HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/21/2021 Item 3, Cooper
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Allan Cooper <
To:Cohen, Rachel; Scott, Shawna; Advisory Bodies
Subject:Letter to the Architectural Review Commission
Attachments:606_20_21...lettertoarc.pdf
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear Rachel and Shawna -
Would you kindly forward the letter attached below to the
Architectural Review Commission? This letter pertains to
Item #3: "Formation of an ARC Sub-Committee to develop
objective standards for specific affordable housing
projects". This item will come before the Commission at
their June 21, 2021 meeting. Thanks!
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 Architectural Review Commission, Rachel Cohen & Shawna
Scott
Re: Agenda Item #3: Formation of an ARC Sub-Committee to develop objective
standards for specific affordable housing projects
From: Allan Cooper, Secretary Save Our Downtown
Date: June 20, 2021
Honorable Chair Withers and Commissioners -
As you know, recent State law requires a “rubber stamp” process for residential developments
that include 20% affordable units. Staff’s approach is to add Objective Design Standards to the
City’s Zoning Regulations that are derived from the City’s existing Community Design
Guidelines. In addition to ARC feedback, staff will meet with a so-called “stakeholder group”
made up of professionals who are involved in local building design, architecture, and
development for their comments on the draft Objective Design Standards (ODS). We expected
that this “stakeholder” group would be comprised of some building and development
“professionals”.
However, the City should assure us that in order to arrive at a more balanced outcome
representing a wider spectrum of community values, full-time, long-term residents who do not
have a monetary interest in property development but have a demonstrated interest in holding
new development to a higher standard might also be considered important, participatory
“stakeholders”. They should serve on this stakeholder committee to provide a counter argument
to the kind of expedited, streamlined development approval process that could very easily lead
to inferior design solutions.
Back in 2012 the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update featured a task force
representing diverse geographic areas of the City. Not surprisingly, there were a few on this 18
member Citizen’s Task Force that clearly had monetary interests in property development.
Represented on this task force was one realtor (Chris Richardson), one architect (Chuck
Crotser), one planner (Michael Multari) and two developers (Matt Quaglino & Rob Rossi).
However, the remaining 13 members were laypersons and/or prominent, long-term residents.
One represented the League of Women Voters (Sharon Whitney), one represented Residents for
Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) (Sandra Rowley) and another represented Save Our Downton
(SLO) (Russell Brown).
Staff may argue that a diversity of viewpoints will arise from discussions within the ARC. But
with the exception of Chair Christie Withers and Allen Root, the remaining five Commissioners
are beholden to the monied interests of the development community. Staff may also argue that
public testimony provided during these advisory board hearings could further represent the
views of the lay public. However, public testimony is often ignored because either 1) it arrives
“too little and/or too late” or 2) the applicant has already “baked into the cake” his/her own core
values - values that understandably premiate self interest over the common good of the
community. Speaking as a licensed architect, I know very well that this characterization may
appear somewhat insulting. But, let’s be honest. An architect’s first allegiance is to his or her
own client. And the developer’s first allegiance is to his/her lending agencies and corporate
shareholders.
In conclusion, Save Our Downtown is particularly interested in how the massing/articulation
standards are conceptualized. Done well, these standards could insure that these entitled
housing projects will fit seamlessly into our existing urban fabric. Thank you!