HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC_2020-03-25_Minutes(D��A 2 d 2020
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING
CITY OF ATASCADERO
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MINUTES
Regular Meeting — Wednesday, March 25, 2020 — 2:00 P.M.
City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA
(Meeting held by teleconference)
CALL TO ORDER — 2:00 p.m.
Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 2:04 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Roberta Fonzi
Committee Member Duane Anderson
Committee Member Mark Dariz
Committee Member Emily Baranek
Committee Member Heather Newsom
Absent: None
Staff Present: Community Development Director, Phil Dunsmore
Senior Planner, Kelly Gleason
Associate Planner, John Holder
Recording Secretary, Annette Manier
Luke Knight, IT Director
Others Present: David Low
Griselda Arroyo, Sprouse Communications
Matt Cebulla, Architect, Cebulla Associates
John Ferguson
Charles Cebulla
Chairperson Fonzi explained the new process for DRC meetings being teleconferenced.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Committee Member Anderson and seconded
by Committee Member Dariz to approve the
Agenda.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote.
(Commissioner Baranek absent)
DRC Minutes of 3/25/2020
Page 1 of 5
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF DRAFT MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2020
MOTION: By Committee Member Anderson and seconded by
Committee Member Newsom to approve the
Consent Calendar.
Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote.
(Commissioner Baranek absent)
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW
(Commissioner Baranek joined the meeting at 2:29 p.m.)
2. DESIGN REVIEW OF CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES YARD AT
6501 VIA AVE.
The project includes a new outdoor contract construction services yard,
installation of cargo containers (seatrains), and use of existing office for
Sprouse Communications.
• Recommendation: Staff requests the DRC review the proposed
design and direct the applicant to make any modifications to the site or
building design as necessary. (usE20-0010)
Director Dunsmore presented the project, and answered questions from the Committee.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Griselda Arroyo from
Sprouse Communications. Ms. Arroyo answered questions from the Committee.
Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
DRC ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
The Committee made the following recommendations:
Land Use, Site Design
The Committee agreed that this land use and site design is appropriate for this site, and
staff has addressed the items appropriately. The back of property will be fenced and not
used by Sprouse. The proposed project uses less area of the property than the previously
approved project.
DRC Minutes of 3/25/2020
Page 2 of 5
Existing Building
The Committee was in agreement with the appearance of the existing building, and
recommended that the applicant work with staff to make sure they are meeting City
recommendations and Municipal Code requirements.
Landscaping
The Committee was in agreement with reduced landscaping requirements due to existing
vegetation and site conditions.
Fencing, screening and lighting
The Committee agreed that lighting should be a key element in safety and site security,
and that the applicant should work with staff to determine where security lighting is
appropriate and appropriate light shielding. The Committee was in agreement with the
proposed separation fence materials (wood framing and metal panels) as suggested by
staff.
Proposed proiect conditions
The Committee recommended that the seatrains be painted a consistent, neutral color if
two are placed on site.
Applicant Arroyo stated that she is in agreement with the above. This item will move on
to Planning Commission. With the approval of the DRC and issuance of a building permit,
one (1) seatrain is permitted on site until Planning Commission approval.
3. DESIGN REVIEW OF A MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 7298 SANTA
YSABEL.
The project applicant proposes the construction of 11 residential units on a
multi -family site.
• Recommendation: Staff requests the DRC review the proposed
design and direct the applicant to make any modifications to the site or
building design as necessary. (PRE19-0126)
Planner Gleason gave a presentation on the project, and she and Director Dunsmore
answered questions from the Committee. Planner Gleason stated that there is a new site
plan, which was not in the staff report, and presented it to the Committee (Exhibit A).
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke during public comment.. Matt Cebulla, Charles
Cebulla, John Ferguson, and David Low.
Mr. Low spoke about his concerns with the project and had sent an email to the
Committee prior to the meeting (Exhibit B).
Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
DRC Minutes of 3/25/2020
Page 3 of 5
Staff, the applicant, and the Committee addressed the questions raised by Mr. Low.
DRC ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
The Committee deliberated on all items listed and included the applicant in their
discussion.
Chairperson Fonzi reopened the Public Comment period.
The following members of the public spoke during public comment: David Low.
Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period.
The Committee made the following recommendations:
Conceptual Site Design
The Committee recommended that the applicant reconfigure the site and suggested the
following ideas as possible alternatives for a redesign:
• Change front door entries (entries are at the wrong end of the unit.)
• Reconfigure the long driveway (driveway leading to the front door is not
safe, and provides little to no area for children to play.)
• Review location of sidewalks (sidewalks do not connect to the front door
area.)
• Review floor plans. Having one bedroom downstairs and one upstairs,
may not be such a good idea or compatible for most families and the
Committee is concerned that with this separation, a space could end up
being rented, contributing to the parking problem.
• Entrance to the stairway could move more towards the carport side,
(there may be a way to make the entrance towards the front side) so
that people can park parallel to their property.
• The applicant may consider moving the sidewalk back.
• The applicant could eliminate garages altogether and possibly have two
carports and storage.
• Applicant and staff should determine if the applicant is able to straighten
out their side of the street a bit more and if so, they might get additional
parking spaces.
• The applicant could explore placing all units attached together, which
would open up a lot of space.
Fencing
The Committee will review fencing in more detail when the project comes back for review.
Landscaping
The Committee will review landscaping in more detail when the project comes back for
review. Staff had concerns about the canopy trees along the isle.
DRC Minutes of 3/25/2020
Page 4 of 5
Trash
The applicant should contact the trash company to see if individual bin service down the
shared driveway is possible as there is not enough room on the street to accommodate
bins for each unit. The Committee prefers that the site have a common trash receptacle
onsite, possibly near the back drainage area.
Parking
The Committee agreed that parking is too tight and may create problems in the
neighborhood. The Committee would like the applicant to explore losing one unit, which
could provide some answers. It is possible that covered parking be waived, but would
have to be a Planning Commission recommendation. The applicant can also enforce the
use of the garage for parking and not for storage.
Architectural Design Package
The Committee agreed with the architectural design of the project. The applicant should
work with staff to obtain information on drainage volume at the back of the property.
The Committee recommended this item come back before the Design Review Committee,
with possible recommendations to the Planning Commission in regards to parking issues.
The City does require covered parking for multi -family, and may need exemptions or a
change in the rules for this project so they could have some other type of parking.
Director Dunsmore noted that this is a ministerial review and will not go to Planning
Commission for approval, so exceptions may not be able to be pursued.
COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Dunsmore stated that there are no items scheduled for the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT— 3:51 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the DRC is tentatively scheduled for April 15, 2020, at 2:00
p.m.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Annette Manier, Recording Secretary
Administrative Assistant
The following exhibits are available in the Community Development Department:
Exhibit A — Revised site plan for 7298 Santa Ysabel
Exhibit B — Email from David Low
Adopted April 29, 2020
DRC Minutes of 3/25/2020
Page 5 of 5