HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2026-04-28_09e Resolution Approving Mural_ARC 25-005Item 9.e.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Andrew Perez, Interim Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Approving Architectural Review 25-005
DATE: April 28, 2026
ACTION:
1) Adopt a Resolution approving Architectural Review 25-005 for a proposed mural at 201
E. Branch Street; and
2) Find that the project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 for minor alterations to existing
structures.
BACKGROUND:
On April 14, 20261, City Council considered and approved the application for a public art
project at 201 E. Branch Street following a noticed public hearing, subject to adoption of
an appropriate resolution memorializing that approval. Adoption of the prepared
Resolution will approve the project with findings based on those made by Council at the
April 14, 2026, hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Adopt the prepared Resolution approving the project; or
2. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Approval of the project will result in a new mural within the Village.
DISADVANTAGES:
None identified.
1https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=80f3febc -62ad-4019-84eb-
c137c344ad1f&lang=English&Agenda=Agenda&Item=42&Tab=attachments
Page 37 of 209
Item 9.e.
City Council
Adoption of a Resolution Approving Architectural Review 25-005
April 28, 2026
Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The proposed mural is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”) under the Class 1 exemption, which applies to the operation, repair,
maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing structures,
facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features where the project involves
negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. (State CEQA Guidelines, §
15301.) The City further finds that no exceptions to the Class 1 exemption apply.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
Page 38 of 209
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE APPROVING ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 25-005 FOR A
PROPOSED MURAL AT 201 EAST BRANCH STREET
WHEREAS, the City’s Architectural Review Committee (ARC) reviewed and
recommended that the City Council approve the proposed painting of a mural at 201
East Branch Street (“project”) on November 3, 2025, in accordance with the City’s
Public Art Guidelines and Public Art Donation Program (the “Guidelines”); and
WHEREAS, the applicant for the proposed mural is “Monarch Books”, which operates a
bookstore; and
WHEREAS, on April 14, 2026, the City Council reviewed the project at a duly noticed
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) the State CEQA Guidelines, and has determined
that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 for
projects proposing minor alterations to existing structures; and.
WHEREAS, all prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. Recitals. All recitals above are true and correct and hereby incorporated into
reference.
2. CEQA. The proposed mural is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 1 exemption, which applies
to the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor
alteration of existing structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or
topographical features where the project involves negligible or no expansion of
existing or former use. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15301.) The City further finds
that no exceptions to the Class 1 exemption apply.
3. Architectural Review Findings:
1. The proposal is consistent with the architectural guidelines of the city, or
guidelines prepared for the area in which the project is located;
The proposal to paint a wall mural on a painted brick wall, and as
recommended by the Architectural Review Committee (ARC), is consistent
with all applicable architectural guidelines for the project. Painted wall murals
are appropriate for this location due to the historical use of painted wall signs
directly onto brick buildings. The colors and the content of the mural are
consistent with all relevant guidelines, including the City’s Design Guidelines
and Standards for the Historic Character Overlay District (D-2.4).
Page 39 of 209
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
2. The proposal is consistent with the text and maps of the Arroyo Grande
general plan and this title;
The proposal, as recommended by the ARC, is consistent with the City’s
General Plan, specifically the Economic Development Element, which
emphasizes the implementation of public art.
3. The proposal will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and general
welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the
proposed project;
The proposal, as recommended by the ARC, will not be detrimental to the
health of safety of the general public due to being designed with materials
that are intended for use on outdoor walls. Further, the applicant will be
required to implement appropriate safety measures for pedestrians while the
work is occurring that will mitigate any potential safety issues during
installation.
4. The general appearance of the proposal is in keeping with the character of
the neighborhood;
The appearance of the artwork, as recommended by the ARC, is in keeping
with the character of the neighborhood. The inclusion of whimsical elements
provide visual intrigue in an area frequented by members of the publi c and
will increase the visual interest of the area, which is already intended for
pedestrians and public engagement.
5. The proposal is not detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development
of the city;
The approval of this artwork will not have any e ffect on the harmonious
development of the City due to being consistent with the adopted guidelines
for public art. Further, the installation of public art in the Village will promote
business development and improve the character of the entire corridor.
6. The proposal will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the
neighborhood.
The proposal, as recommended by the ARC, will not impair the desirability of
the neighborhood due to being consistent with the adopted guidelines for
public art. Further, the installation of public art in an area designed for
pedestrian activity increases the visual intrigue and creates a sense of
community that will promote further investment in the neighborhood.
4. Public Art Selection Criteria Findings:
Page 40 of 209
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
1. Evaluation of artistic excellence, examining:
a. The artist’s qualifications, including: education, training, experience,
body of work, recognition of the artist, and the consistency of the
artist’s qualifications with the stated goals of the project;
b. The artist’s record of previous collaboration with other agencies,
organizations, artists, fabricators, or installers to achieve a successful
result in implementing the proposed project;
c. The artist’s experience working in the public realm;
d. To the extent applicable, the artist’s previous proven successful
experience in creating, producing or otherwise implementing projects
similar to the one proposed;
e. The original nature of the proposed concept;
f. The inherent artistic quality and aesthetic merit of the work;
The artist, Marmalade Mural Company, has completed numerous projects
with similar scopes and scale and has collaborated with dozens of public and
private agencies to complete similar projects throughout the country.
Specifically, the artist has completed numerous examples of highly visible
public wall murals painted directly on brick. Examples include work done at
SLO County Airport, the SLO Ranch Market and SLODOCO.
2. Appropriateness of scale, form, material, content and design relative to
the immediate neighborhood and environment; no mural shall be approved if
the mural, as proposed, would create an objective risk to public health,
safety, or welfare (e.g. a mural near a roadway would be rejected for the use
of reflective materials, like mirrors, which could cause a distraction to drivers).
Scale is defined as the relative size of a building element in relation to other
forms and the human body. Form is the shape or configuration of the
artwork;
The proposal to paint a wall mural, as recommended by the Archit ectural
Review Committee (ARC) is appropriate for the location in terms of form,
material and scale. The proposed location being a public walkway will not
endanger the public due to being oriented for pedestrian viewers and will not
impact the safety of passing vehicles on Branch Street, nor will in endanger
pedestrians viewing the mural. The artwork's objective, which is to serve as a
"selfie spot" ensures that the scale of the mural will be an appropriate scale.
3. Appropriateness of proposed materials in regards to structural and
surface integrity. Materials should be considered in the context of ability to
deter against vandalism, withstand weathering, and maintain the intended
Page 41 of 209
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
design;
The proposed use of exterior-rated paint is intended to maintain the durability
of the artwork over time. After completion of the artwork, a clear coat
preventing vandalism will be applied to further protect the artwork.
4. Ease of maintenance and longevity of the proposed materials;
The proposed use of exterior-rated paint was selected with ease of
maintenance and longevity in mind and are intended for the proposed method
of installation. The use of a protective clear coat will further increase the
longevity of the artwork and dramatically reduce maintenance needs.
5. Appropriateness of the proposed method of installation of the artwork with
consideration given to the safety and structural factors involved in installation;
The proposed method of painting the mural has been selected to consider
safety and structural factors involved in installation. The artist will be required
to provide a pedestrian detour plan if their proposal involves the closure of
any public sidewalks and, therefore, will not contribute to an unsafe situation
for the artist nor the public during the creation of the mural.
6. Location, considering the intended audience for the proposal, whether the
public will be a captive audience or whether a person would need to take
affirmative steps to view the project. Consideration shall be given to whether
the mural would be in an area typically accessed or viewable by minors;
The proposed artwork, visible to the general public, has been designed to
reflect the broad interests of the public and is intended to attract visitor s to
the Village by providing a backdrop for photographs.
7. A mural shall not be approved if it includes:
a. Copyrighted work without permission of the holder of the copyright.
b. Obscene materials.
c. Defamatory content.
d. Fighting words or advocates imminent lawless action.
e. Content, including but not limited to, words, symbols, signs, trademarks,
or references to products or services provided on the premises. Such
content meets the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) definition for
signage, as regulated by AGMC Chapter 16.60;
The artwork does not contain copyrighted words or imagery, nor does it
contain content that is obscene, defamatory, or that will incite imminent
lawless action. The imagery and elements portrayed in the mural were
Page 42 of 209
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 5
determined to be distinct from commercial signage because the mural:
Does not directly mention the title of the business;
References the butterfly statue located at County library, which is
located in the City so references and ties into an existing artistic
feature of the City;
Monarchs inhabit the Arroyo Grande area and the use of the
monarch is not intended to reference the business name, and
The public would engage with the sign even if the business were
no longer there and includes themes of the community’s values.
8. Public Art proposed in the D-2.4 Historic Character Overlay District is also
subject to the following criteria:
a. An identified relationship to the social, cultural and historical identity of the
area;
b. An identified relationship to the site's existing architectural features;
c. The nature of the site's surrounding neighborhood and potential impact of
the public art project on residents, businesses, and existing works of art or
design elements within the site's vicinity.
The proposed artwork has an identified relationship to the identity of the area
and compliments the existing architecture, which includes a painted brick
wall. The installation of a painted wall mural in this location will complement
the character of the existing built environment and will have a positive impact
on the Village as a whole by attracting new visitors and providing visual
appeal to a walkway with public access.
5. Severability. If any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
resolution or the document in the record in support of this resolution is determined
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, unenforceable, unconstitutional or
otherwise void, that determination shall not affect the validity of the remaining
sections, divisions, sentences, clauses, or phrases of this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves the project as described and shown in Exhibit “A” attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference with the above findings, attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
On a motion by Council member _________, seconded by Council member __________,
and by the following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 28th day of April 2026.
Page 43 of 209
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 6
_______________________________________
CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
_______________________________________
MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________________
ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY
Page 44 of 209
EXHIBIT A
Page 45 of 209
Page 46 of 209