HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRR26497 Melideo - ResponsesPRR26497 – Melideo
Responses to requests or questions have been provided in red, Times New Roman,
font below.
10/12/2026 Email
Subject: Re: Records Request DETERMINATION - PRR26497 Melideo - Records related to 2932
Augusta Street (ARCH-0464-2023, AFFH-0620-2025, TREE-0561-2025)
Dear Ms. Colunga-Lopez,
Thank you for your October 8 determination that the City has records responsive to PRR26497 and
expects to provide them by Thursday, October 22, 2026. I am writing to clarify the scope of the
request, to renew my request for rolling release, and to note the timing. I have copied the City
Clerk’s Office; Director Tway; Rachel Cohen, Principal Planner; Mallory Patino, Project Planner; and
the City Attorney’s Office. The application is now before the Director, and the records requested
may bear on that decision.
Timing. I made this request in item 7 of my September 26, 2026 letter to Ms. Patino, which was
copied to Director Tway. Because of the October 5 hearing, the letter asked that records be
provided on a rolling basis. To date I have not received any records. The Architectural Review
Commission recommended approval on October 5, and the application now awaits the Director’s
flnal action. Records released only after that action cannot inform it.
No approval has been issued for any part of the project. A secondary public notice will be provided
when the final Director decision is scheduled.
Scope. My request covers the complete application flles for the three case numbers, including
technical studies and interdepartmental and agency correspondence. To clarify, this means
records about these applications wherever they are kept. That includes Fire Department, Planning,
and Building and Safety records about this project, and any pre-application or building-permit flle. I
am asking only for records that already exist. I am not asking anyone to create a record or answer a
question. Please include records added through the date of the City’s search. If the City treats any
part of this clariflcation as a new request, please process that part separately and do not delay the
October 22 production.
Priority records. If any of the following are ready before October 22, I ask that they be released as
soon as they are ready and also included in the full production:
1. Fire-hose reach, hydrant, and building location. Records, including any Fire Department
comments, addressing:
• flre-hose reach, including the “274' HOSE REACH” noted on sheet A1.0, which an
Architectural Review Commissioner raised and the Fire Marshal addressed at the
October 5 hearing;
• the new flre hydrant shown on sheet A1.0; and
• the location of the primary structure on the site, including any earlier versions of the site
plan and any changes to the building’s location.
See Completeness Communications, the 10/5 ARC Staff Report and accompanying produced
documents, and the Project Files provided.
2. Fire-protection features shown on the plans. Records, including any Fire Department review,
addressing:
• the stair tower and roof access shown on sheets A3.0 and A3.1;
• the construction type and sprinkler system shown on sheet T1.1; and
• the ground-ladder access noted on the elevations (“Line of ladder access to window sill
or deck, max. 30' from grade”).
See Completeness Communications, the 10/5 ARC Staff Report and accompanying produced
documents, and the Project Files provided.
3. Fire Code determinations and alternatives. This item covers two kinds of records:
• any determination under California Fire Code §§ 503.1.1 or 503.1.2, or Appendix D §
D105, as amended by SLOMC § 15.04.090, including any approved increase in access
distance or alternative to aerial apparatus access; and
No approval has been issued for any part of the project.
• any request for, or approval of, a modiflcation or alternative materials, design or
methods for this project under the Fire Code or Building Code administrative provisions,
or on the City’s equivalent request form, with supporting documents and any
conditions.
No approval has been issued for any part of the project. All requests for entitlement are
included in the 10/5 ARC Staff Report and accompanying produced documents, and the
Project Files provided.
4. Review comments and correspondence. This item covers:
• Fire Department plan-review comments, including comments from interdepartmental
routing of the planning applications; and
See Completeness Communications.
• correspondence about site access between the Fire Department and the applicant or
Planning staff.
See Completeness Communications.
Request to Director Tway. Director Tway, I respectfully ask that any Fire Department records of the
kinds listed above be placed before you before your decision on this application issues.
The Director will consider all project information, ARC’s recommendations, and public input to
determine whether to approve or deny a project.
Withheld or redacted records. If any responsive record is withheld or redacted, please identify it
and the exemption relied on (Gov. Code §§ 7922.000, 7922.540).
Format and fees. Please send the records electronically to this address, as searchable PDFs or in
native format, with a short index if one is readily available. If any fees apply, please let me know
before processing.
Thank you for your help.
Mark Melideo
9/29/2026 Email
Subject: RE: Records Request Acknowledgement - PRR26497 Melideo - Records related to 2932
Augusta Street (ARCH-0464-2023, AFFH-0620-2025, TREE-0561-2025)
Dear Ms. Colunga-Lopez,
Thank you for the prompt acknowledgment, and for letting staff know about the October 5 ARC
hearing.
Because the determination date falls after the hearing, I would be grateful for early, rolling release
of the following items if they can be located quickly, ahead of the rest of the request:
1. Any Fire Department plan-review or routing comments on ARCH-0464-2023, including any
recommended conditions of approval.
See Completeness Communications.
2. Any written approval by the flre code official of a modiflcation or alternative for this project
(for example, an increased access distance under CFC § 503.1.1, or an alternative to Appendix
D § D105 aerial apparatus access).
No approval has been issued for any part of the project.
3. Correspondence about this project between the Fire Department and the applicant or its
consultants (Ten Over Studio, Hive Engineering), or between the Fire Department and
Community Development staff.
See Completeness Communications.
If any of these items falls outside my original request, please treat it as a new request so that it does
not delay the rest.
I've copied Ms. Patino, as project planner, since items 1 and 2 may already be in the project flle and
could be sent by email without a broader search. I'm unable to come to City Hall in person, so
electronic copies would be ideal for everything, and I'm happy to narrow or clarify anything that
would speed the search.
Thank you,
Mark Melideo
9/26/2026 Email
Subject: 2932 Augusta Street (ARCH-0464-2023 / AFFH-0620-2025 / TREE-0561-2025):
Request for Materials Not Attached to Staff Report and Clariflcations Before October 5 ARC Hearing
September 26, 2026
Dear Ms. Patino:
Thank you for your prompt reply on September 24 and for adding me to the interested parties list. I
understand the staff report is expected to be published on or around September 28, and I will
review it as soon as it is available. This letter requests digital access to any application materials
that are not attached to the staff report. It also asks several clarifying questions. Both will help me
prepare an accurate, focused written comment before the Architectural Review Commission's
October 5, 2026 hearing.
For transparency, I live at Judson Terrace Lodge, 3042 Augusta Street, approximately 600 feet from
the project site. I intend to submit a written technical comment for the record before the hearing.
1. Digital copies of materials not attached to the staff report
The hearing leaves about one week for review, so I would be grateful for anything you can send
as early as possible. If the materials have to come in stages, these are my priorities, in order:
(a) the density-bonus request and the applicant's justiflcation for each concession and waiver;
See 10/5 ARC Staff Report and accompanying produced documents.
(b) the tree-removal application and replanting plan;
See 10/5 ARC Staff Report and accompanying produced documents for replanting plan. Arborist
report provided.
(c) any technical studies;
See Project Files.
(d) correspondence from other City departments or agencies.
See Completeness Communications.
2. Contents of the application flle
I want to make sure my comment does not describe anything as absent when it is in fact in the flle.
Could you please conflrm whether the flle contains each of the following? For any that are in the flle
but not attached to the staff report, I would appreciate an electronic copy.
(a) A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment or pre-demolition hazardous-materials survey
(asbestos, lead-based paint) for the existing structure. I understand from public reporting that
the structure was built in 1962, but I have not independently conflrmed that date.
Not in submittal.
(b) A certifled arborist report or tree inventory for the 27 trees proposed for removal.
Provided.
(c) A construction air-quality analysis (for example, CalEEMod) or a health-risk assessment.
Not in submittal.
(d) A construction noise or vibration analysis.
Not in submittal.
(e) Fire Department review of, or comments on, flre-apparatus access. Fire Department
reviewed application for completeness.
See Completeness Communications.
(f) A parking, circulation, or curb -utilization study.
Not in submittal.
(g) A drainage, stormwater, or utility-capacity study.
Not a separate submittal; some information may be included in the Project Plans attached to the
10/5 ARC Staff Report.
(h) Materials associated with AFFH-0620-2025.
See response to No. 5, the 10/5 ARC Staff Report, and accompanying produced documents
Affordable Housing Summary.
(i) Correspondence from other City departments or agencies, including the Fire Department,
Public Works, and the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District.
See Completeness Communications.
An index or list of the documents in the flle would serve the same purpose.
Project Files:
- Project Plans (attached to 10/5 ARC Staff Report)
- Affordable Housing Summary (attached to 10/5 ARC Staff Report)
- Fence Height Exception Request (attached to 10/5 ARC Staff Report)
- Garbage letter (provided)
- Arborist report (provided)
3. CEQA determination
The September 22 notice states that the project is categorically exempt from environmental
review. Could you conflrm which exemption the City is relying on? For example, is it the Class 32
inflll exemption (CEQA Guidelines § 15332), or another provision such as Public Resources
Code § 21080.66? I would also appreciate knowing where the supporting analysis appears in
the staff report or project flle, including any consideration of the exceptions in Guidelines §
15300.2.
See the 10/5 ARC Staff Report.
4. Reduced tree-replanting requirement
The September 22 notice lists a "reduced tree replanting requirement" among the density -
bonus concessions and waivers. Could you clarify the following?
• Whether this is being processed as a concession or as a waiver. • What replacement is
proposed, compared with what Municipal Code § 12.24.090 would otherwise require. • Where
the supporting justiflcation appears in the staff report or flle.
See the 10/5 ARC Staff Report and the attached Affordable Housing Summary.
5. Case No. AFFH-0620-2025
This case number appears in the September 22, 2026 notice. It does not appear in the August
2025 cancellation notice for this item, which listed only ARCH -0464-2023. Could you briefiy
describe what this application covers? It would also help to know the number and income level
of the affordable units that qualify the project for the density bonus.
This is the Affordable Housing Agreement Application number, which is created to invoice
specific associated fees. All project files and reviews are coordinated under ARCH-0464-2023.
See the 10/5 ARC Staff Report and the attached Affordable Housing Summary.
6. Public comment and the record
Could you please conflrm the following?
(a) The deadline for written comments to be distributed to Commissioners before the October 5
meeting.
See the ARC webpage (How can I express my opinion on an upcoming agenda item?).
(b) That written comments sent to advisorybodies@slocity.org before the hearing will become
part of the administrative record for this item.
See the 10/5/26 Agenda Correspondence.
(c) The process and deadline for appealing the Director's flnal action, and whether the tree-
removal decision has a separate appeal period under Municipal Code § 12.24.090(K).
The Community Development Director will make the final decision regarding both the Moderate
Development Review and Tree Removal Request. The Director will consider all project
information, ARC’s recommendations, and public input to determine whether to approve or deny
the project. A secondary public notice will be provided when the final Director decision is
scheduled.
Per Municipal Code Section 17.126.020, appeals must be filed within ten calendar days of the
rendering of a decision which is being appealed. If the tenth day is a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday,
the appeal period shall extend to the next business day.
7. Public records request
Some materials in the flle may not be attached to the staff report or otherwise provided
electronically. For those materials, please treat this letter as a request under the California
Public Records Act (Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq.) for copies of the complete application flles
for the three case numbers above. The request includes plans, technical studies, and
interdepartmental and agency correspondence. I am requesting electronic copies. Because the
hearing is on October 5, I would be grateful if you could provide records on a rolling basis as
they become available, following the priorities in item 1.
I would also ask that this letter be placed in the project flle.
A copy of this email was archived as 10/5/26 Agenda Correspondence.
I have copied Director Tway because flnal action on this application rests with the Community
Development Director. Thank you for your time and for the care your office puts into this process.
Respectfully,
Mark Melideo