HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/26/2018 Item 2, Grady
Goodwin, Heather
From:John Grady <johngrady5@yahoo.com>
Sent:Friday,
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:Cultural Heritage Committee - Meeting 11/26/2019 - Agenda Item #2 - 1144 Chorro
Street
Dear Chairman Papp and Committee Members:
I regret that I am unable to attend your meeting on Nov. 26, 2018. Please consider my comments below in your
deliberations of item#2 - 1144 Chorro Street.
I cannot begin to express the depth of my opposition to this project's proposed 75 feet tall building in the heart of our
city's Downtown Historic District. It seems every developer for the past few years is not content with anything less than
the maximum 75 feet building height (and often more) that the city may allow. Just because something may be allowed
does not mean it should be allowed - or even considered. In this case, the fact that this lies in our city's downtown
Historic District must be a major consideration in your deliberations and directions to the applicant. More is not always
better when it comes to building height and mass. Nor is less always better when it comes to parking (as is also being
asked for).
Of utmost concern to me is the context of where this building would reside - immediately adjacent to the Master List
Historic Resource Hotel Wineman - and across the street and 1/2 block away from the Master List Masonic Temple and
the Master List Commercial Bank Building. It would tower above these historic buildings and completely dwarf the
adjacent California Pizza Kitchen and Downtown Center theater buildings. The Historic Wineman Hotel is, as you know,
only 47 feet tall. Other adjacent structures are a mere 30 feet (or less) in height.
City staff refers you to our City's Historical Preservation Guidelines that are to be the guidepost for such
developments.This document states, in Section 3.2.1:
"New structures in historic districts SHALL BE DESIGNED to be architecturally compatible with the district's prevailing
historic character as measured by their consistency with the scale, massing, (and) rhythm, ... of the district's historic
structures."
Clearly this proposed 75 feet tall building fails to comply with the above requirement - noting the use of the word "shall"
above. So this one sentence above is enough to deny any consideration of this project as proposed. Frankly, I am
insulted and you should be too that any developer or architectural firm would even propose such a project. It's as if they
failed to even read our Historic Preservation Guidelines, our Community Design Guidelines, and our General Plan Land
Use Policy! Perhaps the developer feels that since nearly every other project proposed over the past few years has
received height and massing exceptions they may as well try too. This time, however, the building is also in our
Downtown Historic District. It's time you put an end to this madness that's destroying our town's historic character and
just say NO.
Our Historical Preservation Guidelines continue in Sec. 3.2.2 (Architectural Compatibility) to state:
"New development should not sharply contrast with, significantly block public views of, or visually detract from, the
historic architectural character of historically designated structures located adjacent to the property to be developed, or
detract from the prevailing historic architectural character of the historic district."
1
This proposed project would violate all of the above principles! It would clearly block public views of the Historic
Wineman Hotel, towering above it, and it would definitely detract from the prevailing historic architectural character of
the historic district given its proposed height, mass, and scale. This is yet one more reason this project, as proposed, is a
non starter.
Our city's Community Design Guidelines in Chapter 4 - Downtown Design Guidelines state (Sec. 4.2.B):
"The height and scale of new buildings and alterations to existing buildings shall fit within the context and vertical scale
of existing development and provide human scale and proportion." ... and ...
"For new projects adjacent to buildings included on the City's Inventory of Historic Resources there SHALL BE a
heightened sensitivity to the mass and scale of the significant buildings."
Clearly the adjacent Historic Wineman Hotel trumps even the consideration of allowing a 75 feet tall building (or
anything close to this height) in this location. And clearly any 75 feet tall building (or in my opinion anything over 45
feet) would not fit within the context and vertical scale of existing development - as the CDGs cited above require.
Also in our Community Design Guidelines it states (Sec 1.4, Part A, #4):
"All development should be designed to accomplish the following ...
(4) Design with consideration of the site context in terms of the best nearby examples of massing, scale, and land uses
when the site is located in a notable area of the city (for example. the Downtown)."
Lastly, while I never expect to see anything on this site anywhere near this mass and height, how can a project of this
massive scale, which by city zoning regulations would require 93 parking spaces, ask for a variance to provide only 11
spaces? With two proposed stories of office space and two more stories of residential units, where are we to imagine all
these people will park their vehicles? A development of this scale should never be allowed a parking variance of this
magnitude. Even if the resulting structure is only two to three stories tall, I clearly see a need for far more than 11
parking spaces, particularly if residential units are part of the end result.
Please direct the applicant to go back to the drawing board and completely redesign this project. I expect that no
structure taller than the Historic Wineman Hotel would ever be considered for this site, and that any new structure here
will respect the Historic Wineman Hotel building and be at a lower height and smaller mass.
Finally, please don't fall prey to the old line I hear time after time from developers ... "but the project doesn't pencil out
if it's not this tall and massive." This is a specious argument! No one told the developer to buy the property nor ask
them to build the project presented. If a project does not comply with our City's Historic Preservation Guidelines,
Community Design Guidelines, and General Plan Land Use Policy and also 'pencil out' for the developer, then don't build
it! I'm certain countless developments could occur at this site, comply with our city's guidelines, respect the
surrounding historic buildings and district, and also make the developer a reasonable return on his or her investment.
Thank you.
John Grady
San Luis Obispo
2