Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-2012 ac PH1 frederickson ph1• FREDERICKSON PICK,LLP 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 30 0 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805-541-4900 FAX 805 .617 .1827 AGEND A CORRESPONDENC E Date,8/7/i z,Item# FIB Mayor Jan Marx Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter Council Member Jon Ashbaug h Council Member Andrew Carte r Council Member Kathy Smith 990 Palm Stree t San Luis Obispo, California 9340 1 Re : The Icon at San Luis Obispo 1340 Taft Street, San Luis Obispo, Californi a Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Members : My office represents The Icon at San Luis Obispo, LLC, applicant and developer of the Projec t i dentified above . We have been retained to assist the Icon in responding to the pending ,appeal of the decision of the Architectural Review Committee (ARC), recommending approval of the Project to the City Planning Commission and the City Council . To that end, this letter is intended to provide you wit h an overview of the Project, its history, and the extensive steps taken by our client to respond to neighbo r concerns, while at the same time responding and rebutting the claims asserted in the respective appeals . Introductio n The matter is before the City Council upon the appeal by Isabel Marques and Residents for Qualit y Neighborhoods to the ARC decision of June 18, 2012, which approved the Project . The appellants have the burden to demonstrate to the City Council that the ARC decision was imprope r and not substantially supported by the facts . Backgroun d The background and previous reviews are fully described in the ARC Agenda Reports prepared for th e June 18, 2012 ARC meeting, which is incorporated herein by reference . ROGER B . FREDERICKSON MICHAEL R. PICK JR . ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK.COM MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK.COM August 2, 201 2 **Hand delivered** FREDERICKSON PICK,LLP • 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 30 0 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805.541'4900 FAX 805 .617'182 7 Summary of Pertinent Fact s ■The location of the Project is an abandoned gas station that has remained vacant, unuse d (except by the homeless) and in deterioration since 2005, which is a blight on th e neighborhood . ■The Project is consistent with City general plan, which seeks high density, mixed use housin g in the urban core that incorporates much needed affordable units . ■During the past four years, the Project has been modified several times in response t o neighborhood concerns, and not only meets, but significantly exceeds the zoning, planning and building requirements for this location. ■The location is zoned Neighborhood-Commercial (C-N), not Residential, as contended by th e appellants : ■The Project is adjacent to and across the street from commercial developments, within 10 0 yards of United States Highway 101, California Avenue, and bordered to the north and wes t by a residential neighborhood that has largely been converted to rental units, and is within a block and a half of two apartment complexes, each of which is in excess of 30 units (1371 an d 1400 Strafford, the Stafford Garden and Las Casitas Apartment Complexes). ■The following addresses, which surround appellant Marques' property are all converted renta l properties : 1226 A, B, and C, 128 A, B, and C, 1238, 1254, 1256, 1361, 1365, 1366, 136 9 •Strafford Street and 501 ½, 510, 525, 526, 547 Kentucky Street . ■The Project is entirely consistent with two other projects previously approved by and buil t within the City: 225 North Chorro Street and 499 Chorro Street . Project Changes in Response to Public and Staff Comment s In response to public and staff comments, the Project, which is in its third iteration, has bee n substantially redesigned as follows : Grading related to parking : First Design (10-2-2009) Approximately 8,500 cu .yds . Second Design (8-31-2010) Approximately 4,800 cu .yds . Current Design (1-6-2012) Approximately 1,110 cu . yds . Site Coverag e First Design (10-2-2009) Approximately 82 % Second Design (8-31-2010) Approximately 82 % Current Design (1-6-2012) Approximately 51% (a 38% reduction in sit e coverage ) • ROGER B, FREDERICKSON MICHAEL R . PICK JR. ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM 40 FREDERICKSON PICK, LLP 755 SANTA ROSA STREET,SUITE 30 0 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 8o5.54I .49 00 • FAX 805-617-182 7 Density First Design (10-2-2009 ) Second Design (8-31-2010 ) Current Design (1-6-2012 ) Total Floor Are a First Design (10-2-2009 ) Second Design (8-31-2010 ) Current Design (1-6-2012) 20 units, 53 bedroom s 16 units, 41 bedroom s 7 units, 14 bedroom s 28,530 S F 23,828 S F 14,614 SF (40,000 SF allowed ) ■Current design fully complies with setbacks, building height requirements of the CN Zon e (Prior designs required setback variances). ■Per public comment, there are no balconies facing the residential neighbors north of th e Project site . • Further Project Changes following ARC Approva l Following the ARC approval, at substantial expense to Icon, the following further changes wer e incorporated in response to neighborhood concerns about access from the alley, and setback from thei r residences : ■. ■ As approved : As revised : Size reduction : 3,576 S F 3,043 .4 S F 532 .6 SF (15 % reduction ) ■Unit B-106 : 1,620 S F■As approved : ■As revised :1,495 S F ■Size reduction :125 SF (8% reduction ) ■Commercial Retail 3,900 S F■As approved : ■As revised :3,149 S F Size reduction :751 SF (19% reduction ) ■ Amenity Space : 1,320 S F■As approved : ROGER B. FREDERICKSO N ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK.COM MICHAEL R . PICK JR. MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM FREDERICKSON PICK,LLP • 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 30 0 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805-54 1 .49 00 FAx 805.617 .182 7 ■As revised :727 S F ■Size reduction :593 SF (45% reduction ) ■Setback at Alley 30'-0"■As approved : ■As revised :42'-7" ■Increase of 12'-7"(42% increase in setback ) ■Site coverage : ■As approved : (48%) ■As revised :(43%) ■Change : (10 % reduction in site coverage ) Project Changes in Direct Response to Appellant Concern s Icon has made the following changes to the Project in direct response to concerns raised by the appellan t parties : ▪Increased the retail and residential parking, which is now 30% greater than that required b y code, as the Project is not requesting application of mixed use parking reductions and as such i s very responsive to neighbors that expressed concern about impact the Project would have o n street parking . ■Significantly reduced the overall size of the Project, removing one entire floor, and breaking u p the building significantl y ■Substantially increased the set back from the alley bordering the residential properties to th e nort h ■Revised the parking design to eliminate the use of the alley as an access poin t ■Incorporated a retaining wall to separate the Project from the alle y ■Removed all north facing balconies . ■Eliminated all significant windows facing to the north . ■Incorporated an automated parking system to increase onsite parking, eliminating the an y potential impact to off-site parking . The system incorporates the following : ■The entire parking for the residential is "private" and that there would be a control gate an d signage . ■This system is a "fully independent parking system". No one is ever required to back a car ou t of a space in order to park the second car . The following link provides an animated vide o showing how the system operates . http ://www .parklift .com/Independent-Access-Parkers - product .php?product_id=1 6 ■The system is design to accommodate 2 full length vehicles for each townhouse unit . The lowe r space is capable of parking an oversized SUV . ■The Project will have both signage and a control gate to prevent non-residents from entering th e basement parking area . ROGER B . FREDERICKSON MICHAEL R . PICK JR. ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK .CO M • • FREDERICKSON PICK,LLP 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 30 0 SAN LUIs OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805.541-4900 ' FAX 805-617 .182 7 ■The Independent Parking System is consistent with the "sustainable policies" encouraged b y the City of San Luis Obisp o ■The system has a significantly reduced carbon footprint when compared to more conventiona l subterranean parking garages . ■The system significantly reduces the amount of excavation per parking space which in tur n reduces the amount of excavation material that needs to be transported off site and significantl y reduces construction impacts to immediate neighborhood . ■The U . S . Green Building Council recognizes the environmental befits of the automatic parkin g system with regard to LEED credits that can go towards certification (see attached Whit e Paper). ■ The small number of units (now 5 townhomes) utilizing the automated parking system result i n a very manageable situation in terms of assignment of spaces and restricting each unit to a single oversized SUV . In general, sustainable planning practices support planning solution s that encourage more energy efficient vehicles . ■Substantially reduced the size of the community room . In addition, in response to the City's request, Icon has voluntarily increased the affordable unit in th e Project to a two bedroom unit from a required studio . Comparable City Project s The following comparable Projects have been previously approved by the City (and are now built), ar e greater in size, have great parking needs, incorporate interior dens and living spaces larger than thos e sought in this Project, and were permitted without the restrictions now being imposed on this Project : 1 . 225 North Chorro Stree t In August 2007,a developer began the entitlement process for a high density infill 12 unit residentia l Project located at 225 North Chorro Street (135-07). The initial planning application was for a 12 uni t residential development located in a 21,854 square foot vacant lot surrounded by multi-famil y developments and commercial buildings in an area where many students reside due to the proximity to the Highland Drive entrance to Cal Poly . The Project contained two separate buildings, each with si x units ranging from 1,287 to 1,384 square feet . The Project required ARC, PC and City Council approval . By November 2007, City Staff had completed the Environmental Review and determined that th e Project was entitled to a negative declaration under CEQA . To the extent economically and commercially possible, significantly redesigned the interior of each uni t to address appellant concerns that the internal areas (dens) of the units might be converted into a thir d bedroom . ROGER B. FREDERICKSO N ROGER C© FREDERICKSONPICK .COM MICHAEL R. PICK JR. MICHAEL C© FREDERICKSONPICK.COM • FREDERICKSON PICK,LLP 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 300 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805-541'4900 FAX 805'617'182 7 By December 2007, City Staff recommended to the ARC that the Project be approved with no majo r modifications . At the December 3, 2007 ARC hearing a neighbor expressed concerns over increase s traffic and students being attracted . In a perfunctory manner, on December 3, 2007, the ARC approved the Project with no substantia l modifications, changes or conditions required prior to ARC approval . On December 12, 2007, the PC approved the negative declaration and recommended that that vestin g tentative map be approved by the City Council . One slight modification of the Project was mad e regarding a motorcycle parking spot . On the same date, the Project was in front of the City Council an d was tentatively approved . By January 22, 2008, the Project was completely approved by the ARC, PC and the City Council , approximately six months from the time the Project's first application was submitted . No majo r substantive changes to the Project were ever required . 2. 499 Chorro Stree t .In November 2005, a developer began the entitlement process for the development of a seven uni t condominium unit development located at 499 Chorro Street (#207-05). The initial planning applicatio n was for a seven unit residential development located on a 14,625 square foot corner lot in an R-4 zon e predominant with apartment buildings . At the June 5, 2006 ARC hearing the ARC approved the Project as a six unit development . On June 28, 2006, the Project was in front of the PC and the PC approved the tentative tract map an d supported the negative declaration with mitigation measures in place . On August 1, 2006, a mitigated negative declaration and tentative tract map was approved by the Cit y Council providing the Project its full entitlements a little over 10 months since the application for th e Project was submitted with only one substantial modification (the loss of one residential unit). Response to and Rebuttal of Appellant Claim s Ms . Marquez contends that the ARC "did not completely consider the negative impacts such as th e building height, the den/study becoming a bedroom and the alley traffic impact ." The Residents for Quality Neighborhoods ("RQN"), which does not identify its members, whil e conceding that the Project "has been scaled down considerably since it was heard by the Plannin g Commission and now meets maximum height and minimum development standards," contends that th e *Project "remains too large for the area, is incompatible with the neighborhood, which it claims consist s ROGER B. FREDERICKSON MICHAEL R. PICK JR. ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM FREDERICKSON PICK, LL P 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 30 0 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805 .541-4900 • FAX 805 .617 .1827 primarily of single story homes, and that the ARC decision failed to adequately consider the impacts ,the Project would have on ingress/egress, parking and noise . This group also contends that the Project is inconsistent with Community Design Guidelines, specifi c zoning requirements in the Municipal Code and applicable General Plan goals and policies, includin g Land Use Elements 2 .2 .10 and 2.2.12 . These claims are completely without support, inaccurate, and completely ignore the fact that the Projec t not only meets, but exceeds the zoning, planning and building requirements for this location . Contrary to the appellant's vague claims, the Project is entirely consistent with the City's Communit y Design Guidelines, specific zoning requirements in the Municipal Code and applicable General Pla n goals and policies, including Land Use Elements 2 .2 .10 and 2 .2 .12 .Contrary to RQN's claim, the AR C decision fully addressed the Project's impact upon ingress/egress, parking and noise . Prior to ARC approval, the Project had been fully examined by the City Planning Department, whic h found that the Project "was in substantial compliance with property development standards of the C-N zone ." (See page 3 of ARC Commission Agenda Report for meeting of June 18, 2012). Moreover, th e Project was substantially revised to address the density and parking concerns raised by the City Plannin g Department in its Agenda Report of February 13,2012 . As it stands, the Project not only meets, but exceeds the zoning, planning and building requirements for this location . The Appellants provide no specific indication of what part of the Project is in non - compliance, nor do they articulate what specifically was ignored or overlooked by the ARC . Moreover , the appellant's fail to identify any specific aspect of the ARC decision or findings that was improper o r not substantially supported by the facts . Absent such detail, it is difficult, if not impossible to respond o r rebut the allegations made in the appeal . It should be noted that on a number of occasions, our client met personally with some of the residentia l neighbors to the north of the Project, including, Ms . Marquez . Only Ms . Marquez expressed an y significant objection to the Project, with the other neighbors finding it to be a favorable improvement t o the location . During one such discussion with Ms . Marquez and a member of the RQN, they both admitted that in addition to their current residences, they own other properties in San Luis Obispo , which they currently rent out to students . Ms . Marquez also candidly admitted that when she move s from her current residence, she would also rent that out or sell it to someone who also would . It i s important to note that Ms . Marquez has vocally and overtly stated to my client and the City that sh e simply wants nothing developed there as she likes the site as is and certainly does not want any student s as neighbors . ROGER B . FREDERICKSON MICHAEL R . PICK JR. ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM • • FREDERICKSON PICK,LLP 755 SANTA ROSA STREET, SUITE 300 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 9340 1 PHONE 805 .541 .4900 FAX 805.617 .182 7 Attached are four letters from San Luis Obispo residents in support of the Project, including one from a neighbor who originally opposed the Project and is now in support following the multitude o f concessions our client has made . The Council should not overlook the fact that this is exactly the type of Project it and City leaders hav e been attempting to encourage with the City : mixed use, high density, urban infill, environmentall y sustainable . The Project as approved not only meets the goals of the City, but will make a very positive statement to anyone exiting southbound Highway 101 at California Street when entering the City . With regard to the claim that the Project will have a negative impact on local traffic, the appellants seem t o forget that the prior use of this location (which had been approved by the City) was a gasoline service station, a use that resulted in the highest traffic impact possible for this site . At considerable expense, our client has made all possible revisions to this project, which is now in it s fourth iteration, over the span of four years, to bring this Project to fruition, it should be permitted t o proceed with its development . Accordingly, the appeals of the ARC decision should be rejected . Finally, the Council must remain aware of the economic consequences to the City if this Project i s forced to go through the ARC approval process once again . Hundreds of jobs will be created by thi s Project, all of which are awaiting final City approval and permits . Those jobs support hundreds o f families, provide much needed commerce to the City, and, if delayed again, will only add to th e economic distress of a building industry in its attempts to recover from the Great Recession . Please let me know whether there is any more information I can provide . Thank you for you r consideration . Roger Frederickso n RBF/sp Enclosures cc : Client (by electronic and regular mail w/ enclosures ) J . Christine Dietrick, San Luis Obispo City Attorney (hand delivered w/ enclosures) MICHAEL R . PICK JR . ROGER @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM MICHAEL @ FREDERICKSONPICK .COM ROGER B. FREDERICKSON March 2, 201 2 Architectural Review Commissio n 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 Dear Commissioners , I had the opportunity to review The Icon SLO project and feel compelled to write in support o f this development . Transforming that ugly lot into a clean, modern looking mixed use building i s very exciting . This lot has been sitting vacant and frankly has been an eyesore for the locals . The ground floor retail will create new opportunities for small businesses close to town withou t paying downtown rents . Icon will also contribute to the growing demand for new and wel l managed housing in close proximity to Cal Poly . In every way, this building will contribute to th e economic growth and higher quality of living in SLO . This particular area of town is in real nee d of a mixed-use project like this . I would like to express my strong support for The Icon SLO project . Sincerely, City of San Luis Obisp o Community Development Department 919 Palm Stree t San Luis Obispo,CA 9340 1 RE : Kentucky & Taft Mixed-Use Projec t 1340 Taft Street, San Luis Obisp o File #:ARC50-0 9 June 18, 201 2 Dear Members of the Architectural Review Commission , I have followed this project for some time but unfortunately am unable to attend tonight's meeting . I would like to express my appreciation to the commissioners for their diligence in reviewing thi s project and responding to public comments and concerns . It is a very delicate balance between meeting public and applicant needs . I also appreciate the applicant's willingness to adapt to th e commissioners' suggestions and recommendations . As it was discussed at the last meeting, n o project is ever perfect but this one will hopefully be a nice addition to the neighborhood an d respond to the needs of the community . Thank you for your time , Ellen Goodwin Architect, LEEP AP BD + C March 3, 201 2 Architectural Review Commissio n 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 Dear Commissioners , After seeing the vacant gas station site for years, it is refreshing to see a proposed developmen t that is consistent with the neighborhood and surrounding businesses . The proposed mixed-us e development will support the growing need for housing, affordable housing, and retail near th e Cal Poly campus . I would like to express my support for The Icon SLO project . Chad Engeiskirger 1 •March 2, 201 2 Architectural Review Commission 990 Palm Stree t San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 Dear Commissioners , As a Cal Poly graduate and current resident, I am amazed at the amount of time that this site has sa t idle at an important gateway to Cal Poly and downtown . As someone who loves living here, i have followed the history of this site and development (I have spoken in support at the last Commission Hearing) and am angered by the fact that a few neighbor s can affect the policies of the City and delay the much needed development and improvement of thi s site that will offer an affordable unit as well as great retail and new housing . Hopefully, it will also inspire other landowners in the area to invest in the community and improve or redevelop thei r properties . While the initial designs may have been aggressive, this current design is tasteful, stylish, compatibl e with the neighborhood and surrounding buildings, and, is EXACTLY what we need there . We to let developers develop especially after making enormous concessions based on th e con n ity and Commission's request . This is a great project and it's time for it to be approved .