Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-01-16 ARC Correspondence - Item 1 (Hunter)Lomeli, Monique Subject: ARC Communication From: John Logan Hunter [mailto: Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2016 1:03 PM To: Advisory Bodies <advisorybodies@slocity.org> Cc: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: ARC Communication Dear Members of the ARC - Meeting: ALOLLWO Item: I RECEIVED CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUG 01 2016 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I urge you to use your position on the Architectural Review Committee to seriously evaluate the proposed development at 71 Palomar and its obvious, and perhaps insurmountable, shortcomings. Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend Monday's meeting to discuss these concerns in person. It is no secret that our community has housing needs that must be addressed. However, I am distressed that the powers that be in our City seem to be willing to address our housing shortage and the needs of our future residents at the expense of our current residents. The proper way to address our housing needs is not to green light any project that comes before you simply for the promise of workforce or affordable housing. These projects are needed, however they must also fit in responsibly with the needs of our current residents and the character of our various neighborhoods. My concerns with the proposal at 71 Palomar are plenty. A plan that will require decimating dozens of beautiful, mature trees and moving the Sandford House should require extensive Environmental Review, far beyond what has been required of this project thus far. 71 Palomar, as proposed, does not include adequate parking on site. This impact on the neighborhood (and our City's current residents) should not be tolerated. In evaluating other projects, I have heard the ARC declare that zoning and density restrictions provide maximum and minimum allowable guidelines, not a guarantee that each project is entitled to those maximums allowed by the code. Because of this project's proposed impact, it in particular requires the ARC's critical consideration. Another recent discussion has been neighborhood compatibility. 71 Palomar may have the zoning to support the developer's plan, however this project, as designed, is clearly incompatible with its neighborhood and should not proceed as designed. Sincerely, Logan Hunter 1357 Phillips Lane, SLO