Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC_2020-08-12_MinutesC' ��SeC)ADEROciT� oCITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES Regular Meeting — Wednesday, August 12, 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 2:02 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 Public Works Director, Nick DeBar Senior Planner, Kelly Gleason Associate Planner, John Holder IT Director, Luke Knight Others Present: Clayton Cook Aaron Gannage Darin Vandeventer Gary Harcourt APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Committee Member Newsom and seconded by Committee Member Anderson to approve the Agenda. Motion passed by unanimous consent. DRC Minutes of 8/12/2020 Page 1 of 6 PUBLIC COMMENT None. Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DRAFT MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2020 MOTION: By Committee Member Newsom and seconded by Committee Member Baranek to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed by unanimous consent. DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW 2. DESIGN REVIEW OF A PLANNED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT 3710 EL CAMINO REAL. The proposed project includes three (3) mixed-use buildings with a total of six (6) second -floor residential units and first -floor commercial spaces. The project includes private open space areas and 27 parking spaces. • 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. (DEv1 s -0124 -Cook) Planner Holder gave a presentation on the project, and he and Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Committee. PUBLIC COMMENT The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Clayton Cook and Aaron Gannage. Mr. Cook and Mr. Gannage answered questions from the Committee. Mr. Cook said phasing will depend on the financing after project approvals. The property is narrow which poses challenges. Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period. DRC ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: The Committee made the following recommendations: Site Design The Committee was in agreement with the overall site design. Parking The Committee recognized that the parking reduction will be a Planning Commission decision. The curb by the walkways will be painted red so people should not park there. DRC Minutes of 8/12/2020 Page 2 of 6 Landscaping and Decorative Pavement The Committee recognized that there is not much space to do a lot of landscaping. There is already mature landscaping on the site. The Committee recommended that the applicant work with staff to look at landscaping to take into consideration providing privacy for both sides. Setbacks/Variance The Committee recognized that this will be a Planning Commission topic, but could support the finding for the proposed setbacks and variance. Fencing and Screening There is an apartment complex very close to this property, so the Committee recommended the applicant work with staff to provide privacy. The Committee recommended a limit of seven (7) feet for new fencing. Anything over six (6) feet will need Planning Commission approval. Architectural Design The Committee recommended the following: • Darker building colors, preferably gray or brown. • Architectural theme and color should be used on all sides of the building. • The applicant will work with staff on the design of shutters and the same appearance on all the windows. • Staff work with the applicant on the garage doors and windows to make them pleasing and compatible to each other. • Retain juliet balconies as it makes the wall more interesting and decorative. • The applicant shall work with staff to come up with a pleasing exterior to provide articulation on the north -facing wall. • Work with the applicant on wall facing Hwy. 101 for window consistency and more articulation on blank walls. • Adding skylights to provide light that is more natural. • The Committee discussed having individual trash receptacles vs. a common dumpster, and recognized that this is a very narrow site, therefore would like the applicant to work with staff on a solution prior to Conditional Use Permit approval. Signage The Committee was in agreement with staff on the sign recommendations as long as the signage adheres to the sign policy. The signage would be illuminated and on a timer to ensure compatibility. This item will move on to the Planning Commission for final approval. DRC Minutes of 8/12/2020 Page 3 of 6 3. DESIGN REVIEW OF A COMMERCIAL PARK DEVELOPMENT AT 1600 AND 1610 EL CAMINO REAL. The proposed project includes a new commercial park with three (3) new commercial buildings with on-site parking, landscaping, and interior open space area. 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. (PRE20-0055-Vandeventer) Ex Parte Communications Committee member Dariz stated for the record that he is the architect on the project next door to this address. He has no vested or financial interest in this project, and spoke with the Director of Community Development prior to the meeting to make sure he could participate in the meeting. Director Dunsmore gave a history and background on the project and said there is an active code enforcement case on this property. The site is highly visible from EI Camino Real and the US101. The City will continue to work with Mr. Vandeventer on gaining compliance. Planner Holder gave a presentation on the project, and he and Director Dunsmore answered questions from the Committee. Staff is concerned with the use of outdoor storage since most outdoor storage uses are not allowed under the zoning district. Staff is also concerned about the appearance of an unfinished wall, and that the wall might not be completed in the future. Director Debar gave a statement on the retention basin, storm water pipe, and private utility easement. The applicant will need to get permission from utility companies to be able to situate a retention basin in the easement area. The applicant did forward an email from PG&E saying that they would be okay with the location. There will not be dramatic changes to the design based on the retention basin; therefore, the discussion could continue. PUBLIC COMMENT The following members of the public spoke during public comment: Darin Vandeventer and Gary Harcourt, Architect for the project. Mr. Vandeventer and Mr. Harcourt gave a presentation on their project, and answered questions from the Committee. Chairperson Fonzi closed the Public Comment period. DRC ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: The Committee made the following recommendations: Site Design and Access The Committee was in agreement with staff's recommendations on site design and access. Retention Basin Location The Committee recommended that the retention basin and easement issue could be worked out with staff, the applicant and the utility companies. DRC Minutes of 8/12/2020 Page 4 of 6 Frontage Improvements The Committee was in agreement with staff's recommendations. Design Compatibility The Committee was in agreement with staff's recommendations. Architarfiira The Committee was in agreement on the architecture of the building and were in favor of the quality material used. The Committee believes the project is an asset to what is currently there. Signage The Committee was in favor of reduced signage, and not in favor of a large freestanding sign because other industrial parks do not have this type of signage, and because this is a business park, and if approved, it could set a precedent. The Committee was in favor of complying with the code. The proposed sign is not compatible with current sign regulations. The applicant was informed that if they want to seek an exception, they could apply for an exception later, but for now the freeway facing sign would not be part of the plan. The Committee approved a small freestanding sign up to 12 feet. Landscaping, Fencing and Screening The Committee was in agreement with the trash dumpsters being screened behind a six (6) foot high masonry wall. The roof will be used for most of the air conditioning units. The Committee was in agreement with staff's recommendations on landscaping and decorative pavement. Retaining Walls and Screening The Committee recommended that the walls will be capped in the interim between the time the wall is built and the building is built. To exceed a six (6) foot wall height a CUP may be required. The applicant disagrees in how the height is determined, so the applicant should follow the municipal code standards. It is helpful that these will be integrated into the building. The Committee recommended that the site is used for the intended purposes allowed by the CPK zone, and anything otherwise would be a violation. The Committee and staff do not want an unfinished project, and want the unpermitted storage yard that is currently on site to be resolved as soon as possible. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS None DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Dunsmore stated that the next meeting is scheduled for September 9, 2020. DRC Minutes of 8/12/2020 Page 5 of 6 ADJOURNMENT— 5:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the DRC is scheduled for September 9, 2020. MINUTES PREPARED BY: y � Annette Manier, Recording Secretary Administrative Assistant Adopted Sept. 9, 2020 DRC Minutes of 8/12/2020 Page 6 of 6