HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/14/2020 Item 3, Cooper
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Allan Cooper <
To:Bell, Kyle; Advisory Bodies; Codron, Michael
Subject:Letter To The Planning Commission
Attachments:610_09_20...pcletterorcutt.pdf
Dear Kyle -
Would you kindly forward the letter attached below to the
Planning Commission? This letter pertains to Item No. 3 on
their October 14, 2020 meeting agenda where they will be
reviewing a mixed-use project at 830 Orcutt Road. Would
you also insure that this letter is placed on the City's
correspondence file?
Thanks and keep safe!
- Allan
1
To: San Luis Obispo Planning Commission & Kyle Bell
Re: October 14, 2020 Public Hearing Item Number #3: 830 Orcutt Road
From: Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo, CA
Date: October 9, 2020
Honorable Chair and Commissioners -
I am urging you to deny the applicant’s request for an alternative incentive to relax
development standards for the creek setback requirement to allow a minimum 2-foot
setback (setback varies between 2 and 8 feet), where 20 feet is normally required. This
exception will constitute a grant of special privilege and sets a dangerous precedent for
future development.
Staff states that “no useful purpose would be realized by requiring the full creek setback
because no significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or impacts to biological
resources would occur, and the exception is consistent with the character of the
neighborhood”. What staff fails to mention is that this setback area is located within a
flood plain (see map below) and the useful purpose for this setback would therefore be
flood protection. This exception will limit the city’s design options for providing flood
control measures that are needed to achieve adopted city flood policies.
Staff further states that “the site development cannot be feasibly accomplished with a
redesign of the project because the Density Bonus Law mandates that concessions from
development standards shall not be denied in which would result in a reduction of
residential units”. This is clearly not the case.
Firstly, a reduction of residential units would not occur were the 20 foot setback applied
to the single story commercial building. Secondly, units 15 and 12 could be easily
relocated where the 3 guest parking and handicap accessible spaces are located. The
latter could be placed within the 20 foot creek setback area vacated by units 15 and 12.
The City’s zoning regulations stipulate that covered parking spaces may be located within
the required creek setback without obtaining a discretionary exception.
Lastly, it is a shame that the Tree Committee at their September 28, 2020 meeting
approved the removal of all 18 mature, healthy trees currently located on this site. I agree
with their recommendation to add two Coast Live Oaks. However, should you decide to
honor the 20 foot creek setback requirement, I am also urging you to save the three large
eucalyptus trees located along the creek. Mature eucalyptus trees provide key resources
and habitat for birds (at least 59 species of birds have been found nesting in eucalyptus
trees) that are not otherwise well provided for by native communities, particularly in the
urban agricultural context in which eucalyptus stands often occur. Thank you!