HomeMy WebLinkAboutARC 01-21-15 Meeting Correspondence - WhiteFrom: Linda White [mai[to:Iindaleewhitel5Caigmail , com]
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 3:35 PM
To: Carloni, Marcus; Dunsmore, Phil
Subject: 323/353 Grand Ave.
Linda White
2077 Slack Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805) 543 -8801 Phone & FAX
Iindaleewhite 15(cbcharter.net
Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner
Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner
Architectural Review Committee
Re: 323/353 Grand Ave.
File Number ARC 25 -13
RECEIVED
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
JAN 2 0 2015
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
I am a 40 -year resident of Monterey Heights. I am opposed to the proposed high- occupancy
mini -dorm development at 323/353 Grand Ave. for the following reasons:
Each proposed house has an average of 2550 square ft. of living space but neighborhood
homes average only 1680 sq. ft. of living space.
The proposed project expects to build to a 49% living /lot size ratio but neighborhood
homes are built to only a 21 % to 24% ratio.
Even the Leroy Ct. mini dorm project approved by the City is built to 42% and this is far
too dense for the neighborhood and should never have been approved.
If this parcel was zoned R -2 (medium density), the speculator according to the City, would
be allowed to build only 12 bedrooms - - -not the 16 bedrooms proposed. Remember that the
dens or media rooms (which will be used as bedrooms) could be legally and with a permit
converted after the fact, to a legal 5th bedroom for a density of 20 bedrooms.
4. This project defies the Community Design Guidelines for infill development which states
in Chapter 5.3:... provide infill projects of high architectural quality that are compatible
with existing development... and continue existing neighborhood patterns.
• This proposed project is far too dense (49 %) for the existing neighborhood
• This proposed project is far too large (16 bedrooms with the potential for 20 legally)
The City staff has identified parking and circulation difficulties with ingress and egress
from one drive on busy Grand Ave. The suggestions made by staff will not alleviate the
problems. Please see the attached photos of the similar mini -dorm project approved by the
City on McCollum and Grand Ave. Luckily, their ingress and egress is on the less busy
McCollum. Staff approved parking and circulation on the McCollum project. It is simply
ignored and not working. Disregard at this project will be far more dangerous on busy
Grand Ave.
6. How will emergency vehicles ever access the properties when the parking lot looks like
McCollum?
7. How will students walking to and from the Classical Academy and Teach School maneuver
through the trash cans left on the sidewalk just as they are left out on less busy McCollum.
The attached photos were taken on a Saturday and our trash pickup day is Tuesday.
Finally, I would like to point out that the City Staff defines your role and limits your
purview (2.0 Commissions Purview) "...to the projects consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines and applicable City standards ".
I have attended three advisory committee meetings recently where the committees have
ignored this strict limitation imposed by staff and evaluated the presented project on all the
merits and deficiencies. Eg. Cultural Heritage Committee (1267 Fredericks), Planning
Commission (Home Stays), City Council (Monterey Street Hotel).
I would urge you to do the same with this project. Please act as a true ARC. Re- enforce the
fact that guidelines are merely that - -- guidelines. The staff works with the developer to maximize
a project. It is your responsibility to uphold the SPIRIT of our "Guidelines and City
standards ". It is your responsibility to uphold the SPIRIT of our zoning.
Please deny this project and send a strong message that the spirit of San Luis Obispo and
preservation of established neighborhoods is alive and well.
Thank You,
Linda White
C C
m
CL E
di
o
4%
o
i_
Q
B
O
Cn
E 73 COL
C
Mn
0
U
U
M
-
(n
® ®®
�
�
� �oU1
) FLU
=Ul=
QU
U2
¢
o
_
Y"*-^
o
�.
0
0
�°-❑ TZ
❑
❑ In.
❑,nin0
o
� ,.
� * °�tlmbiieri•,p_
,�X�_ . i