Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-26-2017 PC Correspondence - Item 2 (Cooper)Assuming that discussion of building heights is “still on the table”, Save Our Downtown is recommending that you give serious consideration to scaling back even further the heights recommended in this revised concept plan. The block descriptions keyed to the “Downtown Concept Plan Illustrative” recommend 3-4 story buildings on 10 blocks (blocks 15, 16, 18, 24, 25, 28, 29, 34, 35 and 46) and “landmark” buildings along Santa Rosa street that would presumably exceed 4 stories (block 23). Five of these blocks are located outside the Downtown Historic District east of Santa Rosa (blocks 15, 16, 24, 25 and 35). What is disconcerting is that two of these blocks (blocks 29 and 46) are located within the Historic District. And two of these blocks (blocks 18 & 28) flank historic properties such as the Jack House and the Creamery. Besides our concerns regarding building heights we would like to comment on the following excerpts from this draft plan. “North downtown will feature a variety of design styles in contrast to the historic downtown core, which is more traditional in architectural style.”  Comment: By referencing “The MIX” (1308 Monterey Street) as a prototype for this neighborhood, there is an implication that the concept of “contextual design” will be waived. Are we, by implication, waiving the City’s Community Design Guidelines which call for compatible design throughout the City? “Marsh and Higuera will have more intensive development near Santa Rosa, which will gradually lessen as it approaches Pepper Street to respect the adjacent neighborhoods.” Comment: The two block long neighborhoods along Marsh and Higuera Streets between Toro and Pepper Streets are predominantly one story bungalows. Extending more intensive development through to Pepper Street will result in the unfortunate alteration or demolition of these historical bungalows. We believe that this more intensive development should extend along Marsh and Higuera no further than Toro Street. “A new County office building with parking and active fronting retail is envisioned on Block 15; it will have the potential to house a “one stop” counter for County services. Block 23 is envisioned as the home to a new transit center. Block 23 will also include structured public parking, iconic mixed-use buildings, and rooftop public open space.” Comment: The transit center should instead be on the west side of Santa Rosa Street because Santa Rosa Street will remain a formidable pedestrian barrier to the Downtown Core. “On the corner of Higuera and Nipomo Streets, a new plaza provides casual outdoor seating, gathering, and playing opportunities.” Comment: This site along Higuera Street should not be left open as a plaza but should be infilled with retail so as to not interrupt pedestrian retail continuity. “Focus attention on the downtown’s gateways through landmark buildings, public art, and public spaces that announce your arrival into downtown.” “Block 23: New landmark buildings envisioned along Santa Rosa Street, opening one to corner plazas with public art and mid-block paseo.”  Comment: If this report means that “landmark” buildings will be seven stories tall, then there should not be any “landmark” buildings downtown. Rebecca Gershow stated at the April 17th meeting that “landmark” buildings are not necessarily tall. Therefore, there needs to be a more definitive description of what “landmark” means. We fully endorse the following excerpts from this draft plan. “The intersections of Monterey at Santa Rosa and Higuera incorporate public art and scramble intersections, allowing improved bicycle and pedestrian connections across the busy street.” “A new park on the corner of Monterey and Broad Streets celebrates local history while connecting to the Creek Walk and Mission Plaza.” “Cheng Park is expanded.”  “The city should build on downtown’s relatively good walkability by carefully creating an even more human-centric, convivial design and atmosphere. Park-lets and bike corrals should be added where there is support  from a majority the businesses on the respective block. Curb extensions should be a priority to enhance pedestrian safety and comfort  (bonus if they also provide stormwater filtration).” We are asking you to revisit the photographic illustrations included in this draft concept plan. At the first Public Workshop, there were a higher concentration of "sad faces" placed on the Government Center building on the corner of Santa Rosa and Monterey. Yet all of the photographic illustrations included in this latest draft report show buildings similar in appearance to the Government Center with scarcely any step backs above the 2nd or 3rd floor.  In conclusion, we also need to address issues and design features that are missing from this draft report:  ◦underpass/overpass improvements ◦suggested ideas for paving patterns ◦a planting concept plan ◦landscape devices to buffer winds ◦identify areas requiring more night lighting ◦an art in public places masterplan linked to major pedestrian paths ◦specific location of pedestrian islands ◦specific location of more mid-block crosswalks ◦specific location of widened sidewalks by virtue of removing on street parking ◦specific location of intersection bulb-outs ◦specific location of pedestrian pick-up and drop-off areas  Thank you! ______________________________________________________________ Broad Based Public Engagement - Height Discussions Stakeholder Focus Groups (48 participants) Stakeholders expressed the most disagreement about building heights. Out of 48 participants, 5 dots were placed on keeping heights as they are and 5 dots were placed on increasing heights. I should hardly think that this represents a mandate for increasing building heights (which the latest draft report recommends) Public Workshop 1 (75 participants) Map 2: What I like and What I’d Change “in general, the higher concentration of sad faces were placed on…County Building…” Public Workshop 2 (110 participants) Small Group Exercise Summaries by Group Green Group The group generally agreed that heights should stay as they are through much of the study area, with an interest in maintaining the current look and feel of central downtown. Red Group Most people felt comfortable with the maximum heights as they currently are (3 stories in the core (most historic) district. Black Group With regard to height and massing, the group decided to keep the scale as is in the downtown core and the SW area. White Group Solar orientation was very important to the group and they generally felt that the existing setting …should be the primary factors evaluated when determining building heights and massing. Blue Group For height and massing, the group felt that there should be no change to the scale of development in the core or center of downtown to better maintain view sheds Yellow Group In general, the group was supportive of buildings that stepped back at the upper stories. Overflow Group Generally speaking, they do not want to see increases in height behind the current condition in downtown. Online Survey (393 responses) What do you like most about Downtown SLO? Top reply: 19%: Look/Feel Neighborhood Meetings (35 downtown residents) Height, Massing and Intensity of Development Meeting participants broadly supported limitations on new building height. A few discussed negative impacts of development on our environment and noise impacts in neighborhoods.