The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-19-2015 PH2 LopesCOUNCIL MEETING: i'T .M NO.: P To: Mejia, Anthony Subject: RE: May 19, 2015 City Council Item: OASP and Vesting Tentative Tract Maps From: James Lopes [mai Ito: jameslopes @charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 11:34 PM MAY X 3 To: E -mail Council Website Subject: May 19, 2015 City Council Item: OASP and Vesting Tentative Tract Maps May 12, 2015 TO: San Luis Obispo City Council FROM: James Lopes My suggestions in the attached letter of March 5, 2014 were made to your council to avoid a significant loss of peaks viewshed on Orcutt Road. I asked that they be considered in the EIR and staff recommendation, which they were not. The letter described how the developer proposed this subdivision at the last minute on Orcutt Road. I made a proposal to increase density on a less visible property and to shift the proposed units of the subdivision on Orcutt Road to it. Nothing was done to avoid this significant viewshed impact. The developer's visual simulation avoids the most common view from northbound traffic on Orcutt Road. Instead, the simulation uses a much lower, seldom -used view from Hansen Lane traffic at Orcutt Road. Orcutt Road is a candidate scenic road in the County Conservation and Open Space Element. It appears that the continuing tract location indicates that nothing is suggested to mitigate the aesthetic impact of two -story houses intruding on the northbound traffic to insignificance. I would appreciate it if you would make the following changes to the proposal: 1. Retain the existing Urban Reserve Line. Require revisions to the proposed tract map to conform to the URL. 2 Eliminate the tract on Orcutt Road, to retain the beautiful, iconic view of the peaks driving north on Orcutt Road and avoid a significant impact on aesthetic quality. The northbound views from Orcutt Road are not addressed by the applicant's visual simulations or by staff. As suggested in my presentation record, increase density on a portion of land next to the park, as shown in the attachment, or I could suggest to retain the portion of the tract on level land next to the creek but only allow single -floor residences. 3. On the west side of Righetti Hill, eliminate the uphill lots closest to Tank Farm Road, since they will be unsightly at that end of the subdivision - They appear to be Lots 73 -76 and Lots 99 - 101. This reduction will avoid significant visual impacts on Tank Farm Road and noise impacts to residents within these lots. 4. Require Tank Farm Road access only if the developer can provide improvements to stop or slow down the 45+ mph traffic on Tank Farm Road to 35 mph. I support the requirement of a roundabout here. You can redirect this misguided application to fulfill the promise of a high - quality expansion of San Luis Obispo in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Apologies for my last- minute input - did not know this was coming forward now and missed the Planning Commission hearing. I will be away on May 19. Thank you for your consideration. James Lopes James Lopes 1336 Sweet Bay Lane San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Ph. 805 -781 -8960 1336 Sweetbay Lane San Luis Obispo, California 93401 March 5, 2014 City Council 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 RE: Testimony at Hearing March 4, 2014 Amendments to Orcutt Area Specific Plan and Urban Reserve Line Dear Mayor and Council Members: I am requesting that the attached record of my testimony be included and considered in the amendment process, at a minimum as part of the environmental determination. The comments demonstrated how the Specific Plan can be amended to avoid significant visual impacts on Orcutt Road, instead of just partially mitigating them. These comments had no visible response or interest from council members even though they would accomplish the following: • Directly eliminate visual impacts which the plan EIR found were significant and unavoidable in this location, even with mitigation measures (P. 4.1 -6) • Address the "trade -off' made in the late hours of specific plan preparation, which included the "E Street" area as a "benefit" to the owner /developer for accepting the location of the Urban Reserve Line. Staff made the point that, "The applicant's proposal includes utilizing both areas ( Orcutt Road area plus higher elevations) for development" (staff report p. PH3 -5)." • Increase affordable units in the park -side R -3 area to provide extra units besides accommodating the transfer of units from "E Street," with precisely the attached units which many local employees can afford. Although the Council did not give direction to restore the viewshed on Orcutt Road, these comments should be used to remind staff and consultants that a transfer of density within the Righetti property is a feasible way to avoid visual impacts on Orcutt Road. At the least, the environmental determination should examine whether the Specific Plan aesthetic impacts can be further reduced or avoided and consider a recommendation similar to this proposal. In the future, I think it would be fair if public hearing comments that are germane and embedded in details of a proposal have responses from one or more council members just out of courtesy. Thank you for considering my comments. Sincerely, James Lopes Orcutt Area Specific Plan & URL San Luis Obispo City Council James Lopes March 4, 2014 Presentation The following presentation was made to encourage the City Council to avoid significant visual impacts on Orcutt Road, by transferring the number of allowed units along "E Street" to an area next to the neighborhood park, in the same property ownership. "I am asking that you not initiate the request to change the Urban Reserve Line. The requested areas are too steep and too visible. I am also requesting that your Council have staff prepare a related amendment to come back for a hearing to initiate, if you can't initiate it tonight. The amendment is needed to preserve views of the Morros as seen from Orcutt Road. Southbound views of the Morros from Orcutt Road are shown here near Hansen Lane, but views of the peaks were not protected in the Specific Plan and DR. The EIR for the Specific Plan found that a subdivision in the foreground would block or interfere with views of the peaks along Orcutt Road. Even with development standards in the EIR, visual impacts will be significant and unavoidable if this area develops. OASP Presentation A subdivision would block or interfere _ } with views of the peaks ' along Orcutt Road. James Lopes March 4, 2014 The amendment is in this area in the Specific Plan Map. It would remove the area from the Urban Reserve and designate it Conservation /Open Space. A prime area to relocate the 30 units is next to the park. The Specific Plan should be amended to a higher R -3 density in this area, adding to the area requested by the applicant. This area would encourage attached units that could face the park for more security. Cl Remove from the Urban Reserve and designate Cons /OS. OASP Presentation 2 James Lopes March 4, 2014 If your Council wishes to initiate the applicant's request, would you please also initiate my proposal? A relocation of the units to the park area would change the appicant's proposal there within an additional area shown in red, to R -3 for attached units near the park. I hope you will agree that it's important to amend the Specific Piaui to keep the ranch aloi ig Or cu t Road for its visual character and for views of the Peaks." Revise applicant's proposal to change park layout, to transfer density from Orcutt Road. Keep the ranch along Orcutt Road, for its visual character and for views of the peaks. OASP Presentation 3 James Lopes March 4, 2014