The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRe Follow up after our meeting (10)1 Christian, Kevin From:Scott Romaine <scottr@studio-2g.com> Sent:Monday, January 20, 2020 12:58 PM To:Oetzell, Walter Cc:Heidi Gibson Subject:Re: Follow up after our meeting Walter, I've concluded my analysis. Gross lot size: 2 acres Net lot size: 1.52 acres Orcutt Area Specific Plan states dwellings w/ 2 bedrooms or more shall count as 1 density unit. Allowable density units per acre for R‐2 = 12 units Maximum allowable density units on site: 12 units x 1.52 acres = 18 density units Dwelling 1 = 4 Bedrooms (2947 SF) = 1 unit Dwelling 2 = 3 Bedrooms (1658 SF) = 1 unit Dwelling 3 = 2 Bedrooms (1432 SF) = 1 unit Total existing density units: 3 units Remain density potential = 18 density units allowable ‐ 3 density units provided = 15 density units potential Based on this analysis it appears that there is still plenty of development potential on site and that having an additional (R) use i.e. cabana over garage should be allowable. Let me know your thoughts or it you have any questions. Best, ‐S On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:43 PM Oetzell, Walter <woetzell@slocity.org> wrote: Sounds good. It occurs to me that there may also be some alternate standards (e.g. for density) in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, so that should be taken into account. -- Walter Oetzell 2 Assistant Planner (805) 781-7593 From: Scott Romaine <scottr@studio‐2g.com> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2020 2:37 PM To: Oetzell, Walter <woetzell@slocity.org> Cc: Heidi Gibson <heidi@studio‐2g.com> Subject: Re: Follow up after our meeting Walter, Thank you for taking the time to respond in detail. I reach out to Kyle and see if he recollects any findings and I will be doing the density calcs to figure what room we may have for addition (R) uses. Best, ‐S On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:32 PM Scott Romaine <scottr@studio‐2g.com> wrote: I will do the calcs mentioned above. I created the project notes folder and made a copy of the gdoc and will keep track of verbal discussions here. On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:17 PM Heidi Gibson <heidi@studio‐2g.com> wrote: I suggest we do the calculation and see what we come up with. Unfortunately, Joe was the one discussing this with planning and did not take very good notes. Please keep track of all phone conversations, etc. on our PROJECT NOTES gdoc and keep it filed in the job folder under PROJECT NOTES. Joe may not of even made this folder. The PROJECT NOTES gdoc is in JOB TEMPLATES and please make a copy prior to starting to edit. This way we have a written record of everything. Long story short; I think Joe was talking with Kyle on this. 3 Thank You, H e i d i G i b s o n, A I A, L E E D NC studio 2G Architects, LLP 1540 Marsh street, suite 230 san luis obispo, ca 93401 P : 805.594.0771 ext 111 W : http://www.studio-2g.com E : heidi@studio-2g.com FB : studio2G Architects ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Oetzell, Walter <woetzell@slocity.org> Date: Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:05 PM Subject: RE: Follow up after our meeting To: Scott Romaine <scottr@studio‐2g.com> Cc: Heidi Gibson <heidi@studio‐2g.com> Hello Scott, That will depend on the maximum permitted density for the property. Density is discussed in §17.70.040 or our Zoning Regulations. It is measured in “density units” allowed per “net acre.” Calculating Lot Area, including “Net Lot Area” is described in Zoning §17.70.110 (it excludes habitat area and area between top of creek banks, for example). 4 In the R-2 Zone, the maximum permitted density is 12 density units per net acre. Once you know the net lot area (in net acres) you can then multiply to determine the maximum number of permitted density units that could be permitted on the site. As you have existing development, you will need to “subtract” from that maximum to account for the existing development. Zoning §17.70.040 (Density) provides you with a table (subsection A.1) that tells you the density unit values for dwellings, based on how many bedrooms the dwelling has. After subtracting the existing development from the maximum density, you will see whether any potential density remains. If so, the table provided in §17.70.040(A)(1) gives you a guide as to how many more dwellings, with how many bedrooms in each, might be permitted on the site. I see that the site is about 2 acres in size, but that it has a creek through it. The area between the creek banks (and the area of any other feature listed in Zoning §17.70.110(B), such as habitat) will have to be subtracted to arrive at the “net lot area.” Assessor records suggest that there are three dwellings on site: 4- BR; 2-BR; 2-BR. Those, if that information is correct, would account for 4 “density units” of development, according to the table in §17.70.040(A)(1). Roughly speaking, that raw information suggests there may be, in general terms, development potential for additional dwellings, in absence of further knowledge about this specific property. However, I do not know what lies behind the advice you were given about allowing more residential use on the site. Perhaps there are additional restrictions on the property that limit further development, of which I am unaware? I would get back to the person providing those comments, for more information about their conclusion and advice. As Kyle Bell has familiarity with the property, he may be a good contact, if the source of the comment cannot be queried. We certainly want to look deeper into that before giving any positive indication about additional development potential. -- Walter Oetzell Assistant Planner (805) 781-7593 From: Scott Romaine <scottr@studio‐2g.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 4:21 PM To: Oetzell, Walter <woetzell@slocity.org> 5 Cc: Heidi Gibson <heidi@studio‐2g.com> Subject: Follow up after our meeting Walter, Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. I do have a follow up question and am seeking clarity regarding our site and its maximum allowed uses. We referenced the original design several times (which had a cabana on the second story over the garage/shop) and it seems that even though the footprint was larger that the massing was less offensive. The main reason we departed from that design concept was that we got a comment along the way stating planning would not allow another residential use on the site. The cabana was getting classified as residential (R) use so it was omitted from the design which has led to difficulty resolving the clients desire to have height and a way to resolve the massing architecturally. Can you please clarify if planning will allow another residential use as part of this project? Would we need some type of exception or variance? Please advise. Also, please confirm you've received this email so that I know you are aware of the question. Thanks, ‐‐ S c o t t R o m a i n e studio 2G Architects, LLP 1540 Marsh street, suite 230 san luis obispo, ca 93401 6 P : 805.594.0771 ext 113 W : http://www.studio-2g.com E : scottr@studio-2g.com FB : studio2G Architects ‐‐ S c o t t R o m a i n e studio 2G Architects, LLP 1540 Marsh street, suite 230 san luis obispo, ca 93401 P : 805.594.0771 ext 113 W : http://www.studio-2g.com E : scottr@studio-2g.com FB : studio2G Architects ‐‐ S c o t t R o m a i n e studio 2G Architects, LLP 1540 Marsh street, suite 230 san luis obispo, ca 93401 P : 805.594.0771 ext 113 W : http://www.studio-2g.com 7 E : scottr@studio-2g.com FB : studio2G Architects ‐‐ S c o t t R o m a i n e studio 2G Architects, LLP 1540 Marsh street, suite 230 san luis obispo, ca 93401 P : 805.594.0771 ext 113 W : http://www.studio-2g.com E : scottr@studio-2g.com FB : studio2G Architects