Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/12/2018 Item 3, Walker From:Kathie Walker < To:Advisory Bodies; Bell, Kyle; Codron, Michael Subject:Planning Commission Agenda Correpondence: 12/12/2018,1267 Fredericks Street Attachments:Planning Commission Correpondence. use permit 1267 Fredericks.pdf; Fredericks Neighborhood Occupancy.pdf; Fredericks occupancy plan view.pdf; Hathway Alley 6.8.2015 pdf.pdf; Hathway Alley October 2014 - May 2015.pdf; Derek 5.2015 Hathway Alley.pdf; Derek response Hathway Alley.pdf; doug davidson 2014.pdf Please forward my correspondence immediately to the Planning Commission for the hearing on 12/12/2018. Thank you. Kathie Walker 1 1 Kathie Walker 1269 Fredericks Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 RE: Hearing 12/12/2018, Agenda Item 3: 1267 Fredericks Street High Occupancy Use Permit Dear Planning Commissioner Chair Fowler and Commissioners, My husband, Steve and I live at 1269 Fredericks Street with our two sons. We love our Alta Vista neighborhood and feel especially fortunate to own our home in San Luis Obispo. Our neighborhood is mostly comprised of single- story homes that were built in 1940-50. Some have been converted to duplexes while still maintaining the charm of a single family home. There are a few two story triplexes closer to Hathway Avenue, but overall, the homes in our neighborhood are unassuming single-story residences. Most are small with only 1- or 2- bedrooms, and the occupancy is correspondingly low. Two exceptions are the single-story 3-bedroom house across the street at 1270 Fredericks and the subject property next door at 1267 Fredericks. Both of these homes are occupied by four or five college students. Thankfully, we have great relationships with them as a result of a tremendous effort which is manageable with four, challenging with five, and impossible with seven. I will address my efforts further, below. Occupancy in Our Neighborhood Our neighborhood is mostly comprised of single-story bungalows. The Agenda Packet contains correspondence from a representative of the developer, Pamela Jardini of Planning Solutions, dated August 27, 2018, falsely represents that the property at 1251 Fredericks, directly to the west of the subject property at 1267 Fredericks, is “two separate 2-story buildings/apartments”. In fact, there are two adorable single-story bungalows that were built in 1940. Each has two dwellings: three 1-bedrooms and one 2-bedroom, which is occupied by the property owner. They are not 2-story residences and they are not apartments. None are occupied by college students. Further west, the next property (1241) is also a single-story single family residence that was built in 1951 and converted to a duplex while maintaining the look of a single family home. Each dwelling has two bedrooms and one bathroom, and each has two occupants. A two-story triplex is next, then another single-story single family residence. The opposite side of the street has similar dwellings with mostly small, single-story homes and a cluster of three triplexes closer to Hathway, followed by more single-story homes. The infamous “pink house” that attracted 3,000 party-goers on St. Patty’s day and resulted in a roof collapse is at the end of the block, on the corner of Fredericks and Hathway. The Campus Bottle liquor store is located across the street, where Fredericks dead ends into Hathway. From the subject property to the east toward Grand, most residences are single-story, single family homes and many are owner occupied. I have attached information regarding the surrounding residents and current occupancy for your information. 2009: Moving In and Improving Our Neighborhood Hathway Alley When we first moved into our home nine years ago, we felt as though our little pocket of the neighborhood had been forgotten and I worked especially hard to improve the standards and quality of life for everyone who lives nearby. Back then, Hathway Alley was a dumping ground for discarded junk. It was constantly littered with trash because each property’s trash bins were permanently stored in Hathway Alley which borders our property to the south. (See photos, attached) The bins were also a magnet for constant transient traffic that trolled the alley. We had several items stolen from the back of our property including a utility trailer, a friend’s motorcycle and a large stack of redwood lumber. 2 Over the course of six years, I corresponded with the City to request clean-up of Hathway Alley to no avail. In 2015, I was finally successful in having a new City policy implemented which eliminates trash pick-up in the alley. Now, trash pick-up occurs on the street, in front of each property and during the week, trash bin are stored behind each property’s fence and the alley is no longer littered. (Correspondence with Derek Johnson, attached) Additionally, the alley was not maintained and was filled with pot holes and crumbling asphalt. I continually lobbied the City for the alley to be paved and was finally successful in having that accomplished in 2016, after it was initially overlooked by the City’s pavement schedule Also, parking within the alley was a tremendous problem because cars double- and triple- parked. Sometimes egress along the alley was blocked completely. The garbage company was unable to pick up trash on a few occasions and also complained to the City. When the alley was finally paved in 2016, parking signs were added so the problem has been mostly rectified. During the school year, parking continues to be problematic but it is easier for the City to patrol with the new signage in place. Overall, it took seven years of frustration and consistent effort to get the City to make the necessary changes and it has greatly improved the quality of life in our neighborhood! My efforts were a labor of love and I am proud of my accomplishments. Parties and Noise The most challenging situation we faced after moving into our home was the noise generated from houses that are occupied by four or five young adults during the academic school year. Notably, many of our neighbors are not college students, and as noted above, most dwellings in our immediate vicinity are made up of 1- and 2- bedroom residences. That has been our saving grace as noise is not an issue from the smaller dwellings because there are fewer people living in each unit. There is a direct correlation between the number of persons under one roof and the noise generated from that dwelling. This is a key factor in limiting a single residence to five young adults. We are highly impacted by the residents at 1267 Fredericks Street due to the close proximity of our houses. Our bedrooms are located on the west side of our home which borders their property, and we can hear their conversations if our windows are open or we are outside. Sometimes I close my windows to avoid hearing personal cell phone conversations from their back deck. The young women who live there are lovely and I enjoy having them as neighbors, however things weren’t always so good. When we first moved into our house, there were five college students living in the home and it was an absolute nightmare. I described the untenable situation in correspondence with Doug Davidson. (Correspondence with Doug Davidson, attached) Parties were common at 1267 and 1270, which were usual pit stops for the parade of students that traverse up and down Fredericks during the weekend or other holidays like Cinco de Mayo. We witnessed young men fighting in front of our house, a young woman passed out on our driveway, and had our parked car hit by a drunk driver leaving a party next door. On one occasion, I was co nfronted with profanity by one of their intoxicated guests in our front yard. My children witnessed the situation as he told me to f --k off. On another occasion my children were jumping on a trampoline in our backyard during the afternoon while the tenants of the subject property and their guests were partying in th eir back yard. We heard them using offensive language including the ‘f--k ‘f-gg-t,’ and ‘n-gg-r.’ I told the tenants that kids can hear them and to watch their language. One guest responded, ‘F--k that!’ as the group laughed. On yet another occasion when a party was especially loud I called the police. An hour later, I found a large boulder had been moved from our yard into our driveway, blocking my ability to move my car. A police officer helpe d me move the boulder to enable me to back out. Empty cans, bottles and cups were thrown over the fence into our backyard and littered our front yard every week. 3 My husband is a first-responder EMS pilot based at Ft. Hunger Liggett and works 7 days on/7 days off. During the weeks that he was gone, I did not feel safe or secure in my own home. After the situation became intolerable, I contacted the property owner, Sanjay Ganpule. He was dismissive and referred me to his property manager. When I explained that he, as the property owner, is ultimately responsible for the behavior of the residents and he could face fines, he told me that he simply passes those fines onto his tenants. Dr. Ganpule had absolutely no care or compassion for our living situation. Clearly, the property is an investment for him and his concern is with the income generated, not the quality of life of the neighboring residents. Throughout the nine years we’ve lived here, that is the only conversation I have had with him. Building Relationships to Improve the Quality of Life in Our Neighborhood Upon realizing that it was up to me to improve the quality of our lives in the neighborhood, I began reaching out to the new students who moved into the houses at 1267 and 1270 each academic sch ool year. Often, I also meet their parents when they help their child move in. I get to know each student – their name, where they’re from, their major, and we exchange phone numbers. During the school year, I take them treats. When we’re out of town, they watch our pets. We invite them over for a barbeque, they invite us over for a small backyard get -togethers. It's a tremendous effort to build the relationships but is mostly manageable with four or five students who live in a neighboring house. However, allowing seven students in one house - and the corresponding noise related to the higher occupancy - will change the dynamic of the relationship we currently enjoy with our student neighbors. All of my hard work to improve the quality of life in our neigh borhood will be lost as we return to unmanageable chaos of activity and noise associated with a high population of college students under one roof. As we are forced to call the police for noise issues, discord and tension will follow. It is a set-up for disaster and I am disheartened by the prospect. I’d like to point out that throughout the years since we’ve moved in, noise in our neighborhood has significantly decreased. I am confident it is due to my efforts to build trusting relationships with the students who live in the more populated homes. During the three years prior to moving in, police responded to 25 incidents at 1267 Fredericks mostly for noise issues. I am unsure of the number of recent complaints but am certain it is close to zero because ou r student neighbors respect our boundaries and rarely have late-night parties. We no longer call the police because it will jeopardize the trusting, harmonious relationship we have with our neighbors. That dynamic would be shattered with seven college students occupying the house. High Occupancy Use Property investor Sanjay Ganpule owns the property at 1267 Fredericks and several other rental properties in our neighborhood. A few years ago he built a 6-bedroom house at 2008 McCollum, which is occupied by fraternity members. The noise and parties associated with that property has degraded the quality of life in the neighborhood and caused at least one family, Tom and Eve Neuhaus, to sell their property and move away. While it is apparent that more than five students occupy the house, City representatives such as Derek Johnson and Michael Codron, have explained that it is impossible to enforce the ‘five adult’ limitation if a lease only lists five people. Dr. Ganpule now seeks a High Occupancy Use Permit to allow occupancy of seven adults next door to us at 1267 Fredericks Street, presumably to capitalize on the monthly rental income generated by m ore students. The Use Permit disregards the current residents of our neighborhood and ignores the degradation of the quality of our lives. That is not consistent with the General Plan which has a stated goal to "Maintain, preserve and enhance the quality of neighborhoods, encourage neighborhood stability and owner occupancy, and improve neighborhood appearance, function and sense of community." 4 Approval of the Use Permit is in direct opposition to each and every of those listed goals and actually discour ages them. It isn’t possible to make the Findings that the Use Permit is consistent with this policy. The policies to enact the Goal include the mandate that development within established neighborhoods SHALL be of a character, size, density and quality that respects the neighborhood character and maintains the quality of life for existing and future residents (7.1). The policy also encourages programs and strategies that increase long- term residency and stabilization in neighborhoods (7.8). A High Occupancy Use Permit for the property does not maintain the quality of life for existing and future residents, but actually diminishes it. It does not encourage increasing long-term residency and stabilization. As evidenced as a common problem recently, long-term residents are selling their homes get away from the noise and activity related to college student occupancy. The media has covered the subject in numerous articles, including the an Editorial written by Tom Franciskovich of SLO Life Magazine, who moved from his SLO neighborhood because of noise from the high population of students. Approval of the High Occupancy Use Permit does not support the City Goals and Policies and will actually serve to frustrate them. It is impossible for the Planning Commission to make the following Finding: “2. The project is consistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.2.12 (Residential Project Objectives ) and Housing Element Policy 7.1 (Neighborhood Quality) because it is consistent with residential project objectives for conservation and development of residential neighborhoods as it maintains the character, size, density, parking and quality that preserves the neighborhood character and maintains the quality of life for existing and future residents.” Further, the neighborhood is mostly comprised of small dwellings with fewer than three people per unit. Seven adults under one roof is very different than two adults under four roofs, or seven adults living separately in seven studios. The cumulative effect of noise and activity associated with a greater number of people sharing one house is exponential. Density is good when managed correctly. Allowing seven college students to occupy one house is not “good” density, and it is not possible for the Planning commission to make the following Finding: “5. The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses that include existing apartment structures, properties with multiple units, and higher density uses existing in the neighborhood.” Finally, the City points out that the Use Permit is required to be reviewed annually and “violation of the performance standards shall be the basis for enforcement action, which MAY include revocation.” (Zoning Regulations 17.93, High Occupancy Residential Use Regulations). There is no reference to noise complaints or any consequences related to the disruption in a neighborhood. But even if there was a caveat for that, it is nonsensical to set up a situation that is going to negatively impact the neighborhood with the notion that it should be approved because it may be revoked if there are verified problems. By then, the relationship has b een destroyed between the student neighbors and other residents, and it sets up an adversarial relationship with our family and the property owner. It’s a recipe for disaster. Currently, many owner occupants across San Luis Obispo share a common complaint about disruptions and noise caused by students in their neighborhoods. Notably, those problems houses don’t have High Occupancy Use Permits. Thank you for hearing me out. Obviously, I am passionate about this subject because I have invested so much in attaining a better quality of life in our neighborhood which I have grown to love. Please reject the Findings proposed and deny the High Occupancy Use Permit for 1267 Fredericks Street. Sincerely, Kathie Walker Kathie Walker 1269 Fredericks Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 October 1, 2014 Doug Davidson, Director San Luis Obispo Community Development 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Alta Vista Neighborhood District 1267 Fredericks Street, San Luis Obispo Dear Mr. Davidson, I am writing to you regarding the proposed development at 1267 Fredericks Street and the Alta Vista Neighborhood District. My husband, Steve and I own and live the house at 1269 Fredericks Street, next door to the proposed development. I feel fortunate to have the opportunity to own a home in San Luis Obispo. I grew up spending summers at my grandparent’s creek-side house at 1333 Johnson Avenue, while my great-grandmother lived in the small house on the same property until she was 98 years old. My mother was raised here and met my father at Cal Poly in 1960. After I graduated from high school in the early 1980’s, I moved to San Luis Obispo to attend college and work. With strong family roots and wonderful memories, I consider San Luis Obispo to be my home. After moving away in the mid-1990’s I was able to return in 2006, eager to introduce Steve to my beloved hometown. In August 2009, we purchased our home at 1269 Fredericks Street, where we live with our two young sons. I am a stay-at-home mom and Steve is a commercial pilot. The small 2- bedroom house at the front of the property and smaller 1-bedroom cottage at the back of the property were student rentals for decades and had fallen into disrepair. But there is a lovely view of Cerro San Luis Mountain from the back deck and we saw the potential to make the house our family home. We were aware that the property is located near Cal Poly and were assured that our neighborhood includes college professors, retired folks, business professionals and students alike. We met a family with small children who was renting a house across the street from us, and a graduate student who was renting a small home next door to the east. We were informed that the large Victorian house next door to the west (1267 Fredericks) was owned by a family. We were excited to have the opportunity to own a home here in the Alta Vista Residential District of San Luis Obispo. After moving in, we began updating our property. We found ideal tenants, a professional couple who worked at Cal Poly and leased our back cottage to them. Once we moved into the 2-bedroom house we realized it was infested with rats so we removed the contaminated wall board and insulation. We found substantial damage in the small kitchen and ended up removing it completely. In the midst of renovations, Steve was catastrophically injured in an aviation accident. Injuries to his head, neck and spinal cord left him bed-ridden, unable to work. After his accident, our family’s focus shifted to surviving: Keeping our home, improving Steve’s health and providing some normalcy for our sons. Steve was treated at Stanford and after two years of intensive rehabilitative physical therapy he returned to work in 2012. However, a few months later his airline furloughed all of their pilots and went out of business. We had depleted our savings and accumulated substantial debt due to Steve’s unemployment and medical treatment. Fearing the possibility of losing our home, we made the difficult decision to file bankruptcy in 2013. Fortunately, Steve found employment with an Emergency Medical Services (EMS) operation based in El Paso, Texas in 2013. Prior to flying for the airlines he was an EMS helicopter pilot, so he was grateful for the opportunity to return to a rewarding profession. For the past year he has commuted between El Paso and San Luis Obispo whenever possible. In July 2014, he we was able to transfer to the EMS base at Ft. Hunter Liggett and works a 7-day on/7-day off schedule. So, after five long years, we are finally able to continue with our original plan to transform our neglected property into our family home. After moving into our house in 2009, it became apparent that we live on a street that is a hotbed of noisy student parties riddled with parking and traffic problems. The Victorian home next door at 1267 Fredericks was sold to a developer who rented it to five students. The family across the street moved out shortly after we moved in due to the noise in the neighborhood and the constant stream of speeding traffic. Fredericks Street provides the only thoroughfare between California Boulevard (via Hathway) and Grand Avenue, and cars travel at a high rate of speed along the stretch between Hathway and the top of the hill on Fredericks. Several animals have been hit and killed in front of our house including our own pet cat, Lily. We determined it was unsafe to allow our children to play near or cross Fredericks Street. Our tenants were harassed by transients in Hathway Alley who trespassed and slept on their deck, as well as a constant stream of people who rummage through the trash bins and dumpsters that line the alley. Unfortunately, Hathway Alley is exempt from the City’s trash container ordinance, so it provides a ripe opportunity for individuals collecting bottles and cans during all hours of the day and night. The alley is also dumping ground for discarded furniture, tires, and other junk. I attempted to work with the City’s Neighborhood Services to clean up the alley, but due to the constant turnover of the student population it was an exhausting and unsuccessful endeavor. I finally began cleaning up the alley myself, taking loads of junk to the dump with our utility trailer. A few months ago our utility trailer was stolen from our property. Aside from the theft of our trailer, we have had expensive patio furniture, bicycles, tools, and $3,000 worth of lumber stolen since we have lived here. None of the property was covered by insurance due to our deductible. Despite these hurdles, I have held onto the hope and belief that we will be able to enact change for the better in our neighborhood. I felt that I would have energy to devote to the cause once Steve was employed and our lives stabilized. For the most part, our neighbors have been great. Last October our family carved pumpkins on our front patio with a student neighbor who lived in the cottages next door to the east, at 1273 Fredericks Street. We appreciate that we have been able to establish open communication and mutual respect with most of the students who live in our immediate proximity over the years. However, we have also faced some fairly significant problems. I believe we are the only owner/occupants on our block. The professors and retired folks our Realtor spoke about when we purchased the property live a couple blocks away, mostly ‘up the hill’ in our Alta Vista neighborhood. In truth, those people would not tolerate the raucous parades of intoxicated students that invade our neighborhood each weekend. At times, it is surreal and resembles Bourbon Street in New Orleans. The police patrol the area but there is a complacency that comes with enforcing ‘the quiet enjoyment’ in our immediate neighborhood. It seems as though it is expected that the students will be partying and loud here, or perhaps it is due to the fact that nearly every property on the block is occupied by students so few calls are made to the police. In any case, not much is done to prevent the mobs that congregate on Fredericks between Kentucky and Hathway. I have called the police on some occasions and the dispatcher has told me that they are aware of the problems and are responding, yet the noise continues. We have resorted to running fans in both bedrooms at night to drown out the noise from the nearby parties that occur on most Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Inevitably, our front yard is littered with bottles, cans and cups every weekend. The property that has had the greatest impact on us is located next door at 1267 Fredericks Street: the 3-bedroom Victorian house that was sold to a developer shortly after we purchased our property. It has exclusively been a student rental since we have lived here, with 4 to 5 tenants occupying the residence at a time. Parties are common at the house and it is a usual pit stop for the parade of students that traverse up and down Fredericks during the weekend or other holidays like Cinco de Mayo. Steve and I have introduced ourselves to each group of students that move into the house with the hope that we can facilitate communication and cooperation. Due to the close proximity of our respective properties, noise is an issue. If we are outside or have the windows open, we can hear their conversations and I’m sure they can hear ours. We tolerate parties to an extent, but when they become excessively loud or profane we seek out one of the tenants and ask them to dial it down. On one occasion I was confronted with profanity by one of their intoxicated guests in the front yard. My children witnessed the situation as he told me to f--- off. On another occasion my children were jumping on a trampoline in our backyard during the afternoon while the tenants of the subject property and their guests were drinking in their back yard. My children and I heard them using offensive language including the ‘fuck,’ ‘faggot,’ and ‘nigger.’ I asked one of the tenants to be sensitive to the children and stop using such language. It only added fuel to the fire as one guest yelled ‘Fuck that!’ and the group laughed. I ended up taking my children and leaving our house for the rest of the day. On yet another occasion when a party was especially loud I called the police. An hour later, I found a large boulder had been moved from our yard into our driveway, blocking my ability to move my car. A police officer helped me move the boulder to enable me to back out. I finally decided to locate and contact the owner of the property. Ironically, he lives in a rural, quiet area in Templeton. I called him, introduced myself, and explained the problems we were facing with his property. He was brusque and unconcerned. I told him that he could potentially be liable for fines if his tenants were issued a noise violation citation. He said that he would simply pass the fine along to the tenants. He did not want to be bothered with the situation and directed me to contact his property manager. Last month a new batch of students moved into the house at 1267 Fredericks Street. During the first week of school they set up a barbeque pit in their front yard and hosted late night parties with dozens of students drinking in the front and back yards. We geared up for yet another year of acclimating to a new round of students in the house. On Saturday, September 27, 2014, we found a business card from Police Officer Adam Stahnke on the windshield of our vehicle, which was parked in front of our home. He wrote: “Someone hit your car last night. We caught them. Call our records dept. for the report.” (Attached) It turns out an intoxicated student hit our car then tried to evade the police and was caught. That same day we received a pink postcard from the City of San Luis Obispo which indicates that owner/developer of the house next door is seeking to expand the 4-bedroom house into a 7-bedroom house, with a variance “to allow a high-occupancy residential use for seven persons where otherwise a maximum of five persons is allowed, on a potentially-contributing historic property in the Medium Residential (R-2) zone, including a categorical exemption from California Environmental Quality Act.” My heart sank. Steve and I went to the City and a planner showed us the proposed house plans and elevations. We were stunned to see that the development includes a two-story addition to the back of the house that looks directly into our house and backyard. The addition also blocks our solar access from the west and directly blocks our view of Cerro San Luis Mountain, which is one of the primary reasons we decided to purchase our property. Allowing such an addition to an already enormous house strips us of any privacy whatsoever. We find this to be unacceptable. This is our home. We are not transitional tenants who can opt to move. We own and live in this property. We purchased it as our residence, to raise our children and retire here. Although our house is quite small, our ultimate goal is to create a home that encompasses the indoor/outdoor living afforded by the climate and lifestyle in San Luis Obispo. The proposed development of a mini-dorm next door robs us of our opportunity to do so. Further, it is not consistent with the City’s General Plan, the Community Development Guidelines or the City’s commitment to its citizens to promote neighborhood wellness. The San Luis Obispo City’s General Plan states: “New buildings will respect the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings.” (San Luis Obispo General Plan, Chapter 1 Land Use, Section 2.2.10 B. Privacy and Solar Access) The planner we spoke with at the City referred us to Kyle Bell, the planner who is presenting this project at the Administrative Hearing on Friday, October 3, 2014 at 2:30 p.m. Kyle was empathetic but told me that the developer is able to meet the parking requirements due to access from Hathway Alley which provides four additional spaces, as well as the other requirements necessary in order to have a variance granted. He also said that the City’s Community Development Guidelines are “objective and open to interpretation” leaving the possibility open that the project will be approved. Our conversation prompted me to do some research regarding our neighborhood. The former owners of our property at 1269 Fredericks Street lived in Rancho Palos Verdes, CA but their children attended Cal Poly. There were four students living on the property, including the owner’s child, before we purchased it. Records from the San Luis Obispo Police Department reveal the following: -Prior to the time we purchased the property at 1269 Fredericks Street, police responded to 22 incidents, mostly related to noisy parties. (Attachment) -Police have responded to 25 incidents at the subject property at 1267 Fredericks Street, mostly for noise issues. (Attachment) -A nearby residence at 1340 Fredericks Street has 5 bedrooms. Police have responded to 38 incidents at that property, mostly related to noisy parties. (Attachment) -Police have responded to 26 incidents in Hathway Alley, mostly related to parking problems or suspicious activity. (Attachment) It is difficult to imagine that these statistics would be acceptable anywhere. The proposed development to increase the size from four seven bedrooms, will only further these statistics and should be denied. Allowing a variance for occupancy greater than current regulation of five unrelated adults will increase the extensive problems and nuisances currently experienced in our already burdened neighborhood. The proposed development will diminish the comfort, quality and enjoyment of our lives and the neighborhood as a whole. Aside from the direct effect the development will have on us as owner/occupants of our property, it will set a precedent for other properties that back up to Hathway Alley. Many of those properties have the ability to provide additional parking by accessing the alley. Thus, each property owner is potentially able to obtain the same variance sought by the current developer. When one adds the number of available parking spaces in the front driveway to the additional parking spaces available by accessing the alley, it provides enough parking to “legally” allow seven bedrooms. The inference is made that one should then be allowed to increase their occupancies to a density higher (than regulatory limit of five unrelated adults per residence) because they have the extra parking spaces available. This conclusion is flawed and inconsistent with the reasoning behind the five adult per household limitation, which was enacted to control overpopulation of student rentals. The regulation limiting five unrelated adults per residence should be enforced and the extra parking provided by the alley should be celebrated. This afternoon I snapped a few photos of the alley and have attached them to this letter. It’s a random sampling of the continuing problems we face. As you can see, some of the cars encroach into the alley. Students park in tandem so the tail end of some cars encroach into the alley. Two large trucks encroach into the alley area outside of a newer garage. The students have put down carpet inside of that garage and use it as a lounge. (They were partying inside the garage while I took this photo which is why the garage door is not completely closed, to allow them ventilation on this warm afternoon.) The problem is often much worse, but these photos illustrate the parking issues related to Hathway Alley. The issue of increased trash in Hathway Alley introduces yet another problem which would be exacerbated with the addition of more trash bins or even worse, a dumpster to the alley. I took some photos this afternoon of the trash in the alley. Yesterday was our trash service, so the bins and dumpsters are generally empty. However, the dumpsters are usually overflowing and surrounded by discarded items and trash. As you can see, despite having just been serviced, unsightly trash still remains and the trash bins are scattered in the alley. A dumpster already butts up to our property line to the east and the overflow of trash and other junk ends up on our back driveway. The trash and recycle bins in the alley are often toppled over after the weekend, as people from outside of our neighborhood forage through them for bottles and cans. In 2011, I read a Letter to the Editor in the Tribune which pointed out the irony of the implementation of an extreme trash can ordinance when areas around Cal Poly look like “a refuse center.” He urged the readers to take a drive up Hathway Alley in San Luis Obispo to make his point. (Attached) This issue has been brushed aside by the City since we purchased our property in 2009. It surely won’t be solved by increasing the density of an already populated residential neighborhood. Finally, the proposed development of the property at 1267 Fredericks Street is not consistent with the existing homes in the neighborhood. With the exception of the condominium complexes on the block that pre-date the present zoning, our neighborhood consists of low profile bungalows with two to four bedrooms. The subject property at 1267 Fredericks is by far the largest home on our block. Its steep roofline towers over the other homes in our neighborhood and is the approximate height of a two-story dwelling. (See attached photos) The proposed addition to the back of the structure is even higher than the existing roof peak of the house. It is gigantic and disproportionate to every other house on the block. The General Plan states: “Housing built within an existing neighborhood should be in scale and in character with that neighborhood. All multifamily development and large group-living facilities should be compatible with any nearby, lower density development.” (San Luis Obispo General Plan, Chapter 1 Land Use, Section 2.2.10) “New Buildings should respect existing buildings which contribute to neighborhood historical or architectural character, in terms of size, spacing, and variety.” (San Luis Obispo General Plan, Chapter 1 Land Use, Section 2.2.10 A.) The proposed high density development in our neighborhood is contradictory to the goals set forth in the City’s General Plan and Community Development Guidelines. It diminishes a safe, comfortable quality of life for our family and our neighborhood. Therefore, I urge the City to deny the applicant’s request. Sincerely, Kathie Walker Owner/Occupant of 1269 Fredericks Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 543-9661 Attachments cc. Derek Johnson, Jan Marx, John Ashbaugh, Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Kathy Smith 12/10/2018 Gmail - Hathway Alley https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=c193ab931d&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1502371729194875125&simpl=msg-f%3A15023717291…1/2 Kathie Walker <kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com> Hathway Alley Johnson, Derek <djohnson@slocity.org>Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:35 PM To: Kathie Walker <kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com> Cc: "Wallace, Christine" <cwallace@slocity.org>, "Floyd, Aaron" <afloyd@slocity.org>, "Staley, Chris" <cstaley@slocity.org>, "Liddell, Dan" <dliddell@slocity.org>, "Codron, Michael" <mcodron@slocity.org> Dear Kathie, Thank you for being patient while we developed a comprehensive approach for addressing the problems in the Hathway Alley. We wanted to provide a more hands on and a comprehensive approach by which the City could holistically address the issues in the Alley. Thus, Police, Utilities, and Code Enforcement developed the following short and longer term strategy to achieve the desired outcome of long term improvement of the conditions. In an effort to achieve an immediate, short term solution to code violations in Hathway alley, we will implement the following and would like your input before moving forward: 1. Coordinate with Utilities for special trash pick-up throughout the alley and to “clean sweep” current challenged locations. 2. Add “No Parking” signs at the East end of Hathway alley; add additional “no parking” at intervals throughout the interior of the alley. 3. Label trash cans with property addresses. 4. Coordinate an all student email with Clean Up week information. 5. Coordinate with the Garbage Company to change service pick-up to the front of the properties, rather than the alley way. Notices will be sent the 1st week of June when this will be in effect. 6. Continue with daily/weekly Neighborhood Services Specialists (NSS) patrol to identify code violations. By implementing these actions, we will be able to achieve compliance through owner identification, citation, and community education. Additionally, we propose a long term plan, intended to prevent the issues going forward: 1. Notify all property owners, which border the alley, of clean up information and state that future clean- ups will be at their cost. 2. Request the re-paving of the alley to allow for the easy identification of what is the public road and what is private property (this will assist parking enforcement, emergency vehicle and trash removal access). 3. Distribute door hangers to properties which border the alley that detail trash and parking expectations (consider doing in early September, January and March). 4. Explore with Public Works the option of adding street lights in the alley or at entry points. 5. Explore with Planning the possibility of modifying the MC§17.17.075A to require trash can screening in alleys. 12/10/2018 Gmail - Hathway Alley https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=c193ab931d&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1502371729194875125&simpl=msg-f%3A15023717291…2/2 6. Schedule NSS and Neighborhood Officer “walk & talks” in the Fall to encourage compliance with noise, parking, and trash laws. With a partnership of Neighborhood Service Specialists, Code Enforcement, Police, Utilities, Fire, and Parking officers, implementation of this plan should achieve compliance through environmental changes and thus prevent the careless or operational issues that have plagued the alley for decades. Please expect to hear from Dan Liddell who is the team lead on comprehensively addressing these issues and seeing through the implementation of each of these action items listed in this email. Thank you, Derek BCC: Mayor and Council From: Kathie Walker [mailto:kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 6:26 PM To: Johnson, Derek Cc: Marx, Jan; Wallace, Christine; Lichtig, Katie; Christianson, Carlyn; Rivoire, Dan; Carpenter, Dan; Ashbaugh, John Subject: Re: Hathway Alley Hi Derek, [Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden] 12/10/2018 Gmail - Hathway Alley https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=c193ab931d&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1502284324457454434&simpl=msg-f%3A15022843244…1/1 Kathie Walker <kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com> Hathway Alley Kathie Walker <kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com>Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:26 PM To: "Johnson, Derek" <djohnson@slocity.org> Cc: jmarx@slocity.org, "Wallace, Christine" <cwallace@slocity.org>, klichtig@slocity.org, cchristi@slocity.org, "drivoire@slocity.org" <drivoire@slocity.org>, dcarpent@slocity.org, jashbaug@slocity.org Hi Derek, The recycling truck was unable to pass through Hathway Alley today because there was not enough room due to the trash containers on one side (directly across from our property along the fence) and a vehicle parked on the other side (belonging to one of the students at 1267 Fredericks Street). We heard the recycling/trash man yelling and went out to the alley to see what was wrong. He was upset because he could not get his truck through the alley. He said he has repeatedly reported the problem to Community Development to no avail. He said the piles of junk, trash cans and illegally parked cars that encroach into the alley are a continual problem that blocks their ability to drive through the alley. He told me he feels bad for us because we have to live with that junk pile in our own backyard. :( While the trash/recycling truck waited, my husband moved many of the trash bins along the fence opposite our property and the student next door moved her car so that the trash truck could pass through the alley. If there was a fire, there is no way a fire truck would not have been able to pass through the alley. This is not an isolated incident! I am frustrated because I have been working with the City to rectify this problem since 2010. I looked back at my notes. Ardith Tregenza tried to help but was unable to make any progress. There were other people in Community Development that tried to help - one posted signs on the trash bins - but he has left the City, too. I sent you graphic photos in October 2014 and again last week to illustrate the terrible problem. I've spoken with Dan Liddell and Christine Wallace. According to the recycling/trash employee, he has also notified the City numerous times. I previously suggested a solution: Residents keep their trash bins in their yards and wheel their blue bins to the front yard (on Stafford and Fredericks) on pick up day. Currently all bins, including recyclables, green waste and trash, are kept in the alley 24/7. If we were able to eliminate the continual traffic of people that dig through the blue bins and transfer the trash into the green bins while they look for recyclables it would begin to solve the problem. Christine Wallace told me she could not implement the solution because it was beyond the scope of her job...It would need to go through Community Development. Please, let's work together proactively to find a solution. Respectfully, Kathie Walker -Kathie Walker On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Johnson, Derek <djohnson@slocity.org> wrote: [Quoted text hidden] HATHWAY ALLEY WEDNESDAY 10/1/2014 HATHWAY ALLEY ON A “GOOD DAY” WEDNESDAY 10/1/2014 THE DAY AFTER TRASH PICK-UP ON TUESDAY 9/30/2014 HATHWAY ALLEY (Westward) Sunday, May 17, 2015 “A” Broken glass wine bottles spilling out of toppled blue bins “C” Dumpster of trash turned over and spilling into Alley “B” Area meant for dumpster filled with trash and debris “D” Trash and broken glass in alley from trash bins that were knocked over “E” Area meant to house trash bins filled with loose junk and debris “A” Broken glass wine bottles spilling out of toppled blue bins “B” Area meant for dumpster filled with trash and debris “C” Dumpster of trash turned over and spilling into Alley “E” Area meant to house trash bins filled with loose junk and debris “D” Trash and broken glass in alley from trash bins that were knocked over ROADWAY NOT MAINTAINED POTHOLES AND CRUMBLING BLACKTOP THROUGHOUT ALLEY “E” Area meant to house trash bins filled with loose junk and debris HATHWAY ALLEY Eastward Sunday, May 17, 2015 “A”“B”“C” “A” Green Waste containers never emptied Trash and debris build up in this area “B” Graffiti on building “C” Trash in weeds along alley After Pick-up of Trash, Recyclables & Green Waste Tuesday, May 19, 2015 Bushes encroach 5’ into alley Dumpster area/junk still encroaching in Alley Cars and bins still encroaching in Alley Trash and junk still dumped on ground near bins Hathway Alley 6/8/2015 Trash bins still surrounded by trash in Alley Trash still gathered at base of bushes Cars still illegally parked encroaching in Alley GarageGarage GarageGarage Parking Lot ADU Parking Lot Garage GarageGarage PROPOSED ADDITION Deck 1 2 2 24 5 2/2 1 1 2 1 12 1 2 1 1 Parking Lot 1 2 2 Parking Lot 1 2 Garage 1270 1267 1269 SFR Garage 3 Garage 12511241 2 PARKING PARKING G G G G G G G G GG N 2 22/2 2 1 1 2 5 1 112 412 2 2 Single-story SFR w/garage. Owner, Al Fiscalini, visits once a week to do yard maintenance. Single-story SFR converted to duplex w/garage. No college students Single-story SFR converted to duplex w/garage. Single-story SFR cottages face Fredericks Two story duplexes face Kentucky and overlook our property. One tenant in most units. No college students. Our property Single-story, SFR & ADU Owner occupied. No college students. 1267 Fredericks (Historical Property) Single-story SFR w/garage: 11 2 1 4 Single-story SFR w/garage & ADU Owner occupied. No college students. 2 Two single-story bungalow duplexes w/garage. One unit owner-occupied. No college students G Single-story SFR converted to duplex w/garage Single-story SFR w/garage Single-story SFR w/garage Single-story SFR w/garage Single-story SFR w/garage Single-story SFR Single-story SFR Single-story SFR w/garage Single-story SFR w/garage Triplex w/garage Single-story SFR w/garage PARKING Fourplex Triplex 1