Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARC-1004-16 (ARCH-2448-2015 -- 736 Higuera Street)RESOLUTION NO. ARC -1004-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW CREEK -SIDE PATIO THAT INCLUDES A CREEK SETBACK EXCEPTION, WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED APRIL 4, 2016 (736/738 HIGUERA STREET, C -D -H ZONE; ARCH -2448-2015) WHEREAS, on April 4, 2016, 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, for the purpose of reviewing the design of a new creek -side patio, that includes a creek setback exception (ARCH -2448-2015), San Luis Downtown Management, 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 approves the design of the creek -side patio that includes a creek setback exception (ARCH -2448-2015) 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. The city arborist has reviewed and recommended removal of an existing tree on the property. This tree is in declining health and was planted as part of a pocket park along the creek in 1970 on the top of an existing 7 foot retaining wall which was not part of the native riparian vegetation. 3. The project has been reviewed by the Natural Resource Manager and the need for a biological survey was waived based on the determination that no purpose would be served by such a survey because no biological resources could be affected by the exception. Architecture Review Commission Resolution No. ARC -1004-16 ARCH -2448-2015 (736/738 Higuera Street) Page 2 Creek Setback Exception 4. The location and design of the patio exception will minimize impacts to scenic resources, water quality, and riparian habitat due to the replacement of impervious surfaces with permeable materials. 5. The exception will not limit the City's design option for providing flood control measures that are needed to achieve adopted city flood policies because the project elevates the existing patio area to the Base Flood Elevation (199.5 feet). 6. The exception will not prevent the implementation of City -adopted plans, nor increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans, because the project consists of the replacement of an existing patio area on private property for compliance with ADA standards. 7. There are circumstances applying to the site such as topography associated with a 7 foot retaining wall, which does not apply generally to land in the vicinity with the same zoning, which would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning because several other properties are similarly developed with outdoor dining areas in the creek setback. 8. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area of the project or downstream, because the project is on private property that proposes to replace an existing patio area with permeable materials that will contribute to increasing the creek carrying capacity from the existing conditions. 9. Site development cannot be accomplished with a redesign of the project unless a creek setback exception is requested to meet ADA standards and elevate the patio outside the AE Floodzone. 10. A redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the existing patio area due to accessibility requirements. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt under Class 3, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures; Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of removal of an existing patio area and construction of a new patio that includes permeable surfaces that will have no significant effect on the environment. SECTION 3. Action. The Architectural Review Commission does hereby grant final approval of application ARCH -2448-2015 subject to the following conditions: Planning 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 Architecture Review Commission Resolution No. ARC -1004-16 ARCH -2448-2015 (736/738 Higuera Street) Page 3 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 deck surfaces and other improvements on elevation drawings. Natural materials shall be used for the project to the satisfaction of the Community Development and Public Works Directors. 3. The area below the deck shall be enclosed with an open lattice style design (constructed with durable materials) to prevent people from accessing the area. The material of the lattice shall be of a light material consistent with the design of the deck to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 4. The applicant shall work with City staff to incorporate a planter into the deck design between the City railing and the edge of the existing wall at the creek to the approval of the Natural Resources Manager and the Community Development and Public Works Directors. 5. The applicant shall pay Parking In -Lieu Fees and record a Parking In -Lieu Fee Agreement prior to issuance of a building permit with the approval of the Director prior to occupancy. Preliminary estimates indicate that the project will be subject to in -lieu fees for 2 parking spaces. 6. Plans submitted for a building permit review shall include lighting fixture details. The locations of all lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut -sheets shall be separately submitted for the project file of the proposed lighting fixtures. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to insure that light is directed downward consistent with Section 17.23.050 of the Zoning Regulations. 7. The Owner/Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City or its agents or officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void, or annul, in whole or in part, the City's approval of this project. In the event that the City fails to promptly notify the Owner / Applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, or that the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense of said claim, this condition shall thereafter be of no further force or effect. Engineering Division 8. A soils report will be required in conjunction with the building permit plan submittal unless otherwise waived by the City based on the final foundation design and assumptions. 9. The building plan submittal shall include a Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP) and Construction Staging and Phasing Plan for reference. Pedestrian protection measures shall Architecture Review Commission Resolution No. ARC -1004-16 ARCH -2448-2015 (736/738 Higuera Street) Page 4 be included in the plan. The WPCP shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Community Development and Public Works Directors, and the Natural Resource Manager. 10. A separate permit approval may be required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board for any proposed or required dewatering or groundwater displacement related to the proposed demolition and/or foundation construction. 11. The building plan submittal shall show and note compliance with the Floodplain Management Regulations and the Waterway Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. A final drainage report and structural analysis shall be provided to show compliance with all pertinent codes and regulations. The deck, framing, and sub -structure shall be shown to comply will all requirements of the Floodplain Management Regulations and FEMA Technical Bulletins and guidelines for flood -resistant materials and resistance to hydrostatic, hydrodynamic, and impact loads related to a flood event. 12. An easement agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo and the developer/owner shall be provided for review, approval,, and recordation prior to building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the Community Development and Public Works Directors, and City Attorney. The agreement shall include but is not limited to the expansion/clarification of the limits of the existing public pedestrian and landscape easements, public viewing area, ADA access, developer/owner maintenance responsibility, and City standard hold harmless/liability release provisions. 13. The public access and viewing portion of the Creekwalk and deck shall be accessible and shall be provided with signage to clarify and identify the public use areas. The signage shall comply with requirements of the ADA and California Building Code Section 11 B-703. The signage text, size, location(s), and format shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 14. Tree protection measures shall be implemented per City Engineering Standard Specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Arborist for the existing Walnut tree to remain. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist shall approve any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of trees. A city -approved arborist shall complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be shown or noted on the building plans. Code Requirements 1. The patio area shall be redesigned with a second exit to comply with occupancy requirements, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. a. As shown on the proposed plans, without the placement of un -concentrated tables and chairs, the deck area must be calculated as standing space with an occupant load of 1:5 which totals 150 occupants and 2 exits required. Architecture Review Commission Resolution No. ARC -1004-16 ARCH -2448-2015 (736/738 Higuera Street) Page 5 b. If tables and chairs are to be shown on the proposed plans, an occupant load factor of 1:15 totals 50 occupants. A second exit will be required from this space to a public way. c. Combined occupant load of un -concentrated tables and chairs at 1:15 for dining along with public viewing area at 1:5 totals 58 occupants. A second exit will be required. d. Structural plans submitted for permit review shall be designed and calculated for an assembly live load condition. On motion by Commissioner Root, seconded by Commissioner Nemcik, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Andreen, Nemcik, Root, Vice -Chair Ehdaie, and Chair Wynn NOES: Commissioners Curtis and Soll REFRAIN: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 4th day of April, 2016. Doug Davids9h, Secretary Architectural Review Commission