HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/07/1992, 3 - APPEAL OF AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION TO APPROVE RENOVATION OF A CITY-OWNED PLAYLOT AT 870 MISSION STREET, BETWEEN CHORRO AND LINCOLN STREETS.MEETING DATE:
�u� ��lll►I�IIp � � city o f San J s OBI spo /-7-92.0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ��'" NUMBER
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director
By: Whitney McIlvaine, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Appeal of an Architectural Review Commission action to
approve renovation of a City -owned playlot at 870 Mission Street,
between Chorro and Lincoln Streets.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution denying the appeal, and
uphold Architectural Review Commission Action approving the
project.
BACKGROUND
The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) first reviewed plans for
renovating the Mission Street Playlot on October 14, 1991, and
continued the item with direction to the applicant and staff. On
November 18th, the ARC granted final approval to the revised
project (on a vote of 4 to 2) . Staff reports and minutes from both
meetings are attached to this report. On December 1st, the
immediate neighbor to the north of the playlot filed an appeal.
The appellant's statement is also attached. The appellant attended
and spoke at both hearings. Plans illustrating the proposed
improvements to the playlot are included in each council member's
packet and will be available at the meeting.
DISCUSSION
The appellant, Mr. Gaines, states that he was at no time notified
or consulted during the design process, and therefore, had no
opportunity to impact the outcome of the project. Mr. Gaines was,
however, notified of both ARC meetings, and attended both meetings.
After voicing his objections to the project on October 14th, the
commission continued the item with specific direction to staff to
meet with Mr. Gaines and try and address his concerns. Mr. Gaines
did meet with Casey Patterson of the Public Works Department, and
later submitted a letter outlining his proposals for design
changes. Please refer to a copy of this letter, which is attached
as part of the appellant's statement.
In response to Mr. Gaines proposals, ARC commissioners did not
support the idea of a double - width, split -face, concrete block
sound wall to be constructed at the rear of the playlot. Nor did
they support a dense planting of bamboo, 20 feet in depth, also at
the rear of the playlot. Play structures will meet setback
standards, as requested by Mr. Gaines. Lighting, another of Mr.
Gaines' concerns, has been eliminated from the plans by the ARC.
At the November meeting, representatives of the neighborhood group
which helped design the project responded to Mr. Gaines proposal
that play structures be located at the front of the site only.
They explained their goal of providing a variety of activity areas
3-
������ ►r►►�IVilllllllll�� ►llUlll city of San 1- 's OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Appeal of ARC 91 -90
Page 2
for different age groups, while still maintaining street yard
setbacks typical of a residential neighborhood. They noted that
equipment had been sited to achieve this goal and also to meet
state requirements for safety zones surrounding the equipment. Mr.
Gaines was also concerned about the visibility of play equipment
from his house. Currently, mature Pittosporums line the rear of
the site, providing an existing visual barrier between the playlot
and Mr. Gaines' property.
This project was initiated by neighborhood residents, many of whom
helped design the renovation. At the public hearings, 6 neighbors
spoke in favor of the project and the commission received 25
letters of support. City records indicate a playlot has been at
this location at least since 1956.
Conclusion
The appellant was notified of, and did attend, the two public
hearings which were conducted to review proposed renovations to the
playlot. He also met with Casey Patterson, staff coordinator and
designer for the project. Therefore, he did have an opportunity
to impact the outcome of the project, and his concerns were given
serious consideration by the ARC.
FISCAL IMPACT
Any changes to the project would affect the budget established by
the Public Works Department for the renovation. Additional
requirements, such as an 8 -foot high, double -width sound wall could
add significantly to the cost of the project. Scaling the project
down would eliminate some costs. Each adjustment to the plan
drawings involves additional costs.
ALTERNATIVES
A. Adopt a resolution upholding the appeal. The council then has
the option of referring the project back to the ARC with or
without direction;
B. Denying the project altogether so that no improvements would
be made to the playlot;
C. Making changes to the renovation proposal to better
incorporate more of the appellant's suggested design
solutions.
��IIIi11�IIIluIIIIIIIIII��i IIII��I city Of San i S OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Appeal of ARC 91 -90
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denying the appeal because this project is
supported by many residents of the neighborhood who have put
considerable effort into its design. Please refer to the 25
letters in support of the project, which were submitted prior to
the November 18th ARC meeting and are attached to the staff report
for that date.
Attachments:
-Draft Resolutions
- vicinity map
- Appellant's statement and letter
- Action notices and minutes
-Staff reports for ARC meetings
RESOLUTION NO. (1991 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL FROM THE ACTION OF THE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION TO APPROVE RENOVATION
OF A PUBLIC PLAYLOT AT 870 MISSION STREET.
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission conducted
public hearings on application No. ARC 91 -90 on October 14, 1991
and November 18, 1991, and approved plans to renovate the
existing playlot at 870 Mission Street; and
WHEREAS, the immediate neighbor to the north, Mr.
Merrill Gaines of 945 West Street, has appealed that decision to
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the testimony
and statements of the appellant, and other interested parties,
and the records of the Architectural Review Commission hearing
and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff;
NOW, THEREFORE, the council resolves to deny the appeal and
uphold the action taken by the Architectural Review Commission to
approve renovation plans for the playlot at 870 Mission Street,
subject to the following findings:
SECTION 1. Findings.
1. The appellant's concerns with the design of the proposed
renovation to the playlot were adequately addressed during
architectural review of the project.
a.. The proposed renovation is compatible with the low density
residential character of the neighborhood.
Resolution No. (1991 Series)
ARC 91 -90
Page 2
On motion of
seconded by , and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day
of , 1990.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
� 7<L-�
City Administr4tive Officer
3---5m
RESOLUTION NO. (1991 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
OBISPO UPHOLDING AN APPEAL FROM TH
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION TO
OF A PUBLIC PLAYLOT AT 870 MISSION
REFERRING RENOVATION PLANS BACK TO
REVIEW COMMISSION WITH DIRECTION.
CITY OF SAN LUIS
E ACTION OF THE
APPROVE RENOVATION
STREET, AND
THE ARCHITECTURAL
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission conducted
public hearings on application No. ARC 91 -90 on October 14, 1991
and November 18, 1991, and approved plans to renovate the
existing playlot at 870 Mission Street; and
WHEREAS, the immediate neighbor to the north, Mr.
Merrill Gaines of 945 West Street, has appealed that decision to
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the testimony
and statements of the appellant, and other interested parties,
and the records of the Architectural Review Commission hearing
and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff;
NOW, THEREFORE, the council resolves to uphold the appeal
and refer the project back to the Architectural Review Commission
for further review and consideration, subject to the following
findings:
SECTION 1. Findings.
1. The proposed renovation is not compatible with the low
ddensity residential character of the neighborhood.
3- to
Resolution No.
ARC 91 -90
Page 2
On motion of
seconded by
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
(1991 Series)
and on the
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day
of , 1990.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
�Cat,-_
City inistra ive Offi er
Community Devel`Qpinent Director
3-7
vy Wes d ST.
q�� e
LO
IJ / m
I� �p
u r. tf5
O T4
O
R I =z
�O
O O
a O
10 0 s�
010 �� sor. O
Mlc�S�ON
' e r
O O O O O r� 0 O
O o
�0 O nN O
1 1
O i O
2
O O , � N O
� �• l� Q« �`� o O O � O
83O �vliNA p73
�5 855 ` O O ` • O 4
4t 1 �D
� 0 pNTALBAN
NORTH
VICINITY MAP
�E- neig�+�ot'S Cornn�e(�'•�� on PrcJec�'
3-B
APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedure as authorized by Tide I, Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of The Architectural Review Con mission
rendered on November 18 , which decision consisted of the following (i.e. set forth factual
situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal. Use additional sheets as needed):
Approval of revisions to 870 Mission Street Play Lot.
On the grounds.that the immediate neighbor to the north at 945 West Street
was at no time notified or consulted during the design process, and thus, .
has had no opportunity to impact the outccane of the project.
(See attached letter to the ARC for further clarification of objections
and requested changes to the approved plan.)
DATE & TIME APPEAL RECEIVED:
Ch ' CLERi
SAN LUIS OBISPO. CA
Calendared for
;r
)ealed with:
Appellant:
Merrill C. Gaines
Name/ e
Representative
945 West Street, SLO 93401
re.-4
'F544 -1326
rnone
Original to City Clerk
City Attorney
Copy to Administrative Officer
Copy to the-following department(s):
A _
-- J
3 -9
Merrill C. Gaines
945 West Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Telephone 805,544 326j
October 25,1991
Architectural Review Commission
City of San Luis Obispo
Post Office Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100
Attn: Whitney Mcllvaine, Assistant Planner
Subject: Request for Design Revisions to 870 Mission Street Play Lot
To begin with, I am concerned that I was never notified of the significant changes planned for
the play lot at 870 Mission Street, and consequently, have never had the opportunity to affect
the design of this planned element that has profound implications for both my own living
environment and the economic value of my property. This exclusion seems highly suspect,
totally adverse to normal practice, and, I believe, sufficient grounds for further action should
my requests for revisions not be satisfied.
Moreover, I am convinced that use as a play lot is incompatible with the predominant
single - family residential zoning of the area, particularly due to the proximity of adjacent
houses and high noise factor and general disturbance. This situation will be substantially
aggravated by the increased intensity of use as a result of the proposal before the ARC.
Speculations about this being an element in a once - planned series of such play lots for the area
seem specious, particularly when presented by a city employee with an obvious bias toward it's
continued use as a play lot, and conflicts with information I've received about this parcel
originally being set aside as part of a city emergency water supply (this seems to be confirmed
by the city's recent efforts to find potable water on the site).
In spite of these serious objections to it's continued use, I am willing to compromise and not
carry the issue further provided my requirements for tempering the nuisances are agreed to.
They are:
1. A double -width split -face concrete block "sound wall" to be constructed along the
residential(1) property line (north boundary of the play lot); to a height of 8' -0" from the
residential lot elevation.
2. A dense planting buffer of bamboo (Golden Bamboo or equivalent) on the play lot side of the
block wall extending into the play lot to a horizontal dimension of 20' -0 ".
3. Play structures, equipment, lighting standards, and all other construction located no less than
the typical rear -yard setback dimension from the residential property line. (Section 17.16.020,
C; Yard Standards; "Zoning Regulations," City of San Luis Obispo).
4. Play structures and high use children's' equipment located at the front of the site, nearest
the street where it will be compatible with noise levels. Quieter uses kept to the rear of the
site.
5. Play structures, equipment, lighting standards, and all other construction kept to a vertical
elevation below that of the sight lines from the first floor and deck levels of the residence.
6. All lighting to be indirect and shielded from the residence.
page 1 of 2
3-ID
Notes:
(1) The terms "residential" and "residence" refers to the property owner's house;at 945 West
Street-.
If these 'stipulations -are agreed to by the .parties involved and validated. by the ARC,' I
would request a letter documenting theie reconviiendaticifts to serve as a contract for compliance.
Sincerel
Merrill C. Gaines
copy: Patterson
page .2 of 2.
III ci o san tuis-oaspo 41mg 11111 A � y so
990 Paim Street /Post Office Box 8100 - San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100
October 21, 1991
Mr. Casey Patterson
Parks & Buildings
25 Prado Road
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Subject: ARC 91 -90: 870 Mission Street
Renovation of mini -park
Dear Casey:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of October 14, 1991, continued
consideration of the above project with direction to provide for easy access (strollers,
wheelchairs, handicap), bench to be relocated away from the entry and add more
benches, add more trash containers, use pipeline play equipment, provide a
shuffleboard court, move the stage away from the neighbor's window, and add down -
security lights. The commission also directed that youme9t with the neighbor at 945
West Street to discuss his concerns.
If you have any questions, please contact Whitney Mcllvaine at 781 -7175.
Sincerely,
Ken Bruce
Senior Planner
3 -J a
ARC Minutes
October 14, 1991
Page 1
?. ARC 91 -90: 870 Mission Street; renovation of mini -park; R -1 zone; final review.
Whitney McIlvaine, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report recommending the
commission grant final approval.
Casey Patterson, Public Works Department, responded to the staff report and explained
the fence height and his idea for a well-head cover and public art.
Alexa Selem, neighbor, explained the history of the project.
Greg Macedo, neighbor, noted neighborhood input into the project. He explained why
the red and blue colors were chosen.
Merle Gaines, 945 West Street, indicated he was not approached about the design. He
objected to the development of a park and noted security and noise concerns. He felt
the park was incompatible with neighborhood use.
Jim Stockton, Parks and Recreation Director, noted the park has been there for at least
35 vears.
Commr. Gates wanted to see an area set up for recyclable trash, more sod areas added,
the softening of side areas with landscaping, rearrangement of play structures toward the
front. She suggested using pipeline play equipment rather than wood.
Commr. Bradford noted the play area has been there for many years, and is well -
screened at the rear with a high planting, and was not sympathetic to the complaint.
She thought the scale was tight and there was a possibility there were too many surfaces.
She thought the utility parking area needs to serve more of a dual purpose. She felt the
entries were complex and suggested using a canopy tree rather than a loquat. She felt
another bench was needed toward the back of the park.
Commr. Cooper concurred with previous comments. He agreed that pipeline play
equipment might be a better choice. He questioned whether a soundwall with
replacement landscaping might mitigate noise concerns. He suggested relocating play
equipment and including night lighting.
Commr. Illingworth recommended the selection of different equipment than proposed.
He could not support the soundwall idea. He felt lighting might encourage unwanted
nighttime use.
3-13
ARC Minutes
October 14, 1991
Page 2
Commr. Sievertson noted that more trash enclosures were needed, with some located at
the back of the park. He also disagreed with the installation of a soundwall. He had no
problem with type of play equipment selected. He was, however, concerned with the
durability of wood equipment. He noted that lighting needed to be indirect and
durable.
Comm r. Combrink was concerned that Mr. Gaines was not involved with the initial
design. He suggested moving the park's intensity away from the rear of the park. He
supported a continuance.
Chairman Underwood did not support soundwall installation. He wanted the play
structure relocated away from the rear of the lot. He noted there were lots of obstacles
to the access into the play area. He wanted to see the parking area's surface changed
and provision of on -site storage for play equipment. He felt lighting was needed. He
supported the chosen play structure. He felt the stage area conflicts with the windows in
the house to the west. He suggested moving the bench away from the entry.
Greg Macedo noted the recommended clearances around the equipment pose obstacles
to relocation.
Commr. Cooper moved to continue the project with direction to provide for easy access
(strollers, wheelchairs, handicap), bench to be relocated away from the entry and add
more benches, add more trash containers, use pipeline play equipment, provide a
shuffleboard court, move the stage away from the neighbor's window, and add down
security lights and with direction for the applicant's representative to meet with the
neighbor at 945 West Street to discuss his concerns.
Commr. Illingworth seconded the motion.
AYES: Cooper, Illingworth, Gates, Sievertson, Combrink, Bradford, Underwood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passes.
3 -1 q
gl�llllll!�IIII'i ICI EfI l CCh Q� San is �B�spo DEVOPMNT
MMMMA
STAFF REPORT
FOR Architectural Review Commission MEETING DATE October 14,1991
BY Whitney McIlvaine, Assistant Planner ITEM NO, 2
PROJECT ADDRESS 870 Mission Street FILE N0, ARC 91 -90
SUBJECT:
Architectural review of a proposed renovation of a neighborhood play lot.
SUNNIMARY RECOMMENDATION
Grant final approval.
BACKGROUND
Improvements to city parks and playlots require architectural review and approval. The
applicant is requesting final approval.
Data Summary
Applicant /Property Owner: City of San Luis Obispo
Representative: Casey Patterson, Public Works Department
Zoning: R -1
General Plan: Low density residential
Environmental Status: Exempt (CEQA Section 15302)
Action Deadline: 4/4/92
Site Description
The flat, rectangular lot is 5,750 square feet in size, and located in an established single
family residential neighborhood. Significant vegetation includes a large Redwood, four Elm,
and six Pittosporum trees. Existing play equipment includes a swing set, two empty
concrete sand boxes, and a merry -go- round. Only the merry -go -round is proposed to remain
and be refurbished.
There are two well heads on site, one of which will be removed. The Utilities Department
has asked that the other remain. Because water from these wells contains high levels of
manganese, the City currently has no plans to use water from the remaining well. In the
event the City decides to use the remaining well, water would be pumped elsewhere and
treated, with minimal disturbance to the playlot.
Project Description
The City proposes to renovate the play lot. Plans propose new play equipment as well as
more clearly defined activity areas and additional landscaping. The new play equipment
would be constructed from timber, with some metal components, such as slides and railings.
Accent colors are not specifically called out on the plans. The play equipment brochure
shows metal components painted primary red, blue and yellow. The project also includes
<3 -I
opportunities for public art, especially on the wall behind the play stage. However no
specific proposal has been submitted yet.
EVALUATION
This proposal is a result of a number of neighborhood meetings. The project has been
designed to accomodate not only young children, but also older people in the neighborhood
who occaisionally enjoy meeting here to socialize. Staff strongly supports the project and
has only minor suggestions to offer for consideration:
Landscaping: What about incorporating plants that attract butterflies and birds (but not
bees...)? What about providing a small garden area for flowers and /or vegetables?
Trash Disposal: Staff recommends recycling be incorporated into the design of the trash
receptacle.
Fencing: In reviewing the plans, some neighbors felt the fencing was rather bulky in
appearance and suggested using narrower boards. New fencing is proposed at the front
and sides of the lot. For continuity, it may be desireable to add new fencing at the rear of
the lot. The project was granted a fence height exception by the Administrative Hearing
Officer (A S8-91) to allow portions of the fence to exceed 6 feet in height, as shown in the
proposed design.
Handicapped Access: To meet standards for handicapped access, the plans will be revised
to include a ramp into the play bark area. Instead of the traditional bark material, a
different material will be used which meets the same safety standards as bark but also
compacts so that a wheelchair can maneuver across it if necessary.
Public Art: So far, ideas include a background mural for the play stage and handmade tiles
along the low seat wall that separates the grass area from the sand lot. There could be
climbable scupture. The entry may be another good location for an art project. Neighbors
are still brainstorming and WOUld welcome any suggestions.
OTHER DEPARMNIENT CO''INIENTS
The Public Works Department notes the abandoned well must meet County Health
Department requirements, and should be abandoned below grade. Casing for the remaining
well should be highly visible and designed as an integral part of the playground. Since the
site is in Flood Zone "A ", the casing should be raised one foot above the 100 -year storm
elevation. Final plans must show site contours.
The Arborist has recommended the low seat wall be redesigned to minimize impact on the
root system of the nearby Elm tree.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the project with any recommended design details, including those from other
departments, to return to staff.
3-10
EM
November 20, 1991
city of sAn k1s oaspo
990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
Mr. Casey Patterson
Parks & Buildings
25 Prado Road
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401
Subject: ARC 91 -90: 870 Mission Street
Renovation of mini -park
Dear Casey:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting on November 18, 1991, granted final
approval to the plan submitted by a neighbor (Greg Macedo) with new timberform
equipment in a forest green color; new fencing all around the park; a lower stage area;
addition of a trash container toward the rear of the lot; and location of the picnic table to
be resolved by planning staff.
The decision of the commission is final unless appealed to the City Clerk within ten days
of the date of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by a decision
of the commission.
Please note that Architectural Review Commission approval expires after one year if
construction has not started, unless the commission designated a different time period.
On request, the Community Development Director may grant an extension of up to one
year, but not greater than two years beyond the original date of ARC approval.
Minutes of this meeting will be sent to you as soon as they are available.
If you have any questions, please contact Whitney Mcllvaine at 781 -7175.
Sincerely,
K,.. wag-o
Ken Bruce
Senior Planner
3-17
draft
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
San Luis Obispo, California
Regular Meeting - November 18, 1991
PRESENT: Commrs. Melinda Bradford, Woody Combrink, Madi Gates, Curtis
Illingworth, Bruce Sievertson, and Chairman Mike Underwood
ABSENT: Commr. Allan Cooper
OTHERS
PRESENT: Whitney McIlvaine, Assistant Planner; and Ken Bruce, Senior Planner
PROJECTS:
1. ARC 91 -90: 870 Mission Street; renovation of mini -park; R -1 zone; final review.
Whitney McIlvaine, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report recommending the
commission grant final approval.
Casey Patterson, Public Works Department, responded to the staff report.
Greg Macedo, 779 Murray Avenue, explained that the alternative plan was meant to
simplify surfacing and lower the stage height. He indicated that one picnic table would
be adequate. He didn't think that lighting was justified. He argued in favor of using
timberform equipment because it would involve less soil penetration and would be less
disturbing to the existing redwood.
Alexa Slem, 348 Lincoln Street, noted that all of the other adjacent neighbors supported
the project except Mr. Gaines. She explained that the neighbors did look at different
groupings of equipment with Mr. Macedo. She explained why moving the equipment
forward would not accommodate the projected uses well.
Elaine Holder, 931 West Street, indicated that noise is not a problem. She felt noise
was more audible in the morning when the kids waited for the school bus to arrive. She
felt the bottom line was what was good for the children.
Roy Lovetang, 856 Mission, has lived in the area for 27 years and supported the project.
Trudy Lovetang, 856 Mission, noted that the park is usually used by young children with
their parents for short periods of time.
Merrill Gaines, 945 West Street, indicated he was not involved with the initial planning
process and noted he still had problems with the project. He noted that a utility
easement exists at the rear of the park.
3 -/B
ARC Minutes
November 18, 1991
Page 2
Con=. Bradford indicated she preferred using timberform play equipment and a solid
fence at the rear of the property. She felt lighting was not necessary. In response to the
neighbor's comments, she noted there had been no history of noise complaints and felt
installing a sound wall or bamboo planting would be unreasonable. She was concerned
that there may be too much play equipment, but liked the straight ramp, strawberry tree,
and reduced sand area. She preferred the xerox plan.
Commr. Seivertson also preferred the xerox plan. He suggested adding a trash station
near the well head. He felt the stage area would be acceptable if it were lowered. He
thought an 8 -foot sound wall would not be effective because of the grade change at the
rear of the property.
Commr. Combrink preferred the use of timberform equipment. He agreed that lighting
was not necessary and liked the reduced sand area. He did not think it was fair to
ignore the rear property owner's concerns. He suggested eliminating some of the rear
structure.
Commr. Elingworth also preferred the xerox plan. He liked the tiberform equipment
and appreciated the neighborhood input. He agreed with Commr. Bradford regarding
Mr. Gaines'. letter.
Con=. Gates preferred the plan submitted by the Public Works Department. She
liked the tree at the entry, but did not like the pyramids on the timberline. She asked
about a bus shelter for the kids? She indicated that if the ramp with the turn stays, she
wanted the brick adjusted. She asked if a sand area was needed at all?
Chairman Underwood indicated he also preferred the xerox plan and supported the use
of timberform. He felt the rear fence should be like the side fencing. He appreciated
the neighborhood input.
Commr. Sievertson moved to grant final approval to the plan submitted by Greg
Macedo with new timberform equipment in a forest green color, new fencing all around
the park; a lower stage area; addition of a trash container toward the rear of the lot;
and location of the picnic table to be resolved by planning staff.
Commr. Illingworth seconded the motion.
AYES: Sievertson, Illingworth, Bradford, Combrink, Underwood
NOES: Combrink, Gates
ABSENT: Cooper
The motion passes.
3 -119
it � ';ij ,. City O� SIS OBISPO DEVELOPMENT
SETNAO REP ORT
FOR Architectural Review Commission MEETING DATE November 18, 1991
Whitney McEvaine, Assistant Planner ITEM NO, 1
PROJECT ADDRESS FILE N0,
870 Mission Street ARC 91 -90
SUBJECT:
Architectural review of a renovation proposal for a neighborhood play lot.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Grant final approval.
BACKGROUND
Data Summary
Applicant /Property Owner: City of San Luis Obispo
Representative: Casey Patterson, Public Works Department
Zoning: R -1
General Plan: Low density residential
Environmental Status: Exempt (CEQA Section 15302)
Action Deadline: 4/4/92
Situation /Previous Review
Improvements to city parks and playlots require architectural review and approval. The
applicant is requesting final approval. The commission reviewed the project on October
14, and continued action with direction (minutes are attached at the end of this packet).
Design response to this direction is discussed below. The applicant is requesting final
approval. This review addresses only aesthetic changes to the playlot. The use of the site
as a playlot is not the subject of this review.
DESIGN CHANGES
This report refers to two site plans submitted in response to commission direction. The
blueprint is more comprehensive. The xerox is an alteration of the original plan, and only
addresses changes to the eastern side of the playlot - specifically, handicapped access and
surfacing. It shows a more simplified ramp design, and replacement of the decomposed
granite surface with a continuation of the play bark and an additional section of concrete
with brick bands.
Access: The entry has been simplified. Handicapped access to the safety bark area will be
via a ramp adjacent to the maintenance vehicle parking area. Staff recommends that the
brick grid pattern should be modified so as not to conflict visually with the slope of the
ramp. An alternative ramp design (on the xerox plan) is also included in the commissioners'
packet. Because of its simplicity and allowance for additional landscaping, staff finds the
alternative plan more preferable.
117-80 3-4;0 O
Site Furniture: A picnic table has been shifted to allow easier access to the play areas.
Another. picnic table has been added at the eastern side of the lot. Also a seating bench
has been added and one additional trash can.
Play Equipment: The play equipment at the rear of the lot has been changed to the
"pipeline" style, which some of the commissioners suggested might be more durable. The
front structure is the "timberform" style. As noted on the plans, members of the
neighborhood have a strong preference for the " timberform" style. They feel this design will
blend into the look of the neighborhood better. Apparently the " timberform" play
equipment has been redesigned by the manufacturers, and photos of the new design will be
available at the meeting. Required safety zone boundaries are now clearly depicted on the
plans.
Shuffleboard /Surfacing: Staff understood ARC's direction on this issue to be a "suggestion"
in connection with discussion of the surfacing of the maintenance vehicle parking area. No
shuffleboard court is shown in the revised plans, but the surfacing material has been
changed from decomposed granite paving to concrete paving with brick bands toward the
front and bark mulching toward the rear. Staff would prefer to see either the concrete area
extended or the surfacing proposed in the alternative plan.
Stage Location: The stage has been shifted to minimize any conflicts with windows on the
neighboring house.
Lighting: The Parks and Building Maintenance Department, the Parks and Recreation
Department, members of the neighborhood do not support lighting the playlot. There is
concern that, as Commissioner Elingsworth suggested, lighting the plavlot after dusk, when
it closes, will only encourage people to use it at night.
Neighbors' Concerns: Casey Patterson of the Public Works Department Parks Division met
with the property owner of 945 West Street to discuss this neighbor's concerns - as directed
by the commission. Mr. Gaines's concerns and proposed solutions are listed in his attached
letter. Other letters, supporting the project, are also attached.
Miscellaneous Changes: The plans now show new fencing at the rear of the site, in
addition to that proposed for the sides and front. Currently the site is fenced at the rear
with chain link. Behind the chain link fence is wood fencing on the property of two
residential lots that border the play lot to the rear. The wood fencing serves as a visual
screen, but is in poor condition, and will probably need replacing in the near future.
ALTERNATIVES
The commission may deny the project with appropriate findings, continue action with
direction, or grant final approval with or without conditions.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the project with any recommended design details to return to staff.
5-a)
779 Murray Avenue
San Luis Obispo,CA
November 11, 1991
Architectural Review Commission
City of San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo, CA
Dear Commissioners,
Simply stated, Mission Playlot is a classic
neighborhood park. It grew out of a tradition of
towns providing a network of accessible greens and
playlots within walking distance of people's homes.
And until three years ago, it served the needs of the
neighborhood well.
In keeping with that tradition, the new park
design emerged from neighborhood meetings with the
sharing of ideas and wishes of neighbors - -old and young.
The consensus was: (1) maintain the park's beauty;
(2) meet the needs of pre - school and elementary age
children; (3) retain previous scale and setbacks
and (,1)
keep the "natural setting ", e.g.., no plastic
or bright colors. What developed was a park design
which addressed the unique character of the site and
the neighborhood.
Perhaps the destruction of the old park equipment
was, in fact, a blessing. It has allowed us to create
a sense of renewed stewardship of this most precious
neighborhood resource.
Sincerelv,
Ae- d`
a Mac
q Maedo
3 —a cr�
Tanya L Kati
,167 L jlco =ry Pv e.
'sp LU15 Cbr Cf4
November 11 / /-171
' Y, DeveJ• rnei-.4 are O2
P
llea � rn R J onaS )
I ms I74,'er ;s in �,zy:�Hs -to
re:%
oar �,s-ol ofe.
Ty2 fe5fo(:�'►on orb -�hts ��slur�� �1a��lo�t -. L
�,
i1aVZ "{'WJ v��n�. C11i�c"�ren ;;ndPr 4ne "'�, o� r 'C-.
nearly -{o r yO-c-Ars o)J nas
'ne
Li-�.
r`
I r � ��c'S'x1�ai�, ia�kln � 1S�cr1G�JOr l�1el•'' h��� .
lease do all in jvojr' ewer 4v �ssjre. --hem
1
CJ, �l �Gcc)L. 7h� k yo-) �r~
4
-to -r/) Is 6?eea.
Stncere��
J -a3
movember 10 1991
Arnold Jonas
Community Development Director
My name is LLoyd Pierce and I live at 864 Mission
Street. We border the park on the west side. I was born and
raised on the central coast and have lived here for 14 years.
This letter is about ARC 91 -90.
I have two girls, ages five and eight. They and their
friends use the park frequently. Even before I had the girls the park
being next door never bothered me. Most people, including myself are
not disturbed by the sound of kids playing and having fun.
We. would like to voice our support of the park project.
We have attended the meetings for the renovation and are happy
with the development of the project. The people involed are
working hard and are doing a great job. It would be gshame to
let the voice of person stop or even delay this project. The park
has been here for a long time. We urge you to continue with the
renovation fo the park.
Thank You
Lloyd Pierce
P 864 Mission St.
3a�
TO: Ir.av Dunn
S. T. O. City Co nci l
Archie= cT.•_rai l?.evi=w Ce =ittee
F30M: Michael N. Bader
882 Fission Stre_t
r,••t =(•r _ i n ^Tr__ Fla Tr.]• T %� ^rte_
o•�JJ t 1 . M_ = =_Gr � _ � yy.
1A T =: l I \TweS T :01
rrrr_r-rrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrr- r---- rrrrrrr_rrrrr___ - -rr -r - r -rrrr-
IL has come to my attention that :`Cszible liti`.ytin^ =a7 C'=
'_nitl3t =d to 'halt any or L'?ralinff of tthis _arr `:__
+M nai=e �r0===' -Sio. . a].+ ��AINSl any :eG�3l 3nC /Cr C._'_nCi__ r5e_r3inT_S
`or the followirlc:
V
•CiC
7ar K w i t T• tiGdT T.
. _ _
S_.= C_ _1_ i rC "se. word n ght5 and s_: = -_n
. y_
, *1t1^ff t -'e dray wee_ -.dz and wee ke vs. and s=- !-dam f _
t]c n•]ia °_ level e:..•? =o.iye _T.C"Sh to real '_y di =curb me.
=. : °.m 44 year = o:c and grew
of my ;.lends.
a Maicr t`sr_ of this
OV r Of
C) Ln aT_a for __1_Qren waiting g - or 1
n=1r School ]':.
a) Mee =1nS _'_ace :or Sot ^ers w34 t2.:L7 to ' 1_
='st t h e
-= i_uren IrC= cCCcc" bus.
AS I L. _ r3d... tC:i. rL• =Crsa =Ct'_Gn �� ttriDUteQ t0 =.� C3_leG
possible noise levels) it is rein.z bro' =2ht by -h= household living
behind 382 ?fission Street and the Par's. If this rumor is correct,
this house -hold has no basis f or s cc=1a int. They have Shown
little regard for their neigh ors ^v rLIM-ling electrical equipment
(Saws, etc. ) , o :•erazinz a a_ ttoe, and using h a=ers, on Saturdays
(some Sundays) an or bef or= v a.m. Cy2r t:•e ^a5t four years..
This household= CC::St L; =._C:7 rtCiS_ _=•v._•1 Co= etes riCht along •' �, ens mod=
the noise level of a few _ ties aiv *1 by file G31 Poly etLd rte C ^.
this street. at least tti := _.arty noie. is rezulated by the i*�
V Ilun'
IV^� IAI / •
3a5
P
d
3a
Y�
0
�
c
d
3a
Y�
931 West Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
93'fOS
November 11, 1991
Mr. Arnold Jonas
Community Development Director
ARC Number 91 -90
Dear Mr. Jonas:
My house is across the back fence from the
neighborhood park on Mission Street that you are
considering revamping. I have seen the plans and
they look excellent. I am especially glad that you
plan on adding play equipment that will appeal to
older children and not gust toddlers. This may
increase the noise level, but it is hard to complain
about the voices of happy children having fun. It is
a very enjoyable sound.
My children are grown and my grandchildren live in
another state, but I know how important this kind of
play space is to growing children. I also know how
hard it is to obtain community agreement on any
project. Older residents, especially those who are
childless, sometimes fail to recognize how important
this kind of community project is, not only for the
children, but for the community as a whole. I
strongly support your plans.
Sincerely" yours,
Elaine Holder
3a( it
A AN'
i
Lj
�d A-
L~
i
Z
0
a
c U
0
a
<a�
0
a
o U
� o
b � h
G
Q M v1
'0 VO
A �
d
X
� � d
� d
V
4
No
Q
vi
4
L
d
ad
3
d
J
�cl� a
3 -a 9
November 13, 1991
Arnold Jonas
Community Development Director
San Luis Obispo, California
Dear Mr. Jonas,
I live at 342 Lincoln Street about two and one -half blocks from the
Mission Street Playlot. We moved into the neighborhood about five
years ago. The park was an important factor in our decision as we
have three young children. Approximately three years later most of
the equipment was removed from the park to drill a well. The
neighborhood waited and waited for some equipment to reappear.
Finally a group of neighbors assembled and began to work with the cit,
to have the park returned to its original state.
Greg Macedo and I have continued to work on the plans for the park
with Jim Stockton of the Parks and Recreation Department and, and Lane
Wilson and Casey Patterson of the Parks and Building Division. We have
met with the Parks and Recreation Commission on several occasions.
The plans have been taken back to the neighborhood periodicallly for
review and input. We have always been especially sensitive to the
feelings. and ideas of the immediate neighbor_.. To our delight two
years later we have a beautiful design and budget for the park.
Unfortunaly, the neighbors to the back of the park never heard about
the neighborhood meetings. Because the home of Mr. Gaines could not
be seen from the park, there was. never any thought given to notifying
him. I hope this situation has been resolved as we spoke with Mr.
Gaines after the ARC meeting and he has met with Casey Patterson to
discuss the plans.
I understand Mr. Gaines objects to the layout of the park. This was
given alot of thought. We tried to maintain a low profile to the park
by having at low fence and lat.-in area to the front. A small cl imbino
structure of wooden blocks and a 4 foot slide have been placed next to
the lawn to allow for parents close s.uoervi=_ion of young children and
again so that the immediate neighbor_ would not see play structures.
We had to plan around the merry -go -round as we were told, "If you move
it, you lose it." And since it has been a favorite for years, we
didn't want to threaten its existence. Two climbing structure_ and
swings were centered in the back replacing a very high slide and bar
unit and a huge set of swings. The wooden structures were chosen to
be consistent with the nature of the park with its many trees an-d to
blend in visually for the neighbors.
As I hope I have demonstrated, a lot of thoughtful planning has gone
into the current design for the Mission Playlot. We have young and
old alike anxious for our park to be returned to us.
Sincerely yours,
Alexa Slem
3-30.
U
� urtto� -u2 k�ntde�u.�i� L.�in
ua -cmr, an�,t�e, �ionu� cku�n.i�
my
fora- u�✓ur�at� e�'6�q- �'/w' -cam,
AVY� JAI�� -j� 1�&n
14� ��� 17'a .,t
_ _ .'c:O�c•o� �. - --'�h� _� ��� n c . t�-�_ � ors_.. - - - -_ _... -- --
V
�J c in
c„>e�`�..
P.
CIA's e
cSwo,,b L'i e \\
CA
P\ CGS c. .. _.60C\s
f .
%5-3a
James Mark and Debbie Collins November 12, 1991
841 West St.,
San Luis Obispo, Ca, 93405
To San Luis Obispo Staff,
Im very concered with the future of our neighborhood park located on
Mission Lane in San Luis Obispo. My children have enjoyed this park for
the last 6 years. I have a 12 year old son and a 7 year old daughter my
daughter uses this park on a average of 4 to 5 times a week and would
probably use and enjoy it more often if the new play structures were put
in.
The historical value of this park is very important to me and I hope the
city of San Luis Obispo understands the needs and concerns of the local
familys. This Park was dedicated to the city in 1947 by the Lions clubs
with funds brought in by Our La Fiesta de San Luis Obispo for the
enjoyment of our children.
Sincerely Yours, Debbie Collins, Collins, Mother, Neighbor,and
Past La Fiesta de San Luis Obispo President
3-33
Q;-� Po--�-k Crlj-.V-�
r r1
J v
C. A.e :.-
/J
CLJ-
r
3-34
H
K T LCF-��m
P�of -"' I
3-3-57
q1- 90
Ae�'L., � �� . d),I� z
C7 I
,, GG
T
e, xle
4 Ai t
-� / f�� i - ✓� % . //� !+'{/� ' /r ���f- 'mac.— ��
' f - •CGS ii,'�2 ./G!,D C�� �`�
Acrt�ic J6 ckz
Csarv%rwri, bb'M-)rec-
kx)e lke.. � e ?rte cor- �;ppo4 �c'
iY we GRZ
Ice
4\0�
_1
3 -3 7
7el d &)n (J �J
... �Gn'I�+un Zvz•��vymeti � .� r-c -c.��
Me _ ores
.. � GLr'!'f Lc,Jrr1;2 �..'�G -l( .'yC'"]f`fJ /PaSc�iL •s �
b G. r - h r cf .r /%c ci. /o 1... I . C t jp is e* `t. (� , - . -- _ . . .
- •� Zs- L �i r !� rY7Ct /L.%r• L� G'Z.[��7 C%t � l�� r2 � : ti `-%'L� i 5
J4-' r%t.Cd b ee e n f' e�
n <
tiGhC�C:. <s5�5 u -ri`{ �f ,�
G•� � ���r� -�.i � , �U � -6L� '?�v �pl� , ..� -fh � �o % Gcn-4 i
11.2 ��(s Ctrr•lc'�'rS Z /��. �urc'E- �J� �('c�y uT
�'� ��gLLIL�' C:.r�� ��r•1' be�io����� �..•;iI /b-e�
L r�
Ct (c , r c r� /10� 5-ei . -�Lc4- �. �.� ill t� �s `*r� .- 52. /o � -' r5
�� � � M1 � /% (�-• � G. ^ L. / 5 er �i1,_ i r' �' n r �C� rG� +L �c S
... f.G iC S �� � •F/ rl S K� ✓ _Y%1 L �J S �G[ C t� rP J
.._ ....- - - -- � !'. `� � rn r� ::cam _ �.7�•�ef- ��c, .107 ..
3-38
Dlt
-gyp' hvot) 0�l u,-e
P L
00
do
3 -3 9
November 1 1, 1991
848 Mission St
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Mr. Arnold Jonas, Director
Community Development
City Planning Department
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Mr. Jonas:
I support the beautification and maintenance of the Mission St. Ptaylot located
just down the street from my home.
Since moving here four months ago, I have appreciated the neighborhood appeal of
this area. Before living here, I lived on Chorro Street in the old town neighborhood.
There, no children walked by my house because of the high traffic volume and
because there was no place to walk to.
Here on Mission Street, I see small children walk by with their parent or daycare
provider. They make a happy group as they carry their toys and pull their wagons.
Their giggles indicate that these children are on an `adventure.' Children should
not be locked away all day in small 'back yards surrounded by tall fences. in that
environment they have no sense of community and little chance for the adventure a
2 to 5 year old feels in a 'walk to the park.'
The beautification of the Mission St. Ptaylot as described in ARC 091 -90 will
ensure that the children of this neighborhood continue to have a safe and happy
chance to explore their community. Please give it your support.
In community,
Melody DeMeritt
3- Q
Mr. Arnold Jonas
Director of Community Development
City of San Luis Obispo
Dear Mr. Jonas:
I am the mother of four boys, ages 10, 8, 4, and 1 year. We
have greatly enjoyed living on Center Street because it affords us
such safety and enjoyment for our children. We have been
especially excited at the prospect of upgrading Mission Park.
My children play there often. I enjoy knowing that they can go
there without having to cross any traffic. It seems to me that since
the park is there for the enjoyment of the children; since the funds
are available for upgrading the park; since the wheels have been set
in motion, it would be unfortunate that it all comes to a grinding halt
because one man decides he doesn't want to deal with a park in his
back forty.
The gentleman most certainly knew the park was there when
he purchased his home. What difference does it make to him if the
children who play there anyway play on nice, safe, attractive
equipment, or old, ugly, unsafe equipment? (Have you noticed that
the swing is disconnected at the top joint ?)
Please add my voice of support to this worthwhile and
welcome project in our neighborhood, and offer my condolences to
the gentleman who finds the joyful play of children annoying.
Sincerely,
'7 / -'( cj-.,L. L.,
Marti Cavaletto
868 Center
San Luis Obisp,
CA 93405
IN
3-4)
GRANT eye center
E2 A MEDICAL GROUP
FREDERICK J. GRANT, M.D.
LARRY B. BALDWIN, M.D.
Diplomates
American Board of Ophthalmology
AEA
Y
-/-'x.�' a. 61
CAI
V
400�
1304 Ella Street, Suite B • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 • (805) 543-6121
�
3 4;
ARC #91 -90
Mr. and Mrs Paul H. Kocher
867 Mission. Street
San Luis Obispo
California 93401
November 10, 1991
Mr. Arnold Jonas
Community Development Director
City of can Luis Obispo
Dear Mr. Jonas,
As resident=of San Luis Obispo living for
21 years across N.ission Street from Mission Baylot
we endorse wholeheartedly the plAn to maintain and
upgrade the little park.
Mission Playlot is more of an a= =et to the
community than ore might suppose from its wall
size. Children: of all ages play in it cor.tir_ually.
Adults frequently bring their lunches there. It is
particularly valuable ac a safe place for children
a'- 'aitinE the numerous school buses for which it is
a pick -up station - -a glace where :arents of the
children meet and becoLe friend;.
We cannot imagi-ne- the neighborhood without it.
Sincerely,
I;r. and Mrs. Paul H. Kocher
3 -43
November 11, 1991
Mr. Arnold Jonas
Community Development Director
San Luis Obispo, California
Dear Mr. Jonas,
We live on Mission Street and have been involved in the
planning of renovation of the Mission Street Playlot. We are
concerned that a letter of discontent has been sent to you that
may be construed as a reflection of the attitude of all the
neighbors. This is not true. We have not written of our support of
this project because we have been satisfied with its progress and
our involvement as an entire neighborhood. Now we feel that the
park renovation may be in jeopardy and must express our support
of the project.
We have lived next to our little park for 28 years and our
children, who are now grown, loved it dearly. It has been the
center for the families who live close by. Even those who do not
live close come here because they appreciate a small park just for
children to enjoy. We were distressed when the city had to tear
out part of the park's equipment, particularly the adult -sized
swings that the junior high students enjoyed so much as they
waited for their .bus each morning, but were gratified when the
notice came around that the city was making plans to renovate
and asking for our input.
The noise of happy children playing on a safe, well- designed
playground is not a disturbance to us at all. We live only one
house away from the playlot and we miss the sound of children
playing there, A small, quiet playlot just for small people is
needed here. There are several playgrounds in the city designed
for adults with basketball and tennis courts, and baseball and
soccer fields, with just a tiny area set aside for children, so this
park is unique. Please continue with this project.
Sincerely,
elosl Li(/ / X a
Roy and Prudy
856 Mission St.
San Luis Obispo,
93405
u'
Lovtang
California
3 -'f'i
November 12,1991
Dear Mr. Arnold Jonas,
I live on Mission Street only two doors from the Mission
Playlot. I raised my kids at the park and now enjoy
watching the neighborhood children playing there. I was
sorry to hear that anyone was unhappy about the park because
I th ;,:k the park needs to be fixed up soon. The equipment
was taken out a long time ago and there are alot of children
that have been waiting for its return.
Thank you for your attention to my letter.
3-'5
Mon, Oct 7, 1991 OCT 08199.
y of San Lurs Olt—
CITY OF SAN LUIS OPISPO
Architectural Review Board
Dear Members,
I am responding to your notice about Mission St. mini -park by writing as
I will not be in town on Oct. 14.
My husband and I have lived on nearby West street for more than 25
years. Our children played in the mini -park and now when my grandson
visits me he would like to go there but as you know there are only a couple
of rickety swings left and some other dangerous conditions - a rusting
merry-go- round, exposed well pipes, and concrete curbs surrounding empty
sandboxes.
The little children in this area need the play ground. I have counted 15
small children on Lincoln, 7 on West street, and 8 on Mission and there-are
many more on Center, Mountain View, Venable, Murray, and Chorro. These
children are too young to go all the way to Santa Rosa park,
My five- year -old grandson, Mikie Rogers, and I walked over to view the
park this weekend. It could be such an asset to the neighborhood. A
magnificent redwood shades it most of the time. I asked him what he
thought should be done. He suggested more swings, a pirate's ship with a
place to walk the plank, or a fort and a bridge, and of course, something to
slide on.
For the neighbor's sake, the mini -park needs better fences. And I suggest
no sandboxes - there are too many cats in the neighborhood. What surface
might be put under swings so that great muddy puddles don't form 1n the
rainy season?
Let me know what I can do to help.
Sincerely,
Betty Lacey
965 West St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
3- to
Ilrt�cflN(; AGENDA
DATE /''1" Z ITEM # 3
.1AN O
Crtv of San Luis
3 January 1992
Judy Lautner, Asst. Planner
Community Development Dept.
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE; Appeal of ARC 91 -90
Renovation of Mission Street Playlot
Dear Ms. Lautner;
We are again writing in support of the renovation of the Mission
Street Playlot as approved by the ARC 18 November 1991. We urge
the City Council deny the appeal by Merrill Gaines.
The Playlot is a valuable asset to the neighborhood as a whole, has
been for many years and, hopefully, will be for many more. _
Respectfully;
Prudy Lovtang '
Roy Lovtang
856 Mission St
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805)544 -2120 REGE21VED
2' Op'1^.
J N7 99[
COUNCIL
SAN_. Is OBIsPO, CA
i
�J
COMM
❑ • Dodo Acd= nn
c
909V0 FIR DR
zrccDD&
C20ACAO ❑ MECHU
ZAT71=415Y ❑ FIN EIR
20CLERv0wc. ❑ FouCSCN.
❑ MCMT. TEAM ❑ Rm DaL
"� 0 0 a
1
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
R.-
i
}
I
m _ _ a_
SECTION
r
t
t
t
m
r �
E
e
LS i
mm
}
f
e
Clio
IYOW L ELEVATION - LOOKING FROM 1
t
ho
r
—
a. r
0
60
��i IIIIIIIIIIIi �j� ������plllll11111I ���
city O sAn x,11S OBISPO mawmkA
990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer
FROM: Whitney McEvaine, Assistant Planner
DATE: December 17, 1991
SUBJECT: City Council Agenda for January 7, 1992
Ken, I received a request to move consideration of the Mission Street playlot appeal
forward on the agenda. A number of concerned neighbors attended the ARC meeting,
many with children. As a courtesy to those parents with children who are planning to
attend the council hearing, could we schedule this as item 2? Please let me�now if this
would be okay.
-�j
c: Kim Condon
Ci
RECEIVED
t �.1 1 91
,CCK
SAN LUIS 081SPO, CA
REVISED
TENTATIVE
AGENDA CLOSE FOR TUESDAY, JANUARY 7 IS
MONDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1991 AT 9:00 A.M.
NOTE: DUE TO THE CHRISTMAS HOLIDAYS, THE AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR
MEETING OF TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1992, WILL CLOSE ON MONDAY, DECEMBER
23 AT 9:00 A.M. RATHER THAN THURSDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1991.
December 10, 1991
MEMORA, DUM
TO: Management Team /
FROM: Kim Condon, Assistant City Clef
SUBJ: AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL N EETING OF TUESDAY
JANUARY 7. 1992 (a7 7:00 PM
PRESENTATION
A Presentation by Irma Famularo and Pam Jardini, Co- directors of the Board of
ARTernatives, thanking the City Council for their support.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. STREET ABANDONMENT - SAN LUIS DRIVE (ROMERO /535 - 15 min.)
Public bearing to consider a Planning Commission recommendation to abandon a
portion of San Luis Drive adjacent to 2097 San Luis Drive; R -1 zone; Steven Frank,
applicant (continued from December 3, 1991).
�Mx tJ 2: APPEAL - DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY HOUSE (JONAS /407 - 30 min.)
1� V.� ` Public hearing to consider an appeal by David Jones, President of Delta Upsilon, of
an action by the Planning Commission denying an amendment to a conditionally
approved use permit 1515 to allow Rush events at the Fraternity House
PP P N ) tY
tf' proposed at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard.
1
do
3. APPEAL - MISSION STREET PLAY LOT (JONAS /407 - 30 min.)
Public hearing to consider an appeal by Merrill C. Gaines of an action by the
Architectural Review Commission approving renovation of the Mission Street Play
Lot located at 870 Mission Street.
4. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS (ROMERO /533 - 30 min.)
Public hearing to confirm costs for installation of curb, gutter and sidewalks along
portions of Santa Barbara Street.
BUSINESS ITEM
5. UNTREINTFORCED MASOI\'RY ORDINANCE (BAASCH /707 - 60 min.)
Public hearing to consider an ordinance establishing seismic strengthening standards
for unreinforced masonry buildings by creating a new appendix to the Building Code
(continued from 12/3/9I }.
CONSENT AGENDA
C -1 COUNCIL MINUTES. (VOGES)
C -2 CONTRACT PAY ESTIMATES (ROMERO).
Consideration of contract pay estimates and change orders.
C -3 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRI ACT? PROGRAM (ROIAMRO /495)
Consideration of approving City participation in Pacific Gas & Electric's ACTiz
Program (Advanced Customer Technology Test for Maximum Energy Efficiency).
C-4 RFP - HEADQUARTERS FIRE STATION /RECREATION ADMIN BUILDING
(NEUMANN/ )
Consideration of the proposed RFP process for retaining architectural services for
the design of the Headquarters Fire Station /Recreation Administration Building,
estimated to cost $
hey ,gip, 4&nNG/�,,�, AMDA
DATE - %��f� -M3111
JA
01 San uis
Ms. Judy Lautner, Associate Planner
Community Development Department
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93103 -8100
Dear Ms. Lautner:
931 West
Street
San Luis
Obispo, CA
93'fOS
December
28, 1991
7wTotw
;lq
MF
Q{
❑ MCMT 7 AM>' REC DIR.
❑� CS4DFU ❑ LUILDIR.
I was appalled to learn that the Architecture
decision to approve the renovation of the Mission Street Play Lot
has been appealed. It seems that twenty six neighborhood letters in
favor of the project and only one in opposition should indicate wide
neighborhood support. It will be very unfortunate if one person is
allowed to block the desires and needs of the greater community out
of very selfish personal interests.
My children are grown and my one young grandchild lives in another
state so I will not profit from the play lot. However, in a
community, it is important for all residents to work together to
meet the needs of those least able to champion their own cause. Our
children have little power but they are our major resource and we
must all nourish them. It is a very difficult time to grow up.
With all of the concerns about drugs, gangs, and irresponsible
sexual activity, the community should support any project that
encourages physical activity and social interaction with other
children and that may strengthen family life (parents often share
the park experience with their children). Would we all be better
off if the children were home quietly watching television instead of
developing skills they will need to help them become responsible
adults?
My lot is directly behind the play lot as is the lot of the person
making the appeal. I can see the play lot from my yard and I
sometimes hear the children. It is surprising that there are rarely
harsh sounds of quarrelling or other obnoxious loud sounds. College
students living on the same street are much noisier. I cannot
understand how anyone can be offended by the happy voices of
children at play. It is very annoying that cats in the neighborhood
mess my lawn and tear up my patio furniture with their claws - but I
would not even suggest that cats should be banned from the
neighborhood. Neither should the play activities of children.
Please continue your plans to upgrade the park and, in planning the
renovation, consider the needs of the children to be the highest
priority.
Sincerely yours
Elaine Holder
war
rx"
I
-4 01
'_� i -':� L4
3.
roe 0
fi
t.
m
A 1-4 T 1 PA Gy -A yk 1-1
im
HT