The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5/25/2022 Item 4b, SpevackCity of SLO Planning Commission Hearing 5/25/2022 2406 & 2414 Johnson Ave. (APPL-0 182-2022) Dear SLO City Planning Commission, My name is Jeff Spevack. I am the owner of properties 2406 & 2414 Johnson Ave. SLO. I ask that you deny the appeal of the approval of my project by the SLO Planning department for the following reasons: 1) This project has already been painstakingly reviewed by city planning and the ARC board, and has been unanimously approved. 2) Our plans are in compliance with city planning codes and ARC requirements that were previously added. 3) Our plans conform to the existing neighborhood. 4) Our plans are respectful of our neighbors. 5) With the size of our lots, we could have planned more density, but with respect to our neighborhood, we did not 6) We could have fought for two story houses, but with respect to our neighbors, we did not. It should be noted that many of the neighbors who are appealing live in two story houses on Corona Court, and when they were built, had a much more severe impact on their uphill neighbors who live on Flora Street above them. 7) Our choices of quality manufactured housing, using basement foundations, upscale features, and beautiful landscaping, will achieve quality but affordable housing, and fit nicely in this neighborhood. 8) In closing, I am not a professional developer trying to cram in cheap housing. I am a homeowner trying to develop my property in a way the has been directed and approved by the city, in a way that will create affordable housing, and in a way that will create a better neighborhood. Respectfully, Jeff Spevack 2414 Johnson Avenue Support Honorable Commissioners, SLO County YIMBY is writing in support of the proposed creative housing project at 2414 and 2406 Johnson Avenue. We have reviewed the applicant's project proposal and the appellant's detailed remarks about the project. The Community Development Director found the project compliant with all objective standards this March, and the appellants filed an appeal less than two weeks later. A quick appeal like this is not particularly unusual, however we find it odd that a group who Is able to file such a timely appeal of this project would then cite development codes that are, in some cases, 10 years old or older. It is not unusual for housing projects to take a long time to move through the entitlements process, but the state has passed numerous laws about what constitutes an appropriate denial of a project in that time period. Much of the appellant's comments against this project are rooted in the subjective, Interpretive guidelines that have been rendered null and void by the State of California's Housing Accountability Act (passed in 1982 without much thought to enforcement) and its subsequent strengthening amendments of recent years. Phrases such as "neighborhood character," "architectural interest," and "complementary style," are essentially unenforceable because reasonable people can come to very different conclusions on how a proposed project meets such guidelines. The appellant even admits this in their appeal with their comments on page 7, which reads: "Compatibility takes on many forms." Apparently, according to the appellant, that's good enough to deny a project in the face of a crippling housing shortage, but not good enough to approve a project that the neighbors would prefer to design to their own standards. In fact they do almost suggest this outright on page 6, when they insist that a "custom designed structure" would be a better fit for a site of this topography. Out of curiosity, what YIml Y `(E!!S IJO ))E!!0�[,`)1E!!, `(E!!S IJO IIIOUSilii lg, A C T l� yiI 11 ril [,"),Yr� C 'J"i 0 I'l, 0 rg would we say the price difference is between a "custom designed structure" that the appellants want, and the "pre -fab horizontal boxes" that the applicant is paying for? Current construction costs in our state hover comfortably about $400-$500 per square foot® excluding the costs of land. We find it so strange that the appellant would complain about how the "pre -fab boxes" are not going to be income -restricted housing and in the same complaint insist that the owner spend $450 a square foot to build a custom structure to their specifications. For all the time and attention to detail that the appellants have obviously taken to make their concerns known, their priorities are revealed in their concluding comments on page 11, which boil down to the same specious and self-interested arguments that have thwarted housing for decades. The appeal is a modern day example of fiddling while Rome quite literally burns. In conclusion, our sincere advice to the appellant - if the idea of students living near you is so abhorrent - is to find accommodation in a place where there is not a century -old and venerable institution of higher education. Please deny the appeal and approve the creative and cost-effective housing that SLO so desperately needs. Ban Cars and Build Homes, SLO County YIMBY Leads and Members Krista Jeffries Kevin Buchanan Rachel Mann Arnie Wilkinson Kristin Horowitz To Whom It May Concern, We are neighbors of Mr. Spevack, and we support his project to add houses to 2406 & 2414 Johnson Ave., SLO. lek- -241d JY 14mil s, 10� �' q ki )--1 /z, Pr? A �L S3 7'7j 7 45,a, fi 6U Lt. CL kous, q, e fit, Cst a, cc C� � v e i car C7 To Whom It May Concern, We are neighbors of Mr. Spevack, and we support his project to add houses to 2406 & 2414 Johnson Ave., SLO. I 0 5122/22, 10:58 AM Gmail - In Re- Jeff Spevackffieverly Collier Project IVI Gmail Jeff Spevack <jspev52@grnaiI.corn> In Re: Jeff Spevack/Beverly Collier Project Sara St. Cyr <sarastcyr@gmail.com> Mon, May 9, 2022 at 10:33 AM To: advisorybodies@slocity.org Cc: "jspev52@gmail.com" <jspev52@gmail.com> To Whom It May Concern, We live at 1608 Sydney St, San Luis Obispo, CA and support our neighbors Jeff Spevack and Beverly Collier in their project ARCH 0383-2021. Please include this letter of support in the City Planning Commission meeting on 05/25/2022, reviewing appeal Appl-0182-2022. Thank you, Sara and Richard St. Cyr https-Ilmail.,google.Gomlmaillul0l?ik--fcg6cb5O5b&view--pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-fOI.3A1 732370912521453634&simpl=msg-t'O/o3Al732370911 25... 1/1 Joel Diringer 2475 Johnson Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.544.7722 Joel.diringer@gmail.com May 17, 2022 Planning Commission City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ...ti"...�..'JAR...R.o�.l...y.!.!.�..�.c V.e.....Q....:J.g.gl..q....ti..�..a.g Re: 2406 and 2414 Johnson Avenue (APPL-0182-2022) May 25, 2022 agenda Support for project; oppose appeal Dear Commission members: I have lived across the street from the proposed project since 1985 and fully support it. I have reviewed the plans and visited the property. The proposed project is well-designed and fits within the overall neighborhood. Adding additional housing, particularly as in -fill, is important to our community and our residents. I urge you to deny the appeal and allow the project to proceed. Please feel free to contact me for any further information. Sincerely, rh Joel Diringer cc: Rachel Cohen rcohen@slocity.org