HomeMy WebLinkAboutARC Correspondence - TBD (Leopold)Lomeli, Monique
Subject: Serra Meadows Affordable Housing RECEIVED
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Meeting: RC T 17 JUL 13 2016
From: Jackie Leopold [
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 8:36 PM Item: `fi S D COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
To: Advisory Bodies
Subject: Serra Meadows Affordable Housing
Hi ARC Members,
My husband and I are closing escrow soon on a home in Serra Meadows and wanted to bring the attached letter and photos to your attention.
We also mailed you copies a few months back.
We look forward to the project as our neighbor and hope it is planned and executed in a manner that is respectful and cohesive with our home
as well as our neighbors'. We also have a petition going that outlines what we see as minor changes to the initial plans in order for all to be
happy with the outcome (link below).
We thank you very much for your time.
Respectfully yours,
Ian & Jackie Leopold
Petition: ht!p://www.ipetitions.com/petitionlserra-meadows-affordable-housing-amendments
07/11/2016
Dear Serra Meadows Neighbor—
This letter is not intended to question the appropriateness or need for low-cost public housing —
the purpose of this letter is to bring the proposed design of the Serra Meadows subsidized
housing project to the attention of adjoining homeowners.
The San Luis Obispo City Architectural Review Commission (ARC) recently reviewed the Serra
Meadows Public Housing project, which is to be constructed on a manufactured building pad — a
"plateau" — overlooking the Serra Meadows neighborhood. The Commissioners appeared to
"approve in concept" the 36 -unit apartment project. However, more than one Commissioner and
members of the public (from the neighborhood) made the following observations:
• The subsidized public housing should be better integrated into the neighborhood in order
to minimize visual impacts. The Commissioners did not want four large, three-story
apartment buildings to "dominate" the neighborhood. One Commissioner commented
that she did not want the complex to look like "Hearst Castle on the hill" overlooking
Serra Meadows. Unfortunately, as proposed, the top of the proposed building will tower
approximately 50' above the elevation of Plum Street.
■ There is minimal on-site parking for residents and their guests. The proposed plan for the
entire 36 -unit apartment complex included only one on-site parking space for each
apartment unit, and only 3 parking spaces for guests. "Spillover parking" into the
existing neighborhood will be a significant problem. A slight reduction in the number of
apartment units would allow more on-site parking for the apartment residents and their
guests — resulting in a lesser impact on the street parking in the surrounding
neighborhood. The proposed plan also did not include an on-site area for children to play,
nor did it include any outdoor bicycle racks.
Curiously, however, at that same meeting the Commissioners apparently granted a tentative
"OK" to a 3 foot height extension (increasing overall height of each of the four buildings from
30 feet to 33 feet) and additionally granted an allowance for a very minimum building setback
(from the "top of bank") of only 10 feet — such a small setback will make the front of the
building appear even taller on the plateau, further contrasting it from the surrounding
neighborhood.
We hope all of the Commissioners will have a chance to visit the site.
As it stands, the "manufactured building pad" sits high above the neighborhood, with view
angles such that third -story windows will look directly down into the back yards of some Serra
Meadows homes. View sheds and the privacy of existing homes should be considered.
The four photographs (attached) demonstrate the height of the proposed three-story building,
contemplated to be constructed on top of the existing building pad with only a 10 foot building
setback. In fairness to those who purchased homes in Serra Meadows, the ARC and the City
Planning Commission should also consider the impact to the surrounding neighbors. The visual
impact can be mitigated by the following:
1. Increasing the building setback at the top of the bank from 10 foot to 20 foot.
2. The "front building" (located at the top of the bank, bordering Plum Street) could be
restricted to a two-story building, which would mitigate the visual impact from the
neighborhood below.
3. The landscaping plan for the banks located above Plum and Violet Streets need to be
developed in a manner that will truly mitigate the visual impact with appropriate trees, shrubs
and groundcover.
We also would like to note that in the photos enclosed, the 10 foot setback with poles is shown
from the top of the plateau, not 10 feet from the property line. If the exception were allowed and
the building was actually placed 10 feet from the property line, it would appear much closer and
higher than shown.
Again, we emphasize that we are all in support of this development and the need for affordable
housing within our community. We simply want to ensure the privacy, safety and cohesiveness
of this project with the already existing surrounding neighborhood. We are also expecting the
City to notify all people that are currently "vested" in their homes that are currently under
construction, within 300' but not yet closed escrow — this has been a problem, because the City
has not obtained their mailing addresses from the Developer, and yet these people deserve to be
informed.
Sincerely,
Ian & Jacqueline Leopold
Serra Meadows: The building site for four
buildings, each three-story, for 36 units of
public housing.
Only one on-site parking space per unit
I - _. 71 -'
17'
This photo was taken from the SFR
building pad, Lot #129, across the
street at approximately 9'above
Plum Street
Height of proposed
1 three-story building
d
r fd�
Holding a 33'tall pole located at the 10'
Aback from top of bank as the proposed
site of the front of the 33'tall building.
kv 7
-- lurn Street --
. q�
`4 -
..
77
�t
W' �,
+1. `� .
4y'
w max. {, .A_
-. ,.
..•kms y {
kv 7
-- lurn Street --
NOW
It-
-moi-- NMOW
"-"•. `_'.�- `-'"_�
Vq
Serra Meadows: view from ground level
building proposed at 33'in height.
AL
Wh
IAN
Lri7? ,,•
tl.
�
a
w
�
O
41
"
i
i
O
V
4t
V)
O
VI
Q)
Q)
V
Y I }• r�#�
+ ,�'
' Yrs' �_ �
J
1 1• �
I
�� .w
r
O
V
}
f
r'
r
IAN
Lri7? ,,•
�
a
w
�
O
41
"
i
i
O
V
4t
V)
O
VI
Q)
Q)
V
10
I
L
O
V