HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC_2016-07-13_AgendaPacket
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR
Code with your
smartphone to
view DRC Website
CITY OF ATASCADERO
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA
Committee Meeting
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
1:00 P.M.
City Hall
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, California
Room 306 (3rd floor conference room)
CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call: Chairperson Bob Kelley
Committee Member Duane Anderson
Committee Member Mark Dariz
Committee Member Roberta Fonzi
Committee Member Jamie Kirk
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENT
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approval of Draft Minutes of June 1, 2016
2. Approval of Draft Minutes of June 7, 2016
City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Agenda Regular Meeting, July 13, 2016
Page 2 of 3
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR
Code with your
smartphone to
view DRC Website
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW
3. PLN 2016-1596, SECOND DRC REVIEW: NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 7300
EL CAMINO REAL (OLD COCO’S SITE)
4. PLN 2016-1604, DESIGN REVIEW OF FIRE DEPARTMENT CARPORT
Property Owner: Timmons Calstate LLC, c/o Joel & Priscilla Brown Family LTD PTP, 2200
Faraday Ave. #250, Carlsbad, CA 92008
Applicant: Richard Hofmeister, Dynamic Development Company,
1725 21st St., Santa Monica, CA 90404
Project Title: PLN 2016-1596 / DRC 2016-0087
Project Location: 7300 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
(APN 030-222-048) San Luis Obispo County
Project
Description:
Second DRC review: Redevelopment of 7300 El Camino Real commercial site.
Proposed remodel of old Coco’s restaurant to provide for new restaurant with
rear patio. Includes new 3,650 sq. ft. commercial building for Med Post urgent
care. Reconfigured site layout, parking areas and drive aisles proposed.
Zoning District: Commercial Service (CS)
General Plan Designation: Service Commercial (SC)
City Staff: Callie Taylor, Sr. Planner, ctaylor@atascadero.org, Phone: 805-470-3448
Staff
Recommendation:
Staff recommends DRC review updated site plan and architectural elevations
and provide direction to applicant and City staff regarding any requested plan
modifications.
Property
Owner/Applicant:
City of Atascadero, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title: PLN 2016-1604 / DRC 2016-0089
Project Location: 6005 Lewis Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
(APN 029-332-004) San Luis Obispo County
Project
Description:
The project is for a 980 sq. ft. metal carport structure, proposed to be installed at
the rear of the site to store the Fire Department’s emergency response trailer .
Zoning District: Downtown Commercial (DC)
General Plan Designation: Downtown (D)
City Staff: Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director pdunsmore@atascadero.org,
Phone: 805-470-3488
Staff
Recommendation:
Staff recommends DRC review carport design and location provide direction to
City staff.
City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Agenda Regular Meeting, July 13, 2016
Page 3 of 3
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
@atownplanning
Scan This QR
Code with your
smartphone to
view DRC Website
COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
The next DRC meeting is scheduled for July 27, 2016 at 2:00 p.m.
Agendas, Minutes and Staff Reports are available online at www.atascadero.org
under City Officials & Commissions, Design Review Committee.
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 1 of 9
x
CITY OF ATASCADERO
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Regular Meeting – Wednesday, June 1, 2016 – 2:00 P.M.
City Hall Room 106
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER – 2:00 p.m.
Chairperson Kelley called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Bob Kelley
Committee Member Duane Anderson
Committee Member Roberta Fonzi
Committee Member Mark Dariz
Committee Member Jamie Kirk
Absent: None
Staff Present: Community Development Director, Phil Dunsmore
Katie Banister, Assistant Planner
Recording Secretary, Annette Manier
Others Present: Mike Zappas
Max Zappas
Robert Fisher
Ciro Marino, Director of Operations, McDonald’s
Christopher Lisle, Contractor, Avanti Development Partners,
representing McDonald’s
Robert Priest, Core States Architect-Engineer, McDonald’s
Kristen Cumby, Sevan Solutions, McDonald’s
Jessica Alviz, Restaurant Manager, McDonald’s
Charles Bourbeau
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 7-13-16
1
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 2 of 9
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Committee Member Fonzi and seconded by
Committee Member Kirk to move Item 1 to Item 2, and to
hear Item 2 (McDonald’s) first.
There was Committee consensus to approve the
Agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF DRAFT ACTION MINUTES OF MAY 18, 2016
Recording Secretary Manier announced two changes to the minutes. On Page 4,
she would like to replace “Committee Member Dariz” with “Chairperson Kelley,”
and she stated that Committee Member Fonzi would like the word “porportional”
corrected to say “proportional” on Page 3.
MOTION: By Committee Member Fonzi and seconded by
Committee Member Anderson to approve the consent
calendar with the above changes.
There was Committee consensus to approve the
consent calendar. (Kirk abstained)
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW
2. PLN 2016-1591, EXTERIOR REMODEL AT 6300 MORRO ROAD (MCDONALD’S)
Property Owner: Archland Property II, PO Box 182571, Columbus, OH 43218
McDonald’s LLC, 3800 Kilroy Airport Way #200, Long Beach, CA 90806
Project Title: PLN 2016-1591 / DRC 2016-0085
Project Location: 6300 Morro Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
(APN 030-211-018) San Luis Obispo County
Project
Description:
The project is a proposal to replace the façade of the McDonald’s location on
Morro Road. The existing mansard roof and drive-thru structure will be
removed and replaced with modern architecture including new entry arcade,
canopies, light sconces and color scheme. Updated signage is also proposed.
Zoning District: Commercial Tourist (CT)
2
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 3 of 9
Assistant Planner Banister presented the staff report, and she and Community
Development Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Committee.
Representatives from McDonald’s also gave a presentation and explained that
McDonald’s is doing a building revitalization program to their stores. Assistant Planner
Banister said that each item under Staff Recommendations would be addressed
separately and discussed. The committee discussed each item as follows:
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Lighting and Security: Committee Recommendation: LED lights: Avoid bright
LED lights, make sure they are shielded down, due to the existing neighborhood
right behind McDonald’s. (Applicant stated that they would be replacing all fixture
heads with LED fixtures, bring up the foot candle count in the entire parking lot to
make it safer, and will be replacing poles that are deemed insufficient. Most of
their stores already have security cameras.)
Carport: Applicant said although it will be removed, the structure to replace it will
protect cars while in the drive-thru.
Provide a contrasting or complementing building material for the brand walls such as
weathered wood, faux wood tiles, slate tiles, bricks or similar. Applicant agrees to to
use a tile with wood appearance in this location. (Committee agreed.)
Project the trellis structure in the front elevation 36 inches, similar to side
elevations. (Committee Recommendation: The applicant proposed projections
are sufficient (18 inches in the front elevation).
Remove existing tile band in the lower wall and provide tile wainscoting along all
walls of the building at the building base. Stucco placed low to the ground often
becomes dirty and discolored or damaged. (Committee Recommendation:
painted stucco, with smooth paint or stucco-finish surface i.e. Elastameric
(waterproof). Tile band can remain and could be painted with a contrasting color).
Provide reglets (narrow separation strip between stucco panels in the upper wall)
of sufficient size to be seen from the street. (Committee agreed.)
Provide a smooth sand stucco finish, not a heavy spray texture.(Committee
Recommendation: End product will be what’s already existing, a medium
texture.)
General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC)
City Staff: Katie Banister, Assistant Planner, kbanister@atascadero.org, Phone: 470-3480
Proposed
Environmental
Determination:
The proposed project is categorically exempted from CEQA under Section
15301: Existing Facilities, which exempts interior and exterior alterations to
existing buildings.
Staff
Recommendation:
DRC review and discuss proposed site plan and elevations, and provide
comments to staff and the applicant for incorporation into designs for building
permit submittal (BLD 2016-13566).
3
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 4 of 9
Eliminate the play area and replace with an outdoor seating area. The current
playground appears inconsistent with the modern design esthetic. Alternatively,
redesign the playground fencing to be compatible with the new building façade
perhaps using the white metal theme of the trellis. (Committee Agreed and the
applicant said they would replace the play area with permanent furniture for patio
seating which will include a handicapped table in the seating area.)
Replace the damaged fence between the pedestrian walkway and drive -thru with
materials that complement the new design (See attachment 4). (Committee
agreed.)
Remove or replace the orange tiles on the walkways adjacent to the building
(See attachment 4).(Committee recommends concrete with non-slippery tile.
Exterior walkway tile will be replaced with either non-slip tile or concrete.)
Replace the garbage enclosure door with a new solid metal door (see attachment
4). (Committee recommends the existing door is sufficent. Applicant will paint to
match the building.)
Provide shrubs at the rear and drive-thru sides of the garbage enclosure.
(Committee recommends drought-tolerant shrubs.)
Provide parking lot trees at approximate 30 foot intervals (see attachment 3).
(Eliminate 2 proposed trees in the drive-thru lane for security reasons as they
interfere with lighting)
Provide 3 street trees on Morro Road at an approximate 30 foot interval (see
attachment 3)., (Eliminate the 3 street trees in the landscape area directly in front
of the building, but retain the trees on the exterior sides of the driveways shown
in attachment 3.)
At a minimum, provide landscaping in the front setback and along the side
property lines. (Committee recommends not putting trees in front of the building,
low profile landscaped encouraged.)
Added Note: Flag pole to remain on the property and applicant indicated it would
be illuminated with an LED spotlight.
Sidewalk R-O-W: McDonald’s does not want to install at the current time. Based
on their assumption of valuation, it is not required. They would like to parctipate
when the Highway 41 Corridor Project is done. Community Development Director
Dunsmore stated that if the project triggers sidewalk based on valuation, staff will
discuss this component with the applicant in the future.
Added condition: Signage: DRC recommendation is to approve proposed
signage. Additional signage will need an AUP.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Members of the
McDonald’s team spoke on behalf of the project during review. McDonald’s members
also asked if the City has old photos of the City that might be used in the renovation of
their building. Chairperson Kelley and Community Development Director Dunsmore
responded on where to locate old photographs.
4
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 5 of 9
Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period.
The Committee recommended approval of the project with the
conditions in red listed above.
3. PLN 2016-1594, APARTMENT COMPLEX AT 9405 AVENIDA MARIA
Assistant Planner Banister presented the staff report, and she and Community
Development Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Committee. Assistant
Planner Banister said that each item under Staff Recommendations would be
addressed separately and discussed. The committee discussed each item as follows:
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Circulation (See Site Plan, Attachment 2)
1. The development must provide an accessible path to the nearest bus stop on El
Property
Owner/Applicant:
Mike Zappas, 8189 San Dimas Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title: PLN 2016-1584 / DRC 2016-0080
Project Location: 9405 Avenida Maria, Atascadero, CA 93422
(APN 045-321-022) San Luis Obispo County
Project
Description:
Hidden Oaks Phase II: Proposed 24-unit residential apartment complex in a high
density multi-family district. The subject site is identified in the Atascadero
Housing Element as a site for “by-right-development,” which means that no
Conditional Use Permits are required for a multi-family rental project. The site
is proposed to be gated.
The proposed architectural design would match the Pueblo style of Hidden Oaks
Phase 1. Conceptual plans have been submitted for preliminary review. City
staff has provided comments in the staff report regarding potential modifications
to the proposed elevations and site plan for consideration by the Design Rev iew
Committee.
Zoning District: Residential Multi-family RMF-20 (20-24 units per acre)
General Plan designation: High Density Residential (HDR)
City Staff: Katie Banister, Assistant Planner, kbanister@atascadero.org, Phone: 470-3480
Proposed
Environmental
Determination:
To be determined - currently being reviewed by City Attorney. CEQA
evaluation to be completed prior to building permit issuance.
5
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 6 of 9
Camino Real. The sidewalk on the south side of Avenida Maria is likely outside the
access easement and on the property owned by the SLO County Board of
Education. The applicant will need to provide evidence the residents of the proposed
complex have the right to use this private sidewalk. (Mr. Zappas indicated that
Atascadero Family Apartments’ Attorney and his Attorney are working on the
easement papework. The Committee agreed that this item will be handled with the
easements.)
2. If the residents have permission to use this sidewalk, provide an accessible route
from the development to cross Avenida Maria and access the sidewalk. Staff
recommends a raised crosswalk to slow vehicle traffic. This sidewalk may need
repairs to comply with accessibility requirements. (Committee agreed.)
3. If residents don’t have permission, how will pedestrian access be given to El Camino
Real to reach transit and services? (The Committee agreed that this issue will be
resolved with Item 1)
4. Provide pedestrian access between Phase I and Phase II of the Hidden Oaks
Village. There may be space for this along Avenida Maria or possibly in the
northeast corner of the subject parcel. A gate would have to be placed in the wall at
this location and an accessible path provided. (Mike Zappas indicated that this
project is a stand alone project from Hidden Oaks Village, and should be referenced
as Hidden Oaks Apartments.) The Committee agreed to eliminate “Provide
pedestrian access between Phase 1 and Phase II of the Hidden Oaks Village.”
5. Provide a sidewalk along the property’s entire Avenida Maria frontage that also
connects the Hidden Oaks Village. The Atascadero Municipal Code requires curb,
gutter and sidewalk for all new multi-family developments and on neighboring
properties in the same ownership. (This item has been resolved. There is an existing
asphalt path, and although Mr. Zappas needs to provide an accessible path for his
residents to El Camino Real, he has already planned sidewalks for the front part of
his project, and will be tieing in with the neighbor next door. There is a sidewalk that
goes to the shared facilities.)
6. Provide at least 8 feet of setback between the parallel parking spaces on Avenida
Maria and the shared facility rooms. (This item has been resolved.)
7. Expand the width of the walkway between the buildings and the parking proposed
along the west side of the building. The site plan calls for a 3.5-foot-wide path, which
may feel very narrow between a building and parked vehicles that may overhang the
curb. (The committee recommended that 4 foot clear width must be maintained. The
landscape planter can be wider where back-up space isn’t needed and can be
narrower where there is no need for back-up space. This would allow you to get
larger tree planter areas in some areas, and smaller (down to 3 feet) in the other
areas.)
8. Eliminate the gate. Gated communities are counter to the General Plan goals for
city-wide circulation and slow fire and police response time. (The Committee agreed
to allow a rolling gate as long as it’s not noisy, will remain open during the day, and
6
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 7 of 9
will be closed at night.)
9. Seek access agreements with the Oaks Apartments on Jornada Lane and
Atascadero Family Apartments on Avenida Maria. (The Committee agreed and Mr.
Zappas stated he would work on this.)
10. If access is not attained to Jornada Lane, provide landscaping at the end of the long
driveway so the view from Avenida Maria is more attractive. (The Committee agreed
and Mr. Zappas agreed.)
Parking (See Site Plan and Carport Elevations, Attachments 2 and 5)
Type Required Proposed
Total for residents 36 34 + 2 motorcycle
Covered 24 29
Guest 5 7
Total 41 41 + 2 motorcycle
11. Move the covered parking to the rear of the property to provide a more open site as
viewed from Avenida Maria; (The Committee agreed however accessibility
requirements may require covered parking here and the committee agreed to allow
in that circumstance).
12. Provide a continuous parking bulb out to better accommodate parking along the
Avenida Maria frontage in preference to the proposed 2 separated spaces; (This
item has been resolved)
13. Incorporate pueblo architectural features to the trim and supporting members of the
carport structures. (This item has been resolved)
14. Provide bicycle parking. (Items 12-14 have been addressed and resolved with the
new submittal)
Outdoor Recreation Areas (See Site Plan and Landscape Plan (Attachments 2 and 4)
15. AMC 9-3.173(c) requires 300 square feet of outdoor recreational open space per
unit, or 7,200 square feet. Each recreation space must be at least 1,000 square feet
in area. Landscaped areas are not considered recreation space. The proposed site
plan does not provide adequate recreation space.
16. Consolidate outdoor recreation space to provide at least one larger area;
17. Consider replacing landscaping between the buildings with recreation space;
18. Consider eliminating units to reduce the recreation space requirement and to allow
more space to fulfill this requirement;
19. Consider more fully incorporating the two phases of the Hidden Oaks development
to allowed shared use of recreation facilities in Phase I. Internal circulation and an
accessible path would be required. There may be an opportunity to provide a path
7
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 8 of 9
at the northeast corner of the site.
(Items 15-19: Currently, there is not enough recreation space per code, so staff will work
with the applicant to revise the site plan to meet the needs of the City, and make this happen
while ensuring a quality environment.)
Landscaping (See Landscape Plan, Attachment 4)
20. The site must conform to the Water Efficient Landscape and Irrigation Ordinance,
incorporating native drought tolerant plants, minimizing turf and using drip and other
efficient irrigation methods. (Committee agreed.)
21. Eliminate Atlas cedar from the plant schedule and replace with another tree variety.
(Committee agreed.)
22. Landscaping may not be permitted in the utilities easement based on needed flow
requirements for stormwater from other properties. (Committee agreed.)
23. Provide decorative pavers or concrete at the entry. (Committee agreed.)
Elevations (See Elevations and Color Board, Attachment 5 and 7)
24. Provide additional windows in the south elevation of the residential units facing
Avenida Maria. (The Committee was in agreement with recommending more windows
or architectural features on this wall because of the site’s visiblity.)
25. Replace the brown/orange “Plymouth” trim color with a different bright shade. Perhaps
a cobalt blue or purple with similar intensity as the other proposed colors. (The
committee recommends removing the accent color and use the 3 remaining colors.)
26. Use more than one nuetral color for the walls to provide variety. (Committee
recommended a single wall color is appropriate for the Pueblo style.)
27. Exterior walls to be a smooth, hand troweled stucco finish. (Committee agreed.)
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Mike Zappas,
Robert Fisher, and Max Zappas.
Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period.
COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
DIRECTORS REPORT
Community Development Director Dunsmore stated that the next DRC meeting will be
held on Tuesday, June 7, 2016, at 2:00 p.m. and the committee will review the old
Coco’s Restaurant site.
8
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/1/16
Page 9 of 9
ADJOURNMENT– 4:30 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the DRC will be on Tuesday, June 7, 2016, at 2:00 p.m.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
______________________________
Annette Manier, Recording Secretary
9
10
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/7/16
Page 1 of 3
x
CITY OF ATASCADERO
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Regular Meeting – Tuesday, June 7, 2016 – 2:00 P.M.
City Hall Room 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER – 2:05 p.m.
Committee Member Fonzi called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Member Duane Anderson
Committee Member Roberta Fonzi
Committee Member Mark Dariz
Committee Member Jamie Kirk
Absent: Chairperson Bob Kelley (excused absence)
Staff Present: Community Development Director, Phil Dunsmore
Contract Engineer with Diversified Project Services International,
Inc., Mike Bertaccini representing the City of Atascadero
Chief Building Official, Dave Muehlhausen
Senior Planner, Callie Taylor
Recording Secretary, Annette Manier
Others Present: Richard Hofmeister, Dynamic Development Company
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Committee Member Dariz and seconded by Committee
Member Anderson to approve the agenda.
There was Committee consensus to approve the Agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
Committee Member Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 7-13-16
11
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/7/16
Page 2 of 3
CONSENT CALENDAR
None
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW
1. PLN 2016-1596, NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 7300 EL CAMINO REAL (OLD
COCO’S SITE)
Senior Planner Taylor presented the staff report, and she and Community Development
Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Committee.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Richard Hofmeister.
Mr. Hofmeister gave a presentation on the project and indicated the property is in escrow.
He also stated he will not be completely demo lishing the Coco’s site afterall. He shared
some sample architectural styles for the Committee to review.
Committee Member Dariz closed the Public Comment period.
The Committee approved the project with the following
recommendations:
(SITE PLAN)
1) Move restaurant site closer to El Camino Real for more of a
street prescense and provide outdoor seating.
2) Work on landscaping at the front of the site.
Property
Owner/Applicant:
Timmons Calstate LLC, c/o Joel & Priscilla Brown Family LTD PTP, 2200
Faraday Ave. #250, Carlsbad, CA 92008
Applicant: Richard Hofmeister, Dynamic Development Company, 1725 21 st St., Santa
Monica, CA 90404
Project Title: PLN 2016-1596 / DRC 2016-0087
Project
Location:
7300 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
(APN 030-222-048) San Luis Obispo County
Project
Description:
New 8635 sq. ft. commercial building. Includes 3650 sq. ft. Urgent Care (Med
Post) and up to 3 retail/restaurant spaces (1,300 - 2,200 sq. ft. each.)
Includes demolition of existing vacant restaurant (previously Coco’s)
Zoning District: Commercial Service (CS)
General Plan Designation: Service Commercial (SC)
City Staff: Callie Taylor, Sr. Planner, ctaylor@atascadero.org, Phone: 805-470-3448
Staff
Recommendation:
Staff recommends DRC provide direction regarding potential modifications to
site layout and architectural elevations as recommended by City staff.
12
DRC Draft Action Minutes of 6/7/16
Page 3 of 3
3) Urgent Care building (Med Post, old Coco’s site) will be located
towards back of parking lot.
4) Applicant can work with Public Works if they would like to
improve the bus stop.
5) Applicant can abandon one driveway access on the north end,
while keeping existing ADA ramp.
6) Work with Public Works on the Stormwater requirements and
possibly do a retention swale.
(ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN)
7) The two buildings may be different as long as they are
complimentary of eachother. Can use brick and make it
modern/comtemporary. Provide high quality finish on the
outside, esp. on the portion visible to the public.
There was Committee consensus to approve the project.
Community Development Director Dunsmore stated that the applicant can work with staff
on a second rendition of the site now that they have DRC’s recommendations.
COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
DIRECTORS REPORT
Community Development Director Dunsmore stated that the next DRC meeting will be at
the beginning of July, and the committee may hear a project for an event center.
ADJOURNMENT– 3:06 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the DRC will be announced.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
______________________________
Annette Manier, Recording Secretary
t:\~ design review committee\minutes\minutes 2016\draft actn drc minutes 6-7-2016.am.docx
13
14
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE: 7-13-16
Atascadero Design Review Committee
Report In Brief - Community Development Department
Callie Taylor, Senior Planner, 470-3448, ctaylor@atascadero.org
PLN 2016-1596 / DRC 2016-0087
New Commercial Building & Coco’s Building Remodel
7300 El Camino Real
(Dynamic Development Company)
Property Owner:
Timmons Calstate LLC
In care of: Joel & Priscilla
Brown Family LTD PTP
Address: 7300 El Camino Real
APN: 030-222-048
General Plan: Service Commercial
(SC)
Zoning: Commercial Service
(CS)
Project Area: 0.86 acres
Existing Use: Vacant restaurant
building
(formerly Coco’s
Restaurant)
Proposed: Second DRC review: Redevelopment of 7300 El Camino Real.
Proposed remodel of old Coco’s restaurant to provide for new
restaurant with rear patio. New 3,650 sq. ft. commercial building for
Med Post urgent care. Reconfigured site layout, parking areas and
drive aisles proposed.
Recommendation: Staff recommends DRC review updated site plan and architectural
elevations and provide direction to applicant and City staff regarding
any requested modifications.
Background:
On June 7, 2016, the DRC met to discuss a proposed site plan and elevations for
redevelopment of 7300 El Camino Real, which has been vacant since December 2015.
The applicant’s original proposal included demolition of the existing Coco’s restaurant
and construction of one (1) new 8635 sq. ft. commercial building. The building was
proposed to include an Urgent Care center (Med Post) and up to 3 retail/restaurant
spaces (1,300 - 2,200 sq. ft. each.)
15
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Previous Front Elevation, Single Building, Proposed June 7, 2016
Previous Site Plan, Proposed June 7, 2016
16
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
At the June 7th meeting, the DRC provided comments regarding architectural elevations
and site layout. Direction consisted of the following key points:
Site plan to be revised to create two separate buildings. Move building closer to
El Camino Real to create street presence (avoid “strip mall” appearance)
Larger outdoor dining patio(s) to be used in front of restaurant building; should be
located near El Camino Real frontage
Eliminate the smaller retail spaces in-lieu of a larger patio space for the
restaurant. Sit down restaurants are preferred. Casual dining ok (no drive-thrus)
Architectural style should relate to historic Atascadero Colony architecture. The
Bakery Building downtown at 5915 El Camino Real was referenced as a good
architectural style to mimic (simple form, emphasis on structural components,
storefront, large windows, historic color palate & materials.) Should not be a flat
modern architecture; it needs to relate to Atascadero.
Incorporate higher quality architectural materials, including brick or stone, which
relate to historic and current architectural styles in Atascadero.
Applicant discussed possible reuse of existing Coco’s building with extensive
remodel in an effort to save on construction costs.
Historic Bakery Building Downtown at 5915 El Camino Real
Referenced by DRC as a good example of Atascadero architectural style
17
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Evaluation of Updated Site Plan & Elevations:
Over the past month, the applicant has been working on a few site options to
reconfigure the site plan. The current proposal (July 7, 2016) submitted for DRC review
includes remodel of the existing Coco’s building to save on costs, rather than full
demolition of the building. A potential tenant of the new restaurant space could be
Pieology Pizzeria, a fast, casual dining restaurant. The Med Post would be constructed
as new 3,650 sq. ft. freestanding building. As a medical office, Med Post does not want
to be located in a refurbished building, and requires new construction. The smaller
1,000 sq. ft. commercial retail spaces have bene eliminated from the current proposal.
Current Updated Site Plan Proposal (July 7, 2016)
The separation of the tenants into two separate buildings is a positive change. The
elimination of the north driveway entrance provide s better onsite circulation and allows
for the new Med Post building to be located closer to El Camino Real on the north side
of the property.
El Camino Real
18
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
However, City staff has some outstanding concerns. The following items do not
comply with the previous DRC direction at the June 7, 2016 meeting:
1. Modern architectural elevations on Med Post building are predominantly
unchanged from previously submittal. Expansive stucco wall and gray stone
walls, with metal banding along roofline where signage would be located. Colors
are high contrast (white, gray and red.) Elevations still read as mostly large flat
walls, with a more modern aesthetic that does not reference local architectural
styles or relate to surrounding buildings.
Staff recommends the following:
- Create emphasis a traditional storefront. Show more of the building’s
architectural structure, including columns, bulkheads and horizontal banding,
cornices, clerestory windows and awnings. Avoid large flat walls.
- Staff recommends use of brick or stone. Color scheme should reflect more
historic color palate with deeper earth tones (Not high contrast white stucco,
gray stone tiles, or red metal.)
- Images provided by applicant as examples of Med Post building elsewhere
(see Attachment 3) are much more in line with the style and materials DRC
requested at previous meeting. Revisions to match these examples would be
preferred in-lieu of the elevation drawings submitted with the plan proposal.
Current Updated Med Stop Elevation Proposal (July 7, 2016)
19
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
2. Patio for the restaurant is located at the back of the building facing HWY
101. The proposal is to utilize the existing roof structure of the old Coco’s
building. While staff is encouraged by the prop osal for a large patio, the location
creates several key issues:
a) Noise from HWY 101. Acoustic study would be required to ensure does
exceed thresholds. Will most likely require sound walls. Will not be pleasant
place to dine so close to off ramp and freeway traffic.
b) “Back of house” (dumpster, loading zones, kitchen access) is still adjacent to
El Camino Real, and most dominate elevation from street
c) Does not give the street presence DRC requested. Patio is hidden from El
Camino Real
- Staff recommends the following: One alternative may be to reconfigure the
parking area (5 compact spaces) between El Camino Real the restaurant,
and locate the outdoor patio in this area. Additional landscape and seating
here, in place of the trash storage and loading zone, would enhance the
street frontage.
Patio proposed
adjacent to HWY 101
under existing Coco’s
roof structure
By reconfiguring parking and relocating
trash enclosure, this area next to El Camino
would be much better utilized for patio
Proposed patio at rear of site does not have El
Camino Real presence. Freeway noise and
visible high speed traffic is a major concern
20
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Conclusion:
The applicant has suggested that they need to find ways to lower costs, such as utilizing
the existing building, in order to making this redevelopment project pencil out financially.
The applicant is nearing the end of time on option to purchase the site and needs to
make a decision as to how to move forward.
The current proposal appears to have two key issues which conflict with DRC’s previous
direction: 1.) Modern, flat walls on the Med Post building do not reference historic
Atascadero architectural style or compliment surrounding buildings; and 2.) Location of
the restaurant patio along the Highway 101 frontage is undesirable due to noise and
lack of El Camino Real presence. City staff is referring the current plans to DRC for
input in order to move the project along quickly and receive consensus on potential
design modifications.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Site Photos, 7300 El Camino Real
Attachment 2: Current Conceptual Plans – Site Plan & Med Post Elevations
Attachment 3: Med Post Prototype Buildings
Attachment 4: Pieology Prototype Buildings
21
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Attachment 1: Site Photos
7300 El Camino Real
22
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Attachment 2: Current Conceptual Plans – Site Plan & Med Post Elevations
7300 El Camino Real
23
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
24
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
25
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Attachment 3: Med Post Prototype Buildings
Examples of architectural styles utilized elsewhere
26
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Med Post Floor Plan
27
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
Attachment 4: Pieology Pizzeria Prototype Buildings
Examples of architectural styles utilized elsewhere
28
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
29
ITEM NUMBER:
3
DATE:
7-13-16
30
ITEM NUMBER:
4
DATE: 7-13-16
Atascadero Design Review Committee
Report In Brief - Community Development Department
Phil Dunsmore, Community Development Director, pdunsmore@atascadero.org
PLN 2016-1604
New Accessory Structure
6005 Lewis Avenue
(City of Atascadero Fire Department)
Property Owner:
City of Atascadero
Address: 6005 Lewis Avenue
APN: 029-332-004
General Plan: Downtown (D)
Zoning: Downtown Commercial
(DC)
Project Area: 1 acre
Existing Use: Fire Station 1
Proposed:
New 20’ by 49’ (980 sf) metal building
Recommendation: Staff recommends DRC approve the design and siting of the metal
canopy.
Background:
The subject site is located near the corner of Lewis Avenue and Traffic Way at the rear
yard of Fire Station 1.
The Fire Department would like to install a metal canopy to protect the Disaster
Response Trailer, "DRT" which carries all of the City’s technical rescue equipment. A
preliminary site plan and building design has been submitted for DRC review. The
proposal is for a new 980 sq. ft. metal building, enclosed on the sides only, and open at
each end to allow the fire equipment to be protected at the rear of the site at the existing
asphalt parking area. No site work, grading or other development is proposed. The
31
ITEM NUMBER:
4
DATE:
7-13-16
project requires DRC review since it includes a new building in a commercial zoning
district.
Evaluation:
1. Site Planning
Proposed site design includes one new metal canopy at the northeast corner of the site
at the location of the existing parked trailer. The new canopy would be 20 feet wide and
49 feet deep and located with at least a 5 foot setback from property lines. The new
canopy would be anchored into the existing driveway.
Conceptual Site Plan
Design / Elevations
The proposed metal canopy would
be constructed by Pacific Metal
Buildings Inc. and would consist of
a “boxed eve” structure with an
open gable end. Proposed colors
are pewter gray and a “Quaker
gray” trim to match the existing fire
station building. The building would
simply be anchored to the existing
asphalt driveway and would be
open on both ends similar to this
photo.
Proposed Site
Example of a “Boxed Eve” canopy
32
ITEM NUMBER:
4
DATE:
7-13-16
Conclusion:
The proposed metal canopy is a cost effective, simple solution to protect the valuable
equipment that is currently parked at the rear of the site, exposed to the elements.
Given the location at the rear corner of the site, the proposed location and simple
design is appropriate. Staff is in support of the placement of the metal building at this
site. The DRC should provide comments on the siting, colors, and design of the
proposed building.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Comments from Fire
33
ITEM NUMBER:
4
DATE:
7-13-16
Attachment 1: Staff and Fire Department application response
34
ITEM NUMBER:
4
DATE:
7-13-16
35
36