HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/07/1997, 5 - 1939 HAUSNA DRIVE, SAN LUIS OBISPO A 116-96FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM
PHONE NO. an. 07 1997 OBPM P2
Wu 1111i. Lo'WUP.� _ `'. R1
TO SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
S'UBJEC'T: 1939 Hausna Drive, San Luis Obispo
A 116-96
Concerning my being charged a second time for the planning
application, I think this is a major error and simply wrong.
I've not changed the plans at all, therefore according to city rules,l
should not be double charged.
The plans are identical! Re: the same 3 feet from the sideyard, the
same 5 feet from the back fence, the same 8 foot driveway and the
same plans to build specified carport Not one thing has changed.
We've only put the carport on the other side of the house.
This carport was designed before the surveying was done.
Therefore, everything about the planning application is identical.
So rather than "waiving the fee ", we must acknowledge that they
have already been paid.
Thank you,
Alana Reynolds
OLA,,
TO -AL P.01
.er •
January 7, 1997
To.: SLO City Council
From: Diane Hull
1939 Huasna Street
Alana Reynolds
Objection by Applicant to Second Condition for Exception
I support the applicant's objection to the second condition suggested by city staff that the
existing driveway ramp and paving be removed. City staff maintain that unless a driveway is
set back 20' from the street, the driveway itself does not provide a legal parking space.
Most families that I know, and I am confident that council members will concur,
regularly use their driveways for guest parking or their own personal parking.
My neighbor, who has a two car garage and three cars, never parks in his garage. He told
me that a workshop is the only practical use for a garage! Two of his cars are always parked
in the driveway. I believe that a parked car is the most common use of a driveway in all
of San Luis Obispo, and that, de- facto, driveways should constitute a legal parking
space in a single family residential neighborhood (because they are used as such).
The existing driveway at 1939 Huasna provides a perfect off - street parking space. Currently,
the fire hydrant on the side of the applicant's property removes one parking space. The new
driveway and carport will add two new parking spaces. Whether you leave the old
driveway intact or rip it out, there is no net change in parking spaces available!
This just isn't common sense!!
Applicant's Request for a Fee Waiver
Prior to the initial application for the administrative use permit, the applicant personally
measured the distance from her home to her lot line using the point markers on the sidewalk
concluded that the distance was sufficient but that the fence was not correctly placed and
was one foot short on her property. After the use permit was submitted and approved, the
applicant hired a professional surveyor. The surveyor discovered that the property line
markers placed on the sidewalks by the city staff in 1962 were wrong, and that the
fence was in the correct place. The applicant had the opposite side surveyed and discovered
that fence was one foot inside the property line. As a result of these findings, the applicant
was forced to put the carport on the other side. The application for the administrative use
permit had not changed since the original application did not specify which side of the house
the carport was to be built. The application stated that "the final goal is satisfying the City of
SLO's request to have a covered parking space."
The requirement that the applicant pay the administrative use permit fee twice is
unnecessary because the change in location of the carport was a direct result of the
city incorrectly placing lot line markers in 1962, and that the application itself did not
change.
Sheetl
7- Jan -97
1939 Huasna Drive
Alana Reynolds
Schedule of Costs for Carport Addition
Fees Required (or made necessary) by City of SLO
Administrative Use Permit 213
Energy Report 125
Attorney 800
Professional Planner 300
Administrative Use Permit 235
1,673
Other Pre- Construction Costs
Surveying
500
Re- Surveying
300
Move Gas Meter to Other Side
500
Draftsmen
400
Engineer
300
2,000
Lot Line Adjustment Expenses
Title Policy
400
Lot Line Adjustment -City Fee
386
Lot Line Adjustment - Public Works
378
1,164
6" Purchase of Neighbor's Property
1,500
Current Costs Incurred 6,337
Estimated Costs to Complete
Cut curb and new driveway approach 2,100
Pour concrete in new driveway 3,000
Remove fence and build new fence on
correct property line 1,000
Construction of Carport 3,000
Future Costs to Complete 9,100
Total Estimated Project Costs 15,437
Additional costs required to make
converted garage up-to -code (est) 500
Additional costs, if required by city council:
Estimated cost to remove existing driveway
3,100
Prepared by Diane Hull, CPA
Page 1
Standing of Infersecfion of Huasna and Lima,1 pm Today, January 1,1991
Looking North
Note; Cars parked on street
Looking South
Note; Fire hydrant on right in front
ofAlana's House at 1939 Huasna
Aland Reynold's House
1939 Huasna
Front View
Standing in Front Yard of 1939 Huasna
Looking South
Nofe: Cars parked in driveways
Front view of house up the street on Huasna.
This is an example of many homes on Huasna where the side yards are paved and the
single driveway is used fo park 2 cars.
f 1 i'1' fl 1 f 11 111'
Standing in Front Yard of 1939 Huasna
Looking at 1940 Huasna, The House Across the Street
Note: Abandoned driveway is intact,
Double•wide driveway with side for parking only, Car on right is inoperable,
Side View of 1940 Huasna from Lima Street
Note: 2 car garage with double driveway. Car on left is inoperable, This house has 4
parked cars in 2 driveways, One additional car is covered and parked on street.