Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/2006, - AGENDA ITEM ""MARPOMO"" BERMANT HOMES" Riph.ard Sr1 milt Retain this document for a/^'�5 RECEIVED future Council meeting /9 Oho Sp o 6 2006 RICHARD SCHMIDT. Architect um,if agenclEw SLO CITY CLERK 112 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 544-4247 � CAo c.� �v�E.Z UrGCE- September 5, 2006 .9C.4a �0 c.vEGC. City Council Re: Agenda Item "Marpomo" Bermant Homes City of San Luis Obispo Dear Council Members: As a design professional, I find it very disturbing that planning staff is apparently subverting a key part of allowing tall-buildings downtown =- to wit, the notion that there is nexus between tall buildings and avoiding sprawl. Your zoning code limits building height and mass downtown to a "floor area ratio" (FAR) of 3; only if open space is permanently preserved may a building's FAR exceed 3 -- but only up to a FAR of 4. (17.42.020.E) It has come to my attention that in the Marpomo case staff has "interpreted" the development in a manner which violates the zoning code, To wit, they have arbitrarily decided to EXCLUDE from the FAR calculation a parking level which is an integral part of the building project. This interpretation not only defies the zoning code, it also defies common logic. For example, would a three story parking structure,be excluded from the FAR calculation so another three stories of dwellings could be put atop-t"m without exceeding the FAR of 3? If not, then why is a single level's exclusion OK? This interpretation is in defiance of every commonly understood professional meaning of FAR. It is also in violation of the explicit langge of your zoning code, which defines FAR as "the gross floor area of a building or buildings on a lot divided by the lot area." (17.04.185) The zoning code further defines Gross Floor Area as "the total area enclosed within a building, including closets, stairways, and utility and mechanical rooms, measured from the exterior face of the walls." (17.04.220) There is no exclusion for parking from "total'. Parking would be classified as a "utility' or storage (i.e., non-habitable) space, and is very much a part of a structure's gross floor area. (By contrast, the other common floor area measurement, Net Floor Area, is the actual habitable space measured from the interior surfaces of outside walls; and usually excluding the items noted under "including" in the zoning code definition of Gross Floor Area. It seems staff is using some sort of hybrid between gross and net rather than the Gross Floor Area definition enacted by the Council for establishinga FAR. Further, the zoning code's Gross Floor Area definition is that used universally within the design professions.) Richard Sl*midi 'r 5444247 MOSS-1156 09:47 PM D 212 Y What does this have to do with preserving opdh;-§p1ace? Your zoning code actually does include some (rather weak) nexus between building up and not spreading out. As noted before, zoning code section 17.42.020.E requires preservation of open space in return for building with a FAR greater than 3. Does this provision apply to Marpomo? We don't know because the improper calculation methodology apparently being used by staff understates the actual FAR. If it does apply, the Council needs to ask the developer: "Where's the open space?" As the city moves ahead with discussion of tall buildings, which are very controversial as well as destructive to everything most residents and tourists value about our lovely downtown, it is imperatiave that the Council exercise proper oversight of the actions of staff analyzing these proposals. To do otherwise simply challenges and invites citizen intervention into the affairs of your development approval process. So, please see to it that our laws are followed, not bent, spindled, mutilated and ignored when convenient. Sincerely, Richard Schmidt � RECEIVED SEP 191006 SLO CITY CLERK r Donald . Hearick A CREATIVE PYEWA fGMGEIIiINGFXAC77CiLITY AJWDELECIWCTECWVOLOGY FVrM T1WS73VWGM OFAN OLD FORK TRUCX P_O. Box 343, San Luis Obispo, California 93406 Phone (805) 541-0303_ Tuesday, September 19, 2006 To: San Luis Obispo City Council Subject: Mixed Use and Storage The project of Mixed Use in the vicinity of Nipomo and Marsh Streets brings to mind some concerns. When the concept of mixed use was sold to us years ago it was in terms of the shop keeper living above his shop and the artisan living at his studio. The mixed use as practiced today is more like an ounce of business to the pound of housing. Perhaps along with all those foreign investor special interests that you invite into plucking the cherry of our state's real estate, you plan to stock the mixed use businesses with enough living places to house their whole family tree above their business. Instead of a family living over their business there is enough housing to power a sweat shop full of workers. When the town replaces three existing businesses with thirty three residential units with three commercial units, it seems like the business sector is the tokin representation in the deal. The mixed use deal sets the businesses as second class citizens in their own neighborhood. It is written in the Municipal Code that the residents get the political voice in their neighborhood while the businesses have no defense against the complaints of the residential users of the neighborhood. Another issue of the mixed use housing is that this particular project wants to be excused from supplying any lockable storage for the one bedroom living units. As a reward for denying the code requirement of outside lockable storage this project wants to be rewarded with a high percentage increase in housing density. Why are one bedroom units singled out to give up their right to an outside locking closet. When the lack of available storage units in the city is taken into account it is even more important to not diminish the legal requirement for resident-storage. Sincerely dedicated, Donald. E. Hedrick wn rnA,L 9 COUNCIL 2=CDIJ DIR_ ICAO If FIN DIR �3 ACAO E'FIRE CHIEF ERATTORNEY re PW DIR RED FILE R CLERK/ORIG 1;2 POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT HEADS REC DIR MEETING AGENDA P/19 �UTIL DIR DATE1cJk �`gda6 Fe HR DIR 9 9 ITEM # 2 5� x ccs -� pjg„rcna'�SEs RED FILE MEETING AGENDA I��u��iiu�llllllllll 1111111 council mcmoRanbu E 9-19 o ITEM #P�1 hard nap Vk etc:l z DATE`. September 18, 2006 G7COUNCIL+e-wA Q GDD DIR L3 CAO RFIN'DIR,,i . TO: City CouncilQ ACAO 2FIRE CHIEF Q ATTORNEY. [?PW DIR- 2 CLERK/ORIG aPOLICE CHF VIA: Ken Hampian, CAO ❑ DEPT HEADS_ aREC DIR 1 'Yo bu^e Ia'UTIL DIR FROM: Doug Davidson, Community Development Deputy Director J PT '6trdor _21-R DIR tickn BY: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner t;eci4y '& cand; SUBJECT: City File No. 36-06, Planning Commission Minutes The agenda report for City File No. 36-06, which is scheduled for City Council Review on September 19, 2006 - Public Hearing Item No. 2, included the Planning Commission Resolution, Minutes, and staff report as Attachment No. 5. The incorrect Planning Commission Minutes were inadvertently provided. Attached you will find the draft minutes for the August 23, 2006 Planning Commission Hearing when the mixed-use project was heard, and a recommendation to the City Council was made. The Planning Commission did approve the minutes at their September 13, 2006 meeting, making only minor revisions. These revisions are currently being made to the final minutes by administrative staff. Questions regarding the Planning Commission discussion or action should be referred to Jaime Hill (x 167) or Doug Davidson (x177). ,9/17 <-� Ph r - RECEIVED SLO CITY CLERK DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2006 CALL TO ORDERIPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Charles Stevenson, John Ashbaugh, Peter Brown, Andrew Carter, Jason McCoy, Vice-Chair Carlyn Christianson and Chairperson Andrea Miller Absent: None Staff: Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Jaime Hill, Assistant City Attorney Christine Dietrick, and Recording Secretary Jill Francis ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. The agenda was accepted as written. MINUTES: Minutes of August 9,.2006. The minutes of August 9, 2006 were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no comments made from the public.. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 577 & 579 Marsh Street and 1213 & 1221 Nipomo Street. TR and ER 36-06; Review of a tentative tract map for an airspace condominium subdivision including 33 residential units and 3 commercial units, and environmental review; C-D zone; Bermant Homes, applicant. (Jaime Hill) Associate Planner Jaime Hill presented the staff report„ recommending the Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to the City Council. Staff gave a brief presentation explaining the Condominium Subdivision Regulations, and State Law 435 regarding the density bonus and concession. The applicant team then walked the Commission through the development, explaining the building design, layout, and parking. Detlev Peikert, Peikert Group Architects, described the project with graphics. Scott Hopkins, Peikert Group Architects, went into further detail on the project. Planning Commission Minutes August 23, 2006 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ernie Martin, San Luis Obispo, expressed general concerns about the height of buildings in the downtown, maintaining views to the mountains, compatibility of architecture with the Old Town area, and the increasing parking problems on Pacific, Buchon, and Islay Streets. He also expressed that he felt that this project was well designed. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: The Commission discussed a variety of issues, including the term and tenure of the affordable units, parking, and property development standards. Commr. Ashbaugh focused on the height and mass of the project, and recommended that the owners of the commercial tenant spaces be awarded parking on-site. Commr. Brown had questions about the location of the transit stop on Nipomo, and recommended that additional long-term bike storage for the residents be provided on the ground level. Commr. Stevenson felt that the smoke generated by the Old Country Deli should have been addressed in the environmental document, that there should be additional commercial space, potentially on the Nipomo frontage, and that the upper story should have an additional setback. Commrs. Carter, McCoy, Christianson, and Chairwoman Miller all expressed that this is an appropriate location for a project of this type and scale, that it includes many features that we should be encouraging, such as underground parking for residents, and that it seems well designed. On motion by Commr. Christianson recommending approval of the Mitigated Neqative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map, including the 27.5% density bonus and concession to waive the requirement for lockable storage for the nine 1- bedroom units to the City Council as recommended by staff, adding a condition that owners and occupants receive a disclaimer about adjacent food services and the airborne smoke and odors that they create. Seconded by Commr. Carter. AYES: Commrs. Ashbaugh, Christianson, McCoy, Carter, Brown, and Miller NOES: Commr. Stevenson ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 6:1 vote Commr. Stevenson voted no due to concern about the ratio of residential to commercial floor area, the reduction of commercial floor area on the site, and concern with the adequacy of the mitigated negative declaration concerning the effect of smoke to sensitive receptors. Planning Commission Minutes August 23, 2006 Page 3 2. Staff A. Agenda Forecast Deputy Director Davidson gave an agenda forecast of upcoming meetings and projects, and reviewed the meeting schedule for November and December of this year. 3. Commission ADJOURMENT: With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. to the regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Respectfully submitted by Jill Francis Recording Secretary Diane R. Stuart, CM Management Assistant