Workshop Report
Questionnaire Issues by Category
Questionnaire Issues by Category
This
document places participant comments into various
categories. Where a respondent made
applicable statements in answering more than one question, they are
combined,
separated by semi-colons. Note that this
is just one person’s opinion regarding categorization of
responses. You may disagree. To get the best idea of what
respondents
meant by their statements, review of responses, by question, is
recommended.
Note: In some cases, where appropriate, one response appears in multiple categories
1. Need for new zoning; GP/LCP updates, including specific suggestions and recommendations - mentioned by 29 participants
Note: In some cases, where appropriate, one response appears in multiple categories
1. Need for new zoning; GP/LCP updates, including specific suggestions and recommendations - mentioned by 29 participants
participant # 2The City will need to pass strict laws as to size, views, etc.
participant # 3 Environmental controls – in light of climate change & energy shortages – restrict home size on basis of energy required to heat & cool it or mandate solar panels on basis of square footageof hours – or require positive solar heating; design, & site placement – also energy-efficient appliances mandated
participant # 5 1). Added fees for infrastructure upgrading. 2). Historical or fine arts society representation on Planning commission. 3). Size limitations based on available parking area.[ Special approach needed in Beach and Island streets areas because there is not adequate parking
participant # 6 If it’s a block of 1 story houses – make them stay 1 story houses
participant # 7 Correlate livable floor space to lot size (FAR), and allow encroachment incentives for less, or no second story.
participant # 9 Perhaps consider some zoning changes so that we don’t always hear that everything and anything is “within the legal limit”
participant # 10 Update General Plan. Hold to it. Some variances were reasonable
participant 11 Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view (response to “Are you concerned about the building of out-of-scale houses or additions in your neighborhood?)
participant # 12 Manage scale, setbacks, no variances, etc.
participant # 13 Be reasonable re City history & building in that particular area
participant # 14 Floor area ratios to lot size. Height flexibility as a ratio to bulk
participant # 15 FAR & limiting need for 2-car garage – presently required for any new building, even a studio.; FAR may not work on the 40 x 60 lots in N. MB
participant # 16 Keep mansions in certain areas. Make those houses pay for the services they
participant # 18 Revision/enforcement of zoning ordinance that effectively limits oversized houses
participant # 19 Regulations & rules as to the size of house in proportion to lot, & upper floor setbacks. Then a Planning Dept. which lives here & strong City Council & Planning Commission to adhere to the regulations; Should work for most, if not all. For example – if you buy a small lot, you must build a small house. Want a large house? Move to a ranch.
participant # 20 Size limit (sq. footage) in relation to lot size
participant # 21 Local ordinance or zoning must be established
participant # 22 Better zoning – perhaps “historical district designation” – Some design criteria?; evaluate distinctive areas? i.e. historical – not sure
participant # 25 Limit House bulk increase to 10 – 15% of older house. Preserve and protect trees, shrubbery and views.
participant # 26 Limit size of homes in established neighborhoods
participant # 27 To redo the General Plan that is at the C-C for approval. It was done by developers and realtors., and is designed to maximize profit, not quality of life (QOL). Use reasonable setbacks. Each home needs to fit the area it is in; Morro Bay is made up of many subdivisions with their own needs so different approaches are necessary
participant # 28 Create a standard based on average home sizes (consistent wi/ lot sizes) and set the average as a limit (all lots of a certain size are limited to the average home size in MB on the same lots.
participant # 29 Floor area ratio is one method that has worked in many California cities; Change the zoning so that changes can be accomplished; Houses can be built to fit the size of the lot and not overwhelm the lot
participant # 30 * ratio building to lot size, including overhang,. * setbacks all the way around. *street width considered in front yard setback *live in period required of builder * Height * Roof analysis * Solar potential of neighbors * Utility meter placement; Listen to the residents about their preferences. Uphold existing rules-, no variances. New codes to protect smaller existing properties
participant # 32 We have to look at bulk and scale on the small lots in M.B. since most are 3,600 SF down. There has to be a size limit. Also the character i.e. how it “fits” in with the other houses in the neighborhood; Yes. Larger lot areas can handle larger homes, but the smaller lots can’t handle them
participant # 33 Code enforcement. 2nd stories percentage to first. Percentage of house to lot size
participant # 34 Small scale design – roof pitch, second story setbacks different than first story, credit for design features that make a structure more interesting
participant # 35 Re-write the zoning rules to limit size, etc. Have a City review board on bulk and size
participant # 36 To preserve neighborhood character – not just limit size of homes, limit also height, and amount of land movement i.e. not creating new hills that weren’t there before (Colmer project on Sunset Ave North MB) or excavating huge pits int loand to allow for 48’ buildings (Cameron financial po=roject on Sunset Ave North MB)
participant # 37 Stricter guidelines on setbacks, easements, lot splits. Public input – guidelines set up per other places like Carmel, Santa Barbara; Definitely needs to limit size, scale, bulk and enforce what is currently on the books too
participant # 3 Environmental controls – in light of climate change & energy shortages – restrict home size on basis of energy required to heat & cool it or mandate solar panels on basis of square footageof hours – or require positive solar heating; design, & site placement – also energy-efficient appliances mandated
participant # 5 1). Added fees for infrastructure upgrading. 2). Historical or fine arts society representation on Planning commission. 3). Size limitations based on available parking area.[ Special approach needed in Beach and Island streets areas because there is not adequate parking
participant # 6 If it’s a block of 1 story houses – make them stay 1 story houses
participant # 7 Correlate livable floor space to lot size (FAR), and allow encroachment incentives for less, or no second story.
participant # 9 Perhaps consider some zoning changes so that we don’t always hear that everything and anything is “within the legal limit”
participant # 10 Update General Plan. Hold to it. Some variances were reasonable
participant 11 Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view (response to “Are you concerned about the building of out-of-scale houses or additions in your neighborhood?)
participant # 12 Manage scale, setbacks, no variances, etc.
participant # 13 Be reasonable re City history & building in that particular area
participant # 14 Floor area ratios to lot size. Height flexibility as a ratio to bulk
participant # 15 FAR & limiting need for 2-car garage – presently required for any new building, even a studio.; FAR may not work on the 40 x 60 lots in N. MB
participant # 16 Keep mansions in certain areas. Make those houses pay for the services they
participant # 18 Revision/enforcement of zoning ordinance that effectively limits oversized houses
participant # 19 Regulations & rules as to the size of house in proportion to lot, & upper floor setbacks. Then a Planning Dept. which lives here & strong City Council & Planning Commission to adhere to the regulations; Should work for most, if not all. For example – if you buy a small lot, you must build a small house. Want a large house? Move to a ranch.
participant # 20 Size limit (sq. footage) in relation to lot size
participant # 21 Local ordinance or zoning must be established
participant # 22 Better zoning – perhaps “historical district designation” – Some design criteria?; evaluate distinctive areas? i.e. historical – not sure
participant # 25 Limit House bulk increase to 10 – 15% of older house. Preserve and protect trees, shrubbery and views.
participant # 26 Limit size of homes in established neighborhoods
participant # 27 To redo the General Plan that is at the C-C for approval. It was done by developers and realtors., and is designed to maximize profit, not quality of life (QOL). Use reasonable setbacks. Each home needs to fit the area it is in; Morro Bay is made up of many subdivisions with their own needs so different approaches are necessary
participant # 28 Create a standard based on average home sizes (consistent wi/ lot sizes) and set the average as a limit (all lots of a certain size are limited to the average home size in MB on the same lots.
participant # 29 Floor area ratio is one method that has worked in many California cities; Change the zoning so that changes can be accomplished; Houses can be built to fit the size of the lot and not overwhelm the lot
participant # 30 * ratio building to lot size, including overhang,. * setbacks all the way around. *street width considered in front yard setback *live in period required of builder * Height * Roof analysis * Solar potential of neighbors * Utility meter placement; Listen to the residents about their preferences. Uphold existing rules-, no variances. New codes to protect smaller existing properties
participant # 32 We have to look at bulk and scale on the small lots in M.B. since most are 3,600 SF down. There has to be a size limit. Also the character i.e. how it “fits” in with the other houses in the neighborhood; Yes. Larger lot areas can handle larger homes, but the smaller lots can’t handle them
participant # 33 Code enforcement. 2nd stories percentage to first. Percentage of house to lot size
participant # 34 Small scale design – roof pitch, second story setbacks different than first story, credit for design features that make a structure more interesting
participant # 35 Re-write the zoning rules to limit size, etc. Have a City review board on bulk and size
participant # 36 To preserve neighborhood character – not just limit size of homes, limit also height, and amount of land movement i.e. not creating new hills that weren’t there before (Colmer project on Sunset Ave North MB) or excavating huge pits int loand to allow for 48’ buildings (Cameron financial po=roject on Sunset Ave North MB)
participant # 37 Stricter guidelines on setbacks, easements, lot splits. Public input – guidelines set up per other places like Carmel, Santa Barbara; Definitely needs to limit size, scale, bulk and enforce what is currently on the books too
2. View blockage issues - mentioned by 20 participants
participant #2 Loss of view,
sunlight, privacy participant ; The City will need to pass strict
laws as to size, views, etc.
participant # 4 Smaller houses have lost their privacy and views; Neighborhood residents should have a right to protect loss of views, parking, etc.
participant # 5 Viewshed
participant # 9 Affected views
participant # 6 A new two-story house built right next door covers the entire lot where there used to be a 1 story house & backyard. The new house blocks our southern light and garden space. Where there was a yard is now a 3 car garage w/cars coming in & out. The stairs to the living space on second story are 10 feet from our bedroom – the wrap around deck & living space look directly down into our bedroom, kitchen, & entire backyard. We have lost all of our privacy.
participant # 7 An adjacent property was developed 30+ years ago w/multifamily, most noticeable changes were loss of privacy, loss of afternoon sunlight, and loss of view
participant # 9 Affected views
participant # 11 Our neighbors’ view was totally blocked which decreased the value of his home. Too many homes have been built on existing property; Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view (response to “Are you concerned about the building of out-of-scale houses or additions in your neighborhood?”)
participant # 14 Architecture variety and view loss minimization
participant # 16 What is happening by me is increase of units & size of houses & decrease of land. That might be all right if City provides services & open space (parks, views, etc.), but it does not.
participant # 19 Visual blight for all, and deep concern for actual neighbors of McMansions who have their privacy, light, views & use of yard impeded
participant # 20 Blocked former views
participant # 21 A large second house was built on the same lot directly in front of a small older house, which completely blocks its views and light. City council did nothing to mitigate situation
participant # 23 Decreased view, decreased # of trees, etc. Increased coverage of soil. More un-neighborly exchanges. Loss of affordable housing for longtime residents; Assure view corridors on bay front. Notify renters as well as property owners of proposed changes.
participant # 26 Yes, spec. app. In areas that have smaller lots, viewsheds, etc.
participant # 28 yes. View –blocked. Closes in neighborhood. Increased fire risk due to proximity & on a broader view…we have such limited land space and need more efficient use if we‘ll have affordable housing
participant # 29 Destroyed views, changed neighborhood character
participant # 36 My mother’s property value has fallen below what she paid for it due to out-of-scale development. It will be going into foreclosure. Other neighbors will be losing view and be affected by increased drainage onto their properties
participant # 37 Views – setback issues. Allowing lot splits where character has changed neighborhood.
participant # 37 Views – setback issues. Allowing lot splits where character has changed neighborhood
participant # 4 Smaller houses have lost their privacy and views; Neighborhood residents should have a right to protect loss of views, parking, etc.
participant # 5 Viewshed
participant # 9 Affected views
participant # 6 A new two-story house built right next door covers the entire lot where there used to be a 1 story house & backyard. The new house blocks our southern light and garden space. Where there was a yard is now a 3 car garage w/cars coming in & out. The stairs to the living space on second story are 10 feet from our bedroom – the wrap around deck & living space look directly down into our bedroom, kitchen, & entire backyard. We have lost all of our privacy.
participant # 7 An adjacent property was developed 30+ years ago w/multifamily, most noticeable changes were loss of privacy, loss of afternoon sunlight, and loss of view
participant # 9 Affected views
participant # 11 Our neighbors’ view was totally blocked which decreased the value of his home. Too many homes have been built on existing property; Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view (response to “Are you concerned about the building of out-of-scale houses or additions in your neighborhood?”)
participant # 14 Architecture variety and view loss minimization
participant # 16 What is happening by me is increase of units & size of houses & decrease of land. That might be all right if City provides services & open space (parks, views, etc.), but it does not.
participant # 19 Visual blight for all, and deep concern for actual neighbors of McMansions who have their privacy, light, views & use of yard impeded
participant # 20 Blocked former views
participant # 21 A large second house was built on the same lot directly in front of a small older house, which completely blocks its views and light. City council did nothing to mitigate situation
participant # 23 Decreased view, decreased # of trees, etc. Increased coverage of soil. More un-neighborly exchanges. Loss of affordable housing for longtime residents; Assure view corridors on bay front. Notify renters as well as property owners of proposed changes.
participant # 26 Yes, spec. app. In areas that have smaller lots, viewsheds, etc.
participant # 28 yes. View –blocked. Closes in neighborhood. Increased fire risk due to proximity & on a broader view…we have such limited land space and need more efficient use if we‘ll have affordable housing
participant # 29 Destroyed views, changed neighborhood character
participant # 36 My mother’s property value has fallen below what she paid for it due to out-of-scale development. It will be going into foreclosure. Other neighbors will be losing view and be affected by increased drainage onto their properties
participant # 37 Views – setback issues. Allowing lot splits where character has changed neighborhood.
participant # 37 Views – setback issues. Allowing lot splits where character has changed neighborhood
3. Character, feel, ambiance, scale of neighborhoods - mentioned by 17 participants
participant # 1 Stick to
the rule of neighborhood character. Doubling is not sticking to
what it is.; Keep the neighborhood feeling and desirability intact
participant # 10 The “Western White House” – Olive and Piney Way – Out of scale
participant 11 Yes, completely out of character; Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view; Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view (response to “Are you concerned about the building of out-of-scale houses or additions in your neighborhood?”)
participant # 12 Keep Morro Bay Beautiful. Left big city to be here. Don’t want it to turn out to be like what I left; Please protect MB … this is why we elected you ….it is your job!!! Keep MB beautiful and charming
participant # 17 Limitations of size according to lot size and the character of the surrounding neighborhood. I would also like to see landscape (trees, gardens, greenery) a requirement for new projects; People have been attracted to M.B. because of its eclectic, seaside nature. Without intervention our community will be altered, and not desirably
participant # 18 Residential issue less important than commercial; City needs to do more to limit/improve character of commercial areas, esp. downtown
participant # 22 Ruins the feel of town & street; Please develop a plan that preserves the small town feel without adverse effects on the future – think more about residents & the ability to live, raise a family, earn a living, than “weekenders”
participant # 23 Different neighborhoods already have different character and advantages. Each neighborhood’s character should be considered
participant # 25 Destroyed the ambiance, beauty, peace of the neighborhood
participant # 28 Keeps consistent with General Plan statement to remain consistent w/ small town character/ Infrastructure and goals for affordable housing
participant # 29 Destroyed views, changed neighborhood character
participant # 32 We have to look at bulk and scale on the small lots in M.B. since most are 3,600 SF down. There has to be a size limit. Also the character i.e. how it “fits” in with the other houses in the neighborhood; When a house is out of character, it stands out like a ‘sore thumb” in the area. They all don’t need to look alike, but not blah.
Participant # 33 The preservation is important, for once you allow development it is ruined forever
participant # 36 Yes. Specialized approaches to preserve unique character of some areas; To preserve neighborhood character – not just limit size of homes, limit also height, and amount of land movement i.e. not creating new hills that weren’t there before (Colmer project on Sunset Ave North MB) or excavating huge pits intended to allow for 48’ buildings (Cameron financial project on Sunset Ave North MB)
participant # 37 Views – setback issues. Allowing lot splits where character has changed neighborhood; Yes – different size lots have different character
participant # 36 My mother’s property value has fallen below what she paid for it due to out-of-scale development. It will be going into foreclosure. Other neighbors will be losing view and be affected by increased drainage onto their properties
participant # 38 Morro Bay is rapidly destroying its charm by building out of character homes … box after box after box.
participant # 10 The “Western White House” – Olive and Piney Way – Out of scale
participant 11 Yes, completely out of character; Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view; Yes, especially homes that fill the entire lot, are out of character and/or block another’s view (response to “Are you concerned about the building of out-of-scale houses or additions in your neighborhood?”)
participant # 12 Keep Morro Bay Beautiful. Left big city to be here. Don’t want it to turn out to be like what I left; Please protect MB … this is why we elected you ….it is your job!!! Keep MB beautiful and charming
participant # 17 Limitations of size according to lot size and the character of the surrounding neighborhood. I would also like to see landscape (trees, gardens, greenery) a requirement for new projects; People have been attracted to M.B. because of its eclectic, seaside nature. Without intervention our community will be altered, and not desirably
participant # 18 Residential issue less important than commercial; City needs to do more to limit/improve character of commercial areas, esp. downtown
participant # 22 Ruins the feel of town & street; Please develop a plan that preserves the small town feel without adverse effects on the future – think more about residents & the ability to live, raise a family, earn a living, than “weekenders”
participant # 23 Different neighborhoods already have different character and advantages. Each neighborhood’s character should be considered
participant # 25 Destroyed the ambiance, beauty, peace of the neighborhood
participant # 28 Keeps consistent with General Plan statement to remain consistent w/ small town character/ Infrastructure and goals for affordable housing
participant # 29 Destroyed views, changed neighborhood character
participant # 32 We have to look at bulk and scale on the small lots in M.B. since most are 3,600 SF down. There has to be a size limit. Also the character i.e. how it “fits” in with the other houses in the neighborhood; When a house is out of character, it stands out like a ‘sore thumb” in the area. They all don’t need to look alike, but not blah.
Participant # 33 The preservation is important, for once you allow development it is ruined forever
participant # 36 Yes. Specialized approaches to preserve unique character of some areas; To preserve neighborhood character – not just limit size of homes, limit also height, and amount of land movement i.e. not creating new hills that weren’t there before (Colmer project on Sunset Ave North MB) or excavating huge pits intended to allow for 48’ buildings (Cameron financial project on Sunset Ave North MB)
participant # 37 Views – setback issues. Allowing lot splits where character has changed neighborhood; Yes – different size lots have different character
participant # 36 My mother’s property value has fallen below what she paid for it due to out-of-scale development. It will be going into foreclosure. Other neighbors will be losing view and be affected by increased drainage onto their properties
participant # 38 Morro Bay is rapidly destroying its charm by building out of character homes … box after box after box.
4. Lack of provisions/ability for citizens to influence/stop what they consider unacceptable and inappropriate development - mentioned by 16 participants
The following responses
were to this question: “Have neighbors attempted to stop
this kind of development? If so, what happened?”
participant # 1 Yes, failed
participant # 4 I don’t know why an elderly widow’s request against the height of a neighbor’s house was ignored; Neighborhood residents should have a right to protect loss of views, parking, etc.
participant # 6 As a next door neighbor, I was sent a card and given 10 days (over the Christmas holiday) to comment. I was out of town, & when I came back, I was told it was too late. All of the direct neighbors are renters, so no-one feels they have a voice.
participant $ 8 Yes – they were built anyway – but modified
participant # 9 To my knowledge, some people have talked to someone at City Hall, and have presumably been told that everything was within legal limits
participant # 12 Yes. Spoke with Planning Department. Nothing happened. – given variances, or told the % coverage was acceptable
participant # 16 Some, but if the Planning Commission is run by developers, land sharks, & architects, then they keep cutting the slices of land like a pie. Too small!
participant # 20 Yes – not effective
participant # 21 A large second house was built on the same lot directly in front of a small older house, which completely blocks its views and light. City council did nothing to mitigate situation
participant # 23 At first the large scale, view blocking homes were stopped, but the developers continued to resubmit. They eventually got approval, but did not do the improvements they first offered. Some un-permitted buildings became legitimized
participant # 25 Yes – nothing
participant # 29 Yes, nothing
participant # 33 Concerned, but unable to stop large scale house because it conformed to the code
participant # 36 Yes, my family and my neighbors have been to multiple City Council and Planning Commission meetings against some out of scale developments. It’s made no difference. The developments were approved.
participant # 37 Yes – allowed to go through
participant # 1 Yes, failed
participant # 4 I don’t know why an elderly widow’s request against the height of a neighbor’s house was ignored; Neighborhood residents should have a right to protect loss of views, parking, etc.
participant # 6 As a next door neighbor, I was sent a card and given 10 days (over the Christmas holiday) to comment. I was out of town, & when I came back, I was told it was too late. All of the direct neighbors are renters, so no-one feels they have a voice.
participant $ 8 Yes – they were built anyway – but modified
participant # 9 To my knowledge, some people have talked to someone at City Hall, and have presumably been told that everything was within legal limits
participant # 12 Yes. Spoke with Planning Department. Nothing happened. – given variances, or told the % coverage was acceptable
participant # 16 Some, but if the Planning Commission is run by developers, land sharks, & architects, then they keep cutting the slices of land like a pie. Too small!
participant # 20 Yes – not effective
participant # 21 A large second house was built on the same lot directly in front of a small older house, which completely blocks its views and light. City council did nothing to mitigate situation
participant # 23 At first the large scale, view blocking homes were stopped, but the developers continued to resubmit. They eventually got approval, but did not do the improvements they first offered. Some un-permitted buildings became legitimized
participant # 25 Yes – nothing
participant # 29 Yes, nothing
participant # 33 Concerned, but unable to stop large scale house because it conformed to the code
participant # 36 Yes, my family and my neighbors have been to multiple City Council and Planning Commission meetings against some out of scale developments. It’s made no difference. The developments were approved.
participant # 37 Yes – allowed to go through
The responses below were from another
section of the questionnaire. Note that
participant # 28 also has a statement above; so was only counted once in
tallying the number of participants who made comments that fit into this
section.
participant # 28 Listen
& act based on what the people who live here are saying they
want. If there’s an overwhelming majority, you’re
there to act in their behalf. Also, think beyond this year &
next…. What, based on your decisions, will this place look like
in 10 years & who will be able to live here?
participant # 30 Listen to the residents about their preferences. Uphold existing rules=, no variances. New codes to protect smaller existing properties
participant # 30 Listen to the residents about their preferences. Uphold existing rules=, no variances. New codes to protect smaller existing properties
5. Failure of Council, Planning Commission, planners to follow existing zoning/rules; excessive variances and developer influence on City staff/government - mentioned by 14 participants
participant # 5 Stop
overriding the Planning Commission! City trolleys are not the
same as adequate parking on City streets. Forget
“affordable housing”!
participant # 11 Enforce existing residential planning. Do not change zoning to accommodate builders; Please stick to the local planning and zoning laws. What about setbacks on lots? Where are the workers (clerks, sales people, etc.) going to live?
participant # 12 Manage scale, setbacks, no variances, etc.
participant # 17 Probably specialized approaches are more realistic, but clear, basic requirements should be the starting point. Enforcement of guidelines, laws currently on books
participant # 19 Why are you so swayed by real estate developers and owners who cry, & play “poor me” and give variances, etc. to build bigger & more units per lot – and badly designed unintelligent lot plans?
participant # 20 Variances are excessively given & are not given on a rational basis. Petitioners are encouraged to give “sad stories” mostly untrue since they often sell their properties
participant # 21 Do what’s best for everyone. Have some courage to do what’s right. No one can please everyone, so don’t try to be :”nice”. We have enough of “nice”. Increase impact fees. Do not subsidize developers.
participant # 23 At first the large scale, view blocking homes were stopped, but the developers continued to resubmit. They eventually got approval, but did not do the improvements they first offered. Some un-permitted buildings became legitimized
participant # 24 Keep the charter
participant # 30 Listen to the residents about their preferences. Uphold existing rules-, no variances. New codes to protect smaller existing properties
participant # 31 Enforce existing laws, and remove City staff members that are involved with the affordable housing credit scam. I.e. elected officials (several names were provided and this information has been preserved, but has not been included in this document); Without enforcement, laws are useless
participant # 34 ? Variances. ? Exceptions
participant # 36 A good start would be to follow the ordinances we have in place. Several were violated in these projects. That starts with the planners in the building dept. doing their job correctly; Because if we can’t follow the rules we have in place, what’s the point in establishing new ones?
participant # 37 Definitely needs to limit size, scale, bulk and enforce what is currently on the books too
participant # 11 Enforce existing residential planning. Do not change zoning to accommodate builders; Please stick to the local planning and zoning laws. What about setbacks on lots? Where are the workers (clerks, sales people, etc.) going to live?
participant # 12 Manage scale, setbacks, no variances, etc.
participant # 17 Probably specialized approaches are more realistic, but clear, basic requirements should be the starting point. Enforcement of guidelines, laws currently on books
participant # 19 Why are you so swayed by real estate developers and owners who cry, & play “poor me” and give variances, etc. to build bigger & more units per lot – and badly designed unintelligent lot plans?
participant # 20 Variances are excessively given & are not given on a rational basis. Petitioners are encouraged to give “sad stories” mostly untrue since they often sell their properties
participant # 21 Do what’s best for everyone. Have some courage to do what’s right. No one can please everyone, so don’t try to be :”nice”. We have enough of “nice”. Increase impact fees. Do not subsidize developers.
participant # 23 At first the large scale, view blocking homes were stopped, but the developers continued to resubmit. They eventually got approval, but did not do the improvements they first offered. Some un-permitted buildings became legitimized
participant # 24 Keep the charter
participant # 30 Listen to the residents about their preferences. Uphold existing rules-, no variances. New codes to protect smaller existing properties
participant # 31 Enforce existing laws, and remove City staff members that are involved with the affordable housing credit scam. I.e. elected officials (several names were provided and this information has been preserved, but has not been included in this document); Without enforcement, laws are useless
participant # 34 ? Variances. ? Exceptions
participant # 36 A good start would be to follow the ordinances we have in place. Several were violated in these projects. That starts with the planners in the building dept. doing their job correctly; Because if we can’t follow the rules we have in place, what’s the point in establishing new ones?
participant # 37 Definitely needs to limit size, scale, bulk and enforce what is currently on the books too
6. Concerns about agendas, impartiality, competence of City government and/or staff - mentioned by 8 participants
participant # 3 The
neighborhood will change w/ or w/o the City govt because it’s all
about developers & money. Revolution now! Effects of
loss of access to sunlight have broader environmental sustainability
issues – from ability to dry clothes on a line in the sun to self
sufficient gardening
participant # 13 Planning commission needs to reflect views of residents;
participant # 14 Our current City Council is incapable of dealing with the problem due to personal political agendas
participant # 19 Why are you so swayed by real estate developers and owners who cry, & play “poor me” and give variances, etc. to build bigger & more units per lot – and badly designed unintelligent lot plans?
participant # 28 Listen & act based on what the people who live here are saying they want. If there’s an overwhelming majority, you’re there to act in their behalf. Also, think beyond this year & next…. What, based on your decisions, will this place look like in 10 years & who will be able to live here?
participant # 31 Enforce existing laws, and remove City staff members that are involved with the affordable housing credit scam. I.e. elected officials (several names were provided and this information has been preserved, but has not been included in this document); Without enforcement, laws are useless
participant # 32 First and foremost do our elected officials have a conflict of interest with developers that are associated with (name deleted) ?
participant # 36 A good start would be to follow the ordinances we have in place. Several were violated in these projects. That starts with the planners in the building dept. doing their job correctly; Because if we can’t follow the rules we have in place, what’s the point in establishing new ones?
participant # 13 Planning commission needs to reflect views of residents;
participant # 14 Our current City Council is incapable of dealing with the problem due to personal political agendas
participant # 19 Why are you so swayed by real estate developers and owners who cry, & play “poor me” and give variances, etc. to build bigger & more units per lot – and badly designed unintelligent lot plans?
participant # 28 Listen & act based on what the people who live here are saying they want. If there’s an overwhelming majority, you’re there to act in their behalf. Also, think beyond this year & next…. What, based on your decisions, will this place look like in 10 years & who will be able to live here?
participant # 31 Enforce existing laws, and remove City staff members that are involved with the affordable housing credit scam. I.e. elected officials (several names were provided and this information has been preserved, but has not been included in this document); Without enforcement, laws are useless
participant # 32 First and foremost do our elected officials have a conflict of interest with developers that are associated with (name deleted) ?
participant # 36 A good start would be to follow the ordinances we have in place. Several were violated in these projects. That starts with the planners in the building dept. doing their job correctly; Because if we can’t follow the rules we have in place, what’s the point in establishing new ones?
7. Light/solar access - mentioned by 8 participants
participant #2 Loss of view, sunlight, privacy
participant # 3 The neighborhood will change w/ or w/o the City govt because it’s all about developers & money. Revolution now! Effects of loss of access to sunlight have broader environmental sustainability issues – from ability to dry clothes on a line in the sun to self sufficient gardening; Environmental controls – in light of climate change & energy shortages – restrict home size on basis of energy required to heat & cool it or mandate solar panels on basis of square footageof hours – or require positive solar heating; design, & site placement – also energy-efficient appliances mandated
participant # 6 A new two-story house built right next door covers the entire lot where there used to be a 1 story house & backyard. The new house blocks our southern light and garden space. Where there was a yard is now a 3 car garage w/cars coming in & out. The stairs to the living space on second story are 10 feet from our bedroom – the wrap around deck & living space look directly down into our bedroom, kitchen, & entire backyard. We have lost all of our privacy.
participant # 7An adjacent property was developed 30+ years ago w/multifamily, most noticeable changes were loss of privacy, loss of afternoon sunlight, and loss of view
participant # 12 Sunlight, houses loom over others, parking ugly, they look over several (even into) several yards & homes
participant # 19 Visual blight for all, and deep concern for actual neighbors of McMansions who have their privacy, light, views & use of yard impeded
participant # 17 I live in the smallest home in my 1-block long street. Due to new, large structures being built left, right, and behind me, I now live in a “hole”
participant # 30 * ratio building to lot size, including overhang,. * setbacks all the way around. *street width considered in front yard setback *live in period required of builder * Height * Roof analysis * Solar potential of neighbors * Utility meter placement
8. Privacy issues - mentioned by 7 participantsparticipant # 3 The neighborhood will change w/ or w/o the City govt because it’s all about developers & money. Revolution now! Effects of loss of access to sunlight have broader environmental sustainability issues – from ability to dry clothes on a line in the sun to self sufficient gardening; Environmental controls – in light of climate change & energy shortages – restrict home size on basis of energy required to heat & cool it or mandate solar panels on basis of square footageof hours – or require positive solar heating; design, & site placement – also energy-efficient appliances mandated
participant # 6 A new two-story house built right next door covers the entire lot where there used to be a 1 story house & backyard. The new house blocks our southern light and garden space. Where there was a yard is now a 3 car garage w/cars coming in & out. The stairs to the living space on second story are 10 feet from our bedroom – the wrap around deck & living space look directly down into our bedroom, kitchen, & entire backyard. We have lost all of our privacy.
participant # 7An adjacent property was developed 30+ years ago w/multifamily, most noticeable changes were loss of privacy, loss of afternoon sunlight, and loss of view
participant # 12 Sunlight, houses loom over others, parking ugly, they look over several (even into) several yards & homes
participant # 19 Visual blight for all, and deep concern for actual neighbors of McMansions who have their privacy, light, views & use of yard impeded
participant # 17 I live in the smallest home in my 1-block long street. Due to new, large structures being built left, right, and behind me, I now live in a “hole”
participant # 30 * ratio building to lot size, including overhang,. * setbacks all the way around. *street width considered in front yard setback *live in period required of builder * Height * Roof analysis * Solar potential of neighbors * Utility meter placement
participant #2 Loss of view, sunlight, privacy
participant # 4Smaller houses have lost their privacy and views
participant # 6 Preserve people’s views & privacy & southern exposure
participant # 7An adjacent property was developed 30+ years ago w/multifamily, most noticeable changes were loss of privacy, loss of afternoon sunlight, and loss of view
participant # 18 Yes, loss of privacy
participant # 19 Visual blight for all, and deep concern for actual neighbors of McMansions who have their privacy, light, views & use of yard impeded
participant # 30 The Vesterffeld house on Fairview is a constant annoyance. Not only during the very long building period, but as it looks over the neighborhood creating a feel of constant privacy intrusion; It keeps neighborhood value intact & neighbors’ privacy
participant # 4Smaller houses have lost their privacy and views
participant # 6 Preserve people’s views & privacy & southern exposure
participant # 7An adjacent property was developed 30+ years ago w/multifamily, most noticeable changes were loss of privacy, loss of afternoon sunlight, and loss of view
participant # 18 Yes, loss of privacy
participant # 19 Visual blight for all, and deep concern for actual neighbors of McMansions who have their privacy, light, views & use of yard impeded
participant # 30 The Vesterffeld house on Fairview is a constant annoyance. Not only during the very long building period, but as it looks over the neighborhood creating a feel of constant privacy intrusion; It keeps neighborhood value intact & neighbors’ privacy
9. Affordable housing - mentioned by 6 participants
participant # 5 Stop
overriding the Planning Commission! City trolleys are not the
same as adequate parking on City streets. Forget
“affordable housing”!
participant # 11 Please stick to the local planning and zoning laws. What about setbacks on lots? Where are the workers (clerks, sales people, etc.) going to live?
participant 17 Yes. My major concern is that affordable housing is disappearing – that our community will become a homogeneous group of privileged folks in a single age group
participant # 22 Please develop a plan that preserves the small town feel without adverse effects on the future – think more about residents & the ability to live, raise a family, earn a living, than “weekenders”
participant # 23 Decreased view, decreased # of trees, etc. Increased coverage of soil. More un-neighborly exchanges. Loss of affordable housing for longtime residents
participant # 28 yes. View –blocked. Closes in neighborhood. Increased fire risk due to proximity & on a broader view…we have such limited land space and need more efficient use if we‘ll have affordable housing; Keeps consistent with General Plan statement to remain consistent w/ small town character/ Infrastructure and goals for affordable housing
participant # 11 Please stick to the local planning and zoning laws. What about setbacks on lots? Where are the workers (clerks, sales people, etc.) going to live?
participant 17 Yes. My major concern is that affordable housing is disappearing – that our community will become a homogeneous group of privileged folks in a single age group
participant # 22 Please develop a plan that preserves the small town feel without adverse effects on the future – think more about residents & the ability to live, raise a family, earn a living, than “weekenders”
participant # 23 Decreased view, decreased # of trees, etc. Increased coverage of soil. More un-neighborly exchanges. Loss of affordable housing for longtime residents
participant # 28 yes. View –blocked. Closes in neighborhood. Increased fire risk due to proximity & on a broader view…we have such limited land space and need more efficient use if we‘ll have affordable housing; Keeps consistent with General Plan statement to remain consistent w/ small town character/ Infrastructure and goals for affordable housing