The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7/8/2020 Item 2, Cooper Wilbanks, Megan From:Bell, Kyle Sent:Wednesday, July 8, 2020 10:26 AM To:CityClerk Cc:Scott, Shawna; Codron, Michael; Corey, Tyler Subject:FW: Letter to the Planning Commission - 1144 Chorro Street Attachments:707_05_20...lettertopc.pdf Please upload the attached letter as correspondence for the PC hearing this evening for Item #2. Kyle Bell CDD Associate Planner T 805.781.7524 From: Allan Cooper < Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 2:56 PM To: Bell, Kyle <KBell@slocity.org> Subject: Letter to the Planning Commission - 1144 Chorro Street Dear Kyle - Would you kindly forward this letter to the Planning Commission? This letter pertains to Item #2, 1144 Chorro Street, which will come before the PC on July 8, 2020. Also, I would like to see this letter included in the City's correspondence file. Thank you and I hope you are staying safe! - Allan 1 Save Our Downtown ______________________________________________________________________________ Seeking to protect and promote the historical character, design, livability and economic success of downtown San Luis Obispo. To: San Luis Obispo Planning Commission and Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner Re: July 8, 2020 Meeting Item Number 2: 1144 Chorro Street  From: Allan Cooper, Secretary Save Our Downtown Date: July 5, 2020 On Monday, July 8, 2020 you will be reviewing a project proposed to be located at 1144 Chorro Street. Save Our Downtown is urging you to not consider allowing an FAR of 3.75 in exchange for guaranteeing long-term maintenance of the Downtown Centre public plaza. Moreover, we are urging you to not consider the off-site preservation of the Muzio Building at 868 and 870 Monterey Street in exchange for allowing an increase to the FAR from 3.75 to 3.94. Why? Under the policy objective “open space preservation”, staff states that “the LUE indicates that commercial core properties may serve as receiver sites for transfer of development credits, thereby having higher residential densities than otherwise allowed (LUE Policy 4.2.1 and LUE Policy 6.4.5)”. But read the text under 6.4.5. “Development Credit Transfer” and you will see that it contradicts the previous statement: “Any residential development credit obtained from Open Space designations outside the urban reserve line or development limit line should be transferred to land in the Downtown Core or Speciﬁc Plan area.” In other words, commercial core properties can be receiver sites for only open space created and preserved outside the urban reserve line. Staff states that under the policy objective “historic preservation”, “where there are no historic resources on the project site, the project provides for the permanent preservation of a building off site within the downtown historic district or Chinatown historic district that is listed in the city’s inventory of historical resources through the recordation of a historic preservation agreement.” But there is an historic resource on the project site, that of the Riley’s Department Store, by virtue of its association with a well-known, highly respected architect. Historian Paula Carr initially states that “there is no indication of any architect being associated with the project”. But later she states that a local architect, William Decker Holdredge, was responsible for the Chorro Street facade. This architect designed the 1951 San Luis Obispo City Hall. While in San Luis Obispo he served as Major in World War II between 1941-1946. He was born in Medina, N.Y. on Feb. 24, 1903 and died Aug. 30, 1989. He graduated from USC with a B.A. in 1926. After having a practice in San Luis Obispo between 1937 and 1957 he subsequently left for Houston, Texas to work for the famed ﬁrm of Wyatt C. Hedrick Architect & Engineer as an Executive Architect where he was responsible for the design of the Coke County Courthouse, Austin County Courthouse and the Brazoria County Courthouse. When you see the photos of these three projects which I’ve included for you below, you will be struck by the similarities these buildings have in common with the Riley’s Department Store (ref.: American Architects Directory: http://content.aia.org/sites/default/ﬁles/2018-09/Bowker_1962_H.pdf). Finally, we do not believe that these residential micro-units will be occupied by our local workforce for the following three reasons: 1) these units are simply too small as they range between 40% to 73% of the average apartment size in the City of San Luis Obispo. Like dormitory-style housing, these units are not family-friendly; 2) the rent per square foot, even for the 13 moderate income units, will be 64% higher than the City average and this may result in 2-3 tenants per studio, i.e, close-quarter living lacking in privacy and social distancing; 3) residents living in these units are likely to experience greater exposure densities and/or less social distancing because they will become dependent on common, narrow hallways and elevators for ingress and egress. They will also be dependent on the use of shared, congregate facilities including a shared media room/classroom, shared laundry facilities and a common kitchen. Permit us to elaborate further on the size and comparative cost of these units. Twenty-ﬁve percent of the proposed residential units (13 units) would be reserved for tenants with moderate incomes. Moderate income is deﬁned as 81% ($57.630) to 120% ($85,378) of County median household income ($71,148). That means that the maximum average rent (@ 30% of total household income) for the 25% (13 units) moderate income housing units will range between $1,441 to $2,134 per month. These units will range in size between 318 and 329 sq. ft. Presumably, the remaining 75% of housing units (ranging in size between 350 and 576 sq. ft.) will be charged higher (i.e., in excess of $2,134 per month) rents. The average rent for an apartment in SLO is $2,165 for an average apartment size of 785 sq. ft. or $2.76 per square foot. This is considerably less than the $4.53 per square foot charged for the low end of the 13 moderate income units. Because of the small size of these units and higher rental price per square foot, we hardly believe that these units will be attractive to our local workforce far less anyone else. Permit us to also elaborate on the negative impacts this pandemic and future pandemics will have on this project. Data from a Harris Poll found that nearly a third of Americans are considering relocating to less crowded places as a direct result of Covid-19. This poll, conducted at the end of April, indicated that respondents aged 18 to 35 were the most likely to be considering such a move. With the possibility of social distancing in place until 2022 and beyond, according to Harvard researchers, urban planners must consider how a more dispersed city can thrive. Living through the 2020 lockdown, it's become clear that the lack of space in our residential homes poses a risk to both our physical and mental wellbeing. Open plan living should now be actively discouraged. We must reconﬁgure our apartments into spaces that seal shut which would be especially desirable if housemates happen to get sick. In the future, we will need to be encouraging at-home recuperation. Residents who live in mid-rise and hi-rise residential buildings are likely to experience greater exposure densities because they must use common hallways and elevators. Please note that, apart from the faulty logic supporting these generous entitlements, this project will be precedent setting. Is this the kind of project we want to see replicated throughout our Downtown Historic District? We think not! Coke County Courthouse Austin County Courthouse Brazoria County Courthouse