Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03-2016 Item 12, Schmidt To: Maier, John Paul Subject: RE: Item 12, Buena Vista AC — Item 12 From: Richard Schmidt [ Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 4:33 PM To: E-mail Council Website Subject: Item 12, Buena Vista Please see attached letter. COUNCIL MEETING:_QS---Cj3- ITEM MAY 0 2 2016 This is an effort to explain the misappropriation of zoning process that underlies the reason this project keeps coming back again and again. COUNCIL MEETING: ITEM NO-. AZ Item 12—Buena Vista MAY 0 F 'l_016 Dear Council Members, It seems very odd that after the Council gave explicit instruction, this project returns with another round of "approvals" and advocacy from staff that ignore the Council's explicit direction. Do you perhaps have a discipline problem with staff's misunderstanding who's top dog? I'd like to address the zoning aspects of this project. 1. What is the purpose of zoning? One of the principal purposes of zoning is to provide predictability, for applicants and for neighbors and for residents in general. Predictability is achieved through establishing rules that are to be followed. Everyone knows these rules because they are written down, and can depend upon them to create an orderly development regime that minimizes conflicts. This is expressed in the "purpose" section of the zoning code with terms like "orderly" and the rest: "17.02.020 Purpose. "These regulations are intended to guide the development of the city in an orderly manner, based on the adopted general plan, to protect and enhance the quality of the natural and built environment, and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare by regulating the use of land and buildings and the location and basic form of structures." 2. What are "exceptions?" Incredibly, your zoning code doesn't seem to define the term. So, an "exception" would appear to be pretty much whatever staff wants to call an exception. This is contrary to the purpose of the zoning code itself, which is intended to provide predictability, not promote uncertainty. This use of "exceptions" makes no sense. 3. What is the purpose of "exceptions?" Exceptions are supposed to be similar to variances, but are a bit less "intense" in terms of required "findings" that must be made explicit when they are granted. Variances are explained in our zoning code as follows: "17.60.010 Intent. The variance procedure is intended to allow minor relaxation by the director of certain standards that would otherwise prevent a property from being used in the same manner as other, similar property, where the intent of these regulations is not compromised by such minor relaxation." Note, this is not permissive language. It is prescriptive — variances, and exceptions as they were used in previous years, are to be granted for purposes of equity, not to satisfy whims, desires for things not needed for equity, nor to justify intrusive special things not generally part of our neigh borhoodscape. There's a place for reasonable variances and exceptions because sometimes special circumstances that apply to one site but not to most would prevent reasonable use of a site if the code had to be followed literally. Typically this concern is expressed as "hardship" — as an accommodation necessary due to unusual circumstances not suffered by neighbors. For example, my neighbor bought a 400 square foot house on a substandard 5,000 square foot lot two thirds of which was in or within the banks of a major creek. The little house was fine till he and wife started a family, at which time he wanted to expand. But taking sideyard, front yard and creek top -of -bank setbacks into account would have made the lot unbuildable, even though the legal presumption is all lots are buildable. So this "hardship" resulted in relaxation of various setbacks in a manner that provided for fair use of the lot, but also in a manner not abusive to the neighbors. There is no hardship necessity for the exceptions being sought for this project. 4. 1 believe the city has become very sloppy in its use of exceptions. In effect, your staff has become very indulgent in granting requests that are contrary to the zoning code's requirements and which are not supported by fair -use necessity, and the result is our zoning code's application, instead of providing predictability, provides only unpredictability. This maximizes conflict while endangering quality of life, and serves no public purpose. The word is out among developers that our code means nothing. Ask for something, no matter how contrary to code, and staff will support you. That's clearly what's happening with the project before you. This is wrong, and it's something systemic you need to fix ASAP. 5. Zoning rules are meant to be followed, not "excepted." If you don't agree, you should be honest about it, and just eliminate the zoning code altogether and let SLO become like Houston used to be, where a skyscraper can go up anyplace, even right next to your very own home. Sincerely, Richard Schmidt