Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-07-2016 ARC Agenda Correspondence - Item 2 (Hoffman)Chairman Greg Wynn. Vice -Chair Suzan Ehdaie, Paricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Amy Nemcik, Alan Root and Angela Soll RE: 48 Buena Vista Ave - March 7 Hearing While reading the General Plan and the Community Design Guidelines, I found some important and valid reasons why the proposed structure on Buena Vista Ave. should be either denied or modified to conform to those standards. To Quote: "Guidelines that contain the word "SHOULD"... means... "WILL" BE FOLLOWED, "unless not doing so will result in better implementation of other guidelines or General Plan polices" 1- "no parcel shall be CREATED with an overall average slope of 30% or greater." This lot, with an of an average 45% slope, if designed today, could not be legally built upon. 2 - The current policy states that a building site must have at least 5,000 square feet of of natural slope of no more than 10%slope. 3 - This site is adjacent to a designated open space and should be added to that existing space due to the wildlife corridor it invades between Loomis Park and the surrounding hills 4 - This site is in a critical wildfire zone and all vegetation must be removed from around the building for 60'. 5 - There are driveway drainage concerns as Buena Vista has 12" curbs to try to control the excessive amount of run-off on that street. Design Concerns: - The proposed building has a deck covering the roof to be used for recreation. This is level with the street with an elevator shaft and fencing protruding above it. This will be a major source of noise and light pollution to the neighborhood. Also, It will be subject to the 50-60 MPH winds that regularly come down from Cuesta Grade. This deck should be eliminated! - The flat, unadorned roof adds nothing to the design of the building. It looks like a wooden box. - The size of the Building is a concern due to the inclusion of a Secondary Dwelling Unit. This would mean another family, more cars and traffic on the this narrow, fire lane street. Eliminating this extra unit would help bring the building into better conformity with the neighborhood. - This building, designed for family use, has two kitchens and two living rooms, but no designated dining area. - Because the lower level of this building has been removed, it leaves the building with an open space underneath with a look of being "up on stilts". Code states that these `stilts" should be limited to 6' whereas these are 13' high and are clearly visible from Highway 101.This would need another "exception". - All buildings should have their entrance clearly visible from the street.This entrance is on the side and downhill from the street. - The garage and driveway should not dominate the "look" of the building, which this one does. - The multi -faceted and multi -colored walls, with so many reflective windows and different materials, do not disguise the building from the freeway entrance to the city, but only make it more visible. Rather, a single earth tone or terra-cotta color might better blend it in with its surroundings. - Landscaping plans cannot be easily achieved within the 2 -year goal as requested, due to the shallow and poor soils. Additionally, the building must also have a defensible space around it in this fire -prone are. - Has the owner provided a concrete pad for trash and recycling area away from the street? Residential design should "preserve the traditional quality of the neighborhood. This building is far too contemporary to fit in. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT - "Each structure shall be located on the most accessible, least visually prominent and most geologically stable portion of the site". This might indicate that in spite of the added expense, the Loomis St. site is the least intrusive and the most logical site for the building. - This site is on a scenically sensitive site, as defined by the General Plan, "that must be protected". SUMMARY: Even though the applicant has a legal right to build on this site it does not mean that this ecologically and visually sensitive site SHOULD be developed. If, by modifying the design, it might be possible to make this project more acceptable and to conform to the General Plan and the Community Design Guidelines, it still comes down to what will be the best use for this sensitive hillside site. My choice would be to add this lot and the adjoining one to the City's open space, a gift to the whole community Thank You for your time and attention.