Property Development Standards
3.2.1 Development Standards. Common interest subdivisions provide for ownership of
separate units as well as interest in commonly owned areas that are managed and maintained
via a joint maintenance agreement. Within common interest subdivisions property
development standards 3 including, but not limited to, density, yards, and coverage, apply with
respect to both exterior property limits and within each new lot. In addition to property
development standards, each unit must also comply with development standards specific to
common interest subdivisions 4.
Each of the proposed lots is approximately 3,500 square feet in area, with an average cross
slope of less than 15%. The shapes of lots vary, as the property line layout was designed to
accommodate the allowable residential density and affordable housing, as well as restoration
of the degraded seasonal creek channel. To achieve the allowable density on this site the
project requires the Council make findings in support of approval of setback reductions to
3 Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.16 (Property Development Standards)
4 Subdivision Regulations 16.17.030B-H: Property Improvement Standards for Common Interest Subdivisions
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 29
both internal and external property lines and the restored creek corridor.
While the majority of these reductions are for internal setbacks, several could potentially
impact adjacent neighbors. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant on refinements
which would reduce these impacts, such as reversing the unit footprint on Lot 1 to reduce the
height along the side yard, and utilizing model a in lieu of model b on Lot 9 to eliminate the
need for a creek setback reduction at this location.
Subdivision Regulation Chapter 16.17.110 B requires that the Council make certain findings
to allow exceptions to property improvement standards for new common interest
subdivisions. A table comparing setback standards and those proposed is provided as
Attachment 3. Ordinance standards and project statistics are provided in Table 3.2, below.
Staff has recommended findings supporting flexibility in these standards, and allowing the
ARC to evaluate these property development exceptions with other aspects of the
development plan (e.g. street yard, side yard and creek setbacks, and tandem parking).
Table 3.2 Project Statistics
Statistics
Item Ordinance Standard A Proposed B
Street Yards 20 feet 14 or 20 feet
Other Yards 5 – 13 feet Varies
Max. Height of Structure(s) 35 feet 26-30 feet
Density 10 density units 5 10 density units6
Building Coverage (footprint) 50% ~ 25%
Private Open Space 250 sf per unit Varies > 250 sf
Common Open Space 150 sf per unit (1,350 sf) 4,618 sf within creek corridor
Total Open Space 400 sf per unit (3,600 sf) ~ 7,000 sf
Parking Spaces
(for residents)
2 per home 2 per home
Parking Spaces (for guests)
Cars
Motorcycle
Bicycle
2 car
1 motorcycle
1 short-term rack
2 car
1 motorcycle
1 bicycle rack
Landscaping n/a Private, Common & Riparian
Grading n/a 1,500 CY Fill
Notes: A. City Zoning and Subdivision Regulations
B. Applicant’s project plans submitted [February 2014]
5 Total Site Area = 0.7227 ac
Creek Area = 0.0239 ac
Net Site Area = 0.6988 ac
Allowed Density = 0.6988 ac * 12 units/ac = 8.39 units
Density bonus with 1/8 (12.5%) of units restricted = 7.5% density bonus (plus one incentive/concession) = 9.02,
(allowed to round up to next whole number per Section 17.90.040B) to 10.0 density units.
Minimum parcel size = [43,560 sf/ac ]/ [12 units/ac (1.075) ] = 3,376.7 sf
6 Proposed 8 market rate units and 1 designated moderate unit: 8.39 units x 1.075 = 9.02 du = 10 Density Units
Proposed 9.5 Density Units (eight 2-bedroom homes and one 3-bedroom home)
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 30
3.2.2 Density. Nine on Rockview is located on a narrow, L-shaped lot that is split
perpendicularly by a degraded creek corridor. The nine detached, single-family homes would
be on individual parcels created as part of a common interest subdivision. Lots range in size
from 3,430 sf to 3,582 sf, in excess of the 3,376.7 sf minimum required for a two-bedroom
home. As mentioned in the Project Description (Section 2.2), the home on Lot 5 would be
restricted for moderate income families, entitling the project to a density bonus and one
concession/incentive. The applicant has requested to apply the density bonus to the affordable
unit, increasing it to three bedrooms. The requested concession takes the form of flexibility in
setback standards, which will be reviewed by the ARC following Council approval of other
entitlements. The shapes of lots vary, as the property line layout was designed to
accommodate the allowable residential density and affordable housing, as well as restoration
of the degraded seasonal creek channel.
3.2.3 Open Space. Internal property lines and the fences that delineate individual private
yard spaces do not necessarily correspond, as fences are located to maximize the useable
portion of each lots yard area, while minimizing view conflicts and privacy issues. Property
and fence lines are shown on page A-1 of Attachment 2 (Project Plans). Each unit exceeds
the Subdivision Regulations minimum 250-square feet of qualifying private open space by
providing ground level yard space for each unit. Passive common open space is provided
within the restored creek corridor far in excess of the 1,350 sf required. Similarly, total open
space exceeds the 3,600 sf required (see table 3.2 below).
3.2.4 Access and Parking. Eight of the homes will take access via a common driveway at the
north extent of the site, while the home at the south-west corner of the property will front
Rockview Place directly. A small bridge across the creek channel would provide access to
Lots 4-9. The bridge is approximately 18–feet in span and located at the western extent of Lot
6. The crossing is proposed to be bridged with either a wood structure or a con-span open
bottom arch. Both potential options require a concrete foundation wall at each end of the span
to transfer loads from the structure to the ground.
Vehicle parking for each unit includes both one space within an attached garage and one
uncovered space immediately adjacent to the home. The uncovered parking space for Lot 1
has been proposed to be in tandem within the required street yard. Garages are sized such that
they can also provide enclosed, secure bicycle storage. Guest Parking for two vehicles, one
motorcycle, and bicycles is provided on lot 3, adjacent to the creek, and parallel to the home
on lot 9.
3.3 Environmental Review
On May 7, 2014, the Community Development Director recommended a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 4). The Initial Study identifies potentially
significant impacts associated with air quality, and biological and cultural resources, and
provides recommendations for mitigation measures that if incorporated into the project would
reduce the potential impacts to below the threshold of significance. These mitigation measures
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 31
will affect the development phase of the project, including provisions for ensuring that natural
and cultural resources (should they be discovered) are adequately protected. With the
incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures the potential impacts to the environment
will be reduced below a level of significance.
4.0 Conclusion
Considerable effort has been made by the applicant to design a project that is consistent with the
General Plan and applicable property development standards. The type and density of
development has been planned to suit the physical character of the neighborhood and site, and
improve the condition of the creek corridor. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and
mitigation measures included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the
subdivision and proposed improvements would enhance creek resources and provide quality
housing in an area anticipated by the General Plan for development.
For these reasons, staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending
that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Use Permit A 202-13, and VTM
3057. Final design of the homes, including requested setbacks and tandem parking, will be
reviewed by the ARC following Council approval. Development-specific conditions of approval
will be imposed at that time, as the project could occur without recordation of a final map as
rental units.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Commission may provide direction to the applicant, staff or Architectural Review
Commission on modifications that should be made to the project design for better
consistency with General Plan policies, Design Guidelines, and property development
standards.
2. The Commission may recommend that the City Council deny the use permit and vesting
tentative tract map, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity map
2. Reduced copy of project plans
3. Table identifying building setbacks
4. Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, recommended on May 7, 2014
5. Draft Resolution
Enclosed: Full-size project plans
Attachment 4
ARC1 - 32
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of revised plans for a Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 for a nine (9) lot
common-interest subdivision with exceptions to yard standards and a Use Permit to allow
development on a site zoned Medium-Density Residential with the Special Considerations
overlay (R-2-S). The project includes the dedication of one affordable housing unit to families
qualifying as “moderate income”. PROJECT ADDRESS: 3080 Rockview Place BY: Jaime Hill, PMC Contract Planner Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone Number: 781-7176 E-mail: mcarloni@slocity.org DD FILE NUMBER: TR/A/ER 202-13 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract
Map 3057 and Use Permit A 202-13, and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact (Attachment 8, Draft Resolution), based on findings, and subject to
conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant Covelop, Inc.
Representative Damien Mavis
Zoning R-2-S (Medium Density Residential,
Special Considerations)
General Plan Medium Density Residential
Site Area 31,479 square feet (0.7227 ac)
Application
Complete
Environmental
Status
February 7, 2014
A Mitigated Negative Declaration
was recommended by the
Community Development
Department on May 7 2014 (ER 202-
14)
SUMMARY
On May 14, 2014, the Planning Commission reviewed an application for a vesting tentative tract
map, use permit, and environmental review to create a nine-unit common interest subdivision,
and continued the project to allow the applicant to address specific concerns. The applicant has
Meeting Date: August 27, 2014
Item Number: 1
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 33
since revised the proposal and provided the additional requested information.
Previously staff had recommended that the ARC take the final action on requested exceptions to
development standards, including reductions in street yard, other yard, and creek setbacks, and a
request to allow tandem parking in a street yard. Because of the interest shown by Planning
Commission on the specific layout of property lines, and the effect their realignment has on
building setbacks, staff is now recommending that all setback reductions and the request for
tandem parking be reviewed as part of the subdivision map, and acted upon by the Planning
Commission. This staff report focuses on evaluation of the revisions made subsequent to the
Commissions’ earlier review. For the complete project analysis please see the May 14, 2014 staff
report; Attachment 3.
Following the review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council of the use
permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, Vesting Tentative Map
(VTM) 3057) with exceptions to property development standards, and Mitigated Negative
Declaration, the project will be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). At
that time the ARC will be asked to take the site plan into account, but focus on the home
designs.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The project is VTM 3057 to create a residential common interest subdivision, and Use Permit A
202-13 to allow development on a site with the Special Considerations overlay zoning (R-2-S).
The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the
General Plan, Zoning, and Subdivisions Regulations, and make a recommendation to the Council
on approval of the subdivision, use permit, and environmental review. Relevant excerpts and
standards are included in the analysis where pertinent.
2.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The following discussion provides an evaluation of revisions to the project following earlier
review and for consistency with previous Commission direction. For the complete project
description and evaluation for consistency with the General Plan and property development
standards, please see the May 2014, 2014 staff report (Attachment 3). The applicants’ resubmittal
letter detailing the revisions proposed is included as Attachment 4.
2.1 Planning Commission Direction
1. Simplify the pattern of lot lines to reduce instances where fence lines and property
lines differ, and reduce the need for excessive private use easements.
Applicant Response and Staff Analysis: Lot shapes and sizes have been adjusted to
simplify the internal property lines and reduce the number of private use easements,
while maintaining compliance with the minimum allowable lot sizes 1. Where previously
1 Lot sizes range from 3,392 square feet (lot 4) to 9,958 square feet (lot 2); for the density proposed, the minimum
area required per lot is 3,376 square feet.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 34
fences and property lines differed in many places, private yards and parking spaces are
now wholly on the lots they serve. A single common driveway, open space, utility and
maintenance easement incorporates all access ways, shared parking, and other site
features, such as the creek corridor, trash enclosure and bike parking (see Attachment 2,
project plans page C-1).
Although the placement and separation between homes is largely unchanged in the revised
submittal, restructuring the property lines has affected the internal setbacks. As shown on Table
2.1, internal setbacks to property lines are reduced in several locations. In two locations internal
setbacks are less than the 5-foot minimum; in both these instances the reductions are adjacent to
the private driveway, which guarantees that minimum separations required by building code will
be maintained. In all cases the required minimum setback between buildings of 10feet is
retained. The only change to an external setback is on the south side of Lot 1, discussed in item
4, below. The Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.020E2c allows the entity approving a
subdivision map to approve exceptions to other yard standards, provided at least 10feet
separation between buildings and an acceptable level of solar exposure is maintained. Staff
supports approval of these exceptions, as it will facilitate the development of affordable housing
on-site, fulfilling the applicants entitlement to one development incentive/concession 2.
Table 2.1: Setback Table
Lot
Number
(model)
Direction
Roof
Height
(in feet)
Above Av.
Natural
Grade
Required Setback
for height
(in feet)
Proposed
Setback2
(in feet)
Exceptions to the
setback requirements
requested for multiple
external and internal
setbacks
Lot 1
(model a )
North 27 11.5 5 Internal
East 24-28 11.5 5 Internal
Creek
(Top of Bank) - 20 41
South 24 10 10 West
(street yard) 24-28 20 20, with tandem
parking Street Yard Parking
Lot 2
(model c)
North 28 12 28 East 23-28 12 15 South 23 10 5.5 Internal
West
(street yard) 23-28 20 14 Street Yard
Lot 3
(model a)
North 23-27 11.5 11.5 East 27 11.5 24 Creek
(Top of Bank) - 20 10 Creek
South 23-27 11.5 8 Internal
West 23 10 5 Internal
Lot 4 North 26 11 5 Internal
2 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040G and .060A: 1 affordable unit / 8 market rate units = 12.5% of the project
restricted, yielding a 7.5% density bonus. With greater than 10% of the total units restricted for families of
moderate income the developer is entitled to one incentive or concession.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 35
(model a) East 22-26 11 7 Internal
South 22 9 9 West 22-26 11 26 Creek
(Top of Bank) - 20 18 Creek
Lot 5
(model d)
North 21-25 10.5 7.5 Internal
East 21 9 10 South 21-25 10.5 8 External property line
West 25 10.5 24
Lot 6
(model c)
North 26 11 5.5 Internal
East 22-26 11 10 External property line
South 22 9 5 Internal
West 22-26 11 3 Internal
Lot 7
(model c)
North 20 8.5 10 East 20-25 10.5 10.5 South 25 10.5 24 West 20-25 10.5 12
Lot 8
(model a)
North 22-25 10.5 10 External property line
East 25 10.5 5 Internal
South 22-25 10.5 10.5 West 22 9 24
Lot 9
(model b)
North 26 11 6 Internal
East 22-26 11 3 Internal
South 22 9 9 West 22-26 11 41 Creek
(Top of Bank) - 20 10 Creek
2. Explore providing public access at the eastern corner of the site to the Crossroads
Center.
Applicant Response and Staff Analysis: At the direction of the Planning Commission, the
applicant evaluated the potential for pedestrian access to the neighboring Crossroads
Commercial Center, which share about 10feet of property along their rear property lines
(see Attachment 5, Pedestrian Access Exhibit and email correspondence). Four main
issues led to the determination that such a connection was not practical:
• Pedestrian access would cross an existing drainage swale and easement from the
neighboring property which would require renegotiation and reengineering.
• The existing drainage swale at the location of potential connection contributes to
a 3-5-foot elevation change from the project site to the Crossroads parking lot.
• If access easements were granted by Crossroads, the access to the front of the
development would also need to meet ADA accessibility standards, which it does
not currently. The only feasible location for ADA access improvements would
necessitate additional engineering, demolition and construction, and would
encroach on the parking space back up distances to the extent that required
parking would be eliminated.
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 36
• Both the developer and the owner of the Crossroads Commercial Center agree
that encouraging pedestrian traffic through an unattended, rear parking lot has
the potential to invite vagrancy.
Staff agrees that connections between residential and commercial facilities should be
forged where the topography and existing physical improvements are conducive.
However, given the existing design of the Crossroads Development and the potential
impacts associated with providing a public access path adjacent to a private yard (Lot 5,
the moderate-income family unit), in this instance such a connection appears to be
impracticable.
3. Submit a sample Joint Maintenance Agreement (JMA), including method for
ongoing creek maintenance.
Staff Analysis: The Planning Commission expressed concern as to how ongoing
maintenance of common facilities, including the creek corridor, would be controlled in
absence of a formal Home Owners Association (HOA). To address this concern the
applicant has submitted an exhibit that identifies several Common Interest Subdivisions
of similar scale within the City and copies of their City-approved JMAs (see Attachment
6). Although none of these other subdivisions include creek corridors, maintenance
would occur here like in any other commonly held facility. Reading of these JMAs
confirms that the CCR’s and home buyers responsibilities will be the same under a JMA
as under an HOA, only without need for professional management and the higher costs
this entails. Given the small number of homes, the ongoing monthly costs for an HOA
can be a substantial burden and negatively impact the ongoing affordability of the units.
4. Modify the home on Lot 1 to provide required South side yard setback.
Staff Analysis: The home has been mirrored to reverse the home on the site and reduce
the height along the property line, which coincides with a reduced setback requirement,
and shifted north so that it now conforms to setback standards for this exterior property
line. Additional minor adjustments have been made throughout to simplify the property
lines while meeting lot size minimums and building code requirements. As noted in
discussion item 1, above, multiply setback reductions have been requested as part of the
subdivision, but in all cases a minimum separation of 10-feet is maintained.
2.2 Additional Refinements and Information
1. 10-Foot Creek Corridor Maintained. As discussed in the May 14th staff report, the
restoration plan was designed in conjunction with the City’s Natural Resource Manager,
who determined that the newly engineered 3:1 slope bank, together with a reduced creek
setback for development, was environmentally preferable to the alternative, which
includes a more space-economical 2:1 slope with a standard 20-foot development
setback. To maintain the 10-foot creek setback recommended by the Natural Resources
Manager the home on Lot 9 was shifted north and east. Previous plans identified a creek
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 37
setback of down to 7-feet at this location.
2. Adjusted guest parking layout. To accommodate the changes made to the home on Lot
9, the guest parking space that was previously shown as parallel to the east side of this
home has been rotated, to be a standard stall to the south of the home.
3. Green Building Checklist Update. The applicant revisited the Green Building Checklist
and found additional features to include which would bring the Total Targeted Points to
104 from 87; an increase of nearly 20% and more than double the minimum. These
include some additional landscape measures such as resource efficient landscapes,
minimization of turf, and installation of high-efficiency irrigation systems (see
Attachment 7, revised Green Building Checklist).
4. Finance discussion contrasting Common Interest Subdivisions with Condominiums.
Incited by the complexity of property lines and number of setback variations necessary for
this project, there was some discussion by the Planning Commission on whether an
attached condominium product would yield a better housing product than would a
Common Interest Subdivision. In their cover letter, the applicant provides an assessment
of the total cost differences to homeowners that result from the different subdivision
approaches in consideration of the financing opportunities and HOA fees that the buyers
of the homes will face (Attachment 4). According to the information provided, ongoing
expenses and the ability to obtain low-cost financing would both be negatively impacted
by development as a condominium based on structural requirements outside the developer
or City’s control.
3.0 Environmental Review
On May 7, 2014, the Community Development Director recommended a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 8). The Initial Study identifies potentially
significant impacts associated with air quality, and biological and cultural resources, and
provides recommendations for mitigation measures that if incorporated into the project would
reduce the potential impacts to below the threshold of significance. These mitigation measures
will affect the development phase of the project, including provisions for ensuring that natural
and cultural resources (should they be discovered) are adequately protected. Revisions to the
project since the publication of the document have been evaluated and determined not to have
created any new impacts not previously discussed. With the incorporation of the recommended
mitigation measures the potential impacts to the environment will be reduced below a level of
significance.
4.0 Conclusion
Considerable effort has been made by the applicant to comply with the direction provided by the
Planning Commission, and design a project that will provide affordable detached homes in the
City of San Luis Obispo. The type and density of development has been planned to suit the
physical character of the neighborhood and site, and improve the condition of the creek corridor.
With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation measures included in the
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 38
Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the subdivision and proposed improvements would
enhance creek resources and provide quality housing in an area anticipated by the General Plan
for development.
For these reasons, staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending
that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Use Permit A 202-13, and VTM
3057. Final design of the homes will be reviewed by the ARC following Council approval.
Development-specific conditions of approval will be imposed at that time, as the project could be
constructed as rental units without recordation of a final map.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Commission may provide direction to the applicant, staff or Architectural Review
Commission on modifications that should be made to the project design for better
consistency with General Plan policies, Design Guidelines, and property development
standards.
2. The Commission may recommend that the City Council deny the use permit and vesting
tentative tract map, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity map
2. Reduced copy of project plans
3. May 14, 2014 Planning Commission Staff Report
4. CoVelop response to Planning Commission Comments, June 24, 2014
5. Pedestrian Access Exhibit and email correspondence between CoVelop and Cross Roads
Center, June 25, 2014
6. Common Interest Subdivision Exhibits and Joint Maintenance Agreements
7. Revised Green Building Checklist
8. Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, recommended on May 7, 2014
9. Draft Resolution
Attachment 5
ARC1 - 39
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WITH EXCEPTIONS TO PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS, A USE PERMIT ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT OF A NINE-UNIT
COMMON INTEREST SUBDIVISION ON A SITE WITH SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS (R-2-S ZONING), AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED AUGUST 27, 2014.
3080 ROCKVIEW PLACE; TR/A/ER 202-13 (TRACT 3057)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing on May 14, 2014, at which they reviewed the proposed project and provided direction to
the applicant, continuing review to a date uncertain; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
August 27, 2014, for the purpose of considering application TR/A/ER 202-13, a request for a use
permit to allow development of a site zoned Medium-Density Residential with a Special
Considerations overlay with a nine-unit Common Interest Subdivision and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map for a residential subdivision; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding
recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings in support of approval of the request for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057,
including support for exceptions to the property improvement standards for new common
interest subdivisions, and Use Permit A 202-13 to allow development of a site with the Special
Consideration overlay zoning:
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 40
Subdivision Findings
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan and Airport Land Use Plan, including compatibility with
the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan for
Medium Density Residential land uses.
2. As demonstrated by the Winter Solstice Shading Plan and Conceptual Landscape Plan, the
design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision.
3. As conditioned, the subdivider will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its
agents, officers or employees to attach set aside, void or annul an approval of the City
Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff concerning a subdivision.
4. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including LUE
Policies 2.2.11, 2.2.8 and 2.2.6, and HE Policies 4.2 and 6.14, because the subdivision will
provide residential development anticipated by the General Plan and preserve and
incorporate as amenities, natural site features, and sensitive natural resources.
5. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because the project has
been designed to utilize available residential density while enhancing creek resources.
6. The project is consistent with the intent of the City’s Common Interest Subdivision
standards, in that it provides for small ownership units with private and common amenities
in a compact, cohesive manner.
7. With the incorporation of the recommended conditions and mitigation measures, the design
of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the
project will create beneficial enhancement of degraded natural resources.
8. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public
health or safety problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the location
and will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes.
9. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the
proposed subdivision because such easements will be maintained.
Affordable Housing
10. The development of one home restricted for a moderate-income family on-site is consistent
with the City’s inclusionary housing requirements which require that projects of this size
provide one affordable unit on-site or pay the in-lieu housing fee.
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 41
Property Improvement Standards Exceptions
11. There are circumstances of the site, such as the unusual configuration and bifurcation by an
open drainage channel, distinct from land in the same zoning, which would make
compliance with all setbacks infeasible.
12. Strict adherence to the required property improvement standards would decrease the size or
number of units within the project resulting in a significant loss of entitlement, and inability
to provide for restricted affordable housing on-site.
13. The reduced setbacks will not constitute a grant of special privilege; an entitlement
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning,
as dedication of one on-site affordable unit, or 12.5% of the project, entitles the project to
at 7.5% density bonus and one incentive or concession.
14. No feasible alternative to authorizing the exception would satisfy the intent of the city
policies and regulations. Final configuration of the homes, including setbacks, will be
reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Commission.
Creek Setback Exceptions
15. The Location and design of the feature(s) receiving the exception will minimize impacts to
scenic resources, water quality, and riparian habitat, including opportunities for wildlife
habitation, rest, and movement, as it will facilitate the establishment of gradually-sloped,
vegetated creek bank.
16. The exception will not limit the city’s design options for providing flood control measures
that are needed to achieve adopted city flood policies, as the newly engineered creek
channel has been designed to improve drainage through the site.
17. The exception will not prevent the implementation of city-adopted plans, nor increase the
adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans, as the project includes
reestablishment of a creek channel at this location at a preferred gradual slope-bank.
18. There are circumstances applying to the site, such as its unusual shape and the need to
accommodate the existing culvert on neighboring properties, that does not apply generally
to land in the vicinity with the same zoning that would deprive the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity with the same zoning.
19. The exception will not constitute a special privilege – an entitlement inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning, as the creek channel
will be improved by the proposed project.
20. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in
the area of the project or downstream, as the project will improve the creek channel before
it enters the existing culvert on the neighboring property.
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 42
21. Site development cannot be accomplished with a redesign of the project without reducing
proposed density and a dedicated affordable unit.
22. Redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the property and
the ability to provide affordable housing on-site.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by
the Community Development Department on May 7, 2014. The Planning Commission finds and
determines that the project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately identifies that there is no
foreseeable potential for significant environmental impacts by the proposed project. The
Planning Commission does hereby recommend adoption of the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ER 202-13) with incorporation of the following mitigation measures:
Mitigation Measure 1: Air Quality
1. During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the
following particulate (dust) control measures.
a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust
from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind
speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds
over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and
dust-control work.
c. Dirt stock pile areas (if any) should be sprayed daily as needed.
d. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved
surface at the construction site.
e. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or should
maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load
and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114.
f. Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour
emissions.
g. If determined to be needed, periodic washdowns or mechanical streetsweeping of streets
in the vicinity of the construction site shall be done.
Monitoring Plan, MM #1: These measures shall be shown on grading and building
plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent
transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods
when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such
persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works
Departments prior to commencement of construction.
Mitigation Measure 2: Biological Resources
2. The project shall incorporate the following erosion control measures for work in and
around the riparian corridor:
a. No heavy equipment should enter flowing water.
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 43
b. Equipment will be fuelled and maintained in an appropriate staging area removed
from the riparian corridor.
c. Restrict all heavy construction equipment to the project area or established staging
areas.
d. All project related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project area
shall be cleaned up immediately. Spill prevention and clean up materials should be
onsite at all times during construction.
e. All spoils should be relocated to an upland location outside the creek channel area to
prevent seepage of sediment in to the drainage/creek system.
Monitoring Plan, MM #2: All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note
the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to
contractors and City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-
construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or
assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above
requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community
Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect
the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measure 3: Cultural Resources
3. If materials (including but not limited to bedrock mortars, historical trash deposits, and
human burials) are encountered during excavation, work shall cease until a qualified
archaeologist makes determinations on possible significance, recommends appropriate
measures to minimize impacts, and provides information on how to proceed in light of the
discoveries. All specialist recommendations shall be communicated to the City of San Luis
Obispo Community Development Department prior to resuming work to ensure the project
continues within procedural parameters accepted by the City of San Luis Obispo and the
State of California.
Monitoring Plan, MM #3: All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the
above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and
City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-construction meeting is
required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the
project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and
complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public
Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above
mitigation measures.
SECTION 3. Action. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Use Permit to allow development of a site with Special
Considerations, and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (TR/A/ER 202-13), with
incorporation of the following project conditions:
Community Development Department - Planning
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 44
1. All exceptions to setback standards and conditions of approval, including those required by
the Architectural Review Commission, mitigation measures and easements shall be shown
on the final map and/or subdivision improvement/building plans.
2. Lot 5 shall provide an affordable housing unit in compliance with Section 17.91 of the
Municipal Code. An affordable housing agreement shall be recorded in compliance with
the City’s Affordable Housing Standards.
Community Development Department - Engineering
3. All easements shall be recorded on title with the individual lots.
4. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside,
void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto,
including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall
promptly notify the subdivider of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the
Indemnified Claim and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified
Claim."
5. Some of the proposed lot lines are shown relatively close to the proposed building. Wall
rating requirements and opening protective will apply per Table R302.1(2). Proposed
setback dimensions shall be clearly shown on plans to assess the requirements based on
Table as referenced.
6. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each lot prior to map recordation in accordance with the
fee resolution in effect at the time of final map submittal/recordation.
7. Complete frontage improvements are required as a condition of the subdivision and
development. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance the City
Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of submittal of said
improvements. The required subdivision improvements shall be completed or covered by
an appropriate surety prior to map recordation.
8. Grade and line shall be established by the developer for the new curb and gutter to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Director. A separate public improvement plan may be
required where grades and alignment have not been established or where significant
discrepancies are discovered. The developer is responsible for any required engineering
and/or surveying. Record drawings shall be provided at the completion of construction.
9. The required public and private subdivision improvements may be completed with a
separate subdivision improvement plan submittal processed through the Public Works
Department. As an alternate, the building plan submittal may be used to show all required
improvements. Improvements located within the public right-of-way will require a separate
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 45
encroachment permit and associated inspection fees. A separate plan review fee based on
the fee resolution in effect at the time of plan submittal will be required for the Public
Works Department review of the subdivision improvements associated with the building
plan submittal.
10. The final map shall show and note the offer of dedication for the sidewalk, public
pedestrian easement for any ADA sidewalk extensions, a 10’ PUE, and a 10’ street tree
easement.
11. Any required or proposed off-site easements or license agreements shall be secured or
recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the map or prior to construction.
12. Private easements for access, parking, maneuverability, drainage, utilities, and open space
shall be shown and noted on the final map. Some or all of the private easements may be in
the form of a blanket easement. The common driveway and any maintenance agreements
shall be recorded in conjunction with the map.
13. The open space easement, drainage easement, and any easement agreements shall be
reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of city’s Natural Resource Manager and Public
Works Department in conjunction with recordation of the map. Restoration planting within
the open space and creek corridor shall be approved by the Natural Resource Manager.
14. The final map or additional map sheet shall show the limits of 100-year flood inundation in
accordance with the drainage analysis and as generally shown on the tentative map.
15. The updated project soils report shall be referenced on the map or on an additional sheet.
16. The parcel map/final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the
city’s Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act.
17. All boundary monuments, lot corners and centerline intersections, BC's, EC's, etc., shall be
tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used and
a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map. All
coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. A 3.5" diameter
computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data compatible with Autocad (Digital
Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be
submitted to the City Engineer.
On motion by _______________, seconded by __________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 27th day of August, 2014.
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 46
___________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Planning Commission
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC1 - 47
Meeting Date: October 6, 2014
Item Number: 2
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of modifications to a sign program for the Laguna Village Shopping Center tenant signs and new shopping center identification signs with a categorical exemption from environmental review. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1300 Madonna Road BY: Kyle Bell, Planning Technician Phone Number: 781-7524 e-mail: kbell@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0071-2014 FROM: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the draft resolution (Attachment 1) approving the modifications to the sign program
including a new proposed canopy sign and approving the proposed shopping center identification
signs, based on findings, and subject to conditions of approval.
SITE DATA
Applicant Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC
Representative Pierre Rademaker
Pierre Rademaker Design
Zoning Community Commercial (C-C) zone
General Plan Community Commercial
Site Area ~9.03 Acres
Environmental
Status
Categorically exempt from
environmental review under CEQA
Guidelines section 15311 (Accessory
Structures).
SUMMARY
On July 18, 2014, the applicant received approval for a minor façade remodel of existing
buildings within the Laguna Village Shopping Center (ARC MI 83-14), Condition No. 4
included that the Director may refer signage to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). In
response to this condition, staff has forwarded the project to the ARC to review the exceptions to
the sign regulations for new tenant signs and to allow new shopping center identification signs.
Staff is supportive of the proposed sign program, but recommends modifications to the
applicant’s proposed sign program as discussed below (Section 3.0, Project Analysis). The most
significant concerns with the sign program relate to the size of the canopy sign. Staff is also
recommending modifying the design of the freestanding shopping center identification signs.
ARC2 - 1
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Sign Regulations and
the Community Design Guidelines applicable to signs.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Information/Setting
The project site consists of approximately 9 acres of developed land in the Community
Commercial (C-C) zone. The project site is currently developed as a shopping center with
approximately 102,820 square feet of buildings divided among tenant spaces with
parking and landscape improvements. The project site is bordered by, and takes access
from, Madonna Road, and Los Osos Valley Road. Surrounding uses and zoning include:
North R-2-PD & R-2 (Multi-Family Residences)
South PF (Fire Station #4) & R-1 (Single-Family Residences) & R-3-PD (Multi-
Family Residences)
East R-1 (Single-Family Residences)
West O (Office-Business and Services) & R-4 (Multi-Family Residences)
2.2 Project Description
The project proposes modifications to the Sign Program for the Laguna Village Shopping
Center site (Attachment 2, Proposed Sign Program). Including:
a. New major tenant wall sign for new 99 Cents Only Store (1308 Madonna).
b. New proposed canopy and wall signs for new major tenant Grocery Outlet store
(1314 Madonna).
c. Individual tenant projecting signs.
d. Request to replace the existing freestanding shopping center identification signs at
the south (Madonna Road) and east (Los Osos Valley Road) entrances.
e. Request to allow new driveway entry signs on the existing stone walls that line
each entrance to the shopping center.
2.3 Previous Review
The site has a history of previous signage review.
• On August 21, 1995, t he ARC approved the removal of the shopping center
identification signs to be replaced with taller, larger, internally lit shopping center
identification signs that includes major tenants listed on the signs.
• On November 4, 1999, the ARC approved modification to the approved sign
program for the Laguna Shopping Center, Subject to the findings and conditions.
• On May 8, 2009, the ARC approved modifications to the approved sign program
for the Laguna Village Shopping Center, subject to the findings and conditions.
• On July 18, 2014, the Community Development Department approved the façade
remodel of the existing buildings at 1314 a nd 1308 M adonna, subject to the
findings and conditions.
ARC2 - 2
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
3.1 Building Signs Detailed Descriptions: The applicant’s proposed sign program for the
Laguna Village Shopping Center includes four building sign styles;
1) Wall signs with reverse channel letters with neon illumination;
2) Wall signs with internally illuminated channel letters;
3) Projecting tenant signs beneath the awning; and
4) A canopy sign located on top of a newly constructed trellis.
The sign program includes signage standards for major tenants in Buildings C & D and
separate standards for minor tenants in Buildings A, B & F. Each tenant in Buildings A, B or
F is allowed one wall sign not to exceed 50 square feet or 60% of the lease width and a
projecting sign not to exceed three square feet.
Table 3.1a: Applicant Proposed Minor Tenant Signage
Buildings A, B & F Signage (Minor Tenants)
Maximum projecting sign area 3 s.f.
Maximum wall sign area 50 s.f.
Maximum area per zone 100 s.f.
Maximum width 60% of lease width
Maximum letter height (w/ towers) 24”
Maximum letter height (w/out towers) 18”
Sign types Projecting signs and wall signs
The major tenant in Building C proposes one wall sign and one canopy sign. The major
tenant in Building D proposes one wall sign that exceeds 100 square feet. The different
proposed sign standards, by building, are summarized below.
Table 3.1b: Applicant Proposed Major Tenant Signage
Buildings C Signage (Grocery Outlet)
Maximum letter height (Wall sign) 1st row 30” / 2nd row 16”
Total letter height (Wall sign) 46”
Maximum letter height (Canopy sign) 1st row 20” / 2nd row 11”
Total letter height (Canopy sign) 32”
Maximum area (Wall sign) 74 s.f.
Maximum area (Canopy sign) 78 s.f.
Total area 152 s.f.
ARC2 - 3
Table 3.1c: Applicant Proposed Major Tenant Signage
Buildings D Wall Signage (99 Cents Only)
Maximum letter height 6’ 10”
Maximum area 128 s.f.
Staff Analysis Building C Canopy Sign
(Grocery Outlet): The applicant is proposing a
74 square-foot wall sign and a new 78 square-
foot sign to be attached to a wood trellis that
provides a covered entry to Building C
(Attachment 5). The wall sign replaces another
sign for a former grocery store, but the canopy
sign is a more unique element that does not fall
neatly into any particular sign type category.
Section 15.40.600 of the Sign Regulations states
that unusual site conditions may warrant signs
not otherwise permitted by the regulations, subject to review of an exception by the ARC.
In this case, the unusual site circumstance is the location of Building C in the far interior of
the site where it is not visible from adjacent streets. Staff has concluded that there may be
justification for a sign exception as a component of the sign program to allow the canopy
sign to provide better tenant identification, but that the design needs to be modified to appear
better integrated with building architecture and to minimize visual clutter.
Condition No. 1 is recommended that includes the following:
a. The overall height of the canopy sign structure is to be reduced form 5 feet to 3 feet.
b. The total square footage of signs for the major tenant in Building C including the
canopy sign and wall sign is not to exceed 125 square feet.
Staff Analysis Wall Sign (99 Cents Only):
The maximum wall sign area for the C-C zone
in the Sign Regulations is 50 square feet and
100 square feet per tenant for total signage.
Past sign programs approved for the shopping
center have allowed larger wall signs for major
tenants (greater than 50 square feet). The 99
Cents Only store has a total area of 13,261
square feet and qualifies as a major tenant in the Laguna Village Shopping Center. The
proposal includes one 128 square-foot wall sign in excess of the 100 square feet total allowed
per tenant in the C-C zone (Attachment 6).
Staff finds the proposed wall sign to be compatible with the design and scale of the shopping
center and approved façade improvements, with some modifications. Condition No. 2 is
recommended that includes the following:
ARC2 - 4
a. The overall letter height for the wall sign in Building D is not to exceed 42 inches.
b. The sign area shall not exceed 100 square feet.
3.2 Shopping Center Identification Signs
The applicant proposes the replacement of the two existing
freestanding shopping center identification signs along
Madonna Road, and along Los Osos Valley Road (Attachment
7). The freestanding signs are designed to reflect the
architecture of the newly remodeled shopping center and will
use materials and colors that match the canopies and trellises of
the approved façade improvements. The signs will be largely
comprised of aluminum cabinets with internally illuminated
push through acrylic lettering, steel tubing, and a concrete base.
Below are the details of the proposed freestanding signs:
Table 3.2a: Proposed Freestanding Shopping Center Identification Signage
Existing Shopping
Center I.D. Signs
Proposed Shopping
Center I.D. Signs
Sign height 8’ 13’
Sign depth 18” 6”
Sign width 9’ ~10’
Maximum letter height 1’ 2’
Total Area 65’ 65’
Number of tenant sign faces 3 7
The Community Design Guidelines discuss the scale and size of signage and state that “the
size of a freestanding or monument sign should be scaled to its proposed location and
compatible with surrounding signage” (Section 6.6(D)). The existing shopping center
identification signs are approximately 9 feet tall; proposed replacement signs are 13 feet tall.
The existing shopping center identification signs have space for three tenant signs; the
proposed signs increase the tenant space to seven signs.
Staff Analysis: Staff finds the size and scale of the proposed redesigned freestanding
shopping center identification signs to be incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
The seven tenant faces on the signs appear excessive for a shopping center of this size and
creates sign clutter along Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road.
Therefore, staff recommends that the height of the signs be reduced, and that the number of
tenants listed on the sign be reduced to avoid sign clutter and to be consistent with signage
within the neighborhood. Condition No. 3 is recommended that includes the following:
a. Reduce the number of tenants listed on the sign to a maximum of 5 faces;
b. Lower the total height of the signs to accommodate the reduced tenant faces
ARC2 - 5
c. Keep the area between the steel tubing open to create the look of a trellis, rather than as
an extension of the solid sign faces, to minimize the bulk and scale of the sign.
3.3 Driveway Entry Signs
The applicant is also requesting new driveway entry
signs that say “Laguna Village” to be placed on the
existing stone walls along the entrances to the
shopping center to provide identifying features for the
shopping center (Attachment 7). Staff finds that these
signs are minor and will visually enhance the façade
of the existing stone walls along each of the entrances
to the shopping center.
Table 3.3a: Proposed driveway entry signs along the entrances to the Shopping Center
Driveway Entry Signs
Sign height 8”
Sign width ~7’
Maximum letter height 5.5”
Total Area 3.2’
Number of signs 5
4.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the project. If the ARC continues the project, specific directional items should
be clearly indicated to staff and the applicant.
2. Deny the project. Action denying the application should include findings that cite the
basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the Sign Regulations and
Community Design Guidelines.
5.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity map
3. Sign Program
4. Sign Program (Red Line)
5. Grocery Outlet sign proposal
6. 99 Cents Only sign proposal
7. Street Sign proposal
Included in Committee member portfolio: Project Plans
Available at ARC Hearing: Colors and Materials Board
ARC2 - 6
RESOLUTION NO. ARC- -14
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION APPROVING A SIGN PROGRAM AT THE LAGUNA VILLAGE
SHOPPING CENTER INCLUDING ADOPTION OF A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT
AND ATTACHMENTS DATED OCTOBER 6, 2014
1300 MADONNA ROAD (ARCH-0071-2014)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on October 6, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH 0071-
2014, Laguna Village Shopping Center, 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-0071-2014), based on the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the proposed sign program maintains consistency with the Sign Regulations
by providing signage that will be architecturally compatible with affected structures and the
character of surrounding development.
2. As conditioned, the location, size, dimensions and design of the proposed signs are
consistent with the purpose and intent of the sign regulations included in SLO Municipal
Code Section 15.40.020.
3. As conditioned, the proposed sign program is consistent Community Design Guidelines
Sections 6.6(B)(C)(F)(J) which states that the design of the signs should consider and
complement the architecture of the buildings and the type of business activity conducted
within.
4. Approval of the sign program provides a coordinated design and standards for signs in the
center; therefore, as conditioned, the program will not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to the properties or improvements within the vicinity.
5. The sign program includes an exception from the sign regulations to allow a canopy sign for
Building C, which is warranted based on the following findings;
ARC2 - 7
a. There are exceptional or unusual circumstances applying to the property involved
which do not apply generally to properties in the vicinity with the same zoning such as
its large size – approximately 9 acres, and in the case of the primary signs for major
tenants - the size and location of existing buildings obstruct views from the public right
of way.
b. As conditioned, the sign exception is for superior design will not result in visual clutter
and is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Sign Regulations.
6. As conditioned, wall sign for the new tenant in Building D is consistent with the sign
program for the Laguna Village Shopping Center as a new major tenant space.
7. The project proposes new driveway entry signs along each of the entrances to the shopping
center, these signs are of a superior design that enhance the appearance of the existing stone
walls and will not result in visual clutter.
8. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review under Class 11, Accessory
Structures, of the CEQA Guidelines Section 15311, because the project consists of minor
structures of on premise signs accessory to existing commercial facilities that will not have
a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) hereby grants final
approval to the sign program with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning
1. The applicant shall modify signage for the major tenant in Building C as follows:
a. The overall height of the canopy sign is not to exceed 36 inches.
b. The total square footage of signs for the major tenant in Building C is not to exceed 125
square feet.
2. The applicant shall modify signage for the major tenant in Building D as follows:
a. The overall letter height for the major tenant in Building D is not to exceed 42 inches.
b. The sign area shall not exceed 100 square feet.
3. The applicant shall modify the shopping center identification signs as follows:
a. Reduce the number of tenants listed on the sign to not exceed 5 faces;
b. Lower the total height of the signs to accommodate the reduced tenant faces;
c. Keep the area between the steel tubing open to create the look of a trellis, rather than as
an extension of the solid sign faces, to minimize the bulk and scale of the sign.
4. The sign program shall include language that no sign shall exceed 25 feet above the
adjacent grade.
5. The ARC supported the two new freestanding identification signs reviewed at the October
6, 2014 meeting as conditioned. The final version of the sign program shall be to the
ARC2 - 8
approval of the Community Development Director to confirm that the updated program is
consistent with project conditions included in this resolution. The Director may refer the
freestanding signage back to the ARC if it seems inconsistent with the plans approved by
the ARC on October 6, 2014. All signage included as part of the program shall obtain
required sign permits prior to installation.
Building
6. Plans and specifications and anchorage detailing will be required at the time of submittal for
permit. D epending on de tailing and size of sign structural design calculations may be
required.
7. Plans to specify the current 2013 CA Building Codes and the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code.
Public Works
8. The building plan submittal shall include a complete horizontal control plan to clearly show
the proposed sign setbacks from driveways, property lines, and pedestrian crossings. The
signs shall be located outside of or below 10’ line of sight triangle per engineering standards
and practices.
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 6th day of October, 2014.
_____________________________
Pam Ricci, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
ARC2 - 9
C-C
R-1
R-1
O
R-1
R-1
PF
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-3-PD
O
R-1
R-1
R-4
R-1
R-2
R-2-PD
R-1
PF
R-2-PD
R-2
R-4
R-3-PD
R-1
R-1
R-3
R-2-PD
R-1
R-3
MADONNAROYALG
A
L
L
E
O
N
P
E
R
E
I
R
A
LI
M
A
VI
C
E
N
T
E
H
U
A
S
N
A
L
O
S
O
S
O
S
V
A
L
L
E
Y
T
O
N
I
N
I W NEWPORTATASCA
DE
R
O
E
L
T
I
G
R
E
CORALCAVALIER B
A
L
B
O
A
N
E
W
P
O
R
T
PICOSOLAGARCIABO
RO
N
D
A
MADONNA
MADONNA
VICINITY MAP File No. 0071-20141300 Madonna ¯
Attachment 2
ARC2 - 10
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
TENANT SIGN CRITERIA
Laguna Village Shopping Center
Modified October 1, 2014
Landlord: Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC.
Property Manager: R. POLTL & ASSOCIATES, INC.
A. Introduction
The intent of this sign criteria is to provide the guidelines necessary to achieve a visually
coordinated, balanced and appealing signage environment at the above mentioned project –
Laguna Village Shopping Center (depicted in “Exhibit A- Site Plan of Laguna Village
Shopping Center” attached hereto), and in accordance with the City of San Luis Obispo and its
adopted sign requirements.
Performance under this sign criteria shall be rigorously enforced. Any non-confirming
signs shall be removed by the tenant or his sign contractor at their expense, upon demand
by the Owner.
The Landlord shall review exceptions to these standards, which may also require review
and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department or Architectural
Review Commission. Accordingly, the Landlord, will retain full rights of approval of any
sign used in this shopping center.
B. GENERAL OWNERSHIP/TENANT REQUIREMENTS
1. Each tenant shall submit to Landlord’s Property Manager for written approval, three
(3) copies of the detailed shop drawings of the proposed sign(s), tone in full color
identifying proposed signage areas and letter heights, indicating conformance with
this sign criteria. Landlord’s Property Manager:
R. POLTL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1328 Madonna Rd.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805) 781-9100
2. The tenant shall submit a sign drawing approved by the Landlord to the City of San
Luis Obispo Planning Department, for approval prior to the start of any sign
construction.
3. The tenant shall pay for all signs, their installation (including final connection,
transformers and all other labor and materials) and maintenance.
4. The tenant shall obtain all necessary permits.
5. The tenant is responsible for fulfillment of all requirements of this sign criteria.
6. “Retail shop space tenants” shall provide one of the following to fit in the described
sign area depicted in “Exhibit B: Sign A – Design Details and Drawings for Retail
Shop Tenants” attached hereto :
1. Internally illuminated channel letter signs with optional logo/description box; or
2. Reversed channel letters with neon illumination.
ARC2 - 11
Page 2
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
7. For “Restaurant spaces in Building G”, tenants shall provide illuminated signs utilizing
creativity and individuality, see (Sign “B”) details and drawings, if any, as depicted in
“Exhibit C: Sign B – Design Details and Drawings for Restaurant Shop Tenants in
Building G” attached hereto. Restaurants may use one of the following types:
1. Internally illuminated channel letter signs with optional logo box.
2. Reversed channel letters with neon illumination.
3. Front lit dimensional lettering and border signage.
4. Exposed Neon sign.
And one optional row of additional 8" maximum high non-illuminated letter for
descriptors below the main sign consistent with the limits of the maximum sign area.
8. It is the responsibility of the tenant's sign company to verify all conduit and transformer
locations and service prior to fabrication (for illuminated signs).
9. The location of all signs shall be per the accompanying design criteria.
10. Except as noted in Section E below (“MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE”), the
number of allowable building fascia signs shall be limited as follows:
a. One (1) fascia sign shall be allowed for in-line tenants that only have one public
building elevation (such as the existing Laguna Cleaners, Launderosa, and
Subway spaces); and
b. Two (2) fascia signs shall be allowed for tenants that occupy a space at the end of
a building where their public elevation faces two (2) different directions (such as
the existing Burger King, Laguna Smokes, Laguna Grill, CVS Pharmacy, Taco
Roco, and Nautical Bean spaces).
c. Three (3) fascia signs shall be allowed for tenants that occupy a space where their
public elevation faces three (3) different directions (such as Mattress Land by
Sleep Fit and Upper Crust.
11. The tenant shall verify his own sign location and size with the Landlord and the City of
San Luis Obispo prior to fabrication.
12. All tenants may have an under canopy blade sign designed in accordance with the general
design guidelines attached hereto as “Exhibit D – Design Details and Drawings for Blade
Signs”; and Landlord may approve individual color and design variations to said Blade
Signs so as to provide a creative and attractive variation of said signs..
13. The tenant's sign company, during the regular course of construction, shall apply address
numbers to each store. Numbers shall be applied on panel over storefront entrance 3" up
and must be 6" high white vinyl letters to match the standard font used in the Shopping
Center, except in the event that Tenant’s transom glazing does not exist or is obscured by
Architectural features, Landlord may require Tenant to use bronze letters with oil rubbed
finish to match other tenants, or other design features as required and approved by the City
of San Luis Obispo Building & Fire Departments.
14. Special signs which vary from this sign criteria must first be approved by the Landlord and
respective city authority.
15. Tenant shall be responsible for providing all ADA signage to designate accessible
entrances as required per code.
ARC2 - 12
Page 3
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
C. GENERAL SIGN SPECIFICATIONS
1. No exposed, crossovers, conduits, conductors, transformers, etc. shall be permitted.
2. All lettering shall be restricted to the “net sign area” (except as otherwise approved
in writing). See accompanying design criteria for specific information.
3. No projections above or below the "net sign area" will be permitted (except as
otherwise approved in writing).
4. All signs and their installation must comply with all local building and, if electric,
bare a U.L. label placed in an inconspicuous location.
5. For purposes of store identification and hours of business, tenant will be permitted to
place upon each entrance to its demised premises not more than 144 square inches of
gold leaf or decal application lettering not to exceed 2 inches in height. The overall
design and letter typeface shall be subject to Landlord’s approval.
6. Except as noted in Section E below (“MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE”),
Tenant signs shall be subject to the following limits:
(a) SIGN A - Retail Tenant Signs (the design details of which aredepicted in
“Exhibit B”): The overall sign length may not exceed 60% of the leasehold
width or 10% of leasehold building face or a maximum of 50 square feet for
each public building elevation.
(b) SIGNS ON PROJECTING BUILDING FAÇADE TOWERS (the location of
the façade towers are shown on “Exhibit A-2” and “Exhibit A-3”): The
maximum letter height for signs installed on the “Projecting Building Façade
Towers” shall be a maximum of 24” and the design of said signs shall be subject
to Landlord’s review and approval. The addresses of the tenant spaces with
Projecting Building Façade Towers are as follows:
1316 Madonna Road, in Building B (currently Mandarin Gourmet)
1322 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently Pacific Western Bank)
1336 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently i-Mechanics)
1344 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently Jenny Craig)
1352 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently Snofari)
1358 Madonna Road in Building A (currently Burger King)
(c) For typical internally Illuminated Channel letter and Logo box sign the
face of the individual letters and logos shall be constructed of acrylic
plastic (3/16” thick minimum, and fastened to the channelized metal can in
an approved manner). All surrounds or trim in a single sign shall be a
single color.
(d) The “copy” (letter type), logos and their respective colors shall be
submitted to the Landlord for written approval prior to fabrication.
(e) Individual tenant logos/descriptions may be located anywhere within the
“net sign area”, provided their height does not exceed the height of the “net
sign area”.
ARC2 - 13
Page 4
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
(f) No more than two rows of letters are permitted, provided their maximum
total height does not exceed the height of the “net sign area”
(g) Tenants shall display their established trade name or, as noted above,
tenants may elect to display their logo/description together with their trade
name.
(h) Internal illumination to be 30 milli-amp neon (or other current technology
approved by Landlord) installed and labeled in accordance with the
“National Board of Fire Underwriters Specifications”.
(i) For other typical retail tenant shop spaces, the maximum letter height shall
be 18", with exceptions granted for first letters of words when
appropriately scaled and for sweeping tails on custom letters for visual
effect.
(i) Reverse channel letters shall have a natural patina finish of rust brown or verde
gris or other material and color approved by Landlord.
7. Except as noted in Section E below (“MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE”),
the building fascia signage for Restaurant Tenant Spaces in Building G (11560 Los
Osos Valley Road Suite 110-290) shall include the design requirements set forth in
Exhibit C (if any) and as follows:
(a) Signs shall be attached to designated areas only and may not exceed 55
square feet for each public building elevation, and shall be limited to a
length of 75% of each building face. As noted in Section B. paragrpah10
above, for tenant spaces with more than one public building elevation, one
sign is permitted on each such building elevation (1 sign for spaces with 1
public elevation, 2 signs for spaces with 2 public elevations and 3 signs for
spaces with 3 public elevations). Overall sign height shall be a maximum of
4”-0”. Where there is a peaked building element, exceptions for additional
sign area to accommodate small logo/description elements, not to exceed a
maximum of 12 square feet, may be approved by the Landlord and the City
of San Luis Obispo.
(b) Signage should be creative, exciting, imaginative and well integrated into
the overall design concept and should provide the ‘finished detail’ for each
storefront. It should be refined and ornamental in quality.
(c) The following materials/technologies are permitted based on integration of the
sign concept and execution with the total storefront design.
(1) Internally illuminated channel letters, standard with or without plastic
faces with optional logo box.
(2) Reverse channel or halo illuminated letters with neon illumination.
(3) Front illuminated dimensional signs with lighting to be approved by
Owner.
(4) Exposed neon or exposed neon letters (exposed neon letters must be back
painted or recessed in a letter can). Exposed neon borders and shapes must
be in the designated sign area.
(d) Individuality is encouraged in these signs.
ARC2 - 14
Page 5
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
(e) Internal illumination to be 30 milli-amp for neon or 800 milli-amp for
fluorescent installed (or other current technology as approved by Landlord
such as LED) and labeled in accordance with the “National Board of Fire
Underwriters Specifications”.
(f) Maximum letter height shall be 18”, with exceptions granted for first letters
of words when appropriately scaled against the bulding architeture and for
sweeping tails on custom letters for visual effect.
(g) Reverse channel letters shall have a natural patina finish of rust brown or
verde gris; or other materials and colors approved by Landlord.
(h) Front-lit signage shall be illuminated adequately to view the sign at night
subject to Landlord’s review and approval.
(i) For typical internally Illuminated Channel letter and Logo/Description box
sign the face of the individual letters and logos shall be constructed of
acrylic plastic (3/16” thick minimum, and fastened to the channelized metal
can in an approved manner. All surrounds or trim in a single sign shall be a
single color.
(j) The “copy” (letter type), logos and their respective colors shall be
submitted to the Landlord for written approval prior to fabrication.
(k) Individual shop logos may be located anywhere within the “net sign area”,
provided their height does not exceed the height of the "net sign area"
(l) No more than two rows of letters are permitted, provided their maximum
total height does not exceed the height of the “net sign area”.
D. PROHIBITED SIGNS
1. Signs constituting a Traffic Hazard:
No person shall install or maintain or cause to be installed or maintained any sign which
simulates or imitates in size, or color, lettering, or design any traffic sign or signal, or which
makes use of the words, “STOP”, “LOOK”, “DANGER”, or use any other words, phrases,
symbols, or characters in such a manner to interfere with, mislead or confuse traffic.
2. Immoral or Unlawful Advertising:
It shall be unlawful for any person to exhibit, post or display or cause to be exhibited, posted or
displayed upon any sign, anything of an obscene, indecent, or immoral nature or unlawful
activity.
3. Signs or Doors, Windows or Fire Escapes:
No window signs will be permitted except as noted herein. No sign shall be installed, relocated,
or maintained to as to prevent free ingress to or egress from any door. No sign of any kind shall
be attached to a stand pipe except those signs as required by code or ordinance.
4. Animated, Audible, or Moving Signs:
Signs consisting of any moving, swinging, rotating, flashing, blinking, scintillating, fluctuating
or otherwise animated light is prohibited, except for time and temperature displays.
ARC2 - 15
Page 6
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
5. Off- Premises Signs:
None allowed.
6. Vehicle Signs:
Signs on or affixed to trucks, automobiles, trailers, or other vehicles which advertise, identify,
or provide direction to a use or activity not related to its lawful making of deliveries or sales of
merchandise or rendering of services from such vehicles, is prohibited.
7. Light Bulb Strings and Exposed Tubing:
External displays, other than temporary decorative holiday lighting, which consists of
unshielded light bulbs, and open exposed neon or gaseous light tubing, are prohibited on retail
tenant shops.
8. Banners, Pennants, and Balloons Used for Advertising Purposes:
None allowed.
9. Signs in Proximity to Utility Lines:
Signs that have less horizontal or vertical clearance from authorized communication or
energized electrical power lines than prescribed by the laws of the State of California are
prohibited.
E. MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE
1. The provisions of this Exhibit, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Exhibit,
shall not be applicable to the identification signs of department stores, grocery stores,
drug stores, or other large retail stores who occupy 10,000 square feet or more of space in
this shopping center (hereinafter referred to as “Major/Anchor Tenants”). Major/Anchor
Tenants typically have trademarked signage that is larger (than smaller tenants) to fit the
architectural scale of buildings and shopping centers they occupy.
2. As of the date of this Modified Tenant Sign Criteria (approximately October 1, 2014),
Landlord is in the process of replacing Spencer’s Fresh Market (a grocery store that
occupied in excess of 33,000 square feet, generally depicted on Exhibit A-1 as Buildings
C and D, the address of which was 1314 Madonna Road) that closed for business with the
following two (2) smaller “Major/Anchor Tenants:”
i. Grocery Outlet, a grocery store, that shall occupy 1314 Madonna Road, which is
approximately 19,670 square feet and is depicted on Exhibit A-1 as Building C;
and
ii. 99 Cents Only Store, a grocery and general merchandise store, that shall occupy
1308 Madonna Road, which is approximately 13,261 square feet and is depicted
on Exhibit A-1 as Building D.
3. As of the date hereof, Landlord is also remodeling the former Spencer’s storefront facade
to accommodate these two (2) new “Major/Anchor Tenants” (“Building C&D Façade
Renovation”); and Landlord has obtained architectural design review and approval of the
“Building C&D Façade Renovation” from the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
ARC2 - 16
Page 7
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
Department. The approved design of the “Building C&D Façade Renovation” is attached
hereto as “Exhibit E – Building C&D Façade Renovation Drawings”.
4. The “ Exhibit E - Building C&D Façade Renovation Drawings” incorporate architectural
features used by Landlord in other areas of this shopping center in recent years (including
ledge-stone columns, new wood trellises, wood awnings, and landscaping); and the new
“Major/Anchor Tenant” signage shown on “Exhibit E - Building C&D Façade
Renovation Drawings” compliment the scale and architectural style of the new
improvements and surrounding buildings. And the design and location of the new façade
signage (as depicted in Exhibit E) creatively resolves significant “visibility challenges”
that are unique to Buildings C & D.
5. The “Major/Anchor Tenants” occupying Buildings C&D shall have the right to install the
building façade signage as shown on “Exhibit E – Building C&D Façade Renovation
Drawings” as approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department and
generally described as follows (subject to issuance of specific sign permits by the City of
San Luis Obispo):
i. Due to its unique location near the interior corner of this shopping center, its
absence of visibility from either Madonna Road or Los Osos Valley Road, and
its lack of visibility from the interior shopping center drive-aisles, may install the
following storefront signage on Building C (Grocery Outlet, 1314 Madonna
Road) as depicted on Exhibit E:
(a) one (1) building wall sign (facing Los Osos Valley Road) to provide
visibility from the Burger Kind/Los Osos Valley Road shopping center
entry drive-aisle and
(b) one (1) double sided “canopy sign” on top of the Grocery Outlet
storefront architectural entry structure(“Entry Trellis Canopy”), at 90
degrees to its storefront, (facing Madonna Road) to provide visibility
from the CVS/Madonna Road shopping center entry drive-aisle;
(hereinafter referred to as the (“Perpendicular Canopy Sign”). This
Perpendicular Canopy Sign is approved only because of the extremely
poor visibility suffered by this particular building storefront. Landlord
agrees that the approval of this Perpendicular Canopy Sign shall not
create a precedence for other tenants in this shopping center to request
similar signs; and Landlord agrees that no other buildings within this
shopping center will be allowed to install such a Perpendicular Canopy
Sign.
ii. 99 Cents Only may install one (1) building wall sign on its customer entry tower
facing Los Osos Valley Road; and one (1) building wall sign on the side of the
customer entry tower facing Madonna Road; (the design, color and dimensions
of these (2) signs shall match the Exhibit E renderings and shall not include the
“fuchsia colored side panels” shown in this tenant’s logo); or 99 Cents may elect
to install just one (1) building sign on its customer entry tower facing Los Osos
Valley Road that does include the “fuchsia colored side panels” shown on
tenant’s logo, in which case tenant shall not have a second building sign facing
Madonna Road.
6. Unless otherwise agreed to by the Landlord and the City of San Luis Obispo, the
maximum sign area for each of the Major/Anchor Tenants that will occupy Buildings
C&D (formerly occupied by Spencer’s Fresh Market, a grocery store) shall not exceed the
sign areas and maximum letter heights shown on “Exhibit E – Building C&D Façade
Renovation Drawings”; and the maximum sign area for the Major/Anchor Tenant that
occupies Building E (currently occupied by Longs Drugs, a drug store) shall not exceed
the sign area that currently exists on this building without written approval of Landlord
ARC2 - 17
Page 8
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
and the City of San Luis Obispo. It is estimated that the existing sign area for Buidling E
is approximately 90 square feet with a maximum height of 36 inches for each public
building elevation (Building E currently has two (2) public building elevations – one
facing south towards Los Osos Valley Road and one facing east towards Madonna Road).
There shall be no rooftop signs or signs that are flashing, moving, or audible. All new or
revised signs shall be approved by the Landlord and the City of San Luis Obispo.
F. Attached Exhibits: The following Exhibits are attached hereto and made a part hereof:
Exhibit A-1: “Site Plan of Laguna Village Shopping Center”
Exhibit A-2: “Floor Plan & Elevation of Building A (showing “Projecting Building
Façade Tower Locations”)”
Exhibit A-3: “Floor Plan & Elevation of Building B (showing “Projecting Building
Façade Tower Locations”)”
Exhibit B: “Sign A – Design Details and Drawings for Retail Shop Tenants”
Exhibit C: “Sign B – Design Details and Drawings for Restaurant Shop Tenants in
Building G” (if any).
Exhibit D: “Design Details and Drawings for Blade Signs”
Exhibit E: “Building C&D Façade Renovation Drawings”
End.
ARC2 - 18
Page 9
EXHIBIT A-1
Site Plan of Laguna Village Shopping Center
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT A-1
SITE PLAN OF LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
ARC2 - 19
Page 10
EXHIBIT A-2
Floor Plan and Elevations of Building A
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT A-2
FLOOR PLAN& ELEVATION OF BUILDING A SHOWING:
“PROJECTING BUILDING FAÇADE TOWER LOCATIONS”
ARC2 - 20
Page 11
EXHIBIT A-3
Floor Plan and Elevations of Building B
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT A-3
FLOOR PLAN& ELEVATION OF BUILDING B SHOWING:
“PROJECTING BUILDING FAÇADE TOWER LOCATIONS”
ARC2 - 21
Page 12
EXHIBIT B
Design Details and Drawings for Retail Shop Tenants
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT B
SIGN A – DESIGN DETAILS AND DRAWINGS
FOR RETAIL SHOP TENANTS
ARC2 - 22
Page 13
EXHIBIT B
Design Details and Drawings for Retail Shop Tenants
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT B
SIGN A – DESIGN DETAILS AND DRAWINGS
FOR RETAIL SHOP TENANTS
ARC2 - 23
Page 14
EXHIBIT C
Design Details and Drawings for Restaurant Shop Tenants in Building G
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT C
SIGN B – DESIGN DETAILS FOR RESTAURANT SHOP TENANTS IN BUILDING G
No graphic design details have been prepared for the
restaurant shop tenants in Building G.
Descriptive design details are noted in the Sign Criteria,
page 2, Section B, paragraph 7.
ARC2 - 24
Page 15
EXHIBIT D
Design Details and Drawings for Blade Signs
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT D
DESIGN DETAILS AND DRAWINGS FOR BLADE SIGNS
ARC2 - 25
Page 16
EXHIBIT E
Building C&E Façade renovation drawings
Modified on October 1, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department on
, 2014.
EXHIBIT E
BUILDING C&D FAÇADE RENNOVATION DRAWINGS
ARC2 - 26
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
TENANT SIGN CRITERIA
Laguna Village Shopping Center
Modified October 1July 28, 2014
Landlord: Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC.
Property Manager: R. POLTL & ASSOCIATES, INC.
A. Introduction
The intent of this sign criteria is to provide the guidelines necessary to achieve a visually
coordinated, balanced and appealing signage environment at the above mentioned project –
Laguna Village Shopping Center (depicted in “Exhibit A- Site Plan of Laguna Village
Shopping Center” attached hereto), and in accordance with the City of San Luis Obispo and its
adopted sign requirements.
Performance under this sign criteria shall be rigorously enforced. Any non-confirming
signs shall be removed by the tenant or his sign contractor at their expense, upon demand
by the Owner.
The Landlord shall review exceptions to these standards, which may also require review
and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department or Architectural
Review Commission. Accordingly, the Landlord, will retain full rights of approval of any
sign used in this shopping center.
B. GENERAL OWNERSHIP/TENANT REQUIREMENTS
1. Each tenant shall submit to Landlord’s Property Manager for written approval, three
(3) copies of the detailed shop drawings of the proposed sign(s), tone in full color
identifying proposed signage areas and letter heights, indicating conformance with
this sign criteria. Landlord’s Property Manager:
R. POLTL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1328 Madonna Rd.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805) 781-9100
2. The tenant shall submit a sign drawing approved by the Landlord to the City of San
Luis Obispo Planning Department, for approval prior to the start of any sign
construction.
3. The tenant shall pay for all signs, their installation (including final connection,
transformers and all other labor and materials) and maintenance.
4. The tenant shall obtain all necessary permits.
5. The tenant is responsible for fulfillment of all requirements of this sign criteria.
6. “Retail shop space tenants” shall provide one of the following to fit in the described
sign area depicted in “Exhibit B: “Sign A – Design Details and Drawings for Retail
Shop Tenants” attached hereto :
1. Internally illuminated channel letter signs with optional logo/description box; or
2. Reversed channel letters with neon illumination.
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1", First line: 0"
Formatted: Underline
ARC2 - 27
Page 2
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
7. For “Restaurant spaces in Building G”, tenants shall provide illuminated signs utilizing
creativity and individuality, see (Sign “B”) details and drawings, if any, as depicted in
“Exhibit C: “Sign B – Design Details and Drawings for Restaurant Shop Tenants in
Building G” attached hereto. Restaurants may use one of the following types:
1. Internally illuminated channel letter signs with optional logo box.
2. Reversed channel letters with neon illumination.
3. Front lit dimensional lettering and border signage.
4. Exposed Neon sign.
And one optional row of additional 8" maximum high non-illuminated letter for
descriptors below the main sign consistent with the limits of the maximum sign area.
8. It is the responsibility of the tenant's sign company to verify all conduit and transformer
locations and service prior to fabrication (for illuminated signs).
9. The location of all signs shall be per the accompanying design criteria.
10. Except as noted in Section E below (“MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE”), tThe
number of allowable building fascia signs shall be limited as follows:
a. One (1) fascia sign shall be allowed for in-line tenants that only have one public
building elevation (such as the existing Laguna Cleaners, Launderosa, and
Subway spaces); and
b. Two (2) fascia signs shall be allowed for tenants that occupy a space at the end of
a building where their public elevation faces two (2) different directions (such as
the existing Burger King, Laguna Smokes, Laguna Grill, CVS Pharmacy, Taco
Roco, and Nautical Bean spaces).
c. Three (3) fascia signs shall be allowed for tenants that occupy a space where their
public elevation faces three (3) different directions (such as Mattress Land by
Sleep Fit and Upper Crust.
11. The tenant shall verify his own sign location and size with the Landlord and the City of
San Luis Obispo prior to fabrication.
12. All tenants may have an under canopy blade sign designed in accordance with the general
design guidelines attached hereto as “Exhibit D – Design Details and Drawings for Blade
Signs”; and Landlord may approve individual color and design variations to said Blade
Signs so as to provide a creative and attractive variation of said signs..
13. The tenant's sign company, during the regular course of construction, shall apply address
numbers to each store. Numbers shall be applied on panel over storefront entrance 3" up
and must be 6" high white vinyl letters to match the standard font used in the Shopping
Center, except in the event that Tenant’s transom glazing does not exist or is obscured by
Architectural features, Landlord may require Tenant to use bronze letters with oil rubbed
finish to match other tenants, or other design features as required and approved by the City
of San Luis Obispo Building & Fire Departments.
14. Special signs which vary from this sign criteria must first be approved by the Landlord and
respective city authority.
15. Tenant shall be responsible for providing all ADA signage to designate accessible
entrances as required per code.
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
ARC2 - 28
Page 3
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
C. GENERAL SIGN SPECIFICATIONS
1. No exposed, crossovers, conduits, conductors, transformers, etc. shall be permitted.
2. All lettering shall be restricted to the “net sign area” (except as otherwise approved
in writing). See accompanying design criteria for specific information.
3. No projections above or below the "net sign area" will be permitted (except as
otherwise approved in writing).
4. All signs and their installation must comply with all local building and, if electric,
bare a U.L. label placed in an inconspicuous location.
5. For purposes of store identification and hours of business, tenant will be permitted to
place upon each entrance to its demised premises not more than 144 square inches of
gold leaf or decal application lettering not to exceed 2 inches in height. The overall
design and letter typeface shall be subject to Landlord’s approval.
6. Except as noted in Section E below (“MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE”),
Tenant signs shall be subject to the following limits: typical overall sign length sign
for “SIGN “A” (Retail Tenant Signs depicted in Exhibit B) shall be as follows:
(a) SIGN A - Retail Tenant Signs (the design details of which are depicted in
“Exhibit B”): The Ooverall sSign lLength shall be attached in designated areas
only and may not exceed 60% of the leasehold width or 10% of leasehold
building face or a maximum of 50 square feet for each public building elevation.
(b) SIGNS ON PROJECTING BUILDING FAÇADE TOWERS (the location of
the façade towers are shown on “Exhibit A-2” and “Exhibit A-3”): The
maximum letter height for signs installed on the “Projecting Building Façade
Towers” on Buildings A and B (see Exhibits A-2 and A-3)) shall be a maximum
of 24” and the design of said signs shall be subject to Landlord’s review and
approval. The addresses of the tenant spaces with Projecting Building Façade
Towers are as follows (see attached Exhibits – Building A and B):
1316 Madonna Road, in Building B (currently Mandarin Gourmet)
1322 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently Pacific Western Bank)
1336 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently i-Mechanics)
1344 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently Jenny Craig)
1352 Madonna Road, in Building A (currently Snofari)
1358 Madonna Road in Building A (currently Burger King)
(c) For typical internally Illuminated Channel letter and Logo box sign the
face of the individual letters and logos shall be constructed of acrylic
plastic (3/16” thick minimum, and fastened to the channelized metal can in
an approved manner). All surrounds or trim in a single sign shall be a
single color.
(d) The “copy” (letter type), logos and their respective colors shall be
submitted to the Landlord for written approval prior to fabrication.
(e) Individual tenant logos/descriptions may be located anywhere within the
“net sign area”, provided their height does not exceed the height of the “net
sign area”.
Formatted: Underline
ARC2 - 29
Page 4
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
(f) No more than two rows of letters are permitted, provided their maximum
total height does not exceed the height of the “net sign area”
(g) Tenants shall display their established trade name or, as noted above,
tenants may elect to display their logo/description together with their trade
name.
(h) Internal illumination to be 30 milli-amp neon (or other current technology
approved by Landlord) installed and labeled in accordance with the
“National Board of Fire Underwriters Specifications”.
(i) For other typical retail tenant shop spaces, the maximum letter height shall
be 18", with exceptions granted for first letters of words when
appropriately scaled and for sweeping tails on custom letters for visual
effect., and except for certain tenant spaces in Buildings A & B (as noted in
paragraph C. 6 (b) above) with Projecting Building Façade Towers whose
maximum letter height shall be 24”.
(i) Reverse channel letters shall have a natural patina finish of rust brown or verde
gris or other material and color approved by Landlord..
7. Except as noted in Section E below (“MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE”),
the building fascia signage for Restaurant Tenant Spaces in Building G (11560 Los
Osos Valley Road Suite 110-290) shall include the design requirements set forth in
Exhibit C (if any) and as follows:
(a) Signs shall be attached to designated areas only and may not exceed 55
square feet for each public building elevation, and shall be limited to a
length of 75% of each building face. As noted in Section B. paragrpah10
above, for tenant spaces with more than one public building elevation, one
sign is permitted on each such building elevation (1 sign for spaces with 1
public elevation, 2 signs for spaces with 2 public elevations and 3 signs for
spaces with 3 public elevations)with a maximum number of no more than
two (2) signs per tenant. Overall sign height shall be a maximum of 4”-0”.
Where there is a peaked building element, exceptions for additional sign
area to accommodate small logo/description elements, not to exceed a
maximum of 12 square feet, may be approved by the Landlord and the City
of San Luis Obispo.
(b) Signage should be creative, exciting, imaginative and well integrated into
the overall design concept and should provide the ‘finished detail’ for each
storefront. It should be refined and ornamental in quality.
(c) The following materials/technologies are permitted based on integration of the
sign concept and execution with the total storefront design.
(1) Internally illuminated channel letters, standard with or without plastic
faces with optional logo box.
(2) Reverse channel or halo illuminated letters with neon illumination.
(3) Front illuminated dimensional signs with lighting to be approved by
Owner.
ARC2 - 30
Page 5
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
(4) Exposed neon or exposed neon letters (exposed neon letters must be back
painted or recessed in a letter can). Exposed neon borders and shapes must
be in the designated sign area.
(d) Individuality is encouraged in these signs, therefore, designs should not be
duplicated from existing tenant signs.
(e) Internal illumination to be 30 milli-amp for neon or 800 milli-amp for
fluorescent installed (or other current technology as approved by Landlord
such as LED) and labeled in accordance with the “National Board of Fire
Underwriters Specifications”.
(f) Maximum letter height shall be 18”, with exceptions granted for first letters
of words when appropriately scaled against the bulding architeture and for
sweeping tails on custom letters for visual effect.
(g) Reverse channel letters shall have a natural patina finish of rust brown or
verde gris; or other materials and colors approved by Landlord.
(h) Front-lit signage shall be illuminated adequately to view the sign at night
per the review of the Owner and Architectsubject to Landlord’s review and
approval.
(i) For typical internally Illuminated Channel letter and Logo/Description box
sign the face of the individual letters and logos shall be constructed of
acrylic plastic (3/16” thick minimum, and fastened to the channelized metal
can in an approved manner. All surrounds or trim in a single sign shall be a
single color.
(j) The “copy” (letter type), logos and their respective colors shall be
submitted to the Landlord for written approval prior to fabrication.
(k) Individual shop logos may be located anywhere within the “net sign area”,
provided their height does not exceed the height of the "net sign area"
(l) No more than two rows of letters are permitted, provided their maximum
total height does not exceed the height of the “net sign area”.
D. PROHIBITED SIGNS
1. Signs constituting a Traffic Hazard:
No person shall install or maintain or cause to be installed or maintained any sign which
simulates or imitates in size, or color, lettering, or design any traffic sign or signal, or which
makes use of the words, “STOP”, “LOOK”, “DANGER”, or use any other words, phrases,
symbols, or characters in such a manner to interfere with, mislead or confuse traffic.
2. Immoral or Unlawful Advertising:
It shall be unlawful for any person to exhibit, post or display or cause to be exhibited, posted or
displayed upon any sign, anything of an obscene, indecent, or immoral nature or unlawful
activity.
3. Signs or Doors, Windows or Fire Escapes:
ARC2 - 31
Page 6
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
No window signs will be permitted except as noted herein. No sign shall be installed, relocated,
or maintained to as to prevent free ingress to or egress from any door. No sign of any kind shall
be attached to a stand pipe except those signs as required by code or ordinance.
4. Animated, Audible, or Moving Signs:
Signs consisting of any moving, swinging, rotating, flashing, blinking, scintillating, fluctuating
or otherwise animated light is prohibited, except for time and temperature displays.
5. Off- Premises Signs:
None allowed.
6. Vehicle Signs:
Signs on or affixed to trucks, automobiles, trailers, or other vehicles which advertise, identify,
or provide direction to a use or activity not related to its lawful making of deliveries or sales of
merchandise or rendering of services from such vehicles, is prohibited.
7. Light Bulb Strings and Exposed Tubing:
External displays, other than temporary decorative holiday lighting, which consists of
unshielded light bulbs, and open exposed neon or gaseous light tubing, are prohibited on retail
tenant shops.
8. Banners, Pennants, and Balloons Used for Advertising Purposes:
None allowed.
9. Signs in Proximity to Utility Lines:
Signs that have less horizontal or vertical clearance from authorized communication or
energized electrical power lines than prescribed by the laws of the State of California are
prohibited.
E. MAJOR/ANCHOR TENANT SIGNAGE
1. The provisions of this Exhibit, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Exhibit,
shall not be applicable to the identification signs of department stores, grocery stores,
drug stores, or other large retail stores who occupy 10,000 square feet or more of space in
this shopping center (hereinafter referred to as “Major/Anchor Tenants”). Major/Anchor
Tenants typically have trademarked signage that is larger (than smaller tenants) to fit the
architectural scale of buildings and shopping centers they occupy.
2. As of the date of this Modified Tenant Sign Criteria (approximately August 1October 1,
2014), Landlord is in the process of replacing Spencer’s Fresh Market (a grocery store
that occupied in excess of 33,000 square feet, generally depicted on Exhibit A-1 as
Buildings C and D, the address of which was 1314 Madonna Road) that closed for
business with the following two (2) smaller “Major/Anchor Tenants:”
i. Grocery Outlet, a grocery store, that shallplans to occupy 1314 Madonna Road,
which is approximately 19,670 square feet and is depicted on Exhibit A-1 as
Building C; and
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
ARC2 - 32
Page 7
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
ii. 99 Cents Only Store, a grocery and general merchandise store, that shallplans to
occupy 1308 Madonna Road, which is approximately 13,261 square feet and is
depicted on Exhibit A-1 as Building D.
3. As of the date hereof, Landlord is also remodeling the former Spencer’s storefront facade
to accommodate these two (2) new “Major/Anchor Tenants” (“Building C&D Façade
Renovation”); and Landlord has obtained architectural design review and approval of the
“Building C&D Façade Renovation” from the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department. The approved design of the “Building C&D Façade Renovation” is attached
hereto as “Exhibit E – Building C&D Façade Renovation Drawings”.
4. The “ Exhibit E - Building C&D Façade Renovation Drawings” incorporate architectural
features used by Landlord in other areas of this shopping center in recent years (including
ledge-stone columns, new wood trellises, wood awnings, and landscaping); and the new
“Major/Anchor Tenant” signage shown on “Exhibit E - Building C&D Façade
Renovation Drawings” compliment the scale and architectural style of the new
improvements and surrounding buildings. And the design and location of the new façade
signage (as depicted in Exhibit E) creatively resolves significant “visibility corridor
challenges” that are unique to Buildings C & D.
5. The “Major/Anchor Tenants” occupying Buildings C&D shall have the right to install the
building façade signage as shown on “Exhibit E – Building C&D Façade Renovation
Drawings” as approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department and
generally described as follows (subject to issuance of specific sign permits by the City of
San Luis Obispo):
i. Due to its unique location near the interior corner of this shopping center, its
absence of visibility from either Madonna Road or Los Osos Valley Road, and
its lack of visibility from the interior shopping center drive-aisles, may install the
following storefront signage on Building C (Grocery Outlet, 1314 Madonna
Road) as depicted on Exhibit E may install :
(a) one (1) building wall sign (facing Los Osos Valley Road) to provide
visibility from the Burger Kind/Los Osos Valley Road shopping center
entry drive-aisle; and
i.(b) one (1) double sided “canopy sign” on top of the Grocery Outlet
storefront architectural entry structure (“Entry Trellis Canopy”)its
customer entry trellis, at 90 degrees to itsthe storefront, (facing
Madonna Road) to provide visibility from the CVS/Madonna Road
shopping center entry drive-aisle; (the design, color and dimensions of
these signs shall match the Exhibit E renderings)(hereinafter referred to
as the (“Perpendicular Canopy Sign”). This Perpendicular Canopy Sign
is approved only because of the extremely poor visibility suffered by
this particular building storefront. Landlord agrees that the approval of
this Perpendicular Canopy Sign shall not create a precedence for other
tenants in this shopping center to request similar signs; and Landlord
agrees that no other buildings within this shopping center will be
allowed to install such a Perpendicular Canopy Sign. and
ii. 99 Cents Only may install one (1) building wall sign on its customer entry tower
facing Los Osos Valley Road; and one (1) building wall sign on the side of the
customer entry tower facing Madonna Road; (the design, color and dimensions
of these (2) signs which shall match the Exhibit E renderings and shall not
include the “fuchsia colored side panels” shown in this tenant’s logo); or 99
Cents may elect to install just one (1) building sign on its customer entry tower
facing Los Osos Valley Road that does include the “fuchsia colored side panels”
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.25", Tab stops:
1.5", List tab + Not at 2.27"
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
Formatted: Underline
ARC2 - 33
Page 8
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
shown on tenant’s logo, in which case tenant shall not have a second building
sign facing Madonna Road..
6. Unless otherwise agreed to by the Landlord and the City of San Luis Obispo, the
maximum sign area for each of the Major/Anchor Tenants that will occupy Buildings
C&D (formerly occupied by Spencer’s Fresh Market, a grocery store) shall not exceed the
sign areas and maximum letter heights shown on “Exhibit E – Building C&D Façade
Renovation Drawings”; and the maximum sign area for the Major/Anchor Tenant that
occupies Building E (currently occupied by Longs Drugs, a drug store) shall not exceed
the sign area that currently exists on this building without written approval of Landlord
and the City of San Luis Obispo. It is estimated that the existing sign area for Buidling E
is approximately 90 square feet with a maximum height of 36 inches for each public
building elevation (Building E currently has two (2) public building elevations – one
facing south towards Los Osos Valley Road and one facing east towards Madonna Road).
There shall be no rooftop signs or signs that are flashing, moving, or audible. All new or
revised signs shall be approved by the Landlord and the City of San Luis Obispo.
F. Attached Exhibits: The following Exhibits are attached hereto and made a part hereof:
Exhibit A-1: “Site Plan of Laguna Village Shopping Center”
Exhibit A-2: “Floor Plan & Elevation of Building A (showing “Projecting Building
Façade Tower Locations”)”
Exhibit A-3: “Floor Plan & Elevation of Building B (showing “Projecting Building
Façade Tower Locations”)”
Exhibit B: “Sign A – Design Details and Drawings for Retail Shop Tenants”
Exhibit C: “Sign B – Design Details and Drawings for Restaurant Shop Tenants in
Building G” (if any).
Exhibit D: “Design Details and Drawings for Blade Signs”
Exhibit E: “Building C&D Façade Renovation Drawings”
End.
ARC2 - 34
Page 9
EXHIBIT A-1
Site Plan of Laguna Village Shopping Center
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT A-1
SITE PLAN OF LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
ARC2 - 35
Page 10
EXHIBIT A-2
Floor Plan and Elevations of Building A
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT A-2
FLOOR PLAN& ELEVATION OF BUILDING A SHOWING:
“PROJECTING BUILDING FAÇADE TOWER LOCATIONS”
ARC2 - 36
Page 11
EXHIBIT A-3
Floor Plan and Elevations of Building B
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT A-3
FLOOR PLAN& ELEVATION OF BUILDING B SHOWING:
“PROJECTING BUILDING FAÇADE TOWER LOCATIONS”
ARC2 - 37
Page 12
EXHIBIT B
Design Details and Drawings for Retail Shop Tenants
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT B
SIGN A – DESIGN DETAILS AND DRAWINGS
FOR RETAIL SHOP TENANTS
ARC2 - 38
Page 13
EXHIBIT B
Design Details and Drawings for Retail Shop Tenants
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT B
SIGN A – DESIGN DETAILS AND DRAWINGS
FOR RETAIL SHOP TENANTS
ARC2 - 39
Page 14
EXHIBIT C
Design Details and Drawings for Restaurant Shop Tenants in Building G
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT C
SIGN B – DESIGN DETAILS FOR RESTAURANT SHOP TENANTS IN BUILDING G
No graphic design details have been prepared for the
restaurant shop tenants in Building G.
Descriptive design details are noted in the Sign Criteria,
page 2, Section B, paragraph 7.
ARC2 - 40
Page 15
EXHIBIT D
Design Details and Drawings for Blade Signs
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT D
DESIGN DETAILS AND DRAWINGS FOR BLADE SIGNS
ARC2 - 41
Page 16
EXHIBIT E
Building C&E Façade renovation drawings
Modified on October 1July 28, 2014 by Laguna Village Shopping Center, LLC and approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department on , 2014.
EXHIBIT E
BUILDING C&D FAÇADE RENNOVATION DRAWINGS
ARC2 - 42
This Design Layout is specific to 120 volt electrical power for approved illuminated signage, Any other voltage at job site that requires additional install trips will be an extra charge
Copyright 2000 USS United Sign Systems This artwork/design is sole peoperty of USS United Sign Systems and cannot be reproduced without written permission of Johnson Sign SystemsDESIGN MANUFACTURING INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE
C.S.C.L. # 718965
5201 Pentecost Drive
Modesto, Calif. 95356
1-800-481-SIGN
FAX (209) 543-1326
JOB INFO
LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE
CLIENT APPROVAL DATE
SALESPERSON: SEAN CAMPBELL
DRAWN BY: CP
PAGE 1 OF 5
FILE ELECT.
JOB #: 00000
CLIENT: GROCERY OUTLET
CONTACT:
DATE: 5-1-14
PROJECT LOCATION:
LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SPECIFICATIONS
GROCERY OUTLET
san luis obispo
NOTED8-14-14 bam
8-14-14 bam
8-14-14 bam
120 Volt
277 Volt
Other
one box above
MUST be checked
prior to any mfg.
See Drawing for Specifications
South Elevation South Elevation (view from east)
PROPOSED
SCALE:
FILE NAME:
REVISIONS:
PROPOSEDSign A
Sign B
Sign C
SITE PLAN
L o s O s o s Va l l e y R o a d M a d o n n a R o a d
CVS
Phamacy
Fuel
Grocery
Outlet
A B C
north
21'-6"
30"x258"=53.7 sq.ft.
16"x181"=20.1 sq.ft.
30"
16"
24"
20"
12"
21"
sign total= 73.8 sq.ft.
Sign A:
Led Illuminated Pan Channel Sign
Scale 3/8"=1'-0"
"R" mark (non-illuminated) vinyl on white acrylic.
white acrylic letter faces with golden yellow #3630-125 vinyl overlay copy.
5" deep black returns with black 1" trimcap. ul approved white Led illumination.
End View
5" p/c
1/4" x 2" mounting
screws with shields
(min. 4 per letter)acrylic face
building fascia
led illumination
(ul approved)
12 volt
power supply
aluminum return
trimcap
Led P/C Letter Mounting Detail
electrical wires
120 v. to bldg
12 volt wiring
9-26-14 bamAttachment 5ARC2 - 43
This Design Layout is specific to 120 volt electrical power for approved illuminated signage, Any other voltage at job site that requires additional install trips will be an extra charge
Copyright 2000 USS United Sign Systems This artwork/design is sole peoperty of USS United Sign Systems and cannot be reproduced without written permission of Johnson Sign SystemsDESIGN MANUFACTURING INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE
C.S.C.L. # 718965
5201 Pentecost Drive
Modesto, Calif. 95356
1-800-481-SIGN
FAX (209) 543-1326
JOB INFO FILE ELECT.SPECIFICATIONS
GROCERY OUTLET
san luis obispo
NOTED
120 Volt
277 Volt
Other
one box above
MUST be checked
prior to any mfg.
See Drawing for Specifications
South Elevation (view from east)
acrylic face
trimcap
led illumination
Hinged
.125” alum. bkgd
aluminum return
Led P/C Letter Detail on Oversize Raceway
5”5”6”
12 volt power supplies
3/8” x 3” lag screws @ 3’
into 6” x 6” wood beam
12 volt wiring
1/4"x1" tek
screws (min.
4 per letter)
SCALE:
FILE NAME:
REVISIONS:
PROPOSED
Sign C
SITE PLAN
L o s O s o s Va l l e y R o a d M a d o n n a R o a d
CVS
Phamacy
Fuel
Grocery
Outlet
A B C
north
Signs B & C: Led Illuminated P/C Sign (on d/f oversize raceway)
Scale 3/8"=1'-0"
"R" mark (non-illuminated) vinyl on white acrylic
letters: white acrylic letter faces with golden yellow #3630-125 vinyl overlay (bargain market) copy
5" deep black returns with black 1" trimcap. ul approved white Led illumination
15'-6"
20"5'-0"20"x176"=24.3 sq.ft.
11"x124"=9.4 sq.ft.
11"
16"
13"
8"
14"
sign total= 33.7 sq.ft.
raceway: 6" deep - .080 aluminum faces - Matthews painted finish to match dark red #3630-73.
top hinged on both sides to allow access to electrical
6”
side view
hinged faces
South Elevation
PROPOSED
Sign A
Sign B
8-14-14 bam
9-26-14 bam
LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE
CLIENT APPROVAL DATE
SALESPERSON: SEAN CAMPBELL
DRAWN BY: CP
PAGE 2 OF 5
JOB #: 00000
CLIENT: GROCERY OUTLET
CONTACT:
DATE: 5-1-14
PROJECT LOCATION:
LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CAAttachment 5ARC2 - 44
Signs D & E: (2) D/F Illuminated Monument Signs
Scale: 3/8”=1’-0”
all backgrounds: routed aluminum faces - painted
all copy: 1/2” push thru acrylic copy with 1st surface vinyl overlay
structure: 8” x 1/4” & 6” x 1/4” square steel tubing (round corners) - painted burgundy
ul approved white LED illumination
concrete base & footing by others
This Design Layout is specific to 120 volt electrical power for approved illuminated signage, Any other voltage at job site that requires additional install trips will be an extra charge
Copyright 2000 USS United Sign Systems This artwork/design is sole peoperty of USS United Sign Systems and cannot be reproduced without written permission of Johnson Sign SystemsDESIGN MANUFACTURING INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE
C.S.C.L. # 718965
5201 Pentecost Drive
Modesto, Calif. 95356
1-800-481-SIGN
FAX (209) 543-1326
JOB INFO FILE ELECT.SPECIFICATIONS
GROCERY OUTLET
san luis obispo
NOTED
120 Volt
277 Volt
Other
one box above
MUST be checked
prior to any mfg.
See Drawing for SpecificationsSCALE:
FILE NAME:
REVISIONS:
Signs A, B & C: Led Illuminated P/C Sign (on aluminum bkgd)
8”20”
9-26-14 bam
3 1/2”
8”
LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE
CLIENT APPROVAL DATE
SALESPERSON: SEAN CAMPBELL
DRAWN BY: CP
PAGE 3 OF 5
JOB #: 00000
CLIENT: GROCERY OUTLET
CONTACT:
DATE: 5-1-14
PROJECT LOCATION:
LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CAAttachment 5ARC2 - 45
This Design Layout is specific to 120 volt electrical power for approved illuminated signage, Any other voltage at job site that requires additional install trips will be an extra charge
Copyright 2000 USS United Sign Systems This artwork/design is sole peoperty of USS United Sign Systems and cannot be reproduced without written permission of Johnson Sign SystemsDESIGN MANUFACTURING INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE
C.S.C.L. # 718965
5201 Pentecost Drive
Modesto, Calif. 95356
1-800-481-SIGN
FAX (209) 543-1326
JOB INFO FILE ELECT.SPECIFICATIONS
GROCERY OUTLET
san luis obispo
NOTED
120 Volt
277 Volt
Other
one box above
MUST be checked
prior to any mfg.
See Drawing for SpecificationsSCALE:
FILE NAME:
REVISIONS:
Sign F: (1) D/F Non-Illuminated Blade Sign
Scale: 1”=1’-0”
3” x 1/8” & 2” x 1/8” square tube steel (round corners) - painted bugundy
sheet metal cabinet - painted to match dark bronze anodized
white 1st surface vinyl overlay
4”
2”
9-26-14 bam
LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE
CLIENT APPROVAL DATE
SALESPERSON: SEAN CAMPBELL
DRAWN BY: CP
PAGE 4 OF 5
JOB #: 00000
CLIENT: GROCERY OUTLET
CONTACT:
DATE: 5-1-14
PROJECT LOCATION:
LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CAAttachment 5ARC2 - 46
This Design Layout is specific to 120 volt electrical power for approved illuminated signage, Any other voltage at job site that requires additional install trips will be an extra charge
Copyright 2000 USS United Sign Systems This artwork/design is sole peoperty of USS United Sign Systems and cannot be reproduced without written permission of Johnson Sign SystemsDESIGN MANUFACTURING INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE
C.S.C.L. # 718965
5201 Pentecost Drive
Modesto, Calif. 95356
1-800-481-SIGN
FAX (209) 543-1326
JOB INFO FILE ELECT.SPECIFICATIONS
GROCERY OUTLET
san luis obispo
NOTED
120 Volt
277 Volt
Other
one box above
MUST be checked
prior to any mfg.
See Drawing for SpecificationsSCALE:
FILE NAME:
REVISIONS:
This Design Layout is specific to 120 volt electrical power for approved illuminated signage, Any other voltage at job site that requires additional install trips will be an extra charge
Copyright 2000 USS United Sign Systems This artwork/design is sole peoperty of USS United Sign Systems and cannot be reproduced without written permission of Johnson Sign SystemsDESIGN MANUFACTURING INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE
C.S.C.L. # 718965
5201 Pentecost Drive
Modesto, Calif. 95356
1-800-481-SIGN
FAX (209) 543-1326
JOB INFO FILE ELECT.SPECIFICATIONS
GROCERY OUTLET
san luis obispo
NOTED
120 Volt
277 Volt
Other
one box above
MUST be checked
prior to any mfg.
See Drawing for SpecificationsSCALE:
FILE NAME:
REVISIONS:
D
F
E
9-26-14 bam
LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE
CLIENT APPROVAL DATE
SALESPERSON: SEAN CAMPBELL
DRAWN BY: CP
PAGE 5 OF 5
JOB #: 00000
CLIENT: GROCERY OUTLET
CONTACT:
DATE: 5-1-14
PROJECT LOCATION:
LAGUNA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CAAttachment 5ARC2 - 47
Attachment 6ARC2 - 48
Attachment 6ARC2 - 49
Attachment 6ARC2 - 50
Attachment 6ARC2 - 51
Attachment 6ARC2 - 52
Attachment 6ARC2 - 53
ALL IDEAS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS, AND PLANS INDICATED OR
REPRESENTED BY THIS DRAWING ARE OWNED BY AND THE
PROPERTY OF PIERRE RADEMAKER DESIGN, AND WERE CREATED,
EVOLVED, AND DEVELOPED FOR USE ON AND IN CONNECTION WITH
THE SPECIFIED PROJECT. NONE OF SUCH IDEAS, DESIGNS,
ARRANGEMENTS OR PLANS SHALL BE USED BY OR DISCLOSED TO
ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSO-
EVER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF PIERRE RADEMAKER
DESIGN. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE
PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL
VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND
CONDITIONS ON THE JOB, AND THIS OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFIED OF
ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN
BY THESE DRAWINGS. SHOP DETAILS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE
OFFICE FOR APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH FABRICATION.
Laguna Village Shopping
Center
1328 Madonna Road, San
Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Site Plan with Sign
Locations
PR/DS
PR
07-10-14
Exterior Signage
LV-1402
1 6
Laguna Village Site Plan and Sign Locations
No scale
1041 CHORRO STREET, SUITE 230SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93401rademakerdesign.com
TELEPHONE: 805/544-7774
Entry Sign BSign C
(one per
tenant)
Major Tenant Sign A
Entry Sign B
Sign E Sign D
Sign F
Major Tenant Sign AEntry Sign B
GROCERY
OUTLET
99¢ ONLY
STORESAttachment 7ARC2 - 54
ALL IDEAS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS, AND PLANS INDICATED OR
REPRESENTED BY THIS DRAWING ARE OWNED BY AND THE
PROPERTY OF PIERRE RADEMAKER DESIGN, AND WERE CREATED,
EVOLVED, AND DEVELOPED FOR USE ON AND IN CONNECTION WITH
THE SPECIFIED PROJECT. NONE OF SUCH IDEAS, DESIGNS,
ARRANGEMENTS OR PLANS SHALL BE USED BY OR DISCLOSED TO
ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSO-
EVER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF PIERRE RADEMAKER
DESIGN. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE
PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL
VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND
CONDITIONS ON THE JOB, AND THIS OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFIED OF
ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN
BY THESE DRAWINGS. SHOP DETAILS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE
OFFICE FOR APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH FABRICATION.
Laguna Village Shopping
Center
1328 Madonna Road, San
Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Major Tenant Sign A
Elevations
PR/DS
PR
07-10-14
Exterior Signage
LV-1402
2 6
Major Tenant Sign A Elevation (2 Locations)
Scale: 1/2" = 1'-0"
1041 CHORRO STREET, SUITE 230SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93401rademakerdesign.com
TELEPHONE: 805/544-7774
Interior illuminated
cabinets
(text only is lit)
8.75 sq. ft. each
14 sq. ft. each
4.5 sq. ft. each
Total area of all
signs: 64.5 sq. ft.
Welded steel structure
painted to match Frazee
#1279 “Bracken”
Lo-Sheen Exterior Finish
Concrete base painted to
match Frazee #2644
“Pothole” Flat Exterior
Finish
Front Side13'-0''2'-0''2'-0''2'-4''6''6''2'-0''6''6''7'-0''Attachment 7ARC2 - 55
ALL IDEAS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS, AND PLANS INDICATED OR
REPRESENTED BY THIS DRAWING ARE OWNED BY AND THE
PROPERTY OF PIERRE RADEMAKER DESIGN, AND WERE CREATED,
EVOLVED, AND DEVELOPED FOR USE ON AND IN CONNECTION WITH
THE SPECIFIED PROJECT. NONE OF SUCH IDEAS, DESIGNS,
ARRANGEMENTS OR PLANS SHALL BE USED BY OR DISCLOSED TO
ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSO-
EVER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF PIERRE RADEMAKER
DESIGN. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE
PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL
VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND
CONDITIONS ON THE JOB, AND THIS OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFIED OF
ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN
BY THESE DRAWINGS. SHOP DETAILS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE
OFFICE FOR APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH FABRICATION.
Laguna Village Shopping
Center
1328 Madonna Road, San
Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Entry Signs B
PR/DS
PR
07-10-14
Exterior Signage
LV-1402
3 6
Entry Sign B (5 Locations)
Scale: 1/2" = 1'-0"
1041 CHORRO STREET, SUITE 230SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93401rademakerdesign.com
TELEPHONE: 805/544-7774
Note: 5" high brushed aluminum letters flush mounted to painted 8" tall horizontal steel band which wraps around ends of existing wall
(Sign area: 3 sq. ft. each)Attachment 7ARC2 - 56
Meeting Date: Oct. 6, 2014
Item Number: 3
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of designs for seven attached three-story single-family residences fronting Marsh Street with a categorical exemption from environmental review. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1126 Marsh Street (base address) BY: Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone Number: 781-7176 e-mail: mcarloni@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: ARC 144-14 FROM: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) which approves the project,
based on findings, and subject to conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant MFI Limited
Representative Steve Peck, AICP
Zoning C-R (Retail Commercial)
General Plan General Retail
Site Area 15,528 square feet
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt from
environmental review under
Section 15332 (In-Fill Development
Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SUMMARY
The proposed project is a redevelopment of the subject location with seven three-story single-family
residences. The structures are designed in a traditional “brownstone” row-house style incorporating
brick, stone, stucco, precast concrete detailing and ornamental metal work. Staff finds the siting,
massing, articulation, detail, and color scheme of this infill residential development project to be
compatible with the existing neighborhood, consistent with the Community Design Guidelines.
The project warrants review by the ARC since it includes significant redevelopment of a commercial
property with greater than three single family homes. The applicant is seeking final approval of the
current project plans from the ARC.
UPDATE
PHOTO
ARC3 - 1
ARC 144-14 (1126 Marsh Street base address)
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines and applicable City standards.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Previous Review
September 19, 2014 – The Subdivision Hearing Officer approved the common-interest re-
subdivision of the seven existing parcels into eight parcels finding the project to comply with the
requirements of the Subdivision Regulations.
September 19, 2014 – The Administrative Hearing Officer approved a Use Permit allowed single-
family residences in the Retail Commercial zone finding the project to comply with the Zoning
Regulations and General Plan Land Use Element policies (LUE policies 2.2.12, 2.9 & 4.2.1).
2.2 Site Information/Setting
The generally flat (east to west sloping) site includes mainly parking lot improvements and mature
trees (approximately 11). The site’s existing seven parcels are currently used as a ‘for lease’
parking lot taking access from an existing Marsh Street driveway (also accessed via an existing
driveway from Santa Rosa Street). See Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet A1
The subject location is encompassed by Retail Commercial zoning with office zoning to the east
(Historic San Luis Sanitarium Hospital) and office zoning across Marsh Street to the south (mainly
offices with one single family residence and a duplex). The office zone allows for single-family
residences by right.
1 Single Family Residence
2 Multi Family Residence (two-unit duplex)
2.2 Project Description
A summary of significant project features includes the following (Attachment 3, Project Plans):
1. Redevelopment of the existing parking lot to construct seven attached single-family
residences.
a. The rear portion of the parking lot will be reoriented to provide 27 tandem
Site Size 15,528 square feet (7 parcels)
Present Use & Development Parking lot and trees
Land Use Designation Retail-Commercial (C-R)
Access Marsh Street
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Parking lot and Bank of America (C-R zoning)
South: Offices, one SFR1 and one MFR2 (Office zoning)
East: Offices and Wells Fargo Advisors (Office zoning)
West: Offices (Office zoning)
ARC3 - 2
ARC 144-14 (1126 Marsh Street base address)
Page 3
parking spaces (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet C1).
b. Two car garages at the rear (northwest) of each residence accessed from a
common driveway (permeable concrete pavers) via the existing Marsh Street
curb opening (no new curb openings onto Marsh Street).
c. Removal of four trees in the area of the proposed residences, two trees in the
reoriented tandem parking area, and one tree east of the access way (Attachment
3, Project Plans, Sheets A1 & C1).
i. Tree removals in the area of the proposed residences are supported by the
City Arborist (see condition 11a).
2. “Brownstone” row-house style three story residences (with roof deck) fronting Marsh
Street.
a. Finish materials include brick, stone, stucco, precast concrete detailing,
ornamental metalwork, and aluminum clad windows.
Table 2.0 Property Development Standards
Item Proposed 1 Ordinance Standard 2
Street Yard setback 3 feet 0 feet
Other Yard Setbacks
Side setbacks
Rear setback
0 feet
25 feet
0 feet
0 feet
Max. Height of
Structure(s)
44 feet including
architectural projections
45 feet + 10 feet for architectural
projections
Coverage (buildings) 67% coverage 100% coverage
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.63 3.0
Parking Spaces
Vehicle
Bicycle
2 per unit
2 per unit
2 per unit
2 per unit
Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans
2. City Zoning Regulations
Table 2.1 Density
Proposed Lot Size Proposed Density Allowed Density
Lot 1:
Lots 2-7
2,328 sf
2,200 sf
1.5 density units
1.5 density units
1.92 density units
1.81 density units
3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The existing nearby structures fronting Marsh Street range in size from tall single story buildings
(south east side of Marsh Street) to two and three story buildings (east of the project site). The majority
of these buildings front Marsh Street at minimal setback with landscaping and/or small porches in the
setback area. This block of Marsh Street (between Santa Rosa and Toro Street) has several Master List
historic structures including the Historic San Luis Sanitarium Hospital and a row of structures with
Craftsman, Neo-Classic Rowhouse, and Greek Revival architecture.
Consistent with the Community Design Guidelines, the proposed project is designed for compatibility
with this existing neighborhood. The proposed “Brownstone” style residences front Marsh Street at
ARC3 - 3
ARC 144-14 (1126 Marsh Street base address)
Page 4
minimal setback with defined/recessed “walk-up” entrances (at the second floor) and raised porches
providing a transition from the Marsh Street sidewalk1 (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet A9).
Consistent with the predominant pattern in the neighborhood, parking is not visible from the street;
located at the rear of each structure within two-car garages (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheets L1 and
A6: northwest elevation). The three-story scale of the project is compatible with the scale of the
neighborhood which includes taller buildings near the subject location; County Government Center
(1055 Monterey Street), Heritage Oaks Bank (1135 Santa Rosa Street), and the office complex located
at 1194 Pacific Street). The project is also compatible in height with the directly adjacent Historic San
Luis Sanitarium Hospital building to the east (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet A7).
Although the subject location is not within a historic district, the proposed “Brownstone” style
architecture is compatible with the adjacent historic structures, preserving the historical character of
this older neighborhood. Consistent with the Community Design Guidelines, the incorporation of
significant ornamentation/architectural detailing including cornice details, accent coining, window
surrounds, and entry lintels typify this architectural style and demonstrate compatibility with the
neighboring historic buildings2, namely the Historic San Luis Sanitarium Hospital which incorporates
similar ornamentation and massing (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet A7).
Consistent with the Community Design Guidelines, the project incorporates sufficient articulation
through the use of patios/decks and upper floor bay windows3, with material changes (stucco, brick,
stone, and precast concrete) at logical points of wall plane change. The color palate includes the use of
dark blues, greys, tans, red/browns which are similar and compatible with the existing colors found in
the neighborhood4. The use of articulation, detailing, material and color change provide individuality
between units while breaking up the typical monotony of the row-house style and maintaining a
consistent design theme that is compatible with the neighborhood.
5.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Comments from the other departments have been incorporated into the recommended resolution as
conditions of approval and/or code requirements.
6.0 ALTERNATIVES
5.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
5.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design Guidelines.
1 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 2.1.D: Provide pleasing transitions. Attention should be given to the
transition between the street and the project through definition of the building entry, walkways and
landscaping.
2 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5.3.E: Exterior finish materials. The thoughtful selection of building
materials can enhance desired neighborhood qualities such as compatibility, continuity, and harmony. The
design of infill residential structures should incorporate an appropriate mixture of the predominant
materials found in the neighborhood. Common materials in San Luis Obispo are smooth, troweled, or
sand-finished stucco, wood, horizontal clapboard siding, shingles, brick, and stone.
3 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5.3.D: Outdoor living areas. The use of balconies, verandas, porches,
and courtyards within the building form of infill structures is strongly encouraged.
4 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5.3.F: Existing colors. Color schemes for infill residential structures
should consider the colors of existing houses in the neighborhood, to maintain compatibility.
ARC3 - 4
ARC 144-14 (1126 Marsh Street base address)
Page 5
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity map
3. Project Plans
Included in Committee member portfolio: Project Plans
Available at ARC Hearing: Colors and Materials Board
ARC3 - 5
RESOLUTION NO. ####-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION APPROVING REDEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING LOT WITH
SEVEN ATTACHED THREE-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND
ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT
AND ATTACHMENTS DATED OCTOBER 6, 2014
1126, 1130, 1134, 1138, 1142, 1146, 1150 MARSH STREET (C-R ZONE; ARC 144-14)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on October 6, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARC 144-14,
MFI Limited, 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 the staff at said hearings.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission reviewed and considered the
Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project as prepared by staff;
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 (ARC 144-14), based on the following findings:
1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or
residing in the vicinity since the proposed project is consistent with the site’s zoning
designation and will be subject to conformance with all applicable building, fire, and safety
codes.
2. Consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, the project is compatible in scale,
siting, detailing, and overall character with buildings in the neighborhood.
3. Consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, the project incorporates
articulation, massing, detailing, and a mix of color/finish materials that are compatible with
the neighborhood.
4. As conditioned, reorienting parking spaces on lot 8 into tandem parking is acceptable at the
subject location because it continues to provide usable parking spaces that meet City Parking
and Driveway Standards.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt under Section
15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines because the project is within City
limits, consistent with applicable City policy, surrounded by urban uses, and on a project site less
than 5 acres in size served by required utilities and public services.
Attachment 1
ARC3 - 6
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 2
1126 Marsh Street, ARC 144-14
SECTION 3. Action. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Department
1. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the
project plans approved by the ARC. A separate full-size sheet shall be included in working
drawings submitted for a building permit that list all conditions, and code requirements of
project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed items as to
where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials,
landscaping or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or
Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate.
2. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements on elevation drawings. Plans shall clearly note that
all stucco surfaces are not a sprayed-on product and have a smooth hand-troweled or sand
finish appearance to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
3. 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.
4. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting, shall be
included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be
clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall-
mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the
building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-
sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to insure that
light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky
Preservation standards contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations.
5. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With
submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building,
which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If
any condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted
for a building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately
screen them. A line-of-sight diagram shall be included to confirm that proposed screening
will be adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements.
6. 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.
The plan shall include landscaping along the north and west sides of the trash enclosure.
Landscaping in this area shall have a minimum height of three feet to effectively screen the
trash enclosure.
Attachment 1
ARC3 - 7
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 3
1126 Marsh Street, ARC 144-14
a. Any proposed landscape lighting shall be shown on plans submitted for a building
permit and plans shall clearly indicate lighting to utilize a narrow cone of light (no
brighter than approximately 15 watts) for the purpose of confining the light to the
object of interest.
7. 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.
8. The proposed retaining walls and fencing shall be of a finish quality that is consistent with
the design of the proposed residences, to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director. This shall be shown on plans submitted for a building permit.
9. The proposed railing atop the access way retaining wall (adjacent to the Historic San Luis
Sanitarium Hospital) shall be an open style design, to the maximum extent feasible. The final
design shall be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
10. The proposed reoriented tandem parking spaces shall be used as employee parking rather
than parking for the general public.
11. The proposed reoriented tandem parking spaces shall comply with the requirements of the
City’s Parking and Driveway standards including parking lot landscape standards.
a. The existing trees in this parking lot shall be retained unless otherwise approved
by the City Arborist or Tree Committee. Retention of these trees will negate the
need to provide parking lot trees per Parking and Driveway standard 2010.I1
(Planting Area Placement).
12. The plans and permits for any required off-site work shall be approved in conjunction with
the building plan submittal and/or subdivision improvement plans. Off-site permits will be
required for the relocated sidewalk for 1160 Marsh, for the drainage channel and any other
work proposed or required related to 1120 Marsh, and possibly for the Parcel 8 parking lot
improvements depending upon the map timing or construction phasing proposal. The plans
for the walkway, any accessible parking, and accessible path of travel shall show and note
compliance with accessibility standards to the approval of the Building Division.
13. The Parcel 8 parking lot improvements shall generally comply with the parking and driveway
standards unless exceptions are otherwise approved by the Planning Division. The existing
trash dumpsters shall be included in the final parking lot design whether temporarily or
permanent. The off-site trash/recycle enclosure area shall comply with all pertinent parking
and driveway standards, design guidelines, and water quality treatment BMP’s. The existing
and proposed (i.e. relocated) trash/recycle enclosure and bin placement shall be reviewed and
Attachment 1
ARC3 - 8
Resolution No. ARC-####-14 Page 4
1126 Marsh Street, ARC 144-14
approved to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department, Utilities
Department, and San Luis Garbage Company.
14. Individual solid waste service for each proposed residential unit will not be allowed for
pickup in the public right-of-way. Final bin/enclosure placement shall be reviewed and
approved to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department, Utilities
Department, and San Luis Garbage Company. If a trash enclosure is required for the
residential units, the design shall be consistent with the architectural style of the project, to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Any required easements or
maintenance agreements shall be recorded prior to map recordation and/or building permit
issuance.
Utilities Department
15. Applicant shall verify whether existing water meter sizes are adequate to serve proposed
development. Existing meter boxes may need to be replaced with proposed sidewalk
improvements. These issues shall be addressed with the building permit submittal.
16. Sheet C1 shows three existing sewer laterals proposed for reuse. According to Utilities
Department records, no existing sewer laterals are connected to the City’s wastewater
collection system in this location. If any laterals exist, they must pass a video inspection prior
to reuse, including repair or replacement, as part of the project. The CCTV inspection shall
be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the
Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
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 6th day of October, 2014.
_____________________________
Pam Ricci, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
Attachment 1
ARC3 - 9
O
O
O
O
C-D
C-R
C-R
O
O
O
C-R
C-R
C-C
C-D
R-2-H
C-D
C-R
R-2-HC-D
PF
O
O
C-D-H
OC-R
R-2-H
O
C-D
O
T
O
R
O
MARSHHIGUERAS
A
N
T
A
R
O
S
A
PACIFICMONTEREYO
S
O
S PISMOJ
O
H
N
S
O
N
VICINITY MAP File No. 144-141126 MARSH ¯
Attachment 2
ARC3 - 10
T1DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026TITLE SHEETPROJECT STATISTICS:PROJECT INFORMATION:VICINITY MAP:OWNER:Andrew Mangano MFI Limited 735 Tank Farm Road, Suite 240 San Luis Obispo, CA 9340ARCHITECT:RRM Design Group3765 S. Higuera St San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401PROJECT ADDRESS: 1126, 1130, 1134, 1142, 1146 & 1150 Marsh StreetAPN NUMBER: 002-437-034 to 040 PROJECT DESCRIPTION:Seven three story single family residence with attached garages and roof deck in a traditional Brownstone style.ZONING: C-R PROPOSED OCCUPANCY: R3/UALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE: 100%PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE: 67%PROPOSED LANDSCAPE COVERAGE: 1.0%LOT SIZE: (6) @ 2,200 Square Feet (1) @ 2,328 Square Feet Total = 15,528 Square FeetREQUIRED SETBACKS: PROPOSED SETBACKS: STREET SIDE: 0 Feet STREET SIDE: 3 Feet SIDE YARDS: 0 Feet SIDE YARDS: 0 Feet REAR YARD: 0 Feet REAR YARD: 25 FeetMAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT: 45’-0”PROPOSED HEIGHT: 44’-0”ALLOWABLE FAR: 3.0PROPOSED FAR: 1.63%MAXIMUM DENSITY: 36 DU/ACREALLOWED DENSITY: 15,528 / 43,560 (36) = 12.83 DUPROPOSED DENSITY: ( 7 ) 3 - B R = ( 7 ) 1 . 5 DU = 10.5 DUPARKING:2 SPACES/ DWELLINGBICYCLE PARKING PROPOSED: 2 PER UNITFEMA FLOOD ZONE: REFER TO NOTE ON C1BUILDING STATISTICS: Penthouse Area: 93 sfThird Floor Area: 1,225 sf Second Floor Area: 1,094 sfGround Floor Area: 680 sfTotal Floor Area: 3,092 sfRoof Deck Area: 960 sfGarage Area: 520 sfSecond Floor Decks Area: 180 sfUTILITY PROVIDERS:ELECTRICAL SERVICE:TELEPHONE:WATER & SEWER:CABLE:GAS:GARBAGE:PG&EAT&TCITY OF SLOCHARTER COMMSOUTHERN CALIF GASSAN LUIS GARBAGESHEET INDEX:T1 TITLE SHEETA1 EXISTING SITE SURVEYC1 GRADING AND UTILITIESC2 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLANL1 LANDSCAPE PLANA2 GROUND FLOOR PLANA3 SECOND FLOOR PLANA4 THIRD FLOOR PLANA5 ROOF DECK PLANA6 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSA7 SITE CONTEXTA8 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS/PERSPECTIVESA9 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVEA10 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVEA11 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILSA12 SITE SECTIONSA13 COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARDA14 COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARDA15 COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARDA16 COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARDTPM VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPSHEET TOTAL: 21 SHEETSAttachment 3
ARC3 - 11
A1DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026EXISTING SITE SURVEYSCALE: 1/20”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/40”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 12
C1DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026GRADING & UTILITIESSCALE: 1/10”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/20”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 13
C2DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLANSCALE: 1/10”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/20”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 14
L1DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026LANDSCAPE PLANENLARGEMENT ‘A’ ENTRY PATIO TREATMENTPROPOSED PLANT MATERIALSEE ENLARGEMENT ‘A’SCALE: 1”=10’SCALE: 1”=10’0 2’ 4’ 6’ 8’ 12’A B C D E F G H I J K L M N P Q R S T U V WLOT 1LOT 2LOT 3LOT 4LOT 5LOT 7LOT 6LOT 8SCALE: 1/10”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/20”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 15
A2DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026GROUND FLOOR PLAN0 4 81632W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DMUDROOM8'0"X12'0"BATH6'8"X13'5"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"CL.LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"BATH6'8"X13'5"MUDROOM8'0"X12'0"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"2-CARGARAGE24'X20'2"MUDROOM8'0"X12'0"BATH6'8"X13'5"LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"MUDROOM8'0"X12'0"BATH6'8"X13'5"BATH6'8"X13'5"MUDROOM8'0"X12'0"LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"MUDROOM8'0"X12'0"BATH6'8"X13'5"MUDROOM8'0"X12'0"BATH6'8"X13'5"LOWERENTRY10'0"X9'6"OFFICE/BED313'7"X19'10"EL.EL.EL.EL.EL.L.L.L.L.L.L.L.24' - 6" TypicalMARSH STREET19' - 2 1/2" CLR18' - 5" CLRSTORAGE: 200 CF (3.5'x8'x7.25'), TYPTRTRTRTRTRTRTRTRASH & RECYCLECONTAINERS, TYPELEVATOR EQUIPMENT, TYP(2) BIKE SPACE (2'X6'), TYPNSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 16
A3DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026SECOND FLOOR PLAN0 4 81632UPRDWRDWRDWRDWRDWRDWRDWDECKP.P.EL.DECKDECKDECKDECKDECKDECKKITCHEN16'2"X19'6"DINING13'8"X13'8"ENTRY6'9"X8'0"LIVING23'10"X17'8"LIVING23'10"X17'8"DINING17'0"X14'0"KITCHEN13'6"X19'2"ENTRY6'9" X 8'0"LIVING23'10"X17'8"DINING17'0"X14'0"KITCHEN13'6"X19'2"ENTRY6'9" X 8'0"EL.EL.EL.EL.LIVING23'10"X17'8"KITCHEN16'2"X19'6"DINING13'8"X13'8"ENTRY6'9"X8'0"ENTRY6'9" X 8'0"KITCHEN13'6"X19'2"DINING17'0"X14'0"LIVING23'10"X17'8"LIVING23'10"X17'8"KITCHEN16'2"X19'6"DINING13'8"X13'8"ENTRY6'9"X8'0"ENTRY6'9" X 8'0"KITCHEN13'6"X19'2"DINING17'0"X14'0"LIVING23'10"X17'8"PDRPOW.PDRPOW.PDRPOW.PDR24' - 6" TypicalNSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 17
A4DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026THIRD FLOOR PLAN0 4 81632WDWDWDWDWDWDWDL.OPENOPENLAUNDRY9'4"X6'6"M. CL.9'4"X10'10"M. BED13'7"X15'5"BED 213'7"X13'10"BATH10'0"X5'6"M. BED15'3"X17'8"M. BATH8'4"X16'0"M. CL.9'2"X12'6"LAUNDRY9'2"X6'9"M. BATH10'0"X14'5"LAUNDRY9'4"X6'6"M. CL.9'4"X10'10"M. BED13'7"X15'5"M. BATH10'0"X14'5"BED 213'7"X13'10"BED 213'7"X13'10"M. BED13'7"X15'5"BED 213'10"X13'4"HALLEL.CL.EL.HALLBED 213'10"X13'4"HALLEL.EL.EL.OPENOPENOPENOPENOPENBATH6'0"X9'9"BATH6'0"X9'9"CLCLM. BED15'3"X17'8"M. BED15'3"X17'8"M. BATH8'4"X16'0"BATH6'0"X9'9"BED 213'10"X13'4"M. BATH8'4"X16'0"BED 213'10"X13'4"M. BED13'7"X15'5"HALLHALLHALLCLCLM. CL.M. CL.M. CL.M. CL.BATHCL.M. BATHBATHCL.LAUNDRYLAUNDRYLAUNDRYLAUNDRYHALL24' - 6" TypicalNSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 18
A5DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#10140260 4 81632ROOF DECK PLANOPENOPENOPENOPENOPENOPENOPEN859 SFROOFDECK901 SFROOFDECK863 SFROOFDECK859 SFROOFDECK907 SFROOFDECK862 SFROOFDECKPOWDERPOWDERPOWDERPOWDERPOWDEREL.EL.EL.EL.EL.MECH.MECH.MECH.MECH.MECH.52"-6" Typical897 SFROOFDECK24' - 6" TypicalPROPOSED 5'-0" HIGHSCREENING WALLSBETWEEN UNITS, TYPMECH.MECH.PROPOSED 5'-0" HIGHSCREENING WALLSBETWEEN UNITS, TYPNSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 19
A6DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#10140260 4 81632COLORS AND MATERIALS REFER TO SHEET A13-A16EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSMarsh Street Elevation0’-0”0’-0”10’-7” F.F.10’-7” F.F.22’-1” F.F.22’-1” F.F.33’-7” F.F.33’-7” F.F.+/- 44’-0” T.O.S.+/- 44’-0” T.O.S.5’-0” NO BUILDEASEMENTSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)1126112611301130113411341138113811421142114611461150115045’-0” MAX PERMITTED HEIGHTNorthwest ElevationAttachment 3
ARC3 - 20
A7DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026SITE CONTEXT11261120 1130 1134 1138 1142 1146 1150 11601120 MARSH STREET1160 MARSH STREETAttachment 3
ARC3 - 21
A8DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026COLORS AND MATERIALS REFER TO SHEET A13-A16EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS/PERSPECTIVESSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)0 4 81632Southwest ElevationNortheast Elevation0’-0”0’-0”10’-7” F.F.10’-7” F.F.22’-1” F.F.22’-1” F.F.33’-7” F.F.33’-7” F.F.+/- 44’-0” T.O.S.+/- 44’-0” T.O.S.Marsh Street Perspective5’-0”Attachment 3
ARC3 - 22
A9DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026COLORS AND MATERIALS REFER TO SHEET A13-A16EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVEMarsh Street PerspectiveAttachment 3
ARC3 - 23
A10DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVEMarsh Street PerspectiveAttachment 3
ARC3 - 24
A11DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026SITE SECTIONS0 4 81632SITE SECTION 11122MARSH STREETLOT 1GARAGEBATH OFFICE/BED 3KITCHENM. BEDM. CL.ROOF DECKOFFICE/BED 3OFFICE/BED 3OFFICE/BED 3OFFICE/BED 3OFFICE/BED 3OFFICE/BED 3OFFICE/BED 3KITCHENKITCHENDININGKITCHENKITCHENDININGDININGM. BEDM. BEDM. BEDBATH 2M. BEDBED 2BED 2M. BATHM. BATHM. BATHBED 2M. BATHBATH 2BATH 2ROOF DECKROOF DECKROOF DECKROOF DECKROOF DECKROOF DECKROOF DECKLOWERENTRYLOWERENTRYLOWERENTRYLOWERENTRYLOWERENTRYLOWERENTRYLOWERENTRYLAUND.CL.BATHDININGLIVINGEXISTINGGRADELOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6 LOT 7SITE SECTION 2 10’-7” F.F.22’-1” F.F.33’-7” F.F.+/- 44’-0” T.O.S.SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” (12x18)3’-6”3’-6”Attachment 3
ARC3 - 25
A12DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026ARCHITECTURAL DETAILSPRECAST CONCRETE SURROUNDORNATE METALHANDRAILBRICK VENEERPRECAST CONCRETE CORNICEPRECAST CONCRETE STAIR CAPPRECAST CONCRETE WAINSCOTPRECAST CONCRETE LINTEL AT ENTRYPRECAST CONCRETE DENTALSACCENT COININGAT CORNERPRECAST CONCRETE PILASTERSTAND-OFF RAISEDMETAL ADDRESSPRECAST CONCRETE CORBELSPRECAST CONCRETE DOOR SURROUNDSPRECAST CONCRETE WINDOW TRIMBRICK VENEERPRECAST CONCRETE WINDOW TRIMPRECAST CONCRETE PILASTERPRECAST CONCRETE WINDOW SILLBRICK VENEERALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWSPRECAST CONCRETENEWELPRECASE CONCRETETRIMBRICK VENEERPRECAST CONCRETETREADS AND RISERSWITH NOSINGTYPICAL WINDOWTYPICAL STAIRTYPICAL CORNICETYPICAL COININGTYPICAL PEDIMENTTYPICAL WAINSCOTAttachment 3
ARC3 - 26
A13DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARD1126 MARSH STREET1130 MARSH STREETLA HABRA STUCCO23 ASPENFINISH: SANTA BARBARABRICKGENERAL SHALEMISSION AUTUMN GOLDEXTERIOR LIGHTINGSHADES OF LIGHT “TAVERN”NIGHT SKY COMPLIANTEXTERIOR LIGHTINGHINKLEY “MONTICELLO”NIGHT SKY COMPLIANTTRIMBENJAMIN MOORE2134-30 IRON MOUNTAINWIN/DOORS/GARAGE DOORANDERSON 400 SERIESDARK BRONZELA HABRA STUCCOCOLOR: 73 EGGSHELLFINISH: SANTA BARBARATRIMBENJAMIN MOOREAC-32 PISMO DUNESWIN/DOORS/GARAGE DOORANDERSON 400 SERIESDARK BRONZE112611301A.1B.3A.3B.2A.2B.4A. 5A.5B.4B.3A2B1B4B5B2B4B1A2A4A4A5A* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSS* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSSAttachment 3
ARC3 - 27
A14DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARD1134 MARSH STREET1138 MARSH STREETEXTERIOR LIGHTINGHINKLEY CAMELOTNIGHT SKY COMPLIANTEXTERIOR LIGHTINGHINKLEY “NEWCASTLE”NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT113411381C.1D.3C.3D.2C.2D.4C. 5C.6D.5D.4D.1C1D2D4D6D3D2C3C3C5C1C4CLA HABRA STUCCOCOLOR: 81 OATMEALFINISH: SANTA BARBARABRICKGENERAL SHALECOMMONWEALTHTRIMBENJAMIN MOORE2134-30 IRON MOUNTAINWIN/ DOORS/GARAGE DOORANDERSON 400 SERIESDARK BRONZE* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSS* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSSSTUCCO - BENJAMIN MOORE2129-30 BLUE NOTEFINISH: SANTA BARBARATRIMBENJAMIN MOOREPM-20 CHINA WHITESTONEGENERAL SHALESENECAGARAGE DOORBENJAMIN MOORE2129-30 BLUE NOTEWINDOWS/ DOORSANDERSON 400 SERIESWHITEAttachment 3
ARC3 - 28
A15DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARD1142 MARSH STREET1146 MARSH STREETEXTERIOR LIGHTINGSHADES OF LIGHT “URBAN BROWNSTONE”NIGHT SKY COMPLIANTEXTERIOR LIGHTINGHINKLEY “DEVON”NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT114211461E.1F.3F.2E.3E.2F.4E.5F.5E.4F.1E1F2F4F4F3F5F2E3E1E5E4EBRICKGENERAL SHALEMONOBUCKACCENT TRIMBENJAMIN MOORE2163-40 METALLIC GOLDLA HABRA STUCCOCOLOR: 81 OATMEALFINISH: SANTA BARBARAWIN/DOORS/GARAGE DOORANDERSON 400 SERIESDARK BRONZEACCENT TRIM/GARAGE DOORBENJAMIN MOORE2134-40 WHALE GRAYLA HABRA STUCCOCOLOR: 81 OATMEALFINISH: SANTA BARBARASTONEGENERAL SHALESENECAWINDOWS/ DOORSANDERSON 400 SERIESSANDTONE* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSS* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSSAttachment 3
ARC3 - 29
A16DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARD1150 MARSH STREET11501G.2G.3G.5G.4G.1G3G4G4G3G3G2G5G3GLA HABRA STUCCO81585 CHARLESTONFINISH: SANTA BARBARABRICKGENERAL SHALECOMMONWEALTHTRIMBENJAMIN MOOREHC-84 ELMIRA WHITEWIN/DOORS/GARAGE DOORANDERSON 400 SERIESDARK BRONZEEXTERIOR LIGHTINGHINKLEY “FREEPORT”NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT* IRONWORK: BLACK POWDER COAT; FINISH: SEMI-GLOSSAttachment 3
ARC3 - 30
TPMDATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2014#1014026SCALE: 1/20”=1’-0” (24x36)SCALE: 1/40”=1’-0” (12x18)Attachment 3
ARC3 - 31
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
September 8, 2014
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Suzan Ehdaie, Allen Root, Vice-Chair
Greg Wynn, and Chairperson Michelle McCovey-Good
Absent: Commissioners Ken Curtis and Amy Nemcik
Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Contract Planner Rachel Cohen, and
Recording Secretary Diane Clement
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES:
The minutes of August 18, 2014, were approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 774 Caudill Street. ARC 101-14; Review of a new mixed-use project consisting of
four residential units and six work/live units located on the north side of Caudill
Street between Victoria Avenue and Broad Street with a categorical exemption
from environmental review; M zone; Caudill Street Partners, applicant. (Rachel
Cohen)
Contract Planner Cohen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft
Resolution which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Ehdaie questioned about how the contemporary design blends in with an
adjacent house that may be listed as historic.
Draft ARC Minutes
September 8, 2014
Page 2
George Garcia, Garcia Architecture and Design, representing the applicant, pointed out
the eclectic nature of the neighborhood in both uses and architecture.
Contract Planner Cohen clarified that the neighborhood may include several historic
homes, but that the area was not designated as an historic district.
Commr. Wynn stated that this is an exciting project, and there will be more of this
relatively dense workforce housing in the future.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded by Commr. Root, to adopt the Draft Resolution
which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
AYES: Commrs. Wynn, Root, Andreen, Ehdaie, and McCovey-Good
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commrs. Curtis and Nemcik
The motion passed on a 5:0 vote.
2. 1321 and 1327 Osos Street. ARC 96-13; Review of plans for a mixed-use project
with nine (9) condominium units and 8,000-square feet of office space in the Old
Town Historic District, including a request for a parking reduction through a shared
parking reduction and automobile trip-reduction program; R-3-H and O-H zone;
Mission Medical, LLC, applicant. (Pam Ricci)
Senior Planner Ricci presented the staff report, covering in detail the changes made to
the project to respond to previous ARC direction, and recommending adoption of the
Draft Resolution which grants final approval to the project, based on findings, and
subject to conditions. She noted the letters from the public received.
Carol Florence, applicant representative, noted that the applicant team concurred with
the project conditions. She mentioned the efforts made by the applicant to work with
City staff to refine the Transportation Demand Management Plan.
Jonathan Watts, project architect, described the various changes to respond to the
ARC’s directional items. He noted that the Osos Street elevation had been simplified
and the wood box eliminated, resulting in a more contiguous building. He explained that
the elongated eaves on the Morro Street elevation would be 18 inches and that roof
wells had been provided to screen equipment.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Stew Jenkins, SLO, stated that the revised project is not as ugly as it once was, but that
he is still opposed to this project because it does not solve some of the neighborhood
Draft ARC Minutes
September 8, 2014
Page 3
problems. He noted that the bank of garages adjacent to his home creates a dead zone
without human activity and expressed concern about the glare of security lighting being
visible and intrusive through adjacent windows and in backyards. He stated that the
mass and size of this project violates the historic district development requirements
because there are no other three-story buildings in the neighborhood and only a few
properties with a garage right on the street and those few have their living space on the
ground floor. He stated that in addition to consistency, the City should be looking for a
transition in mass and size; instead, this project presents a massive wall on Morro
Street that separates the downtown from the neighborhood. He noted that the
architects' drawing of Morro Street shows grass on his property in place of his driveway.
He added that only natural starlight and street lights should be seen at night, not parties
on fourth floor decks. He urged denial of the project and suggested the architects
consult the neighbors before redesigning the project.
Buzz Kalkowski, SLO, stated that the redesign on Osos Street is somewhat improved
but he finds some difficulties with the Morro Street side. He noted that the Cultural
Heritage Committee did not recommend approval. He pointed out that birds-eye and
perspective drawings can distort how the project will actually look in relation to the
neighboring homes and that it is important to view the project from the street or
pedestrian level. He added that the rooftop open spaces will become party platforms if
the residences become second home purchases because buyers would likely turn them
into vacation or student rentals. He expressed concern about the type of lighting that
will be used on the decks. He asserted that there will not be enough parking and that
tandem parking rarely works because the moving of cars is disruptive and requires two
drivers plus space to maneuver the cars.
Diane Jenkins, SLO, stated that the 2008-09 project design, approved by the CHC and
the neighborhood, was complementary to the neighborhood with living quarters on the
ground floor, but the proposed design is problematic with the living areas on the upper
floors and a bank of solid garage doors on the ground floor next to her home. She
stated that this is the wrong project for this 28-block neighborhood of single bungalows.
She noted that the construction of the two apartment buildings in the neighborhood
resulted in a decision to protect the historic downtown.
Pete Peterson, SLO, neighbor, stated that the architects have done a good job of
improving the project design but there are still two problems: the mass of a four-story
complex, including the roof decks, next to one-story homes; and the reduced parking,
which will impact the neighborhood because cars will be parked on the streets and
some will end up being towed. He stated that cutting the mass will also solve the
parking problem.
There were no further comments from the public.
Draft ARC Minutes
September 8, 2014
Page 4
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Wynn stated that the applicant has done a good job of fixing up the project to
the point where he can support it because it now fits in the neighborhood. He noted that
some further revisions are needed.
Commr. Andreen stated that the project has achieved a certain elegance that will fit on
the street and is compatible with the church. She added that it will bring people
downtown to live, will add feet to the street, and is better than a parking lot.
Commrs. Wynn and McCovey-Good stated they have no problem with the parking plan.
Senior Planner Ricci noted that an annual parking report is required and, if goals are not
met, the approach to parking will need to be revisited.
Commr. Wynn stated that the small awning over the door facing Morro Street needs
architectural projection to give it more mass and that this could be done by moving the
awning up to the second level window and making it wider. Commr. Root agreed.
Commr. Andreen noted that she looked at the bright yellow color proposed for the
awning at other locations downtown, such as Jamba Juice, and found that it does blend
in well with the surroundings.
Commr. McCovey-Good stated that a more traditional entry doorway would be better for
this Morro Street elevation.
Senior Planner Ricci suggested this wording which was acceptable to the
Commissioners: “Replace the shed awning with a shed roof similar to others in the
neighborhood.”
Commr. Wynn stated that the details of this condition could be worked out at the staff
level.
Senior Planner Ricci addressed concerns about lighting by referring to Condition 10 of
the Draft Resolution which requires exterior lighting to be completely shielded. She
noted that the City's lighting ordinances are stringent and lighting on the roof decks will
need to be integral to the walls and not shine onto other properties.
Commr. Wynn expressed concern about the possibility of a queue of cars blocking the
sidewalk at the garage entrance and asked if the security gate could be moved further
into the building. He also suggested painting the sidewalls of the garage entrance white
to keep this area from being too dark and stated he would like to prevent these walls
from being cluttered with signage, mailboxes, etc. He opposed creative painting on the
PG&E transformer box. He also expressed concern about each vertical portion of the
windows to the left of the garage entrance having a different appearance with the top
section clear glass, the middle spandrel glass painted on the reverse, and the bottom
Draft ARC Minutes
September 8, 2014
Page 5
section possibly etched or obscure glass. He stated they should all look the same if
possible and noted that if the glass is clear on the bottom level, the parked cars and
sprinklers, etc., could be seen from the street.
Commr. Ehdaie questioned whether it was important to screen or obscure the view of
the garage interior and stated that the glass, top to bottom, should have a consistent
appearance.
Commr. Root asked if there could be a screen in front of the vertical windows to the left
of the garage entrance.
Commr. Wynn suggested fritted glass with a pattern that varies from heavy at the
bottom to light at the top.
Senior Planner Ricci suggested this wording: “variegated fritted glazing shall be used
on the left hand side of the Osos Street elevation.”
Commr. Root stated that continuity is important for this elevation facing Osos Street so
the other large window should be treated the same.
Commr. Wynn asked if the transformer box could be moved away from the front of the
window on Osos Street. The architect stated that this is a possibility.
Senior Planner Ricci suggested that Condition 11 be changed to read: “Applicant shall
maximize planting around the PG&E transformer cabinet, and work with PG&E to
explore the possibility of moving the transformer closer to the south property line to the
review of the Community Development Director.”
The Commissioners indicated that the changes made to the affordable housing unit
were acceptable and that the last sentence of Condition 6 requiring the pre-cast
bulkhead to extend across the base of the windows to the left of the garage entrance be
deleted.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On a motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded by Commr. Ehdaie to approve the Draft
Resolution granting final approval to the project, based on findings, and subject to
conditions, with the following changes: 1) Condition 4 to require a small shed roof
similar to those in the neighborhood; 2) Condition 6 to require variegated, fritted
windows to the left of the garage entrance; 3) Condition 11 to require the applicant to
maximize planting around the PG&E transformer cabinet, and work with PG&E to
explore the possibility of moving the transformer closer to the south property line to the
review of the Community Development Director.
Draft ARC Minutes
September 8, 2014
Page 6
AYES: Commrs. Wynn, Ehdaie, Andreen, McCovey-Good, and Root
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commrs. Curtis and Nemcik
The motion passed on a 5:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast by Senior Planner Ricci
• September 15, 2014, meeting will be in the Council Chamber—1845
Monterey Street, new hotel behind Pappy McGregor’s, and another small
project.
• October 6, 2014—brownstone project in the back parking lot of the Bank of
America building, 7 units; Laguna Village identification signs for new stores;
9-unit residential condo project on Rockview. Senior Planner Ricci will be
absent.
• October 20, 2014--conceptual plans for the Miner's parking lot development;
residential care facility in the old KSBY building on Hill Street; CalTrans
offices on S. Higuera.
• November 3, 2014—Long-Bonetti Ranch; modified version of mixed use
project next to Wells Fargo.
4. Commission:
• Commr. Wynn may be absent from October 6, 2014, meeting.
• Commr. McCovey-Good observed that the windows for the Big Five store in
the Marigold Center are covered with images on the glass. Senior Planner
Ricci will talk to Enforcement to find out if the images are temporary.
• Commr. Ehdaie complimented the design of Scout Coffee on Garden Street.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Diane Clement
Recording Secretary
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
September 15, 2014
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Suzan Ehdaie, Allen Root,
Vice-Chair Greg Wynn, and Chairperson Michelle McCovey-Good
Absent: Commissioner Amy Nemcik
Staff: Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Associate Planner Marcus Carloni, Contract
Planner Rachel Cohen, Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, and
Recording Secretary Diane Clement
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 460 Marsh Street. ARC 142-14; Review of a new four-unit multi-family residential
project within the Downtown planning area with a categorical exemption from
environmental review; C-R zone; 460 Marsh Street LLC, applicant. (Rachel
Cohen)
Contract Planner Cohen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft
Resolution which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
Jim Duffy, project representative, mentioned that the previously approved project that
included retention of the small house used as an office was cost-prohibitive to build. He
noted that the contemporary architecture was selected for the new project since the
goal was no longer to mimic the Craftsman style of the existing house. He asked for
some flexibility in the selection of final siding materials.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Vice-Chair Wynn stated that deleting the roof deck and rear stairwell is not detrimental
to the overall project.
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 2
Commr. Curtis stated the design is cohesive and the project is in compliance with the
design guidelines.
Commr. Andreen noted that a letter was received from Allan Cooper stating that the
project might not be compatible with the neighborhood. She added that this block of
Marsh is eclectic in design and this is an attractive project which she could approve.
Commr. Ehdaie stated that the project is a great design, but she had some reservations
with the lack of articulation on the north elevation. She added that she would prefer to
see the windows more evenly distributed.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Wynn, seconded by Commr. Curtis, to approve adoption of the
Draft Resolution which approves the project, based on findings and subject to
conditions, including the following:
1. Changing the last sentence of Condition 1 to begin: “Any change to approved
design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be
approved by the Director or the Architectural Review Commission, as deemed
appropriate. The applicant has flexibility in the final siding selection to the review
and approval of the Community Development Director.”
2. Add a new condition to read: “The applicant may eliminate the roof deck and rear
stairwell if desired. Details of changes to accommodate these modified plans shall
be to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.”
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, McCovey-Good, Root, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commr. Nemcik
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
2. 1845 Monterey Street. ARC 143-13; Design review of a new 102-unit multi-story
hotel building with adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact; C-T-S zone; West Coast Asset Management, applicant. (Marcus Carloni)
Associate Planner Carloni presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the
Draft Resolution which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to
conditions.
George Garcia, applicant representative, noted that the goal was to create an upscale
luxury hotel and that the 1865 structure provided design inspiration for the proposed
wood elements in the new hotel.
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 3
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Bob Lucas, SLO, stated he filed the appeal on behalf of his neighbors in the San Luis
Drive neighborhood which is 95% owner-occupied. He noted that letters have been
sent challenging the proposal and detailing concerns. He stated that the design of the
hotel will negatively affect the neighborhood which is protected by Ordinance 1130,
passed in 1989. He noted the Ordinance states that openings facing the creek and the
neighborhood, such as windows, doors, balconies, etc., shall be minimized but this hotel
project proposes 27 openings, including doors and balconies, and the parking
configuration requires further openings from which he felt sounds of parking will be
amplified. He added that the Ordinance also calls for buffering of noise but felt the size
of the proposed buildings make this impossible. He felt that with 102 rooms and 102
cars, this hotel cannot comply with the spirit of the Ordinance.
Carson Britz, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, stated this is a good
project that the community needs but there are serious flaws. He felt the drawings
show the hotel towering over the trees and the neighborhood with the parking area open
toward the creek which he felt did not comply with Ordinance 1130 because parking
should be in the interior of the building to prevent noise and emissions pollution. He
stated that the building is too big and constitutes an extreme invasion of privacy. He
called for removal of all balconies facing the creek and a reduction in the size, mass,
and glazing. He noted that this project will establish the norm for the future.
Angela Soll, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, stated that, after the
project was proposed, she walked Monterey Street several times and concluded the
proposed hotel does not follow the historical perspective of this gateway to downtown
which includes numerous older buildings that should set a precedent for the design of
the hotel. She discussed statistics related to the percentage of hotel rooms along upper
Monterey Street. She added that she is concerned about the balconies facing the creek
and felt there are no other balconies on the other hotels but there are a few patios.
Hilliard Wood, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, felt that because the
Monterey Street hotels are on a small earthen bluff, the hotel is essentially a massive
five-story structure overhanging his neighborhood. He noted that vegetation does not
attenuate noise, just the view. He stated the staff report does not adequately
characterize how this design is not consistent with the criteria of Ordinance 1130. He
noted that the applicant has not minimized the balconies and a rectangular structure
would have 25% of its balconies on each side but this one has 60% of the balconies
overlooking the creek, so the 29% mentioned by Mr. Garcia is a fallacious figure. He
felt that the open parking will amplify noise and there is no attenuation.
Steve Hansen, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, felt that the land,
that comprises this neighborhood, formed by a tributary of San Luis Creek, traps noise.
He added that Pappy McGregor’s restaurant is not a good neighbor and that not enough
consideration has been given to how drought and climate change has affected the
creek. He stated that the San Luis Drive area is a quiet neighborhood and the residents
have a right to quiet which is important to health. He felt the balconies facing the creek
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 4
would include parties with kegs. He also noted that wildlife in the creek is endangered
by more and more people.
Ron Tilley, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, noted the proposed
hotel is a full story taller than the structure to the north and about 1.5 stories above the
one to the south. He stated the environmental report does not address use and
enjoyment of the individual properties and felt other motels have minimized openings
facing the creek. He added that the prevailing wind blows toward the San Luis
neighborhood and the report minimizes the effect of removing non-native vegetation.
Wendy Lucas, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, noted that Plan 2035
calls for more hotels and consolidation of lots which she felt will make larger hotels
possible which will have significant impacts on neighborhoods. She stated that she will
not be able to sit on her front porch without the visual and auditory impact of this hotel,
including light from the balconies. She noted that she has considered calling 911 about
the noise from Pappy McGregor's. She asked that the height of the hotel be reduced.
R. Michael DeVitt, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, stated that the
balconies at the Quality Suites are about 18” wide with small windows. He stated that he
is concerned about the precedent that would be established in violating the mandatory
direction to minimize openings facing the creek.
Gene Goldschmidt, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, stated he lives
within earshot of this hotel and wants the Commission to consider all that will happen in
his backyard. He added that he just wants to live peacefully and quietly in his park like
setting and that the animals need to remain.
Brigid Moore, SLO, who lives in the San Luis Drive neighborhood, expressed concern
about the balconies and the two levels of open parking facing her back yard. She noted
that Ordinance 1130 says noise-generating parking should be on the interior of the site.
She requested that the parking garage be enclosed.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Andreen stated that this will be a wonderful hotel with an elegant design that
would meet a need in the City but the balconies should be minimized because they are
large enough to allow people to congregate and the hotel's large terrace accommodates
just 49 people. She added that the balconies could be smaller, similar to Juliette
balconies on European hotels. She stated that the parking does not meet the
requirements in Ordinance 1130 related to buffering noise and she would like to
continue approval until the appeal is resolved.
Commr. Curtis stated that, while he likes the architectural elements and elegant style,
he thinks this project is inappropriate for this site. He stated that he gives credibility to
the public comments from the San Luis neighborhood, believes that the project is
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 5
inconsistent with Ordinance 1130, and could not approve it in its present form. He
added that he does not agree with the staff report about health, safety and welfare
because the two-level open garage will amplify and focus noise toward a wide swath of
the neighborhood and there will be light pollution on the side facing the creek that will
affect the neighborhood and the biological resources in the creek. He stated that he
disagrees with the finding that it is compatible in scale and siting, does not think the
building openings have been minimized nor that vegetation along the creek will
attenuate noise. He added that there will also be visual impacts on San Luis Drive and
the street further up the hillside. He stated he would like to see it redesigned.
Senior Planner Ricci stated that the two main issues are the openings on the creek side,
including the size of the balconies and, secondarily, the windows on the creek side; and
the noise emanating from the parking structure, which is not completely closed. She
noted that this project has been through rigorous review because of its location and the
adoption of Ordinance 1130 in 1989, and that the applicant is not proposing any
changes to the creek corridor and has provided additional setbacks beyond what is
required by Ordinance 1130.
Architect Garcia stated his company had a couple of meetings with the neighbors and
the same issues came up—balconies, openings, noise. He added that after a meeting
last Wednesday, he hired a noise consultant to look at potential hotel noise and existing
noise from the restaurant and other hotels and the conclusion was that the neighbors
will benefit from the hotel being set back well beyond requirements and that noise from
the proposed balconies will not exceed City standards. He noted that they do not plan
to have exterior lights on the balconies. He added that, while no study of noise from the
parking areas were done, he would be happy to mitigate potential noise by treating the
driving surface, applying acoustic baffles to the walls, and acoustic panels on the
ceilings.
Associate Planner Carloni stated that the project was reviewed and approved by the
Natural Resources Manager and the City Biologist. He added that Ordinance 1130
established a substantial setback from the creek but did not specifically reduce the
maximum height limitation. He noted that staff considered the balconies facing the creek
to be minimized since they are not designed for large gatherings and are minimized
from potentially larger balconies which could have been much larger in depth or
included a rooftop pool deck.
Commr. Root stated while he really appreciates the general design, attention to detail,
and the strong aesthetics, he cannot vote for approval because he felt issues still
remained. He added that he likes the proposed sound attenuation, the buildings being
well back from the required setbacks, and the project being designed within the
regulations. He noted that natural vegetation could mitigate overlook issues, and that
overlook and noise generation are the two issues that are problems.
Commr. Wynn stated that Ordinance 1130 granted special protection to this
neighborhood in recognition of the quality of the neighborhood and that he understands
the staff recommendation which is based on the applicant complying with regular
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 6
standards and the additional standards of Ordinance 1130. He noted that, ultimately,
the Commission will never be the final decision-making body for this project but can give
direction about what is right and what needs fixing. He stated he is recommending
continuation but that this project is moving in the right direction and the architect has
done an amazing job, trying to design within Ordinance 1130 requirements. He added
that the issue is about minimization and that it was not intended that there be a blank
wall facing the San Luis neighborhood. He stated that the applicant should go back to
figure that out, but, in the end, this is a well-designed project that will be allowed. He
noted that he wants staff to consider sound attenuation, including garage closure;
balcony alternatives; visual concerns that have to do with the headlight wall; and
identification of non-native plantings that may be removed.
Commr. Ehdaie stated she appreciates that the architect and his team worked with the
neighbors who are the stakeholders. She noted that the hotel adds value to the
community and suggested that the architect meet again with the neighborhood and the
neighboring restaurants and hotels to obtain feedback about noise, the creek and any
other sticking points. She agreed that the project is going in the right direction.
Commr. McCovey-Good stated that this is a well-designed project and there are really
only those two items that seem subjective.
Senior Planner Ricci suggested that the project be continued to a date uncertain and
that the applicant be directed to deal with garage noise, principally on the east side; the
balconies; a taller wall for screening headlights; and identify plantings to be removed.
Commr. Wynn expressed concern about dealing with the two-way drive way.
Supervising Civil Engineer Hannula suggested that if something is written tonight about
the driveway, it should be open-ended to allow flexibility.
Commr. Wynn supported keeping the south entrance driveway.
Commr. Andreen suggested information is needed from the noise consultant about the
garage.
Commr. Root stated that he really appreciates the horizontal slats on the balconies
because they help to screen the view and that he could not understand the logic in
wanting to eliminate one of the driveways.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On a motion by Vice Chair Wynn, seconded by Commr. Root, to continue to a date
uncertain with the following directional items (6:0):
1. Provide additional noise analysis and information related to the parking garage
and other hotel noise-generating activities.
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 7
2. Provide additional information on lighting, especially on the east side of the
project.
3. Look at ways to further minimize impacts to neighbors from the proposed
balconies, including the possibility of reducing the number and/or size of
balconies, and explore balcony screening alternatives such as taller guard
railings.
4. Provide a detail of a taller screening wall and associated landscaping for the
uncovered parking area.
5. Include information on plantings in the creek setback area to be removed and
any replacement plantings.
6. Provide an update on Public Works Condition #23 related to driveways off of
Monterey Street.
AYES: Commrs. Andreen, Curtis, Ehdaie, McCovey-Good, Root, and Wynn
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Commr. Nemcik
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3. Staff:
a. Agenda Forecast by Senior Planner Ricci:
• Appeal of a ARC decision concerning the a second floor addition at 1335
Johnson Avenue was denied by the City Council on September 2, 2014.
• October 6, 2014--7 brownstones in the back of the Bank of America parking
lot on Marsh Street; 9-unit project on Rockview; and signage for Laguna
Village.
• October 20, 2014—residential care facility in the old KSBY building on Hill
Street; conceptual review for 69 residential units and 2,000 sf of commercial
on the southern portion of the Miner's property; and remodel for Cal Trans
offices in the former moving van place at 2885 S. Higuera.
• November 3, 2014-- Long-Bonetti revised plans for the west side of their
property; Quicky Carwash at the old Denny’s building on Calle Joaquin; and
conceptual review of a mixed use project at Broad and Marsh, just north of
Wells Fargo Bank.
4. Commission:
a. Commr. Wynn noted that he would be absent from the October 6, 2014
meeting.
b. After staff’s mention that new signage was proposed for the Laguna Village
shopping center, Commr. Root mentioned that the identification signs could use
Draft ARC Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 8
an update. He mentioned how the landscaping for the Costco shopping center
was very attractive and well maintained.
c. Commr. Andreen agreed with Chairperson McCovey-Good that the Big 5
signage needed enforcement follow-up.
d. Vice-Chair Wynn mentioned his recent visit to downtown Napa after the
earthquake and the need for San Luis Obispo to remain vigilant in its efforts to
strengthen the City’s Unreinforced Masonry buildings.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Diane Clement
Recording Secretary