HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-12-14City of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on
this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development, 919 Palm
Street, during normal business hours.
SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Council Chamber
City Hall - 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
November 12, 2014 Wednesday 6:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler,
Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and
Chairperson John Larson
ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA:Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items.
MINUTES: Minutes of October 22, 2014. Approve or amend.
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Commission about items
not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their
name and address. Comments are limited to five minutes per person. Items raised at
this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Commission is necessary,
may be scheduled for a future meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
NOTE: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda
may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
Any decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council
within 10 days of the action (Recommendations to the City Council cannot be appealed
since they are not a final action.). Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission
may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community
Development Department, City Clerk’s office, or on the City’s website (www.slocity.org).
The fee for filing an appeal is $273 and must accompany the appeal documentation.
If you wish to speak, please give your name and address for the record. Please limit
your comments to three minutes; consultant and project presentations limited to six
minutes.
Planning Commission Agenda
Page 2
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs, and
activities. Please contact the City Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance.
1.City-Wide.GPI/ER 15-14: Housing Element Update: Planning Commission
recommendation to City Council to approve the Housing Element Update and
proposed Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; City of San Luis Obispo –
Community Development Dept., applicant. (Tyler Corey)
2.500 Mountain View Street.AP-PC 111-14: Appeal of the Director’s interpretation of
the Municipal Code in upholding a Notice to Correct regarding use of a recreational
vehicle as a dwelling unit; R-1-S zone; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; John
Hollowman, appellant. (Erik Berg-Johansen)
3.1460 Calle Joaquin.USE-0049-2014: Review of the establishment of a car wash in
the Tourist-Commercial (C-T) zone including a categorical exemption from
environmental review; Auzco Development, LLC, applicant. (Walter Oetzell)
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
4.Staff
a. Agenda Forecast
5.Commission
ADJOURNMENT
Presenting Planners: Tyler Corey, Erik Berg-Johansen, and Walter Oetzell
Meeting Date: November 12, 2014
Item Number: 12
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: 2014 Housing Element
PROJECT ADDRESS:Citywide BY: Tyler Corey, Housing Programs Manager
Phone Number: 781-7169
e-mail: tcorey@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: GPI/ER 15-14 FROM:Kim Murry, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION:Adopt the attached Planning Commission resolution which recommends that the
City Council approve the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and adopt the 2014 Housing Element.
SITE DATA
Applicant City of San Luis Obispo
Representative Tyler Corey, Housing Programs
Manager
Zoning Multiple
General Plan Multiple
Site Area ~13 square miles
Environmental
Status
Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact
SUMMARY
The 2014 Housing Element has been updated in response to input received through 11 public
workshops and meetings as well as other correspondence over the past year. Many of the policies and
programs in the 2010 Housing Element are being carried forward because they are effective and need
to be continued or because the City has yet to implement some of the programs. On February 12, 2014,
the Planning Commission received a presentation regarding Housing Element status and provided
input on items and issues that should be considered in the update process (Attachment 1). On July 23,
2014, the Planning Commission reviewed and commented on the proposed goals, policies and
programs, recognizing these would come back for further review following initial State Housing and
Community Development Department (HCD) review (Attachment 2). A complete version of the Draft
Housing Element can be found on the City’s Splash Page at the following link: www.slocity.org.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing proposed changes to the General Plan and for
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
PC1 - 1
GPI/ER 15-14 (Citywide)
Page 2
making recommendations to the City Council under Government Code section §65353. The Planning
Commission has two primary roles in the Housing Element update process: 1) provide a forum for
public discussion and consensus building; and 2) provide policy and program direction. The 2014
Housing Element and associated environmental document must be considered by the Planning
Commission in at least one public hearing before final action can be taken on the item by the City
Council. The goal of this meeting is to review the draft update to the Housing Element to confirm that
previous Commission direction has been incorporated as well as to assess HCD’s recommendations
and provide any additional comments and direction as appropriate. The Commission’s
recommendation will then be forwarded to the City Council for final action on the Housing Element.
2.0 HCD REQUIREMENTS
The City submitted the 2014 Draft Housing Element to HCD for review and comment on September
12th. On October 28th, staff met with HCD staff regarding their initial comments and suggested edits.
Overall, HCD was very supportive of the document and suggested relatively minor language changes
in several proposed programs. HCD staff recommendations are shown highlighted in yellow in
Attachment 3. Staff has updated the document accordingly and resubmitted the Draft to HCD to
confirm direction for final approval and certification pending City Council adoption.
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
State law establishes a schedule for cities and counties to periodically update their housing elements of
the General Plan. Under this schedule, the City’s Housing Element update is due in 2014 to modify
policies and programs to reflect changing needs, resources, and conditions in the community and to
respond to changes in housing law. Over the past year, the City conducted outreach to identify
housing needs, issues and opportunities in the community. The primary goals of the outreach effort
were to:
x Actively engage the diverse populations of the City in discussions about housing needs.
x Ensure that affected residents, housing providers, homeless services providers, and funding
entities have opportunities to be actively involved in the process.
Workshops and Meetings
Staff facilitated public workshops and meetings (total of 11) over the past year. This included
community workshops on November 14, 2013, and July 16, 2014, and meetings with the following
groups and organizations:
x Workforce Housing Coalition – January 9, 2014
x Planning Commission – February 12, 2014
x Association of Realtors – March 4, 2014
x Economic Vitality Corporation – March 18, 2014
x Chamber of Commerce – April 3, 2014
x Home Builders Association – April 10, 2014
x Residents for Quality Neighborhoods – April 16, 2014
x Workforce Housing Summit – May 28, 2014
x Planning Commission – July 23, 2014
Staff compiled feedback from these workshops and meetings as well as other correspondence into
three categories of criteria: needs, issues and opportunities. These categories were used throughout the
PC1 - 2
GPI/ER 15-14 (Citywide)
Page 3
public outreach process for consistency. The following overview of public feedback summarizes
comments received in each category. These comments informed updated policy and program
recommendations considered by the Commission:
Needs
x Affordable and workforce housing
x Senior and veteran housing
x Transitional housing for children out of foster care and those with mental health issues
x Small apartments and efficiency units for seniors and homeless
x Increased owner-occupied housing
Issues
x Financing for affordable housing production
x Preservation and rehabilitation of existing housing stock
x High property cost and low incomes
x Development fees proportional to impact
x Affordable housing units comparable in size and quality to market-rate units
Opportunities
x Incentives for single room occupancy (SRO) and secondary dwelling units
x Increase residential densities where appropriate
x Allow greater building height to accommodate housing
x Creatively utilize existing housing resources
Draft Policies and Programs
The 2014 Housing Element appendices (on file with the Community Development Department)
include updated demographic and residential capacity information. The latter is important because it
demonstrates the City is able to accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation of 1,144
dwelling units for the planning period without the need to rezone property. The core of the element,
however are the policies and programs that provide the direction for how the City will achieve its
housing goals. Chapter 3 of the element contains the updated policy and program language and is
shown in legislative draft for Commission review.
The Planning Commission should review the proposed changes to Chapter 3 (Attachment 3) in
response to community input, Commission direction, and HCD comments and provide any additional
comments or direction as appropriate as part of its recommendation to City Council. Attachment 3
shows changes that reflect Commission comments highlighted in green; and changes that reflect HCD
comments highlighted in yellow. Proposed changes to the element previously reviewed by the
Commission continue to be shown in legislative draft format with strikeouts indicating deleted text and
underlining indicating added text. Where substantive changes or new policies or programs are
proposed, a brief description follows to explain how the modification or addition better achieves
housing goals or state requirements.
6.9 Policy – Housing Production. This program was recommended by the Commission to encourage
and support employer/employee financing programs and partnerships to increase housing opportunities
targeted toward the local workforce. This policy supports recent community sentiment regarding the
need to increase the production and financing opportunities for workforce housing.
PC1 - 3
GPI/ER 15-14 (Citywide)
Page 4
6.10 Policy – Housing Production. HCD recommended this program become a policy. The intent of
the policy is to support residential infill development and higher density where appropriate.
6.32 Program – Housing Production. This program addition was recommended by HCD as support for
the City’s existing practice to submit annual Housing Element progress reports by April 1st of each
year.
7.8 Policy – Neighborhood Quality.The Commission recommended language changes to proposed
program 7.13. HCD recommended this program become a policy. Staff modified policy language
based on Commission comments. It should be noted that during the Housing Element public outreach
process, staff received several comments related to the need to increase long-term residency and
stabilization in neighborhoods. The proposed policy encourages strategies and programs that would
further this goal.
8.20 Program – Special Housing Needs. HCD requested that program language be modified to clearly
indicate that transitional and supportive housing is allowed in all zoning districts where residential uses
are allowed, as required by state law.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On October 30, 2014, the Deputy Director of Community Development recommended a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact for the 2014 Housing Element update (Attachment 4). The Initial
Study of Environmental Impact does not identify any impacts that are considered significant and
unavoidable. Final action on the environmental document will be taken by the City Council.
5.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. The Commission may modify the proposed 2014 Housing Element. Specific direction should
be given to staff regarding any modifications.
2. The Commission may continue action, if more information is needed. Direction should be
given to staff regarding additional information needed to make a decision.
6.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission minutes from the February 12, 2014, meeting
2. Planning Commission minutes from the July 23, 2014, meeting
3. Chapter 3 of the 2014 Housing Element (Legislative Draft with PC and HCD edits highlighted)
4. Initial Study
5. Planning Commission Resolution
PC1 - 4
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 5
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 6
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 7
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 8
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 9
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 10
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 11
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 12
$WWDFKPHQW
PC1 - 13
Chapter 3
GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
3.10 Overview
This chapter includes the Housing Implementation Plan for the period January 2014 to June
2019. The following goals, policies and programs are based on an assessment of the City’s
needs, opportunities and constraints; and an evaluation of its existing policies and programs.
3.20 Goals, Policies and Programs.
This chapter describes the City's housing goals, policies and programs, which together form the
blueprint for housing actions during the Housing Element’s planning period. Goals, policies and
programs are listed in top-to-bottom order, with goals at the top and being the most general
statements, working down to programs, the most specific statements of intent. Here is how the
three policy levels differ:
Goals are the desired results that the City will attempt to reach over the long term. They
are general expressions of community values or preferred end states, and therefore, are
abstract in nature and are rarely fully attained. While it may not be possible to attain all
goals during this Element's planning period, they will, nonetheless, be the basis for City
policies and actions during this period.
Policies are specific statements that will guide decision-making. Policies serve as the
directives to developers, builders, design professionals, decision makers and others who
will initiate or review new development projects. Some policies stand alone as
directives, but others require that additional actions be taken. These additional actions
are listed under "programs" below. Most policies have a time frame that fits within this
Element's planning period. In this context, “shall” means the policy is mandatory;
“should” or “will” indicate the policy should be followed unless there are compelling or
contradictory reasons to do otherwise.
Programs are the core of the City’s housing strategy. These include on-going programs,
procedural changes, general plan changes, rezonings or other actions that help achieve
housing goals. Programs translate goals and policies into actions.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 14
Goal 1: Safety
Provide safe, decent shelter for all residents.
Policies
1.1 Assist those citizens unable to obtain safe shelter on their own.
1.2 Support and inform the public about fair housing laws and programs that allow equal
housing access for all city residents.
1.3 Maintain a level of housing code enforcement sufficient to correct unsafe, unsanitary or
illegal conditions and to preserve the inventory of safe housing.
Programs
1.4 Continue to provide financial assistance to extremely low, very low, low and moderate
income homeowners and renters for the rehabilitation of 30 single-family, 75 multi-
family, 10 historic and 20 mobile homes for the planning periodrental housing units,
single-family houses or mobile homes using Federal, State and local housing funds, such
as Community Development Block Grant Funds.
1.5 Continue code enforcement to expedite the removal of illegal or unsafe dwellings, to
eliminate hazardous site or property conditions, and resolve chronic building safety
problems.
1.6 Enact a Rental Inspection Program to improve the health and safety condition of the
City’s housing stock on a periodic basis.
1.7 Continue to support local and regional solutions to homelessness by funding programs
such as the Maxine Lewis Memorial Shelter and The Prado Day Center.
1.8 Create an educational campaign for owners of older residences informing them of ways
to reduce the seismic hazards commonly found in such structures, and encouraging them
to undertake seismic upgrades.
Goal 2: Affordability
Accommodate affordable housing production that helps meet the City’s quantified
objectives.
Policies
2.1 Income Levels For Affordable Housing households. For purposes of this Housing
Element, affordable housing is that which is obtainable by a household with a particular
income level, as further described in the City’s Affordable Housing Standards. Housing
affordable to Extremely Low, Very Low, Low, and Moderate income persons or
Attachment 3
PC1 - 15
households shall be considered “affordable housing.” Income levels are defined as
follows:
Extremely low 30% or less of County median household income
Very low: 31 to 50% of County median household income.
Low: 51% to 80% of County median household income.
Moderate: 81% to 120% of County median household income.
Above moderate: 121% or more of County median household income.
2.2 Index of Affordability.The Index of Affordability shall be whether the monthly cost of
housing fits within the following limits:
For extremely low income households, not more than 25% of monthly income.
For very low- and low-income households, not more than 25% of monthly
income.
For moderate income households, not more than 30% of monthly income.
For above-moderate income households, no index.
These indices may be modified or expanded if the State of California modifies or expands
its definition of affordability for these income groups.
2.3 For housing to qualify as "affordable" under the provisions of this Element, guarantees
must be presented that ownership or rental housing units will remain affordable for the
longest period allowed by State law, or for a shorter period under an equity-sharing or
housing rehabilitation agreement with the City.
2.4 Encourage housing production for all financial strata of the City's population, in the
proportions shown in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, for the 2014 - 20192007 –
2014 planning period. These proportions are: extremely low income, 121 percent, very
low income, 12 percent; low income, 16 percent; moderate income, 198 percent; and
above moderate income, 42 percent.
Programs
2.5 Amend the Inclusionary Housing Requirement, Tables 2 and 2A (Appendix P), to
provide more ways for commercial development projects to meet the requirements, such
as by providing land in an amount sufficient to accommodate the number of inclusionary
housing units required by the ordinance, or by converting off-site units to affordable units
through deed restrictions.
2.5 Continue to manage the Affordable Housing Fund so that the fund serves as a sustainable
resource for supporting affordable housing development. The fund shall serve as a
source of both grant funding and below-market financing for affordable housing projects;
and funds shall be used to support a wide variety of housing types at the following
Attachment 3
PC1 - 16
income levels: extremely low, very low, low, and moderate, but with a focus on
production efficiency to maximize housing benefits for the City’s financial investment,
and to support high-quality housing projects that would not be feasible without
Affordable Housing Fund support.
2.6 Continue to review existing and proposed building, planning, engineering and fire
policies and standards as housing developments are reviewed to determine whether
changes are possible that could assist the production of affordable housing, or that would
encourage preservation of housing rather than conversion to non-residential uses,
provided such changes would not conflict with other General Plan policies. Such
periodic reviews will seek to remove regulations that have been superseded, are
redundant or are no longer needed.
2.7 Continue to implement existing procedures that speed up the processing of applications,
construction permits, and water and sewer service priorities for affordable housing
projects. City staff and commissions shall give such projects priority in allocating work
assignments, scheduling, conferences and hearings, and in preparing and issuing reports
and water and sewer service allocations.
2.8 Continue to pursue outside funding sources for the payment of City impact fees so that
new dwellings that meet the City’s affordable housing standards can mitigate their
facility and service impacts without adversely affecting housing affordability.
2.9 To the extent outside funding sources can be identified to offset impacts on City funds,
exempt dwellings that meet the moderate income, Affordable Housing Standards from
planning, building and engineering development review and permit fees, including water
meter installation fee. Maintain exemptions for extremely-low, very-low and low-income
households.
2.10 Continue to coordinate public and private sector actions to encourage the development of
housing that meets the City’s housing needs.
2.11 Continue to assist with the issuance of bonds, tax credit financing, loan underwriting or
other financial tools to help develop or preserve affordable units through various
programs, including, but not limited to: (1) below-market financing through the SLO
County Housing Trust Fund and (2) subsidized mortgages for extremely low, very-low,
low- and moderate income persons and first-time home buyers, and (3) self-help or
“sweat equity” homeowner housing.
2.12 Amend Affordable Housing Standards to establish a methodology for adjusting
affordable housing standards and secure Council approval. Consider incorporating HOA
fees and a standard allowance for utilities in the calculation for affordable rents and home
sales prices.
2.13 In conjunction with the Housing Authority and other local housing agencies, continue to
provide on-going technical assistance and education to tenants, property owners and the
Attachment 3
PC1 - 17
community at large on the need to preserve at-risk units as well as the available tools to
help them do so.
2.14 In conjunction with local housing providers and the local residential design community,
continue to provide technical assistance as requested by to the public, builders, design
professionals and developers regarding design strategies to achieve affordable housing.
2.15 Evaluate the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements and the effect of Table 2A on
the City’s ability to provide affordable housing in the proportions shown in the Regional
Housing Needs Allocation, per Policy 2.4.
2.16 The City will evaluate and consider including a workforce level of affordability in its
Affordable Housing Standards to increase housing options in the City for those making
between 1210 percent and 160 percent of the San Luis Obispo County median income.
This affordability category cannot be used to meet inclusionary housing ordinance
requirements and is not eligible for City Affordable Housing Funds.
2.17 Evaluate andContinue to consider increasing residential densities above state density
bonus allowances for projects that provide on appropriate sites for housing affordable
tofor low, very low and extremely low income households.
Goal 3: Housing Conservation
Conserve existing housing and prevent the loss of safe housing and the displacement of
current occupants.
Policies
3.1 Continue to Eencourage the rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of sound or
rehabitable housing rather than demolition. Demolition of non-historic housing may be
permitted where conservation of existing housing would preclude the achievement of other
housing objectives or adopted City goals.
3.2 Discourage the removal or replacement of housing affordable to extremely low, very-
low, low- and moderate income households, and avoid permit approvals, private
development, municipal actions or public projects that remove or adversely impact such
housing unless such actions are necessary to achieve General Plan objectives and: (1) it
can be demonstrated that rehabilitation of lower-cost units at risk of replacement is
financially or physically infeasible, or (2) an equivalent number of new units comparable
or better in affordability and amenities to those being replaced is provided, or (3) the
project will correct substandard, blighted or unsafe housing; and (4) removal or
replacement will not adversely affect housing which is already designated, or is
determined to qualify for designation as a historic resource.
3.3 Encourage seismic upgrades of older dwellings to reduce the risk of bodily harm and the
loss of housing in an earthquake.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 18
3.4 Encourage the construction, preservation, rehabilitation or expansion of residential hotels,
group homes, integrated community apartments, and single-room occupancy dwellings.
3.5 Preserve historic homes and other types of historic residential buildings, historic districts
and unique or landmark neighborhood features.
3.6 Preserve the fabric, amenities, yards (i.e. setbacks), and overall character and quality of
life of established neighborhoods.
3.7 Encourage and Ssupport creative strategies for the rehabilitation and adaptation and reuse
of residential, commercial, and industrial structures for housing.
Programs
3.8 Adopt an ordinance that implements policy 3.2 to discourage removal or replacement of
affordable housing.
3.9 Correct unsafe, unsanitary or illegal housing conditions, improve accessibility and energy
efficiency and improve neighborhoods by collaborating with agencies offering
rehabilitation programs. City will use State or Federal grants or other housing funds to
implement the program and provide services such as home weatherization, repair and
universal access improvements.
3.10 Continue to encourage the creationPreserve the number of dwellings in the Downtown
Core (C-D Zone) and the Downtown Planning Area by continuing the "no net housing
loss" program, consistent with Chapter 17.86 (Downtown Housing Conversion
Regulations) of the Zoning Regulations. so that as of the baseline date of March 30, 2004,
the number of dwellings removed shall not exceed the number of dwellings added.
3.11 Continue to Iidentify residential properties and districts eligible for local, State or Federal
historic listing and preparein accordance with guidelines and standards to help property
owners repair, rehabilitate and improve properties in a historically and architecturally
sensitive manner.
3.12 To encourage housing rehabilitation, amend the Inclusionary Housing Requirements to
allow a reduced term of affordability for rehabilitated units, to the extent allowed by State
or Federal law, with a minimum term of three years and in proportion to the level of City
assistance.
3.123 Establish a monitoring and early warning system to trackContinue to monitor and track
affordable housing units at-risk of being converted to market rate housing annually.
Provide resources to support the Housing Authority and local housing agencies purchase
and manage at-risk units.
3.134 Working with non-profit organizations, faith-based organizations, or the Housing
Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo, the City will encourage rehabilitation of
Attachment 3
PC1 - 19
residential, commercial or industrial buildings to expand extremely low, very-low, low or
moderate income rental housing opportunities.
Goal 4: Mixed-Income Housing
Preserve and accommodate existing and new mixed-income neighborhoods and seek to
prevent neighborhoods or housing types that are segregated by economic status.
Policies
4.1 Within newly developed neighborhoods, housing that is affordable to various economic
strata should be intermixed rather than segregated into separate enclaves. The mix should
be comparable to the relative percentages of extremely low, very-low, low, moderate and
above-moderate income households in the City’s quantified objectives.
4.2 Include both market-rate and affordable units in apartment and residential condominium
projects and intermix the types of units. Affordable units should be comparable in size,
appearance and basic quality to market-rate units.
4.3 Extremely-low and very low-income housing, such as that developed by the Housing
Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo or other housing providers, may be located in
any zone that allows housing, and should be dispersed throughout the City rather than
concentrated in one neighborhood or zone. In general, 23 dwellings should be the
maximum number of extremely low or very-low-income units developed on any one site.
4.4 In its discretionary actions, housing programs and activities, the City shall affirmatively
further fair housing and promote equal housing opportunities for persons of all economic
segments of the community.
Program
4.5 Review new development proposals for compliance with City regulations and revise
projects or establish conditions of approval as needed to implement the mixed-income
policies.
4.6 Consider amending the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Affordable Housing
Incentives to require that affordable units in a development be of similar size, number of
bedrooms, amenities,character and basic quality as the non-restricted units.
Goal 5: Housing Variety and Tenure
Provide variety in the location, type, size, tenure, and style of dwellings.
Policies
5.1 Encourage the integration of appropriately scaled, special needs housing into
developments or neighborhoods of conventional housing.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 20
5.2 Encourage mixed-use residential/commercial projects to include live-work and work-live
units where housing and offices or other commercial uses are compatible.
5.3 Encourage the development of housing above ground-level retail stores and offices to
provide housing opportunities close to activity centers and to use land efficiently.
5.4 In general, housing developments of twenty (20) or more units should provide a variety
of dwelling types, sizes or forms of tenure.
Program
5.5 Review new developments for compliance with City regulations and revise projects or
establish conditions of approval as needed to implement the housing variety and tenure
policies.
Goal 6: Housing Production
Plan for new housing to meet the full range of community housing needs.
Policies
6.1 Consistent with the growth management portion of its Land Use Element and the
availability of adequate resources, the City will plan to accommodate up to 1,144
dwelling units between January 2014 and June 2019 in accordance with the assigned
Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
6.2 New commercial developments in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone) shall include housing,
unless the City makes one of the following findings:
A) Housing is likely to jeopardize the health, safety or welfare of residents or employees; or
B) The property’s shape, size, topography or other physical factor makes construction of
new dwellings infeasible.
6.3 If City services must be rationed to development projects, residential projects will be
given priority over non-residential projects. As required by SB 1087, housing affordable
to lower income households will be given first priority.
6.4 City costs of providing services to housing development will be minimized. Other than
for existing housing programs encouraging housing affordable to extremely low, very-
low and low income persons, the City will not make new housing more affordable by
shifting costs to existing residents.
6.5 When sold, purchased or redeveloped for public or private uses, City-owned properties
within the urban reserve shall include housing as either a freestanding project or part of a
mixed-use development where land is suitable and appropriate for housing.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 21
6.6 Property located behind the former County General Hospital shall be designated a
“Special Considerations” zone and may be considered suitable for residential
development after further analysis and environmental review, provided that development
be limited to site areas with average slopes of less than 20 percent, that approximately
one-half of the total site area be dedicated for open space and/or public use, and that an
additional water tank be provided if determined necessary to serve new development.
6.7 Support the redevelopment of excess public and private utility properties for housing
where appropriately located and consistent with the General Plan.
6.8 Consistent with the City’s goal to stimulate higher density infill where appropriate in the
Downtown Core (C-D Zone), the City shall consider changes to the Zoning Regulations
that would allow for the development of smaller apartments and efficiency units.
6.9 Encourage and support employer/employee financing programs and partnerships to
increase housing opportunities specifically targeted towards the local workforce.
6.10 To help meet the Quantified Objectives, the City will support residential infill
development and promote higher residential density where appropriate.
Programs
6.110 Maintain the General Plan and Residential Growth Management Regulations (SLOMC
17.88) exemption for new housing in the Downtown Core (C-D zone), and new housing
in other zones that is enforceably restricted for extremely-low, very low, low- and
moderate income households, pursuant to the Affordable Housing Standards. In
expansion areas, the overall number of units built must conform to the City-approved
phasing plan.
6.121 Amend the Zoning Regulations and Parking Access and Management PlanContinue to
allow flexible parking regulations for housing development, especially in the Downtown
Core (C-D Zone), including the possibilities of flexible use of city parking facilities by
Downtown residents, where appropriate, and reduced or no parking requirements where
appropriate guarantees limit occupancies to persons without motor vehicles or who
provide proof of reserved, off-site parking. Such developments may be subject to
requirements for parking use fees, use limitations and enforcement provisions.
6.132 Continue to develop incentives to encourage additional housing in the Downtown Core
(C-D Zone), particularly in mixed-use developments. Density based on average unit size
in a project should be explored to encourage the development of smaller efficiency units.
6.143 Specific plans for the Orcutt Expansion Area and any new expansion area identified shall
include R-3 and R-4 zoned land to ensure sufficient land is designated at appropriate
densities to accommodate the development of extremely low, very-low and low income
dwellings. These plans shall include sites suitable for subsidized rental housing and
affordable rental and owner-occupied dwellings, and programs to support the
Attachment 3
PC1 - 22
construction of dwellings rather than payment of in-lieu housing fees. Such sites shall be
integrated within neighborhoods of market-rate housing and shall be architecturally
compatible with the neighborhood.
6.15 Consider General Plan amendments to rezone commercial, manufacturing or public
facility zoned areas for higher-density, infill or mixed use housing where land
development patterns are suitable and where impact to Low-Density Residential areas is
minimal. For example, areas to be considered for possible rezoning include, but are not
limited to the following sites (shown in Figure 1 and further described in Appendix D,
Table D-2):
A) Portions of South Broad Street Corridor and Little Italy area
B) 1499 San Luis Drive (rezone vacant and underutilized School District property)
C) 1642 Johnson Avenue (vacant School District property)
D) 4325 South Higuera Street (former P.G.&E. yard)
E) 4355 Vachell Lane (vehicle storage)
F) 173 Buckley Road (Avila Ranch)
G) 2143 Johnson Avenue (adjacent to County Health Department)
H) 3710 Broad Street (Plumbers and Steamfitters Union)
I) 11950 Los Osos Valley Road (Pacific Beach High School)
J) 2500 Block of Boulevard Del Campo (adjacent to Sinsheimer Park)
K) 12165 Los Osos Valley Road (adjacent to Home Depot)
Attachment 3
PC1 - 23
Figure 1
Areas to be Considered for Possible Rezoning
Attachment 3
PC1 - 24
6.165 Continue to provide resources thato support the SLO County Housing Trust fund’s efforts
to provide below-market financing and technical assistance to affordable housing
developers as a way to increase affordable housing production in the City of San Luis
Obispo.
6.176 Encourage residential development through infill development and densification within
City Limits and in designated expansion areas over new annexation of land.
6.185 Seek opportunities with other public agencies and public utilities to identify, assemble,
develop, redevelop and recycle surplus land for housing, and to convert vacant or
underutilized public, utility or institutional buildings to housing.
6.196 Develop multi-family housing design standards to promote innovative, attractive, and
well-integrated, higher density housing. Continue to incentivize affordable housing
development with Developments that meet these standards shall be eligible for a
streamlined level of planning and development review. Developments that include a
significant commitment to affordable housing may also be eligible to receive density
bonuses, parking reductions and other development incentives, including City financial
assistance.
6.17 Complete Orcutt Area Specific Plan and consider final City approval to annex the Orcutt
specific planning area by December 2010.
6.2018 Continue to Ffinancially assist in the development of housing affordable to extremely
low, very-low, low- or moderate income households during the planning period using
State, Federal and local funding sources, with funding priority given to projects that
result in the maximum housing benefits for the lowest household income levels.
6.2119 Actively seek new revenue sources, including State, Federal and private/non-profit
sources, and financing mechanisms to assist affordable housing development for
extremely low, very low and low or moderate income households and first- time
homebuyers.
6.220 Update the Community Design Guidelines and amend SLOMC Chapter 2.48 to exempt
the construction, relocation,Continue to exempt the rehabilitation or remodeling of up to
4 dwellings of up to 1200 square feet each from Architectural Review Commission
review. New multi-unit housing may be allowed with “Minor or Incidental” or staff level
architectural review, unless the dwellings are located on a sensitive or historically
sensitive site.
6.231 Assist in the production of long-term affordable housing by identifying vacant or
underutilized City-owned property suitable for housing, and dedicate public property,
where feasible and appropriate, for such purposes, as development projects are proposed.
6.242 Community Development staff will prepare “property profiles” describing proactively
provide information for properties suitable for housing as identified in the Land Use and
Attachment 3
PC1 - 25
Housing Elements. properties suitable for housing to facilitate public or private
development and make this information publicly available.
6.253 Evaluate and consider amending the General Plan to designate the 46 acres associated
with the former County General Hospital as a “Special Considerations” zone, suitable for
housing development on areas of the site of less than 20 percent average slope, provided
that open space dedication and public improvements are part of the project.
6.264 Continue to Uupdate the Affordable Housing Incentives (Chapter 17.90, SLOMC) and
Zoning Regulations to ensure density bonus incentives are consistent with State Law.
6.275 Evaluate and consider increasing the residential density allowed in the Neighborhood-
Commercial (CN), Office (O) and Downtown Commercial (CD) zoning districts. The
City will evaluate allowing up to 24 units per acre in the CN and O zones, and up to 72
units per acre in the CD zone, twice the current density allowed in these areas.
6.286 Evaluate how underlying lot patterns (i.e. size, shape, slope)in the City’s multi-family
zones affect the City’s ability to meet housing production policies. If warranted, consider
setting a minimum number of dwellings on each legal lot in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 zones,
regardless of lot size, when other property development standards, such as parking,
height limits and setbacks can be met.
6.27 To help meet the Quantified Objectives, the City will support residential infill
development and promote higher residential density where appropriate.
6.298 Consider Continue to pursue incentives changes to theto encourage development of
Secondary Dwelling Units (SDUs). Possible incentives include SDU design templates,
flexible development standards, fee reductions or deferrals, or other measures to
encourage the construction of SDUs where allowed by zoning.
6.3029 Evaluate and consider adopting Subdivision and Zoning Regulations changes to support
small lot subdivisions, ownership bungalow court development., Eeliminateing the one
acre minimum lot area for PD overlay zoning, and other alternatives to conventional
subdivision design.
6.31 Consider scaling development impact fees for residential development based on size,
number of bedrooms, and room counts.
6.32 Continue to submit annual Housing Element progress reports to the State Department of
Housing and Community Development per Government Code Section 65400.
Goal 7: Neighborhood Quality
Maintain, preserve and enhance the quality of neighborhoods, encourage neighborhood
stability and owner occupancy, and improve neighborhood appearance, function and sense
of community.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 26
Policies
7.1 Within established neighborhoods, new residential development shall be of a character,
size, density and quality that preserves the neighborhood character and maintains the
quality of life for existing and future residents.
7.2 Higher density housing should maintain high quality standards for unit design, privacy,
security, on-site amenities, and public and private open space. Such standards should be
flexible enough to allow innovative design solutions in special circumstances, e.g. in
developing mixed-use developments or in housing in the Downtown Core.
7.3 Within established neighborhoods, housing should not be located on sites designated in
the General Plan for parks or open space.
7.4 Within expansion areas, new residential development should be an integral part of an
existing neighborhood or should establish a new neighborhood,with pedestrian and
bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent
neighborhoods, schools and shopping areas.
7.5 The creation of walled-off residential enclaves, or of separate, unconnected tracts, is
discouraged because physical separations prevent the formation of safe, walkable, and
enjoyable neighborhoods.
7.6 Housing shall be sited to enhance safety along neighborhood streets and in other public
and semi-public areas.
7.7 The physical design of neighborhoods and dwellings should promote walking and
bicycling and preserve open spaces and views.
7.8 Encourage evaluate strategies and programs that increase owner-occupied housing
opportunities long-term residency and stabilization in neighborhoods.
Programs
7.98 Continue to iImplement varied strategies, such as early notification through electronic
media, website improvements, neighborhood outreach meetings, etc.,to ensure residents
are aware of and able to participate in planning decisions affecting their neighborhoods
early in the planning process.
7.109 Continue to work directly with neighborhood groups and individuals to address concerns.
Identify specific neighborhood needs, problems, trends and opportunities for
improvements. Continue to wWork directly with neighborhood groups and individuals to
address concerns.
7.110 Help Continue to fund neighborhood improvements, including sidewalks, traffic calming
Attachment 3
PC1 - 27
devices, crosswalks, parkways, street trees and street lighting to improve aesthetics,
safety and accessibility.
7.121 Continue to develop and implement neighborhood parking strategies, including parking
districts, to address the lack of on- and off-street parking in residential areas.
7.13 Continue the City’s Neighborhood Services and proactive enforcement programs to
support neighborhood wellness.
Goal 8: Special Housing Needs
Encourage the creation and maintenance of housing for those with special housing needs.
Policies
8.1 Encourage housing development that meets a variety of special needs, including large
families, single parents, disabled persons, the elderly, students, veterans, the homeless, or
those seeking congregate care, group housing, single-room occupancy or co-housing
accommodations, utilizing universal design.
8.2 Preserve manufactured housing or mobile home parks and support changes in these forms
of tenure only if such changes provide residents with greater long-term security or
comparable housing in terms of quality, cost, and livability.
8.3 Encourage manufactured homes in Expansion Specific Plan Areas by:
A) When the City considers adopting new specific plans, including policies that support
owner-occupied manufactured home parks with amenities such as greenbelts,
recreation facilities, and shopping services within a master planned community
setting. Such parks could be specifically designed to help address the needs of those
with mobility and transportation limitations.
B) Establishing lot sizes, setback, and parking guidelines that allow for relatively dense
placement of manufactured homes within the master planned neighborhood.
C) Locating manufactured home parks near public transit facilities or provide public
transportation services to the manufactured home parks to minimize the need for
residents to own automobiles.
8.4 Encourage Cal Poly University to continue to develop on-campus student housing to
meet existing and future needs and to lessen pressure on City housing supply and
transportation systems.
8.5 Strengthen the role of on-campus housing by encouraging Cal Poly University to require
entering freshmen and sophomore students to live on campus.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 28
8.6 Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus. Until that is
possible, they should be located in Medium-High and High Density residential zones near
the campus.
8.7 Encourage Cal Poly University to develop and maintain faculty and staff housing,
consistent with the General Plan.
8.8 Disperse special needs living facilities throughout the City where public transit and
commercial services are available, rather than concentrating them in one district.
8.9 Support continued efforts to implement the document “The Path Home: San Luis Obispo
County’s 10 Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness”.
8.10 Encourage a variety of housing types that accommodate persons with disabilities and
promote aging in place, including a goal of “visitability” in new residential units, with an
emphasis on first-floor accessibility to the maximum extent feasible.
8.11 Encourage changes to City regulations that would support the special housing needs of
disabled persons, including persons with developmental disabilities.
8.12 Assist the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless by supporting shelters,
temporary housing, transitional housing, and by facilitating general housing assistance.
Programs
8.131 As funding allows, cContinue to provide resources that support local and regional
solutions to meeting the needs of the homeless and continue to support, jointly with other
agencies, shelters and programs, such as Housing First and Rapid Rehousing,for the
homeless and for displaced women and children..
8.142 Continue the mobile home rent stabilization program to minimize increases in the cost of
mobile home park rents.
8.153 Identify sites in specified expansion areasContinue to look for opportunities in specific
plan areas suitable for tenant-owned mobile-home parks, cooperative or limited equity
housing, manufactured housing, self-help housing, or other types of housing that meet
special needs.
8.164 Advocate developing more housing and refurbishing campus housing at Cal Poly
University.
8.175 Work with Cal Poly University Administration to secure designation of on-campus
fraternity/sorority living groups.
8.186 Jointly develop and implement a student housing plan and continue to support "good
neighbor programs" with Cal Poly State University, Cuesta College and City residents.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 29
The programs would seekshould continue to improve communication and cooperation
between the City and the schools, set on- campus student housing objectives and establish
clear, effective standards for student housing in residential neighborhoods.
8.197 Provide public educational information at the Community Development Department
public counter on universal design concepts (i.e. aging in place) for new and existing
residential dwellings.
8.18 Solicit input on the zoning ordinance provisions for homeless shelters from service
agencies that work with extremely-low income persons and the homeless or
persons/families at-risk of homelessness such as the Economic Opportunity Commission
(EOC), the Department of Social Services of the County of San Luis Obispo, and the
Leadership Council for the 10-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness.
8.19 Within one year of Housing Element adoption, update the Zoning Ordinance to allow
homeless shelters by right provided they are consistent with the ministerial review
standards identified in State law. The City will establish objective standards with input
from service agencies to regulate the following, as permitted under SB 2, including:
A) The maximum number of beds/persons permitted;
B) Parking based on demonstrated need but that does not exceed parking requirements
for other comparable uses in the same zone;
C) The size/location of exterior and interior onsite waiting and client intake areas;
D) The provision of onsite management;
E) The proximity of other emergency shelters, provided that emergency shelters are not
required to be more than 300 feet apart;
F) The length of stay;
G) Lighting; and
H) Security during hours that the emergency shelter is in operation.
8.20 Transitional Housing and Supportive Housing: Continue to allow the establishment of
transitional and supportive housing in all zoning districts where residential uses are
allowed. that functions as residential uses in residential zones consistent with similar
residential uses.
8.21 Identify propertiesContinue to look for opportunities (land, retail or commercial space,
motels, apartments, housing units, mobile home parks) that can be acquired and
converted to affordable permanent housing and permanent supportive housing for
homeless persons and families.
8.22 Update the Community Design Guidelines code to include universal access standards
such as at-grade threshold entry for ground floor dwellings, accessible exterior path of
travel, accessible interior path of travel for ground floor dwellings (wider hallways and
doorways), an accessible common room (in addition to kitchen), an accessible half- or
full bathroom on the ground floor.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 30
8.23 Consult with service agencies that work with the disabled and prepare and adopt a
program addressing reasonable accommodation to land use and zoning decisions and
procedures regulating the siting, funding, development and use of housing for persons
with disabilities.
8.224 Consider addition of an overlay zone to existing and future mobile home and trailer park
sites to provide constructive notice that additional requirements, such as rent stabilization
and a mobile home park conversion ordinance may apply.
8.23 Encourage the creation of housing for persons with developmental disabilities. The City
will seek grant opportunities for housing construction and rehabilitation specifically
targeted for persons with developmental disabilities.
8.24 Continue to coordinate with the County, social services providers and non-profit
organizations for delivery of existing, improved and expanded services, including case
management, drug, alcohol, detoxification, and mental health services.
8.25 Continue to engage the Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC) and Friends of
Prado Day Center (FPDC) to identify, evaluate, and implement strategies to reduce the
impacts of homelessness on the City.
Goal 9: Sustainable Housing, Site, and Neighborhood
Design
As part of its overall commitment to improving quality of life for its citizens and to
maintaining environmental quality, the City Encourage housing that is resource-
conserving, healthful, economical to live in, environmentally benign, and recyclable when
demolished. Sustainable or “green” housing programs help reduce the life cycle costs of
housing, saving homeowners’ or renters’ utilities costs and extending their housing
budgets. Moreover, the initial costs of green construction measures or improvements often
pay for themselves over time in utility cost savings.
Policies
9.1 Residential developments should promote sustainability in their design, placement, and
use. Sustainability can be promoted through a variety of housing strategies, including the
following:
A) Maximize use of renewable, recycled-content, and recycled materials, and minimize
use of building materials that require high levels of energy to produce or that cause
significant, adverse environmental impacts.
B) Incorporate renewable energy features into new homes, including passive solar
design, solar hot water, solar power, and natural ventilation and cooling.
C) Minimize thermal island effects through reduction of heat-absorbing pavement and
increased tree shading.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 31
D) Avoid building materials that may contribute to health problems through the release
of gasses or glass fibers into indoor air.
E) Design dwellings for quiet, indoors and out, for both the mental and physical health
of residents.
F) Design dwellings economical to live in because of reduced utility bills, low cost
maintenance and operation, and improved occupant health.
G) Use construction materials and methods that maximize the recyclability of a
building’s parts.
H) Educate public, staff, and builders to the advantages and approaches to sustainable
design, and thereby develop consumer demand for sustainable housing.
I) City will consider adoptingcontinue to refer to a sustainable development rating
system, such as the LEED program when evaluating new development proposals.
9.2 Residential site, subdivision, and neighborhood designs should be coordinated to make
residential sustainability work. Some ways to do this include:
A) Design subdivisions to maximize solar access for each dwelling and site.
B) Design sites so residents have usable outdoor space with access to both sun and
shade.
C) Streets and access ways should minimize pavement devoted to vehicular use.
D) Use neighborhood retention basins to purify street runoff prior to its entering creeks.
Retention basins should be designed to be visually attractive as well as functional.
Fenced-off retention basins should be avoided.
E) Encourage cluster development with dwellings grouped around significantly-sized,
shared open space in return for City approval of smaller individual lots.
F) Treat public streets as landscaped parkways, using continuous plantings at least six
feet wide and where feasible, median planters to enhance, define, and to buffer
residential neighborhoods of all densities from the effects of vehicle traffic.
9.3 Preserve the physical neighborhood qualities in the Downtown Planning Area that
contribute to sustainability. Some ways to do this include:
A) Maintain the overall scale, density and architectural character of older neighborhoods
surrounding the Downtown Core.
B) Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of historically designated housing
stock.
9.4 To promote energy conservation and a cleaner environment, encourage the development
of dwellings with energy-efficient designs, utilizing passive and active solar features, and
the use of energy-saving techniques that exceed minimums prescribed by State law.
9.5 Actively promote water conservation through housing and site design to help moderate
the cost of housing.
9.6 Support programs that provide financing for sustainable home upgrade projects such as
installation of solar panels, heating and cooling systems,water conservation and windows
to improve the energy efficiency of the City’s existing housing stock.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 32
Programs
9.76 Continue to Eeducate planning and building staff and citizen review bodies on energy
conservation issues, including the City’s energy conservation policies and Climate Action
Plan. and Staff shall instruct that they work with applicants to achieve the City’s energy
conservation goals.housing goals that conserve energy.
9.87 Evaluate solar siting and access regulations to determine if theyContinue to provide
assurance of long-term solar access for new or remodeled housing and for adjacent
properties, consistent with historic preservation guidelines, and revise regulations found
to be inadequate.
9.98 Adopt Low-impact Development (LID) StandardsContinue to implement the Water
Quality Control Board’s “Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for
Development Projects in the Central Coast Region”,to, including street and access way
standards that reduce the amount of paving devoted to automobiles.
9.109 Adopt an ordinance with requirements and incentives Implement Climate Action Plan
programs that to increases the production of “green” housing units and projects and
require use of sustainable and/or renewable materials, water and energy technologies
(such as, but not limited to solar, wind, or thermal).
9.110 Continue to promote building materials reuse and recycling in site development and
residential construction, including flexible standards for use of salvaged, recycled, and
“green” building materials. Continue the City’s construction and demolition debris
recycling program as described in Chapter 8.05 of the Municipal Code.To help
accomplish this, the City will implement a construction and demolition debris recycling
program (as described in Chapter 8.05 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code).
9.12 Consider incentivizing dwelling units to a minimum size of 150 square feet, consistent
with the California Building Code, by reduced impact fees and property development
standards.
9.13 Consider participating in financing programs for sustainable home improvements such as
solar panels, heating and cooling systems, water conservation and energy efficient
windows.
Goal 10: Local Preference
Maximize affordable housing opportunities for those who live or work in San Luis Obispo
while seeking to balance job growth and housing supply.
Policies
10.1 Administer City housing programs and benefits, such as First Time Homebuyer
Assistance or affordable housing lotteries, to give preference to: 1) persons living or
Attachment 3
PC1 - 33
working in the City or within the City’s Urban Reserve, and 2) persons living in San Luis
Obispo County.
10.2 Cal Poly State University and Cuesta College should actively work with the City and
community organizations to create positive environments around the Cal Poly Campus
by:
A) Establishing standards for appropriate student densities in neighborhoods near
Campus;
B) Promoting homeownership for academic faculty and staff in Low-Density Residential
neighborhoods in the northern part of the City; and
C) Encouraging and participating in the revitalization of degraded neighborhoods.
Programs
10.3 Continue to Wwork with the County of San Luis Obispo for any land use decisions that
create to mitigate housing impacts on the City due to significant expansion of
employment in the unincorporated areas adjacent to the City to mitigate housing impacts
on the City.Such mitigation might include, for example, County participation and
support for Inclusionary Housing Programs.
10.4 Encourage residential developers to sell or rentpromote their projects to those residing or
employed in the City first within the San Luis Obispo County housing market area (San
Luis Obispo County) firstbefore outside markets.
10.5 Advocate the establishment of a link betweenWork with Cal Poly to address the link
between enrollment and the expansion of campus housing programs at Cal Poly
University to reduce pressure on the City's housing supply.
10.6 Work with other jurisdictions to advocate for State legislation that would: 1) provide
funding to help Cal Poly University provide adequate on-campus student housing, and 2)
allow greater flexibility for State universities and community colleges to enter into
public-private partnerships to construct student housing.
Goal 11: Suitability
Develop and retain housing on sites that are suitable for that purpose.
Policies
11.1 Where property is equally suited for commercial or residential uses, give preference to
residential use. Changes in land use designation from residential to non-residential
should be discouraged.
11.2 Prevent new housing development on sites that should be preserved as dedicated open
space or parks, on sites subject to natural hazards such as unmitigatable geological or
flood risks, or wild fire dangers, and on sites subject to unacceptable levels of man-made
hazards or nuisances, including severe soil contamination, airport noise or hazards, traffic
Attachment 3
PC1 - 34
noise or hazards, odors or incompatible neighboring uses.
Program
11.3 The City will adopt measures ensuring continue to ensure the ability of legal, conforming
non-residentialnon-conforming uses to continue where new development is proposed.
housing is proposed on adjacent or nearby sites.
Attachment 3
PC1 - 35
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER # 15-14
1. Project Title: General Plan Housing Element Update
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Tyler Corey, Housing Programs Manager
(805) 781-7169
4. Project Location:
Citywide, City of San Luis Obispo
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
6. General Plan Designation:
N/A
7. Zoning:
N/A
Attachment 4
PC1 - 36
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
8. Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The project consists of the September 2014 Draft Housing Element Update, a five-year plan
which explains the City’s housing goals, policies, and programs. It updates the current Housing
Element which was adopted in 2010. Once adopted, the Housing Element becomes part of the
General Plan, which guides public and private decisions regarding housing, development review,
land use, City budgets and capital improvement programs. The Draft includes policies and
programs intended to increase housing opportunities for extremely low, very-low, low- and
moderate-income households, while accommodating growth in a manner consistent with goals
and policies contained in the Land Use Element and other elements of the General Plan. The
content of housing elements is prescribed under State housing law, and this draft has been
prepared to include the required sections and information.
This draft update addresses changes in State housing law and in regional housing needs. State,
regional and local housing costs, supply and needs have changed since 2010, as evidenced by
current information on real estate prices, affordable housing, and the widening “gap” between
rental and purchase housing costs and consumers’ incomes. Although the update retains many of
the same policies and programs in the 2010 Housing Element, there are also new policies and
programs that address these changing conditions.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings):
Citywide
10. Project Entitlements Requested:
General Plan Amendments approving the 2014 Housing Element.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.):
The 2014 Draft Housing Element Update must be referred to the California Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD) for a determination of consistency with State
housing law.
Attachment 4
PC1 - 37
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population / Housing
Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Public Services
Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation
Biological Resources Land Use / Planning Transportation / Traffic
Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities / Service Systems
Geology / Soils Noise Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND GAME FEES
X
The Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect
determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife,
or habitat (see attached determination).
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish
and Wildlife fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code. This initial study has
been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
X
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more
State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and
Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines
15073(a)).
Attachment 4
PC1 - 38
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
X
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made, by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially
significant unless mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions
or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Kim Murry
Printed Name Deputy Community Development Director
Attachment 4
PC1 - 39
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects
like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained
where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If
there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross-
referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe
the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
addressed site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Attachment 4
PC1 - 40
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?2 X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
14, 15 X
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings?
6X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
7X
Evaluation
a)b) Policies in the Draft Housing Element Update encourage the development of housing in urbanized areas and in
expansion areas planned and phased to accommodate residential growth. It follows Land Use Element (LUE) policies in
directing growth into those areas and sites that can accommodate residential development based on size, shape, topography,
zoning and environmental sensitivity. New residential development would be guided by existing development standards
regarding building height, creek and property line setbacks, and avoidance of important site and environmental features such
as historic features or buildings, rock outcroppings, open space, and heritage trees.
c) The General Plan contains goals and policies that address the visual character and quality of new development. Within the
Community Design Guidelines, General Principle 2.1, Site Design, states that each project should be designed with careful
consideration of the site character and constraints and minimize changes to natural features rather than altering a site to
accommodate a stock building plan. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) uses this policy, among others, to
determine if new development is acceptable as proposed or needs modification. The Community Design Guidelines include
other principles that require new development to be designed in a manner that is consistent with its surrounding structures
and environment. The ARC and the development review process ensure, through required project modifications, conditions
of approval or mitigation measures, that development plans are consistent with visual character and quality guidelines prior to
project approvals.
d) Residential development projects are subject to the Night Sky Ordinance, which includes operational and development
standards that mitigate light or glare impacts to a less than significant level.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
2X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract?
23 X
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use?
1X
Evaluation
a)c) The City of San Luis Obispo is in the central portion of the County's coastal agricultural region. The City is, for the most
part, urbanized with only a few small areas still engaged in agricultural production. Land Use Element Policy 1.8.1 calls for
the preservation of economically viable agricultural operations and land within the Urban Reserve and City limits. The
Housing Element follows the Land Use Element in terms of where housing should be developed and promotes compact urban
form to reduce urban sprawl and loss of productive agricultural lands outside the Urban Reserve. Agricultural and
Conservation/Open Space designated lands allow limited residential use at very low densities of one dwelling per five or
more acres, which is only suitable for rural housing. The Draft Housing Element Update will not result in the conversion of
prime or unique farmland or involve other changes that would lead to conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses
because it does not identify any new land that is subject to urbanization, rezoning from agricultural use to residential use or
expansion of the City’s Urban Reserve Line beyond that already anticipated in the General Plan.
Attachment 4
PC1 - 41
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
A residential development capacity inventory completed with the 2014 Housing Element Update identified approximately
144 acres of vacant or underutilized Open Space within City limits, with a potential development capacity of 6 density units.
Of the 144 acres approximately 45 acres were farmed in 2014. This includes the 25 acre Sunset Drive-in property, and two
parcels totaling about 20 acres between Los Verdes Residential Condominiums and San Luis Obispo Creek (off Los Osos
Valley Road). These parcels are located within a 100-year flood zone and are not suitable for residential development until
the flood hazard is mitigated without significant harm to San Luis Obispo Creek. Development of Interim Open Space
requires approval of a development plan or specific plan, showing how these flood hazards would be mitigated.
b) The City has established an Agricultural land use designation (AG) in its General Plan to help preserve important
agricultural land. No land within the current City limits is designated AG. The General Plan has allocated sufficient land for
urban uses to achieve housing goals and meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation without expanding the current Urban
Reserve Line into agricultural lands in the unincorporated County area. Draft Housing Element Policy 6.16 states the City
will encourage residential development focused on infill development and densification within City Limits and designated
expansion areas over new annexation of residential land to maximize housing potential in the City. There are no properties
within City limits under Williamson Act contracts.
Conclusion: No impact.
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or
air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
1, 2, 4 X
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
4X
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
4X
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
6,1 X
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
Evaluation
a)d) The Draft Housing Element Update will not conflict or obstruct implementation of the San Luis Obispo County 2001
Clean Air Plan (CAP). The CAP calls for building compact communities to limit urban sprawl, mix complementary land
uses, such as commercial services with higher density housing, increasing residential and commercial densities along transit
corridors, and increase pedestrian-friendly and interconnected streetscapes, helping to make alternative means of
transportation more convenient. The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with this plan. Policies 9.1 through 9.6
promote sustainable development that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Housing Element policies 7.4, 7.5, and 7.7
support walkable and bikeable neighborhoods, connected to shopping, schools and other neighborhoods. Community Design
Guidelines and Noise Element policies require setback buffers and HVAC systems for residences located along high traffic
corridors. These mitigations also serve to separate residences from potential exposure to vehicle-related pollutants.
b) The Draft Housing Element Update includes policies and programs to accommodate up to 1,144 in-city dwellings during
the planning period from January 2014 to June 2019. Of these, 666 units will be affordable to extremely low, very low, low
and moderate income households. As discussed under Population and Housing, Section 13, this level of growth is consistent
with the residential growth anticipated in the General Plan Land Use Element and evaluated in the 1994 General Plan Land
Use/Circulation final EIR. Based on the added number of in-city dwelling units and the average number of occupants per
household (2.29 persons), the City can anticipate an increase of 2,620 persons during this planning period. This anticipated
population number within the planning period, and the rate at which it is attained, is within growth projections of the Clean
Air Plan.
c) The project will not result in a significant impact to air quality. The Housing Element Update anticipates population and
Attachment 4
PC1 - 42
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
housing growth consistent with the Land Use Element based on household size and dwelling unit potential for this planning
period. The Draft has numerous policies and programs designed to promote compact urban growth, encourage mixed use,
promote housing within walking or biking distance of employment, and encourage downtown housing close to jobs, services,
government, recreation and cultural opportunities.
e) New development within mixed-use projects may be subject to impacts from odors generated by restaurants and other,
similar business activities. The City routinely confers with the local Air Pollution Control District regarding the acceptability
of adjacent land uses and addresses compatibility of land uses in mixed-use developments. Limits on hours of operation also
reduce conflicts between residents and customers in mixed-use developments. The City’s use permit requirement and
performance standards for mixed-use development reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 2 X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
7X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
7X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
2X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
2X
Evaluation
a)b)c) The General Plan Land Use and Conservation and Open Space Elements guide the preservation of biological
resources. These resources include creeks and adjacent riparian corridors, vernal pools, marshes, endangered species or
species of special concern, hillsides, open space and park areas, and Laguna Lake. General Plan Conservation and Open
Space Element Policy 7.3.3 says that wildlife habitat and corridors that provide continuous wildlife habitat shall be preserved.
The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with those documents, and anticipates new dwellings only in those areas
suitable for residential development, with adequate guarantees to preserve natural and biological resources as part of new
development. It says housing should be prevented on sites that are unsuitable for development due to the presence of open
space resources, or natural or manmade hazards.
Individual development projects will be subject to development review by City staff and advisory bodies to ensure
compliance with pertinent creek and wetland policies. Zoning Regulation Section 17.16.025 (Creek Setbacks) says that
projects shall be consistent with the General Plan and require the protection of scenic resources, water quality and natural
creekside habitat including opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest and movement; therefore, all new residential
development must comply with the Creek Setback Ordinance and must avoid sensitive site resources. New projects are
evaluated for compliance with the Creek Setback Ordinance and modifications are required through the development review
Attachment 4
PC1 - 43
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
process, conditions of approval or mitigation measures, as appropriate to insure that any potential impacts are less than
significant.
d) Development projects will be subject to applicable City standards and guidelines, the State and Federal Endangered
Species Act (ESA), the Clean Water Act (CWA) and other local, state and federal regulatory programs to ensure significant
impacts have mandated mitigation measures. Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 7.7.8 ensures the protection of
wildlife corridors. The City conditions development permits in accordance with applicable mitigation measures to ensure that
important corridors for wildlife movement and dispersal are protected. Important featured corridors include riparian
corridors, wetlands, lake shorelines, and protected natural areas with cover and water.
e) Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 7.5.1 states that significant trees making substantial contributions to natural
habitat or to the urban landscape due to their species, size or rarity shall be protected and their removal will be subject to
specific criteria and mitigation requirements. Any housing projects proposed on sites with significant trees will be subject to
this policy and mitigation.
f) The Draft Housing Element does not conflict with any adopted Conservation Plan.
Conclusion: No Impact.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource as defined in §15064.5.
1,2
14, 15
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5)
2, 13 X
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
2, 13 X
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
2, 13 X
Evaluation
a) Preservation of cultural resources is an important General Plan goal. Draft Housing Element Policy 3.1 encourages the
rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of housing rather than demolition. Changes to historic buildings and development in
historic districts should reflect the design and materials of the original building and contribute to a neighborhood’s historic
pattern of development and architectural character.
b) The City has established criteria to identify significant archeological resources and encourage the preservation of these
archaeological resources and sites. The City’s Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines are used to determine
significant resources. These guidelines support General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.5.1 which says
the City shall protect known and potential archaeological resources. Meeting the community’s housing needs is also a key
community goal, and the Draft Housing Element Update seeks to balance these sometime competing needs. It contains
policies addressing the need to rehabilitate rather than demolish housing, protect historic housing and residential districts,
ensure new residential development is compatible with designated historic resources, and encourage seismic safety upgrades.
According to the Guidelines, as new housing is developed, those features or characteristics that create or reinforce San Luis
Obispo’s “sense of place” are to be preserved. Individual residential development projects will be evaluated for site-specific
cultural resources and where necessary, appropriate mitigation included to protect those resources.
b)c)d) The City’s Archeological Resource Preservation Guidelines include specific criteria that address the discovery of
unique resources or human remains during construction excavation. Development that is proposed on sensitive sites, which
are mapped, requires a Phase 1 study to determine the likelihood of discovering resources during construction. These
existing measures, which are in place for development city-wide, are sufficient to prevent impacts to archeological or
paleontological resources, or any discovered human remains.
Conclusion: No Impact.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 1, 2
Attachment 4
PC1 - 44
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
36 X
II. Strong seismic ground shaking?36 X
III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 36 X
IV. Landslides?36 X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?7 X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
36 X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the
California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to
life or property?
36 X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste water?
X
Evaluation
a)b)c)d)e) San Luis Obispo County, including the City of San Luis Obispo, is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic
Province, which extends along the coastline from central California into Oregon. This region is characterized by extensive
folding, faulting, and fracturing of variable intensity. In general, the folds and faults of this province comprise the
pronounced northwest trending ridge-valley system of the central and northern coast of California.
Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special
studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently-active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well-defined as to
constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County, the special Studies
Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults. The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit line, near
Los Osos Valley Road. The closest mapped active fault is the Los Osos Fault, which runs in a northwest direction and is
about one mile from the City’s westerly boundary. Because portions of this fault have displaced sediments within a
geologically recent time (the last 10,000 years), portions of the Los Osos fault are considered “active”. Other active faults in
the region include: the San Andreas, located about 30 miles to the northeast, the Nacimiento, located approximately 12 miles
to the northeast, and the San Simeon-Hosgri fault zone, located approximately 12 miles to the west.
The Draft Housing Element Update includes policies to prevent new housing on sites with natural hazards, such as geological
or seismic risks, including soil erosion, landslides, or liquefaction. Draft Housing Element Policy 3.3 encourages seismic
upgrades of older dwellings to reduce the risk of bodily harm and the loss of housing in an earthquake. Policy 11.2 states that
the City will prevent new housing development on sites subject to natural hazards such as unmitigable geological or flood
risks, or wild fire dangers. City policies and development standards encourage housing where appropriately zoned land exists
with the necessary public services and infrastructure (or can be served), and where the land is physically and environmentally
suited for residential development. Community Development Department (planning and building) review of projects will
ensure they are developed in a manner that is safe and consistent with City standards, guidelines and policies.
e) The City maintains a sewer system that has adequate capacity to meet current housing needs, plus residential growth
anticipated during the planning period.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment?
2, 35 X
Attachment 4
PC1 - 45
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
2, 35 X
Evaluation:
a)b) Human activities, such as fossil fuel combustion and land use changes release carbon dioxide (CO2) and other
compounds, cumulatively termed greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHGs are effective in trapping infra-red radiation which
otherwise would have escaped the atmosphere, thereby warming the atmosphere, the oceans, and earth’s surface. GHGs are
any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere. AB 32, the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006”
codifies the Statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (essentially a 15% reduction below 2005
emission levels) and the adoption of regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. GHGs
include the following gases: CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons
(PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). In California, the main sources of GHG emissions are from the transportation and
energy sectors. Potential impacts of climate change in California may include loss in snow pack, sea level rise, more extreme
heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years (CalEPA, April 2010).
Senate Bill (SB) 97, signed in August 2007, acknowledges that climate change is an environmental issue that requires
analysis in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. In March 2010, the California Resources Agency
adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG
emissions. The adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the
assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts.
In 2008, the City conducted a baseline GHG emissions inventory, which was followed by adoption of a Climate Action Plan
(2012 CAP) for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The 2012 CAP includes a GHG emissions reduction target and
emissions reduction strategies designed to help the City achieve that target. The adopted target is a reduction of community-
wide emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, consistent with AB 32. The 2012 CAP identifies strategies to guide the development
and implementation of GHG reduction measures in the City and quantifies the emissions reductions that are anticipated to
result from these strategies. The GHG emissions forecast in the 2012 CAP shows that implementation of all of the strategies
in the 2012 CAP would achieve a 15% reduction from baseline levels by 2020, which would meet required AB 32 State
reduction goals. Having an adopted CAP allows the City to streamline the CEQA review process for certain development
projects and serves as the City’s qualified GHG reduction plan.
As described in the 2012 CAP, State policies to reduce GHG emissions associated with energy use, including the Renewable
Portfolio Standard, Title 24 of the California Building Code, and the California Solar Initiative, would reduce anticipated
emissions associated with future development projects. In addition, the City’s General Plan, Community Design Guidelines,
and Zoning Regulations include policies and standards that reduce energy use from buildings and equipment, including
design standards that maximize passive ventilation and cooling systems and use of natural lighting within buildings, and
energy efficiency performance standards for proposed buildings taller than 50 feet. Development projects within the Draft
Housing Element Update planning period would be required to comply with these existing policies and standards.
The Draft Housing Element Update would result in development consistent with the anticipated growth under the inventory
and assumptions of the 2012 CAP. The Draft includes policies and programs designed to promote compact urban growth,
encourage mixed use, promote housing within walking or biking distance of employment, and encourage downtown housing
close to jobs, services, government, recreation and cultural opportunities. Draft program 6.16 states the City will encourage
residential development focused on infill development and densification. Policies 9.1 through 9.6 promote sustainable
development that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policies 7.4, 7.5 and 7.7 support walkable and bikeable
neighborhoods, connected to shopping, schools and other neighborhoods.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
1, 2,
7, 37
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
X
Attachment 4
PC1 - 46
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
37 X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
8X
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working
in the project area?
X
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
38 X
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury,
or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
2, 36 X
Evaluation
a)b)c)d) The General Plan Land Use and Safety Elements are the primary policy documents addressing hazards and
hazardous materials. Within the Safety Element, Policy 5.2 states that new residential projects should minimize people’s
exposure to hazardous materials and substances. Policy 5.3 says the City should avoid using hazardous materials in its own
operations to the greatest extent practical and will follow all established health and safety practices when they are used. In
addition, the City’s 2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) addresses all hazards applicable to the City including:
earthquakes, wildland fires, adverse weather, hazardous materials events, floods, and landslides. The LHMP also addresses
mitigation strategies to best reduce negative effects from these identified hazards. The Draft Housing Element Update is
consistent with these documents.
e)f) Airport compatibility issues are of special concern because much of the City’s vacant residential land is located in the
southern part of the City, near the San Luis Obispo County Airport. The Airport Land Use Commission adopted the San Luis
Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan to guide where and what types of land uses are compatible with airport operations.
Generally, residential development is not appropriate in flight approach and take-off areas, and where safety or noise
considerations dictate greater spacing between housing and airport activities. City Land Use policies are consistent with the
Airport Land Use Plan, and individual developments are evaluated for their consistency with the Plan. The anticipated
residential growth is located outside of airport hazard areas, or within areas where residential use is conditionally allowed
with appropriate design and safety considerations. There are no private airstrips within the City’s Urban Reserve line.
g) Fire Code regulations, emergency response and evacuation plans are reviewed with any new residential development to
ensure the safety of the community.
h) Safety Element Policy 3.0 addresses adequate fire services and Policy 3.1 addresses housing and wildland fire safety. It
says that developments should be approved only when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available.
Maintaining consistency with Fire Department standards will ensure the safety and well-being of the community and exclude
development from areas of “very high” wildland fire hazards. The 2013 California Fire Code, adopted by the City, states
development guidelines required for development throughout the State. In addition, Chapter 15.04.100 of the City’s Building
Code provides amendments to the California Fire Code stating specific development standards required for fire safety and
prevention within the City of San Luis Obispo.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
Attachment 4
PC1 - 47
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
1, 2, X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
2, 12 X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on or off site?
39 X
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site?
X
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?X
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on
a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map?
31 X
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
X
i) Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
X
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?X
Evaluation
a)b) Per Water and Wastewater Management Element (WWME) Policy A 2.2.1, the City utilizes multiple water resources to
meet its water supply needs. Having several sources of water avoids dependence on any one source that may not be available
during a drought or other water supply reduction or emergency. The City has five water sources, including Salinas & Whale
Rock Reservoirs, Nacimiento Reservoir, Recycled Water, and Groundwater, achieving the goal of diversifying its water
supply portfolio to meet current and future community needs. Per WWME Policy A 3.2.3, the City will continue to use
limited amounts of ground water for domestic purposes when available, but will not consider this source of supply as part of
its water resources availability due to limitations for the use of groundwater resources.
c)d)e)f)g)h)i)j) New development projects will be in accordance with Chapter 12.08 of the City’s Municipal Code, which
includes Urban Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control, and State, and Federal standards relating to
drainage, runoff, water quality and flood zones. The City’s development review process will ensure future residential
developments will be in accordance with applicable standards.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?1, 2 X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
2X
Attachment 4
PC1 - 48
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
2X
Evaluation
a)b)c) The Draft Housing Element Update includes numerous programs to implement its goals and policies. For example,
policies in the Draft encouraging higher density, infill housing close to jobs and employment centers are consistent with
existing policies in the Land Use Element that encourage compact urban form. A few programs that identify non-residential
sites as potential areas to consider residential zoning would be implemented, in part, through changes to the General Plan
Land Use Map and Zoning Map but do not involve activities that would conflict with a regulation adopted for the purpose of
avoiding an environmental effect. Sites that may be appropriate for multi-family housing are identified in the Draft, with
subsequent review and action needed to evaluate and implement the change, however, no circumstance can be envisioned
where an encouraged project would physically divide an established community. No Habitat Conservation Plans are in effect
on any of the sites identified in the Housing Element as suitable for residential development.
Conclusion: No Impact.
11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
1, 2 X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
X
Evaluation
a)b) There are no known mineral resources of value to the region identified in the General Plan, specific plan or other land
use plan. The Draft Housing Element Update would not result in the loss of a locally-important mineral resource.
Conclusion:No impact.
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
1, 2,
5, 7
X
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
7X
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
7X
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
7X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
8X
X
Evaluation
a)b)c)d) The General Plan Noise Element establishes standards and procedures for protecting noise-sensitive uses from
stationary and mobile noise sources. Noise attenuation measures identified in the General Plan include land use limitations,
separation between land uses (i.e. noise buffers), earth berms, and where appropriate and no other feasible measure exists,
sound attenuation walls. New residential development must be consistent with the Noise Element and Noise Ordinance
standards. Noise Element Policy 1.1 says that the City will work to minimize noise exposure based on the established
numerical noise standards, or thresholds, contained in the document. The Draft encourages the production of affordable
housing through the development of non-conventional housing, including mixed residential-commercial housing, “work-live”
and “live-work” housing, and high-density downtown housing above commercial uses. In these types of housing, special
Attachment 4
PC1 - 49
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
attention must be paid to use compatibility. The City routinely evaluates proposed development projects to ensure
compliance with applicable Noise Element policies and Noise Ordinance standards. The City also publishes a Noise
Guidebook, which includes prescriptive compliance techniques where noise attenuation through building design is
determined to be necessary.
e)f) The City’s General Plan and Zoning Regulations are consistent with the standards contained in the San Luis Obispo
County Regional Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). The ALUP includes standards to insure that uses near the airport are
developed in a manner that is safe and compatible with aircraft operations. Noise levels are one of the key considerations in
the ALUP, and all development with the Plan area must be developed in a manner that eliminates noise exposure in excess of
the standards, including through the imposition of noise attenuation measures where necessary. There are no private airstrips
within the City’s Urban Reserve line.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
1, 2 X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
2X
2X
Evaluation
a) General Plan policies seek to achieve a sustainable level of growth through the City’s planned buildout of 24,674
dwellings and 57,200 persons, anticipated to occur by 2029. Land Use Element Policy 1.10.2 says that the City’s housing
supply should grow no faster than one percent per year, on average. This maximum average growth rate excludes dwellings
affordable to residents with extremely-low, very-low, low and moderate incomes as defined by the Housing Element. This
will assure population growth does not exceed the City’s ability to assimilate new residents and ensure municipal services are
available for new and existing residents.
As required by State law, the Draft Housing Element Update includes Quantified Objectives showing the number of units the
City expects to accommodate in each income group during the planning period from January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2019.
Under the Draft, the City would expect to accommodate up to 1,144 new, in-city dwellings. Of the total, 58%, or 666 units,
will be affordable to extremely-low, very-low, low and moderate income households. The remaining units can be
constructed within the allowed average residential growth rate of one percent per year and will be credited towards meeting
the City’s Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) of 1,144 added units by 2019.
According to the Regional Housing Needs Plan adopted by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, San Luis Obispo’s
RHNA during the planning period is 1,144 dwellings as shown in the table below. However, State housing law (Article 10.6,
Section 65583(b)(2) of the California Government Code) recognizes that total housing needs identified for a jurisdiction may
exceed available resources and the ability of the jurisdiction to satisfy this need within the context of State and local General
Plan requirements. Under these circumstances, a jurisdiction’s quantified housing objectives need not be identical to the total
housing needs. The City’s proposed Quantified Objectives are shown in Table 1, below.
Regional Housing Need Allocation, January 2014- June 2019
City of San Luis Obispo
Income Category
New
Construction
Need (RHNA)
Extremely-Low (< 31% of
Area Median Income)142
Attachment 4
PC1 - 50
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Very Low (31-50% of AMI) 143
Low (51-80% of AMI) 179
Moderate (81-120% of AMI) 202
Above Moderate (>120% of
AMI)478
TOTAL RHNA UNITS 1,144
Source: City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department
b)c) San Luis Obispo has evaluated its ability to accommodate the RHNA number of 1,144 dwellings by June 2019 and
determined it has sufficient zoned land, water and infrastructure to accommodate its assigned RHNA. New State housing
laws have placed greater responsibility on local government to address housing needs in the face of reduced financial
resources. The Draft includes new information, policies and programs to address these legal requirements.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection?2 X
b) Police protection?X
c) Schools?X
d) Parks?X
e) Other public facilities?X
Evaluation
a)b) Safety Element Policy 3.0 states that adequate facilities and services shall be in place before new development is
approved. City policy calls for new development to “pay its own way”, and for costs of new development not to be shifted to
existing residents.
c) The Draft Housing Element Update estimates that one, or possibly two, additional school sites will be needed to serve
planned residential growth in the southern part of the City. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan includes one potential elementary
school site. Development projects will be required to pay construction permit school fees to offset costs of developing new
schools.
d) The Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan requires new development areas to allocate 10 acres of developed
park land for every 1000 residents to ensure that sufficient parkland is developed along with new residential development.
Infill areas pay Quimby fees to capture 5 acres per 1000 residents or provide land for parks.
e) Draft Housing Element Update policies and programs call for the City to solicit new funding sources to assist in the
development of affordable housing. The City has an Affordable Housing Fund that can be used to offset costs and provide
infrastructure and services to affordable housing developments. This and other funding sources will be needed to meet the
Quantified Objectives. City utilities, parking and recreation facilities and programs, and public schools are funded by service
users and new development. City fees on new development, including water, wastewater, traffic, park, affordable housing,
and school are collected at the time of construction permit issuance to offset the costs borne by the City to meet the service
needs of new development.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
15. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
1, 2 X
Attachment 4
PC1 - 51
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
1, 2 X
Evaluation
a) The General Plan Parks and Recreation Element Policy 3.13.1 says the City shall develop and maintain a park system at a
rate of 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The City monitors the adequacy of its recreational facilities and evaluates
each new residential development to determine if additional service capacity is needed. New development is responsible for
providing funding or facilities in proportion to the need generated by the development project. This will help to ensure
sufficient open space and recreational areas are allocated for the community.
b) Housing development, including recreational facilities required as a condition of that development, will be allowed only in
areas suitable for such development. Draft Housing Element Policy 11.2 states that the City will prevent new housing
development on sites that should be preserved as dedicated open space or parks.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of
the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel
and relevant components of the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
1, 2 X
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel
demand measures, or other standards established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
2X
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
8X
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)?
2X
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?2, 7 X
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding
public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
2X
Evaluation
a) Circulation Element 16.1.4 states that the City will evaluate potential transportation impacts created by new development
projects. Development applications submitted to the City include displays of the project’s interfaces with nearby
neighborhoods, and indicate expected significant qualitative transportation effects on the entire community. Traffic load and
circulation impacts must be mitigated prior to development plan approvals. This information is used by decision makers and
planners to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures, including required off-site improvements, are established as part of
any approved development project.
b) Circulation Element Policy 8.0.1 says that the City will manage the use of arterial streets and regional routes/highways to
accommodate increases in traffic levels limited to and permitted by the City’s adopted growth management plan so levels of
traffic congestion do not exceed the peak hour level of service standards. To maintain levels of service, traffic management
plans will be established, alternative forms of transportation will be established and changes within existing roadways will be
made to improve pedestrian and bicycling safety while improving traffic flow.
Attachment 4
PC1 - 52
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) The City’s General Plan and Zoning Regulations are consistent with the standards contained in the San Luis Obispo
County Regional Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). The Draft Housing Element Update is a policy document that does not
include a rezoning program or target new sites for residential development.
d) The City evaluates proposed development projects to insure that hazards due to design features are reduced or eliminated.
The Draft will not change the City’s process for evaluating new development projects to ensure that vehicle circulation is
accomplished without creating design hazards or conflicts with incompatible uses.
e) Emergency access to new development will be reviewed with through the development review process. Safety Element
Policy 10.1 and Program 10.3 states that the Fire Department has set a response-time objective of four (4) minutes. Safety
Element Policies 9.20 through 9.23 lists the precautionary measures the City will take when evaluating a development plan.
The City conducts safety inspections for fire safety, including enforcement of fire lanes, for multi-family residential
developments.
f) Using alternative means of transportation is a key way to minimize congestion, and reduce health and environmental
impacts. The City’s General Plan discusses transportation with goals that are supported by specific policies to encourage
alternative modes of travel throughout the City. Circulation Element Policy 2.0.1 supports county wide and community
programs geared to substantially reduce the number of vehicle trips and parking demand. Through this and many other
transportation-related policies, transportation impacts due to level of service, road damage and traffic capacity can be
successfully mitigated.
Conclusion: No Impact.
17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
1, 2 X
b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
12 X
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
X
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and
expanded entitlements needed?
12 X
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
12 X
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
40 X
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
X
Evaluation
a)b) The Draft Housing Element Update includes Quantified Objectives that can be accommodated by existing and planned
water and wastewater, distribution and collection facilities.
c) New development projects will be in accordance with City, State, and Federal standards relating to storm water drainage
facilities. The City’s development review process will ensure future residential developments will be in accordance with
applicable standards.
d) Per Water and Wastewater Management Element (WWME) Policy A 2.2.1, the City utilizes multiple water resources to
Attachment 4
PC1 - 53
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
meet its water supply needs. Having several sources of water avoids dependence on any one source that may not be available
during a drought or other water supply reduction or emergency. The City’s 2013 Water Resources Status Report states that
the City has approximately seven years of water supply until reservoir levels are drawn down to a minimum pool, assuming
the onset of an extended drought. With its multi-source water policy, the City has implemented a long-term strategy which
will ensure a reliable supply of water to meet the current and future needs of the community.
e) The City’s current wastewater treatment facility has a design capacity of 5.1 million gallons per day. According to the
City’s Utility Department, this is adequate capacity to meet current needs, plus residential growth anticipated during the
planning period.
f)g) City of San Luis Obispo’s Municipal Code Chapter 8.05 states the City’s Construction Debris Diversion and Recycling
Ordinance which requires that all new development include a recycling plan to reduce the amount of debris disposed of at the
Cold Canyon Landfill, which serves the City. The City’s development review process will ensure future residential
developments will be in accordance with these standards. Cold Canyon Landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate the
City’s anticipated build-out population.
Conclusion: No Impact.
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X
Individual development project impacts on natural and cultural resources will be evaluated and mitigated, consistent with
CEQA and with General Plan policies. The proposed Draft Housing Element Update will not affect City policies on
protecting and enhancing biological or cultural resources or preclude the City from achieving resource protection goals.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
The Draft Housing Element Update would accommodate up to 1,144 in-city dwelling units in a five year period. Over half of
these units are targeted to be affordable to extremely-low, very-low, low and moderate income households and are exempt
from the Residential Growth Management Regulations. The Draft is consistent with General Plan Land Use policies
regarding residential growth. Cumulative impacts of General Plan policies and anticipated growth are addressed and
mitigated in the Land Use Element Final EIR. It also identified significant, adverse impacts of cumulative growth factors,
despite mitigation, for which findings of overriding considerations were made with regard to conversion of agricultural land
to urban uses, accommodating a regional share of anticipated regional growth within the Urban Reserve line, and increases in
population, employment and housing.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
The Draft Housing Element Update will meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the planning period. There is
no evidence that the Draft Element’s policies and programs will have significant, adverse impacts on humans, either directly
or indirectly.
19. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion
Attachment 4
PC1 - 54
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used.Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Final Environmental Impact Report, Land Use and Circulation Element Updates; available at the Community Development
Department, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
b) Impacts adequately addressed.Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
See attached Resolution No. 8332 (1994 Series), summarizing environmental impact, mitigation, monitoring and overriding
considerations from the 1994 Land Use Element update.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions of the project.
The Draft Housing Element Update is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and must also be guided by the
mitigation that applies to that document.
20. SOURCE REFERENCES.
1. Draft Housing Element Update, City of San Luis Obispo, September 2014
2. General Plan, City of San Luis Obispo
3. 2013 California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA Guidelines, American Council of Engineering Companies
4. 2001 Clean Air Plan, San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
5. Noise Guidebook, City of San Luis Obispo, May 1996
6. Community Design Guidelines, City of San Luis Obispo, June 2010
7. Zoning Regulations, City of San Luis Obispo, August 2014
8. San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan, May 2005
9. Orcutt Area Specific Plan, City of San Luis Obispo, March 2010
10. Margarita Area Specific Plan, City of San Luis Obispo, October 2004
11. Municipal Code, City of San Luis Obispo
12. Water Resources Status Report, City of San Luis Obispo, 2013
13. Archeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, City of San Luis Obispo, October 2009
14. Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, City of San Luis Obispo, November 2010
15. Historic Preservation Ordinance, City of San Luis Obispo, December 2010
16. Final EIR – San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element Updates, August 1994
17. General Plan Annual Reports, 2010-2013
18. Workforce Housing Survey, Economic Vitality Corporation, September 2013
19. Regional Housing Needs Plan for San Luis Obispo County, SLOCOG, June 2013
20. Housing Element Update Guidance, HCD, December 2012
21. U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 & 2010
22. American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2012
23. Agricultural Census, U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 2012
24. ACTION for Healthy Communities: Indicators Report, San Luis Obispo Community Health Foundation, 2013
25. 5
th Cycle Data Package, HCD, September 2014
26. The 2012 Central Coast Economic Forecast, Beacon Economics, 2012
27. San Luis Obispo County 2013 Economic Outlook, Beacon Economics, 2013
28. Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements, HCD, 2013
29. General Plan Guidelines, State Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2014
30. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, April 2012
31. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use Inventory and Geographic Information System, current database
32. Path to a Home, San Luis Obispo Countywide 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness, October 2008
33. SLO County Homeless Point-In-Time Census & Survey Comprehensive Report, Applied Survey Research, 2013
34. San Luis Obispo County Apartment Market Survey, Real Estate Consulting & Brokerage Services, March 2011
35. Climate Action Plan, City of San Luis Obispo, August 2012
Attachment 4
PC1 - 55
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
2014 General Plan Housing Element Update (ER # 15-14)
Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
36. California Building Code
37. 2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
38. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 15.04 – Fire Code
39. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 12.08 – Storm Water
40. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 8.05- Recycling
Attachments:
1) Resolution No. 8332 (1994 Series) approving the Land Use/Circulation Element Update and summarizing environmental
impacts, mitigation and monitoring, and overriding considerations.
2) 2014 Draft Housing Element Update
Attachment 4
PC1 - 56
Attachment 4
PC1 - 57
Attachment 4
PC1 - 58
Attachment 4
PC1 - 59
Attachment 4
PC1 - 60
Attachment 4
PC1 - 61
Attachment 4
PC1 - 62
Attachment 4
PC1 - 63
Attachment 4
PC1 - 64
Attachment 4
PC1 - 65
Attachment 4
PC1 - 66
Attachment 4
PC1 - 67
Attachment 4
PC1 - 68
Attachment 4
PC1 - 69
Attachment 4
PC1 - 70
Attachment 4
PC1 - 71
Attachment 4
PC1 - 72
Attachment 4
PC1 - 73
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND
AMENDMENTS TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
(GPI /ER 15-14)
WHEREAS, State law requires cities and counties to adopt a general plan. The
general plan includes seven required elements, one of which is the housing element. The
housing element must be updated every five (5) years or as otherwise provided by State
law; and
WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan Housing Element was last updated on June 1,
2010 in compliance with State law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on November 12, 2014, for the purpose of considering the Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact and amendments to the Housing Element to address the
changing needs, resources and conditions in the Community, as required by State law;
and
WHEREAS, the draft Housing Element was transmitted to the State Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review, and modifications have been
made to address HCD comments; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding
recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project;
and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including
the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations
by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the
following findings:
1. The proposed amendments included in the draft Housing Element are consistent
with other land use goals and policies of the General Plan.
Attachment 5
PC1 - 74
Planning Commission Resolution No. (2014 Series)
GPI/ER 15-14 (Housing Element)
Page 2
2. The proposed amendments are appropriate and necessary to ensure that the City’s
Housing Element meets State law and the changing needs, resources and
conditions in the community.
3. Achieving Housing Element State certification will promote affordable housing
opportunities and help achieve adopted housing goals by making the City eligible
for various housing grants and financial incentives, and will foster cooperation
among local and state agencies in addressing an urgent need for affordable
housing in the City.
Section 2. Environmental Determination.The Planning Commission does
hereby recommend the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact.
Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission does hereby
recommend the City Council adopt the proposed amendments to the Housing Element
dated November 2014, incorporated herein by reference.
On motion of , seconded by , and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of November, 2014.
___________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Planning Commission by
Attachment 5
PC1 - 75
Meeting Date: November 12, 2014
Item Number: 2
2X
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Appeal of the Director’s Decision to deny an appeal requesting use of a recreational
vehicle as a dwelling unit.
PROJECT ADDRESS:500 Mountain View BY:Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner
& Cassia Cocina, Code Enforcement Officer
Phone Number: 781-7573
e-mail: eberg@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: AP-PC 111-14 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION:Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) denying the appeal and
supporting the Director’s decision to uphold the citation.
SITE DATA
Appellant John Holloman, Resident
Zoning R-1-S, Low-Density Residential,
Special Considerations Overlay
General Plan
Low-Density Residential, Special
Considerations
Site Area
3 Acres
Environmental
Status
Categorically exempt under
Section 15270, projects which a
public agency rejects or
disapproves.
SUMMARY
City staff received a complaint alleging unpermitted structures, an unpermitted septic system, and a
recreational vehicle present on the property that is being rented out for permanent living purposes. An
inspection of the property was conducted, and Code Enforcement staff documented the code
violations. The property owner received a Notice to Correct Violations for the unpermitted structures,
electrical and sanitary drainage system, swimming pool, and use of a recreational vehicle as a dwelling
unit. The enforcement action regarding the recreational vehicle was appealed by John Holloman, the
property owner and resident of 500 Mountain View Drive.
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
D.D.
Cerro
San
Luis
Natural
Reserve
PC2 - 1
AP-PC 111-14 (500 Mountain View)
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Planning Commission’s role is to determine if use of the recreational vehicle as a dwelling unit is
consistent with the Zoning Regulations.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Information/Setting
The subject property is located northwest of Downtown San Luis Obispo approximately 0.15 miles
north of Highway 101. The property is accessed via a private driveway that connects to the
intersection of Mountain View Drive and Hill Street. The property is adjacent to the Cerro San
Luis Natural Reserve, which includes approximately 121 acres of public open space and hiking
trails. The immediate neighborhood consists of relatively large parcels developed with single-
family homes. According to the San Luis Obispo County Assessor’s Office, a four bedroom
residence was constructed on the subject property in 1952. Please see Attachment 2 for a Vicinity
Map.
Site Size 3 Acres
Present Use & Development Single-family residence, RV rental, multiple accessory structures
Topography Sloping upwards from east to west
Access Mountain View Street, Hill Street
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: R-1 (Single-family residences)
South: R-1 (Single-family residences)
East: R-2 (Duplex)
West: C-OS (Public Open Space, Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve)
2.2 Background
October, 2008
Appellant cited by Code Enforcement for violating Municipal Code 17.16.015 and International
Property Maintenance Code 504.3 for operation of a hazardous plumbing system. No appeal was
filed by property owner and resolution to the case was achieved by voluntary cessation of the
trailer’s use as a residence.
January 13, 2014
A complaint was issued by a neighbor regarding the use of the RV as a dwelling unit and
unpermitted structures - Code Enforcement Officers Cassia Cocina and Ben Ross, and City
Building Inspector Dave Fogg conducted an inspection of the property with the property owner.
January 24, 2014
Notice to Correct Code Violations was issued to the property owner. Documented violations
included use of RV as a dwelling unit, two unpermitted structures, an unused pool with standing
water, and an unpermitted electrical system and sanitary drainage system.
PC2 - 2
AP-PC 111-14 (500 Mountain View)
Page 3
February 10, 2014
Property owner hand - delivered his appeal to the Community Development Department. Initial
appeal did not clarify which violations were appealed, therefore a follow-up letter and due date
extension was granted until February 28, 2014.
February 28, 2014
Received complete letter from property owner appealing the violation related to use of the RV as a
dwelling unit.
March 25, 2014
Notice of Director’s Decision was sent to the property owner, upholding the violations and denying
the appeal.
April 9, 2014
Received the appeal contesting the Director’s Interpretation of SLOMC 17.16.015 (Recreation
vehicle as a dwelling unit).
2.3 Appeal
The appellant’s letter (Attachment 4) refutes the applicability of violation 17.16.015 to his
property, and states that the recreational vehicle is not visible from the public right of way or
accessible to the public. Mr. Holloman also discusses the history of SLOMC 17.16.015 and the
intention of the ordinance. The appellant contends that the recreational vehicle provides affordable
housing to otherwise homeless individuals. The appellant’s letter confirms that the use of the
trailer at 500 Mountain View Street is a dwelling unit, and is being rented out for compensation.
3.0 APPEAL EVALUATION
3.1 Consistency with Zoning Regulations
The appellant’s use of the trailer as a dwelling unit at 500 Mountain View Street is inconsistent
with the City’s Municipal Code. Section 17.16.015 (Recreation vehicle as dwelling unit) of the
Municipal Code states the following:
No recreational vehicles, camper shell, automobile or similar device shall be used for living or
sleeping quarters on private property, except in a lawfully operated mobile home park, travel
trailer park, or campground, except as provided in Section 17.08.010(C)(4)
Section 17.08.010(C)(4) stipulates that a RV can be used as a temporary dwelling for a period not
to exceed 7 days for the purpose of housing guests of onsite residents. This section of the
Municipal Code does not apply to the subject case because the RV is being used as a permanent,
long-term dwelling.
3.2 Visual Blight and Public Safety
During a site inspection, City staff analyzed the situation from the perspective of the public open
space that exists to the west of the subject property. Staff accessed the Cerro San Luis Natural
Reserve via the trail system, and it was clear that the RV is visible from one of the primary trails
PC2 - 3
AP-PC 111-14 (500 Mountain View)
Page 4
(see Attachment 3, Site Photos). The RV creates visual blight for those who visit this open space
area.
Staff also confirmed that dry brush piles and two deceased Monterey pine trees exist behind the RV
near the property line that separates the public open space and the subject property. The City’s Fire
Marshall confirmed that if a fire starts within the RV, ignition of the brush pile could lead to a
major wild lands fire in the open space area that would destroy natural habitat and endanger
residents. Further, if gas-operated heating or cooking appliances within the RV were improperly
connected to the natural gas system, it is considered unsafe and a violation of the California Fire
Code Section 603.7 since it is an immediate fire hazard or can imperil human life. The fire
department reviewed a photograph of the RV’s hookup to a utility line and it appears to be
improperly connected. The increased probability of a serious fire or explosion also puts the
inhabitant(s) of the RV in danger.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The use of the recreational vehicle as a dwelling unit at 500 Mountain View Street is inconsistent
with the City’s Municipal Code. The illegal use of the RV creates a nuisance to neighboring
properties, and poses a severe fire danger. In order to maintain consistency with the City’s Zoning
Ordinance, and to protect the safety of City residents, staff recommends the Planning Commission
uphold the citation and prohibit use of the recreational vehicle as a dwelling unit.
5.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Grant the appeal based on different or modified findings.
2. Continue the action and request that staff and/or the appellant provide more information.
6.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity Map
3. Site Photos
4. Appeal letter from John Holloman, Property Owner and Resident
PC2 - 4
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. PC- XXXX-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING AN APPEAL FOR USE OF A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AS A DWELLING
UNIT AS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS DATED
NOVEMBER 12, 2014 (500 MOUNTAIN VIEW AP-PC 111-14)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
November 12, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under AP-PC 111-14, John Holloman,
appellant.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San
Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following
findings:
1. The use of the recreational vehicle as a dwelling unit does not comply with the City’s Municipal
Code, Section 17.16.015. This section states that the use of recreational vehicles for sleeping or
living purposes on private property is prohibited.
2. The use of the recreational vehicle as a dwelling unit poses a fire hazard to those living on the
property, the Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve, and homes in the vicinity.
Environmental Review. Section 15270, Projects which are disapproved, states that CEQA does not
apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.
Action. The Planning Commission does hereby deny application AP-PC 111-14.
On motion by _______, seconded by _______, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
PC2 - 5
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-XXXX-14
AP-PC 105-14 (625 Cuesta)
Page 2
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12th day of November, 2014.
_____________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Planning Commission
PC2 - 6
C/OS-20
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1-S
R-1-S R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1-S
R-1
C/OS-5
R-1
C-N
R-1
C-N
R-1
R-1
R-3-SHI
LL BROADCENTE
R
LINC
O
L
N
MOUN
T
AI
N
VI
E
WALMOND
VICINITY MAP File No. 111-14
500 Mountain View ¯
Attachment 2
PC2 - 7
Attachment 3
Site Photos
Figure 1: View of RV from Mountain View Drive
Figure 2: View showing use of RV as a dwelling unit
PC2 - 8
Attachment 3
Figure 3: View of RV from Public Open Space (Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve)
Figure 4: View looking East from Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve. Notice dry vegetation
and dead Monterey pine trees in top right of photo.
PC2 - 9
Attachment 4
PC2 - 10
Attachment 4
PC2 - 11
Attachment 4
PC2 - 12
Attachment 4
PC2 - 13
Attachment 4
PC2 - 14
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
68%-(&7 5HYLHZRIDSURSRVDOWRFRQYHUWDUHVWDXUDQWEXLOGLQJLQWRDFDUZDVKLQWKH7RXULVW
&RPPHUFLDO &7 =RQH
352-(&7$''5(66 &DOOH-RDTXLQ%< :DOWHU2HW]HOO$VVLVWDQW3ODQQHU
ZRHW]HOO#VORFLW\RUJ
),/(180%(5 86( )520 'RXJ'DYLGVRQ'HSXW\'LUHFWRU
5(&200(1'$7,21 $GRSWWKHGUDIWUHVROXWLRQ $WWDFKPHQW GHWHUPLQLQJWKDWWKHSURMHFW
LVFDWHJRULFDOO\H[HPSWIURPWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH&DOLIRUQLD(QYLURQPHQWDO4XDOLW\$FWDQG
JUDQWLQJDXVHSHUPLWWRDOORZWKHRSHUDWLRQRIDFDUZDVKLQWKH7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO &7
=RQHEDVHGRQILQGLQJVDQGVXEMHFWWRFRQGLWLRQV
6,7('$7$
Address 1460 Calle Joaquin
Applicant AuzCo Development, LLC
Representative George Garcia, AIA
garcia architecture+design
Property Owner AuzCo Development, LLC
Zoning Tourist-Commercial (C-T)
General Plan Tourist Commercial
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt
(CEQA Guidelines §15301: Minor
alteration of existing structures)
6800$5<
*HRUJH *DUFLD $,$ UHSUHVHQWLQJ $X]&R 'HYHORSPHQW //& WKH DSSOLFDQW KDV ILOHG
DSSOLFDWLRQVIRUWKHDOWHUDWLRQRIDQH[LVWLQJUHVWDXUDQWEXLOGLQJDW&DOOH-RDTXLQWRFRQYHUW
WKHEXLOGLQJLQWRDFDUZDVKDQGLQVWDOODSD\NLRVNYDFXXPVWDWLRQVDQGDGRJVSDZDVKRQWKH
VLWH2SHUDWLRQRIDFDUZDVKLVDOORZHGLQWKH7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO &7 =RQHVXEMHFWWRDXVH
SHUPLWJUDQWHGE\WKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
0HHWLQJ'DWH 1RYHPEHU
,WHP1XPEHU
ZR
''
PC3 - 1
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
&200,66,21¶63859,(:
7KH&RPPLVVLRQ¶VUROHLVWRUHYLHZWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWDQGFRQVLGHUZKHWKHUWKHFDUZDVK
FRXOGEHHVWDEOLVKHGDQGPDLQWDLQHGZLWKRXWMHRSDUG\WRSHUVRQVRUSURSHUW\ZLWKLQRUDGMDFHQW
WRWKHSURSRVHGVLWHDQGZLWKRXWGDPDJHWRWKHUHVRXUFHVRIWKHVLWHDQGLWVVXUURXQGLQJV7KH
&RPPLVVLRQPD\DFWWRLPSRVHDGGLWLRQDOGHYHORSPHQWVWDQGDUGVDQGFRQGLWLRQVRIDSSURYDOWR
UHGXFHRUDYRLGGHWULPHQWDOHIIHFWV DQGSUHYHQWSRWHQWLDOFRQIOLFWVLQODQGXVH$UFKLWHFWXUDO
5HYLHZRIWKLVSURMHFWLVDOVRUHTXLUHG7KH$UFKLWHFWXUDO5HYLHZ&RPPLVVLRQLVVFKHGXOHGWR
UHYLHZWKHSURMHFWIRUFRQIRUPDQFHWRGHYHORSPHQWVWDQGDUGVDQGGHVLJQJXLGHOLQHVDWDSXEOLF
KHDULQJRQ1RYHPEHUWK
352-(&7,1)250$7,21
6LWH,QIRUPDWLRQ6HWWLQJ
7KHSURMHFWVLWHLVDôDFUHSRUWLRQRIDODUJHUSDUFHOZLWKLQWKH7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO &7 =RQH
,WLVRQWKHVRXWKVLGHRI&DOOH-RDTXLQDERXWIHHWHDVWRI/RV2VRV9DOOH\5RDGDQGLV
DFFHVVHG IURP &DOOH -RDTXLQ E\ WZR IRRW ZLGH GULYHZD\V 7KHVLWH LWVHOI GRHV QRW KDYH
VLJQLILFDQWSK\VLFDORUWRSRJUDSKLFIHDWXUHVEXWLVDGMDFHQWWR3UHIXPR&UHHNZKLFKUXQVDORQJ
WKH VRXWKHUQ DQG HDVWHUQ HGJHV RI WKH SURSHUW\ ,W LV GHYHORSHG ZLWK D VTXDUHIRRW
UHVWDXUDQWEXLOGLQJRULJLQDOO\FRQVWUXFWHGIRU'HQQ\¶V5HVWDXUDQWVDQGQRZYDFDQW7KH6/2
&RDVW'LQHUDQG=DNL¶V*ROGHQ:DIIOHZHUHUHFHQWRFFXSDQWVRIWKHEXLOGLQJ
Site Dimensions
(approx.)
Area: 0.75 acres
Width: about 240 feet
Depth: about 160 feet
Street Frontage: 240 feet
Present Use &
Development
Commercial (Vacant)
Topography Elevation: Min. 110 feet; Max. 113 ft.
Slope: Flat
Natural Features: None. Creek bank and riparian vegetation adjacent to the
site at eastern and southern edges
Access From Calle Joaquin
Surrounding Use /
Zoning
South and East: Open Space, Prefumo Creek
West: Tourist Commercial (C-T); Gas station
North: Service-Commercial (C-S); Auto-related and motel
3UHIXPR&UHHNUXQVWKURXJKD&RQVHUYDWLRQ2SHQ6SDFH &26 =RQHWRWKHVRXWKDQGHDVW
RIWKHVLWH7RWKHZHVWRIWKHVLWHLQWKH7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO &7 =RQHLVDQ$5&2JDV
VWDWLRQ$FURVV&DOOH-RDTXLQLVD6HUYLFH&RPPHUFLDO &6 =RQH%XVLQHVVHVWKHUHLQFOXGHWKH
PC3 - 2
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
$XWRPRELOH&OXERI6RXWKHUQ&DOLIRUQLD ³7ULSOH$´ 7R\RWD6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0RWHODQG
$PHULFD¶V7LUH
3URMHFW'HVFULSWLRQ
%XLOGLQJ&RQYHUVLRQ 7KLVSURMHFWZLOOFRQYHUWWKHH[LVWLQJUHVWDXUDQWEXLOGLQJRQWKHVLWHLQWRD
FDUZDVK7KHVKHOORIWKHEXLOGLQJZLOOEHUHWDLQHGDQGUHQRYDWHG$FDUZDVKWXQQHOHTXLSPHQW
URRPDQGDXWRPRELOHGHWDLODUHDZLOOEHFRQVWUXFWHGZLWKLQWKHEXLOGLQJVKHOO7ZRSURMHFWLRQV
DWHLWKHUHQGRIWKHEXLOGLQJZLOOVHUYHWRHQFORVHWKHH[WHQVLRQRIWKHFDUZDVKWXQQHO
.LRVN9DFXXPV'RJ6SD $³SD\NLRVN´ZLOOEHFRQVWUXFWHGMXVWZHVWRIWKHEXLOGLQJ$SDWK
ZLOO EH VWULSHG WKURXJK WKH NLRVN DQG EH\RQG WR WKH FDU ZDVK WXQQHO HQWU\ 7KLV SDWK FDQ
DFFRPPRGDWHDERXWFDUVDSSURDFKLQJWKHWXQQHO7KUHHYDFXXPVWDQFKLRQVZLOOEHLQVWDOOHGWR
SURYLGHDIXOOVHUYLFHYDFXXPVWDWLRQQHDUWKHFDUZDVKWXQQHOH[LWDQGQLQHPRUHVWDQFKLRQV
ZLOOEHLQVWDOOHGWKURXJKRXWWKHSDUNLQJDUHDWRSURYLGHVHOIVHUYLFHYDFXXPLQJDUHDV$GRJVSD
ZDVKXQLWZLOOEHLQVWDOOHGDWWKHIURQWRIWKHFDUZDVKEXLOGLQJ
/DQGVFDSH 7KHH[LVWLQJODQGVFDSHDUHDDORQJWKH&DOOH-RDTXLQIURQWDJHZLOOEHUHIUHVKHGZLWK
QHZJURXQGFRYHUDQGVKUXEVDQGDFFRPPRGDWHQHZVWUHHWWUHHV$QRWKHUVWUHHWWUHHVDUH
SURSRVHGWREHSODQWHGLQVPDOOODQGVFDSHDUHDVDWHDFKFRUQHURIWKHVLWHIURQWDJH $WUDVK
HQFORVXUHGHVLJQHGDFFRUGLQJWRWKH&LW\¶V6ROLG:DVWH'HYHORSPHQW6WDQGDUGVDQGVFUHHQHG
ZLWKYLQHVZLOOEHFRQVWUXFWHGDGMDFHQWWRWKHHDVWHUO\DFFHVVGULYHZD\SURYLGLQJFRQYHQLHQW
DFFHVVIRUVROLGZDVWHFROOHFWLRQ
2WKHULPSURYHPHQWV 7KHH[LVWLQJVLWHSDYHPHQWZLOOEHUHWDLQHGDQGUHVWULSHGWRGHPDUFDWHWKH
FLUFXODWLRQSDWKVWKURXJKWKHVLWHDQGWRSURYLGHSDUNLQJVSDFHV1HZLQFKDVSKDOWFRQFUHWH
EHUPVZLOOEHLQVWDOOHGWRGLUHFWFLUFXODWLRQQHDUWKHZHVWHUO\GULYHZD\
2SHUDWLRQ 7KHEXVLQHVVLVLQWHQGHGWRRSHUDWHGD\VDZHHNW\SLFDOO\EHWZHHQWKHKRXUVRI
DPDQGSPZLWKPLQRUYDULDWLRQVGXHWRZHDWKHUDQG'D\OLJKW6DYLQJ7LPH7KHIDFLOLW\
UHTXLUHVPLQLPDOVWDIILQJZLWKWRHPSOR\HHVRQVLWHGXULQJRSHUDWLRQ
PC3 - 3
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
352-(&7$1$/<6,6
&RQVLVWHQF\ZLWKWKH*HQHUDO3ODQDQG=RQLQJ5HJXODWLRQV
Appropriate Uses and Locations
7KH/DQG8VH(OHPHQW /8( RIWKH*HQHUDO3ODQGHVFULEHV7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDOXVHVDVWKRVH
ZKLFKSULPDULO\VHUYHWKHWUDYHOLQJSXEOLF7RDVVXUHDGHTXDWHVSDFHIRUYLVLWRUVHUYLQJXVHV
DUHDVGHVLJQDWHG7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDOVKRXOGQRWLQFOXGHRIILFHVJHQHUDOUHWDLOVWRUHVDXWRUHSDLU
RUEXVLQHVVVHUYLFHV /8( 9LVLWRUVHUYLQJXVHVVKRXOGEHLQWHJUDWHGZLWKRWKHUW\SHVRI
XVHVDQGDUHHVSHFLDOO\DSSURSULDWHZKHUHVXFKXVHVKDYHDOUHDG\FRQFHQWUDWHG /8( $
FDUZDVKPD\EHDOORZHGLQWKH7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO &7 =RQHLIDXVHSHUPLWLVJUDQWHGE\WKH
3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
:KLOHWKHSURSRVHGFDUZDVKPXFKOLNHWKHQHLJKERULQJJDVVWDWLRQLVQRWH[FOXVLYHO\YLVLWRU
RULHQWHGYLVLWRUVZLOOILQGWKHVHUYLFHXVHIXO,WLVFRQYHQLHQWO\ORFDWHGQHDU+LJKZD\DFFHVV
UDPSVDQGLQWHJUDWHGZLWKVHYHUDODXWRPRELOHUHODWHGVHUYLFHVFRQFHQWUDWHGQHDUE\
Creeks and Floodplains
&UHHN 6HWEDFN &UHHNV DQG IORRGSODLQV DUH WR EH PDQDJHG WR DFKLHYH WKH REMHFWLYHV RI
PDLQWDLQLQJ DQG UHVWRULQJ QDWXUDO FRQGLWLRQV DQG ILVK DQG ZLOGOLIH KDELWDW DQG PLQLPL]LQJ
SURSHUW\ GDPDJH IURP IORRGLQJ /8( =RQLQJ 5HJXODWLRQVHVWDEOLVK D IRRW FUHHN
VHWEDFNRQWKLVSURSHUW\ 7KLVLVDSUHYLRXVO\GHYHORSHGVLWHDQGWKHHGJHVRIWKH
H[LVWLQJSDYHGSDUNLQJDUHDDUHZLWKLQWKHFUHHNVHWEDFN1RQHZVWUXFWXUHLVSURSRVHGZLWKLQ
WKLV VHWEDFN DQG ZRUN ZLWKLQ WKH VHWEDFN LV OLPLWHG WR UHVWRULQJ DQG UHVWULSLQJ WKH DVSKDOW
SDYHPHQW
)ORRG3URWHFWLRQ 7KHVLWHLVZLWKLQ)ORRG=RQH$(ZKLFKLVGHVFULEHGDV³$UHDVVXEMHFWWR
LQXQGDWLRQE\WKHSHUFHQWDQQXDOFKDQFHIORRGHYHQWGHWHUPLQHGE\GHWDLOHGPHWKRGV´7KH
*HQHUDO3ODQSURYLGHVSROLFLHVIRUGHYHORSPHQWZLWKLQWKHIORRGSODLQ
To limit the potential for increased flood damage in previously developed areas, the
City will ensure that infill, remodel, and replacement projects do not displace more
flood water than previous structures on a site; do not contribute floating debris to
flood waters; and have finish floors at least one foot above the flood level or, if this is
not practical, be flood-proofed, to minimize risk to life and damage to utilities,
furnishings, merchandise, and equipment. /8(
$ SUHOLPLQDU\ GUDLQDJH UHSRUWSUHSDUHG E\ WKH :DOODFH *URXS LQFOXGHGLQ WKH&RPPLVVLRQ
0HPEHUSRUWIROLR ZDVSUHSDUHGIRUWKLVSURMHFW,WGHVFULEHVKRZWKHSURMHFWGHVLJQPHHWVWKH
GHVLJQ FULWHULD RI WKH &LW\¶V :DWHUZD\ 0DQDJHPHQW 3ODQ WR DYRLG VLJQLILFDQW LPSDFWV IRU
IORRGZDWHU VXUIDFH HOHYDWLRQ ULVH $V GHWDLOHG LQ WKH GUDLQDJHUHSRUW EDWKURRPV HTXLSPHQW
)HGHUDO(PHUJHQF\0DQDJHPHQW$JHQF\ )(0$ 1DWLRQDO)ORRG,QVXUDQFH3URJUDP 1),3
PC3 - 4
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
VWRUDJHDUHDVWKHSD\NLRVNDQGDWUDQVIRUPHUSDGZLOOEHIORRGSURRIHGWRDQHOHYDWLRQRI
IHHWZHOODERYHWKHIRRW%DVH)ORRG(OHYDWLRQ
5XQRIIDQG5HFKDUJH 7KH&LW\HQFRXUDJHVWKHXVHRISRURXVSDYLQJDQGODQGVFDSHGDUHDVWR
IDFLOLWDWHWKHSHUFRODWLRQRIVXUIDFHUXQRII
Parking lots and paved outdoor storage areas shall, where practical, use one or more
of the following measures to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater
recharge: porous paving; ample landscaped areas which receive surface drainage
and which are maintained to facilitate percolation; drainage detention basins with
soils that facilitate percolation. /8(
3XEOLF:RUNVKDVUHFRPPHQGHGWKHUHPRYDORIH[LVWLQJQRQSHUYLRXVSDYLQJWKDWLVRXWVLGHWKH
IXQFWLRQDO DUHDV RI WKH VLWH VHH FRQGLWLRQ RI WKH GUDIW UHVROXWLRQ 6XFK WUHDWPHQW LV
HVSHFLDOO\GHVLUDEOHLQWKHVRXWKZHVWSRUWLRQRIWKHVLWHEHWZHHQWKHFDUZDVKHQWU\GULYHDQGWKH
VLWH¶VERUGHUZLWKWKHFUHHNWRSURYLGHDGGLWLRQDOSHUFRODWLRQRIUXQRIIDVZHOOHQKDQFLQJWKH
DSSHDUDQFHRIWKLVDUHDRIWKHVLWH
Noise Exposure
7KHFDUZDVKZLOOJHQHUDWHQRLVHGXULQJLWVRSHUDWLRQ$VGHVFULEHGEHORZWKHOHYHORIQRLVH
H[SHFWHGWREHJHQHUDWHGE\WKHIDFLOLW\LVZLWKLQDSSURSULDWHOHYHOVVHWE\WKH*HQHUDO3ODQDQG
=RQLQJ5HJXODWLRQV
'U\HU 7KHYHKLFOHGU\HUXQLWDWWKHHQGRIWKHFDUZDVKWXQQHOLVWKHVRXUFHRIPRVWRIWKHQRLVH
JHQHUDWHGE\WKHFDUZDVK,WLVPDQXIDFWXUHGE\3URWR9HVW,QF WKH³:LQGVKHDU´PRGHO 7KLV
LVWKHVDPHHTXLSPHQWXVHGDWWKH4XLN\&DU:DVKDW %URDG6WUHHWZKLFKZDVUHYLHZHGE\
WKH&LW\LQ 8VH3HUPLW$ 3ODQVLQGLFDWHWKDWWKHGU\HUXQLWZLOOEHLQVWDOOHGDWWKH
HQGRIWKHFDUZDVKWXQQHODWDSRLQWDORQJWKHHDVWHUO\HGJHRIWKHEXLOGLQJ
³7KH 6LOHQFHU 3DFNDJH´ LV DQ DYDLODEOH HTXLSPHQW RSWLRQ DQG KDV EHHQ VHOHFWHG IRU WKLV
LQVWDOODWLRQWRIDFLOLWDWHFRPSOLDQFHZLWKQRLVHH[SRVXUHVWDQGDUGV,QIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGE\WKH
PDQXIDFWXUHU $WWDFKPHQW LQGLFDWHV WKDW H[SHFWHG QRLVH OHYHOV IURP WKH GU\HU ZLWK WKH
VLOHQFHUUHDFKQHDUO\GHFLEHOVZLWKLQIHHWRIWKHHTXLSPHQWIDOOLQJWR GHFLEHOVDWD
GLVWDQFHRIIHHWDQGWRGHFLEHOVDWIHHW
9DFFXPV 7KHYDFXXPV\VWHPXVHGWKURXJKRXWWKHFDUZDVKLVDQRWKHUVRXUFHRIQRLVH1RLVH
H[SRVXUH HVWLPDWHV ZHUH PDGH IRU VLPLODU HTXLSPHQW XVHG DW WKH%URDG 6WUHHW FDU ZDVK
$WWDFKPHQW 7KHVHHVWLPDWHVLQGLFDWHWKDWGHSHQGLQJRQWKHGLVWDQFHIURPDYDFXXPQR]]OH
DQGWKHQR]]OH¶VGLVWDQFHIURPWKHYDFXXPV\VWHP¶V³EORZHU´XQLWQRLVHOHYHOVIURPYDFXXPLQJ
HTXLSPHQWUDQJHVEHWZHHQDQGGHFLEHOV
1RLVH([SRVXUH/LPLWV 7KHVLWHLVZLWKLQDG%QRLVHFRQWRXUGHSLFWLQJHOHYDWHGQRLVHOHYHOV
IURP+LJKZD\$FDUZDVKLVQRWDQRLVHVHQVLWLYHXVHDFFRUGLQJWR)LJXUHRIWKH*HQHUDO
PC3 - 5
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
3ODQ¶V1RLVH(OHPHQWVRPLWLJDWLRQRIWKHFDUZDVK¶VQRLVHH[SRVXUHLVQRWUHTXLUHG+RZHYHU
WKHFDUZDVKLWVHOIZLOOEHDVRXUFHRIQRLVHDQG3HUIRUPDQFH6WDQGDUGVZLWKLQWKH=RQLQJ
5HJXODWLRQVUHTXLUHWKDWQRLVHJHQHUDWHGE\DODQGXVHEHZLWKLQWKHOLPLWVGHVFULEHGLQWKH
0XQLFLSDO&RGH 1RLVH&RQWURO
No person shall cause or allow to cause, any source of sound at any location within
the incorporated city or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased,
occupied or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when
measured on any other property, either incorporated or unincorporated, to exceed:
1RLVH OLPLWV DUH VHW DV ³0D[LPXP 3HUPLVVLEOH 6RXQG /HYHOV DW 5HFHLYLQJ /DQG 8VH´
$ GHSHQGLQJRQWKH]RQLQJFDWHJRU\RIWKHUHFHLYLQJXVH7DEOHVXPPDUL]HVWKH
QRLVHH[SRVXUHOLPLWVDSSOLFDEOHWRSURSHUW\QHDUWKLVVLWHDORQJZLWKWKHHVWLPDWHGQRLVHOHYHOV
H[SHFWHGDWUHFHLYLQJXVHV
7DEOH 1RLVH([SRVXUH
1RLVH/LPLW1RLVH/HYHO G%HVW #'LVWDQFH IW
=RQH'D\1LJKW'U\HU9DFXXP
1RUWK&66 #¶ #¶
:HVW&7 #¶ #¶
(DVW&26 #¶ #¶
7KLVVXPPDU\VXJJHVWVWKDWQRLVHOHYHOVIURPWKHGU\HUXQLWDVH[SHULHQFHGDWWKHDGMDFHQWRSHQ
VSDFH &26 EHWZHHQWKHFDUZDVKDQG+LJKZD\H[FHHGPD[LPXPSHUPLVVLEOHOHYHOV
+RZHYHUWKHVHOLPLWVDUHQRWVWULFWO\DSSOLFDEOHWRWKLVDUHD,WLVDQXQGHYHORSHGSRUWLRQRIWKH
VXEMHFWSDUFHO QRW³RWKHUSURSHUW\´ ZLWKQRSRWHQWLDOWREHGHYHORSHGIRUDQ\XVHFRPPHUFLDO
RUUHFUHDWLRQDO)XUWKHUPRUHWKHDUHDLVVXEMHFWHGWRHOHYDWHGDPELHQWQRLVHOHYHOVIURPWKH
IUHHZD\DQGSHUPLVVLEOHQRLVHOHYHOVZRXOGEHDGMXVWHGXSZDUGWRUHIOHFWWKHHOHYDWHGDPELHQW
QRLVHOHYHOV
PC3 - 6
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
Development Standards
7KHH[LVWLQJUHVWDXUDQWEXLOGLQJFRQIRUPVWRGHYHORSPHQWVWDQGDUGVDSSOLFDEOHLQWKH7RXULVW
&RPPHUFLDO=RQH$IWHUFRQYHUVLRQRIWKHEXLOGLQJWKHFDUZDVKZLOODOVRFRQIRUPWRWKRVH
VWDQGDUGV,WLVDWOHDVWIHHWIURPDQ\SURSHUW\OLQHIHHWORZHUWKDQWKHPD[LPXPSHUPLWWHG
EXLOGLQJKHLJKWDQGZHOOEHORZWKHPD[LPXPSHUPLWWHGIORRUDUHDUDWLR
7DEOH 'HYHORSPHQW6WDQGDUGV
6WDQGDUG3URSRVHG
)ORRU$UHD5DWLRPD[
6WUHHW<DUGIHHWIHHW H[LVWLQJ
2WKHU<DUGV
West (C-T) 1RQH IHHW H[LVWLQJ
East (C/OS)IHHWIHHW PLQ
South (No Zone)1$ &DOWUDQV52: IHHW PLQ
&UHHN6HWEDFNIHHWIHHW PLQ
/RW&RYHUDJHPD[
+HLJKWIHHWIHHW
3DUNLQJ6SDFHV:DLWLQJ/LQHVVSDFHV
,WVKRXOGEHQRWHGWKDWWKHORFDWLRQRIWKHWUDVKHQFORVXUHDWWKHVWUHHWIURQWDJHDQGDGMDFHQWWRDQ
DFFHVVGULYHZD\FRXOGREVWUXFWYLHZVWRWUDIILFRQWKHVWUHHWDQGVLGHZDONIURPH[LWLQJYHKLFOHV
$FRQGLWLRQRIDSSURYDO LVUHFRPPHQGHGWRHQVXUHWKDWDIRRWGULYHZD\VLJKWWULDQJOH
DUHDLVSURYLGHGWRHQKDQFHVDIHW\
&21&/86,21
6WDIIEHOLHYHVWKDWWKHFDUZDVKDVSURSRVHGDQGVXEMHFWWRWKHUHFRPPHQGHGFRQGLWLRQVRI
DSSURYDOFDQEHHVWDEOLVKHGDQGPDLQWDLQHGZLWKRXWMHRSDUG\WRSHUVRQVRUSURSHUW\ZLWKLQRU
DGMDFHQW WR WKH SURSRVHG VLWH DQG ZLWKRXW GDPDJH WR WKH UHVRXUFHV RI WKH VLWH DQG LWV
VXUURXQGLQJV,WLVLQDQDSSURSULDWHORFDWLRQDPRQJVHYHUDODXWRPRELOHRULHQWHGXVHVDQGZLWKLQ
D7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO=RQH7KHSURMHFWLQYROYHVPLQLPDOFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLW\RQDGHYHORSHG
VLWH6WUXFWXUHVUHPDLQRXWVLGHWKHFUHHNVHWEDFNDUHDDQGZLOOEHIORRGSURRIHGWRPLQLPL]H
GDPDJHIURPIORRGHYHQWV1RLVHH[SRVXUHOHYHOVDUHZLWKLQSHUPLWWHGOLPLWV
%DVHGRQWKLVHYDOXDWLRQVWDIIUHFRPPHQGVWKDWWKH&RPPLVVLRQILQGWKHSURMHFWWREHH[HPSW
IURPWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKH&DOLIRUQLD(QYLURQPHQWDO4XDOLW\$FW &(4$ DVDOWHUDWLRQRIDQ
H[LVWLQJ FRPPHUFLDO VWUXFWXUH DFFRUGLQJ WR &(4$ *XLGHOLQHV DQG DGRSW WKH GUDIW
UHVROXWLRQ $WWDFKPHQW JUDQWLQJDXVHSHUPLWIRUWKHRSHUDWLRQRIDFDUZDVKDWWKLVORFDWLRQ
EDVHGRQWKHILQGLQJVDQGVXEMHFWWRWKHFRQGLWLRQVRIDSSURYDOFRQWDLQHGLQWKHGUDIWUHVROXWLRQ
PC3 - 7
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
3DJH
5(9,(:$1'&200(17
3URMHFW SODQV ZHUH URXWHG WR VHYHUDO GHSDUWPHQWV IRU UHYLHZ DQG YDULRXV FRPPHQWV ZHUH
VXEPLWWHGLQUHVSRQVH7KRVHFRPPHQWVZHUHLQFRUSRUDWHGLQWRVXJJHVWHGFRQGLWLRQVRIDSSURYDO
IRUWKLVSURMHFW
$/7(51$7,9(6
&RQWLQXHFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIWKHSURMHFWWRDIXWXUHGDWHWRDOORZWLPHIRUFROOHFWLRQRIDGGLWLRQDO
LQIRUPDWLRQRUIRUPRGLILFDWLRQVWRWKHSURMHFWGHVLJQ RU
'HQ\WKHDSSOLFDWLRQGHVFULELQJILQGLQJVWKDWFRQVWLWXWHWKHEDVLVIRUGHQLDOEDVHGRQLQFRQVLVWHQF\
ZLWKWKH&LW\¶V*HQHUDO3ODQRU=RQLQJ5HJXODWLRQV
$77$&+0(176
'UDIW5HVROXWLRQ
9LFLQLW\0DS
3URMHFW3ODQV 5HGXFHG6L]H
0DQXIDFWXUHU,QIRUPDWLRQ 'U\LQJ6\VWHP1RLVH/HYHOV
1RLVH(VWLPDWHVIRU9DFXXP(TXLSPHQW IURP8VH3HUPLW$
,QFOXGHGLQ&RPPLVVLRQ0HPEHU3RUWIROLR
3URMHFW3ODQV +DOI6L]H
3UHOLPLQDU\'UDLQDJH5HSRUW
PC3 - 8
5(62/87,21123&
$5(62/87,212)7+(6$1/8,62%,6323/$11,1*&200,66,21*5$17,1*
$86(3(50,7$//2:,1*7+((67$%/,6+0(17$1'23(5$7,212)$&$5
:$6+,17+(7285,67&200(5&,$/ &7 =21(
$1''(7(50,1,1*7+$77+(352-(&7,6(;(037)5207+(3529,6,216
2)7+(&$/,)251,$(19,5210(17$/48$/,7<$&7$65(35(6(17(',1
7+(67$))5(3257$1'$77$&+0(176'$7('129(0%(5
&$//(-2$48,186(
:+(5($6 WKH3ODQQLQJ &RPPLVVLRQ RI WKH&LW\ RI 6DQ /XLV 2ELVSR FRQGXFWHG D
SXEOLF KHDULQJ LQ WKH &RXQFLO &KDPEHU RI &LW\ +DOO 3DOP 6WUHHW 6DQ /XLV 2ELVSR
&DOLIRUQLDRQ1RYHPEHUSXUVXDQWWRDSURFHHGLQJLQVWLWXWHGXQGHUDSSOLFDWLRQ86(
$X]&R'HYHORSPHQW//&DSSOLFDQW DQG
:+(5($6QRWLFHVRIVDLGSXEOLFKHDULQJZHUHPDGHDWWKHWLPHDQGLQWKHPDQQHU
UHTXLUHGE\ODZ DQG
:+(5($6WKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQKDVGXO\FRQVLGHUHGDOOHYLGHQFHLQFOXGLQJWKH
WHVWLPRQ\ RI WKH DSSOLFDQW LQWHUHVWHG SDUWLHV DQG HYDOXDWLRQDQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV E\ VWDII
SUHVHQWHGDWVDLGKHDULQJ
12:7+(5()25(%(,75(62/9('E\WKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQRIWKH&LW\RI
6DQ/XLV2ELVSRDVIROORZV
6(&7,21 )LQGLQJV %DVHG XSRQ DOO WKH HYLGHQFH WKH &RPPLVVLRQ PDNHV WKH
IROORZLQJILQGLQJV
$VFRQGLWLRQHGWKHXVHZLOOQRWKDUPWKHJHQHUDOKHDOWKVDIHW\DQGZHOIDUHRI
SHRSOHOLYLQJRUZRUNLQJLQWKHYLFLQLW\
7KH SURSRVHG SURMHFW LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK *HQHUDO 3ODQ SROLFLHV DSSOLFDEOH WR
7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDODUHDV,WLVDSSURSULDWHO\ORFDWHGLQD7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDODUHD
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLVFRQVLVWHQWZLWK*HQHUDO3ODQSROLFLHVUHODWHGWR&UHHNV
DQG)ORRGSODLQV%XLOGLQJVDUHIORRGSURRIHGWRPLQLPL]HULVNVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKIORRGHYHQWVDQG
QRVWUXFWXUHVDUHSURSRVHGZLWKLQWKHFUHHNVHWEDFN
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFW LV FRQVLVWHQWZLWK*HQHUDO 3ODQSROLFLHVUHODWHGWR QRLVH
H[SRVXUHOHYHOV7KHHTXLSPHQWXVHGLQWKHIDFLOLW\KDVEHHQGHVLJQHGDQGSODFHGVRWKDWQRLVH
H[SRVXUHUHPDLQVGRHVQRWH[FHHGSHUPLWWHGOHYHOV
6(&7,21 (QYLURQPHQWDO 5HYLHZ 7KH SURMHFW LV FDWHJRULFDOO\ H[HPSW IURPWKH
SURYLVLRQVRIWKH&DOLIRUQLD(QYLURQPHQWDO4XDOLW\$FW &(4$ DVLWLVFRQVLVWVRIWKHDOWHUDWLRQ
RIDQH[LVWLQJFRPPHUFLDOEXLOGLQJDVGHVFULEHGLQRIWKH&(4$*XLGHOLQHV
PC3 - 9
5HVROXWLRQ1R3&3DJH
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
6(&7,21 $FWLRQ 7KH &RPPLVVLRQ KHUHE\ JUDQWV D XVH SHUPLW DOORZLQJ WKH
HVWDEOLVKPHQWDQGRSHUDWLRQRIDFDUZDVKZLWKLQWKH7RXULVW&RPPHUFLDO &7 =RQHDW
&DOOH-RDTXLQVXEMHFWWRWKHIROORZLQJFRQGLWLRQV
Planning
&RQIRUPDQFH WR 3ODQV )LQDO SURMHFW GHVLJQ DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ GUDZLQJV VXEPLWWHG IRU
FRQVWUXFWLRQSHUPLWVVKDOOEHLQVXEVWDQWLDOFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKHSURMHFWSODQVDSSURYHGE\
WKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ$VHSDUDWHIXOOVL]HVKHHWVKDOOEHLQFOXGHGLQZRUNLQJGUDZLQJV
WKDWOLVWVDOOFRQGLWLRQVDQGFRGHUHTXLUHPHQWVRISURMHFWDSSURYDOOLVWHGDVVKHHWQXPEHU
5HIHUHQFHVKDOOEHPDGHLQWKHPDUJLQRIOLVWHGLWHPVDVWRZKHUHLQSODQVUHTXLUHPHQWVDUH
DGGUHVVHG $Q\ FKDQJH WR DSSURYHG GHVLJQ FRORUV PDWHULDOV ODQGVFDSLQJ RU RWKHU
FRQGLWLRQVRIDSSURYDOPXVWEHDSSURYHGE\WKH'LUHFWRU$UFKLWHFWXUDO5HYLHZ&RPPLVVLRQ
RU3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQDVGHHPHGDSSURSULDWH
([WHULRU/LJKWLQJ 3ODQVVXEPLWWHGIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQSHUPLWVZLOOLQFOXGHDSKRWRPHWULFSODQ
DQG VXIILFLHQW LQIRUPDWLRQ WR VKRZ FRPSOLDQFH ZLWK 1LJKW 6N\ 3UHVHUYDWLRQ UHJXODWLRQV
=RQLQJ5HJXODWLRQV&K 7KHORFDWLRQRIH[WHULRUOLJKWLQJIL[WXUHVPXVWEHFOHDUO\
LQGLFDWHGDQGEXLOGLQJPRXQWHGIL[WXUHVPXVWEHGHSLFWHGRQEXLOGLQJHOHYDWLRQGUDZLQJV
$OOH[WHULRUOLJKWLQJPXVWEHRULHQWHGUHFHVVHGRUVKLHOGHGWRSUHYHQWOLJKWWUHVSDVVDQG
SROOXWLRQ
/DQGVFDSH3ODQ 3ODQVVXEPLWWHGIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQSHUPLWVZLOOLQFOXGHDODQGVFDSLQJSODQ
LQGLFDWLQJWKHH[WHQWRIODQGVFDSHGDUHDKDUGVFDSHSODQWVHOHFWLRQDQGPHWKRGRILUULJDWLRQ
FRQVLVWHQWZLWK&RPPXQLW\'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHV(QJLQHHULQJ6WDQGDUGVDQG:DWHU(IILFLHQW
/DQGVFDSH6WDQGDUGVDVDSSOLFDEOH
(TXLSPHQW1RLVH 7KHYHKLFOHGU\HUZLOOEHILWWHGZLWK³WKH6LOHQFHU3DFNDJH´RIIHUHGE\WKH
PDQXIDFWXUHU 3URWR9HVW,QF WRHQVXUHWKDWWKHQRLVHLWJHQHUDWHVZLOOEHZLWKLQDFFHSWDEOH
OLPLWV7KHHTXLSPHQWXVHGIRUWKHFDUZDVKZLOORSHUDWHDWDOOWLPHVLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKH
1RLVH&RQWUROUHJXODWLRQVRIWKH6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0XQLFLSDO&RGH &KDSWHU 8VHRIDQ\
DOWHUQDWHPHWKRGRIQRLVHUHGXFWLRQLQSODFHRIWKHVLOHQFHUPXVWEHVXSSRUWHGE\DQRLVH
VWXG\ GHPRQVWUDWLQJ FRPSOLDQFH ZLWK WKH OLPLWDWLRQV VHW IRUWK LQ WKH 1RLVH &RQWURO
UHJXODWLRQV
+RXUVRI2SHUDWLRQ 7KHFDUZDVKHTXLSPHQWZLOOQRWEHRSHUDWHGEHIRUH DPRUDIWHU
SP7KLVOLPLWDWLRQLVLQWHQGHGWRDYRLGH[FHVVLYHQRLVHOHYHOVGXULQJQLJKWWLPHKRXUV
7UDVK(QFORVXUH3ODFHPHQW 7KHSURSRVHGWUDVKHQFORVXUHZLOOQRWEHSODFHGZLWKLQDIRRW
³VLJKWGLVWDQFHWULDQJOH´DGMDFHQWWRGULYHZD\V6XFKDWULDQJOHKDVWZRVLGHVRIIHHW
PHDVXUHGDORQJWKHHGJHRIWKHGULYHZD\DQGDORQJWKHSURSHUW\OLQHEHJLQQLQJIURPWKH
LQWHUVHFWLRQRIWKHGULYHZD\HGJHDQGWKHSURSHUW\OLQH
PC3 - 10
5HVROXWLRQ1R3&3DJH
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
Building & Safety
8VHDQG2FFXSDQF\&ODVVLILFDWLRQ 3ODQVVXEPLWWHGIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQSHUPLWVPXVWFOHDUO\
LGHQWLI\RQWKHWLWOHVKHHWWKHXVHDQGRFFXSDQF\FODVVLILFDWLRQDSSOLFDEOHWRVWUXFWXUHVRU
SRUWLRQVRIVWUXFWXUHVWKDWDUHGHSLFWHGRQWKHSODQV
Public Works
3URMHFWV LQYROYLQJ WKH VXEVWDQWLDO UHPRGHO RI H[LVWLQJ VWUXFWXUHV UHTXLUH WKDW FRPSOHWH
IURQWDJH LPSURYHPHQWV EH LQVWDOOHG RU WKDW H[LVWLQJ LPSURYHPHQWV EH XSJUDGHG SHU FLW\
VWDQGDUG0&
&XUEJXWWHUDQGVLGHZDONLPSURYHPHQWVDUHUHTXLUHGDFURVVWKHHQWLUHSURSHUW\IURQWDJH
LQFOXGLQJ DQ\ SRUWLRQ RI WKH XQGHYHORSHG SDUFHO XQOHVV RWKHUZLVH DSSURYHG IRU SDUWLDO
LPSURYHPHQW FXUEDQGJXWWHURQO\ ZDLYHURUGHIHUUDOE\WKH&LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR7KH
H[LVWLQJVHFWLRQVRI$&FXUEEHUPDQGRUXQILQLVKHGVKRXOGHUVKDOOEHXSJUDGHGSHU&LW\
(QJLQHHULQJ 6WDQGDUGV DFFRUGLQJO\ ,I SXEOLF LPSURYHPHQWV DUHWHPSRUDULO\ ZDLYHG RU
GHIHUUHG IRU DQ\ SRUWLRQ RI WKH SURSHUW\ D FRYHQDQW DJUHHPHQWWR FRPSOHWH IURQWDJH
LPSURYHPHQWVDWDODWHUGDWHZLOOEHUHTXLUHG
7KHEXLOGLQJSODQVXEPLWWDOVKDOOVKRZRUQRWHWKHUHSODFHPHQWRIWKHH[WHQVLYHDUHDVRI
GDPDJHG RU GLVSODFHG FXUE JXWWHU DQG VLGHZDON LQFOXGLQJ GULYHZD\ DSSURDFKHV WR WKH
VDWLVIDFWLRQRIWKH3XEOLF:RUNV'HSDUWPHQW
7KHH[LVWLQJGULYHZD\DSSURDFKHVVKDOOEHXSJUDGHGSHUFLW\VWDQGDUGV7KHFXUUHQWFLW\DQG
$'$VWDQGDUGUHTXLUHVD¶DFFHVVLEOHVLGHZDONH[WHQVLRQEHKLQGWKHUDPS7KHEXLOGLQJ
SODQVVKDOOVKRZWKHQHZDSSURDFKSHUFLW\VWDQGDUG7KHDGGLWLRQRIDQ$'$H[WHQVLRQRQO\
WRWKHGDPDJHGGULYHZD\DSSURDFKHVLVQRWVXSSRUWHG
7KLVSURMHFWVKDOOVKRZFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKHDSSURYHG/295,QWHUFKDQJH /295,& SURMHFW
,IWKH/295,&XWLOLW\UHORFDWLRQVKDYHQRWEHHQFRPSOHWHGE\WKHWLPHRIWKHSURSRVHG
SURMHFWFRQVWUXFWLRQDSKDVHGVHUYLFHDQGDJUHHPHQWPD\EHUHTXLUHG7KH/295,&SURMHFW
SURSRVHVWRUHORFDWHWKHH[LVWLQJRYHUKHDGZLUHVIURPWKHFRUULGRUEHWZHHQWKH&DO7UDQV
ULJKWRIZD\DQGFUHHN FRUULGRUWR QHZRYHUKHDGZLULQJORFDWHGDORQJWKH&DOOH-RDTXLQ
ULJKWRIZD\ 7KH SURMHFW VKDOO VKRZ KRZ DOO ZLUH XWLOLWLHV ZLOO EH SODFHG XQGHUJURXQG
ZLWKRXWDQHWLQFUHDVHLQXWLOLW\SROHVORFDWHGZLWKLQWKHSXEOLFULJKWRIZD\
'HYHORSPHQWRIWKHGULYHZD\DQGSDUNLQJDUHDVVKDOOFRPSO\ZLWKWKH3DUNLQJDQG'ULYHZD\
6WDQGDUGV IRU GLPHQVLRQ PDQHXYHUDELOLW\ VORSHV GUDLQDJH PDWHULDOV DQG SDUNLQJ ORW
SODQWHUV$OWHUQDWHSDYLQJPDWHULDOVDUHUHFRPPHQGHGIRUZDWHUTXDQWLW\DQGTXDOLW\FRQWURO
SXUSRVHVDQGLQWKHDUHDRIH[LVWLQJRUSURSRVHGWUHHVDQGZKHUHWKHGULYHZD\RUSDUNLQJDUHD
PD\RFFXUZLWKLQWKHGULSOLQHRIDQ\WUHH$OWHUQDWHSDYLQJPDWHULDOVKDOOEHDSSURYHGWRWKH
VDWLVIDFWLRQRIWKH3ODQQLQJ'LYLVLRQ
PC3 - 11
5HVROXWLRQ1R3&3DJH
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
7KHSDUNLQJORWSODQVVKDOOLQFOXGHDOOVLJQDJHDQGVWULSLQJLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHSDUNLQJ
DQGGULYHZD\VWDQGDUGV7KHSODQVVKDOOLQFOXGHDOOGLUHFWLRQDODUURZVDQGVLJQDJHIRUVLWH
DFFHVV DQG FLUFXODWLRQ FRQWUROV 2QHZD\ HQWU\ H[LW RU GULYH DLVOHV VKDOO EH FOHDUO\
GHOLQHDWHG
7KHEXLOGLQJSODQVXEPLWWDOVKDOOLQFOXGHDFRPSOHWHJUDGLQJGUDLQDJHDQGWRSRSODQ7KH
SODQVKDOOFODULI\WKHH[WHQWRIWKHH[LVWLQJDQGSURSRVHGSDYHGVXUIDFHVWRUHPDLQWREH
UHPRYHGRUWREHUHSODFHG
7KLVSURSHUW\LVORFDWHGLQDQ$()ORRG=RQHDVVKRZQRQWKH)ORRG,QVXUDQFH5DWH0DS
),50 IRUWKH&LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR7KHVLWHDQGIORRUSODQVVKDOOVKRZDQGQRWH
FRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKH)ORRGSODLQ0DQDJHPHQW5HJXODWLRQV7KHSODQVVKDOOVKRZWKDWWKH
EXLOGLQJ))DQGDOOEXLOGLQJVHUYLFHHTXLSPHQWDUHORFDWHGRUIORRGSURRIHGWRDWOHDVW¶
DERYHWKH%DVH)ORRG(OHYDWLRQ %)( $GGLWLRQDOIUHHERDUGWR¶DERYHWKH%)(PD\UHVXOW
LQDGGLWLRQDOSURWHFWLRQVDQGVDYLQJVRQIORRGLQVXUDQFHDQGLVHQFRXUDJHG
7KHSURMHFWVKDOOFRPSO\ZLWK3RVW&RQVWUXFWLRQ6WRUPZDWHU5HTXLUHPHQWVDVSURPXOJDWHG
E\WKH5HJLRQDO:DWHU4XDOLW\&RQWURO%RDUGIRUGHYHORSHGVLWHV7KHILQDOSODQVDQGUHSRUW
VKDOOFRQVLGHUDOOQHZRUDOWHUHGSDYLQJVXUIDFHV7KHUHPRYDORIH[LVWLQJQRQSHUYLRXV
SDYLQJWKDWLVORFDWHGRXWVLGHWKHIXQFWLRQDODUHDVRIWKHSURSRVHGQHZVLWHLVUHFRPPHQGHG
5HJDUGOHVVRIWKHILQDODQDO\VLVRIUHGHYHORSPHQWDUHDWKHSURMHFWDQGILQDOGUDLQDJHUHSRUW
VKDOO WUHDW DOO SDUNLQJ ORW UXQRII IRU ZDWHU TXDOLW\ LPSURYHPHQWV LQ DFFRUGDQFH ZLWK
3HUIRUPDQFH5HTXLUHPHQWRUSUHYLRXV&LW\(QJLQHHULQJDQGRU&$64$VWDQGDUGV5XQRII
IURPWKHQHZWUDVKHQFORVXUHDUHDDQGEXVLQHVVRSHUDWLRQVVKDOOEHWUHDWHGDVDSRWHQWLDOSRLQW
VRXUFHLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK&LW\(QJLQHHULQJ6WDQGDUG%±6RXUFH&RQWURO$SDVVLYH
WUHDWPHQWV\VWHPIRUWKHSDUNLQJORWUXQRIILVDFFHSWDEOH5HPRYDORIH[LVWLQJLPSHUYLRXV
SDUNLQJ ORW PDWHULDOV LQ IDYRU RI ODQGVFDSH LPSURYHPHQWV LV DQDFFHSWDEOH WUDGHRII WR
LPSURYHWKHRYHUDOOZDWHUTXDOLW\OHDYLQJWKLVVLWH
7KH EXLOGLQJ SODQ VXEPLWWDO VKDOO LQFOXGH D FRPSOHWH VLWH XWLOLW\ SODQ $OO H[LVWLQJ DQG
SURSRVHGXWLOLWLHVDORQJZLWKXWLOLW\FRPSDQ\PHWHUVVKDOOEHVKRZQ([LVWLQJXQGHUJURXQG
DQGRYHUKHDGVHUYLFHVVKDOOEHVKRZQDORQJZLWKDQ\SURSRVHGDOWHUDWLRQVRUXSJUDGHV$OO
ZRUNLQWKHSXEOLFULJKWRIZD\DQGRUSXEOLFHDVHPHQWVVKDOOEHVKRZQRUQRWHG7KHVLWH
XWLOLW\ DQG ODQGVFDSH SODQV VKDOO LQFOXGH DQ\ GHWDLOV RU SURSRVDO IRU H[WHQGLQJ LUULJDWLRQ
VHUYLFHIURPWKHH[LVWLQJZDWHUZHOOWRWKHGHYHORSHGVLWH7KHH[LVWLQJRUSURSRVHGZDWHU
PHWHUVVKDOOEHSURWHFWZLWKDQ53SULQFLSOHEDFNIORZSUHYHQWLRQGHYLFH:DWHUZHOOVHUYLFH
SURSRVHGIRUORFDWLRQZLWKLQWKHSXEOLFULJKWRIZD\VKDOOEHDSSURYHGE\WKH&LW\(QJLQHHU
,IDSSURYHGDWHPSRUDU\HQFURDFKPHQWDJUHHPHQWLQDIRUPDWSURYLGHGE\WKHFLW\VKDOOEH
UHTXLUHG7KHDJUHHPHQWVKDOOEHUHFRUGHGSULRUWREXLOGLQJSHUPLWLVVXDQFH
PC3 - 12
5HVROXWLRQ1R3&3DJH
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
7KH SURSRVHG DEDQGRQPHQW RU UHOLQTXLVKPHQW RI WKH H[LVWLQJ &LW\ RI 6DQ /XLV 2ELVSR
PXQLFLSDOZDWHUZHOOVKDOOEHFRPSOHWHGWRWKHVDWLVIDFWLRQRIWKH8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQWDQG
&DOLIRUQLD'HSDUWPHQWRI+HDOWK6HUYLFHV '+6 SULRUWREXLOGLQJSHUPLWLVVXDQFHDQGRU
DFFHVVDQGXVHRIWKHZDWHUZHOOIRUSULYDWHSXUSRVHV
7KHEXLOGLQJSODQVXEPLWWDOVKDOOFODULI\WKHGLVSRVLWLRQRIWKH³WRXUEXV´SDUNLQJVLJQDJHDQG
FXUESDLQWLQJORFDWHGDORQJWKHSURSHUW\IURQWDJH8QOHVVRWKHUZLVHSURSRVHGDQGDSSURYHG
E\WKHFLW\WKLVGHVLJQDWHGSDUNLQJDUHDVKDOOEHUHPRYHG
7KHDSSOLFDQWVKDOOSURYLGHFODULILFDWLRQRQWKHH[WHQWRIWKHSUHYLRXVWUHHUHPRYDOVIURPWKLV
SURSHUW\ 7KLV LWHP VKDOO EH UHVROYHG SULRU WR EXLOGLQJ SHUPLW LVVXDQFH &RPSHQVDWRU\
SODQWLQJV PD\ EH UHTXLUHG WR WKH VDWLVIDFWLRQ RI WKH &LW\ $UERULVW DQG &RPPXQLW\
'HYHORSPHQW'LUHFWRU
2QHJDOORQVWUHHWWUHHPD\EHUHTXLUHGIRUHDFKOLQHDOIHHWRIIURQWDJH7KH&LW\
$UERULVWLQFROODERUDWLRQZLWKWKH3ODQQLQJ'LYLVLRQVKDOODSSURYHWKHWUHHVSHFLHVSODQWLQJ
UHTXLUHPHQWVDQGOLPLWVRISODQWLQJ8QOHVVRWKHUZLVHZDLYHGRUGHIHUUHGVWUHHWWUHHVVKDOO
EHSODQWHGDORQJWKHHQWLUHSDUFHOIURQWDJHEH\RQGWKHH[LVWLQJEULGJHFXOYHUW
3ULRU WR RFFXSDQF\ WKH DSSOLFDQW VKDOO VXEPLW D VLJKW GLVWDQFHVWXG\ IRU HDFK RI WKHLU
GULYHZD\V%DVHGRQWKDWVWXG\DQ\REVWUXFWLRQVXFKDVRQVWUHHWSDUNLQJ ODQGVFDSLQJVKDOO
EHUHPRYHG
Utilities
7KHH[LVWLQJ&LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSRZDWHUZHOOSURSRVHGIRUFDUZDVKPDNHXSZDWHUDQG
LUULJDWLRQVKDOOEHGLVFRQQHFWHGIURPWKHSXEOLFPXQLFLSDOVXSSO\WRWKHVDWLVIDFWLRQRIWKH
8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQW$VHSDUDWHHQFURDFKPHQWSHUPLWZLOOEHUHTXLUHGIRUDQ\ZRUNRU
FRQVWUXFWLRQVWDJLQJZLWKLQ WKHSXEOLFULJKWRIZD\$ZHOOXWLOLW\WUDQVIHUDJUHHPHQWRU
RWKHUPHFKDQLVPDFFHSWDEOHWRWKH&LW\$WWRUQH\DQG8WLOLWLHV'LUHFWRUVKDOOEHSURFHVVHG
SULRUWRFRQYHUVLRQRIWKHZDWHUZHOOIURPDPXQLFLSDOVXSSO\ZHOOWRDSULYDWHZDWHUZHOO
$VWKHH[LVWLQJVLWHLQFOXGHVDZHOOEDFNIORZGHYLFHVVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGEHKLQGDOOPHWHUV
VHUYLQJWKHSDUFHOFRQVLVWHQWZLWK &LW\VWDQGDUGV ,IWKHZHOOLV SURSRVHGWR EHXVHGIRU
SXUSRVHVRWKHUWKDQLUULJDWLRQDZHOOPHWHUVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGSHU&LW\6WDQGDUGWRDOORZ
WKH&LW\WRSURSHUO\PHDVXUHZDWHUXVHIRUVHZHUELOOLQJSXUSRVHV7KHPHWHUVKDOODWOHDVW
PHDVXUHDOOZDWHUXVHGIRULQWHULRUSXUSRVHV LHLWPD\H[FOXGHZDWHUXVHGIRUODQGVFDSH
SXUSRVHVLIWKHV\VWHPVDUHVHSDUDWH
3OHDVHQRWHRQWKHSODQVWKDWWKHSURSHUW\¶VH[LVWLQJVHZHUODWHUDOWRWKHSRLQWRIFRQQHFWLRQDW
WKH&LW\PDLQPXVWSDVVDYLGHRLQVSHFWLRQLQFOXGLQJUHSDLURUUHSODFHPHQWDVSDUWRIWKH
SURMHFW7KH&&79LQVSHFWLRQVKDOOEHVXEPLWWHGGXULQJWKH%XLOGLQJ3HUPLW5HYLHZ3URFHVV
IRUUHYLHZDQGDSSURYDOE\WKH8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQWSULRUWRLVVXDQFHRID%XLOGLQJ3HUPLW
PC3 - 13
5HVROXWLRQ1R3&3DJH
86( &DOOH-RDTXLQ
7KH DSSOLFDQW DFNQRZOHGJHV WKDW UHSODFHPHQW RI WKH H[LVWLQJ VHZHU IRUFH PDLQ LQ &DOOH
-RDTXLQZLOOEHXQGHUFRQVWUXFWLRQEHJLQQLQJLQHDUO\DQGWKDWFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKLV
SURMHFWVKDOOQRWFRQIOLFWZLWKFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHIRUFHPDLQUHSODFHPHQWSURMHFW
$SSOLFDQWVKDOOSURYLGHZULWWHQFRQILUPDWLRQWKDWWKHSURSRVHGWUDVKHQFORVXUHDQGFROOHFWLRQ
PHWKRG PHHWV WKH 6DQ /XLV *DUEDJH &RPSDQ\ 6/* UHTXLUHPHQWV 7RP 0DUWLQ 6/*
*HQHUDO0DQDJHUFDQEHFRQWDFWHGDW
$GGLWLRQDOGHWDLORIFDUZDVKIDFLOLW\VKDOOEHSURYLGHGGXULQJWKHEXLOGLQJSHUPLWUHYLHZ
SURFHVV WR HQVXUH FRPSOLDQFH ZLWK 0XQLFLSDO &RGH 6HZHUV5HSRUWLQJ
5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU 3HUPLWWHHV ,QVWDOODWLRQ RI DQ\ IORRU GUDLQVZLOO UHTXLUH VDIHJXDUGV WR
SURWHFWVDQLWDU\VHZHUV\VWHP&RQWDFW$DURQ)OR\G IRUDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQ
2QPRWLRQE\&RPPLVVLRQHUBBBBBBBBBBBVHFRQGHGE\&RPPLVVLRQHUBBBBBBBBBBBBB
DQGRQWKHIROORZLQJUROOFDOOYRWH
$<(6
12(6
5()5$,1
$%6(17
7KHIRUHJRLQJUHVROXWLRQZDVSDVVHGDQGDGRSWHGWKLVWKGD\RI1RYHPEHU
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
'RXJ'DYLGVRQ6HFUHWDU\
3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
PC3 - 14
C/OS-20
C-T
C-S
C-S-S
R-1-PD
R-1
C/OS-10
R-2-S
C-S-PD
R-1
R-1-PD
R-1
C-T
R-1
C/OS-10
C/OS-10
C/OS-20
C/OS-20
LOS OSOS
VALLEY
CALLE
J
O
A
Q
UI
N CREEKSIDELOS VERDESMARIPOSALOS PALOS LINDACHUPARROSA
VILLACARISSA
VICINITY MAP File No. 49-2014
1460 Calle Joaquin ¯
PC3 - 15
PC3 - 16
PC3 - 17
PC3 - 18
PC3 - 19
PC3 - 20
PC3 - 21
PC3 - 22
PC3 - 23
PC3 - 24
PC3 - 25
PC3 - 26
PC3 - 27
PC3 - 28
PC3 - 29
PC3 - 30
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 22, 2014
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler,
Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and
Chairperson John Larson
Absent:None
Staff:Community Development Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Contract
Planner Rachel Cohen, Utilities Deputy Director Wade Horton,
Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, and Recording Secretary
Diane Clement
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES:Minutes of October 8, 2014, were approved as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made from the public.
PRESENTATION ON WATER SUPPLY was made by Utilities Deputy Director Horton.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1.43 Prado Road.U 87-14: Review of a Safe Parking Program at the Prado Day
Center with a categorical exemption from environmental review; PF zone;
Community Action Partnership SLO, applicant. (Rachel Cohen)
Contract Planner Cohen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft
Resolution which approves the project, based on findings and subject to conditions.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Draze stated he is supportive of this program now and in the past, and he does
not want to see closure of this program as a condition for the opening of the new
homeless facility because a second site may be needed in the future.
Commr. Fowler stated he supports the program and noted that it makes perfect sense
to increase the number of parking spaces to seven.
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
October 22, 2014
Page 2
Commr. Riggs asked if staff has considered a condition like the one mentioned by
Commr. Draze. He added he is concerned about clustering of the parking spaces.
Contract Planner Cohen stated there had been no consideration of a condition because
the Prado Day Center will close.
Commr. Multari stated the new center will have to come to the Commission to obtain a
use permit and a condition could potentially be added at that time.
Commrs. Malak and Dandekar stated they are supportive of this program.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Draze, seconded by Commr. Dandekar, to adopt the Draft
Resolution which approves the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
AYES:Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, and Riggs
NOES:None
RECUSED:None
ABSENT:None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
2.783 Alphonso Street.GENP-0136-2014 (GPC): General Plan conformity report
for the acquisition of portions of 783 Alphonso Street and 780 Woodbridge Street
properties for use as a right-of-way by the City of San Luis Obispo with a
categorical exemption from environmental review; M zone; City of San Luis
Obispo, applicant. (Rachel Cohen)
Contract Planner Cohen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the
Planning Commission resolution, which determines and reports to the City Council that
the proposed acquisition conforms to the General Plan.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Draze stated that he had a phone conversation with a neighbor who is
supportive of this.
There were no further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Multari, seconded by Commr. Malak, to adopt the Draft
Resolution which determines and reports to the City Council that the proposed
acquisition conforms to the General Plan.
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
October 22, 2014
Page 3
AYES:Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, and Riggs
NOES:None
RECUSED:None
ABSENT:None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3.Staff
a. Agenda Forecast by Deputy Director Davidson:
x November 12, 2014—appeal of a Director's decision about using an RV as
a dwelling; an appeal about high occupancy; car wash use permit in a CT
zone; housing element update
x December 10, 2014—appeal of use permit for the hotel, homeless services
center
x Possibility of doing a tour of sites that have come before the Commission
x Commission prefers staff to continue filtering emails from the public to avoid
a serial meeting.
4.Commission
a. Commr. Dandekar will be absent from the November 12, 2014, meeting.
Commr. Fowler may be absent from the December 10, 2014, meeting
Commr. Malak requested a second meeting about water to learn about how the
City handles waste water treatment, runoff, and recycling.
b. Budget Goals 2015-17:
Commr. Larson stated that he does not want to drop or change any of the present
goals other than a few statements or references that might be out of sync time-
wise, such as references to Measure Y.
Commr. Dandekar stated there has been a great deal of discussion about access
to affordable housing and there is a gap between what the market is providing and
what is needed. She suggested that the City look at partnering with developers
and think about other creative ways to finance workforce housing and research
what is done within the state and across the country. She stated she would like to
see the Commission endorsing this as a priority. She suggested that the City have
a goal to facilitate opportunities to encourage the creation of workforce housing,
including developing a definition and a regulatory structure, and identify potentially
successful partnerships and financial possibilities.
Commr. Riggs stated that he would prefer to separate workforce housing and
affordable housing to avoid de-emphasizing affordable housing.
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
October 22, 2014
Page 4
Commr. Fowler agreed with Commr. Riggs and noted the need to define workforce
housing and how to regulate or control it.
Commr. Riggs stated that “encourage” is a better word to use than “regulate” or
“control.”
Commr. Fowler stated that a discussion is needed about how to make providing
affordable housing equal among the projects coming through, whether it be via
requiring a fee, the donation of land or something else. He noted that the aging
population is a huge issue that he would like to see included in the consideration of
how to deal with housing.
Commr. Riggs stated that there are three possible goals that warrant consideration
as goals: 1) open space because it is important to all segments of the population;
2) dealing with the need to accommodate the two different ends of the population
spectrum—the increasing number of Cal Poly students and the growing number of
older residents; and 3) dealing with a cohesive direction for parking across the
City including neighborhood parking, rebalancing, structure parking, innovation in
pricing, and guidance (way finding).
Commr. Larson stated that the City does not have a goal about implementing open
space which is related to the LUCE update. He agreed with Commr. Riggs about
getting a directive on parking and stated it is a part of transportation and land use
planning in general.
Commr. Riggs suggested that parking could be a part of the existing Goals 1 or 5
and should be linked to a nonautomotive transportation strategy.
Deputy Director Davidson suggested it be part of Goal 1.
Commr. Larson supported keeping the five existing goals but updating wording to
embody more than is now included. He stated that putting parking in Goal 1 is
acceptable.
Deputy Director Davidson summarized: keep the existing five goals, add a goal for
open space, revise the wording on Goal 1, and include workforce housing.
Commr. Dandekar stated she would like some wordsmithing in Goal 2 aimed at
broadening the City's economic strategy. She noted that this was discussed in the
LUCE Task Force because the City seemed to be focused on downtown retail.
She added that there was discussion about developing incentives to broaden the
economic base by attracting new kinds of businesses, such as high tech, and
noted that the housing issue is tied in with this.
Commr. Multari agreed that the economic development strategy needs to be much
broader than just downtown retail but noted that part of the reason for the focus on
downtown was to not forget about the vacant retail spaces there. He stated that
accommodating Cal Poly and Cuesta students seems to be a growing problem that
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
October 22, 2014
Page 5
has generated the most controversy about housing and the behavior of students.
He asked what the Commission would request the City Council to spend resources
on to address this over the next two years. He suggested an overlay zone,
perhaps in the neighborhoods closest to Cal Poly, and noted that it is important to
explicitly address this in relation to parking, housing, and behavior, which are all
linked.
Deputy Director Davidson asked if this would be a seventh goal.
Commr. Riggs stated that workforce housing is caught up in this issue as well,
because units acquired to rent to students takes housing off the market.
Commr. Larson stated that maybe all types of housing should be considered
together but that a structure is needed to keep the identity of each housing issue
separate.
Commr. Dandekar stated that she thinks Commissioners have been expressing
concern about a spectrum of housing issues, from those that have support to those
that need more creative solutions. She supported the umbrella idea and, under
that, categories. She added that senior housing is one that has the possibility of
being met by a partnership with developers. She stated that the reasons students
want to live in the City and whether the private sector can meet those needs
should be investigated.
Commr. Draze stated this is a huge issue that is not just about housing. He
suggested coming up with a new separate goal for next meeting about student
community relations includi,ng housing, communication, neighborliness, and
parking. He stated he would be willing to drop another goal and deal with this
rather than tacking this onto something else.
Commr. Riggs agreed and stated it creates an infrastructure burden including
police and fire department issues, and properties off the tax roles.
Commr. Malak stated that it is inevitable that the neighborhoods around Cal Poly
will change to become a college community because investors will continue to
scoop up properties and attempting to deal with it would just be forestalling it.
Commr. Dandekar stated that the reasons students move off-campus, such as a
desire to experience being downtown, taking charge of their own apartments, living
in a more normal environment, and taking charge of their lives, could be benefits
for the City and, with creative planning, this need could be met and diffused to
more areas than just next to Cal Poly which would be a win-win for the City and the
students.
Commr. Riggs noted that he spent six years working on this issue in Berkeley
where the neighborhoods on the south side of the city have been preserved
without becoming just student areas. He stated it is important to prioritize this.
Commr. Multari stated that because the City Council and the City have limited
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
October 22, 2014
Page 6
financial, political, and administrative resources, it is important to come to the next
meeting with focused and specific details for goals.
Commr. Riggs noted that Cal Poly took four houses off the tax rolls on Grand
Avenue. He asked what kind of compensation the City is asking for over the next
30 or 100 years and stated that the City should pay attention to this.
ADJOURNMENT:The meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Diane Clement
Recording Secretary