Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-17-2012 ph3 home occupation appeal marcuscounci l�j acEnda uEpoRt Meeting Date Item Number 1/17/1 2 PH3 C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O FROM : Derek Johnson : Community Development Directo r Prepared By : Brian Leveille, Associate Planne r SUBJECT : APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION WHICH UPHEL D THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER'S DECISION T O REVOKE THE HOME OCCUPATION FOR PIANO LESSONS AT 124 7 VISTA DEL LAGO (R-1-PD ZONE). RECOMMENDATIO N Approve a Resolution denying the appeal and revoke the Home Occupation Permit for pian o lessons at 1247 Vista Del Lago . DISCUSSIO N Backgroun d On November 4, 2011, the Administrative Hearing Officer revoked the appellant's Hom e •Occupation Permit to give piano lessons in her home . On December 14, 2011, the Plannin g Commission heard an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer's decision . The Plannin g Commission denied the appellant's appeal and upheld the Administrative Hearing Officer's revocation without prejudice . On December 21, 2011, the appellant filed an appeal of th e Planning Commissions' decision to the City Council (appeal letter, Attachment 1). The appellant, Ms . Deborah Marcus, applied for a Home Occupation Permit on November 19 , 2010 . The home based business had already been in operation without a City license and tw o protest letters were received from neighbors during the notification period, stating that th e continued operation of the business would negatively impact the neighborhood (see Exhibits 7 & 8, of Planning Commission staff report, Attachment 2). Following staff discussions with Ms . Marcus and the protesting parties', protests were withdrawn, and the permit was conditionall y approved and issued on January 21, 2011 . Review and approval of Home Occupation Permi t The appellant's property is a condominium unit with a shared wall between the adjoinin g residential units to the west (1251 Vista Del Lago). The neighbor complained of the excessiv e noise of the grand piano which could be heard through the shared wall . The property is accesse d via a driveway which is part of the common area for the Laguna Shores development (Figure 1 , below). Both protesting parties were concerned with vehicular traffic and parents dropping off and picking up children, or waiting in vehicles for lessons to be completed . The Municipal Cod e requires an administrative hearing to review Home Occupation Permits when protests ar e •received unless concerns can be addressed and protests are withdrawn . PH3-1 Council Agenda Report —AP-CC 2-1 1 1247 Vista Del Lag o January 17,201 2 Page 2 Staff recognized the difficulty of accommodating piano lessons at this location with a shared wal l and parking on the common area driveway in front of the garage was generally not consisten t with Home Occupation Regulations that require one on-site customer space in addition t o required residential parking . In order to meet the definition of a parking space for the purposes o f home occupations, the parking must be in a driveway with a minimum depth of 20 feet from th e back of sidewalk, and be available to customers during business hours . Staff determined th e space in front of the garage could serve as required parking as long as customers pulled up to th e garage to keep the common drive and fire lane clear . The appellant subsequently agreed t o supplemental conditions of approval to address issues raised in the protest letters . The protestin g parties subsequently agreed to drop their protests and a review hearing no longer was required . The supplemental conditions of approval were intended to address the noise from the grand pian o and to clarify parking requirements for students . In addition to standard Home Occupatio n regulations the conditions stipulated that the grand piano could not be played unless adequat e sound reduction measures had been taken and that client's vehicles were parked directly in fron t of the garage and not block the fire lane of the common drive (Exhibit 6, of Plannin g Commission Staff Report, Attachment 2). • • Within a few months of issuing the Home Occupation Permit, staff received complaints fro m neighbors who had originally filed and then withdrawn protest letters . On several occasions, staff discussed strategies to reduce neighbor conflicts . These efforts were not successful and o n October 7, 2011, a formal request to initiate a review hearing was received . The Administrative • PH3-2 Council Agenda Report – AP-CC 2-1 1 1247 Vista Del Lag o • January 17,201 2 Page 3 Hearing Officer found the complaints were reasonable and substantiated to justify the schedulin g of an administrative hearing to consider revocation of the home occupation permit . Thi s determination was based substantial evidence which indicated that sound attenuation condition s were not effective nor was that a clear adherence to the parking requirements . Administrative Hearin g On November 4, 2011, the Administrative Hearing Officer revoked the appellant's Hom e Occupation Permit . The Hearing Officer's decision was based on the fact that continue d operation of the home business was detrimental to the neighborhood because of th e circumstances of the property with shared walls, common drive aisle, and close proximity o f residences in the planned development neighborhood. In making the decision, the Administrativ e Hearing Officer found that residential welfare - is a considerable factor in making th e determination (revocation letter, Exhibit 2, Planning Commission Staff report). The Hearing Officer acknowledged the challenges to make alternate business plans on short notice an d allowed the business to continue until December 31, 2011 . Planning Commission Hearin g On November 14, 2011, the appellant filed an appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision to th e Planning Commission (Exhibit 3, of Planning Commission Staff Report). On December 14 ,• 2011, the Planning Commission denied the appeal without prejudice . The denial without prejudice stipulated that the appellant could reapply for the home occupation if noise attenuatio n measures were incorporated and implemented as identified by a licensed acoustical engineer t o mitigate noise levels to established noise thresholds . The denial without prejudice stated tha t interior sound levels for adjacent residential units shall be at or below Noise Control Ordinanc e (Chapter 9 .12) thresholds of 40-45 decibels (draft PC minutes, Exhibits 3 & 4, PC denia l Resolution No . PC-5569-11). EVALUATION Appeal to the City Counci l Ms . Deborah Marcus appealed the Planning Commission's decision on December 21, 2011, an d the Home Occupation Permit is still valid until a decision is made by the City Council . Ms . Deborah Marcus's appeal offers to discontinue playing the grand piano altogether as long as th e adjacent resident and owner Jay Chester, resides at his property . Staff recommends agains t upholding the appeal for several reasons . Given neighborhood concerns, it is conceivable that th e upright piano would impact adjoining neighbors . Staff has gone to great lengths to identif y reasonable conditions to address neighborhood compatibility issues . The proposed condition to disuse the grand piano would be difficult to enforce and does no t adequately address other neighborhood compatibility problems such as client parking an d • circulation or general noise from piano lessons, regardless if the noise emanates from the uprigh t or grand piano . Should noise complaints arise, it would be difficult to determine which pian o was generating any new noise complaints . It is also likely that if Mr . Chester were to relocate ;a PH3-3 Council Agenda Report —AP-CC 2-1 1 1247 Vista Del Lago January 17,201 2 Page 4 new tenant/owner would raise similar complaints about the use of the grand piano . It would b e reasonable that any resident in the unit with the adjoining wall would be disturbed by pian o lessons . Previous special conditions of approval did not mitigate neighborhood compatibility issues . Based on comments at the Administrative and Planning Commission hearings, it is unlikely tha t the additional conditions of approval would ameliorate neighborhood compatibility issues . It is for these reasons that staff recommends denying the appeal . The Planning Commission's denia l of the appeal without prejudice would allow Ms . Marcus to immediately reapply for a hom e occupation in the future if sound attenuation measures were implemented . Even if sound attenuation measures could be implemented below noise ordinance thresholds, it is likely th e piano lessons would still be audible in the adjoining residence and other neighborhoo d compatibility issues with client parking and circulation would continue . The draft Resolutio n simply denies the appeal and revokes the Home Occupation Permit . This means that the applican t could not apply for the same home occupation permit for a one-year period . Conclusio n The Home Occupation Regulations allow the conduct of a home enterprise which is incidental to and compatible with surrounding residential uses . The Home Occupation Regulations also stat e that home occupations should not have characteristics which would reduce residents' enjoymen t of their neighborhoods, and that the peace and quiet of residential areas shall be maintained . The Home Occupation Regulations set a high standard for businesses to maintain compatibility in th e neighborhood and, as this appeal showcases, it is unlikely that any special conditions could full y mitigate neighborhood compatibility issue with this specific type of home occupation . ALTERNATIVE S 1.Uphold the appeal and allow the continued operation of the home occupation as proposed b y the appellant with the restriction that the grand piano never be played or with other modifie d conditions of approval . Staff does not recommend this alternative since additional condition s of approval are likely unenforceable and the appellant has not assiduously followe d previously imposed conditions . 2.Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the appeal of th e Administrative Hearing Officer without prejudice . 3.Continue item if additional information is needed, specific direction should be given to staff . ATTACHMENT S 1.Appeal letter to City Council, December 21, 201 1 2.Planning Commission Staff Report, December 14, 201 1 PC Report Attachments : • • • PH3-4 Council Agenda Report — AP-CC 2-1 1 • 1247 Vista Del Lag o January 17, 201 2 Page 5 Exhibit 1 . Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 . Hearing Officer Decision, November 4, 201 1 Exhibit 3 . Letter of appeal, November 14, 2011 & letters in support of appea l Exhibit 4 . Letter of objection, November 22, 2010 (1251 Vista Del Lago ) Exhibit 5 . Letter of objection, November 30, 2010 (1255 Vista Del Lago ) Exhibit 6 . Condition approval (memo to file) January 21, 201 1 Exhibit 7 . Letter of objection (Mr . Jay Chester, 1251 Vista Del Lago ) Exhibit 8 . Letter of objection (Ms . Suzanne Heitzman, 1255 Vista Del Lago ) Exhibit 9 . Letter from Ms . Deborah Marcus Exhibit 10 . Draft resolution denying appea l 3.Draft Planning Commission Minutes, December 14, 201 1 4.Planning Commission Resolution No . PC-5569-1 1 5.Draft City Council Resolution denying the appea l • T :\Council Agenda Reports\2012\2012-01-17\PH4-Marcus Planning Commission Appeal (Johnson-Leveille)\AP-CC 2-11 (1247 Vista Del Lago ) Council Report .docx PH3-5 12/21/2011 (d e.:AP-PC.1 -chent 1• To the Members of the City Council : After much thought and discussion with my family, I've decided to go ahead and file a n appeal to the city council for reinstatement of my business license and permit .The key element in this next appeal will be my committing to shutting the lid on my Steinwa y grand and not using it at all for as long as I am living next door to Jay Cheste d whose residence has an adjoining wall with mine . At the hearing on December 14th, it was evident that the members of the commission ha d made a serious effort to really understand the issues, and listen carefully to what al l parties involved had to say . I know it was a difficult decision for them to make as peopl e on both sides of the issue had very strong views . Even though I did not agree with thei r decision, I think the commission did a good job considering all the evidence and I appreciate their effort s The issue clearly given the most attention during the approximately 2 hour hearing was the distress experienced by my neighbor from the sound of my Steinway baby gran d piano . From the outset of the discussion, my son and I endeavored to draw a clea r distinction between my personal use of the grand piano and the "noise" emanating fro m my piano teaching, which is done almost exclusively on an upright Yamaha piano i n another area of the house . I had been teaching my advanced adult students on the gran d piano for a total of 4 to 5 hours per week . Since the completion of the Planning Commission hearing on Dec 14 I have not playe d my grand piano at all, and I intend to not play it up to the time of whenever the Cit y Council hearing is scheduled as a show of good faith . I believe that will demonstrate that by not playing that piano I can mitigate the concerns about piano noise in my home . As to the issue of traffic, safety, and concern for the health and welfare of residents in th e neighborhood, I believe that we've demonstrated that these concerns are not serious an d can be mitigated . My students, their parents, and my adult students have taken great car e to cooperate with the restrictions of my permit and license to teach from my home . The many letters of support from them and my neighbors on Vista del Lago attest to m y conformance with the conditions of my permit and license . The exceptions are rare . To the extent that there are any issues with parking, I believe that they can be resolved, and I believe the Planning Commission's comments demonstrated they largely agreed with that stance . I do not think concerns over traffic or neighborhood safety are well founded, an d I believe the Planning Commission also largely agreed with this- several members note d at the December 14 hearing that they visited our neighborhood and noted the lack o f significant vehicle traffic . Several neighbors also wrote letters or testified durin g previous hearings that they do not believe the business is in any way a public safet y concern . PH3-6 • • • • Attachment 1 We started our presentation to the Planning Commission with my offer to give all m y lessons only on the upright piano, in addition to agreeing not to use the grand for my ow n playing during the hours of 7 A .M . to 7 P .M . which was the time period specified in th e permit . (I never teach before 8 :30 or 9 :00 A .M .). Though several members of the Commission approved of this offer, others seemed to fee l that me using the grand piano even just for personal use would result in a situation wher e neighbors would continue to object to my piano practice and they felt compelled not t o support the offer. As a result, I am prepared to go further with the above offer t o discontinue the use of my grand piano at this residence for as long as Mr . Chester, my neighbor, is in residence next door . Mr. Chester has not obiected to my use of the upright piano for teaching or my ow n playing (see letter to Yost Management dated 10-10-11). During periods when I hav e not been able to use my grand piano, he has described the lack of that sound a s "entirely blissful" (11/2/2011 for 11/4 hearing, addressed to "whom it ma y concern"). During the periods I was doing all my teaching on the upright, obviousl y without any objection from him . I believe that limiting my playing to just th e upright piano would fairly resolve his concerns about piano noise . Over the course of the hearing, the consensus among the members of the commission was quite apparently the concern that, regardless of reinstatement of my license or not, thi s highly emotional and bitter dispute would only continue unless and until the issue o f noise associated with use of the grand piano was successfully addressed . The y recommended my employing the services of a licensed acoustical engineer to explore . what measures might be taken to provide effective soundproofing in order to minimiz e the impact of playing my Steinway on Mr . Chester . Let me note here that Mr . Chester was quite eloquent during the hearing about the way s in which his sensitivity to the sounds of the grand piano has affected his well-being . I am certainly not without sympathy for his suffering . I believe that the stress over thi s conflict has been sickening to each of us . I had already begun to explore the possibilities for effective soundproofing, but there ar e obstacles which stand in the way of undertaking major soundproofing measures . Th e primary one is the fact that Tno longer own the property, but am a tenant here . My landlady is a very reasonable, sympathetic person, but it is certainly understandable tha t she would not want any extensive work done to her home, even though it would be at m y expense . In addition, there could be no guarantee that all the work would successfull y alleviate Mr . Chester's distress and the costs to me would be prohibitive . The logical solution is for me to give up the use of my grand piano since it is ver y important to me to be able to teach from my home and wish to do so as long as I reside a t this address . It is a personal sacrifice for me as a musician to give up the use of thi s lovely instrument that I have owned for 45 years, but it is worth it to me in order to PH3-7 Attachment 1 resolve the issue . The financial consequences and stress of relocating my business at th e present time make it imperative that I do so . I hope the City Council will agree that what I've proposed in this appeal is a satisfactory solution to Mr . Chester's objections . Thank you for your consideration . Sincerely, • V • PH3-8 Attachment 2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPOR T • ITEM #.2- BY :Brian Leveille, Associate Planner (781-7166) DATE : December 14, 201 1 FROM : Doug Davidson, Deputy Director of Community Development()j FILE NUMBER :AP-PC 2-1 1 PROJECT ADDRESS :1247 Vista Del Lag o SUBJECT :Appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer's decision to revoke the hom e occupation permit (piano lessons). SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIO N Adopt the attached Planning Commission resolution (Attachment 10) denying the appeal an d upholding the hearing officer's decision to revoke the home occupation permit . BACKGROUN D Situatio n On November 4, 2011, the Administrative Hearing Officer revoked the appellant's hom e occupation permit for piano instruction which was issued on January 21, 2011 (Attachment 2 , • follow up letter). The Hearing Officer's decision to revoke the home occupation permit allowe d the use to continue through December 31, 2011 unless an appeal was filed . On November 14 , 2011, the appellant, Ms . Deborah Marcus, filed for an appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision t o the Planning Commission (Attachment 3, Appeal letter and letters supporting the appeal). Data Summar y Address : 1247 Vista Del Lag o Appellant : Ms . Deborah Marcu s Zoning : Single-Family Residential with Planned Development Overlay (R-1-PD) General Plan : Low Density Residentia l Environmental Status : Exempt from environmental review under the General Rule (15061(b)(3)), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no potential for a significant effect on th e environment . Background On November 19, 2010, the appellant, Ms . Deborah Marcus, applied for a Home Occupatio n permit to allow a piano instruction business at her residence . Following posting of the home occupation permit application, two letters of protest were received which objected to the Hom e Occupation on the grounds that the business was incompatible with the neighborhood characte r (Attachments 4 & 5). The letters of objection were based on two primary issues ; (1) Sound levels emanating throug h the walls and outdoor areas due to the high volume levels of the grand piano ; and, (2) safety PH3-9 • AP-PC 2-11 (appeal of Home Occupation revocation ) 1247 Vista Del Lago Page 2 Attachment 2 • concerns and disturbances from vehicles coming and going to attend lessons and parent s dropping off and picking up children, or waiting in vehicles for lessons to be completed . The residential unit is a condominium and has an adjoining wall with the neighboring residence to the west (1251 Vista del Lago). The appellant's unit also is accessed via a common area drivewa y and students were using street parking and parking in front of the garage of the residence whic h is immediately adjacent to the neighbor at 1251 Vista del Lago . The parking spaces in front o f the garage are part of the common area of the Laguna Shores development (Figure 1, below). Shortly after the objections were filed, the appellant, Ms . Deborah Marcus, agreed t o supplemental conditions of approval in exchange for the protesting parties dropping their protest s (Attachment 6). The supplemental conditions included a requirement that clients shall only par k in the common drive area immediately in front of the garage and that parking for the residenc e shall remain available for use within the garage . The supplemental conditions also prohibite d special events/recitals and prohibited instruction on the grand piano unless adequate soun d reduction measures were achieved . The conditions were in addition to standard home occupatio n regulations which recognize music instruction may be provided on an individual basis and ther e are no more than six clients in any one day . Standard Home Occupation requirements state tha t clients also may only visit the home between the hours of 7 :00 a.m . and 7 :00 p .m . Another PH3-10 • AP-PC 2-11 (appeal of Home Occupation revocation) Attachment 2 1247 Vista Del Lag o Page 3 requirement of businesses with customer access is that there must be one on-site custome r parking space in addition to their required residential parking . Revocation Hearing Following the January 21, 2011, conditional approval, staff continued to receive complaints fro m the neighbors who had filed and then dropped their letters of objection, that conditions had bee n violated and that the conditions of approval had been ineffective in alleviating the hom e occupation's impacts on the neighborhood in terms of noise and traffic . Following a forma l request for a review hearing, and staff's determination that complaints were reasonable an d substantiated, an administrative review hearing was scheduled for November 4, 2011, to conside r revocation of the home occupation permit . Written correspondence was received and testimon y was provided at the hearing from the adjoining neighbor with a shared common wall with Ms . Marcus (Mr . Jay Chester, 1251 Vista Del Lago). Mr . Jay Chester complained of the excessiv e sound levels of the grand piano and concerns over traffic and liability issues (Attachment 7). Written correspondence and testimony at the hearing was also provided by the neighbor tw o doors down (Ms . Suzanne Heitzman, 1255 Vista Del Lago) which summarized th e incompatibility of the home occupation with the neighborhood due to parking issues, traffic, an d clients waiting in cars for children to complete lessons (Attachment 8). • Ms . Deborah Marcus submitted a letter and provided testimony stating the conditions of approva l were followed and that there had been only isolated instances where students have not parked i n the designated location in front of the garage . Ms . Marcus stated in her letter that the grand pian o is only used for teaching 3-5 hours per week and that Mr . Jay Chester's complaints are related t o her playing the piano and not related to the piano instruction business (Attachment 9). Staff's evaluation (provided below) noted that continuing the home business would b e detrimental to the neighborhood because of circumstances of the property with shared walls , common drive aisle, and close proximity of adjacent residences in the planned development neighborhood . Staff also agreed with the neighbor that shares a common wall with the appellan t that sound reduction measures of the grand piano have been inadequate, and the sound level s generated by the grand piano are excessive for the operation of a music instruction business wit h shared walls . Staff's recommendation to revoke the home occupation was based on residentia l welfare as the first priority. The administrative hearing officer revoked the home occupatio n based on findings that continued operation of the business interferes with residential welfare i n the area (Attachment 2). EVALUATIO N Municipal Code section 17 .08 .090 A . states that home occupation regulations are intended to allow the conduct of a home enterprise which is incidental to and compatible with surroundin g residential uses . • In most cases, music instruction would be found compatible in a property configuration such as a single family home which did not have adjoining walls, sufficient setbacks/separation fro m • PH3-11 AP-PC 2-11 (appeal of Home Occupation revocation ) 1247 Vista Del Lag o Page 4 Attachment 2 • adjacent properties, and off-street parking completely within the property on a driveway . In thi s circumstance, the piano instruction has been found incompatible with the surrounding residentia l uses due to the issues raised in the appellant's letters . The fact that the residence at 1247 Vist a del Lago has adjoining walls, and relies of parking and circulation on the common drive fo r students and parents, and is in very close proximity to other residential units in a planne d development neighborhood, makes the piano instruction business incompatible with the peac e and quiet of the neighborhood which should always be the first priority . The issues raised i n complaints appear to be substantiated and reasonable . Staff believes it is not unreasonable for th e neighbor with the adjoining wall to be annoyed at hearing music lessons through the walls, or fo r neighbors to be bothered by vehicles coming and going to drop off and pick up students, or fo r persons to be waiting inside vehicles for children while lessons are being conducted . CONCLUSIO N Staff's recommendation and the Hearing Officer's decision to revoke the Home Occupation wa s based significantly on the neighbor's objections who shares a common wall with the appellan t and is most directly affected (Mr . Jay Chester, 1251 Vista Del Lago). The Hearing Office r determined it was reasonably demonstrated that Mr . Chester's right to quiet enjoyment of hi s property would continue to be detrimentally affected by the operation of Ms . Marcus's pian o instruction business ; and, that in making the decision of whether the home occupation shoul d continue, residential welfare should always be the first priority . Ms . Marcus's piano instructio n business should be relocated to a commercial location or operated as a home occupation in a more suitable location, such as a single family residence with driveway parking on the property , and with adequate separation from neighbors with no adjoining walls . RECOMMENDATIO N Uphold the decision of the hearing officer and deny the appeal based on findings included in th e attached Planning Commission Resolution (Attachment 10). ALTERNATIVE S 1.Uphold the appeal and allow the continued operation of the home occupation as currentl y conditioned . 2.Uphold the appeal and allow the continued operation of the home occupation subject t o modified conditions of approval . Staff does not recommend this alternative since additional conditions of approval may prove unenforceable and staff has already attempted to allo w operation of the business with conditions of approval . 3.The Commission may continue action, if additional information is needed, direction shoul d be given to staff. PH3-12 • Attachment 2 • AP-PC 2-11 (appeal of Home Occupation revocation ) 1247 Vista Del Lag o Page 5 1.Vicinity Map 2.Hearing officer decision, November 4, 201 1 3.Letter of appeal, November 14, 2011 & letters in support of appea l 4.Letter of objection, November 22, 2010 (1251 Vista Del Lago ) 5.Letter of objection, November 30, 2010 (1255 Vista Del Lago ) 6.Conditional approval (memo to file) January 21, 201 1 7.Letter of objection (Mr . Jay Chester, 1251 Vista Del Lago ) 8.Letter of objection (Ms . Suzanne Heitzman, 1255 Vista Del Lago ) 9.Letter from Ms . Deborah Marcu s 10.Draft Resolution denying appea l ATTACHMENTS : • • PH3-13 VICINITY MAP File No . 2-11 N 1247 VISTA DEL LAGS $„ • • • city o f san lui :Exhibit 2 Community Development Department • 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-321 8 November 8, 201 1 Deborah Marcu s 1247 Vista del Lag o San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 SUBJECT : Use Permit Appl . A 2-1 1 1247 Vista del Lag o Dear Ms . Marcus : On Friday, November 4, 2011, I conducted a public hearing to review and possibl y revoke or modify an approved home occupation permit which allowed piano lessons a t the above address . After reviewing the information presented, I revoked your home occupation permit , based on the following findings : Finding s 1.Continued operation of the business will adversely affect the health, safety, o r welfare of persons living in the vicinity and will interfere with residential welfare in th e area . 2.The use is not consistent with Home Occupation Regulations of Municipal Cod e Section 17 .08 .090 A which states that home occupations are intended to allow a home enterprise which is incidental to and compatible with surrounding residentia l uses . 3.The piano instruction business is incompatible with General Plan Policy LU E 2 .2 .13, Non-Residential Activities, since the business is not compatible with th e adjoining residence and surrounding residences . The Home Occupation shall cease effective December 31, 2011, unless an appeal i s filed . My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within 10 days of th e action . Any person aggrieved by the decision may file an appeal . Appeal forms ar e available in the Community Development Department or on the City's websit e (www .slocity .org). The fee for filing an appeal is $261 and must accompany the appea l documentation . The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activitiesP H3-1 5 Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410 . A 2-11 (1247 Vista del Lago ) Page 2 If you have any questions, please call Brian Leveille at (805) 781-7166 . Sincerely , Doug Davidso n Hearing Office r cc : County of SLO Clerk-Recorde r Janine Butle r 9910 Rudnick Avenu e Chatsworth, CA 9131 1 Suzanne Heitzma n 1255 Vista del Lag o San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 • PH3-16 arc,, ,Exhibit 3 Re ;pp r~--U ~e-Pe.v‘'04 :T-pP /-t ~,L.--1 I am appealing the November 8, 2011 revocation of the home occupatio n permit previously granted by the City on January 21, 2011 . I have been substantially in compliance with the requirements of my hom e occupation permit, and believe it should be allowed to continue . The revocation was almost exclusively based on the concerns of tw o neighbors related to noise, parking, and traffic . In revoking the license the Community Development Department relied excessively on evidence presented by these two neighbors . They did not adequately consider testimony of other members of the neighborhood that th e parking and traffic associated with my piano teaching were perfectl y acceptable and consistent with the character of the community : No actual evidence of noise related to my piano lessons was presented , and noise complaints instead related to my personal piano playing o n my grand piano, complaints which are irrelevant to my permit hearing , given that I teach piano lessons on a smaller piano in a different part of the house . The noise complaints and many more of the concerns raised in the cas e are related to unfortunate private disputes between myself and my neighbors, and were not relevant to the home occupation permit . Piano • teaching is my livelihood, and denying me a permit that enables me t o make a living is a serious decision, not to be taken lightly simply t o avoid having to deal with the complaints of a small minority of th e community . I hope the Planning Commission can agree that City agencies should not be used as a weapon in a private dispute, and wil l permit my home occupation permit to continue unrevoked • PH3-17 •Dear Planning Commission , I am writing in regards to the home occupation permit for my mother, Deborah Marcus, who applie d and received a permit for a home piano business that was later revoked . It is my hope that you wil l give strong consideration to overturning a decision made by city hearing officer Doug Davidson o n November 4 to overturn the business occupation permit to hold piano lessons in her home . We believ e the decision was made on faulty premises . In the report that Mr . Davidson used for his decision, city planner Brian Leveille writes tha t "continued operation of the business will adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons livin g in the vicinity ." This seems to be largely based on the testimony of two neighbors on the street . At th e November hearing where Mr . Davidson made his ruling, there were four neighbors who showed up t o testify that my mother's business was not negatively impacting the neighborhood in anyway, as well a s her tenant and her landlady . We expect to demonstrate at next week's Planning Commission hearing that there are even more who are willing to testify that my mother's business has not been a problem . The complaints of the two neighbors opposing my mother's permit seem to be based on noise , parkin g and on concerns about visiting piano students in the neighborhood somehow causing crime or fir e hazard problems . I will address noise and parking below, but I'd like to say here that the complaint s of potential crime or suspicious people in the neighborhood are unfounded as there is no evidenc e whatsoever that the neighborhood has become any less safe because of my mother's piano lessons . One of the incidents that is listed as by Ms . Suzanne Heitzman as being a problem to the welfare of a neighborhood is a child accidentally knocking on her door to ask to use the bathroom . If that is enoug h to constitute damage to the health, safety, and welfare of a neighborhood, no home business could b e operated in San Luis Obispo . In his report, Mr . Leveille also cites the Home Occupation Regulations of Municipal Code Sectio n 17 .08 .090 and uses it to suggest that the music instruction business is not compatible with th e neighborhood's surrounding residential uses . However, it appears that the code he cites specificall y refers to businesses that involve public customer access rather than private instruction businesses . The code specifically mentions "education tutoring,music,and art" (emphasis added) as the type of business that would not fall under the rules barring a home business from hosting customers . As such, i t implies that music instruction is a business that should be allowed in a residential neighborhood . The city approved my mother's home occupation permit in January of 2011 and Mr . Davidson revoked it in November of 2011 . But in the report presented to Mr . Davidson at the November hearing, Mr . Leveille does not say my mother has violated the terms of her permit . He does not present an y evidence that she has violated any of the terms of her permit . Instead, he writes that the permit shoul d be revoked because her unit has "adjoining walls" and "no off-street parking" and notes that her hom e is in "very close proximity" to other residential units . All of these things were also true in January o f 2011 when the permit was granted conditionally . We believe my mother complied with all four of th e conditions of the permit and Mr . Leveille does not say otherwise in his report, but rather simply says • • PH3-18 •that the complaints of the two neighbors of my mother who opposed the permit are justified . Thos e complaints were the same complaints they had made prior to January 2011 . As you will see below, m y mother has complied with the conditions imposed by the city when her permit was granted . The four conditions were : 1)Clients shall parking in parking spaces in front of garage .Ms . Heitzman has provided pages an d pages of photos, but most of them are my mother's car parked in the street . Nowhere in the permit does it say her car is not permitted to be parked in the street during lessons . If the city wants to impos e this condition she is willing and able to comply with it, but it was not a condition of her permit when i t was issued . There are also photos of my mother's driveway with two cars in it . Those photos also ar e not a violation of the permit . Ms . Heitzman has photos of several other cars which she suggests belon g to my mother's clients . Even assuming this is true, she does not have evidence of extensive violations o f this condition that would warrant revoking the permit . And if there was evidence of this, Ms . Heitzma n would likely have it, as by her own admission in an email she wrote to Mr . Leveille, she frequentl y approaches people as they park in order to inquire to see if they are there for piano lessons . 2)Prohibition of recitals or special events -this condition has been complied with and nobody ha s suggested otherwise . •3)No lessons on the grand piano until noise reduction measures are taken .My mother did not giv e lessons on the grand piano for four months, during which time she paid approximately $5,500 fo r measures to make it more quiet . Mr. Leveille then inspected it and determined it was acceptable t o use for lessons in May of 2011 . Yet despite giving the piano his approval during inspection, Mr . Leveill e then cited noise issues as one of the reasons to support revoking the permit . He cited the repeate d noise complaints filed by Mr. Jay Chester, my mother's next door neighbor . These complaints have n o connection whatsoever to my mother's business .In his communications with the city, Mr . Chester say s that his concerns are about the grand piano, which she uses mainly for her own personal musical use . As stated above, my mother did not use this piano at all for four months, even for personal use, at th e behest of the city. Mr . Chester wrote in a letter (which you can view in Mr . Leveille's report on page 1 6 and 17) that "Mrs . Marcus has a correctly sized upright piano in her guest bedroom that she has set u p as a piano studio and that poses no noise problems . " My mother almost exclusively gives lessons o n that upright piano and not on the grand piano . She only resumed using the grand piano at all after Mr . Leveille's inspection . In other words, she is being faulted for using the grand piano despite her meetin g the city's condition on usage, even though she almost exclusively uses it for personal use anyway . 4)Notification of students and adult parents -my mother notified her students and their parents o f parking changes and the other conditions imposed by the city, as required by the permit . My mother has spoken with Mr . Leveille about other music teachers in San Luis Obispo and he ha s • revealed that she is the only one in the entire city who has a home occupation permit . Are we to believ e PH3-19 •that she is the only one in the city who is teaching out of her home? If not, then why is she the only on e who has been required to apply for a permit? Why is she the only one who may potentially be barre d from teaching in her home ? My mother has acted with good faith in this situation . She responded to her neighbor's complaint s by willingly applying for a home occupation-permit, which was granted . She has largely complie d with all the conditions that were laid out in that permit, even having the $5,500 in work done on he r grand piano to have its noise level adjusted down . Her reward was to have her permit revoked . If Mr. Davidson's decision is allowed to stand, the city will impose thousands of dollars of additional costs o n her by forcing her on the road to teach lessons or requiring her to rent a music studio . In closing, I'd like to say that I sincerely believe that Mr . Chester is attempting to use a city proces s to attempt to resolve a conflict with my mother over her personal use of the grand piano and i s determined to do so at any cost . City regulations are meant to be used to place restrictions on a business when its practices are creating an problem in a neighborhood ; city regulations are not meant t o be used to intervene when a neighbor has an issue with what his neighbor is doing in her personal time . My mother has said repeatedly that she would be willing to consider teaching all students on the uprigh t piano, which Mr . Chester has said does not cause any noise . She would still be willing to consider thi s as a condition on her permit . However, this has not stopped Mr . Chester from complaining . One thin g he has never done, however, is to call the police and file a noise complaint . I believe that is because h e knows that she is not violating any of San Luis Obispo's noise ordinances by playing her piano . As such , he has resorted to trying to interfere with her business through city planning codes . The argument that my mother's business is creating problems in my neighborhood is being advance d by two people in the neighborhood, versus four people who say there has been no problem, and man y more who have clearly not been bothered enough to contact the city, even though Mr . Chester and Ms . Heitzman have been trying to rally other neighbors to do so . My mother has agreed to try to mitigat e the two neighbors' concerns, but the only way that would be possible would be for her to stop th e personal use of her piano in her home . Sincerely, Dan Abendschein • PH3-20 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O Original Message DE Com: Mcgehee, Carol A CTR (Trofholz Technologies Inc) NGCA 20 1 [mail to :carol .a .mcgehee .ctr@us .army .mil ] Sent : Monday, December 05, 2011 11 :43 AM To : Leveille, Bria n Subject : Deborah Marcus - Appeal to challenge the revocation of license t o teach piano lessons from her home (UNCLASSIFIED ) Classification : UNCLASSIFIE D Caveats : FOUO Members of the Planning Commission : Attn : Brian Leveille , Please reconsider your choice to revoke the license for Deborah Marcus t o teach in her home as I know she always ensures everyone that comes to he r home to take piano lessons parks as close to her garage as possible as to no t disturb any of the neighbors in her area and requests that we are courteou s to the neighbors by being quiet entering and leaving her home . I understan d the need for quiet in a neighborhood but I do not see how this traffic in an d out of her home could be affecting the peace in the neighborhood as th e individuals I have encountered going to and from her home are quiet and wel lmannered. I currently am taking lessons from Ms . Marcus and would b e adversely affected if she no longer were able to instruct from her home an dpossibly had to leave the area . I know this would be a hardship on he r •financially and in today's economy this would not be good for her or th e community, she truly is an asset that we in San Luis Obispo do not want t olose. Thanks for your time . Sincerely , Carol McGehe e Carol McGehe e Contractor, TT I Analyst, J6 Service Desk (CSLO ) Toll Free : (866)264-364 6 Open a ticket at : Https ://Portal .ca .ngb .army .mil /sites/J6/Web%20Part%20Pages/Help_Desk .asp xOr Https ://p ortal .ca .ngb .army .mil/shrinkurl/?id=34 2 **** REMEMBER : Save documents to your personal -> U :\ Drive - Always!**** • COMMUNIr1 OFNE . CPMEN T P H 3-21 •From :Fran Davidson fmailto :fdavidsonncharter .net l Sent :Monday, December 05, 2011 11 :24 A M To :Leveille, Bria n Subject :Re : Deborah Marcus licens e 1180 Vista del Lago, San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 December 5, 201 1 To : San Luis Obispo City Planning Commissio n Re : Deborah Marcus Business Permi t Dear Friends : I live down the street from Ms . Marcus and until the recent death of my dog, I walked past Ms . Marcus's home almost every afternoon between 3 and 5pm . Knowing that some neighbors ha d concerns about traffic from her in-home piano teaching, I always checked and fairly frequentl y saw a car parked in right front of her garage and one occasionally legally parked on th e street . There was never more than one in front of her garage and obviously I couldn't tell if th e occasional car parked near the mini park was one of her client's or not . It should also be note d that many of us frequently park our cars in front of our garages instead of inside them . We DO have a traffic problem in this neighborhood but it is on Laguna Lane and only at the hours too many parents deliver and pick up their kids to/from Laguna Middle School . There i s not a traffic problem on Vista del Lago . I have never heard music from the outside of Ms .Marcus' home nor seen any disruption cause d by her business . We all know how poorly supported most artists are in our country and it is unreasonable to thin k that they need to rent retail space for their work . I happen to know that Ms . Marcus had been a valuable asset to several musical groups in this community by serving as an accompanist t o choral groups and coach to fledgling musicians . We are fortunate to have her in our town . I will be unable to attend your December 14, 2011 meeting because of travel to the East Coas t but wanted my opinion expressed . Sincerely , Frances W . Davidso n 545 8687 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O DEC - 5 201 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN T • PH3-22 Leveille, Brian Exhibit 4 •From :Jay Chester [jay@cyberyonder .com ] Sent :Monday, November 22, 2010 5 :12 P M To :Leveille, Bria n Cc :Dan ; Suzanne Heitzma n Subject :Re : Home Occupatio n Attachments :1247vistalago .zip Hello Brian First I would like to thank you for your time and courtesies today in helping me with the issue of th e home occupation application for 1247 Vista Del Lago . As discussed, the situation has been ongoing fo r over 2 years and finally now coming to a head after all attempts at an alternative arrangement hav e failed . Attached please find a zip file of 5 images I have taken of various situations where vehicula r traffic associated with the running of Ms Marcus' Piano School has caused a dangerous fire and safet y hazard as well as, entry/exit problems for all the neighbors that live in this residential development .I believe the images speak for themselves . In addition, I am forwarding to you the email that I sent to the president of the Laguna Shores HOA tha t governs this development . As mentioned, I am sending a fax of a printed letter from Ms Marcus to m e after our last altercation . This was when I called to complain again about the constant noise penetratin g my living space and outdoor areas, including my safety concerns about hitting a child or other studen t • walking behind my Garage/drive-area when I need to leave my home . The letter basically supports al l my claims of excessive noise and the fact that Ms Marcus' Grand Piano is "very loud" and even too lou d for her own taste . I have had no further contact with Ms Marcus since and hope that the City's system o f rules and regulations will prevail to make the right decision for all the members of this community an d ensure our rights to quiet enjoyment and public safety . Please accept this letter as my official objection to the Home Occupation Request by Ms Marcus for he r Piano School that has proven itself to be a problem for myself and the other neighbors you have recentl y spoken with . Sincerely , Jay Cheste r Cell : 805-591-058 7 CyberYonde r Internet Developmen t http ://www .cyberyonder .co m Tel : 805-277-392 0 Fax : 805-706-033 9 ------------------ PH3-2 3 11/23/201 0 • Exhibit 5 •Leveille, Bria n From :Suzanne Heitzman [suzanne .heitzman @gmail .com ] Sent : Tuesday, November 30, 2010 3 :47 P M To :Leveille, Bria n Subject : 1247 Vista del Lag o Brian Leveille, AIC P Associate Planner City of San Luis Obispo RE : Home Occupation Permit 1247 Vista del Lag o Dear Brian , Please consider this email as my formal objection to the operation of a piano school at 1247 Vista de l Lago . I have not submitted this in writing earlier as I was learning about the City's process for granting a home office permit, and was under the impression a phone call would suffice . Now that I understand th e process better, I am of the opinion that it would be better if I formally object to the granting of th e permit in writing . I would first like to state that it goes against my values to hamper another person's ability to earn a living . I normally live and let live, and appreciate being granted the same respect . However, Ms . Marcu s personality is such that she has consistently been inconsiderate about the community of th e neighborhood in which she is currently living . She has consistently put her own needs above those of her neighbors without regard . Ms . Marcus is living in a small townhouse with close proximity to neighbors . She has two pianos, one a grand and one smaller . These pianos are in use many, many hours per day by her and her students . She has operated the school for about two years without a city permit for a home office . Moving into a townhouse with two pianos, the grand piano by her own admission is over loud , demonstrates her lack of good sense and consideration of neighbors . She has stated--in writing-- she will never stop playing her grand piano . My objections to the home office permit are based on the following issues : 1.Ms . Marcus has a large practice of adults and children learning to play piano . She has both a gran d piano and a smaller upright piano in her small townhouse . Parents drop their children off for thei r lesson . There is considerable traffic in our neighborhood throughout the day and the evening from th e operation of the piano school . The cars stack up in the common drive when children are being picke d up/dropped off . With families tending towards the use of SUV's and mini-vans, it is difficult to se e pedestrians, and most particularly children . Cars have even parked in the red curb on the street, i n blocking the fire hydrant . 2.Ms . Marcus held a recital in her townhouse for the children in her home . The neighborhood is no t conducive for this kind of assembly . Ms Marcus could, and should have rented a hall for this type o f gathering . P H 3-24 • 11/30/2010 Page 2 of 2 3.There is insufficient parking for the parents dropping off/picking up their children . In fact, th e residence at 1247 Vista del Lago has NO private parking or even a private drive . There are currently tw o • cars for the tenants residing at this address, both of which are parked in either common grounds or o n the street--this is for the two individuals living at 1247 without the vehicles of the piano student s factored in . 4.The traffic flow of the residence is not conducive to a large number of cars coming and going . 5.Ms . Marcus is no longer the owner of the residence, but now (or in the immediate future)a tenant. The liability if a child is injured will most likely fall to the Homeowners Associations of Lagun a Shores, the City of San Luis Obispo and of course, the current home owner . 6.Parents quite often sit in their cars and wait for their children during their lesson . As a close neighbor , it is uncomfortable to come and go from my home with strangers observing me . 7.Parents have left their children unsupervised in cars . In September of this year, a young child tried to enter my home and would have but my door was locked . I literally had my hand on my phone to cal l 911 to prevent what I thought was a break in . Upon further examination, I realized it was a very smal l girl trying to enter my front door--perhaps 5 years old . She needed to use the bathroom, as her sister was having a piano lesson from Ms. Marcus . The child had been waiting unsupervised in a car parked i n front of my home . The child was confused about which house her sister was at . I escorted the little girl personally to Ms . Marcus home . • In summary, the school is operating in an area that does not work well for parents or children, with a large number of cars in our neighborhood . It is not safe . It is not working for the neighborhood . The music is too loud for the type of home Ms . Marcus is living in . While Ms . Marcus could have tak e certain measures had she so chosen to mitigate the sounds from the grand piano over the past 2 years , there isn't anything she can do to create a safe parking area. Ms . Marcus needs to find alternat e arrangements for her business . Please deny this permit before an accident occurs . Suzanne Heitzman PH3-2 5 11/30/201 0 The city has documentation from Mr . Jay Chester substantiating these points . have personally observe d the activities I've described . • Exhibit 6 •Community Development Dep i Memorandu m January 21, 201 1 TO :File Inquirie s FROM :Brian Leveille, Associate Planne r SUBJECT : Home Occupation — 1247 Vista Del Lag o The following conditions of approval were agreed to by th e applicant subsequent to two protests which initially were filed upo n posting . The protesting parties agreed to drop their protest s subject to application of the following conditions of approval i n supplement to standard home occupation permit regulations : 1)Parkinq :Clients shall only park in the spaces immediately in front of th e garage and clients shall be notified not to park in the fire lane (see below , notification to Parents and Adult Students) parking for the residence shal l remain available within the garage . 2)Prohibition of Special Events/Recitals :There shall be no special events , recitals, or other gatherings of students and/or parents in conjunction wit h the Home Occupation . As required in the Home Occupation Regulations , there shall be private instruction on an individual basis only . 3)Grand Piano :Lessons shall take place on the upright piano and lesson s on the grand piano shall not commence until such time as adequate soun d deadening measures can be achieved to reduce the volume level . Prior to commencing lessons on the Grand piano notification shall be provided t o Associate Planner, Brian Leveille to verify adequate sound reduction ha s been achieved such that there will not be unreasonable noise levels whic h would detrimentally impact the adjacent residential unit . Once approva l has been.obtained from the Community Development Department (Bria n Leveille) to instruct on the grand piano, keep all doors and windows close d while lessons are given on the grand piano . 4)Notification to Parents and Adult Students :Provide the attached lette r dated 12-10-2010 to all parents and adult students which contai n additional measures to minimize impacts to the adjacent neighbor . Continue to monitor for compliance with requirements for the home occupation and notification letter . 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 (805)781-7170 FAX :(805)781-7173 PH3-26 • 1247 Vista del Lago — Home Occupation Page 2January 21, 2011 5)Revocation :,The applicant agrees the Home occupation is conditiona l upon continued compliance with standard home occupation regulation s (attached) and additional conditions included herein . Upon substantiate d complaints of continued violations, the Home occupation is subject to a hearing to consider modifications to the home occupation approval an d possible revocation . Brian Leveill e Associate Planner PH3-27 Jay Cheste r 1251 Vista Del Lago San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5 Tel : 805-591-0587 Exhibit 7 • 11/2/201 1 RE : Deborah Marcus Business Permit Revocation Hearin g To whom it may concern, I am writing this letter to help provide a quick overview of the troublesom e situation being caused for my neighborhood and myself by the operation of Mrs . Marcus' Piano School at 1247 VDL.Problems with excessive noise being created b y Mrs. Marcus and her grand piano started soon after I moved in to my new home i n October of 2008 .Since that time, her and I have been at war over the chronic nois e being created by her and her student's piano playing, as well as other neighborhoo d traffic and liability issues . Numerous attempts to discuss this issue and come u p with a solution to abate the sound problems, have been met with obstinate refusa l or lack of compliance to agreed-upon sound/traffic/liability abatement conditions . The continuous cacophony of noise being produced by the Grand Piano on the othe r side of the common wall Mrs . Marcus and I share has been a constant nuisance an d made it impossible for me to have quiet enjoyment of my property . It is just wrong that a concert size instrument is being played in a shared residentia l environment with no sound proofing being used . Mrs . Marcus says she has recentl y had her piano retuned to a softer note, but this has barely lessened the level of pian o noise that is able to reverberate through the common wall and outside environment . When someone sets up a space as a music studio, they do not sound proof th e instrument, they sound proof the room the sound is being created in . Any steps that Mrs . Marcus has taken to stop the sound from her grand piano from flowing into m y environment have been totally inadequate . On the other hand, I have had to tak e sound deadening actions such as hanging a large tapestry on the common wall and a queen sized comforter from the railing of my loft . All in the hope of finding som e relief from the constant noise coming from next door . Please keep in mind that the sound being produced is not sweet music perfectl y played, but the sound of uneven practicing or learning of songs . In addition, th e chronic cacophony of scales being practiced is particularly annoying . Worst of all i s when beginning students would play and try to hammer out tunes while bein g coached by Mrs . Marcus . All the lessons being given and hours of practicing ha s created a situation where it has been difficult to live at my home or enjoy th e peaceful surroundings I thought I had moved into when I bought it. PH3-28 • • •This tiresome and annoying situation has been going on for some time now, a s attempts by me, the city and my HOA have tried to resolve the problem . I have bent over backwards to try to work with Mrs . Marcus to come to a solution, but to n o avail . Hard work by the city to hammer out a conditional agreement to allow he r business to continue to operate has also been ineffective, as condition afte r condition has been broken . Evidence of this has been provided to Brian Leveille a s well as the HOA property management company . Recent video evidence chroniclin g the constant sound nuisance I had to deal with for the months of July throug h September was sufficient for the property manager to write officially to the owne r of the property, that steps must be taken to stop the noise or sound proof th e environment. This action was taken in the last month and has for the momen t stopped Mrs . Marcus from playing her Grand Piano . The new-found quiet has bee n entirely blissful ! It is my understanding that a report on the matter has been prepared by Bria n Leveille. Rather than retell in its entirety the story of my plight and problems wit h Mrs . Marcus and her grand piano, I have included documentation that I hope wil l give you a good idea of what has been happening here . •Copies of email communication between the HOA President and myself about this matter. •. • Copies of email between me and the property manager relative to the latest officia l actions requesting the current owner to comply with the HOA Rules and Regulations concerning my right to quiet enjoyment of my property. Including copy of letter t o owner of 1247 VDL . •Copies of the HOA regulations that are relative to rights to quiet enjoyment an d what constitutes a noise nuisance . •Letter from Mrs . Marcus to me after a strong discussion about the piano noise an d the breaking of agreements and understandings we had developed from a previou s talk about the problem. Her letter admits to the loudness of her grand piano and shows her adamant stance that she will not stop playing it . Also shows proof o f regular recitals that she would have at her place where more than one student plays . The battle with Mrs. Marcus over the noise that her grand piano creates and traffi c and liability issues caused by the operation of her piano school has pitted neighbo r against neighbor . Poor choices by Mrs Marcus concerning the right space fro m which to run her business and practice her piano have created a terrible situatio n for all those involved . Whether the refusal to sound proof her home or not take th e opportunity to find a new place that met her piano related needs, after the sale o f her home ... Mrs Marcus has consistently shown a lack of consideration to th e •problems being discussed and extreme stubbornness to take any actions to resolv e the situation . Only once her back was officially up against the wall, would she tak e any actions to accommodate issues with my neighbors and I . We have been patien t PH3-29 and civil for too long, as we have tried to work with Mrs Marcus and the City in thi s matter . The constant flow of noise from the playing of Mrs Marcus' grand pian o both for giving lessons and her own hours of practicing is oppressive and made m e regret the purchase of my home . I am hoping that a decision to revoke Mrs . Marcus' business license will force her to finally do the right thing and bring an end to thi s ongoing problem for both the neighborhood and myself . Thank you in advance for all your time and efforts in reviewing my information an d listening to my story to resolve this matter . Sincerely Jay Owner : 1251 Vista Del Lago • PH3-30 • Co Pr 2aM : L f4C,yv4 S l400 s /404 CO-g ARTICLE VII I USE RESTRICTION S Use of the Project and each Residential Parcel therei n shall be restricted in accordance with the following provision s in addition to all other covenants, conditions and restriction s herein contained : 8 .1 .RESIDENTIAL USE :None of the Residential Parcels shall b e used except for residential purposes . No building shall b e erected, altered,placed or permitted to remain other than a single-family dwelling and garage, except for buildings fo r common use and approved by the Association and no suc h building shall exceed the height above ground level specifie d in the original plans and specificiations ; provided, however , that Declarant, its successors or assigns, may use th e Project and Residential Parcels for models and model sites an d display and sales office during the construction and sale s period . 8 .2 .OWNER'SMAINTENANCE DUTIES :In addition to the dutie s imposed by Paragraph 2 .5 of Article II hereof, each Owner shal l maintain in good repair, at his sole cost and expense, th e interiors of his Residential Parcels, and shall have th e exclusive right to paint, repair, tile, wax, paper or otherwis e refinish and decorate the inner surfaces of the walls , ceilings, floors, windows and doors bounding their respectiv e units . 8 .3 . All landscaping of every kind and character, includin g shrubs, trees, grass and other plantings shall be neatl y trimmed, properly cultivated and maintained continuousl y by the owner thereof in a neat and orderly condition an d in a manner to enhance its appearance . 8 .4 . No tree,shrub or planting of any kind shall be allowe d to overhang or otherwise encroach upon any sidewalk or othe r pedestrian way from ground level to a height of ten (10) fee t without the prior approval of the architectural committee . 8 .5 .NO MODIFICATIONS OR ALTERATIONS :No Owner shall, a t his own expense or otherwise, make any alterations, additio n or modification to the building in which his Residentia l Parcel is located or to any part or portion of the Commo n Area, without the prior written a p p roval of the architectura l committee, herein created . With respect to the installatio n of awnings, sunshades, screen doors, and other minor install- tions to any individual unit, the prior written approval o f the architectural committee shall be exercised with a view toward promoting uniformity and thereby enhancing the at- tractiveness of the property as a whole . 8 .6 .SIGNS :No sign or billboard of any kind shall b e displayed to the public view on any portion of any Residentia l Parcel except one sign for each Residential Parcel, not mor e than three (3) square feet in surface area, advertising th e property for sale or rent, or except signs used by Declarant , its successors or assigns, to advertise the Project o r Residential Parcels during the construction and sales period . 8 .7 .LAWFUL USE :No noxious, offensive or unlawful activit y shall be carried on, in or upon any Residential Parcel o r any part of the Project, nor shall anything'.be done thereo n which may be, or may become, an annoyance or nuisance to th e neighborhood, or which shall in any way interfere with th e quiet enjoyment of each of the Owners of his respective PH3-31 Residential Parcel, or which shall in any way increase th e rate of insurance on the Project or any part thereof . 8 .8 .TEMPORARY STRUCTURES :No structure of a temporar y character, trailer, basement, tent, shack, garage, barn, o r other outbuilding shall be used on any Residential Parcel a t any time as a residence, either temporarily or permanently . No trailer, camper, motor home, boat, inoperable vehicle, o r similar equipment shall be permitted to remain upon an y property within the Project, unless placed or maintaine d within an enclosed garage except as used by Declarant i n connection with its construction and sales program on th e Projec t 8 .9 .ANIMALS :No animals, livestock or poultry of any kin d shall be raised, bred or kept on any Residential Parce l except one dog or one cat, neither of which may excee d thirty-five (35) pounds at maturity ; provided,they are no t kept, bred or maintained for any commercial purpose . Notwithstanding the foregoing, no animals or fowl may b e kept on the Project which result in an annoyance or ar e obnoxious to residents in the vicinity . 8 .10 . PARKING : There shall be no parking in the privat e courts or driveways of the Project, except in areas designate d therefor . The City of San Luis Obispo, is hereby grante d the right to tow away vehicles improperly parked in th e Project, on a complaint basis and pursuant to the provision s of the Municipal Code . 8 .11 .TRASH REMOVAL :All rubbish, trash and garbage shal l be regularly removed from the Residential Parcels, and shal l not be allowed to accumulate thereon .All clotheslines , refuse containers, woodpiles, storage areas and machiner y and equipment shall be prohibited upon any Residentia l Parcel unless obscured from view of adjoining Residentia l Parcels and streets by a fence or appropriate screen approve d by the architectural committee . 8 .12 .CHILDREN :Each Owner shall be accountable to th e Association and the other Owners for the conduct and behavio r of children residing in or visting his Residential Parce l and any'damage to any portion of the Common Area, persona l property of the Association or property of another Owne r caused by any such child shall be repaired at the expense o f the Owner with whom the child is residing or visiting . 8 .13 .ANTENNAS :No radio or television receiving or transmittin g antennae or external apparatus shall be installed in an y Residential Parcel, or in any part of the Common Area , without prior written approval of the architectural committee . No Owner shall attach, install, or hang or,cause to b e attached, installed or hung, in, on or from his Residentia l Parcel any air conditioning unit or other equipment which i s visible from any portion of the Common Area or from th e streets adjacent to the properties, except as approved b y the architectural committee . PH3-32 • Cow ]24JLZ'S i •Vi .Unnecessary Nois e 1 . Boisterous activity or unnecessary noise due to the use o f musical instruments,radios ; stereo,or TVs, etc . is no t permitted . VII .Pets 1.All dogs must be kept on a leash when in common areas, an d owner must clean up droppings . 2.No pets may be kept which are an annoyance, or ar e objectionable to other residents . 3.No animals, livestock, or poultry may be kept, raised, or bre d on any premises within Laguna Shores . VIII .Architectural Contro l 1.No building, fence, wall, or other structure or landscap e planting shall be commenced, erected or maintained upo n properties, nor shall later remodeling, reconstruction , alterations or additions to those improvements, includin g material alterations of previously approved landscaped plantin g be made until the plans and specifications showing the nature , •kind, shape, height, materials, and location of the structur e and landscaping have been submitted to, and approved i n writing as to harmony of external design and location i n relation to surrounding structures and topography, by th e Architectural Committee of the Board of Directors and i f required, by the City of San Luis Obispo . 2.Patio or exterior window covers must be approved by th e Architectural Committee and if required, by the City of Sa n Luis Obispo . 3.Outdoor furniture will be restricted to the usual patio-typ e furniture in a well maintained condition . 4.No exterior antennae shall be permitted without the prio r approval of the Architectural Committee . 5.Window hangings,draperies and backing of draperies visible b y residents of neighboring lots shall be in a well maintaine d condition and shall not be offensive or rude as determined b y current social standards . 6.Homeowners shall provide exterior maintenance to his or he r respective residential building, fences and walls on o r appurtenant to his or her residential parcel . PH3-3 3 v,AJ4 5L4cRE; • Pr1Rlt ` Subject:1247 VOL Noise Nuisance http://us .mgl .mai' .com/neo/launch?.rand=e7q93qj23m2l p L .E-ittjz T-D ,<joST gl~T = of 2 From :Jay Chester (jay@cyberyonder .com) To:yostmanagement@aol .com ; Cc :bleveille@slocity .org, Date :Monday, October 10, 2011 1 :42 PM Hello Frank Sorry for the delay in getting this to you, but I was incredibly busy with work and some deadlines fo r clients . Since we last spoke, there seems to be no let up in the piano noise that continues to strea m from the grand piano that sits on the other side of the Common Wall that I share with 1247 VDL . This problem has been going on since I bought my home . I have been patient and praised by th e SLO City Planner, Brian Leveille, for my "civility" in this conflict . The city issued Mrs . Marcus a conditional business permit, for which she has consistently shown little intention of following . Her piano playing is constant and monotonous . I must have to endure the cacophony of her students doin g scales and Mrs . Marcus' attempts at learning new songs . Her supposed attempt at having her Gran d Piano made quieter by replacing the hammers has not accomplished the lessening effect that sh e promised it would . It is my understanding, that Mrs . Marcus has done nothing else to try and quite the noise from her side of the Common Wall, such as hanging tapestries (as I have done) or othe r sound deadening materials to help the situation. As previously discussed, I have been taking video evidence to help show the levels of noise I a m dealing with both inside and outside my home . The video evidence helps to show the chronic an d repetitive nature of the noise I must endure . In addition, it showcases infractions of the Conditional Business Permit to "keep all doors and windows closed while lessons are given on the grand piano". This of course still has no effect on the amount of sound that reverberates through my walls an d permeates through to the outside. The volume levels a Grand Piano is capable of producing are ver y high and according to studies has a sound level of 84 - 103dB . Please follow this link to review som e video evidence I was able to collect over the last couple months to show my plight : http ://vvww.cyberyonder .com/projects/ 1247 V DL/PianoPollution / It is only appropriate that as I am writing this email to you, Mrs . Marcus and a student are playing th e Grand Piano . The sound is permeating the interior of my home and outdoor living spaces . This chronic assault of noise is a direct infringement on my right to quiet enjoyment of my property . I am seeking for her to desist from playing her Grand Piano . Mrs . Marcus has- a correctly sized uprigh t piano in her guest bedroom that she has set up as a piano studio and poses no noise problems . This i s a reasonable alternative piano to give lessons to her students and play herself . For her to play a Concert Grand on the other side of a poorly insulated Common Wall is highly inconsiderate . It is the same as someone having a very powerful stereo that they are playing loudly on a regular basis . If thi s was the situation of a student playing loud music, it would not be tolerated! I have been patient lon g PH /N42 :04 AM • Print , -* http://us .mg l .ma: )oo .com/neo/launch?.rand=e7g93gj23m21 p • • enough and wish for you to take action with the landlord of the property to resolve this nuisance that I am forced to endure in my own home . In addition, Brian Levelle is being CC'd on this communication, so that he can also view the evidenc e that I have collected as proof of Mrs . Marcus' disregard for the Conditional Business Permit sh e agreed to honor. The video clips referenced demonstrate the various levels of chronic piano noise I must endure and related permit infractions . Business Permit aside, my right to the quiet enjoyment of my property is being trampled on by th e chronic noise of Mrs . Marcus' Grand Piano and it must stop . Thanks in advance and I appreciate any efforts that you can make to help alleviate my misery . Sincerely , Jay Cheste r Owner : 1251 Vista Del Lag o of 2 PH ./2 :04AM Ms . Janine Butle r 9910 Rudnick Ave . Chatsworth, CA 9131 1 Please be advised the use of the piano by your tenant continues to disturb other residents . i n my last communication to you dated October 11, 2011, it was asked that the use of the pian o cease until the deadening measures required by the City of San Luis Obispo had bee n completed . It was also requested that a completion date for the deadening measures b e supplied, but as of this date it has not been received . The Board of Directors has the option of taking additional measures to achieve conformity t o the governing documents and the City requirements . These options include, but are not limited to, fines and legal action . It is hoped that such action will not be necessary . • -P-lease-instruct your tenantto immedlatelycease the use of the piano until you have complete d the deadening measures required by the City of San Luis Obispo . Your cooperation will be to everyone best interest . PH3-3 6 Lela T) 4,To A)'w Q„4 ,U6:1z,f2LP v~L • YOST MANAGEMENT • 2251 Broad Street, Suite C • San Luis Obispo, California 93401 ■Phone (805) 543-8321 '7-14,\.C(4Es I-b A:St D c From:Jay Chester (jay@cyberyonder.com) To :daneboy@charter.net ; Date :Sun, November 21, 2010 3 :49:37 PM Cc : suzanne .heitzman@gmail .com ; Subject :Piano School at 1247 Vista Del La .go Dear Dan I am writing you to discuss a troublesome situation that has been going on here since I move into m y unit at 1251 Vista del Lago . This problem is now coming to a head with the sale of 1247 Vista de l Lago and Ms Marcus' new petition of the city for a business license (which should have been don e when she moved in). I closed on my place in September 2008 and basically moved in right after m y neighbors that share a wall with me at 1247 . One thing I did not know when purchasing my home , was that Ms . Marcus in 1247 had plans to run a full time piano school out of her home . I was also . unable to know that Ms Marcus had placed a very loud Grand Piano in her living room, that sh e insists to practice constantly . To be honest, if I had known of this situation, I never would have bough t my place and looked elsewhere . However, due to the fact that she did not follow rules and regulatio n and file with the city for a business license or notify me of this fact till after I had closed, I was neve r properly provided with the information to make the right decision for myself . I never would hav e knowingly bought a home next to a piano recital hall . Not to be a bad neighbor, I gave myself 3 months to assess the situation and see what I could or coul d • not deal with or find to be fair. It became extremely apparent that Ms Marcus' Grand Piano was very loud and at first Ms Marcus would play with all her windows and sliding doors open . The first time I heard this I could not believe how loud her piano playing was or how much the sound carried ove r from her residence to mine or filled the whole backyard/creek area with her cacophony of practicin g scales and hammering out music she was learning to play . I had to quickly bring this issue to M s Marcus' attention and asked her to please play with her windows and doors closed so as not to creat e so much sound pollution that would travel from her home . This was in addition to the constan t DRONE of her piano coming through the wall which we share . When these issues were brought t o Ms Marcus, she apologized and blamed the issue on "crappy California construction", then said sh e would keep her windows and sliding glass door closed to mitigate some of the noise . It was during this conversation that she discussed also her piano school business, and said that she taught schoo l children on an upright piano in the 2nd bedroom that was converted to a piano studio . She then aske d me to listen from my home while she went into her piano studio, closed the door and played to see if I could hear it . I could not really hear much in this situation and told her that we would see . It was als o at this time that Ms Marcus also told me that she only practiced on her Grand Piano for about an hou r a day . Since that time, I have been constantly dealing with this situation ... Having to remind M s Marcus often to close her windows/slider when practicing and often to play less loudly due to th e sound penetrating the wall between us . Then things got worse when she went against what she sai d and began to also teach Adult students and teaching them not in the closed studio room, but on he r grand piano . This was never part of our original agreement and now in addition to her constan t practicing, I am also subjected to her adult students hammering on a grand piano that is way too bi g • for the space it is in nor properly sound proofed . • PH3-37 What was written above tells my personal story of my rights to "quiet enjoyment" being trample d upon . Now I am going to discuss the even more important issues of the problems and potentia l liabilities that have been affecting me and my neighbors too . Ms Marcus's Piano School is a nightmare for all of us that live near it! We are constantly having to deal with a continuous stream o f inconsiderate parents and piano students that are parking, dropping off and picking up to atten d classes . More often than not, I am finding young children walking behind my garage, as I am trying to back my large truck out of the common driveway, that all of the tenants along the creek must use . In addition, it is often that the parents are to blame for blocking the driveway or parking illegally i n fire zones to sit and wait for their children to finish with their lessons . This has caused a real nuisanc e for me and all the surrounding neighbors and most of all a dangerous liability situation for all that liv e here and our HOA . God forbid, I should one day back up and run over a child walking behind m y garage and blocking access to the driveway to exit ... Not only will I be sued, but the HOA will b e sued for allowing this situation when it was known to be dangerous and not properly addressed ;I have evidence of these issues ... pictures of parents/students vehicles blocking the driveway an d parking in our fire lanes . In addition, I have written confirmation from Ms Marcus of knowing tha t her grand piano is too loud (even too loud to her taste) and problems with parents parking and no t escorting their children to Ms Marcus' door . Its just not the right situation for this type of operation to be run from here . In case you do not know, Ms Marcus is in contract to sell her unit and is working with her buyers t o lease the property back from them to live and run her school . I believe it is because of this and nee d of the buyers to follow the CC&Rs to close on the property and legally rent it, that Ms Marcus ha s been now forced to petition the City of SLO for a business license . The CC&Rs specifically state tha t anyone running a business from their home needs to have the permission of the HOA and the City . This has not been the situation and on Friday 11/19/10 I saw a sign posted in front of #1247 statin g the now the city was being petitioned for a piano school to be allowed to operate here . The situation is now coming to a head, and I as well as most of my neighbors, have been in contact with on e another and are all calling the city to voice our concerns and viewpoint that a license should not b e granted within the 5 day period allowed to do so . Ms Marcus will probably be closing her home deal soon and I believe that HOA needs to take actio n here to make sure a business that creates a nuisance and liability to the neighbors surrounding it an d all members of the HOA does not happen . Ms Marcus is selling her place and will no longer be a n owner or member of our HOA, so why should we have to take on such a potential risk? What woul d our HOA insurance premiums do if the insurer were to find out about this dangerous situation? M s Marcus should do what she should have done from the beginning and purchased a single family hom e to run her business or find a studio in a commercial property with the proper sound-proofing to have a Piano School operate without causing a nuisance to others . I would like to discuss this with you as soon as possible to find out the best course of action for al l parties concerned. I wanted to talk with you first about all this before taking the next steps of filing a formal complaint in writing to the Board of Directors and acting within the regulations for settlemen t of such disputes and situations . Clearly something needs to be done . Thanks in advance for your time and attention to this matter . I look forward to your response and • • • PH3-38 ability to discuss what needs to be done to assure the quiet enjoyment and mitigation of liability an d • nuisance that is the right of every homeowner within our HOA . Please feel free to call me at th e number below. Jay Cheste r 1251 Vista Del Lag o Cell : 805-591-058 7 ------------------ CyberYonde r Internet Developmen t http ://wwvv.cyberyonder .com Tel : 805-277-392 0 Fax : 805-706-033 9 ------------------ • PH3-39 gCuT tm-R- ,CkcTel ..'- 10/23/1 0 Jay, Had you not been so determined to yell and talk over me earlier today, I could hav e conveyed to you some important info relevant to your concerns . We have sold this condo and will close in 45 days . It will be used as a rental propert y and I have the option of staying on . At this point I am exploring other housing options . It would be advantageous to me to find an affordable home rather than a condo . It's to o bad that you did not purchase a small house yourself in a quiet area in which you would have no adjoining wall and possibly more land in between you and your neighbors, sinc e you are in the house most of 24/7 . There are certainly no guarantees that the new owner s will come up with tenants who you are happy about . For the meanwhile, it occurred to me that I could move the grand piano so the soun d board is facing toward the corner in the opposite direction from your place . I have done so this afternoon and we can see if that is somewhat helpful , I DID NOT LIE TO YOU . We had agreed that I would teach primarily in the musi c room where you don't hear anything . This I do except for a very few adult students, onl y two of which have any advanced abilities . Beginners make no significant noise at all , We also agreed that I would keep all doors and windows in the LR/DR closed whe n anyone plays on the grand piano . This morning was a rare exception that I teach an y child in my living room . On this occasion I gave a single, half hour lesson (make-u p lesson since I don't teach on the weekend) to a child . I only taught out there because I had an overnight guest that had been using a pull-out bed in the music-room . What yo u reacted to, after a couple of minutes of loud music, was me playing my own music . Another factor was that the blanket I use to deaden sound inside the piano was in th e dryer after a washing . I told you from the start, and all through our dialogues, that I would not give up playin g my Steinway grand . Under the circumstances we outlined above, problems should b e reduced . However, it is a very loud piano . I long to have the action replaced whic h would allow me to have fat new felt hammers which could be voiced to be very quiet ; really to my taste as well as your ears . I am planning to do this after the first of the year , regardless of where I am living . The only thing that has kept me from doings so is coughing up the $7000 it requires . The job requires a 2-3 month period in which th e piano will be out of commission – the moving parts being replaced in a technician's workshop . As to the factors you mentioned about parent/child traffic primarily from 3-6 P .M . in the afternoon, I have enclosed a copy of the letter I am sending to all my student's parent s regarding parking and escorting young children to the door without exception . Most of • • PH3-40 • them have been informed previously,but in a more casual way . This should make thing s perfectly clear . In this interim 45 day period in which I am investigating my options, we will have t o endeavor to be cooperative neighbors, despite our issues . We should test this change i n the piano's position to see if the move makes any difference . Tomorrow afternoon, between 3 and 4 :30, some of my young students will be comin g here for a "piano class", a happening that occurs 2-3 times per year in which the childre n play for one another and learn to be a good audience . All parents will be called iii advance to make sure they observe the traffic rules discussed above . I would like us to communicate on these subjects primarily by e-mail to avoid these high - intensity emotional telephone exchanges . I know that we are both capable of being ver y pleasant, friendly neighbors -- that has been demonstrated at one time or another, bu t these emotional clashes we've had are truly horrific . Me-maij is dlight49@hotmail .com . • • PH3-41 SV Piano Studi oof Deborah Marcu s 1247 Vista del Logo San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805-439-005 2 10/23/1 0 Dear Parents , My next door neighbor has brought to my attention some serious concern s about the comings and goings of students . My condo driveway backs up to a fire lane in which no parking is allowed, even for a brief drop-offlpick-up o f children . I would appreciate your parking on the street and escorting your children t o the door as well as back to the car. They shouldn't be coming and going o n their own to assure their safety and my liability. Thank you for your helpful attention to these rules . Best regards , Deborah PH3-42 • • Exhibit 8 My name is Suzanne Heitzman and I live 2 doors away from Ms . Marcus on Vistadel Lago . Vista del Lago is a cul de sac leading to Laguna Lane and has n othrough traffic . There are almost no visitor parking spaces in the neighborhood .For most of the residences in Laguna Shores the only visitor parking is on th estreet. For the past 3 years Ms . Marcus has operated a business from her home fro mwhich she gives piano lessons to adults and children . She purchased theproperty in 2008 and moved in with two pianos, one a Steinway concert gran dand a second, smaller piano . She did not apply for business permits or a hom eoccupation permit when she purchased the property. She began providin glessons and giving recitals to her students . Eventually she was required to ge tthe necessary permits, including a Home Occupation Permit . In 2010 she sol dher residence and became a tenant . In 2010 the City granted Ms . Marcus a conditional Home Occupational Permit . I nreading the conditions of the HOP some of us thought it would not be grante dsince the requirements called out for a private drive . Ms . Marcus residence doe snot have a private drive . Her driveway is part of the common drive shared b yabout five or six residences (Exhibit 7 Plot Map). When the City approved Ms . Marcus' permit it carefully crafted an agreemen twith Ms . Marcus to address the limitations of the property and ensure the safet yprimarily of the children . The neighbors agreed to drop their protest, allow th eHOP to be issued, and "test the waters ." A public hearing was not held . Th econditions were that her clients were to park on the garage pad in front of Ms .Marcus home and not on the street : Ms . Marcus was directed by City staff to par kher personal vehicle in her garage . She was also required to stagger th escheduling of her students so that they did not over lap . The conditions were straight forward and they have essentially been ignored on adaily basis from the time the HOP was issued . Ms . Marcus routinely parks he rpersonal vehicle on the street in various locations (Photo Exhibits 3A-K). He rclients do the same . This leads to traffic congestion on the common drive ,children (and adults) walking unsafely behind garages and shortage of parkin gspaces to other residences . Further, her clients are adversarial and rude to residents . Rather than direct he rclients what her expectations were regarding the community rules, she blamed i ton her neighbor . (Exhibit 1C) This past September, I was told by one of he rclients who was parked on the street in front of my own home (email Exhibit 5 )that the street is public parking and she could park there . Ms . Marcus has no ttaught her clients how to conform to the conditions of her permit as evidenced b y•photographs taken by me over a short period of time . PH3-4 3 • • Rather than trying to work cooperatively with the neighbors, she set the stag e early on by attempting to form alliances with various members of th e neighborhood (Exhibit 1 A) and being defiant (Exhibits 1B and 2) and create d conflict with others . Ms . Marcus took her case to the Home Owners Association and was told t o provide verification of insurance waiving other property owners from liability o f her business . There is no record she did so . She has misinformed her landlord (Ms . Janine Butler) of the facts (Exhibit 8). Fo r example, she stated that there is a rock band performing next door to my home . That is completely false . There is, in fact, a professional musician and full tim e chiropractor living there, who has never rehearsed there . Ms . Butler accuse s another neighbor of taking photographs and harassing the clientele of Ms . Marcus . I am the individual that took the photographs, and you can clearly se e that the subjects are vehicles and no persons are photographed . To state tha t Ms . Marcus' clients have been harassed by anyone in the neighborhood is fals e and outrageous . Other neighbors have responded to Ms . Butler's letter . Ms . Marcus' business has put a great strain on the neighborhood . Parking is very limited here and she is using much of it with her vehicle, her clients, her tenant , and her tenant's guests . Her clients make a regular practice waiting in their car s for their children, and observe our coming and going . I feel like my home is bein g cased on a regular basis . In other neighborhoods when a person loiters in a neighborhood people don't stand for it, and the cops are called . But we don't have that option . From October 4 to October 24 of this year, I photographed vehicles parked on m y street that are in violation of the permit . I took these photographs from my cel l phone when I was coming and going from my home conducting my persona l business . I have submitted copies of those pictures . (Exhibits A-K). As you can see the infractions are frequent . The infractions were easily captured on a shor t term, incidental time frame . Our neighborhood has been through a lot since Ms . Marcus moved in . To summarize : One of Ms . Marcus' clients' car was broken into and the mother's purse wa s stolen . •A young child—around five years old—pushed her way into my home lookin g for a bathroom . I personally escorted the child to Ms . Marcus home . ▪We have struggled to put out our trash when there are vehicles parked in ou r only available space . P H 3-44 • •Ms . Marcus put a hostile and demeaning note on my personal vehicle when itwas parked in my driveway .•Routine landscaping and street cleaning has been deferred more than onc ebecause her tenant's vehicle was parked in the way .•Numerous individuals have come to my door asking for directions to Ms .Marcus home .•Her clients have disregarded City direction and the request of variousneighbors to park in the drive of Ms . Marcus home, and been unfriendly an dhostile ignoring simple greetings .Her clients have sat in their cars on the street and observed our coming an dgoing.•Ms . Marcus has held piano recitals, at least one including a French horn .•She has generated an overall atmosphere of conflict and tension amongs tvarious neighbors . There are other options available to Ms . Marcus as a piano teacher . She ca nteach at her students' home, she can rent a studio, or as she is a tenant she ca nmove. No one is suggesting she terminate her business ; just not conduct fro mour neighborhoo d The City tried to accommodate Ms . Marcus with the imposition of fairly straigh t •forward conditions, which are consistently violated . The consequences hav ebeen unpleasant to the neighborhood with too much traffic and too many car sparked and unsafe traffic . Please revoke this Home Operation Permit and restoreour neighborhood . aix~na~ t l (3 foIb PH3-45 •• 1 1 x 1 II 4?I • 10/23/1 0 Jay , Had you not been so determined to yell and talk over me earlier today, I could hav e conveyed to you some important info relevant to your concerns . We have sold this condo and will close in 45 days . It will be used as a rental propert y and I have the option of staying on . At this point I am exploring other housing options . It would be advantageous to me to find an affordable house rather than a condo . It's too bad that you did not purchase a small house yourself in a quiet area in which you woul d have no adjoining wall and possibly more land in between you and your neighbors, sinc e you are in the house most of 24/7 . There are certainly no guarantees that the new owner s will come up with tenants who you are happy about . For the meanwhile, it occurred to me that I could move the grand piano so the soun d board is facing toward the corner in the opposite direction from your place . I have don e so this afternoon and we can see if that is 'somewhat helpful , I DID NOT LIE TO YOU . We had agreed that I would teach primarily in the musi c room where you don't hear anything . This I do except for a very few adult students, onl y two of which have any advanced abilities . Beginners make no significant noise at all . We also agreed that I would keep all doors and windows in the LR/DR closed whe n anyone plays on the grand piano . This morning was a rare exception that I teach an y child in my living room . On this occasion I gave a single, half hour lesson (make-u p lesson since I don't teach on the weekend) to a child . I only taught out there because I had an overnight guest that had been using a pull-out bed in the music-room . What you reacted to, after a couple of minutes of loud music, was me playing my own music . Another factor was that the blanket I use to deaden sound inside the piano was in th e dryer after a washing . I told you from the start, and all through our dialogues, that I would not give up playin g my Steinway grand . Under the circumstances we outlined above, problems should b e reduced . However, it is a very loud piano . I long to have the action replaced whic h would allow me to have fat new felt hammers which could be voiced to be very quiet ; really to my taste as well as your ears . I am planning to do this after the first of the year , regardless of where I am living . The only thing that has kept me from doings so i s coughing up the $7000 it requires . The job requires a 2-3 month period in which th e piano will be out of commission – the moving parts being replaced in a technician's workshop . As to the factors you mentioned about parent/child traffic primarily from 3-6 P .M . in the afternoon, I have enclosed a copy of the letter I am sending to all my student's parent s regarding parking and escorting young children to the door without exception . Most o f PH3-47 Piano Studio o f Deborah Marcu s 1247 Nsta del Lazo San Lids Obispo,CA 93401 805-439-005 2 10/23/1 0 Dear Parents , My next door neighbor has brought to my attention some serious concern s about the comings and goings of students . My condo driveway backs up to a fire lane in which no parking is allowed, even for a brief drop-off/pick-up o f children . I would appreciate your parking on the street and escorting your children t o the door as well as back to the car . They shouldn't be coming and going o n their own to assure their safety and my liability . Thank you for your helpful attention to these rules . Best regards , Deborah • • PH3-48 o ,,za/44 V --2--4,e-e4d - PH3-49 exh ;bl'+3,4 t (ku,ite.tL 4:wf-)46- U~ L 'xhib,+3 g Ma/cc,to tv.4t1‘t,c.vaAie.(.fa/t4d otthf7(t Poioe,,(14,,,std-)ty-t a q E v 'A.,.e,hs-1 .0430 PH3-51 vs pcicAece)/a v 7 Vde,Q L -mkt ic,s/ P H 3-52 a r +You Gmail Calendar Documents Photos Sites Web More -tk hi bi "" 3 A • blevetlle@slocity .org Show search optionsSearch Mail Search the Web i Create a filter Mail The 2012 FIAT 500 - www .fiatusa.com - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio .About these ads < ! r>1 Contacts . Tasks Archive 1 Spam I Delete I 1 I (Move to Inbox . Labels .7 (More 7 of 26 11/1/11 1 :25 P M suzanne .heitzman@gmail .com Compose mall 1 Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mail Drafts [ImapyDraft s Administrativ e Arbonne Bridg e Carol Taylo r Edward Jone s Employment Flood Insuranc e FOOD BAN K Laguna Shore s movies Note s Phone Picture s Piano Procrastination 11 more • Suzanne Heitzmar add o .ma d e Invite a friend • People Diane Pilloud ndjpilloudigcharter. net Jay Chester Jay @cyberyonder .co m Leveille, Brian nblevei I le igsl ocity . org 'of 26 vity: 5 minutes ag oitlocationsDetails be L... kic k Two student vehicle s Suzanne to bleveille, Jay, djpilloud Show details Oct 9 (Reply Two vehicles parked simultaneously on drive . Photo taken on 10/7/2011 approximately 4 :00 pm . 1247 Vista del Lago . Suzanne Heitzma n Sent from my iPhone The 2012 FIAT 50 0 www.fiatusa .com - Drive a New Italian Classic I 28% ful l Using 2048 MB of your 7643 MB lttPs :/lrriail .google .com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 Page 1 of 1PH3-5 3 11/1/11 1 :27 P M +You Gmail Calendar Documents Photos Sites Web More -suzanne .heitzman©gmatl.com - i bleveille@slocity .org .Search Mail j I Search the Web 10eate flies°"eons Mai l Contacts Tasks Compose mail Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mai l Draft s [Imap]/Drafts Administrative Arbonn e Bridg e Carol Taylor . Edward Jone s Employment Flood Insurance FOOD BAN K Laguna Shores movies Notes Phone Pictures Piano Procrastinatio n 11 more • Suzanne Heitzmar acd cr invit e Invite a friend Holistic Nutrition School - www .integrativeNutrition .com - Passionate About Health & Wellness? Get Certified - Free Career Guidel Ai out these ads (<i > Archive Spam Student parking Leveille, Bria n Suzanne to bleveille show details Oct 20 (12 days ago)Reply blevellle@slocity .org This was taken at approximately 3 :45 pm this date. The student is appropitely parked per l ? Conditions of permit on Ms Marcus drive. See next email .---- ,2011 Family Health Plans, Compare & Save on Health Insurance . 888.529.4512 Fast, Free Quotes ! Anthem .co m Holistic Health/Medicin e Practical Online Bachelor's Degre e in Complementary/Alternative Healt h aSource .com/Free_lnfc le a doctor ? a free ND foru m 11/19/11 . laturopathicDocto r Holistic Nutrition Schoo l www .IntegrativeNutrition .com - Passionate AI Reply Forward Archive Spam Delete VA fullUsing 2048 MB of your 7643 MB S~r~iicf;h :r ne loo k :ps ://rnail .google .com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 PH3—54 Page 1 of 1 Exhib ..-+-.'.„. +You Galati Calendar Documents Photos Sites Web Mor e ,,,,.... bleveillvgslocity .org Search Mail Search the Web 1 create'w s a eita'°''t'°"s_...a r Holistic Nutrition School - www .IntegrativeNutrition .com - Passionate About Health & Wellness? Get Certified - Free Career Guide!About these ads re-IF?-Is_a_ ,,.. 6 of 26 f ji"Archive Spam Delete i Move to Inbox i i Labels I i More Vehicle People Suzanne to bleveille, Jay .shp,w_tefaik Oct 12 Reply :Jay Cheste r This expedition is parked on curb at 1255/1251 vista del lap on trash day . No room available for trash cans . ! More about... QuiltingaPatchwork Quilts eBaby Quiltse EasyQuilt sHomeopathvNatural HealingaJohone App DeveloperNatural Health About these links 11/1/11 1 :25 PM suzanne .heitzmaniPgmall .com -,,........ al l Contacts Tasks [ImapyDrafts Administrativ e Arbonn e Bridge Carol Taylo r Edward Jones Employmen t Flood Insuranc e FOOD BAN K Laguna Shores movies Note s Phone Pictures Piano Procrastinatio n 11 more ' Compose mall Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mai l Drafts Suzanne Heitzmar Sent from my (Phone Reply Reply to all Forward Holistic Nutrition Schoo lwww.IntegrativeNutrition .com - Passionate About Health & Wellness? Get Certified - Free Career Guide!Ads jay@cyberyonder.co m Leveille,Brianbleveille@slocity .org Ads Low Cost HMO Health Plan sCompare & Save on Health Insurance .(888) 529-4512 Fast, Free Quotes!Anthem .co m Holistic Health_lMedtcin e Practical Online Bachelor's Degre ein Complementary/Alternative Healt hEducationDegreeSource.com/Freelnft Want to become a doctor ? Start by attending a free ND forumin San Diego on 11/19/11 .www.aanmc.org/NaturopathicDocto r Archive Spam Delete ;Move to Inbox ! Labels ! More 6 of 26 .__eea ;Wily: 7 minutes agoher locations Details aiieiteh 1.0 tha eta-a Lac:hi ittp slirriail .google .com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 Page 1 of 1PH3-55 i 1 E) bi -I-- 11/1/11 1 :27 P M0311P7-01 i +You Gmail Calendar Documents Photos Sites Web More -suzanne heitzmanfhgmail .com...,,,,,,,... bleveille tlsloclty .org 1 ShowsearchSearchMallSearchtheWebcreme.filterP otion= The 2012 FIAT 500 - www.fiatusa .com - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio . rc ve Spam Delete (r Move to Inbox I Labels More Compose mall Photo taken today Leveille, Briant_ Inbox Suzanne to bleveille show detaks Oct 18 Reply 1 bleveilleftslocity.org Buz z Important Ms Marcus personal vehicle and her tenants parked on vista del lago, an infraction of the permit ... „ ,. Sent Mali Showdetail s Drafts I Uivo,foL M, Ads Mall Contact s Tasks About these ads Lc'f >- 4of26 L i Suzanne Heitzrna r add, or invite The 2012 FIAT 500 Invite a friend www .fiatusa .com - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio . [ImapyDrafts Administrativ e Arbonne Bridg e Carol Taylor Edward Jones Employment Flood Insurance FOOD BAN K Laguna Shore s movie s Note s Phone Picture s Pian o Procrastinatio n 11 more' Sent from my (Phon e ReA.Forward 4 of 26 26% fullUsing2048 MB of your 7643 MB i Archive Spam . Delete fa Move to Inbox Labels More ©2011 Google -Terms &PrivaovDisablebuzz Last account activity :8 minutes agoOpen in 1 other location Detail s Ittps ://rnail .google . O v./itch to the nee.,look +You Gmail Calenda r •Mail Contacts Tasks Compose mall Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mall Draft s [Imapj/Drafts Administrativ e Arbonne Bridg e Carol Taylo r Edward Jones Employment Flood Insurance FOOD BANK Laguna Shore s movies Note s Phone Picture s Pian o Procrastinatio n 11 more • Suzanne Heitzma r Invite a frien d • t kh;o1) 3 GZ it 11/1/11 1 :28 P M suzanne .heitzmantgmail .com -Documents Photos Sites Web /Mk '&6 I 1 show search option sblevellleQs!ocity .org Search Mail ] [Search the Web j Create a me, Suzanne to bleveille show details Oct 20 (12 days ago)Reply While the white sedan was parked properly in Ms Marcus drive as shown the on separate email, at the same time s Ms . Marcus personal vehicle was parked across the street from her own residence (infraction). The second Vehicl e pictured (dark sedan) belongs to Ms. Marcus tenant. This infraction (Marcus vehicle on the street) is particularl yvexing because due to the day–Thursday–and the hour--3:45 pm–the homeowner in the residence where the tw ovehicles are parked will not have the fallen leaves swept from the street by our Association landscapers . This create s a potential fire hazard as the leaves accumulate over the weeks due to the constant parking there over an extende dperiod of time by the residents of the Marcus household . Sent from my iPhone Holistic Nutrition Schoo lwww.IntegrativeNutrition.com - Passionate About I- .Spam Delet e 26% full Using 2048 MB of your 7643 M B Sent from my iPhone Reply Forward photo .JP G 32K View Download About these ads '.<> 2of26 1 r Leveille, Brian bleve illeeslocity.o rg........... Show details Ads 2011 Family Health Plan s Compare & Save on Health Insurance.888.529.4512 Fast, Free Quotes ! Anthem.co m Make Your Practice Grow Learn Proven Techniques to Get Mor eHypnotherapy Clients. Sign Up ' D Forum 19/11, free s 26 :9 minutes agoocationDetails Holistic Nutrition School - www .lntegrativeNutrition .com - Passionate About Health & Wellness? Get Certified - Free Career Guide ! J Archive Spam Delete_t I Move to Inbox J I Labels J l more (no subject) %!`.itch to turd new look. Ittps ://rnail .google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 PH3-57 Page lof l 7)Ex-hi b i +- O PH3-58 &hi bit 3_r 11/1/11 1 :29 PM suzanne .heitzman@gmail.com - (01 7 LC +You Gmail Calendar Documents Photos Sites Web IVlvae bleveille@slocity .org Search Mail 1 Search the Web I ShowCreatenit~opeO°5 •Contacts Tasks I Compose mall Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mali Drafts [Imapj/Drafts Administrative Arbonne Bridg e Carol Taylor Edward Jones Employment Flood Insurance FOOD BAN K Laguna Shores movie s Note s Phone Pictures Piano Procrastinatio n 11 more Suzanne Heitzmar Holistic Nutrition School -wVw .IntegrativeNutrition .com - Passionate About Health & Wellness? Get Certified - Free Career Guide ! t 'Archive1Spam Delete I I_ Move to Inbox I i Labels I More j Marcus vehicle Suzanne to bleveille show detaL.&Oct 21 11 days ago) i Reply Vehicle parked in violation of permit 3 :52 pm this date. Mitsubishi license plate 6dnk906 Calif . Ads 2011 Family Health Plan s Compare & Save on Health Insurance . 888 .529 .4512 Fast, Free Quotes!Anthem .com Want to become a doctor ? Start by attending a free ND foru min San Diego on 11/19/11 . www.aanmc.org/NaturopathicDocto r Holistic Health/Medicin e Practical Online Bachelors Degre eientay/Alternative Healt h egreeSource .com/Free_lnft linga Develo p ern It112? ;bout these links About these ads I < I La:j 1of2 6 Leveille,Bria n bleveille@slocity .org Lee Show details Sent from my iPhone Archive Spam Delete 26% ful l Using 2048 MB of your 7643 M B Holistic Nutrition Schoo l www .IntegrativeNutrition.com - Passio 1of26 ;count activity :9 minutes agoen in 1 other location petails .ok tips ://mail .google .com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 Page 1 of 1 PH3-59 ,.) PH3-60 /-2(1?'V ~ad C4e,f(c PH3-61 Gala n Mai l Contacts Tasks Compose mai l Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mail Drafts [Imapj/Drafts Administrative ' Arbonne Bridge Carol Taylor Edward Jones Employment Flood Insuranc e FOOD BANK Laguna Shore s movies Notes Phone Pictures Pian o Procrastination 11 more • Suzanne Heitnnar Invite a friend la lz.?k 1I X~~ j~t bleveille@Jslocity .org Search Mail Search the Web . Archive . Spam Delete Move to Inbox Labels More Violation of conditions re : piano lesson parking Suzanne Fieitzrnan to bleveille,Jay Dear Brian , The conditions that the City imposed on Ms. Marcus'piano lessons license are consistently being violated . Specifically,there is often more than one car parked in the common area at a time (the condition was that she should stage the lessons so that there is only one car on the common drive at a time)Second, cars are consistently parking on the street throughout the neighborhood .It is not uncommon for there to be two vehicles for piano lessons plus Ms . Marcus tenant parked on the street. People wait in their cars for their child to have their lesson . Last week there a family allowed their children an d their dog to walk around on the lawn of a resident while their child had their lesson. Within the last week I over heard a nearby resident explain to one of the parents that they are not supposed to park on the street then wal k their family through through the drive, that they should park on Ms. Marcus' drive. The parent seeme d unfamiliar with the restrictions . On another day I watched a family load up their car with their children whe n there were TWO cars parked on Ms. Marcus' drive.I held my breath as the vehicle was nearly behind Ja y Chester's garage. The father was on the opposite side of the car and was blind to the danger . If Mr. Chester had backed out at that moment it could easily have been a tragedy. I have not taken photos or logged dates as you advised me not to continue to do that when we went throug h the "appeal" process. Further, since the City granted the conditional permit, it is the City's responsibility t o enforce the conditions. We were advised by the City we would best be served by withdrawing our protest, allowing the conditiona l permit to be granted, and letting the business roll out to determine If the conditions would be followed . The conditions have been flaunted . In good faith we followed your suggestion and withdrew our protest, and ar e now living with violations of most all of the conditions . I would also like to point out that Ms . Marcus is the only resident in the neighborhood that has been allowed t o operate this kind of business, where there is client traffic. Sure, there are other residents with home based businesses . They are not allowed to park their work trailers on the common property, and they do not hav e clients coming and going . Please advise. Suzanne Heitzma n San Luis Obispo . CA to me,Jay Jun 28 I a or ..+ rue . atill con act De D z rah and discu s the w i Ili_~..:il .de ::O From : Suzanne Heitman [mallto : Sent :Tuesday, June 28, 2011 7 :20 AM To: Leveille, Brian Cc:Jay Chester Subject Violation of conditions re : piano lesson parkin g Sho .QUCIe(I u ■' u7ttnne Heilama t to Brian Jun 28 Brian . So. here we are . She'll be reminded of her conditions which she has never com plied with .We forfeited X Inbox X Jun 28 11f11113 :49 PM . • 11 of 26 Leveille, Bria n Jay Chester u Ad s Compare & Save on Health Insurance . 888.529.4512 Fast, Free Quotes l Anthem .co m Practical Online Bachelor's Degre e in Complementary/Alternative Health EducationDegreeSource .com/Free_I nfc Get Heart-Based Sales Training T o Grow Your Hypnotherapy Practice . RejuvenateYourPractice . corn More about... - www .IntegrativeNutrition .com -Passionate About Health &Wellness? Get Certified - Free Career Guide!About these ads 5 :11rnall .google .com/mail/?u1=2&vIewa.bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 Page 1 of 2PH3-62 11/1/113:49 PM the right to the hearing in an effort to be reasonable and the assurance that the permit would be revoked if sh efailed to meet the conditions. Surely we can do better than this conundrum. Suzanne -Show quoted text - Show quoted to■A Archive Spam Delete Move to Inbox Labels More Ads 11026 www.IntegrativeNutrition .corn -Passionate About Health &Wellness? Get Certified- Free Career Guide! 26% full -Last account activity.2 minutes agoUsing2048MB of your 7643 MS Open in 3 other location s • ttps://rrraii .googie_com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohh14rw8mbn4 Page 2 of 2 PH3-63 h bit' / ~.J /Z.Mail Search the Web 11/2/119 :40 AM bleveilletstocity.org • Gmai l Mal i Contacts Tasks Compose mail Inbox (1 ) Buzz Important Sent Mail Drafts (1 ) [Imapj/Drafts Administrative Arbonne Bridg e Carol Taylor Edward Jones Employment Flood Insurance FOOD BAN K Laguna Shores movies Notes Phone Picture s Pian o Procrastination 11 more • -www.fiatusacom - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio . Archive Spain Delete Move to Inbox Labels More Incident this date X Inbox X Suzanne Heitzman to Brian, Dee, Jay Sep 1 3 Hi Brian, I had an encounter with one of Ms . Marcus' clients today that is bothering me . When I left the house,a woman and a child were waiting in a parked car in front of my home . I asked politely if she was waiting for a piano lesson .She affirmed yes . I told her she needed to park in the drive of Ms . Marcus' home,and pointed to it. She said she could park in the street as it was a public street I said it was part of Ms. Marcus' permit where people were allowed to park. The woman refused to move her vehicle, and I left . She sat there in her car with her child observing me coming and going, and did not respond to my polite request from as a resident It i s routine that Ms. Marcus' clients park on the street . It is common in any neighborhood that residents do not appreciate having people sitting in parked cars In fron t of their homes watching their activities . Street parking by clients is specifically a violation of Ms . Marcus' conditional permit as this is not a commercialretail zone . This picking up/dropping off of children with thei r parents lingering in their cars creates a very uncomfortable environment in the neighborhood, almost a hostility. It is not possible to work with this out at the personal level . Ms . Marcus is not in conformance with her permit. This incident happened at about 3 :30 this date . Suzanne Heitzma n San Luis Obispo, CA About these ad s 10 of 26 Levelile, Brian Dee &Joe Pilloud .)ay Chester Ads Top Dollar Paid . 888-416-2213. Sell Car Instantly. Get Cash Today. www .18000a sh ForJ un kCars .co m High Speed Internet +Free Router. Califomia Residents, Order Now! verizon .co m Sell Your Clunker To Us & Get Cash No Towing Charges . Get A Quote Now! www . DamaoedCars . corn • More about .. to me, Dee,Jay Sep 14Suzanne Heitzrna r Invite a friend From: Suzanne Heitzman [mailto : Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 5 :10 P M To : Leveille, Brian Cc : Dee & Joe Pilloud ; Jay Chester Subject : Incident this date S,,.w qt et _, te .; v,;;.f atuse . Coll - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio . Ad s Archive Spam Delete 26%full Using 2049 MB of your 7643 MB Move to Inbox Labels More •Last account activity :2 minutes ago Open in 1 other locatio n 10 of 26 taps :/ /enail .google.com/mall/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhi4rw8mbn4 Page 1 of 1 P H 3-64 11/1/11 12 :44 P M +You Gmail Calendar Documents Photos Sites Wan More D 7/sir • bleveille@slocltyorg Search it Search the Web !'se'outlon s Geatea filter suzarrre .heitzrnan :a;gr?aii .corn - Mai l Contacts Tasks The 2012 FIAT 500 - www .fiatusa.com - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio.A,houl,thes..e .eds Archive ; Spam Delete Move to Inbox Labels More 9of26 INFRACTIONS OF CONDITIONAL PERMIT AT 1247 VISTA DEL LAG O Suzanne Heitzman to Brian, Diane, Jay, Fran k Images are not displayed .Displav images belo w Dear Brian , Compose mai l Inbo x Buzz Important Sent Mai l Draft s [Imap)/Drafts Administrative Arbonne Bridg e Carol Taylo r Edward Jone s Employment Flood Insurance FOOD BAN K Laguna Shores movies Note s Phone Picture s Piano Procrastinatio n 11 more . panne Hettzmar Invite a friend ai --,,___,s Oct 7 Reply By way of this email, I am formally requesting that the steps be initiated to revoke the conditional permit for pian o lessons at 1247 Vista del Lago operated by Ms . Debbie Marcus. The reasons for the conditions have been well documented and I'll not rehash them here . The City has gone to a n extraordinary length to grant Ms . Marcus a permit to allow her to have her business in her home and make it tolerabl efor the neighborhood . Since the time of Ms . Marcus was granted her conditional permit she has never been i n compliance. She has regularly and frequently violated the conditions of her permit relating to client parking, th eamount of cars on the common drive, noise, and on occasion hours of operation . The City's efforts have her compl ywith the conditions of her permit have fallen on deaf ears . The efforts of the neighbors to try and encourage herdirectly and personally to have her clients park properly have equally met with resistance . She simply does as sh echooses without regard to the impact on neighborhood or the City requirements .I have overheard other neighbor s speaking civilly to Ms . Marcus client/parents about where to park . Recently another neighbor shared with me that sh ewas afraid to open her garage door as a man was sitting in his car in front of her home watching her and she did no t feel safe . On September 13 of this year I wrote to you addressing an encounter I had had with one of her clients where th e driver of a vehicle had a small child with her and was parked in front of my home . I politely asked the driver of th evehicle if she was waiting for a piano lesson and she responded yes . I explained she was supposed to park on Ms .Marcus drive . This individual informed me that she had the right to park on a public street . Obviously, she had notbeen informed by Ms . Marcus of the rules pertaining to the operation of the piano lesson business . The individual's disrespectful response to me, not unusual among the client/parent, leaves me wondering if Ms . Marcus' is complaining to her clients about her own neighbors? Why else would we be treated with hostility in our street by tota lstrangers? The client/parent on September 13 never did move her car to the approved parking place . I simply walkedaway as I did not choose to escalate the conversation in the presence of a small child . I do not know what action yo u took to address situation, but like everything else the City has tried to do it appeared to have little to no impact a sevidenced by the activities this week . I take the time to recount this episode in detail to demonstrate that we a sneighbors have tried to work with Ms . Marcus and her clients directly to no avail . Peopl e Diane Pilloud djpil loud@charter. net Frank Yos t Jay Cheste r Leveille, Bria n Show details v a Over the course of the last week I have photographed a number of violations . I have attached a few photograph staken on my camera phone . On 10/4/2011 Ms . Marcus personal vehicle was parked on the street while sh econducted her lessons . The conditions of her permit require her to have her own car in the garage during lessons s othat street parking is not taken and her drive is available to the parent/student . Please note in the photo "2 cars o ndrive" that there are two vehicles parked on Ms . Marcus pad (violation) at the same time her neighbor has a vehicl eparked on his own drive . Notice how tight the space is between the black Mercedes (client) and the neighbor. If theBlack Mercedes is a parent, the children will be loading on the same side as the neighbor . There isn't much visibilit ythere for either driver. I am including a few other photos with an explanation about the date/time/infraction . These were taken in the las tweek. I would like to remind you for the record that the conditions that were imposed were a compromise between th e residents and the City . It is not an ideal situation to have her students park on the Homeowner Association commo ndrive, as it is a shared driveway by several other residents .) have seen a bottle neck of cars trying to get in and out o fthe driveway of her clients 'cars and the residence . In fact, operation of a home business with client visits i sunprecedented in Laguna Shores Homeowners Association . It is a stretch of the City Home Occupation Permit whic hspecifies a private drive for a home occupation permit . It seems slightly safer for the driver to park on our drivewa y than having her students park up and down the street, and then have the children supervised or not, walk down th edrive along the garages where residents' cars are backing up . However, business parking on the drive creates aliability to our homeowners association . However, she has not honored the compromise which allowed her to conduct her business in her home, have he rclients park on her driveway, as her clients frequently and consistently park on the street anyway creating the ver y issue of child safety and cars backing up the compromise attempted to avoid . You advised me when the permit was granted not to monitor her behavior but to allow her to go about her dail y business and that I should do the same . That seemed appropriate to allow the business to develop naturally .Icertainly do not wish to bother Ms . Marcus or her clients, but I do not believe that you had in mind that we would b e expected to deal with a variety of daily, multiple infractions of the conditions by which you granted the permit . Under normal circumstances, someone sitting in a parked car for a prolonged period of time in a neighborhood woul d be considered a threat or at least a concern to the safety and security of the nearby residents . In fact, I read a newsarticle last week where the police were called in the City of San Luis Obispo because a car with someone in it ha dbeen parked for a prolonged period of time in front of someone's home . However, in our small, quiet street, th e volume of vehicles sanctioned by the operation of Ms. Marcus business makes it impossible to determine who is astranger. We have unknown cars with people sitting in them on the street all day long . I'm hard pressed to believe tha tSLOPD would take kindly to being called when we have a stranger sitting in a parked car for a some period of tim e like they are able to do in other neighborhoods in the city . However, it is exactly this activity--the intrusion of stranger sin a neighborhood, lingering and observing the coming and going of residents that leads to crime . It puts the resident s at greater risk of robbery and burglary, and of assault, a particular concern to the female residents . We have ou r hands tied as far as enforcing this uncomfortable behavior of various types of folks watching us and loitering in front o f httPsl/niail .google .com /mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 -65 Page 1 of 2PH3 •11/1/11 12 :44 P M Ms. Marcus has many options open to her to continue the operation of her business . She could go to the student s home . She could re-locate her piano to a studio . As she is a tenant, she could easily move . The operation of a piano lesson school with a grand piano on Vista del Lago, in a townhouse with a shared driveway, and a common wall, i s not a good fit . It never has been, and the City and the residents are the only ones that have made any effort to make i t tolerable . Ms. Marcus has done almost nothing to make it work for anyone but herself . At this point, with her complet e and utter lack of regard for the rules, no further compromise should be entertained . She has had her opportunity t o work within the grounds set by the City, and be a tolerable neighbor . It needs to end now . • Marcus client.JPG 35K View Downloa d 10/5/201 1 Parked on Stree t 2 attachments —Download all attachments View all image s DM car on streetjp g 10/6/2011 3 :30 pm (time approx) .;These 3 photos taken withi n 1 hour on the same da y 56K View Downloa d Car on drive 10-6.jp g 3 :30 pm (time approx) Ths is correct but at the sam e time DM's own car parked on stree t (above ) 55K View Download 2 cars on drive 10-6.jp g 3 :50 pm (Approx ) 44K View Download Suzanne Heitzma n San Luis Obispo . C A Reply Rep ly to all Forward The 2012 FIAT 500 Ad s vAm .fiatusa .com - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio . Archive Spam Delete Move to Inbox Labels More 9 of 26 26% ful lUsing2048 MB of your 7643 MB 102011 Google -Terms & PrivacyDisable buzz Last account activity :'I minute ago Open in 2 other locations Detail s tips :/ / rnail .google .com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 PH3-66 Page 2 of 2 r 11/1/11 1 :OS PM +You %nail Calendar Documents Photos Sites Web Mor e • bleveille@slocity .org Search Mall ! Search the Web)Show Creakea Fl search lter opuons l (J suzanne.heitzman@gmail .co m Mail Contacts Tasks j Compose mail Inbox Buzz Important Sent Mail Drafts [lmapj/Draft s Administrative Arbonn e Bridg e Carol Taylor Edward Jones Employmen t Flood Insurance FOOD BAN K Laguna Shores movies Note s Phone Picture s Pian o Procrastination 11 more . Invite a friend The 2012 FIAT 500 - www.fiatusa.com - Drive a New Italian Classic Now Available at a FIAT Studio . 1 Archive j Spam Delete i Move to Inbox j Labels ;More 1 Missing Attachments to Email Regarding 1248 Vista del Lag o Suzanne Heitzman to Brian, Jay, Diane, Frank Brian, Here are the photos which did not come through in my email . Photo number 1 .10/6/11 Approximately 3 :30 pm. The vehicle is parked properly . However, at the same time Ms . Marcus has her own vehicle parked across the street (infraction).Shown in Photo #3 . Photo 2 . 10/6/11 shows how tightly the cars are parked (infraction .) Please note how close the Black Mercedes is t o the next vehicle next to it . If the Black Mercedes has children they will be loading on the side by the neighbor . Thereis very little visibility for either driver . Approximately 3 :50 pm Photo 3 . Ms. Marcus is parked across the street during lessons . 10/6/11 3:30pm. Photo 4. Vehicle parked on street . 10/5/201 1 Sorry for the confusion . Suzanne Heitzman San Luis Obispo, CA 4 attachments —pownload all attachments View all image s Car on drive 10 .6 jp g55K View Download About these ads !<ir > 8of26 j Peopl e Diane Pilloud djplllo ud@charter . ne t Frank Yos t Jay Chester Leveille, Bria n show detail s S ,oitat ti t; s Hats 10o k 2 cars on drive 1O-6 .jpg 44K View Downloa d ittps ://r-nail .google .com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=ohhl4rw8mbn4 P H 3-67 Page 1 of 2 2.O/,ce.4'Psr Tor F • Yost Management 2251 Broad Street Suite C San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 RE : 1247 Vista Del Lag o Mr . Yost, Thank you for bringing this noise issue to my attention. It seems there may be one or two persons in th e entire complex that have taken issue with this . There are two issues that surfaced after all of my research . One is having a small business being run out of the townhouse, and the other is piano music . Apparently piano music is noxious, based on 8 .7 CCRs . 1 have looked into the issues relating to the business license of Deborah Marcus,the application for which I approved last year as Landlord . Conferring with her and my other tenant who lives and work s out of rooms on the second floor of my condo, as well as Ms . Sally Erwin, the neighbor who lives 17 fee t from the front door to the right of my unit, I am convinced that Ms . Marcus is in conformance with th e stipulations of her business license . She is a good, responsible tenant who has worked closely with Bria n Leveille, Associate Planner for the city's Community Development Dept . in her efforts to bring tha t about. Regarding the issue of noise disturbance from Ms . Marcus 'teaching, Paul Scott, my other tenant maintains that he doesn't hear any significant noise from her work with students,but does hear he r when she is playing her baby grand piano . Her teaching is almost exclusively conducted from an uprigh t piano in another area apart from the grand piano . Only a few adult students are allowed to play the grand piano, amounting to no more than 4 daytime hours spread throughout the course of a week.Ja y Chester's complaints regarding noise relates to her own playing the piano,which is a separate issu e from her piano teaching .That is not for this branch of the city to deal with.- As to measures to reduce noise from her baby grand, in the last 6 months she has paid $5500 .00 to reduce the loudness and harshness of her 75 year old piano by replacing all the moving parts. Another concern stated was related to parking . Any safety or parking issues have been addressed wit h the cooperation of Ms . Marcus' students and their parents . • • PH3-69 r I understand that Ms . Suzanne Heitzman has made complaints about the existence of Ms . Marcus ' business license . The noise issue cannot relate to her since she lives two units away from my own . i n addition,I understand that her immediate conjoined neighbor has a rock band that perform s professionally and conducts regular rehearsals from his garage which can be heard all down the street . It is also my understanding that Mr. Chester has harassed Ms. Marcus and her students by takin g pictures of young students to make his case prior to approval of the license, and along with Ms. Heitzman,glaring at, and rudely addressing them upon occasion as they come and go.This truly concerns me as this is an invasion of privacy and harassment. Please remember, most of these piano students are minors. If Ms . Marcus finds it necessary to discontinue renting from me in order to conduct her business, give n the current state of the market, I may feel compelled to accept Cal Poly students as my tenants whic h may be even less satisfactory to Mr . Chester and Ms . Heitzman . As you know, many students hav e parties and are much more disruptive and play more noxious music than can ever be played on a Gran d Piano. Or I could move in, and frankly I enjoy listening to ALL kinds of music and I work at home all da y too. So to officially respond,ALL of your stated concerns have been resolved . I would expect you to pass thi s on to Mr.. Chester and Ms . Heitzman. If they have other legitimate complaints going forward, I would lik e to hear them, and then I will pass them on to my lawyer . Thank you for your attention to this matter . PH3-70 Exhibit 9 • Dear Mr . Davidson : I'm submitting this letter to you hoping to clarify what I hold to be the critical issues regardin g the continuance of my business license . The areas of concern that have been raised by Jay Chester and Suzanne Heitzman relating to m y piano teaching at home are : (1 .) Safety and traffic issues and (2) Noise disturbance from teachin g piano . These concerns have been addressed and I am in conformance with the requirements of m y business license and Home Occupation Permit . (See attached documents 1 & 2 below specifyin g the conditions for approval). I have been able to accomplish this in large part, through th e sympathetic, patient cooperation of my students and the extensive consultation and help provide d by Brian Leveille, Associate Planner from the Office of Community Development . (1)Safety & traffic issues : In keeping with my discussion with Mr . Levielle, I have addressed concerns regarding the safet y of children exiting cars with their parents by making sure that my car is always parked in m y garage during the times in the day that I am teaching, and that there are two designated parkin g spots directly in front of the garage so that the children can exit next to the path leading to m y front door without crossing the fire lane or the street . • As stipulated in the requirements for a home business license, my teaching only takes plac e during the period between the hours of 7 A .M . and 7 P .M . However, in actuality, lessons ar e only scheduled between the hours of 9 :00 A .M . and 7 P .M.; the majority occurring during the hours 3 :00 to 6 :00 P .M ., Monday through Friday , My students come one at a time, and if there is a slight overlap between one vehicle arriving an d another leaving, there are two designated parking spots to accommodate such a n occurrence . The number of student hours per day is in conformance with the licens e requirements as well . I have alerted all parents of students, in person as well as by written notice, that they should onl y park directly in front of my garage and not block the fire lane . They are fully cooperative an d will make sure that children enter the path to my home immediately after exiting the car so tha t they are not in danger from any oncoming traffic in the fire lane . In addition, I have distributed a handout to each student family, (see attached document 3 below), reminding them how close my neighbors are and the considerations that should be taken , (i .e . limiting noise, refraining from leaving cars idling, and parking close to the garage to leav e plenty of space). My car is now in the garage throughout the times that I am teaching with th e exception of the very occasional instances in which I park my own vehicle in the street if I a m returning from an appointment and a parent's car is already in one of my designated parkin g • spots in front of the garage . PH3-71 •My students have been eager to cooperate and modify their behavior in any way I request . That said, I believe that in the process of implementing the requirements of the license, it is inevitabl e that there will be a few instances in which someone may be initially confused or not full y understand what is expected . I have learned that I need to continue checking how people ar e comprehending and observing the rules so that there is no misunderstanding ; particularly when a new student begins lessons . To my knowledge, since January of this year when my license was approved, through the presen t date, there have been no more than 5 instances in which my students were confronted by eithe r Jay Chester or Suzanne Heitzman, (the appellant in this Hearing), as to their detailed prope r observance of the conditions of licensure . Both Ms . Heitzman and Mr .Chester have been aggressive and rude in addressing my students . They are both at home most of the time on a daily basis, and are vigilant in observation of th e coming and going of my students . Parents have informed me that they have been stared an d glared at, and Mr . Chester (admittedly), and I understand Ms . Heitzman as well, have take n pictures of their movements . There were two instances in which parents of new students wer e confronted by either of these two neighbors when they mistakenly parked on the street an d expressed anger at the way in which they were being addressed . I quickly set each paren t straight, making clear to them what they needed to do . (2) Noise disturbance from piano playing The appellant listed for this hearing is Suzanne Heitzman . I do not know the specifics of th e complaints she submitted for review, but .the noise issue cannot relate to her since she lives tw o units away from my own . In addition, her immediate conjoined neighbor has a rock band tha t performs professionally and conducts regular weekly rehearsals from his garage which can b e heard even from the street. Ms .Sally Erwin, my neighbor on the left, (as viewed from the street), whose front door is 17 fee t from my own, has stated that she has no problem with my teaching and is not disturbed by an y noise from student lessons . She will be attending the Hearing as well as Paul Scott, my fello w tenant who lives and works upstairs during the day .'Mr .Scott maintains that he doesn't hear an y significant noise from my work with students, but does hear me when I am playing my bab y grand piano . The source of the complaints re noise disturbance is Jay Chester,the only neighbor wh o hears any piano playing . His complaints were not regarding my piano teaching per se, but rather , the "droning" sound he experienced when I played my grand piano for my own pleasure o r practice . My teaching has always been done on my upright piano, except for 3-5 hours per wee k when I allowed 3 or 4 advanced students to use the grand piano for their lessons . My ow n playing amounts to no more than 6 hours per week during acceptable hours . Mr . Chester and I agreed on the following some time ago : I would blanket the inside of my grand piano and shut all doors and windows when I played .• PH3-72 • I would teach almost exclusively on my upright piano, since Mr . Chester stated that he did no t hear anything when I taught on that instrument . His objections have always related to my playing the grand piano ; not my teaching .I maintain that this is not an issue to be reviewed by this branch of the local government . It has t o do with noise disturbance and I believe that his complaints should be registered elsewhere . If my license is revoked and I am forced to find alternate venues for my teaching (at considerable cost), I will still play my Steinway at home . If Mr . Chester opposes my playing the grand piano for my own pleasure or practice durin g reasonable hours, he can contact the following Department so that noise levels that he i s subjected to can be impartially tested from inside his home : Office of Neighborhood Service s Police Departmen t 1042 Walnut Stree t San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 Phone :805 .781 .718 6 I have been teaching for 15 years, always giving private instruction from my home wherever I resided . I moved to California from New Jersey in January of 2008 and have been living in Sa n Luis Obispo since September of 2008 in my current residence . I have never known of any piano teachers working from their homes who had a business license , and didn't realize that I needed one in San Luis Obispo until Jay Chester, informed me in lat e October, 2010, that it was necessary . Consequently, I applied for a Home Occupation Permit an d Business License in November of 2010 . It is only since October of 2010, that Mr . Chester started expressing concerns about traffic an d safety issues . These have been addressed since then . In regard to any noise issues, I have recently spent $5500 to have the action, (all the hammer s and moving parts), replaced on my 75 year old Steinway grand piano in order to restore it s mellow tone ; softening and reducing harshness as a result . Until that major work on th e instrument to significantly reduce the noise level was completed there was no teaching at all o n that piano . The conditions of my license required that Mr .Leveille listen to me play the piano once the wor k was completed to determine whether or not I would be allowed to teach on the grand . He did s o after his visit on May 25th, and gave his approval . I've been teaching from the condo since I moved here in 2008 as the property owner . Mr . Cheste r moved in about the same time I did . He literally had a panic attack the first time he heard m e playing the grand with the sliding doors open . He was hysterical and I promised to only pla y with the windows and patio doors closed . I continue to do so . He said he was disturbed b y vibrations from the grand, but had no problem with the upright piano . At one point he demande d• PH3-73 that I install and pay for an acoustical wall to be put up between our properties (my contracto r estimated the cost to be $1500). I considered this to be quite unreasonable ; nevertheless,I offered to split the cost with him and he adamantly refused .From the start, it was no t about my teaching, but all about my playing the grand .I only played with the to p down and blanketed the strings with layers of felt . Since then, to reiterate, I have spent $5500 to have the piano softened and mellowed . Mr . Chester is in his condo pretty much 24/7 and feels entitled to quiet all the time, despite living in a conjoined unit . As a renter, if I were to move away from the neighborhood when my lease is up , Ms . Butler, my landlady who values me as a tenant, has stated that, given the current renta l market, she might feel compelled to rent to students, possibly creating an even more distastefu l situation for Mr . Chester and Ms .Heitzman . If it is deemed necessary, in the interest of appeasing Mr . Chester, I may be willing to agree t o have my few advanced adult students take their lessons only on the upright piano . Beyond that , as a final measure ; in order to protect my livelihood, I might even go as far as to guarantee tha t there will be no playing the grand at all during my permissible teaching hours ; my own playin g included. I understand that there are approximately 19 other home businesses operating on Vista del Lag o alone . I believe that I am being singled out unreasonably, and hope the City's action on thi s matter will be fair and reasonable . Sincerely , Deborah Marcus PH3-74 Exhibit 1 0 RESOLUTION NO . XXXX-1 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNIN G COMMISSION DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATIV E HEARING OFFICER'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE HOM E OCCUPATION PERMIT FOR PIANO LESSONS (1247 VISTA DEL LAGO, APPLICATION #AP-PC 2-11 ) WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted publi c hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, o n December 14, 2011, for the purpose of considering application # AP-PC 2-11 ; and WHEREAS, the administrative hearing officer revoked the appellant's home occupatio n permit to allow piano lessons in the R-1-PD zone on November 4, 2011 ; and, WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manne r required by law ; an d WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including th e testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff , presented at said hearing . • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City o f San Luis Obispo as follows : Section 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the followin g findings : 1.Continued operation of the business will adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare o f persons living in the vicinity and will interfere with residential welfare in the area . 2.The use is not consistent with Home Occupation Regulations of Municipal Code Sectio n 17 .08 .090 A . which states that home occupations are intended to allow a home enterpris e which is incidental to and compatible with surrounding residential uses . 3.The piano instruction business is incompatible with General Plan Policy LUE 2 .2 .13 , Non-Residential Activities, since the business is not compatible with the adjoinin g residence and surrounding residences . Section 2 .Environmental Review .The project is exempt from environmental revie w under the General Rule (15061(b)(3)), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no potentia l for a significant effect on the environment . Section 3 .Action .The Planning Commission does hereby deny the appeal and uphold th e • Hearing officer's decision to revoke the home occupation for piano lessons . PH3-75 Planning Commission Resolution # XXXX-1 1 AP-PC 2-11 (1247 Vista Del Lago ) Page 2 On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , and on the following roll call vote : AYES : NOES : REFRAIN : ABSENT : The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 14 th day of December, 2011 . Doug Davidson, Secretar y Planning Commission by : PH3-76 Draft Planning Commission Minute s December 14, 201 1 Page 2 • Ch . •erson Multari stated the item was continued from the October , 2011 meetin gbecaus- the Commission was not yet informed of the Fair olitical Practice s Commissio opinion . He suggested the item be postponed t• ebruary's meeting t oensure that the , •inion will be received by that time . Mrs . Visveshwara s ed the item may require a ' ity Council hearing if potentia l conflicts of interest preve n t a quorum of the Plann' • Commission from considering th e item .. Commr . Draze spoke in suppo of co 'muing the item to the February Plannin g Commission meeting . There were no further comments . + - •e Commission . AYES :Corn . s . Michael Draze, Eric Meyer,irlin Singewald, Charle sSte enson, Larson, Vice-Chairperson Mary Wh' lesey, and Chairperson ichael Multar iNOES:Non e RECUS :Non e•ABSE :Non e T e motion passed on a 7 :0 vote . 2 .1247 Vista Del Laqo .AP-PC 2-11 : Appeal of Administrative Hearing decision t o revoke home occupation permit (piano lessons); R-1-PD zone ; Deborah Marcus , appellant and applicant .(Brian Leveille) Commr. Whittlesey recused herself from the item citing a potential conflict of interest . Brian Leveille, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending th e Planning Commission adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the hearin g officer's decision to revoke the home occupation permit . Commr . Draze inquired if conditions of approval had been met by the appellant . Staff clarified that conditions of approval had not been met to meet minimu m requirements for a home occupation permit . Commr . Stevenson asked if a noise measurement had been taken . Staff noted that decibel readings had not been taken but it was clearly evident the pian o is very loud as it can be heard from the street and can reasonably be expected to b e heard through the shared wall .• PH3-77 Draft Planning Commission Minute s December 14, 201 1 Page 3 PUBLIC COMMENTS : Attachment 3 • Dan Abendschein, appellant representative, requested the Commission overturn th e revocation of the home occupation permit . Mr. Abendschein stated that the majority o f piano lessons are taught on the upright piano, which is not audible to the neighbor . H e proposed the appellant limit her instruction to the upright piano and that the appellan t would not play the grand piano between the hours of 7 am and 7 pm in order that th e condition be enforceable . He also expressed that the parking concerns raised b y neighbors in opposition to the home occupation are not valid . Commr . Stevenson asked if any attempts to mitigate noise had been made at th e residence and asked the Appellant if she was aware that the Laguna Lake CCR's specifically prohibited boisterous noise and loud music from musical instruments . Deborah Marcus, appellant, stated the noise from the piano instruction is not boisterou s or offensive . She stated she has considered implementing noise abatement measure s in her residence . Assistant City Attorney Visveshwara, stated the Commission can only consider the ite m based on City standards and not based on CC&R's which are akin to a privat e agreement . Laura Cooper, San Luis Obispo, spoke against revocation of the home occupatio n permit . Jay Chester, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staff's recommendation to deny th e appeal of revocation of the home occupation permit citing significant disturbance to th e enjoyment of his residence due to noise from the home occupation . Commr . Singewald asked Mr . Chester if he has pursued this issue in the civil courts . Andy Zink, stated that Ms . Marcus has communicated appropriate parking locations t o clients . Diane Pilloud, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staff's recommendation to revok e the home occupation permit citing parking and traffic issues in the neighborhood . Suzanne Heitzman, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staff's recommendation t o revoke the home occupation permit citing that the appellant has not complied with th e conditions of her home occupation permit and that parking for the subject busines s causes a safety hazard on commonly owned property in the neighborhood . Sally Erwin, San Luis Obispo, stated that she seldom hears noise from the piano an d that client visitation is not intrusive . Elaine Cormier, San Luis Obispo, stated that Ms . Marcus has made significant efforts t o dampen the noise from her baby grand piano . PH3-78 Draft Planning Commission Minute s December 14, 201 1 Page 4 Attachment 3 •Cynthia Steele, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staff's recommendation t o revokethe home occupation permit . Colleen Wiest, San Luis Obispo, stated that Ms . Marcus has informed clients o f appropriate parking locations .There were no further comments made from the public . COMMISSION COMMENTS : Commr . Draze stated that he had conducted a site visit, and witnessed several on -street parking spaces available and limited traffic on Vista Lago Street . He suggested that the parking issue raised may be solved by allowing on-street parking for clients . H e clarified that the primary issue for consideration by Commission should be the hom e occupation activity and not the CC&R's . Commr. Meyer stated he had conducted a site visit and considered the traffic on th e street to be limited . He expressed that noise produced by piano instruction seems t o prevent quiet enjoyment of property . He spoke in support of staff's recommendation t o deny the appeal . Commr . Stevenson spoke in support of the staff's recommendation to deny the appea l • citing that quiet enjoyment of the neighborhood should be protected . He stated that th e home occupation is inappropriate for this location . He suggested that if revocation o f the home occupation is upheld, it should be done without prejudice in order to give th e appellant an opportunity to address the noise which affects the neighbor with th e adjoining wall . Commr . Larson requested the City's Noise Ordinance be read to clarify if there ar e mandated noise limitations that cannot be exceeded . Assistant City Attorney Visveshwara recited portions of the City's Noise Ordinanc e including : Municipal Code section 9 .12 .040 ; and Municipal Code section 9 .12 .050 . Commr . Larson expressed surprise that no noise measurements had been taken by a nacoustician and no steps had been taken by the Appellant to reduce the noise levels .He supported staff's recommendation to deny the appeal . Commr . Singewald stated that the traffic associated with the home occupation is not ou t of character with the neighborhood . He stated that conducting lessons on the uprigh t piano does not create excessive noise . He supports the appeal and indicates that th eissue of noise from the baby grand piano is a CC&R compliance issue that should b e pursued in the courts . • Chairperson Multari stated that home occupation permits are not allowed by right i n residential zones . As a commercial activity, it is the responsibility of the business owne r to demonstrate its compatibility with the neighborhood . He spoke in support of denyin g the appeal citing violation of the home occupation permit conditions of approval . PH3-79 Draft Planning Commission Minute s December 14, 201 1 Page 5 There were no further comments made from the Commission . Attachment 3 • On motion by Commr . Stevenson, seconded by Commr. Meyer, to deny the appeal an d uphold the hearing officer's decision to revoke the home occupation permit withou t prejudice so the appellant may apply to reestablish the home occupation provided a professional acoustical report is provided with measures to meet interior sound levels i n compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance . AYES :Commrs . Draze, Meyer, Stevenson, Larson and Chairperson Multar i NOES :Commr . Singewal d RECUSED :Vice-Chair Whittlese y ABSENT :Non e The motion passed on a 5 :1 vote . 3 .955 Morro Street ; 845, 861, 863, and 877 Palm Street .GPC 30-09 : General P :n nformity determination for the sale and purchase of property related • th e Chi . town Project : C-D-H zone, City of San Luis Obispo, applicant .(Pam ' Icci) Deputy Community Development Director, presented ' e staff report t resolution, recommending adoption of the Planng Commissio n termines and reports to the City Council that th- proposed propert y nformance with the General Plan base• on findings which h e On mot.n by Commr.Draze, seconded by Commr . Stevenson, to adopt of the anninq Corn fission resolution with revised lanquage, which determines and reports to th Cit y C . dncil that the proposed property transactions are in conformance with the Genera l 'Ian . PH3-8 0 Commr . Draze asked staff i e current parking map s works with the new phasin g plan for the project . Mr . Davidson responded in the affirm ive . PUBLIC COMMENTS : There were no comments made from e public . COMMISSION COMMENTS : plan for the presently vacant b'Iding on Morro Street . Claire Clark, Econ o Copeland family . is Development Manager, stated that it being leased to th e There were • further comments made from the Commission . Doug David s and revised d resolution, whic h transactions are i n discussed . Attachment 4 •RESOLUTION NO . PC-5569-1 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION DENYIN G AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER'S DECISION T O REVOKE THE HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT FOR PIANO LESSON S (1247 VISTA DEL LAGO, APPLICATION #AP-PC 2-11 ) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted publi c hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, o n December 14, 2011, for the purpose of considering application # AP-PC 2-11 ; and WHEREAS, the Administrative Hearing Officer revoked the appellant's hom e occupation permit to allow piano lessons in the R-1-PD zone on November 4, 2011 ; and , WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manne r required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including th e testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff , presented at said hearing. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City o f San Luis Obispo as follows : Section 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the followin g findings : 1. Continued operation of the business will adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare o f persons living in the vicinity and will interfere with residential welfare in the area . 2.The use is not consistent with Home Occupation Regulations of Municipal Code Sectio n 17 .08 .090 A . which states that home occupations are intended to allow a home enterpris e which is incidental to and compatible with surrounding residential uses . 3.The piano instruction business is incompatible with General Plan Policy LUE 2 .2 .13, Non - Residential Activities, since the business is not compatible with the adjoining residence an d surrounding residences . Section 2 .Environmental Review .The project is exempt from environmental revie w under the General Rule (15061(b)(3)), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no potentia l for a significant effect on the environment . Section 3 .Action .The Planning Commission does hereby deny the appeal withou t prejudice, and upholds the Hearing Officer's decision to revoke the home occupation for pian o lessons . Any subsequent application to reestablish the home occupation shall include a technica l report from a licensed acoustical expert assessing the noise levels produced by the grand pian o PH3-8 1 • Attachment 4 Planning Commission Resolution No . PC-5569-1 1 AP-PC 2-11 (1247 Vista Del Lago) Page 2 and detail methods to mitigate the sound produced by the grand piano . The sound level shall b e reduced to a level below the interior noise limits of the City's Noise Ordinance for the residenc e on the other side of the adjoining wall . On motion by Commissioner Stevenson, seconded by Commissioner Meyer, and on th e following roll call vote : AYES : Commrs . Stevenson, Meyer, Draze, Multari, and Larso n NOES : Commr . Singewald REFRAIN : Commr . Whittlesey ABSENT : Non e The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 14 `h day of December, 2011 . im Murry, Secret a Planning Commission PH3-82 Attachment 5 RESOLUTION NO . (2012 Series ) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O CITY COUNCIL DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER'S DECISIO N TO REVOKE THE HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT FOR PIANO LESSONS AT 1247 VISTA DEL LAGO (AP-CC 241 ) WHEREAS,the Administrative Hearing Officer .revoked the appellant's home occupatio n permit to allow piano lessons at 1247 Vista Del Lago, in the R-1-PD zone on November 4, 2011 ; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted publi c hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, o n December 14, 2011, for the purpose of considering application # AP-PC 2-11, an appeal of th e Administrative Hearing Officer's decision to revoke the home occupation permit for piano lesson s at 1247 Vista Del Lago ; an d WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing i n the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 17 , 2011 to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to deny the appeal and uphol d the Administrative Hearing Officer's decision to revoke the home occupation ; an d WHEREAS,the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony o f interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obisp o as follows : SECTION 1 .Findings .The Council makes the following findings : 1.Continued operation of the business ::will adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare o f persons living in the vicinity and wit) interfere with residential welfare in the area . 2.The use is not consistent with Home Occupation Regulations of Municipal Code Sectio n 17 .08 .090 A . which states that home occupations are intended to allow a home enterpris e which is incidental to and compatible with surrounding residential uses . 3.The piano instruction business is incompatible with General Plan Policy LUE 2 .2 .13 , Non-Residential Activities, since the business is not compatible with the adjoinin g residence and surrounding residences . SECTION 2.Environmental Determination .The project is categorically exempt unde r Section 15270(a), since CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects o r PH3-83 Attachment 5 disapproves . SECTION 3 .Denial of Appeal .The City Council denies the appeal . Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following vote : AYES : NOES : ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of , 2012 . Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST : Elaina Can o City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM : J . Christine Dietrick City Attorney P H 3-84