HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC_2012-04-26_MinutesF1A Y 31 2012'
CITY OF ATASCAD
CITY OF A7XIND �RO
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
ACTION MINUTES
Regular Meeting — Thursday, April 26, 2012
3:30 P.M.
City Hall, Council Chambers
6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER — 3:33 p.m.
Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 3:33 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Fonzi, Committee Member Kelley, Committee Member Ward,
Committee Member Cooper, Committee Member DeCarli
Absent: None
Recording Secretary: Warren Frace, Community Development Director
Staff Present: Callie Taylor, Associate Planner
Others Present: Applicants: Rick Scott, John Boggs, and Kevin Crook
Total of 12 in audience including:
Nancy Ayres
Kathy Lemonie
Murry Hunter
Corin Laraute
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Committee Member Ward and seconded by Committee
Member Kelley to approve the Agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes April 26, 2012
Page 2 of 5
CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non -controversial by City Staff and will be
approved by one motion if no member of the Committee or public wishes to comment or ask questions.)
1. APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT MINUTES OF APRIL 12.2012
MOTION: By Committee Member Ward and seconded by Committee
Member Kelley to approve the minutes.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. (Cooper Abstained)
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW
2. PLN 2099-0079 / DRC 2012-0019, LAS LOMAS SFR -2 REVISIONS
The new project owner, Sunwood Ventures, is proposing three (3) new floor plans with revised
elevations to use for the build out of the remaining single-family lots at Las Lomas. These lots
are identified in the 2003 Woodridge Specific Plan as the SFR -2 lots.
Associate Planner Callie Taylor gave a presentation of the approved and proposed SFR -2 designs.
Rick Scott with Sunwood Development gave an overview of the project proposal:
- 1839 to 2550 sq. ft. range in size.
- Optional "studio." Multi -generational floor plan for flexibility.
- Single story important
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE QUESTIONS:
Committee Member DeCarli
■ What is the price? (low 400k)
■ How about 2nd story mix? (costs similar, single story for broader market)
Committee Member Ward
■ Does not match existing lots of variety / too "tract" like.
Committee Member Kelley and Committee Member Cooper
■ Had no questions.
Chairperson Fonzi
■ Studio Units?
■ CC&R's / ACC (too be determined)
■ Landscape (Front yards — Yes)
City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes
PUBLIC COMMENT
April 26, 2012
Page 3 of 5
Nancy Ayres
- CC&R's allow accessory.
- Interim ACC committee established (Nancy, Kathy, Murry.) Working on formal
appointment.
- Not compatible / new product type is not a minor update.
- Smaller units.
- Existing homes are high end development; proposed changes are not same quality.
- Existing units have more amenities / details.
- Studio concerns — could be rented as multi -family residence, more cars/parking.
- Side elevations very plain.
- Setbacks tighter.
- Mix of stories important (currently 1, 1 1/2& 2 story mix.)
- Price concerns; comps for property values
- Appeal process?
- Premature for DRC review / need ACC review first / City should work with ACC.
Kathy Lemonie
- Read neighbor's letter.
- Concerned with price.
- Single stories sold best — but 2"d story mix is good.
- Don't want tract look.
- Have ACC volunteers.
- Why wasn't neighborhood told about Sunwood Development at earlier DRC meeting?
Murry Hunter
- Agrees with other neighbors.
- Too tract like.
- Should have Planning Commission review because it is "new product."
Corin Laraute
■ Lives in existing 3700 sq. ft. house.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
Committee Member Cooper
■ Design Review Committee review ok.
■ Likes arch product / quality proposed / market reality.
Committee Member Ward
■ Design Review Committee review ok.
■ Design modifications needed to be compatible.
■ Too "tract" like.
Committee Member DeCarli
■ Processing question is about whether or not proposal is in substantial conformance
City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes
April 26, 2012
Page 4 of 5
■ Design Review Committee can work out design — but needs to go to Planning
Commission with neighborhood association review for broader input as it is not in
conformance with original approval.
Committee Member Kelley
■ Design Review Committee review ok.
■ Some upgrades needed (95% there); garage doors, landscape, details
■ One story ok because is what sells.
■ CC&R's & ACC formation need legal review.
Chairperson Fonzi
■ Looking for consensus on how to process amendment (DRC or PC.) Try to work out at
DRC level.
■ Appeal process for neighbors? (Yes - fee + application)
■ Floor plan is not a concern; do need to work on elevations
ADDITIONAL DESIGN DISCUSSION:
Neighborhood / Audience
■ Would like to see more 2nd story mixed in.
■ Repetitive nature of proposed designs
■ Eyebrows on side windows, good quality garage doors, etc.
■ Location of model homes/traffic? Where start construction? (Applicant not sure yet)
Rick Scott
- Would add 2"d story in mix / but no size increase.
- Will work on landscape plan before next meeting.
Committee Member DeCarli
■ Exterior materials are important.
■ Upgraded garage doors & roof (No asphalt shingle, per applicant, all concrete tile)
■ Roof lines are monotonous.
■ Add 2 story in mix.
■ Size of homes is not key issue.
Committee Member Ward
■ Roof materials? (all concrete tile, per applicant)
Committee Member Cooper
■ All one story ok / allow builders to follow market.
Committee Member Kelley
■ Meeting with neighborhood needed.
Chairperson Fonzi
■ Vote - Majority of DRC wants to add 2"d story units
■ Applicant to give proposal of percentage mix to DRC
City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes April 26, 2012
Page 5 of 5
Committee Member DeCarli
■ Streetscape Plotting (show mix of units & setbacks for tract)
Chairperson Fonzi
■ Plan 1A plain— variety of exterior materials.
Committee Member Kelley
■ Overall Good Start.
DRC DIRECTION FOR APPLICANT:
Refer back to the applicant to make changes; then bring back to DRC.
1. Add 2nd story to mix. Applicant to propose percentage & location; include plot plan
2. Applicant to set up meeting with neighborhood. (City may provide room; 6:00 pm
evening meeting)
3. Garage door upgrades & variety.
4. Setback variety (Submit plot plan for tract)
5. Add more window detailing/ variety of shapes (add more windows or grouping of
windows if possible.)
6. Landscape plans (Prepare concept plan for next DRC meeting)
7. Upgrading detailing (front doors, lights, hardware)
8. Plan 2: recessed entry needs security; add gate.
9. Plan 1A: too much horizontal banding/ courtyard wall is too flat. Add texture, stone
work, variation with height and/or landscape.
10. Main goal overall. avoid cookie cutter look.
COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
ADJOURNMENT - 5:35 pm
arren Frace, om- rty Development Director
Adopted May 31, 2012
\\cityhall\cdvlpmnt\— dre design review committee\minutes\minutes 2012\action minutes 4-26-12.docx