Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-07-2016 ARC Agenda Correspondence - Item 2 (Cochran)San Luis Obispo has been favored with a beautiful 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 resource. " The hill descending from Buena Vista Avenue to Loomis Street has long been recognized as a scenic asset, "The Gateway to San Luis Obispo", specifically because it forms the first view of the city seen by south -bound travelers on Highway 101: "...the S -Overlay is in place due to the visibility from Highway 101 and because of the sensitive nature of hillside development' The ARC was specifically charged' to consider the concerns of the prominence of the proposed structure as viewed from Highway 101, yet no change in this aspect has been instituted in the developer's plans. The developer continues to propose masking the building from 101 by the planting of oak trees, an approach professionally discredited: it would take 45 years for such trees to grow to the height of the building, and the soil will not support the growth of oaks.' The desirability of a distinct line between urban and non -urban development to mitigate against urban sprawl is illustrated at the beginning of Chapter 9 of the General Plan, and Buena Vista Avenue provides a text -book example of the concept. [Photos 2,3] Approving the applicant's permit would destroy forever these assets which add to the uniqueness and charm of the city. Once destroyed they can never be recovered. Photos 1, 2, &3] Il. Building on the Buena Vista site does not comply with the Community Design Guidelines. Consider Sections 7, 7.1.a.(1), 7.3, and 7.2.B.c: The guidelines [are intended to assist] by minimizing the visibility [of hillside development]. " "No parcel shall be created: (a) With an overall average slope of 30 percent or more. " "Each structure shall be located in the ... least visually prominent... portion of the site, and at the lowest feasible elevation. Siting structures in the least prominent locations is especially important on open hillsides where the visibility of structures should be minimized.... " The proposed structure will, if approved, be located in the most visually prominent portion of the site, and at the highest elevation. [Photo #11 III. Declining to approve the application for building on the designated site does not deprive the applicant of building on the lot. There is a viable alternate site' at 2390 Loomis Street, which is where the initial application specified the project would be built. The only justification for approving the permit is the desire of the developer, but there many reasons to deny it, not the least of which are the desires of residents. 1,2,3 The city has no compelling reason to favor the Buena Vista site. If the Loomis site is not viable the burden of proof is on the applicant, not on the city or its residents. If a record or deed indicates that access is to be provided from Buena Vista it should not be interpreted as requiring Buena Vista to provide the only access, or that construction is required there. If neither the Buena Vista nor the Loomis site is viable the city should initiate a study for possible purchase of the land and inclusion in the city open space. IV. The City Council Resolution No.10689 denied two requested exceptions6, yet the applicant has replaced them with two others of similar intent. This is unlikely to be satisfactory to the City Council, and should not be satisfactory here. If no proposal can be submitted which conforms to code then the proposal is inappropriate for the site. Ken Schwartz has written J have no sympathy for an individual who purchases a difficult site and then asks for relieffrom the strict interpretation of our code. "' SUMMARY Due to the convoluted history of this parcel and the (probably) intentional vagueness of some language in city documents, interpretation is inevitable. Obviously consideration must be given to possible legal actions. But a decision cannot be based on intimidation, it must be based on the interests of the city as expressed in the codes, regulations, and plans that have been developed through years of experience. If Buena Vista hill is the Gateway to the City, the city's Commissioners are the gate keepers. REFERENCES (available on request) 1. Memo to SLO Planning Commission from William Cochran, 9/18/15 2. Memo to the SLO Planning Commission from Linda White, co-chairman Monterey Heights Neighborhood Association, 9130/15 3. Letter to SLO Planning Commission from Kenneth Schwartz, 9/30/15 4. For example see File Number USE -1520-3015 (A), Administrative Hearing Agenda Report 5. See "OB SER VA TIONS COMPILED FROM THE PUBLIC RECORD" [ATTACHED] 6. City Council Resohition No. 10689 (2016 Series) 7. Greenvale Tree Company, Mr. Chris Stier, ISA Certified Arborist, #9262 OBSERVATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC RECORD: from the Sierra Club (1/5/16): We urge you to uphold the planning commission's denial of the project." (1/5/16) The ability to grant an exception should be based on an actual need ... [not on] a desire for a better view on the part of the applicant." (1/15/16) from Ken Schwartz, FAIR: I continue to urge you to reject this project...." (10/26/15) The applicant seeks to construct a resident that is simply out of scale for this location..." 10/26/15) encourage the developer to either reduce the scale of his proposed development to comply with existing city regulations without exceptions OR consider developing his project using the Loomis Street frontage." (10/26/15) I also urge you in the future to stop the procedure wherein City planning staff act as the developer's agent; this is an affront to existing residents." (10/26/15) I have no sympathy for an individual who purchases a difficult site and then asks for relief form the strict interpretation of our codes...." (9/30/15) The visual was sophomoric." [referring to staff investigation of safety] (9/30/15) lames lopes, AICA: The house at 48 Buena Vista Drive should be located adjacent to Loomis Street.... The requested exceptions should not be granted because the applicant does not have a hardship which prevents the development of a residence on the parcel. The use of exceptions in this case has exceeded the intent of the State's Variance law." (10/28/15) Michael Codron: City staff has reviewed the potential for access from Loomis Street, and while it may be possible, Loomis access would create a host of additional complications..." 1/14/16) ipy 4 )V .41.,F E