HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-12-2017 Item 1, LopesCOUNCIL MEETING: y- IZ -/;Z RECEIVED
ITEM NO.:
From: James Lopes [ L_S�=Q C- 11Y (�LERK
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 12:44 PM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>; Advisory Bodies <advisorybodies@slocity.org>; CityClerk
<CityClerk@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Davidson, Doug <ddavidson @slocity.org>
Subject: Joint April 12 City Council -Planning Commission session - Zoning Regulations Update
Dear City Council and Planning Commission:
The Zoning Regulations Update will open discussion about the ways to "fit" tall buildings, mixed use projects
and apartment projects next to residences and commercial buildings. It is headed to be piecemeal and
unfortunately, not done in an integrative manner, unless explicit direction is given by you to "solve" the woes
which are now being created continuously upon residents near these kinds of projects. Over -building by using
numerous "exceptions" such as under -parking, is a sign that a community is not caring enough to protect the
environment in adjacent development and its zoning. I ask you to require a holistic examination of the many
exceptions and allowances which undermine and even destroy the integrity of our Zoning Regulations.
It is apparent from the comments by development supporters and some council members, that many in San Luis
Obispo do not know or want to know about good urban design. It is a grievous fallacy to say those who want
you to follow sensible design guidelines are NIMBY's. As I am such a person, I ask you to identify how
housing and employment can feasibly be developed within this historic and evolving character we share, which
would be about contextual development, which again, "fits" within its surroundings. For this reason, I again
urge you to consider making the Community Design guidelines in their entirety, design standards. This is a
simple consideration which if enacted, will be effective and very useful to decision makers.
From a planner's perspective, a major task for a general plan update was not achieved in the LUCE update, and
the Zoning Regulations should accomplish this omission, to identify the areas zoned and planned for housing
and for employment, and to calculate the potential imbalance between them. A rezoning proposal should be the
major outcome, to redistribute these land uses in ways that reduce our transportation burden (especially on
Highway 101) and to catch up with seriously fast job growth, for which the city acquiesced and now promotes
fast housing development. Once again, I ask you to add a jobs -housing inventory of land planned for these
uses, and to engage a qualified planner to give you a jobs -housing balance report, accompanied with a strategic
plan for re -designating properties to and from commercial and residential, in order to achieve more of a balance
between areas planned for jobs and land planned for housing which employees could afford. This request
would actually open up discussion about whether single family housing is even desirable to allow, since it is
usually priced beyond the level of employee incomes in San Luis Obispo. It would re -open the discussion
about the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and other major developments. It would reveal the hubris and masochism
of trying to be the perennial commercial center of the county universe.
Lastly, I support the comments provided to you by Allan Cooper. His points are excellent regarding downtown,
particularly the need to transfer allowed heights beyond three stories out of downtown.
Sincerely,
James Lopes
James Lopes
San Luis Obispo, CA
Ph.