HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-2016 Item 14, CochranSUMMARY INDEXI
COUNCIL MEETING: 01/ (et�6
JAN i 5 2016 ITEM NO.: 144 —
V FO JANUARY 19:
ti
There are many reasons why the proposed
development at 48 Buena Vista Avenue should not be
allowed. Above all others is the issue of safety. The
plan proposes to build on a narrow fire lane at the apex
of a blind curve, and to provide parking on a ramp
which would require backing a vehicle up the ramp and
onto the blind curve. If this building is permitted
someone will eventually be injured, possibly killed. This
is a very serious concern. Please consider the following
(in order of presentation):
I. Buena Vista is a narrow dead -end fire lane.
There is no possibility of introducing parking on
one side.
2. House photos showing incompatibility of
proposal.
3. Letter to Planning Commission from Ken
Schwartz (9/30/15) in which he characterizes
staff as sophomoric, and presents a strong
statement in favor of putting the proposed
building on Loomis Street.
4. Letter to Planning Commission from James Lopes
in which he states unequivocally that exceptions
from code should not be granted, and that the
building should be located adjacent to Loomis
Street.
5. Memo to Planning Commission from Dr. Wm
Cochran (43 Buena Vista Ave) giving five reasons
that the permit should not be granted.
6. Analysis by professional Certified Arborist of
proposal to disguise the proposed structure by
planting "large oak trees ". Conclusion: it can't
be done successfully.
7. "What is the General Plan ?" A statement from
the city website: "All land use decisions are
governed by the General Plan..."
8. Section 9 from the General Plan "Views ". Among
other points made: slopes greater than 20%
should be avoided; any development....shall be
visually subordinate and compatible with the
landscape features... ; the city will promote the
creation of ... linear scenic parkways or
corridors....; the city will preserve and improve
views of important scenic resources from public
places. Included is a profile of the building site
with a 30- degree (equals 58 percent)
draftsman's triangle. The slope far exceeds the
buildable limit specified in the General Plan.
any danger, but the family was able to show that
the city had been told on many occasions
(presumably "anecdotal information ", similar to
the derision of neighbor's concerns when
presented to the Planning Commission).
Damages were awarded to the survivors "well
into the six figures ". SLO has now been told of
the extreme dangers of permitting a driveway
which requires cars to back up a grade onto the
curve known locally as "dead man's curve" on
Buena Vista. Pictures are attached. Note the
amazing similarity between the Buena Vista
curve and the SF curve.
14. The final two pictures show the problems
created when the infrastructure is insufficient for
the residents. We in Monterey Heights face this
every day. Adding a 4 -5 bedroom home on a
narrow street totally without street parking is
not a solution to this problem. Where will
service vehicles park? The proposed parking
ramp will supposedly accommodate six vehicles.
What will happen when the inner -most vehicle
must exit?
\
I
1�
0
EKING
ANY
t rr.
TIME
i7
I 'A
•
fix rR
at
~ •ifs �
�� � 'fit: � •� '�
T „ y
r • � +� n
Ab
r
Zia , ire # 44 '� - �i ♦ }y'
r
low
1
dA
O
0
N
P
c
r
v
L
G
x
h
i
t
M
..
4
k
Av 6c,
Ilk,
4
eil
t
1�� v
Mr. John Larson, Chairman September 30, 2015
San Luis Obispo City Planning Commission ...................... ...
Dear Chairman Larson,
I write for two reasons: (1) to apologize to you and Commission Members for speaking overly long at the
September 23rd Planning Commission meeting. I think you could tell I was a bit emotional about the
proceedings; you were very generous is permitting me the extra time. Thank you. And (2) to express my
frank dismay with what I observed including actions of both staff and Commission members. I will limit
my remarks here to the development of the property fronting Buena Vista Avenue in the Monterey
-TTb P tts subdivision. M attendance were residents who occupy single family dwellings that were built in
compliance with City's codes. This was the second hearing residents were forced to attend because of
staff failure to properly notice the first hearing and to properly post the site.
Monterey Heights subdivision was laid out in the 1920's to standards of the time. Most, if not all, of the
existing single family dwellings were individually built and complied with zoning and building ordinance
regulations in effect at the time. To my knowledge, there is not a single flat lot in the entire subdivision;
all of the sites have generated individual home building challenges. In my own case, my parcel is kidney
shaped and has a cross fall of 36 feet in its 105 foot depth. In 1962 when I built my home, It was
necessary for me to detonate 40 sticks of dynamite to establish a building site. I also graded out 117 feet
of earth and rock to create a shelf for a five foot integral concrete sidewalk across my entire frontage In
order to comply with City regulations — all excavated material had to be trucked off site. I did not ask for
any exceptions nor was I granted any. Other Monterey Heights residents could speak of similar building
challenges.
site and then asks for relief from the strict
r ers its challenges an compliance can Fe costly, but reliet trom our
That is the reason residents spoke or wrote to challenge s
recommendations. I do not understand why staff speaks on behalf of any applicant's appeal whch is in
comnAlling reason p r se to seathis or any other site.developed.
Upon learning of residents' concerns, it a ears that staff — not the a
photographed site distances in Buena vista Avenue ared a
are
The City has no
— went out to the site and
on
was
sc�. c, It was a static two - dimensional picture. The traffic problems are aynamrc, i ne visual
shc)uId have =shown a vehicle moving down Buena Vista Avenue at 25 mph and a second vehicle moving
up Buena Vista at 25mph and a third vehicle sitting at 90 degrees with the curb as if exiting from the
driveway of the proposed residence. Then everyone could understand the dynamics and the dangers
involved. Hove tatdem P° L01
Chairman John Larson, page 2
Then, is this wasn't enough, Commissioner Mike Draze, a professional planner who I generally admire,
threw a red herring into the mix when he proposed completely out of the blue, that part of the
conditions of approval should prohibit the use of the Loomis Street side of the parcel from ever being
considered as an access. Mike's reason, 'the bank on Loomis makes access too complicated (costly ?) So
have a RrQup of
angers being told to their faces that so_ this
access and you Buena Vista residents will
to
Mike, really?
(One of my classmates, Jack 0uzounian, AIA, solved a similar Loomis type frontage problem for his own
home in West Los Angeles in an ingenious, but simple manner. I'll be happy to make arrangements with
Jack for any Commissioner visiting LA to stop by his home and see what can be done with a little
imagination.)
I find it absolutely astounding that only one Commissioner was unable to find the required justifications
to support this project. That Commissioner, Mike Multari, just happens to be the most experienced
professional planner on the commission — and staff for that matter. Everyone else stumbled and
hemmed and hawed and generally embarrassed themselves in front of the residents in attendance to
oppose the project. Then to rub salt into the wounds they were inflicting, six commissioners directed
staff to work with the applicant to clear {.gyp a question about the bottom level of the house proposed by
the applicant to be left vacant, and then return to the commission for another meeting which, in turn,
forces residents to attend a third meeting to see if commissioners have enough starch in their backbones
to turn down the project as submitted and tell the developer to restart his application with a design
conforming to City codes and regulations. Chairman Larson, the commiss'ion's actions should have been
as clean and clear as that.
What an absolute boondoggle) Now hurtful to watch decades of work
a humane
program in San Luis Obispo cruet a rem a es.
I would appreciate your sharing this communication with other members of your commission as well as
staff.
A very, very disappointed former member of this planning commission.
Lin rtz
201 Buena Vista
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Copies: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Linda White, Co-chair, Monterey Heights Neighbors
Print
https: / /us- mg6.mail.yahoo. com /neo /launch ?.partner= sbc &.rand=6up...
Subject:
48 Buena Vista item at PC 10 -28 -15
From:
James Lopes
To:
amejia @slocity.org; kbell @slocity.org;
Cc:
Date:
Wednesday, October 28, 2015 3:54 PM
Dear Mr. Mejia,
Would you kindly forward this to the Planning Commission before tonight's hearing?
Dear Chairperson Larson and Commission members:
vent Qi resiaence•on the � i ne use or exceptions to finis case nas
'File proposed heig t wi impose incrementally on views from Highway 101
from this high location.
In this case, the application and staff review demonstrates that the City does not have an adequate scenic protection policy in its
Hillside Development Guidelines. This lack could jeopardize a possible State Scenic Highway 101 designation, which has been
advocated by Mayor Jan Marx.
Most importantly, the exact average slope of the site needs to be calculated in order for staff and your Commission to determine
if it is at 30% or greater. If that is the case, then no grading is allowed on the site, by a recent amendment to what I believe is
the Grading Ordinance. The table below shows the policy in effect. Staff will need to show you in what section it is located,
because the City's website does not list the complete ordinance yet since the amendment in September. I have not been able to
determine the source of the amendment from staff yet.
NN. Add Appendix Table J101.6 as follows:
TABLE J101.6
GRADING TO REMAIN IN NATURAL STATE
Percent Average Cross Percent of Site to Remain
Slope
In Natural State
0 -5
0
6 -10
25
11 -15
40
16 -20
60
21 -25
80
26 -30
90
Above 30
100
(Ord. 1612 § 3, 2015; Ord. 1595 § 6 (part), 2014)
Thank you for addressing these concerns before making your decision.
Jamie Lope AMP-
1 of 2 10/28/2015 4:11 PM
MEMO
TO: Mr. John Larson hairman, SLO City Planning Commission, and Commission
Members Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler, Michael Multari,
William Riggs, and Ronald Malak
COPY: Mr. Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner
.x,11 � 1 .�:� • r •� ' = -�• � i �1
SUBJECT: September 23 review of a proposed new single - family residence at 48
Buena Vista Avenue /2390 Loomis Street
DATE: 18 September 2015
I live at 43 Buena Vista Avenue, my home being directly across the street from the
lot on which the proposed residence is to be built. I have lived at this address for
20 years.
RECOMMENDATION: Deny this proposal for the following reasons:
1. Placing a residence with four bedrooms and a Secondary Dwelling at the
proposed location is inconsistent with the character, the history, and the
infrastructure which supports the area. Monterey Heights was plotted in
the 1920s, a time when families owned a single car, narrow streets were
adequate, and off - street parking was the norm. Since that time the
population has increased and student rentals have gotten out of hand.
The area's current congestion, inadequate parking, and hazards of
negotiating the crowded streets should not be increased through a total
disregard of the basic early plan. The area is zoned R1, specifically
designed as a residential area for single - family homes. To my knowledge
there are no Secondary Dwellings in the area, the area was not designed
for high density housing, and cannot support it.
2. There should be no special exemptions from sidewalk requirements, nor
for Height and Setback. The Council has the authority to grant exemptions
in unusual cases, but the granting should not be automatic at the request
MEMO
of a developer. The need for the Exemptions and exceptions in this case
are manifestations of the simple fact that the position of the building on
the lot is not suitable. I know of no houses in the area which required or
received such special treatment when built; certainly my home did not.
The new home should be built at 2390 Loomis Street, as clearly intended
by the plot map, and should comply with all code requirements.
3. Fire and parking: There is no on- street parking permitted near the site,
and for good reason. Buena Vista Avenue is the city's first line of defense
against forest and brush fires, and it is vital that clear access be
maintained at all times. Approving the proposed construction will put
increased pressure on the nearest permitted parking, which is severely
limited, and will result in neighborhood acrimony. I repeat, the site is not
suitable for a four - bedroom house with a Secondary Dwelling and a roof-
top party deck.
4. 1 have observed during my 20 years of residence that the area attracts a
large number of sightseers who walk, jog, drive, cycle, scooter, and even
skateboard to take advantage of the view. It is especially popular with
artists and photographers. The proposed residence will center on a blind
curve of Buena Vista Avenue. I have serious concerns for the safety of
area residents and visitors alike if the residence is approved. I have seen
many near accidents there involving cars, bicyclists, skateboarders,
children, and pedestrians. The proposed design requires that vehicles
leaving the residence back into the blind curve, totally unable to see or be
seen by an oncoming vehicle. To acquiesce in the addition of this hazard
would be an act of negligence by the city.
5. The City Code, Section 17.56.010 -A, specifies that a "...development
review may also be used to protect areas of scenic or ecological
sensitivity, wildlife habitat, or wildland fire hazard." The reason Buena
Vista Avenue was so named is obvious. The view is unhampered by the
existing homes, which are built on the uphill side of the street. The
proposed residence lies on the downhill side and would disrupt the vista,
contrary to Code. In addition, the view of the area as seen from highway
101 has in the past been rigorously guarded by the city. When my home
was constructed a substantial bond was required to insure compliance
MEMO
with additional stipulations made by the City specifically to preserve that
view. The explanation given was that the area is "scenically sensitive, and
provides the first view of the city to motorists travelling south on 101. It
is imperative to maintain its scenic integrity." Construction of the
proposed residence at dead center of the vista will disfigure that view,
and is directly counter to the previous position taken by the city.
In conclusion I restate my recommendation that the property, if
developed, should be as a single family residence with no Secondary
Dwelling and no exceptions to the existing Code or sidewalk
requirements. Other building sites on the property do exist which would
require no such special treatment.
Respectfully,
William Cochran
rLEASE w4 re totucws,o*j I pal`I
41&
GREEN VALE TREE COMPANY
Purpose: To explore the feasibility of planting, viability, maintenance and fire safety regarding Oaks to
be planted along the back and sides of a proposed residence on Buena Vista Avenue in San Luis Obispo.
Background:
Local residents in the neighborhood of Buena Vista Avenue are concerned with a proposed residence
that is to be located on a very steep lot. In the proposal it has been stated that large Oak trees are to be
planted to screen views from the back of the residence (toward Loomis) and the sides. Concerns have
arisen about the ability to plant large trees on the slope and the viability and maintenance of them should
they be planted.
Visibili — Because of the steep slope and the height of where it is to be built the structure will be
highly visible from Highway 101 and the roads and properties below including areas off Monterey
Street and San Luis Drive. There has been some discussion of a 101 scenic highway through the area
and some restrictions concerning buildings along the view corridors as cars approach San Luis Obispo
from Cuesta Grade. Mitigation for this structure was in part to plant trees to screen the residence.
Slope and soil - The lot is extremely steep. Much of it approaches, or perhaps exceeds, 45 degrees. The
soil is loose alluvial soil and not far below this is rock. This type of soil has a high capacity to slip and
erode.
Exposed rock from cuts throughout this area shows signs of underlying serpentine rock. There is very
little organic matter in this soil. Currently the area is grassland with Oaks below along Loomis. There is
one Oak above, very close to Buena Vista Avenue.
Access to the lot — The lot runs between Loomis (below) and Buena Vista. Access for trees and
equipment to be brought onto the property is primarily from Buena Vista as the current plan exists.
There is no driveway but a steel "bridge" linking the garage to the road. Below, on Loomis, there will be
no feasible way up to the area where the trees are to be planted due to the steep terrain. Buena Vista
Avenue is about 1' /2 lanes at the lot frontage which makes this area narrow.
Size of trees — Other than "large" trees being planted I have no reference as to what size. I will assume
that large would indicate a boxed tree and 48 -inch would be considered as "large ". For this report, Trees
or Oaks in regard to planting and/or this planned structure are considered to be a 48 -inch box.
Feasibility of Planting
The container measures 48 by 48 inches. Oaks would likely be 8 to 12 feet in height. Normally trees of
this size are either craned in or a large, construction -type forklift is used to lift them off the truck and
with the aid of rigging lower them into the planting holes. Due to the steepness of slope and lack of
room for a crane or fork lift neither can be used. To get the trees downhill winches and rollers would
need to be used to slowly get the boxed trees into position. Holes would have to have ramps dug out on
one side so the trees could be slid down into the planting holes. Time and care will need to be taken to
maneuver these trees down slope into place and to plant them.
Coast Live Oaks in a 48 -inch box will grow 8 to 12 inches per year on average. They will, on average,
reach a height of 65 feet. Width on a Coast Live Oak varies widely from 20 to 80 feet. Plants should be
planted 30 -40 feet apart.
Oaks should not be planted closer than thirty feet from the structure, utilities or drainage. The further
downhill you plant an Oak the more it will need to grow to become a screen. Planting trees that are 8 -12
feet high would have very little screen impact on the down slope side of the residence. It would take
many years before Oaks could significantly screen this residence.
Let's walk through some math:
Start with a tree 10 feet tall. You plant this tree 30 feet downhill from the closest footing.
Drop in elevation from edge of footing to planting site given 45 degree slope 30 feet
Elevation from footing to roof peak
39 feet
Distance (vertical) from ground where tree is planted to roof height 69 feet
Subtract 10 feet for our original tree height
Divide the above number by 8 - 12 inches per year
59 feet
59 to 74 years
This is the number of years it will take to have an oak grow to be as high as the roof line and effectively
screen the residence.
Viability
Oak trees prefer loose well drained soils, lots of organic matter and a healthy rhizosphere.
The rhizosphere is an area of soil (10 to 16 inches deep) that contain microorganisms such as bacteria,
beneficial fungi and larger organisms such as worms and bugs that break down organic matter. Without
a healthy rhizosphere Oaks are subject to stress, disease and pests. In a practical sense it is the lack of a
suitable rhizosphere, or conditions to create one that limits the viability of an Oak.
The soil on this slope is alluvial with underlying rock. Rock in this area tends to have plentiful
serpentine in it. Serpentine rock/soils tend to have high levels of magnesium and heavy metals and are
low in Calcium. Some plants adapt and some even thrive in serpentine soils. Oaks have adapted to
serpentine soils but these oaks are native coming up from seed. They are also much smaller and more
sparse than oaks that grow on other soils. Also the micro - organisms needed for Oaks tend to fail to
colonize in serpentine soils as heavy metals can be toxic to them.
While the soil here has a loose upper surface there is rock not far below. Two very opposite things are
likely to happen in the establishment of Oaks on this lot due to the underlying rock. The underlying rock
will need to be chipped away to make a basin for the planting hole. This is a suitable situation when
water can be controlled. But when we have wet years water will pool in the rock planting hole and the
oak will likely die or become stunted due to rot or root asphyxiation. If deeper soil is found where the
planting can be done in loose soil likely the opposite is true. Water will flow through the soil rapidly and
hit the underlying rock where it will then flow downhill. This perennially dry soil will lead to poor
establishment and a stunted tree.
Both the serpentine soil and underlying rock is the reason we find no Oaks growing on this hillside. The
grasses and other annual, shallow rooted plants can survive and grow but establishing an Oak to full
potential and vigor is improbable.
Maintenance
Oaks are wonderful in natural settings but can be a great expense and a big mess in our landscapes.
Constant leaf drop, twig dieback and dropping acorns don't just make a mess they can be fire hazards.
More to the point it is dead leaves and twigs (and sometimes branches) that remain on the tree that can
become fire hazards. Oaks are by nature fire resistant. That is they can recover and re- sprout and in
doing so the fire eliminates the dead and weak branches as well as pests. Near a residence the fire
marshal requires all combustibles within 30 feet of a structure to be removed. Trees "shall" be pruned of
all dead limbs, combustible debris be removed and canopies lifted to prevent fires from coming up from
the ground into the canopy. In general, to meet this requirement oaks will need frequent pruning (every
two to three years).
Because of the type of soil and terrain the oaks should be watered the first three years. In dry years the
Oaks will need supplemental water to survive perhaps on a monthly basis. Failure to maintain the Oaks
through watering can lead to severe dieback, disease and it can become a fire hazard.
Fire Safety
On the lot in consideration the terrain will pose a problem if a fire occurs. Fire moves uphill faster than
downhill as the heat creates air currents pushing flames uphill. Low canopies are subject to being
burned. Oaks which naturally grow with extensively wide but low canopies would be subject to this
type of fire situation. Any tree on this steep of a slope is going to need its canopy elevated for fire
prevention alone. Oaks do not do well, and in fact are subject to disease and pests, if maintained at high
canopy heights. Higher canopy heights will also expose the house to view, negating the screening of the
home.
Because Oaks sheds debris continually, maintaining fallen leaf and twig litter on the roof and near the
building will need to be done several times a month. Oaks if planted would need to be planted further
away from the home to prevent dry leaf and twig debris from accumulating on the roof or near the
building. The fire plan states no combustibles within 30 feet.
Oaks will accumulate deadwood on a consistent basis. When we read that Oaks are "fire- proof' it does
not mean that they do not burn. When Oaks are ignited they burn very well if there is deadwood, dead
twigs and dry leaves. The term "fire- proof' in the case of Oaks means that the Oak can recover and
grow after a fire. Oaks planted nearby this structure then would need to be regularly "cleaned" of
combustibles on average every 2 -3 years to make the trees less combustible.
The rest of the landscape would also need to be designed and planted with fire in mind. Certainly on this
steep of slope plantings would want to be made with erosion control and slope stabilization in mind.
However, fire safety will need to dictate what actually can be planted and what materials can be used.
Conclusion
Considering all the factors (slope, type of soil, need to screen the view within a reasonable amount of
time), oaks may not be a good selection for this property. Having said that, there probably is no tree that
will meet all requirements given the challenges posed by the conditions on this lot.
Sincerely,
Chris Stier,
ISA Certified Arborist, #9262
*Diagnosis was made with observation, history and sound arboricultural and horticultural knowledge. It is always possible
that other, or different problems exist that may contribute to the decline and death of plants. Further evaluation may be
warranted if the steps above do not work. Pathology tests and other lab analysis are available.
City of San Luis Obispo, CA: General Plan
CONTACT INFO
(805) 781 -7170
Baaii)dikil, ahid safely
(805) 781 -718o
Public Works
(805) 781 -7220
Addilionai Contact Info = >
Ilours said Locations
http: / /www. slocity. org /government/ department- directory/community...
General Plan
What is the General Plan?
The C c. n it P1 �i i j is the principal tool the City uses when evaluating municipal service improvements and land use proposals.
Every service the City provides to its citizens, from police and fire protection to park maintenance, can trace its roots back to goals
and policies found in the General Plan.
All land use decisions are governed by the General Plan and must be consistent with the General Plan's direction.
General Plan goals, policies, and implementation measures are based on an assessment of current and future needs and available
resources. The City recently updated its Land Use, Circulation and Housing Elements. For more information regarding the
update, please visit
Laud. Ilse l enicii_l_ piarni iml.
Table of Contents
• Cliahler t -Land Use (2014)
• C_I_iahtei Circal_ation (2014)
• Chapter 3- 1l0tisin9 (2015)
o - II_0usiJ1-A.hlx _ udix
o - Nlore information
• Cliapter I- Noi_Le (1996)
o - More infon)ALioii and Figures
• Clial - ter 5- Sa1'QIy (2012)
o -- Xlo—re inforpiatiou and Fir,ures
1 of 3
ly
i
10/28/2015 5:13 PM
Chapter 6 Citik,
9. Ylaw
Background
San Luis Obispo has been favored with a beautiful natural setting. Also, the
community has strived for attractive urban development. Protection of these
assets enhances the community's quality of life and economic vitality.
Protection involves both the integrity of the resource being viewed, and lines
of sight to the resource.
Goals and Policies V -� ' •`
9.0. Viewsheds.
9.1. Policies
City limits form a well- defined urban edge, with
open space beyond
9.1.1. Preserve natural and agricultural landscapes.
The City will implement the following policies and will encourage other agencies with jurisdiction to do
likewise:
A. Natural and agricultural landscapes that the City has not designated for urban use shall be maintained In
their current patterns of use.
B. deveiopmen #nat_A milted I natuWl ol bi v3 I nrdinat to
evelopment includes, but is not limited to buildings, signs
(including billboard signs), roads, utility and telecommunication lines and structures. Such development
shall;
1. slo
2. Avoid unnecessary grading, vegetation removal, and site lighting.
3. Incorporate building forms, architectural materials, and landscaping, that respect the setting,
including the historical pattern of development in similar settings, and kyoid stark contrasts with it s
setting,-
4 ignificant trees in terms of size, age, species or rarity, and rock
outcroppings.
C. The City's non - emergency repair, maintenance, and small construction projects in highly visible locations,
such as hillsides and downtown creeks, where scenic resources could be affected, shall be subject to at
least "minor or incidental" architectural review.
9.1.2. Urban development.
The City will implement the following principle and will encourage other agencies with jurisdiction to do so:
urban development should reflect its architectural context. This does not necessarily prescribe a specific
style, but re uires deliberate desi n choices that ackn wledge human scale, natural site features, and
rneghbn u n development, and that are compatible with histories an architectural resources. Plans
for sub -areas of the city may requlre certain architectural styles.
9.1.3. Utilities and signs.
In and near public streets, plazas, and parks, features that clutter, degrade, intrude on, or obstruct views
should be avoided. Necessary features, such as utility and communication equipment, and traffic equipment
Page 6 -58
•�
Conservation and Open Space Element t We
and signs should be designed and placed so as to not impinge upon or degrade scenic views of the Morros or
surrounding hillsides, or farmland, consistent with the primary objective of safety. Nevtr billboard signs shall
not be allowed, and existing billboard signs shall be removed as soon as practicable, as provided In the Sign
Regulations.
9.1.4. Stivetscapes and major madweys.
In the wAuisitlon, design, construction or slgniflam modifleation of major roadways (highways /regional
routes and arterial streets), the City will promote the creation of "streetsra s" and linear
... _ _. _.._ ... — . Mrt a. enhance adiacent uses, and integrate roadways
To accomplish this, the
A. Establish streetscape design standards for major roadways.
B. Encourage the creation and maintenance median planters and widened parkway plantings.
C. Retain mature trees In the public right -of -way.
D. Emphasize the planting and maintenance of California Native tree species of sufficient height, spread,
form and horticultural characteristics to create the desired streetscape canopy, shade, buffering from
adjacent uses, and other desired streetscape characteristics, consistent with the Tree Ordinance or as
recommended by the Tree Committee or as approved by the Architectural Review Commission.
E. Encourage the use of water - conserving landscaping, street furniture, decorative lighting and paving,
arcaded walkways, public art, and other pedestrian - oriented features to enhance the streetscape
appearance, comfort and safety.
F. Encourage and where possible, require undergrounding of overhead utility lines and structures.
9.1.6. View protection in new development•
The City will include in all environmental review and carefully consider effects of new Gevelopmeh fight streets
and road con . rru_�Don oamie and visual quality by applying the Community Design
restrictlans, Ilside standards, istorical Preservation Program Guidelines and the California Environmental
Quality Act an u e nes.
9.1.6. Night-sky prosery ittion.
City will adopt a "night sky" ordinance to preserve nighttime views, prevent light pollution, and to protect
public safety by establishing street and public area lighting standards.
9.1.7. GOAL: Viewing opportunfdss.
Provide ample opportunities for viewing attractive features.
9.2. Policies
9.2.1. Visws to and from public places, including scent roadways.
The Ci will reserve and Im rove views of im ortant scenic resaurces from ublic la a and encourage
I parks, p azas, the grounds of civic buldings,
n er agencies w Jurisdiction c on o o u c p
streets and roads, and publicly accessible open space. In particular, the route segments shown in Figure it
are designated as scenic roadways.
A. Development projects shall not wall off scenic roadways and block views.
B. Utilities, traffic signals, and public and private signs and lights shall not intrude on or clutter views,
consistent with safety needs.
C. Where important vistas of distant landscape features occur along streets, street trees shall be clustered
to facilitate viewing of the distant features.
Page 6-59
Chapter 6
D. Development projects, including signs, in the viewshed of a scenic roadway shall be considered
"sensitive" and require architectural review.
9.2.2. Views to and from private development.
Projects should incorporate as amenities views from and within private development site3° Private
development designs should cause the least view blockage for neighboring property that allows project
objectives to be met.
9.2.3. Outdoor lighting.
Outdoor lighting shall avoid: operating at unnecessary locations, levels, and times; spillage to areas not
needing or wanting illumination; glare (intense line -of -site contrast); and frequencies (colors) that interfere
with astronomical viewing.
9.3. Programs
The City shall do the following to protect and enhance views, are' will en ouraae others to do so, as a Rrrggriatj_ , ,
9.3.1. Public facilities.
Locate and design public facilities and utilities consistent with General Plan goals and policies.
9.3.2. Update Community Design Guidelines.
Update and maintain Community Design Guidelines to address views from scenic roadways and include them
in design standards in plans for sub -areas of the City.
9.3.3. Sign Regulations.
Maintain and apply Sign Regulations consistent with General Plan goals and policies. When possible, signs in
the public right -of -way should be consolidated on a single low - profile standard.
9.3.4. Environmental and architectural review.
Conduct environmental review and architectural review consistent with General Plan goals and policies
regarding visual impacts and quality.
9.3.5. Visual assessments.
Require evaluations (accurate visual simulations) for projects affecting important scenic resources and views
from public places.
9.3.6. View blockage along scenic highways.
Determine that view blockage along scenic roadways is a significant impact.
9.3.7. Development proposals in unincorporated County.
Review County- proposed general plan amendments and development proposals within the City's Planning
Area for consistency with City General Plan goals and policies. '
9.3.8. Scenic highway designation.
Aflvocate State acrd Count scenic hi hwa designations and protective programs for scenic routes
connecting ± n Luis spa w o er ca �e�
9.3.9. Undergrounding utilities.
Place existing overhead utilities underground, with highest priority for scenic roadways, entries to the city,
and historical districts.
9.3.10. Prohibit billboards.
Not allow additional billboards.
9.3.11. Billboard removal.
Remove existing billboards through amortization, conditions of development approval, and grants for
enhancing open -space and transportation corridors, with highest priority for scenic roadways, entries to the
city, and historical districts.
Page 6 -60
lu
kl'�Vw �13
At
Ir
F4*4
4A
�R
r1%
(v
CL
u
(0)
cl
I CL
4T-
0
I
�
�
`\
�
`.
IS \
\*•�� � \\
>V
§
� � �ƒ \
/.
r'k
}
.
�-�
\
~ �
.�
\
{
I
�
�
F.Q. W R2
San LWa OWSK
Ca 43"
w rs"a
tr ews M
Rw*: lev-7933
far W79o5
�kSUnQcprr o� th�. Ccrrn'al Gxul
THE -TRIBUNE
EDITORIAL BOARD ,
TM Cofto
Pubkd w
shomw
Oorion Pw Edft
SER" Dow
Executive Editor
oil f !s
EDITOYIAL
OPINION OF THE TRIBUNE
Highway 101
designation
h cta its perks
Scenic 'highway honor would bring attest oni
to segment f om Atascadero t0 Risrrro Beach
here's ,a campaign mot to gaits scenic
highway 9W, 'fDr U.S. 101, betwv n Atas-
c:adero no Pismo Beast.
tf it% amxvs" that stria of the 101
will be added to the lityt of the state's amiuset
beautiful MVV-- , which intiudes Xg Sur, Death Val-
ley and Yosi mitr Valley, as well as the Witch of
1 fghway 1 begin Sim Luis Obi and Cambria.
The desiaation is reflected, on %we neaps, and
"sculls 1> way" tIi�" are instaBed along the rmites.
Ahtwu& we don't befiew we need signs to artiest
to the naftw4 b 0i cW-fty ay 101 trot rider —
that si 'be, Ott -- we do tie wvend
advantages.
For one, it could help rid us of the bad case of bill-
board blight plaguing Highway 101, which is a major
selling point promoted by organizers of the scenic
highway campaign. They say there are nearly 50 bill-
boards on the 101 between Santa Margarita and Avi-
la Beach — far more than in nearby counties of San-
ta Barbara, Monterey and Ventura.
A scenic highway designation would make the
county eligible for grants that could be used to retire
billboards, scenic highway advocates told the San
Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors during a
recent session devoted to setting Planning Depart
ment priorities.
Atascadero resident Chuck Ward, who was among
the speakers lobbying; the Board of Supervisors, apt-
ly compared the lillboards to a speck of dust under
a contact lens — a constant irritr-alion. he said, as well
as a distraction for drivers.
Supervisors were generally supportive of explor-
ing the idea. Although they didn't move the scenic
highway item to the Planning Departnlent's main pri-
ority list, they indicated it's an issue planners should
work on as time permits.
Board Chairwoman Debbie Arnold pointed out
that the SLO Council of Governments has already
been discussing this and may be the more appropri-
ate agency to move it forward.
We don't really care which agency takes the lead,
as long as one or the other does so.
In addition to helping eradicate billboards, we see
other perks that make it an idea worth pursuing:
• The scenic highway designation could be used
to market the Central Coast to visitors who aren't fa-
miliar with the area
+ It's a preservation tool. While new development
isn't prohibited,
its ssuch as junkyards and gravel pits;
• ZEEftut not least, there are bragging rights that
coarse with the designation. C You've got an Ikea? How
nice for you r! We've got a scenic highway ...'°j
Bottom line: The natural beauty of the Highway
101 corridor sets our county apart. Preserving it is
one of the lestways to XLNIVI Vtslu11'ti to otar C011111tu`
nities; to draw the attention (A employers looking to
open clean, high -tech industries; and to serve as a dai-
ly reminder of why we decided to make this our
home.
If a scenic highway designation can help protect
that local leaders should move on it.
WILL PLANNING COMMISSION NIX
SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION?
FROM THE TRIBUNE, OCTOBER is,
Bois:
"CAL TRANS REQUIRES A SCENIC
CORRIDOR PROTECTION PROGRAM
TO GUARD AGAINST INAPPROPRIATE
PROJECTS... TO PROTECT VIEWS OF
HILLSIDES BY MINIMIZING
DEVELOPMENT ON STEEP SLOPES...
THE NATURAL BEAUTY OF THE
HIGHWAY 101 CORRIDOR SETS OUR
COUNTYAPART...A DAILY REMINDER
OF WHY WE DECIDED TO MAKE THIS
OUR HOME."
ti
a
THE GENERAL PLAN STATES:
"All land use decisions are governed
by the General Plan and must be
consistent with the General Plan's
direction."
and...
OW
4-
f � 4
THE GENERAL PLAN STATES:
"All land use decisions are governed
by the General Plan and must be
consistent with the General Plan's
direction."
and,..
"San Luis Obispo has been favored with a beautiful
0
natural setting... Protection of these
assets enhances the community's quality of life and
economic vitality ... ... PROTECTION INVOLVES
.BOTH THE INTEGRITY OF THE RESOURCE
BEING VIEWED, AND LINES OF SIGHT TO
THE RESO URCE. At
and...
"The City will implement the following
policies ......Any development that is permitted in
natural or agricultural landscapes shall be visually
subordinate to and compatible with the landscape
features—Such development shall... avoid visually
prominent locations such as SLOPFS
E. CEED I G 20 %. " [Sections 9.i.i.B.1 &4, and
section 9.1.1.4, p. 6581
CA L TRANS SPECIFIES THE SAME SLOPE
RESTRICTION WHEN CONSIDERING
APPLICATION'S FOR DESIGNATION OF
SCENIC CORRIDORS
PAGE
THE SLOPE:
The Planning Commission staff report states "The
property is a downward sloping lot... WI TH AN
AVERAGE GRADE OFAPPROXIMATELY30%. "
The 30% value is wrong. The correct value, obtained from
USGS Topological maps, is 42 0/0, while the value obtained
from drawings submitted by the developer is 48 %.
SUMMARY
The General Plan specifies a
maximum slope of zo %.
The proposed building site has a
slope of 42%.
"The General Plan governs all
land use decisions, and such
decisions must be consistent
with the General Plan's
direction."
THE SLOPE:
The Planning Commission staff report states "The
property is a downward sloping lot... WI TH AN
AVERAGE GRADE OFAPPROXIMATELY30%."
The 30% value is wrong. The correct value, obtained from
USGS Topological maps, is 42 %, while the value obtained
from drawings submitted by the developer is 48 %.
61113 1L'KAILVJ
The General Plan specifies a
maximum slope of ao %.
The proposed building site has a
slope of 42%.
"The General Plan governs all
land use decisions, and such
decisions must be consistent
with the General Plate's
direction."
Wb
Aim \b-
I
410
f.
c
4at
- � r
f� A
low
,
+ rl �.r r 1t4
m
< Gam'+
M
A S
Awl
rte-- �,��. �.' �� � / / ■■ � -' {l. 7
k
.� '
�{
.� • y! � 11
_ S '+ .. �� i �l
- � � �„ .►
[;., y
� � r
,� ..�; � � � a,
.yf '��" -�
�. � ,, ., - �� t,
,;' l . , r � ,� .
.f'�' �
- - t I' � 4
/' .� �'
1 i �.
r ��
. _ e. - _
#� ,
.- - �.
.' � -..
a � . k�
j
' �
;/ �. . -
f; , - i
�.
v
r � �'
� ��
r
" ���
- . . ��� , r
��,�1 I,�
- _ �� � �.
i � ��
+ � ..
j'I _
� — t
c 1
f
�� � f � Y�_
y
YW
1 �� �
�•
_ �
��
,�
k
.� '
�{
.� • y! � 11
_ S '+ .. �� i �l
- � � �„ .►
[;., y
� � r
,� ..�; � � � a,
.yf '��" -�
�. � ,, ., - �� t,
,;' l . , r � ,� .
.f'�' �
- - t I' � 4
/' .� �'
1 i �.
r ��
. _ e. - _
#� ,
.- - �.
.' � -..
a � . k�
j
' �
;/ �. . -
f; , - i
�.
v
r � �'
� ��
r
" ���
- . . ��� , r
��,�1 I,�
- _ �� � �.
i � ��
+ � ..
j'I _
� — t
c 1
f
�� � f � Y�_
y
YW
1 �� �
�•
_ �
��
1
I
N
H
V "
All
ki
11
K..
T
T
r�f
'
r
H
V "
All
ki
11
K..
Long before death,
city knew of danger
on Twin Peaks road
6y Jaxon Van Derbeken
Oil a tranquil Iliursday
evening before Chri stmas in
2m, Kai Yuan did what thou-
sands of San Franciscans and
tourists do each year — he
headed up Twin Peaks for a
view of the city lights.
But this trip ended in di-
saster when Yuan, his mother
and "vo friends from out of
town — with nowhere to
walkbut aroadthat theft
had long classified as "inher-
ently unsafe" for pedestrians
— wou nd up i n the path of a
drunken driver weavingup
the hill.
There was no escape but to
jump a 2- foot -tall, concrete -I'
barrier and take their chanc-
es on a steep embankment
Yuan managed to scramble
out of the way, but his moth-
er, 56- year -old Yuee Yao, was
hit by the car and killed. His
friend q safrered debilitating
injuries.
Prosecutors charged the
23 ,year- old motorist, Gina
Twin Peaks conNnum on Ail
Lee Suzuki / The Chronicle
"There is no glace
Kai Yuan of San
to hide, and �+'�' u doret
Francisco carries a
� bouquet of flowers to
lwre any options
place near the site
where his mother
to Meet yours f there,
was hit by a car and
lfec se Of the design."
killed on Twin Peaks
Boulevard in 2o12.
Kai Yaw
iri *** SFCHRONICLE.COM I Sunday, December 20, 2015 1 A17
Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle
Kai Yuan watches a car on Twin Peaks Boulevard near the site where his mother was fatally struck and two friends were injured by a vehicle in 2oi2.
Road's tral*1'1*nherently unsafe'
Twin Peaks from page Al
Eunice, with manslaughter and
drunken driving, and she was
ultimately sentenced to four
years in prison.
But it took nearly two years
of litigation for the victims to
discover that city officials had
long known the road sightseers
walk every day — part of a city
park -- poses a danger to pedes-
trians and had done nothing to
fix it.
"There was 3o years of talk
about changing this roadway,
and no action," said Doris
Chen -, attorney for the Yuan
family. "This was a repeat of-
fense. Every day for every de-
cade, without any action at all."
Unplanned visit
Yuan and his father filed suit
in late 2oi3, as did his friends in
a separate action. The lawsuits
were settled on the eve of trial
last month, and the deal is ex-
pected to go before the Board of
Supervisors in early 2oi6. Nei-
ther side will reveal the details
until the pact goes to the board,
but the dollar total is expected
to be well into the six figures,
without the city admitting
wrongdoing.
It started exactly three years
ago, Dec. 20, 2012, when bad
weather in the Midwest kept
Yuan's visiting roommate from
college, Ymg Zhang, and
Zhang's wife, Chen Li, from
catching a flight home to Wis-
consin. They called Yuan to get
together.
Yuan was then 3o and had
just moved to the U.S. from
China with his wife to do post-
doctoral stem cell research at
the UCSF center in Mission
Bay. His mother was on an
extended visit from China to
see the couple's toddler son and
to celebrate Chinese New Year.
After the friends dined out,
they took Yuan's wife and boy
home, then headed to Twin
Peaks.
f '
8'. /X1
i
Eureka Peak
(Wortl►Peak)
szs t�et
Kai Yuan parked
car here.
3
tu
W
_
U)
3
Vista point
t"
I
Yuee Yuan and
• son s friends hit by
drunken driver.
aim
• f
' Guardrail
0 - v8
MILE
- °Go
U �
in her Honda Accord. Her blood
alcohol level was more than
three times the legal limit, and
she took the turn too widely, hit
the guardrail and headed to-
ward Yuan, who was at the head
of the group.
"It happened suddenly," he
said. "There is no place to hide,
and you don't have any options
to protect yourself there, be-
cause of the design.
"I could jump. My mother
just couldn't."
Yuan's mother was hit by the
Mount
Sutro���ll '`
SAN F AAfC SC0
John Blanchard / The Chronicle
In the early 198os, then -May-
or Dianne Feinstein formed a
Twin Peaks task force to beauti-
fy what she considered a ne-
glected city treasure. Bike and
pedestrian paths were part of
the plan the task force came up
with in 1985, and Feinstein
promised to "move quickly."
But nothing came of it.
"No one could ever tell us
what happened with that," sail
Andrew McDevitt, one of the
Yuan family's attorneys.
Courtesy Kai Yuan 2011
Yuee Yao, Kai Yuan's mother, was photographed in San
Francisco in 2011,16 months before the deadly incident.
V Butler suggested putting in
sidewalks or creating a shoul-
der. The city responded by
trimming the bushes. A =ity
traffic official told Elsbemd's
office he wo uld "certainly take a
look" at improvement ideas.
Parks officials developed a
management action plan that
same year, identifying Twin
Peaks Boulevard as "inherently
unsafe because pedestrians
share the road with cars! Still,
no one did anything.
In 20u, city officials ventured
to 1 win Peaks to survey tae
area. Parks official Lisa Wayne
sun ected that bemuse the road
wai not b wily used by motor-
ist, it coi dd easily be narrowed
b allow for bike and pedestrian
paths.
1
`Bureaucratic morass'
City officials, according to
minutes of community meet-
ings that year, acknowledged
that pedestrian safety was "a big
neighborhood concern" and
floated the idea of cutting the 30
mph speed limit in half. They
came up with a plan that the
Recreation and Park Commis-
sion approved in 2012, but it left
unsafe' "
To this day, there is still no
designated walkway for pedes-
trians on Twin Peaks Bou-
levard. Recreation and Park
officials floated a plan to ban
cars from the section of road
where Yuan's mother was
killed, but it remains open.
Agency spokeswoman Sarah
Madland said parks officials are
in the midst of a "planning
effort to address the rest of the
road," working with the city
transportation authority and
the Public Works Department.
Those agencies referred ques-
tions b the city attorney's office.
"The city has no imminent
plans to close the road to traf-
fic," said city attorney spokes-
man Matt Dorsey, "although
that has been expressed as an
eventual policy objective for the
Twin Peaks redesign."
Dorsey declined to comment
on the allegations made in the
lawsuits.
Since his mother's death,
Yuan has gone back to Twin
Peaks more than 20 times to pay
his respects, including on her
birthday and each anniversary
of her death. The first few times,
I tea Suzuld / The Chronicle
Kai Yuan watches a ear on Twin Peaks Boulevard near the site where his mother was fatally struck and two friends were n jured by a vehicle in 2012.
Road's tra1*1'1*nherent1y unsafe'
T =Iff"pV_,U
Eunice, with manslaughter and
drunken driving, and she was
ultimately sentenced to four
years in prison.
But it took nearly two years
of litigation for the victims to
discover that city officials had
long known the road sightseers
walk every day — part of a city
park — poses a danger to pedes-
trians and had done nothing to
fig it
"Then was 3o years oftaik
about changing this roadway,
and no action," said Doris
Cheng, attorney for the Yuan
family. "This was a repeat of-
fense. Every day for every de-
cade, without any action at all."
Unplanned visit
Yuan and his father filed suit
in late 2oi& as did his friends in
a separate action. The lawsuits
were settled on the eve oftrial
last month, and the deal is ex-
pected to go before the Board of
Supervisors in early 2016 Nei-
ther side will reveal the details
until the pact goes to the board,
but the - dollar total is expected
to be well into the six figures,
without the city admitting
wrongdoing.
It started exactly three years
ago, Dec. 20, 2012, when bad
weather in the Midwest kept
Yuan's visiting roommate from
college, YmgZ Lm& and
Zhang's wife, Chen Li, from
catching a flight home to Wis-
consin. They called Yuan to get
together.
Yuan was then 3o and had
just moved to the U.S. from
China with his wife to do post-
doctoral stem cell research at
the UCSF center in Mission
Bay. His mother was on an
extended visit from China to
see the couple's toddler son and
to celebrate Chinese New Year.
After the friends dined out,
they took Yuan's wife and boy
home, then headed to Twin
Peaks.
"That night was their last
night in San Francisco," Yuan
said. "I wanted to show them
how beautiful the city was.
"That place has a great view I
didn't know it was that danger-
ous."
Hikeuptheroad
Unaware ofthe parking lots
at the vista point, Yuan left his
car in a paved area offTwin
Peaks Boulevard near the trail-
head to the peaks. After hiking
several hundred feet up the
road to the designated view
area and snappingpictures for
20 minutes, the party headed
back to the car, walking in sin-
gle file against the one -way
traffic.
"We were very careful," Yuan
said. "I reminded them several
times to stay close to curb, be
careful and stay together so
they (motorists) could see us."
But there was little time to
react when Eunice came
aroim,: an unlit curve at 25 mph
in her HondaAccord. Herblood
alcohol level was more than
three times the legal limit, and
she took the turn too widely, hit
the guardrail and headed to-
ward Yuan, who was at the head
ofthegroup.
"It happened suddenly," he
said. "There is no place to hide,
and you don't have any options
to protect yourself there, be-
cause ofthe design.
"Icouldjump. My mother
just couldn't"
Yuan's mother was hit by the
Honda and thrown down the
embankment to her death.
Zhang also was hit and suffered
ahead injury and broken bones.
His wife fell qo feet down the
hill and suffered numerous
injuries-
That nigh� when Yuan was
visiting Zhang at San Francisco
General Hospital, a nurse told
them a friend ofhers had nearly
been hit by a carat the same
spot The men started asking
questions.
Both eventually sued, and
over many,months of discovery
they learned the truth about
Twin Peaks Boulevard.
Makeshiftpath
As far as back as 1972, city
officials earmarked the road as a
"recreational street" — one to be
usedbothbypedestrians and
motorists. But they did nothing
to accommodate pedestrians,
who over the years beat a nar-
row, makeshift dirt path on the
other side of the guardrail
John Blanchard / The Chnmide
In the early i98os, then -May-
or Dianne Feinstein formed a
Twin Peaks task force to beauti-
fy what she considered a ne-
glected city treasure. Bike and
pedestrian paths were part of
the plan the task force came up
with in 1985, and Feinstein ,
promised to "move Quickly."
But nothing came ofit.
"No one could ever tell us
what happened with that," sail
Andrew McDevitt, one ofthe
Yuan family's attorneys.
In 1995, the city talked about
narrowing the road to create
shoulders, abike lane and a
6-foot-wide pathway. In a letter
to the city's traffic engineer, the
general managerofthe Recre-
ation and Park Department at
the time, Mary Burns, said the
Twin Peaks area was `very
much oriented toward vehicle
use," with pedestrians forced to
walk unprotected on the side of
the road
"There are no physical barri-
ers or visual cues to separate
pedestrians from automobile
and bicycle traffic," Burns
pointed out Still,, the city did
nothin&
In 2006, a frequent Twin
Peaks hiker sounded the alarm
to then -city Supervisor Sean
Elsbernd. Chris Butler com-
plained that a driver had come
"zipping along" around a curve,
forcing him and his group to
"scatter into the bushes to avoid
becoming road kill"
Courtesy Kai Yuan 2011
Yuee Yao, Kai Yuan's mother, was photographed in San
Francisco in 2w416 months before the deadly incident.
V Butler suggested putting in
sidewalks or creatinga shoul-
der. The city responded by
trimming the bushes. A pity
traffic official told Elsbemd's
office he would "certainly take a
look" at improvement ideas.
Parks officials developed a
mariggemeat action planthat
same year, identifying Twin
Peaks Boulevard as "inherently
unsafe because pedestrians
share the road with cars.' Still,
no one did anything.
In eon, city officials ventured
to Twin Peaks to survey tie
area. Parks official Lisa Wayne
su&estFd that ec -iuse the road
wan not h wily used by motor-
ist, it cmild easily be narrowed
t1' allow for bike and pedestrian
laths.
Bux�tnHc tna�
City officials, according to
minutes of community meet-
ings that year, acknowledged
that pedestrian safety was "a big
neighborhood concern" and
floated the idea of cutting the 30
mph speed limit in half. They
came up with a plan that the
Recreation and Park Commis-
sion approved in 2012, but it left
the road open and the speed
limit in place — and none of the
minor improvements for pedes-
trians had been made before the
"Every 10 years, you have city
r$cials who want to sound like
key are trying to improve the
s`uation," Cheng said. "But
r)thing is ever done."
"It Was one bureaucratic
n3rass into another," said Rob -
ef Cartwright, an attorney for
pang and Li. "They spent
rare on pushing ideas around
thin it would have cost to fix it
thhe first place.
'It's unbelievable — I've
neer seen anything like it."
luring litigation after the
201 crash, San Francisco offi-
dal were "adamant that there
v,,ario responsibility" on their
per, Cheng said. `It took three
yees of digging up documents
to now that they had notice,
they had known all along
tb was an area, to use their
ow words, that was `inherently
unsafe'"
To this day, there is still no
designated walkway for pedes-
trians on Twin Peaks Bou-
levard. Recreation and Park
officials floated a plan to ban
cars from the section of road
where Yuan's mother was
killed, but it remains open.
Agency spokeswoman Sarah
Madland said parks officials are
in the midst of a "planning
effort to address the rest of the
road," working with the city
transportation authority and
the Public Works Department.
Those agencies referred ques-
tions.to the city attorney's office.
"The city has no imminent
plans to close the road to traf-
fic," said city attorney spokes-
man Matt Dorsey, "although
that has been expressed as an
eventual policy objective for the
Twin Peaks redesign."
Dorsey declined to comment
on the allegations made in the
lawsuits.
Since his mother's death,
Yuan has gone back to Twin
Peaks more than 20 times to pay
his respects, including on her
birthday and each anniversary
of her death. The first few times,
he looked for the camera the
party was using that night on
Twin Peaks — the one he used ,
to take the last photo of his
mother before her death. In the
chaos ofthe crash, it was lost.
"I wanted to find it, but it was
impossible," Yuan said.
`Ihavetomoveon'
Yuan said the city's attitude
toward his case left him dis-
illusioned.
"Ifyou go there, you can tell it
is dangerous, even during the
daytime," Yuan said. "There are
no signs for pedestrians. They
haven't done anything to protect
the pedestrians."
He added, "I hope they now
realize that this is a problem
and fix it. I'm not going to blame
anybody anymore. I have to
move on."
Jaxon Van Derbeken is a San Fran-
cisco Chroniclestaffmriter: E-
mail: jva)iderbekeii rr sfciit ot:rcle.
com Twitter: @jvanderbeken
.oar
,i Ie
K '
'•IJ
J IL
e
W5
Yr
lid'
I
4-
pr-
i.
IN
41
Affif
6A
N
m ;
�r
,JAS �rY
J
k 1'
&A
b i