HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-22-2017 PC Correspondence - Item P1 (Mourenza)
Meeting: 2.2 Z • 1:- 96"
From:
Lydia Mourenza <
Sent:
Wednesday, February 22, 2017 9:31 AM Item:,__
To:
Advisory Bodies
Cc:
Davidson, Doug
Subject:
Planning Commission 2/22/17 item 1 please post
The State does not mandate that ADU's be owner occupied but allows that to be a condition. This appears positive to help
ensure neighborhood wellness, however is perhaps too restrictive as written. Allowance of a family member to occupy would
be more appropriate as the owner may wish to travel, become hospitalized or numerous other situations while the property
would remain their primary residence.
An additional question arises as to title of ownership, would property held in a Trust be ineligible?
The covenant Agreement 17.21 Ela is additionally troublesome, first with the use of the word "may" which is indefinite and
surely will lead to problems. The most troublesome issue is the annual inspection: of what? by whom? for what purpose?
What exactly is the result if the owner is unable to occupy? What is the violation and could this go against their estate in the
event of their death?
As an additional note, Policy 2 of appendix B, page 27 sets a goal for Cal Poly and Cuesta, rather than for the City.
Many Cities are instituting amnesty programs in conjunction with the new law, not sure whether or not that is something for
you to consider or a policy issue for City Council.
Thank you for considering these issues as you work out the details of Chapter 17,
Lydia & Bob Mourenza
Anholm, SLO
Sent from my iPad
RECEIVED
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FEB 2 2 2017
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT