HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-07-2016 ARC Agenda Correspondence - Item 2 (Hoffman)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.