Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ph1draftlucereview
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: Kim Murry, Deputy Director, Community Development SUBJECT: DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT REVIEW (GPI/ER 15-12). RECOMMENDATION 1. Review the Planning Commission’s recommended changes to the Land Use Element (LUE) and provide direction to staff regarding edits or changes. 2. Adopt a resolution identifying the updated legislative draft of the LUE as part of the project description for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update to be evaluated through the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). DISCUSSION Background The City Council appointed a resident task force to assist in the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) update process. This now 15 member group, called the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update (TF-LUCE) worked diligently to review proposed changes to the draft elements and to provide direction and guidance regarding new policies and programs. The TF- LUCE draft of the Land Use Element was reviewed by the Planning Commission on December 12th and 16th, 2013. The Commission made several minor changes in response to public testimony and to clarify intent in several places. The draft LUE is now ready for City Council review and endorsement to be included as part of the project description to be studied through the EIR. The development of alternatives for San Luis Obispo has been a two‐step process: the proposed physical alternatives were endorsed for further study by the City Council in October 2013; and the proposed policy changes will be reviewed and evaluated by the City Council at special meetings on January 14th and January 28th for the Land Use Element and Circulation Element respectively. This staff report is focused on the LUE update. Update Process The Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing proposed changes to the General Plan and for making recommendations to the City Council under Government Code section §65353. The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended minor edits to the TF-LUCE draft of the Land Use and Circulation Elements for consideration by the City Council. The LUCE update is comprised of both the potential physical changes and the policy changes which, once endorsed by the City Council, become the “project description” to be evaluated in the EIR. Once a draft EIR is available, the update process will result in further refinements to the draft LUCE as potential impacts and mitigations are considered by the advisory bodies, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. Meeting Date Item Number 1-14-14 PH 1 PH1 - 1 Land Use Element – Planning Commission Draft Page 2 Land Use Element Draft Each chapter of the revised draft LUE is briefly described below. Pages included in the headings refer to the pages in the Planning Commission legislative draft document. Please note that the Table of Contents, figures, and tables will be updated and all references will be adjusted once the Council review is complete. The Council should review the legislative draft document and be prepared to proceed through the document with pauses for discussion of those policies or programs for which Council members wish to make adjustments. Introduction (Pages 1-10 through 1-32) The first section of the LUE provides the backdrop of community values and how those values have been demonstrated through public votes, the community-wide surveys, and input through the update process. This section will continue to be modified to reflect activities that contribute to the policy direction in the draft elements as the update proceeds. The Planning Commission expressed a desire to review the introduction in more detail after the EIR is drafted to update the language. This portion of the introduction is not required as part of the EIR process. This chapter also includes the LUE goals. The legislative draft includes five new goals, three of which are associated with two new chapters: Sustainability and Healthy Community. Two other goals were proposed by Task Force members that express ongoing support for implementation of LUE policies regardless of funding, and support for compact mixed-use neighborhoods. A notable change recommended for this chapter is the addition of an explanation of the Land Use Diagram (LUE Map) and a matrix that contains descriptions of each land use designation and guidance regarding their respective purpose, application, and density/intensity parameters. In the existing LUE, the language associated with the land use designation descriptions is scattered throughout the various chapters. The proposed update standardizes and consolidates the presentation of this information into a matrix at the front of the document. One item that both the Task Force and the Planning Commission struggled to resolve was how to address the areas outside of the City limits and Urban Reserve Line. Both the TF-LUCE and the Commission were interested in expressing strong support for retaining the rural nature of the land surrounding the City while recognizing that several areas have already been subdivided and developed with suburban densities. Table 2 in the legislative draft describes the land uses in areas outside of the urban area and provides strong language that discourages further subdivision. Growth Management Policies (Pages 1-33 through 1-49) This chapter of the LUE provides direction regarding the City’s desire to manage growth and to protect land surrounding the City from urban development. Strong policies to maintain agriculture and open space in the City’s greenbelt are located in this chapter as well as policies that address potential growth impacts from educational and government facilities located near to, but outside of the city boundaries. Also located in this chapter are the City’s annexation policies and guidance regarding the responsibility of new development to bear its fair share of the cost of required infrastructure. PH1 - 2 Land Use Element – Planning Commission Draft Page 3 The Task Force recommended, and Planning Commission supported, one substantive change in this chapter; the elimination of Policy 1.4 Jobs-Housing Relationship. After discussion about how this policy was monitored and implemented by the City, Task Force members unanimously determined that the LUE diagram, designations and other LUE policies identify the amount of land dedicated to housing and non-residential development, which should determine the balance of uses. Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods (Pages 1-50 through 1-67) The purpose of this chapter is to provide policies and programs to protect and enhance the City’s neighborhoods. The topics of this chapter include descriptions of neighborhood character, uses that can be compatible in residential neighborhoods, transitions between residential and non-residential uses, connectivity between neighborhoods and to amenities and services, protection from cut- through traffic, student housing, and housing in the Downtown. Revisions have been included to provide additional guidance to describe compatible development, and neighborhood amenities. Commercial and Industrial Development (Pages 1-68 through 1-83) This chapter contains policies that give direction on where to locate different types of non- residential uses. The Task Force developed, and the Planning Commission supported, four new programs that: support design guidelines for transitions between residential and non-residential uses, prompt review of Zoning Regulations, and implement economic development programs. Downtown (Pages 1-84 through 1-94) The Downtown chapter contains policies and programs that recognize the Downtown Core as the community’s most densely developed urban center that is the focus of social, cultural, entertainment, and political activity. The policies in this chapter focus on maintaining an active commercial and pedestrian environment in the Downtown Core, encouraging new residential development, and protecting existing residential uses. The Task Force added several policies and programs to encourage a healthy mix of street level businesses, and to ensure that Downtown is a safe and pleasant place to be at all hours of the day. As part of the Nightlife Safety assessment, the Task Force recommended a program to develop criteria for evaluating new requests for establishments selling alcohol. The Task Force added several programs related to safety Downtown as well as overall community safety (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design). For purposes of Council review, these additional programs are found in the Downtown chapter but may be more appropriately located elsewhere in the LUE, such as in the new Healthy Community chapter (which could be renamed to “Healthy and Safe Community”). Public and Cultural Facilities (Pages 1-95 through 1-100) The purpose of this chapter is to provide policy direction regarding co-location of public or service uses and to continue to encourage the collaboration of the City with its public partners to help meet the arts, government, and cultural needs of the community. Resource Protection (Pages 1-101 through 1-116) PH1 - 3 Land Use Element – Planning Commission Draft Page 4 This chapter supports the Conservation and Open Space Element by providing land use direction for resource areas. These policies provide guidance for hillside development, protection of sensitive habitats or unique resources, identification and protection for creeks and wetland areas, and direction for areas to protect as open space. A notable change proposed in this chapter is to remove the designation of “Interim Open Space” and instead designate those areas according to more descriptive land uses. Most of the areas formerly designated “Interim Open Space” are now included in the Special Focus Areas chapter. Airport Area (Pages 1-117 through 1-122) The existing chapter addressing the Airport Area focused on the need to develop a specific plan for the area. Since 1994, the City adopted, and is currently updating, the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). Recommended new policies are informed by the Airport Land Use Compatibility Report prepared by the City’s airport land use consultant, Johnson Aviation, and reflect the larger area of the City that is subject to airport influence. Edits reflect the desire to address appropriate noise and safety constraints associated with existing and future airport operations. The Task Force recommended, and Planning Commission supported, edits to existing policies and programs that are shown in the legislative draft. The Task Force opted not to act on the new airport policies and program based on a majority feeling that these particular policy decisions should be made by the Council with full legal advisement from the Attorney’s office. The Task Force stated support for Council’s efforts to have “fact-based consideration of airport noise and safety zones” and offered that the City Council should “consider the draft airport policies and any potential legal ramifications”. The Planning Commission considered the Task Force action and agreed that safety and noise analysis should be fact-based and that Council should make the determination of appropriate airport policy language at the point land use decisions are being formulated. Special Focus Areas (Pages 1-123 through 1-142) This renamed chapter focuses on those areas of the community identified for physical changes or where specific policy direction is needed. The chapter identifies two primary types of focus areas: Specific Plan areas (Dalidio, Madonna on LOVR, and Avila Ranch); and other areas where policy guidance is needed but development potential or concerns are not so complex as to require a specific plan. Existing design areas where planning efforts are completed have been deleted, and language for new areas (including previously identified Interim Open Space areas) has been added. Planning Commission supported TF-LUCE language in this chapter with a few minor edits. In response to public testimony from residents on San Luis Drive and the Palm Street area, the Commission added language in the Upper Monterey area to provide more guidance regarding compatibility with neighborhoods. In the Santa Rosa/Foothill area, the Commission directed staff to retain the policy direction but to make it more readable. The Commission modified the development table associated with the Dalidio Ranch property to allow up to 200 hotel rooms (up from 150); and clarified the footnote to the development table for the Avila Ranch property to indicate that the modification allowed for on-site open space could be pro-rated for the amount of on-site affordable housing provided in excess of inclusionary requirements. PH1 - 4 Land Use Element – Planning Commission Draft Page 5 Sustainability (Pages 1-143 through 1-145) This is a new chapter to address Strategic Growth Council grant objectives and to reference policies from the City’s adopted Climate Action Plan. Healthy Community (Page 1-146) This is a new chapter to address Strategic Growth Council grant objectives and to reflect a Council- identified desire to address health policies as part of the LUCE update. Review and Amendment (Page 1-147) There are only minor grammatical edits to the direction in this chapter, which addresses how often the City should review and update its general plan and reflects what is contained in the annual report to the City Council. Implementation (Pages 1-148 through 1-150) This chapter includes references to the many ways the City implements the General Plan: through zoning and subdivision regulations, guidelines, ordinances, and financing of capital improvements. The edits proposed in this section refer to historic preservation implementation that was not in place when the LUE was updated in 1994 and to reconfirm the City’s commitment to public planning. Both the Task Force and the Commission spent a lot of time updating the section pertaining to environmental review. The Task Force provided edits to reflect that even if CEQA went away, the City would still want to conduct environmental review due to the community’s environmental values. The Commission provided edits to clarify the narrative, to indicate that some projects are exempt from environmental review, and to put “environmental review” in lower case so that no conflicts are created with the regulated CEQA review process. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental review will occur once a project description has been endorsed by the City Council. The project description will include a combination of proposed physical changes and proposed policy changes associated with the LUCE update. FISCAL IMPACT The LUCE update has been funded in part by a grant from the Strategic Growth Council ($880,000) and in part through General Funds ($430,000) as part of the 2011-13 Financial Plan. Activities to date have been fully covered by these encumbered funds and progress on the update is within budget and on-time. Fiscal impacts of any changes proposed to land use or infrastructure will be evaluated as part of the update process so that the General Plan is fiscally balanced. ALTERNATIVE 1. The Council could continue the item so that additional information could be provided. If this option is chosen, specific direction to staff would be needed and Council may need to identify a special meeting in order to maintain timely progress on the LUCE update project. PH1 - 5 Land Use Element – Planning Commission Draft Page 6 ATTACHMENTS 1. Legislative Changes – how to read 2. Draft Minutes – PC 12-12-13 meeting 3. Draft Minutes – PC 12-16-14 meeting 4. Planning Commission Legislative Draft of Land Use Element 5. Planning Commission Draft Land Use Element – clean version 6. Resolution for two planning areas 7. Resolution for Land Use Element LINKS Community wide survey previously provided to the Council is available at: http://www.slo2035.com/images/meetings/tf/00_slogpu_survey_2012.09.16-rrr.pdf www.slo2035.com provides TF-LUCE information and summaries of workshops and other studies that have informed the process. AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE TF-LUCE Binders with agenda materials T:\Council Agenda Reports\2014\2014-01-14\LUCE policies (Land Use) (Johnson-Murry)\LUCE-CAR_1-14-14.docx PH1 - 6 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 LUCE Policy Update REVIEW GUIDE EXAMPLE OF A POLICY MARK-UP 2.1.2 Neighborhood Groups The City should shall encourage and support the formation and continuation of neighborhood planning groups composed of neighborhood residents. Policy. 2.1.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. HOW TO READ MARK-UPs TO POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Changes to existing text (policies, programs, etc.) Proposed changes are shown in a strikethrough format for deletions (strikethrough) and underlined for additions (additions). HOW TO READ TRACKING TABLE BELOW POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Below each policy and program, a table comprised of two rows has been included. This table is designed to give the reviewer some insight on the type of change and reason for the change being proposed. These tables are intended to assist the initial review, and will be removed from the public review draft. ROW 1 Box 1. If an existing goal, policy or program, note the policy or program number in the existing General Plan. If a new goal, policy, or program is recommended, insert the word “NEW” in the box. For new items, no checkboxes should be completed. Style. To provide for a consistent writing style within the element, the item has been edited for style. This change is not intended to modify the original intent. For example, adding “The City shall…” at the beginning of a policy or program. Clarity. The item has been edited to more clearly define its intent or application. While this change does not modify the original intent, it does clarify the item to make it more understandable or to promote better implementation. Currency. The item has been updated to reflect current conditions or to better align direction with community issues or objectives. Relocate. This item is proposed to be relocated in order to: 1) change the level (i.e., goal, policy, program) of the item to better reflect its purpose (e.g., moving a policy to the program section), 2) better group the item within its element with other similar content, or 3) move the item to another element within the General Plan. Row 2 will describe where and why the item is proposed to be located. Complete. The item has already been completed, and therefore can be removed from the General Plan. This typically applies to completed implementation programs. Used when items are recommended for deletion. PH1 - 7 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 Relevance. The item is no longer relevant to the community due to changing conditions, new community issues and objectives, or changing opportunities. Used when items are recommended for deletion. Row 2 will describe why the item is no longer relevant. Resources. This item is considered infeasible due to financial or staffing constraints. Used when items are recommended for revision or deletion. Row 2 will describe why the item is considered infeasible. ROW 2 This row provides a place for commentary explaining the change being proposed. Simple edits (Style, Clarity) may not need explanation if the change is clear (changing “should” to “shall”, etc.). More detailed changes, significant modifications, new additions, and items marked as Relocate, Complete, Relevance, and Resources need explanation. For new items, genesis of policy recommendation will be described and referenced in this area (i.e. new policy added to address Complete Streets legislation; or policy implements a preference expressed in COMMUNITY SURVEY). COMMENT BOXES Boxes with a light orange background, like the one below, are used in the revised Land Use and Circulation Elements to provide information to the reviewer and will be removed from the final document. NOTE TO REVIEWER: This version focuses on updates to the policy and program components of the Land Use Element. The Introduction and Community Goals will be edited as appropriate based on the changes approved for the policies and programs. Maps and illustrations have also not been updated at this time, and will be updated to reflect the agreed upon policy and program changes. PH1 - 8 Attachment 2 DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 12, 2013 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, Charles Stevenson, Vice-Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze Absent: Commissioner William Riggs Staff: Community Development Director Derek Johnson, Deputy Community Development Director Kim Murry, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of October 23, 2013, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. City-wide. GPI 15-12: Land Use and Circulation Elements update. Review of Task Force draft of proposed updates to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Project includes City-wide policy changes in addition to consideration of policy and potential future physical changes for areas including but not limited to Foothill between Chorro and Santa Rosa, upper Monterey Street, Sunset Drive-in area, Calle Joaquin auto sales area, Dalidio area, Los Osos Valley Road near Los Verdes, Pacific Beach School site, property southeast of Los Osos Valley Road near Highway 101, and Avila Ranch off of Buckley Road; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Kim Murry) Community Development Deputy Director Kim Murry presented an overview of the more substantive changes recommended by the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update (TF-LUCE) committee. She provided an overview of each chapter of the legislative draft of the Land Use Element and recommended the Planning Commission take public testimony and then provide input and recommendations for consideration by the City Council. PUBLIC COMMENTS: PH1 - 9 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 2 Stephen Hansen, SLO, expressed concern about noise from Upper Monterey and about the health of San Luis Creek if proposed language in the Land Use Element Update is adopted. Debbie Farwell, SLO, stated that the Land Use Element goals assert the City should be a well balanced community concerned about quality of life but also talks about development and tourism. She noted that any density changes in the Upper Monterey area will impact her life on Palm Street and that the downtown is her “front yard” where she takes walks. She noted that tourism in California brings in over $55 billion annually and she is concerned about what will happen to her home. Robert A. Lucas, and Hana Novak, SLO, representing the San Luis Drive Neighborhood Association, presented a petition for the public record signed by over 90 residents stating their concerns and suggesting changes to the Land Use Element update in reference to the Upper Monterey area. They explained that the neighborhood association was started as a response to a 1987 City plan for a trail along the San Luis Creek through the backyards of some residents that resulted in Ordinance 1130, protecting the creek and prohibiting the trail. They noted that the neighborhood is active in protecting the neighborhood and that the association publishes a newsletter and holds frequent neighborhood events. They expressed concerns of light, glare, and noise from adjacent commercial uses. Dave Garth, SLO, formerly with the Chamber of Chamber, stated that balance is best for business and the environment. He stated that the creek is not as much of a buffer as one might think for the San Luis Drive neighborhood and that what happens on the other side of the creek impacts the neighborhood. He explained conditional use permits have been of limited use in dealing with the problems and restaurants have flaunted them. Rachel Kovesdi, SLO, representing the Dalidio Project, stated that the hotel management companies that she is in contact with about the Dalidio property have asked that the maximum number of hotel rooms be increased to 200 from the 150 listed in the draft. Stephen Peck, SLO, Mangano Homes, asked the Commission to revisit the issue of open space for the Avila Ranch area. He supported offsite mitigation for some of the required open space. Charlene Rosales, SLO Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber supports increasing the height limits for buildings, increasing the availability and type of housing in the City, and the LUCE Task Force recommendations regarding the Airport Land Use Plan, including the findings of the City’s aviation consultant. She indicated that the Chamber will have suggestions for tourism and economic development policies. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: PH1 - 10 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 3 Comm. Multari noted that the Commissioners need to refer to the Land Use Map to examine the areas that have not been developed and those that are designated Rural Suburban and Residential Rural. He expressed that these might become areas of urban sprawl. Community Development Deputy Director Murry displayed the map and indicated the areas around the Urban Reserve Line that already have been subdivided. Comm. Draze asked if the City will have input if the County rezones any of these areas. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated the City is provided a referral from the County for any discretionary project that occurs within the Planning Area. She indicated that the General Plan should provide the policy basis on which to respond to any County proposals. Comm. Multari suggested adding a policy stating that the City does not support further subdivision in the City’s sphere of influence area to lots smaller than 20 acres. Comm. Larson stated that he shares the same concerns and recognizes that this is a very difficult issue. He noted that the intent of Table 2 is to recapitulate the higher County zoning designations and define the City’s desire to have lower densities in areas that might affect the City’s plans for a green belt. He stated that while the City needs to be able to evaluate anything that affects a green belt around the City, it would be better to recognize the City’s goal and develop policies without being so detailed. He supported the inclusion of a general and consistent policy statement and a clear graphic representation about the City’s sphere of influence, the City limits, the green belt concept, and LAFCO’s policies and role. Comm. Stevenson stated that he agrees with Comm. Larson and thinks that Table 2 is not necessary. He noted that the County’s policies about agricultural preservation are particularly strong, that the County honors the City’s boundaries, and that any development that would come close to City boundaries would result in consultation with the City. He supported language stating the City’s desire to preserve rural character of the area and the green belt. Comm. Multari stated that the Task Force struggled with this issue and the map was an attempt to acknowledge development and define the rest of the land as open space. Comm. Draze stated that there is a need to have some influence over lands that are close to, but not within, the City limits. He supported a statement stating that it is the City’s desire to have development in these areas with no more than one dwelling per 20 acres. Comm. Stevenson stated language should refer to LAFCO’s sphere of influence update, done every five years, which has provisions about how any proposals for land use changes would be handled between the City and County and is specific about general plan amendments. He suggested looking at language in Memorandums of Agreement the County has with other cities. Staff member Murry indicated the City has a Memorandum of Agreement with the County that provides for referrals and discusses how land use changes will be handled. The Commission proceeded through the legislative draft of the Land Use Element by chapter. PH1 - 11 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 4 Growth Management: Comm. Fowler noted that 1.8.4 Design Standards eliminated the setback of 150 feet from public roads. He requested clarification of why this was done. Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods p. 1-50 to 1-67 Comm. Draze asked Community Development Deputy Director Murry how the concerns of the San Luis Drive neighborhood about the Upper Monterey Area will be handled. He noted it is difficult to draw up something that would work for all neighborhoods. She replied that Upper Monterey area is specifically addressed in the Special Focus Area section and the element also contains policy language that deals with the interface of nonresidential and residential uses. Comm. Larson asked if the first paragraph of 2.3.1 Density Categories and the Residential Population Assumptions table on page 1-59 of the Land Use Task Force Review Version dated 10/16-2013 are related to airport land use possibilities. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that they are about linking population density assumptions to land use designations. Commercial and Industrial Development Policies, pp. 1-68 to 1-83 Comm. Multari suggested adding “southwest of Johnson” to the second New Program on page 1-83. This was accepted. Comm. Draze asked why the Task Force retained 3.5.4.3 Air & Water Quality when the note below it states that it is not required. Comm. Multari stated that this is “comfort language” designed to reassure the public. He noted that the Task Force knows it is not necessary. Community Development Director Johnson stated that there are about a dozen of these “comfort” statements in the Land Use Element Update. Comm. Fowler asked why there is no mention of hours in 5.7.6 Noise Control. Community Development Deputy Director Murry replied that the statement about hours is in the zoning code. He also asked about “more cohesion” in 3.5.7.7 Madonna Road Centers. She replied that this is about making connections between the centers rather than intensifying the uses in these areas. Comm. Multari explained that the Task Force included the third New Program on page 1-83 because emerging technologies and trends are bringing new types of commercial businesses that aren’t currently addressed in the zoning regulations. Comm. Malak asked about how the City deals with issues of noise such as nearby residents hearing conversation from an outdoor restaurant patio. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the City has a Noise Element and zoning ordinances that deal with this. Downtown: pp. 1-84 to 1-95 PH1 - 12 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 5 Comm. Stevenson asked if there was a program or anything else that deals with the statement in the last bullet of 4.0.1 Existing and New Dwellings on page 1-85. He stated this bullet point was probably not worth keeping. Comm. Draze stated that this falls in the “comfort” category. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that this is a policy direction that allows commercial core properties to serve as receiver sites if that possibility arises. Comm. Draze supported keeping it. Comm. Stevenson: stated it is worthwhile but basically useless and asked what kind of density would be supported if density was transferred. He noted that it has to have something that would incentivize it. He suggested linking it to a program for some connection to what is allowed. Comm. Larson stated that there is another reference transferring development credits in another area of the element and that an internal cross reference might be helpful. Comm. Draze stated, in reference to 4.0.7 Traffic in Residential Areas on page 1-89, that he is not certain he wants any streets made more difficult to get through. He noted that the Downtown is a grid and grids disperse traffic more evenly. He asked if this was discussed by the Task Force. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the idea was to discourage cut-through traffic in residential areas. Comm. Draze stated that the emergency call boxes in the New Program on page 1-95 are not used where installed in the County because people use cell phones for emergencies. Community Development Director Johnson stated that staff will consider whether this is outdated technology. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that “will develop” will be replaced with “will consider” for this New Program. Airport Area p. 1-118 to 1-125 Comm. Multari stated that the Airport Compatibility Report was very informative and encouraged the Commission to review it. He explained that the Task Force was supportive of that effort but was concerned that they did not have enough information or legal counsel to understand any liability implications if the City Council were to use State law to override the Airport Land Use Commission on a 4/5ths vote. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the consultant can make a presentation to the Commission and explain the technical information and the liability issues. Comm. Larson asked about the receptivity of the Airport Land Use Commission and noted that he is familiar with setting airport safety zones and with the need to alter those zones. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the Airport Land Use Commission is currently in the process of updating their Land Use Plan and the City has provided information to them. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the City has hired a consultant and conducted an in-depth study of the safety zones and noise contours, and has come to different conclusions about the safety zones and noise contours. Special Focus Areas p. 1-126 to 1-146 PH1 - 13 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 6 Comm. Stevenson stated that 8.3.3.1 Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Area is very difficult to read and understand. He suggested breaking this paragraph down into smaller sections with bullets. Comm. Draze stated that 8.3.3.2.1, which says the City will investigate adding the Upper Monterey area to the Downtown Parking District, suggests that another parking structure might be built. Comm. Multari stated that what is meant by Upper Monterey might need more differentiation. Comm. Draze stated he was satisfied with the language of this statement. Comm. Multari stated that the Commission needed to address whether to 1) include language from the San Luis Drive Neighborhood Association petition in 8.3.3.2, 2) raise the number of allowed hotel rooms to 200 in the Dalidio Specific Plan Area, 3) accept the Task Force’s decision to not allow offsite mitigation for the Dalidio area, and 4) alter the amount of open space for Avila Ranch. 8.3.2.4 SP-2, Dalidio Specific Plan Area, p. 1-133 Comm. Draze stated he supported keeping the 50% open space provision but noted that with a project of this magnitude, a General Plan amendment may be needed later. Community Development Director Johnson stated that if other performances, including the open space goal, can be achieved, flexibility on the number of hotel rooms could help with financing. Comm. Draze stated that he had no problem with 200 hotel rooms but that there are so many constraints, he doubts they would actually be able to build that many rooms. Comm. Stevenson stated he was concerned about no justification being presented and he would like to know if the request for 200 rooms has something to do with viability of a hotel project. Ms. Kovesdi, representing the Dalidio Project, stated that the hotel companies did not indicate that fewer rooms wouldn’t be viable but that they have shared a 200-room business model. Comm. Larson noted that a 150- room hotel could be larger than a 200-room hotel simply by design and that he accepts the increase, especially if it means holding firm on the 50% open space goal. Comm. Draze stated that he sees no big difference between 150 and 200 and that it will be studied in the EIR for impacts to water services, traffic, etc. The Commission agreed to the increase to 200 hotel rooms. 8.3.3.2 Upper Monterey, p. 1-139 Comm. Stevenson suggested adding “neighborhood preservation” to the preamble. Comm. Multari supported this addition. Comm. Draze stated that the reference to buffering from the creek area in point 4 should be retained and that there is no need to add language prohibiting any development in the creek because that is well covered elsewhere. Comm. Multari suggested adding “and, north of California, prohibited on the creekside of the buildings” after “oriented toward Monterey Street” in point 4. PH1 - 14 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 7 Comm. Stevenson stated he does not support the statement about meeting rooms and conference facilities in point 6 because he sees no problem with a stand-alone conference center. Comm. Draze supported accepting the existing language. Comm. Multari suggested adding “would not be envisioned on the east side of Monterey north of California.” He stated this should not be excluded from the whole area but is not a good idea north of California Street. Comm. Stevenson suggested adding language about prohibiting outdoor activities on the creek side for hotels. Comm. Multari suggested “and outdoor dining and other public activities shall be prohibited on the creekside of the buildings on Monterey.” He stated that Ordinance 1130, created in 1989 in response to hotel development on one side of the creek that impacted residents on the other side, already has many of the protections requested by the San Luis Drive neighborhood, and that the question is whether it has been enforced. Community Development Director Johnson stated that staff plans to codify this as part of the annual ordinance update. Comm. Stevenson stated that it would be odd to include language like this in the General Plan because it is usually found in the zoning ordinance. Community Development Director Johnson noted that the neighborhood proposal is to expand the ordinance in terms of public review. Comm. Fowler stated there was no need to modify the language. Comm. Multari stated that, rather than being part of the policy, a program should be developed stating that the City will review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve the residents in doing so. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that this will be moved into a program. 8.3.2.6 SP-4 Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area, p.1-136 Comm. Draze stated that there is a valid argument for the request to change the open space requirements. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that Chevron would meet their open space requirements onsite and other development would meet it through payment of in-lieu fees. She noted that the Task Force draft allows up to one-third to be met with in-lieu fees and up to 30% could be eliminated if affordable housing was provided on-site. She stated it would be appropriate to clarify that the 30% could be pro-rated based on the amount of affordable units provided above inclusionary requirements. Comm. Multari suggested this addition to the language: “pro rata and above the normally required inclusionary standards.” Community Development Deputy Director Murry asked if the language on pages 21-22 of the Transmittal Memo about the Madonna Inn property was acceptable. The Commissioners approved the language. Sustainability Community Development Deputy Director Murry summarized the policies and programs within the new chapter. Commissioners had no comments. Healthy Community, p. 1-150 Comm. Stevenson stated that he was pleased to see this included as it is a great start and covers important issues like walkability and access to local food. He noted that Heal SLO will help provide direction. In response to a question from Comm. Malak, PH1 - 15 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 8 Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that 10.3.1 Neighborhood Access provides guidance for community garden and farmers market locations. She noted that the Task Force changed “ensure” to “to encourage” under a new program for communal gardens in multi-family residential developments. Implementation, p. 1-151 Comm. Larson expressed concern that reference to the CEQA process has been removed from the language in 12.3.11 Environmental Review. He stated that the title should be changed to something like “Resources and Constraints Review.” He stated that there might be confusion or some might think the City is ignoring environmental review when authorizing exemptions to projects. He noted that prior language was linked with CEQA. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the Task Force discussed whether to reference CEQA, but, knowing there were changes ahead, they wanted to emphasize how the City does environmental review. Comm. Multari stated that there was quite a bit of discussion on this issue and that the Task Force concluded that they wanted the City to have environmental review even if CEQA was no longer in effect and they did not want to reference particular types of documents such as initial studies or mitigated negative declarations. Comm. Larson stated that the intent that comes across is the City’s commitment to early and meaningful environmental review. Comm. Multari stated that the only problem with this is the extremely remote possibility that someone could present a legal argument against the City citing the language about the features to be examined if the list is not exhaustive. Comm. Larson noted that most people would not characterize a CEQA exemption as involving community input. Comm. Multari stated that he thinks the points raised by Comm. Larson should be considered. Community Development Director Johnson suggested adding language that says some projects may be exempted per state law or city procedures. Comm. Draze stated that the purpose of the environmental review process is to give the community leaders plenty of knowledge to maintain a good quality of life for City residents. Comm. Larson stated that the clear intent is to make sure that the list of features will be examined, although not necessarily in a detailed way, when a project is considered in order to keep a high quality environment. He noted that this could easily be done for a small project. He stated that his discomfort is with using the title “Environment Review.” Comm. Stevenson suggested using a lower case title: “The City’s environmental review.” Comm. Draze stated that he supported including the language suggested by Community Development Director Johnson. The Commission agreed to do this. 12.3.12 Communication, p. 1-154 Comm. Draze stated that the language should state that the General Plan is the basis of everything the City does. Comm. Multari suggested this change: “are consistent with the goals and policies.” Comm. Stevenson asked for clarification of what prompted the inclusion of this section. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the PH1 - 16 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 9 intent is to have some basis for staff to know that the reference point is the General Plan. It was noted that communications with other agencies could be constrained by the reworded policy because not all City staff to know all of the General Plan. Comm. Multari suggested this language: “City positions communicated to other agencies shall be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan.” Comm. Stevenson stated it would be valuable if all department heads and senior staff were aware of this. He supported moving this section to the preamble to the General Plan. Community Development Director Johnson supported using Comm. Multari’s language and leaving it in Implementation. On motion by Comm. Stevenson, and seconded by Comm. Larson, to continue the review of the TF-LUCE recommended changes to the Land Use Element and the Resolution until 6 p.m., Monday, December 16, 2013. AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Comm. Riggs The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. There were no further comments made from the Commission. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 1. Staff a. Agenda Forecast 1) Next meeting Monday, December 16, 2013 2) January 8, 2014--scoping meeting for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update and application for 1050 Osos Street 3) January 22, 2014--Airport Area Specific plan and 2885 S. Higuera appeal of a Use Permit denial 2. Commission: Comm. Draze announced he will recuse himself for the January 22, 2014, meeting on the Airport Area Specific Plan. ADJOUR NMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Diane Clement Recording Secretary PH1 - 17 Attachment 3 DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 16, 2013 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, William Riggs, Charles Stevenson, Vice-Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Derek Johnson, Community Development Deputy Director Kim Murry, Public Works Deputy Director Tim Bochum, Principal Transportation Planner Peggy Mandeville, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement Other: Jim Damkowitch, Principal Planner, Kittelson and Associates, Inc. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Land Use Element - Continued Hearing PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bob Lucas, SLO, expressed concern that permitting a standalone conference center will become the rationale for more development on upper Monterey Street including more and larger hotels, restaurants and shops. He stated that this is what can happen when the City’s building code comes up against pressure from developers. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Multari noted that the Commission did not consider the status of the Cal Poly parcels, the Villa Montana development and the Cal Fire property at the last meeting. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the Task Force recommended the Cal Fire parcel be zoned as a special planning area and the Bella Montana condos be designated as Medium High Density Residential. On motion by Commr. Riggs, and seconded by Commr. Malak, to approve the Task Force zoning recommendations for the Cal Fire and Bella Montana properties. PH1 - 18 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 2 AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Multari reminded the Commission that a letter was received from Debbie Farwell that was not discussed at the last meeting. He stated that the changes made to the Upper Monterey planning area in response to the San Luis Drive neighborhood petition probably covered her concerns. Chair Draze stated that developing a standalone conference center in the Upper Monterey area will be difficult due to lack of undeveloped land. Commr. Larson noted that there was once a standalone conference center in the City but it was not successful. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the business model today for conference centers is that they are part of a hotel facility. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the policy language supports conference facilities rather than a stand-alone conference center for both Upper Monterey and the CalTrans site. Commr. Multari supported adding a sentence to the policy and noted that the likelihood of one being built is very remote. Commr. Larson suggested adding this sentence at end of policy 6 in 8.3.3.2 on page 1-139: “No standalone conference center is envisioned.” On motion by Commr. Larson, and seconded by Commr. Multari, to add “No standalone conference center is envisioned.” to the end of 8.3.3.2.6. AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Multari recused himself for discussion of the Luneta Drive area. Commr. Draze explained that this area is close to Commr. Multari’s home. On motion by Vice-Chair Larson, and seconded by Commr. Riggs, to approve the language as proposed by the Task Force on policy L of 6.2.7 Hillside Planning Areas. AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: Commr. Multari ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. PH1 - 19 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 3 On motion by Commr. Riggs, and seconded by Commr. Malak, to approve a Resolution forwarding the Land Use Element Policy and Program Revisions and Additions for City Council consideration to be considered through the EIR process (GPI 15-12). AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Vice-Chair Larson stated that while he supports the motion to approve the resolution, he finds the Introduction and Background sections of the draft Land Use Element to be weak: some of the philosophical language, the historical recapitulation, and the attempt to identify core community values based on comparisons of the 1988 and 2012 surveys does not seem to flow well and is difficult to read. He stated he is uncomfortable with this section of the draft element and suggests that between now and the end of the process, staff and the consultant team “tighten up” the language. Chair Draze noted that approving the resolution does not affect the EIR. Commr. Multari suggested a motion that states the introduction and goals do not affect the EIR. A motion was proposed by Vice-Chair Larson, and seconded by Commr. Fowler, to direct staff to simplify the language in the Introduction, the Background Review, and the statement of Community Values on return of the Land Use Element for final consideration and, furthermore, to state that the Planning Commission understands that none of that language affects the Environmental Impact Report. Commr. Malak stated that he wanted to modify the motion to identify what is meant by “simplify.” Vice-Chair Larson responded that, in reading those sections of the Land Use Element, he found redundancies and contradictions, and some statements that were interpreted as reflecting core community values. He stated that the entire front section should be edited for consistency to remove contradictions and to communicate more clearly. He noted that parts pertaining to the update in 1994 were chopped and rearranged and that it appeared to be written by committee. Commr. Multari agreed with Commr. Larson’s sentiment and stated that it was written by committee, but rather than directing staff to deal with the language, he proposed a friendly amendment: “The Planning Commission acknowledges that the Introduction and Background language was not reviewed in depth but that this section does not affect the environmental review, the Commission wants to forward the draft element to the Council, with the understanding that this section will be reviewed and edited in the future.” This was accepted by Commr. Larson and Commr. Fowler. On motion by Vice-Chair Larson, and seconded by Commr. Fowler, that the Planning Commission acknowledges that the Introduction and Background language was not reviewed but that this section does not affect the environmental review, therefore the Commission wants to forward the draft element to the Council, with the understanding that this section will be reviewed and edited in the future. PH1 - 20 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 4 AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. There were no further comments made from the Commission. 2. City-wide. GPI/ER 15-12: Land Use and Circulation Elements update. Review of Task Force draft of proposed updates to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Project includes introduction of Multi-Modal level of service policies in addition to updates and changes to city-wide circulation policies; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Kim Murry) Principal Transportation Planner Peggy Mandeville presented the staff report, recommending the Commission review the TF-LUCE recommended changes to the Circulation Element and provide input and recommendations for consideration by the City Council. Commr. Multari thanked Eric Meyer for chairing the Task Force and moving it through a process that was not easy. He noted that the Circulation Element was delivered to the Task Force ahead of the Land Use Element and the document was in much rougher shape when the Task Force reviewed it. In addition, some of the concepts were much more technical. He noted that the Circulation Element garnered more public input than the Land Use Element. Vice-Chair Larson added his appreciation for the Task Force’s work and Mr. Meyer’s role as chairperson. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Dan Rivoire, San Luis Obispo County Bicycle Coalition, stated that the Coalition supports approving the multimodal goals and the proportional funding of bike infrastructure. He stated that community members are ecstatic about this and asked that his written comments be read into the record. Lea Brooks, SLO thanked the Task Force for its work and supported the 20% mode share for bikes and the movement away from a car-centric focus to one that supports all modes. Myron Amerine, SLO, also strongly supported the bike mode share and the matching of mode share with funding. He noted that in many communities, starting right after World War II, planning has made streets bicycle and pedestrian-proof and there is a need to change that. He stated that this is a chance to reverse 50 years of bad planning. Anne Wyatt, SLO, thanked Commr. Multari, Chairperson Meyer and the rest of the Task Force. She supported the multimodal goals and associated funding. She stated that the hard work of taking biking seriously as a mode of transportation is still ahead and PH1 - 21 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 5 she emphasized that the roads need to be shared and funds are needed to improve the bike infrastructure for safety. Eric Meyer, chairperson of the LUCE Task Force, stated he reviewed many general plans and found most boring but a few are good and innovative. He noted that in this General Plan, one truly outstanding and unique feature is that the Task Force decided to allocate funding based on the desired mode share goals and that, based on this new funding idea, it becomes possible to build the infrastructure in a reasonable amount of time. He stated that discussion should continue on exactly what the numbers should be and that carpooling and public transit numbers should perhaps be broken out rather than lumped together under “other modes”. Jim DeCecco, Pismo Beach, also supported the mode share goals and funding. He noted that he and his family often come to San Luis Obispo by bike to shops and restaurants. Chair Draze emphasized that the Commission welcomes testimony from anyone, not just San Luis Obispo residents, and that everyone has a right to express their opinions. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Chair Draze stated that the 2035 objectives for mode split are reasonable but that he has questions about the funding. Commr. Riggs noted that it is critical to establish the mode split goals in order to talk about specific policies. Vice-Chair Larson stated that he likes the 20% modal split goal for bicycling but he does not understand how the funding works and what the ramifications would be. Commr. Multari explained that the Task Force had questions about how to implement and labored over the language in the program regarding Transportation Funding. He stated that the General Plan should not contain the details regarding funding implementation but that the program directs staff to develop funding policies and bring them back to the Commission and the City Council. He noted that restrictions in the use of different funding sources could skew a single year’s funding plan or instances where emergencies occur where funds would be needed to deal with something urgent. He noted that the Task Force tried to develop a program that could be used for budgeting and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). He also stated that, from the perspective of the Commission, the proposed CIP is reviewed by the Planning Commission every two years for a finding of consistency with the General Plan. Chair Draze stated that since some infrastructure is very expensive, such as an overpass, and that the Council and Caltrans have to make decisions on these costs, he questions the feasibility of assigning 20% of transportation funding to meet the bike goals. Commr. Multari noted that there was general Task Force support for the policies and programs but the percentage splits were debated more closely. Commr. Fowler asked PH1 - 22 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 6 if there should be reference to Measure Y as a source of CIP funding. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville replied that the City Council took out specific reference to Measure Y in the Bicycle Transportation Plan because the measure is due to expire next year but that the current Measure Y funds are being used for bicycle funding as part of addressing traffic congestion. 1 Introduction Vice-Chair Larson reiterated his support for the 20% bicycle mode share but noted that in the listing of Transportation Goals in 1.5 Goals and Objectives, much of the language is repeated from the current Circulation Element. He stated that of the nine goals, there were four that specifically addressed non-motor vehicle items, four that addressed all forms of transportation, and only one (#4) that addressed motor vehicle traffic but is worded with a distinctly negative connotation. He supported rewording goal #4 to delete the word “only”. Commr. Multari agreed that the word does change the meaning and supported deleting it and including “If there is a demonstrated need, widening and extending streets will be done.” Commr. Riggs stated that he did not read any hostility toward any mode in Section 1.5 Goals and Objectives. He stated that what he noted in the goals was an emphasis on mobility and that tonight’s public speakers all talked about the deference toward vehicles that has existed for a long time. He added that he thinks the nine goals are holistic. Commr. Fowler agreed with Commr. Multari as to “only.” Chair Draze stated he was more comfortable leaving it in. Vice-Chair Larson explained that he supports implementation of the goals but does not want to lose sight of the importance of moving goods and people. No action was taken to reword the goal. 2 Traffic Reduction: Commr. Fowler asked if the Task Force talked about affordable housing in close proximity to services as a means to achieve trip reduction. Community Development Director Johnson stated that this is covered in the Land Use Element under the concept of Complete Neighborhoods. Commr. Multari and Task Force Chairperson Meyer agreed that this was not explicitly discussed by the Task Force. 3 Transit Service: Commr. Riggs expressed concern transit funding fare box ratios could force a continuing reduction in service. He stated that he hoped this would not result in a setup for failure with an unsustainable goal. He also noted that there are no goals for service standards. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that riders have to pay at least 20% of the cost of the service and that there is a need to look for ways to get more people to take the bus. Commr. Riggs stated that the problem of financial pressure and the need to increase ridership needs to be acknowledged. He supported having no more than 30-minute off-peak and 20-minute peak headways. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville indicated that service provision is described in the Short Range Transit Plan. Chair Draze asked if the Short Term Transit Plan should be referenced. Commr. Multari suggested stating that the City is going to adopt service standards in PH1 - 23 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 7 the Short Range Transit Plan rather than including service standards in the element. Commr. Stevenson suggested including transit funding limitations in the Appendix and referencing it in 3.1.1 Transit Plans because appendices can be changed without a General Plan amendment. This was accepted by the Commission. Commr. Malak stated he would like to add a program to 3.1 Programs to evaluate the feasibility of a shuttle system among shopping centers and the Downtown. Chair Draze supported this and Community Development Director Johnson stated it could be a new program under 3.1.7. Commr. Fowler asked what groups would be targeted to increase public transit ridership so that the 2035 goal could be met. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that “and other interested groups” could be added to 3.1.2 Transit Passes. 4 Bicycle Transportation Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville provided corrections to the legislative draft Commr. Multari stated that these were preliminary concepts were replaced by the proposed transportation funding policy and program. Vice-Chair Larson noted that the language used in the first sentence of 4.0.4 New Development is a good example for policy statements. Commr. Riggs stated that he likes the way 4.1.4 Campus Master Plan is more assertive and thanked the Task Force for this language. Commr. Fowler suggested adding “and educate” to 4.1.1 Incentives which was accepted by the Commission. He noted that there is no date for attaining a gold level designation in 4.1.7. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that this is reviewed approximately every five years and the City was recently renewed at the silver award level. Commr. Riggs recommended not adding a date. 5 Walking Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that 5.0.7 Sidewalks generated much discussion about sidewalk design and installation at Task Force meetings. Vice-Chair Larson reiterated his commendation of policy language like that in 5.0.3 New Development. Commr. Fowler suggested adding “and promote” to 5.0.1 Promote Walking. Commr. Riggs suggested that a combined pedestrian and bicycle plan be considered. Chair Draze stated that the downtown is quite different from the rest of the City because bikes and pedestrians do not share space. Consultant Damkowitch stated that there is a difference in design for pedestrians and bicycles. Commr. Riggs stated that he disagreed with Mr. Damkowitch. Commr. Multari suggested a new program to consider the benefits and costs of a combined city-wide bicycle and pedestrian plan. Commr. PH1 - 24 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 8 Stevenson stated that it might be better to analyze the issues relative to connectivity rather than as a citywide plan so as to focus on getting people to shopping and other destinations. Commr. Multari suggested the program in 5.1.2 does this when it references a “continuous and connected pedestrian network:” Commr. Stevenson stated that, while vague, this does have the word “connected” but that he wants to focus on and how people in residential multifamily get to work and shopping without driving a car. Vice-Chair Larson noted that 4.1.2 and 5.1.1 should, at minimum, be coordinated, or at least acknowledge each other. He stated that reference to coordination could be in 4.1.2 and that staff could develop the language. Community Development Director Johnson proposed “The City shall consider the benefits and costs of consolidating a pedestrian and bicycle plan.” Commr. Riggs stated that he sees this as an opportunity to reframe these modes to be more equal in importance. 6 Multi-modal Circulation Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that considering all modes rather than just vehicle LOS is new. Vice-Chair Larson asked for an explanation of “further degradation” in 6.0.D Defining Significant Circulation Impact. Consultant Damkowitch stated that degradation is based on a score representing degrees within each LOS and that there could be a significant impact even if the degradation does not change the LOS. Vice-Chair Larson stated that in the CEQA process, it could be argued that this kind of impact is not a substantial change. Chair Draze and Mr. Damkowitch agreed. Commr. Riggs asked about the meaning of improved crossings in 6.0.E.a Mitigation, Pedestrian. Consultant Damkowitch stated that the intent is to simply show the broader range of choices available for mitigation and that the improvements listed are for illustrative purposes. He noted that when LOS is only about vehicles, you get mitigations only about cars. Community Development Director Johnson agreed that the examples are not meant to be exhaustive. Commr. Riggs asked why language about reducing intersection crossing distance is not also in the Pedestrian paragraph. Mr. Damkowitch stated that this could clearly be added there. Consultant Damkowitch noted that the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual was the first to embrace multimodal service. He stated that some cities are including these in their plans but most are shying away from establishing standards. He noted that what SLO is doing is impressive and will put the City ahead of the curve. 7 Traffic Management Vice-Chair Larson stated that he appreciates Commr. Multari’s prior comments on 7.1.9 Transportation Funding. He noted that this very important paragraph took a great effort and captures much of the direction needed. He stated that the language he praised in prior sections should serve as a model for a new policy regarding vehicular traffic. He noted that in Types of Streets, 7.2 Design Standards, the language is very passive and does not indicate who will be responsible. He stated that subdivision developments have been brought back to the Commission for relief from these things due to passive PH1 - 25 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 9 language. He supported a policy clearly stating that new development will provide necessary circulation improvements. Vice-Chair Larson proposed a motion stating that new development shall be responsible for road improvements. Chair Draze noted that 7.2 Design Standards is about all roads, not just those in new development. Commr. Multari stated that 7.2 is about what the City will do but agreed with the idea of requiring new development to be responsible for infrastructure. Vice-Chair Larson stated that his concern is about implementing the General Plan where appropriate and, in his opinion, it is a deficiency in the Circulation Element not to carry and recognize that typical, standard, and reasonable requirement. He clarified that he is not suggesting that he would like to build roads everywhere in the City. Commr. Stevenson stated that a statement could be added to the beginning of the Circulation Element. Community Development Director Johnson stated that Chapter 9 would be the appropriate place and most of the Commission agreed. Vice-Chair Larson withdrew his motion. Air Transportation: The Commission agreed to Vice-Chair Larson’s suggestion to move “as well as protecting and improving circulation and public transit access to the airport” from the deleted 11.0.1 County Airport to the end of 11.0.2 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Vice-Chair Larson supported renaming 11.0.2 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan to avoid confusion with the Airport Commission’s plan. Community Development Deputy Director Murry suggested “Airport Land Use Compatibility Strategies” but subsequently, the Commission agreed to strike 11.0.2 entirely in addition to previous policy 11.0.1, 11.0.3, 11.0.4, and 11.1.4 because they are covered under the Land Use Element. Commr. Fowler stated that the word “additional” in 11.1.3 is not needed. The Commission agreed. Commr. Malak asked for a history of why there is no public transit to the airport. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that it did exist but did not have many riders because most people wanted transportation at times that transit does not run. She stated that extending service to businesses near the airport, including stops at the airport, is now being considered. She added that there is Ride On service for a small cost. 14 Neighborhood Parking Management Chair Draze stated that 13.1.4 Parking Structures should refer to “public parking structures.” Neighborhood Parking Management, p. 60 Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that New Policy #2 under 14.0.1 Residential Parking Spaces could be renamed “Residential Parking Program” so that it is clear it is not referring to a benefits district. PH1 - 26 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 10 Commr. Riggs supported thinking of this district as a finance district to fund neighborhood improvements. Commr. Multari suggested adding a sentence saying “This is not a finance district.” because, if the City is considering finance districts, it should be done in a transparent manner. Commr. Riggs stated that he wants to make that proposal. Commr. Multari suggested the Commission add a program to study the feasibility of establishing financing districts. He noted that at some future time, City residents may support this approach in order to make improvements to their neighborhoods. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the program Commr. Multari suggested could be a new program in 14.1. He noted that property owners would have the ultimate vote on this. Commr. Fowler and Commr. Malak supported looking into the feasibility of finance districts. Commr. Multari stated that some neighborhoods might be interested if it finances lighting, landscaping and traffic calming. Commr. Riggs stated that typically the user funds this via meters but that there are multiple ways to do it. Commr. Multari stated that the City is not going to meter residential streets. Public Works Deputy Director Bochum stated that a couple of cities have allowed meters in residential areas and that, in exchange for allowing public parking on their streets, the neighborhood gets a large share of the revenue for improvements. He stated it was investigated here once but got a resounding “no” from the public. He noted that it may make some sense near Cal Poly but probably would not be supported at a city-wide scale. The Commission opted to add a program, “The City will investigate the feasibility and desirability of establishing parking financing districts.” 15 Scenic Roadways Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville recommended keeping existing language in 15.1.4 Billboards due to current litigation. On motion by Commr. Fowler, seconded by Commr. Malak, to adopt the Resolution forwarding the Circulation Element Policy and Program revisions and additions for City Council consideration to be considered through the EIR process (GPI 15-12). AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff a. Agenda Forecast: January 8, 2014, scoping meeting for EIR for LUCE and a request for alcohol sales at 1060 Osos Street. b. Agenda Forecast: January 22, 2014 Airport Area Specific Plan and an appeal of use permit conditions at 2885 S. Higuera Street. PH1 - 27 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 11 4. Commission: Commr. Malak thanks Commr. Multari, Task Force Chairperson Eric Meyer and staff for work on the LUCE update. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary PH1 - 28 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-1 CHAPTER 1 LAND USE PH1 - 29 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-2 CHAPTER 1 - LAND USE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 10 History .......................................................................................................................... 11 Public Participation ....................................................................................................... 13 Background to the 1994 Land Use Element ................................................................ 13 Community Values ....................................................................................................... 14 Preamble To The Land Use Element ........................................................................... 17 San Luis Obispo’s Vision .............................................................................................. 17 Community’s Goals ...................................................................................................... 18 ...................................................................................................... GROWTH MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 34 1.0 Overall Intent ...................................................................................................... 34 1.0.1 Growth Management Objectives ......................................................... 34 1.0.2 Development Capacity and Services .................................................. 34 1.1 Urban Separation ............................................................................................... 34 1.2 Urban Reserve Line ........................................................................................... 35 1.3 Urban Edges Character ...................................................................................... 35 1.4 Jobs/Housing Relationship ................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5 Regional Planning .............................................................................................. 35 1.6 City Size and Expansion .................................................................................... 35 1.6.1 Urban Reserve ........................................................................................... 35 1.6.2 Expansion Areas........................................................................................ 36 1.6.3 Interim Uses ............................................................................................... 36 1.7 Greenbelt ............................................................................................................ 36 1.7.1 Open Space Protection ....................................................................... 36 1.7.2 Greenbelt Uses .......................................................................................... 36 1.7.3 Commercial Uses in Greenbelt .................................................................. 36 1.7.4 Parcel Sizes and Density ........................................................................... 37 1.7.5 Building Design and Siting ......................................................................... 37 1.7.6 Wildlife Habitat .................................................................................... 37 1.7.7 Trees .......................................................................................................... 37 1.8 Prime Agricultural Land ...................................................................................... 38 1.8.1 Agricultural Protection ......................................................................... 38 1.8.2 Prime Agricultural Land ....................................................................... 38 1.9 Residential Clustering for Open Space Protection ............................................. 38 1.9.1 Parcel Sizes ........................................................................................ 38 1.9.2 Means of Protection ............................................................................ 39 1.9.3 Public Access ............................................................................................ 39 1.9.4 Design Standards ...................................................................................... 39 1.10 Growth Rates & Phasing ................................................................................ 40 1.10.1 Overall Intent ............................................................................................. 40 1.10.2 Residential Growth Rate ............................................................................ 40 1.10.3 Nonresidential Growth Rate ...................................................................... 41 1.11 Educational and Governmental Facilities Near the City ................................ 42 PH1 - 30 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-3 1.11.1 Overall Policy .............................................................................................. 42 1.11.2 Cal Poly ...................................................................................................... 42 1.11.3 California Men’s Colony .............................................................................. 42 1.11.4 Cuesta Community College ........................................................................ 42 1.12 Annexation and Services ................................................................................ 43 1.12.1 Water and Sewer Service ........................................................................... 43 1.12.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing ................................................................ 43 1.12.3 Annexation of Cal Poly ............................................................................... 43 1.12.4 Annexation in Airport Area.......................................................................... 43 1.12.5 Required Plans ........................................................................................... 44 1.12.6 Development and Services......................................................................... 45 1.12.7 Open Space ................................................................................................ 45 1.13 Costs of Growth .............................................................................................. 46 1.14 Solid Waste Capacity ...................................................................................... 46 1.15 Countywide Planning ...................................................................................... 47 1.15.1 County “RMS” ............................................................................................. 47 1.15.2 Regular Coordination Meetings .................................................................. 47 1.15.3 Plans Summary .......................................................................................... 47 1.15.4 Project Review ............................................................................................ 47 1.15.5 Regional Growth Management ................................................................... 48 1.15.6 Consistent Plans ......................................................................................... 48 1.15.7 City-County Agreement .............................................................................. 48 1.15.8 Refined Planning Area Map........................................................................ 49 1.15.9 Maintain Development Fee Program .......................................................... 49 ............. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS .............................................................................................................................................. 50 2.0 .................................................................................................................................. 50 2.1 Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement ...................................................... 50 2.1.1 Neighborhood Identity ................................................................................ 50 2.1.2 Neighborhood Groups ................................................................................ 50 2.1.3 Neighborhood Traffic .................................................................................. 50 2.1.4 Neighborhood Connections ................................................................. 51 2.1.5 Neighborhood Open Links .......................................................................... 51 2.1.6 Neighborhood Amenities ...................................................................... 51 2.1.7 Neighborhood Enhancement ............................................................... 52 2.2 Residential Location, Uses, and Design ............................................................. 52 2.2.1 Mixed Uses and Convenience ............................................................. 52 2.2.2 Separation and Buffering ............................................................................ 52 2.2.3 Residential Next to Non-residential ............................................................ 53 2.2.4 Street Access ............................................................................................. 53 2.2.5 Neighborhood Pattern ................................................................................ 53 2.2.6 Housing and Businesses ..................................................................... 53 2.2.7 Natural Features .................................................................................. 54 2.2.8 Parking ........................................................................................................ 54 2.2.9 Compatible Development ..................................................................... 54 2.2.10 Site Constraints .......................................................................................... 55 2.2.11 Residential Project Objectives .................................................................... 55 2.2.12 Residential Rehabilitation and Maintenance ........ Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3 Residential Density.............................................................................................. 58 PH1 - 31 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-4 2.3.1 Density Categories .................................................................................... 58 2.3.2 Density Bonuses ................................................................................. 59 2.3.3 Density and Site Constraints ..................................................................... 59 2.4 Residential Land Protection ............................................................................... 61 2.4.1 Boundary Adjustments .............................................................................. 61 2.4.2 Density Changes ....................................................................................... 61 2.4.3 Residential Conversion .............................................................................. 62 2.5 Student and Campus Housing ........................................................................... 62 2.5.1 Cal Poly ..................................................................................................... 62 2.5.2 Cuesta College .......................................................................................... 62 2.5.3 Amenities ................................................................................................... 63 2.5.4 Location ..................................................................................................... 63 2.5.5 Fraternities & Sororities ............................................................................. 63 2.5.6 Large Group Housing ................................................................................ 63 2.6 Reduced Automobile Dependence in Downtown ........................................ 64 2.7 Updating & Enforcing Standards ........................................................................ 65 2.7.1 Enforcing Standards .................................................................................. 65 2.7.2 Property Maintenance Standards .............................................................. 65 2.8 Multifamily Preferences & Standards ................................................................. 65 2.8.1 Preferences ............................................................................................... 65 2.8.2 Multifamily Open Space and Storage Standards ...................................... 65 2.9 Downtown Residential Development ................................................................. 65 2.10 Neighborhood Plans ...................................................................................... 66 ................................................................. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 68 3.0 Commercial Siting .............................................................................................. 68 3.0.1 Slope .......................................................................................................... 68 3.0.2 Access ....................................................................................................... 68 3.0.3 Residential Area ........................................................................................ 68 3.1 General Retail .................................................................................................... 68 3.1.1 Purpose and Included Uses ...................................................................... 68 3.1.2 Locations for Regional Attractions ............................................................. 68 3.1.3 Specialty Store Locations .......................................................................... 69 3.1.4 Building Intensity........................................................................................ 69 3.2 Neighborhood Commercial................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2.1 Purpose and Included Uses ...................................................................... 70 3.2.2 New or Expanded Areas of Neighborhood Commercial Use .............. 70 3.2.3 Expanding Existing Neighborhood Commercial Areas.............................. 71 3.2.4 Stores in Residential Areas ................................................................. 71 3.3 Community Commercial ..................................................................................... 71 3.3.1 Office Uses ................................................................................................ 72 3.4 Office .................................................................................................................. 72 3.4.1 Office Locations ......................................................................................... 72 3.4.2 Offices Outside Designated Areas ............................................................ 73 3.5 Tourist Commercial Uses ................................................................................... 74 3.5.1 Basis for Tourism ....................................................................................... 74 3.5.2 Locations ................................................................................................... 74 3.5.3 Appropriate Uses ....................................................................................... 74 3.6 Services and Manufacturing ............................................................................... 75 3.6.1 General Retail and Neighborhood Commercial Uses ............................... 76 3.6.2 Access ....................................................................................................... 76 3.6.3 Utility Service ............................................................................................. 77 PH1 - 32 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-5 3.6.4 Vehicle Sales .............................................................................................. 77 3.6.5 Building Intensity ........................................................................................ 79 3.7 Overall ................................................................................................................. 79 3.7.1 Dependent Care ......................................................................................... 79 3.7.2 Convenience Facilities ................................................................................ 79 3.7.3 Commercial Revitalization .......................................................................... 79 3.8 Programs ............................................................................................................. 81 3.8.1 Zoning Regulations ..................................................................................... 81 3.8.2 Planned Development Zoning .................................................................... 81 3.8.3 Neighborhood Uses ............................................................................. 81 3.8.4 Dependent Care ......................................................................................... 81 3.8.5 Neighborhood Centers ............................................................................... 82 3.8.6 Auto Sales Relocation ................................................................................ 82 3.8.7 Noise Control .............................................................................................. 82 3.8.8 Madonna Road Center ............................................................................... 82 3.8.9 Tourism ....................................................................................................... 83 ........................................................................................................................... DOWNTOWN .............................................................................................................................................. 84 4.0 Downtown Residential ......................................................................................... 84 4.0.1 Existing and New Dwellings ................................................................. 84 4.0.2 Dwellings and Offices ................................................................................. 87 4.1 Entertainment and Cultural Facilities .................................................................. 87 4.2 Public Gatherings ................................................................................................ 87 4.3 Walking Environment .................................................................................... 87 4.4 Public Safety ....................................................................................................... 88 4.5 Open Places and Views ...................................................................................... 88 4.6 Traffic in Residential Areas ................................................................................. 89 4.7 Street Changes ................................................................................................... 89 4.8 Parking ................................................................................................................ 89 4.9 San Luis Obispo Creek ................................................................................. 89 4.10 Building Conservation and Compatibility ........................................................ 89 4.11 New Buildings and Views ............................................................................... 90 4.12 Noise ............................................................................................................... 90 4.13 Sense of Place ................................................................................................ 90 4.14 Design Principles ............................................................................................ 90 4.14.1 Street Level Activities ................................................................................. 90 4.14.2 Upper Floor Dwellings ................................................................................ 91 4.14.3 Continuous Storefront ................................................................................. 91 4.14.4 Building Height ........................................................................................... 91 4.14.5 Building Width ............................................................................................. 92 4.14.6 Sidewalk Appeal ......................................................................................... 92 4.15 Government Offices ........................................................................................ 92 4.16 Commercial Buildings Outside the Core ......................................................... 92 4.17 Updating Downtown Concept Plan ................................................................. 93 4.18 Implementing the Downtown Concept Plan .................................................... 93 4.19 Visual Resource Study.................................................................................... 93 4.20 Expansion of Downtown Plaza ....................................................................... 93 ....................................................................................... PUBLIC & CULTURAL FACILITIES .............................................................................................................................................. 96 5.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 96 5.1 Public Facilities .................................................................................................... 96 5.1.1 Grouping for Convenience.......................................................................... 96 PH1 - 33 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-6 5.1.2 Joint Projects ............................................................................................. 96 5.1.3 Civic Center ............................................................................................... 96 5.1.4 Health Care ......................................................................................... 98 5.1.5 Social Services .......................................................................................... 98 5.1.6 Other Government Functions .................................................................... 99 5.2 Cultural Facilities .............................................................................................. 100 5.2.1 Cooperation ............................................................................................. 100 5.2.2 Mission Plaza Area .................................................................................. 100 5.3 City and County Offices Downtown .................................................................. 101 5.4 Community Arts Support ...................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.5 Land Acquisition ............................................................................................... 101 5.6 Facility Reuse ................................................................................................... 101 5.7 Public Art .......................................................................................................... 100 .................................................................................................... RESOURCE PROTECTION ........................................................................................................................................... 102 6.0 Overall Resource Protection ............................................................................ 102 6.0.1 Resource Planning .................................................................................. 102 6.0.2 Resource Mapping .................................................................................. 102 6.0.3 Resource Protection .......................................................................... 103 6.1 Open Space Policies ........................................................................................ 103 6.1.1 Open Space Uses ............................................................................. 104 6.2 Hillside Policies ................................................................................................ 104 6.2.1 Development Limits ........................................................................... 106 6.2.2 Development Standards .......................................................................... 106 6.2.3 Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines ....................................................... 108 6.2.4 Development Credit Transfer .................................................................. 108 6.2.5 Homesites Outside the Limit Lines .......................................................... 108 6.2.6 Hillside Planning Areas ............................................................................ 109 6.3 Hillside Programs ............................................................................................. 112 6.3.1 Designating Sensitive Sites ..................................................................... 112 6.3.2 Delineation of Development Limit Lines .................................................. 113 6.4 Creeks Wetlands, and Flooding Policies .......................................................... 113 6.4.1 Creek and Wetlands Management Objectives .................................. 115 6.4.2 Citywide Network .............................................................................. 115 6.4.3 Amenities and Access ............................................................................. 115 6.4.4 Open Channels ........................................................................................ 115 6.4.5 Porous Paving ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.4.6 Development Requirements .................................................................... 116 6.4.7 Discharge of Urban Pollutants ................................................................. 116 6.4.8 100-year Floodplain ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.4.9 Erosion Control Measures ....................................................................... 116 6.4.10 Bird Attraction .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.5 Creeks and Flooding Programs ....................................................................... 116 6.5.1 Previously Developed Areas ............................................................. 116 6.5.2 National Flood Program ........................................................................... 117 6.5.3 Creekside Care and Notification .............................................................. 117 ...................................................................................................................... AIRPORT AREA ........................................................................................................................................... 118 7.0 ............................................................................................................................... 118 7.1 Regional Service .............................................................................................. 118 PH1 - 34 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-7 7.2 Airport Land Use Plan .......................................................................................118 7.3 City Annexation and Services ...........................................................................119 7.4 Greenbelt Protection ...................................................................................119 7.5 Internal Open Space .........................................................................................119 7.6 Development Before Annexation ......................................................................121 7.7 Transit Service ..................................................................................................121 7.8 Business Parks ..................................................................................................121 7.9 Airline Service and Impacts ...............................................................................123 ................................................................................................ SPECIAL PLANNING AREAS ............................................................................................................................................125 8.0 Special Use Areas .............................................................................................128 8.1 Specific Plan Areas ...........................................................................................128 8.1.1 Specific Plan / General Plan Amendment ................................................128 8.1.2 Specific Plan Content ...............................................................................129 8.1.3 SP-1, Margarita Area Specific Plan Update .............................................131 8.1.4 SP-2, Dalidio Specific Plan Area ..............................................................132 8.1.5 SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area ..........................................134 8.1.6 SP-4, Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area ......................................................135 8.2 Special Design Areas ........................................................................................137 8.2.1 Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area ......................................................137 8.2.2 Upper Monterey ........................................................................................138 8.2.3 Mid-Higuera Area .....................................................................................139 8.2.4 Caltrans Site .............................................................................................139 8.2.5 General Hospital Site ................................................................................140 8.2.6 Broad Street Area .....................................................................................140 8.2.7 Madonna Inn Area ....................................................................................140 8.2.8 Sunset Drive-in Theater Area ...................................................................141 8.2.9 Pacific Beach Site .....................................................................................142 8.2.10 Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area .................................................................142 8.2.11 LOVR Creekside Area ..............................................................................142 8.2.12 Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site ......................................................142 .................................................................................................................... SUSTAINABILITY ............................................................................................................................................147 9.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................147 9.1 Regional Coordination ................................................................................147 9.2 Sustainability Strategy ................................................................................147 9.3 Community Greenhouse Gas Reductions ..... Error! Bookmark not defined. 9.4 Municipal Greenhouse Gas Reductions ........ Error! Bookmark not defined. 9.5 Climate Action Plan ....................................................................................147 9.6 Urban Heat Effects .....................................................................................147 9.7 Natural Areas and Green Space .................................................................147 9.8 Sustainable Design .....................................................................................148 9.9 Sustainable Infrastructure .................................................................................149 .............................................................................................................. SAFETY BY DESIGN ................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 10.0 Controls on Alcohol Concentration in the City . Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.0.1 Formal Public Convenience or Necessity Process .... Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.0.2 Policy ........................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.0.3 Downtown Area ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. PH1 - 35 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-8 10.0.4 Outside the Downtown Area ........................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.1 Crime Prevention through Environmental Design .......... Error! Bookmark not defined. ......................................................................................................... HEALTHY COMMUNITY ........................................................................................................................................... 150 11.0 Neighborhood Access ........................................................................... 150 11.1 Local Food Systems .............................................................................. 150 11.2 Provide for Community Gardens ........................................................... 150 11.3 Encouraging Walkability ........................................................................ 150 ....................................................................................................... REVIEW & AMENDMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 151 12.0 ............................................................................................................................. 151 12.1 Comprehensive Reviews ............................................................................. 151 12.2 Amendment Proposals ................................................................................. 151 12.3 Annual Report .............................................................................................. 151 ................................................................................................................. IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................................................................................... 152 13.0 Introduction .................................................................................................. 152 13.1 Zoning Regulations ...................................................................................... 152 13.2 Subdivision Regulations ............................................................................... 152 13.3 Community Design Guidelines..................................................................... 152 13.4 Historic Preservation Ordinance, Guidelines, and Context Statement ........ 152 13.5 Grading Regulations .................................................................................... 153 13.6 Budgets ........................................................................................................ 153 13.7 Property Management ................................................................................. 153 13.8 Development Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans .................................. 153 13.9 Environmental Review ................................................................................. 154 13.10 Communication ............................................................................................ 154 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. San Luis Obispo Planning Area .................................................................. 12 Figure 2. Urban Reserve and Principal Expansion Areas ......................................... 21 Figure 3. Vehicle Sales Area at Auto Park Way ........................................................ 78 Figure 4. Downtown Planning Area and Core ........................................................... 86 Figure 5. Public and Cultural Facilities ...................................................................... 97 Figure 6. Hillside Planning Areas ............................................................................. 107 Figure 7. Creeks and Floodplains ............................................................................ 114 Figure 8. Airport Area ............................................................................................... 120 Figure 9. Optional Use and Special Design Areas .................................................. 126 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards within the LUCE Planning Sub-area ..................................................................... 24 Table 2. General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 3. Residential Clustering for Open Space ProtectionError! Bookmark not defined. Table 4. : One Percent City Population Growth Projection ..................................... 40 Table 5. Residential Population Assumptions .......................................................... 59 PH1 - 36 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-9 PH1 - 37 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-10 LAND USE ELEMENT NOTE TO REVIEWER: This version focuses on updates to the policy and program components of the Land Use Element. The Introduction and Community Goals will be updated as appropriate based on the changes approved for the policies and programs and will reviewed at a later meeting. Maps and illustrations have also not been updated at this time, and will be updated to reflect the agreed upon policy and program changes. INTRODUCTION The City's General Plan guides the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. It reflects consensus and compromise among a wide diversity of citizens' preferences, within a framework set by State law. The General Plan is published in separately adopted sections, called elements, which address various topics. The Land Use Element represents a generalized blueprint for the future of the City of San Luis Obispo. Required by State law, it is the core of the General Plan. Starting with conditions at the time of adoption, the Land Use Element sets forth a pattern for the orderly development of land within the City's planning area. This pattern should be based on residents' preference and on protection of natural assets unique to the planning area. The Element also describes the expected level of population growth resulting from construction of the kinds of housing units included in the plan, as well as the kinds of new commercial and industrial development that are responsive to the City's economic needs. The City's planning area coincides with the County's San Luis Obispo planning area (Figure 1), and can be generally described as extending to the ridge of the Santa Lucias (Cuesta Ridge) on the north and east; the southerly end of the Edna Valley (northern Arroyo Grande Creek watershed boundary) on the southeast; the ridge of the Davenport Hills on the southwest; and the ridge of the Irish Hills, Turri Road in the Los Osos Valley, and Cuesta College in the Chorro Valley on the west. The General Plan also defines a smaller geographic boundary, referred to as the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Planning Subarea which contains the urban land uses for the community (Figure X). Policies in the Land Use Element and the General Plan Land Use Map are consistent with other General Plan elements. The General Plan consists of eight elements, including the Land Use Element. These elements have the following key implications for the Land Use Element. The Circulation Element recognizes implications of land use policy on all modes of movement and establishes policies, standards, and implementation measures that work with the Land Use Element update and address both existing and potential circulation opportunities and deficiencies. The Housing Element goals, policies, and programs reflect the land use policies as they relate to residential development. The Circulation Element recognizes implications of land use policy on traffic and establishes relevant goals, policies, standards, and implementation measures that address both existing and potential circulation deficiencies. PH1 - 38 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-11 Noise Element policies provide the appropriate protections needed to allow development and mixture of compatible uses while protecting residents and land uses from noise impacts. The Safety Element identifies hazards that influence the locations and types of land uses proposed. The Land Use and Safety Elements share several safety topics. The Land Use Element update adds to the Safety Element through the inclusion of safety through environmental design concepts and to airport safety policies and programs.could affect both existing and future development and tThe Conservation and Open Space Element addresses protection of open space amenities and resources . in detail. The Land Use Element works with this element and incorporates concepts such as clustering and buffering open space areas in order to enhance their protection. The Parks and Recreation Element provides active recreation areas and facilities that are essential to neighborhoods. The Land Use Element works to incorporate parks and recreation into the larger land use alternative sites and enhance integration of these resources into neighborhoods. The Water and Wastewater Element provides policies and programs to support adequate services to the community. The Land Use Element includes alternatives that are in keeping with the services available and ensures that infrastructure is sized appropriately to serve future service needs and planning. The Land Use Element recognizes these potential constraints on land use policy.Policies in the Land Use Element and the General Plan Land Use Diagram are designed to be consistent and complementary with all other General Plan elements. History The City's first General Plan, including land use and other elements, was adopted in 1961. A revised plan was adopted in 1966, following the County's first adoption of a plan for the San Luis Obispo area in 1965. The City adopted major revisions of its lLand uUse eElement in 1972 and in 1977 and 1994. The current element is a revision of the 19771994 version. PH1 - 39 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-12 Figure 1. San Luis Obispo Planning Area PH1 - 40 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-13 Public Participation Before adopting or revising any General Plan element, the Planning Commission and the City Council hold public hearings. The City publishes notices in the local newspaper to let citizens know about the hearings at least ten days before they are held. Also, the City prepares environmental documents to help citizens understand the expected consequences of its planning policies before the hearings are held. The City started work on updating this element with a series of public workshops in 1988. Also, the City took a public opinion survey and established committees to give advice on the element. The City intends to re-evaluate this element about every ten years. Parts of it may be updated more often. There will be annual reports on how the plan has been implemented and changed. Anyone may suggest or apply for an amendment to the General Plan at any time, though there are state law limits on how often it can be amended in any one year. Background to the 1994 Land Use Element The following represents a historical perspective of the update to the Land Use Element conducted in 1994 and is taken from that Element: “ The City started work on updating this element with a series of public workshops in 1988. Also, the City took a public opinion survey and established committees to give advice on the element. The introduction to the 1977 Land Use Element contained a philosophical discussion of existing conditions and issues facing the City. The discussion is still valid today. Its premise is that the City and County, while still relatively rural and apparently capable of providing room for new residents, face some known and several undefined finite resources which may constrain growth. Furthermore, the introduction said, public attitudes towards the desirability of growth had changed since the City’s first General Plan; experience with growth had caused citizens and public officials to question whether growth, even well planned, produces benefits worth the social, economic and environmental costs and consequences. Despite such consistent and strong expression of community values, there has been continued, incremental degradation of the natural environment expressly valued by residents of San Luis Obispo. On the environmental side, the element stated that key resources known to have finite limits were water supply and air quality. All the basic resources -- land, water and air -- can accommodate some additional growth without severe impacts, but eventually and inevitably growth must stabilize and stop, or else exceed resource limitations with destructive social, economic and environmental ramifications. The purpose of the 1977 element, the Introduction said, was to apply planning methodologies to manage the rate and extent of growth so that irreversible environmental problems would not get out of hand before they were recognized. Concerns about environmental quality continue today, and are the basis for much of the General Plan. Votes of residents and the public opinion survey of residents done as part of the General Plan update have strongly reaffirmed the commitment of residents to preserve and enhance the environmental quality of our community. In the years since 1977 additional issues have become better defined. One, for example, is the maintenance of the remaining prime farmland in and around the City. The 1977 Element cited this as one of the primary issues facing planners, but failed to propose a concrete solution. As a result, irreplaceable agricultural land has been lost. The General Plan now proposes solutions to the continued irretrievable PH1 - 41 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-14 loss of this world-class natural asset. Another issue that was less well understood in 1977 is the preservation of important wildlife and native plant habitats. The General Plan now proposes preservation of such habitats, including planning based on the identification, mapping and monitoring of the community's existing natural assets. This element is an update of the 1977 element; it represents fine tuning rather than a new beginning.” Background to the 2014 Land Use Element Since adopting the Land Use and Circulation Elements in 1994, the City has updated and amended its General Plan elements multiple times. The City updated its Noise Element in 1996, its Safety Element in 2000 and 2012, its Parks and Recreation Element in 2001, its Conservation and Open Space Element in 2006, and its Housing Element in 2004 and 2010, and its Water and Wastewater Element in 2010. While the City made minor amendments to its Land Use and Circulation Elements in 2010 and 2005, respectively, the 2014 LUCE update is the most comprehensive update of these elements since 1994. The City initiated the LUCE Update in early 2012 with the support of a Sustainable Communities Planning Grant from the California Strategic Growth Council. The primary objectives of the Update were to respond to any changed conditions in San Luis Obispo, incorporate sustainable practices and policies, respond to new State planning requirements, and engage the community in a reaffirmation of the community’s vision and goals for the city’s future. The LUCE Update featured a community engagement program, which included a resident LUCE Task Force from diverse geographic areas of the City; a city-wide community survey; a series of six community workshops; open houses; on-line forums; and numerous other outreach efforts. Community Values As the 1977 element noted, pPublic attitudes and values are an essential part of what shapes planning documents. The residents of San Luis Obispo have expressed strong community values. For the past 28 years, rResidents have again and againconsistently voiced their desire to preserve environmental assets and control excessive growth. There have been many public votes on such issues, and all have expressed the samea preferred set of community values: In 1972, 70% of city voters rejected by referendum an environmentally- controversial annexation in the Edna Valley, the Danley Annexation. In June 1978, 62% of city voters amended the city Charter by initiative to allow voters to vote yes or no on annexations. In November 1978, when the first Charter-mandated votes on annexations were held, 58% of voters rejected the Foothills annexation, and 56% the Ferrini annexation. In 1983, 73% of city voters said the city should protect sensitive hillsides and consider purchasing open space in order to preserve it. Also in 1983, 69% of city voters said Port San Luis should not be used for offshore oil activities. Planning Commission asked that the Background and Introduction sections be brought back for review after environmental review. The Commission made no changes to the TF-LUCE edits at this time. PH1 - 42 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-15 In 1985, 71% of voters chose to amend the San Luis Obispo Charter to require that land annexed to the city can only be developed in consistency with the General Plan. In 1989, 68% of city voters said growth management regulations should apply to all development in the city. In 1991, 69% of city voters repealed by referendum Council-approved zoning for the Islay Hill/Arbors Tract. Also in 1991, in the midst of the worst drought in history, 56% of city voters said the city should not participate in the State Water Project. In a 1992 referendum, a similar percentage of city voters rescinded Council approval for joining the State Water Project. Measure P was approved by city voters in 1996 to amend the City Charter to add a water reliability reserve to protect the City from future water shortages. Also in 1996, 51.2% of city voters opposed Measure O, a City-wide assessment district for open space protection and park acquisition. In a special election in 2005, 51.5% of the City voters voted on three separate measures to reverse City approvals for opposed rezoning for the MarketPlace Project, a mixed-use development proposed on prime farmland within the City’s Urban Reserve. These votes 1) opposed the General Plan land use changes (51.4%), 2) opposed changes to the zoning regulations map and approval of the development plan (51.5%), and 3) opposed the Development Agreement and Special Tax Reimbursement Agreement (52.8%), thereby rescinding previous City development approvals. In 2006, City voters supported (64.8%) a sales tax increase of one-half cent for eight years to protect and maintain essential services such as neighborhood street paving and pothole repair; traffic congestion relief; public safety including restoring eliminated traffic patrol; Fire Marshall and fire/paramedic training positions; flood protection; senior citizen services/facilities; neighborhood code enforcement; open space preservation and other vital general purpose services. In 2010, 80% of the voters opposed an initiative to amend the Margarita Area Specific Plan to change the approved alignment of Prado Road, thus retaining the circulation infrastructure identified in the Specific Plan. As voters, the people of San Luis Obispo have spoken clearly and consistently on environmental protection and quality of life issues for the past 28 years. Citizens spoke equally clearly when polled by the City in 1988 as part of the Land Use Element update. The 585 poll respondents placed quality of life and environmental issues at the top of their concerns. Ninety percent of respondents listed the natural environment as their top quality of life concern. Asked, in an open-ended question, the City's greatest problem, the top response (42%) was excessive growth. (The next largest response, at 15%, was traffic.) Asked, also in an open-ended question, the City's greatest strength, 53% of responses concerned environmental quality and sense of community. PH1 - 43 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-16 Asked what reductions in quality of life they were willing to accept in return for greater economic growth, in the following areas a majority said “none”: air pollution, 83%; increased traffic and traffic noise, 67%; development on peaks and hillsides, 66%; development on farmland and ranch land, 51%; development harmful to creeks, 67%; overall pace of life, 51%. Asked to pick a growth rate from listed categories, 85% of respondents picked categories ranging from none (15%) to slower than the state and county (51%) to no faster than the county (19%). Despite such consistent and strong expression of community values, there has been continued, incremental degradation of the natural environment expressly valued by residents of San Luis Obispo. In conjunction with 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element Update, the City conducted a Quality of Life and Future Development Survey in the Spring of 2012. The survey was designed to compare current community attitudes with the results of the 1988 survey but did not duplicate some of the questions asked in 1988. The survey was distributed to 25,000 residents and businesses via utility bill inserts and direct mail. It was also made available online. The survey was completed by 2,029 people via return mail and 169 online, for a total of 2,198 respondents. The results of the 2012 survey largely reaffirmed many community values expressed in the 1988 survey, with some differences. Respondents to the 2012 survey rated the natural environment (71.1%) and crime (62.9%) as having the greatest impact on quality of life – echoing the sentiments expressed by respondents in 1988. Topics offered as San Luis Obispo’s greatest problem in 2012 are shown below: Greatest Problems 2012 Homelessness 19% Traffic/Congestion 10% Jobs Availability 9% Affordable Housing 9% When asked about the city’s greatest strength, the City’s natural setting took most of the top spots, as it had in the 1988 survey. When asked which of several listed approaches to determining allowable growth in the city they supported, respondents continued to support preservation of the natural environment. Sixty-six percent want to keep growth in existing areas and 60% support avoiding harm to the natural environment. In 2012, when asked to pick a growth rate from listed categories, 54.6% of respondents picked no change (maintain a 1% average growth rate); 23.7% supported some increase but less than or equal to the state or county; 10.6% indicated the residential growth rate should be tied to commercial development; and 11% indicated support for no growth limits at all. Other input from the 2012 survey indicated the strongest support was for open space and bicycle infrastructure: PH1 - 44 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-17 Facilities or services Respondents seeking more of these Respondents willing to pay more for these Acquiring and maintaining open space for peaks and hillsides 58% 54.1% Acquiring and maintaining open space for City greenbelt 54% 51.6% Acquiring and maintaining open space for creeks and marshes 53% 49.3% Bicycle infrastructure 52% 48.7% The Land Use Element must be understood as emerging from the context of the community’s past experiences and present attitudes. It is a document that charts a future course of concern with environment, society, economy and quality of life, and responds to the desires of the City’s residents. Preamble To The Land Use Element We, the people of San Luis Obispo, hold that we have the right to determine our community's destiny based on our community's values; that the future livability of our community will be driven by historical choices made from day to day, and not by inevitable forces beyond our control; that in an age when the livability of large, urban communities to our north, south, and east is being destroyed by incrementally accelerating environmental degradation and the breakdown of civility, we assert our desire to seek a different sort of future for our community; that, therefore, we direct our elected representatives and civic employees to preserve our community's natural environment and control excessive growth detrimental to the long-term sustainability of the community. San Luis Obispo’s Vision Our vision is of a sustainable community, within a diverse natural and agrarian setting, which is part of a larger ecosystem upon which its existence depends. San Luis Obispo will maintain its healthy and attractive natural environment valued by residents, its prosperity, and its sense of safety and community, within a compact urban form. Our community will have a comprehensible scale, where people know each other and where their participation in government is welcome and effective. The general plan outlines basic features of the city needed to sustain our livelihoods, our natural and historical heritage, and our needs for interaction and expression. The general plan is a benchmark in the continuing planning process, reflecting the desires of citizens with different backgrounds to sustain the community's qualities for themselves and for future generations. The City should provide a setting for comfortable living, including work and recreation. The City should live within its resources, preserve the relatively high levels of service, environmental quality and clean air valued by its residents, and strive to provide additional resources as needed. PH1 - 45 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-18 Community’s Goals Introduction Goals describe desirable conditions. In this context, they are meant to express the community's preferences for basic future directions. In the goal statements, "San Luis Obispo" means the community as a whole, not just the City as a municipal corporation. The statements also indicate what the City should do and what it should influence others to do. The goals state San Luis Obispo's basic positions on the extent, rate, composition, and financing of growth. The following Growth Management section includes policies and programs which offer more specific guidance on these topics. Later sections, dealing with parts of the City and with land-use categories, give more detailed direction on preserving neighborhoods and designing new development. Approach to Planning San Luis Obispo should: 1. Choose its future, rather than let it happen. San Luis Obispo should be proactive in implementing its vision of the future, and should work with other agencies and institutions to create our desired mutual future. 1.2. These policies and programs shall serve as a blueprint, guiding the City and its various entities in priority setting and resource allocation. It is understood that the availability of financial resources can and will affect the timing of implementation but shall not change the goals and intent. Environment San Luis Obispo should: 2.3. Protect and enhance the natural environment, including the quality of air, water, soil, and open space. 3.4. Protect, sustain, and where it has been degraded, enhance wildlife habitat on land surrounding the city, at Laguna Lake, along creeks and other wetlands, and on open hills and ridges within the city, so that diverse, native plants, fish, and animals can continue to live within the area. 4.5. Protect public views of the surrounding hills and mountains. 5.6. Recognize the importance of farming to the economy of the planning area and the county, protect agriculture from development and from incompatible uses, and protect remaining undeveloped prime agricultural soils. 6.7. Protect and restore natural landforms and features in and near the city, such as the volcanic morros, hillsides, marshes, and creeks. 7.8. Foster appreciation among citizens of the complex abundance of the planning area's environment, and of the need to respect natural systems. 9. Identify, map and monitor our community's natural assets to preserve and protect them. 10. Support statewide and regional efforts to create more sustainable communities, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and develop transportation systems that support all modes of circulation. 8.11. Encourage energy efficiency principles and practices in the City’s built environment. Society and Economy PH1 - 46 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-19 San Luis Obispo should be a well balanced community. Environmental, social, and economic factors must be taken into account in important decisions about San Luis Obispo's future. A healthy economy depends on a healthy environment. The social fabric of the community for both residents and visitors must also be a part of that balance. Therefore, complementary to the goals and objectives of this element, the City shall maintain and bi-annually review goals and objectives that promote the economic well being of the community. San Luis Obispo should: 9.12. Provide employment opportunities appropriate for area residents' desires and skills. 10.13. Provide goods and services which substantial numbers of area residents leave the area regularly to obtain, provided doing so is consistent with other goals. 11.14. Retain existing businesses and agencies, and accommodate expansion of existing businesses, consistent with other goals. 12.15. Emphasize more productive use of existing commercial buildings and land areas already committed to urban development. 13.16. Provide an adequate revenue base for local government and public schools. 14.17. Provide high quality public services, ensuring that demands do not exceed resources and that adequate facilities and services can be provided in pace with development. 15.18. Cooperate with other agencies in the county to assure that increases in the numbers of workers and college and university students in the San Luis Obispo area do not outpace housing availability. 16.19. Accommodate residents within all income groups. 17.20. Preserve existing housing which is affordable to residents with very low, low, and moderate incomes. 18.21. Actively seek ways to provide housing which is affordable to residents with very low, low, and moderate incomes, within existing neighborhoods and within expansion areas. 19.22. Encourage opportunities for elder care and child care within the city. 20.23. Enrich community cultural and social life by accommodating people with various backgrounds, talents, occupations, and interests. 21.24. Provide a resilient economic base, able to tolerate changes in its parts without causing overall harm to the community. 22.25. Have developments bear the costs of resources and services needed to serve them, except where the community deliberately chooses to help pay in order to achieve other community goals. 23.26. Provide for high quality education and access to related services such as museums, art galleries, public art, and libraries. 24.27. Serve as the county's hub for: county and state government; education; transportation; visitor information; entertainment; cultural, professional, medical, and social services; community organizations; retail trade. 25.28. Provide a wide range of parks and sports and recreational facilities for the enjoyment of our citizens. 26.29. Retain accessible, responsive, and capable local government. 30. Ensure that residents' opportunities for direct participation in City government and their sense of community can continue. PH1 - 47 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-20 27.31. Increase the overall health and wellbeing of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo by expanding access to healthy food and nutrition choices and through community design that fosters walking and biking. City Form San Luis Obispo should: 28.32. Maintain the town's character as a small, safe, comfortable place to live, and maintain its rural setting, with extensive open land separating it from other urban development. 33. Maintain existing neighborhoods and assure that new development occurs as part of a neighborhood pattern. 29.34. Create compact, mixed-use neighborhoods that locate housing, jobs, recreation, and other daily needs in close proximity to one another. 30.35. Keep a clear boundary between San Luis Obispo's urban development and surrounding open land. 31.36. Grow gradually outward from its historic center until its ultimate boundaries are reached, maintaining a compact urban form. 32.37. Foster an awareness of past residents and ways of life, and preserve our heritage of historic buildings and places. 33.38. Develop buildings and facilities which will contribute to our sense of place and architectural heritage. 34.39. Develop buildings and places which complement the natural landscape and the fabric of neighborhoods. 35.40. Focus its government and cultural facilities and provide a variety of business services and housing in the downtownDowntown. 36.41. Provide a safe and pleasant place to walk and ride a bicycle, for recreation and other daily activities. 37.42. Be a safe place to live. PH1 - 48 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-21 Figure 2. Urban Reserve and Principal Expansion Areas TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 49 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-22 LAND USE DIAGRAM AND STANDARDS NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The following is a new section that provides a single location for summarizing all land use designations used in the General Plan. This section takes policies that describe a designation’s purpose and application, allowed uses, and density and intensity standards and places them in a single section using a table format. This section is designed to convey the same information in an easier-to-use format. In this document, the information relocated and consolidated into this section is highlighted with an orange colored strikeout (like this). For example, this section replaces policies under Policy 2.4 on residential uses and Policy 3.1 on General Retail. The most familiar part of any general plan is the Land Use Diagram – the illustration that shows the types and locations of existing and future development that the general plan envisions. The following describes how the designations for each land use are expressed and outlines the associated development standards for each of the designations shown on the City of San Luis Obispo’s General Plan Land Use Diagram. Land Use Diagram The Land Use Diagram designates land uses for the entire Planning Area. State planning law requires that the general plan cover all territory within the boundaries of the adopting city or county as well as “any land outside its boundary which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to its planning” (Government Code Section 65300). To carry out this directive, most cities formally delineate a “planning area” boundary in their general plans. The current update does not change the designated planning area but has an emphasis on infill and therefore a smaller Planning Sub-area has been identified to describe the area of focus for policies and land use changes. A copy of the Land Use Diagram is available from the City’s Community Development Department or by download from the City’s website. It is typical for the Land Use and Circulation Diagrams to be updated over time. Please check with the Community Development Department to ensure you have the current version. The Land Use Diagram also depicts the Airport Safety zone overlay for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. This diagram, together with the Airport policies and programs contained in Section 7.0, demonstrate how the City’s General Plan complies with the State Aeronautics Act (California Public Utilities Code, Section 21670 et seq.). For areas outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area and not otherwise designated on the City’s Land Use Diagram, these areas are designated as either AG/Open Space (for lands identified as part of the City’s greenbelt) or reflect Residential Suburban or Residential Rural land use designations (refer to section titled “Land Use Designations Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area” and Table 2). Development Standards State planning law requires general plans to establish “standards of population density and building intensity” for the various land use designations in the general plan (Government Code Section 65302(a)). To satisfy this requirement, the General Plan Land Use Element includes such standards for each land use designation appearing on the Land Use Diagram. Following are explanations of how these standards operate. PH1 - 50 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-23 Residential Designations Standards of building density for residential uses are stated as the allowable maximum dwelling units per net acre. For Medium-High and High Density residential categories a minimum density has also been identified. In determining net area, the following types of areas are excluded: sensitive features such as creeks, habitats of rare or endangered plants and animals, and significant trees; land dedicated in fee to the public for streets or neighborhood parks. Non-residential Designations and Mixed Uses Standards of building intensity for non-residential uses, such commercial and industrial uses, are stated as a range of floor-area ratios (FARs) that describe allowed development intensity. Dwellings may be provided in non-residential districts as part of mixed use projects. So long as the floor area ratio for the applicable designation is not exceeded, the maximum residential density (listed in Table 1) may be developed in addition to non- residential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) A FAR is the gross floor area of a building or buildings on a site divided by the site area. Floor area ratio does not include below grade or subterranean parking garages and basements or similar non-conditioned floor space. For example, on a lot with 25,000 square feet of land area, a FAR of 1.00 would allow 25,000 square feet of floor area which, depending on site constraints and development standards could be distributed on one floor or several floors. A FAR of 2.00 would allow 50,000 square feet of floor area and a FAR of 3.0 would allow 75,000 square feet of building area in this example. The diagram above illustrates conceptually how buildings of one, two, and four stories could be developed on a given lot with a FAR of 1.00. While FAR provides for the overall development size and intensity, it does not specify the form or character of the building. The guidelines for each designation describe key physical form characteristics envisioned for the designation. Other City regulations such as Zoning Codes and Community Design Guidelines will guide the form of buildings within a given FAR range. PH1 - 51 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-24 Land Use Designations within LUCE Planning Sub-area Within the LUCE Planning Sub-area, the General Plan Land Use Diagram includes residential, commercial, industrial, and other land use designations that depict the types of land uses that will be allowed within the LUCE Planning Sub-area. Table 1 identifies all of the designations along with their corresponding development intensity standards. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Table 1 includes information on City land use designations in the current General Plan. Two designations, Suburban Residential and Rural Residential, are shown on Table 2, as these designations are only planned for use in areas outside the City’s Urban Reserve line. These two were renamed to be more in keeping with County naming convention and to designate that they are used in unincorporated areas. The Interim Open Space designation is proposed for deletion. Through this General Plan update, plan is to assign a permanent designation to properties currently designated as Interim Open Space, which includes designation as Open Space. For private properties not planned or developed, designation to an open space use would be done as part of the development review process. MDR increased from current maximum of 18 du/ac to 20 du/ac. Statements in General Retail, Office, and Services and Manufacturing state that certain types uses may not be appropriate in all locations. This was removed from these three designations and incorporated into a general statement that applies to ALL designations. Cross references to applicable policies have been added to General Retail, Office, and Services and Manufacturing. Tables 1 and 2 provide same information: Designation. This column provides the name of each designation and the acronym used when referring to this designation. To the right of each name is the color that is assigned to this designation on the City’s Land Use Diagram. Description. In this column is a description of the purpose and application of each designation, followed by a general list of types of uses that could be allowed in that designation. The City’s Zoning Regulations provide further refinement and expansion of the list of uses allowed on any given property. For any given site, not all uses listed may be appropriate for a given property due to location, adjacent uses, other applicable General Plan policies, or other site specific issues. Density / Intensity. For residential designations, a maximum density is provided, expressed as dwelling units per acre (du/ac). For non-residential uses and mixed uses, a maximum FAR is provided. Table 1: General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards within the LUCE Planning Sub-area. Designation Description Density / Intensity Residential Designations Low Density Residential LDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for low density residential development having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them. These dwellings are generally detached, one and two story buildings with private outdoor space separating them from neighboring dwellings. Uses Single family detached dwellings Maximum Density: 7 du/ac PH1 - 52 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-25 Designation Description Density / Intensity Accessory Secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Low density development within and adjacent to neighborhoods committed to this type of development. Medium Density Residential MDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them, but in a more compact arrangement than Low-Density Residential. Such dwellings are generally one or two story detached buildings on small lots or attached dwellings with some private outdoor space for each dwelling. This type of development is appropriate as a transition from low density development to higher densities. Uses Single family detached dwellings Accessory Secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Maximum Density: 12 du/ac Medium-High Density Residential MHDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for primarily attached dwellings in two and three story buildings with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. This type of development is appropriate near employment centers, major public facilities, and transit corridors and nodes. Uses Single family detached dwellings Single family attached dwellings Multi-family dwellings Accessory Secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Maximum Density: 18 20 du/ac High Density Residential HDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for primarily attached dwellings in two and three story buildings, with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. This type of development is appropriate near Cal Poly, in the Downtown core, near employment concentrations, and near transit corridors and nodes. Maximum Density: 24 du/ac PH1 - 53 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-26 Designation Description Density / Intensity Uses Multi-family dwellings Single family attached dwellings Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Commercial and Industrial Designations General Retail GR Purpose and Application This designation provides for goods and services adequate to meet most of the needs of city and nearby county residents. This designation is applied to Downtown, the intersection of Madonna Road and Highway 101, and the area around Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. Uses Specialty stores Department stores Warehouse stores Discount stores Restaurants Banks and other services Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 36 du/ac Maximum FAR: 3.0 3.75 in the Downtown core, or 4.0 in the Downtown core with a TDC or a density bonus Neighborhood Commercial NC Purpose and Application This designation provides for goods and services to meet the frequent shopping needs of people living nearby. Neighborhood Commercial uses should be available within a one-mile radius of residences. These uses should be located on sites not exceeding about four acres, unless the neighborhood to be served includes a significant amount of high density residential development. Uses Small scale grocery stores Laundromats Drug stores Small-scale specialty stores (provided they will not be a major citywide attraction or displace more general, convenience uses) Residential uses as part of mixed-use projects Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 12 du/ac Maximum FAR: 2.0 PH1 - 54 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-27 Designation Description Density / Intensity Community Commercial CC Purpose and Application This designation provides for shopping centers to serve community-wide needs. Community commercial areas are intended to be configured as distinctive, pedestrian-oriented shopping centers and may accommodate larger scale uses that are not appropriate in the Downtown Core. Uses Retail uses Personal service uses Specialty uses (provided they do not detract from the Downtown as the city’s primary concentration of specialty stores) Residential uses as part of mixed-use projects Offices that provide “over-the-counter” services to customers Professional offices, particularly above the ground floor Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 36 du/acre Maximum FAR: 2.0 Tourist Commercial TC Purpose and Application This designation provides for uses that primarily serve the traveling public. Uses Hotels Motels Restaurants Service stations Recreational uses Minor retail uses serving the needs of travelers Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 12 du/acre Maximum FAR: 2.5 PH1 - 55 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-28 Designation Description Density / Intensity Office O Purpose and Application This designation provides for offices use to meet the needs of city and specialized needs of county residents. Not all types of offices are appropriate in all locations. Uses Professional and financial services such as doctors, architects, insurance companies and banks Government offices Residential uses as part of mixed-use projects Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 12 du/acre Maximum FAR: 1.5 Services and Manufacturing SM Purpose and Application This designation provides for a wide range of service and manufacturing uses to meet the needs of the city and some demands of the region. Certain areas may be reserved through special zoning provisions for certain types of uses to assure compatibility among the wide range of potential uses, and to assure adequate land for certain types of uses. Uses Business and professional services with limited need for public visitation or access to government services such as computer services, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, insurance and financial services) Medical services located on commercial collector or arterial streets with convenient access to public transportation, that do not significantly increase traffic in residential neighborhoods Wholesaling, warehousing, and storage Lumber and building materials dealers Repair shops, printing services, laundries, animal hospitals, sporting goods stores, auto parts stores and some recreational facilities Light manufacturing, research and development, and laboratories Retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, furniture, appliances, and plant nurseries) Convenience restaurants and other activities Maximum Density: 24 du/acre Maximum FAR: 1.5 PH1 - 56 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-29 Designation Description Density / Intensity primarily serving area workers Caretaker quarters Homeless shelters Residential uses as part of mixed–use projects Public and quasi-public uses Business Park BP Purpose and Application This designation provides for research and development and light manufacturing in a campus setting and should provide high quality design of public and private facilities. Uses Research and development Light manufacturing Financial and Professional Services and Offices Small Retail Restaurants Caretaker quarters Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: Maximum FAR: 1.0 Other Designations Public PUB Purpose and Application This designation provides for public, cultural, and quasi-public uses to meet the needs of city and county residents. Uses City, County, and State offices and facilities – similar types of services should be grouped where possible. City and County government offices and meeting rooms should be located Downtown. Health care facilities, such as Mental Health and Public Health services (see Policy 5.1.4) Social services such as County Social Services, CA Employment Development and Rehabilitation, and Social Security Administration (see Policy 5.1.5) Cultural and public recreation facilities Compatible private businesses (provided they do not displace the preferred public agencies) Caretaker quarters Homeless shelters Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: Maximum FAR: 2.0 in Downtown, 1.0 in outlying areas PH1 - 57 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-30 Designation Description Density / Intensity Park P Purpose and Application This designation provides for public park facilities. Uses Passive recreation areas Walking paths Low activity facilities or incidental uses such as basketball courts Playgrounds Small community centers Public restrooms Public and quasi-public uses Recreation REC Purpose and Application This designation provides for outdoor recreational facilities. Uses Active recreation uses such as sports fields for soccer, baseball, football Golf courses Small community centers Public restrooms Incidental retail uses to support active recreation such as “snack shacks” Public and quasi-public uses Open Space OS Purpose and Application This designation provides for land or water areas that remain in a predominantly natural or undeveloped state and which is generally free of structures. It provides for the protection and preservation of the community’s natural and historic resources, defines the urban boundary, and provides visual and physical relief from urban development. Open spaces may consist of small portions of a parcel such as small wilderness preservation areas or large tracts of land. Open Space purposes and uses are more fully described in the current Conservation and Open Space Element. Uses Protection and enhancement of resources in a natural state Protection of hillsides, Morros, and ridgelines Farming and grazing Creeks, marshes, watershed and floodplains Maximum Density: 1 du/5 or more acres to be defined with each area PH1 - 58 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-31 Designation Description Density / Intensity Scenic resources Plant and animal habitat Historic and archaeological resources Passive recreation Agricultural AG Purpose and Application This designation provides for the agricultural uses such as agricultural cultivation and keeping of livestock and is applied to open areas that have historically been used for agriculture. Uses Agricultural cultivation Keeping of livestock Single family detached dwellings Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 1 du/ 20 acres or 1 du/legal lot whichever is less PH1 - 59 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-32 Land Use Designations Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area Most of the land within the City’s Greenbelt, but outside the City limits (unincorporated lands), is designated by the County for Agriculture or Open Space. The City supports these land use designations and discourages any further subdivision of existing parcels unless such subdivision is expressly part of strategy to permanently preserve agriculture and/or open space. However, if any new lots are permitted apart from such a strategy, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater. Other portions of the Planning Area located outside of the LUCE Planning Sub-area (unincorporated lands) but within the City’s Greenbelt include areas that were subdivided under County jurisdiction for low intensity development and are beyond City services. Residential designations (RR, RS) shall be limited to those areas already largely subdivided and developed in the County as shown on the City’s Land Use Diagram. Table 2 identifies the City’s land use designations, along with their corresponding development intensity standards, for these areas. These designations are only used in unincorporated portions of the Planning Area. The City does not support further subdivision of land within these areas, generally; however, if any new lots are permitted they should be a minimum 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). TABLE 2: General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area Designation Description Density / Intensity Residential Designations Unincorporated Residential Rural RR Purpose and Application This designation is applied to areas that have been developed or subdivided to allow lower density residential development within otherwise predominantly open space areas near the edges of the city. These areas were subdivided under County jurisdiction and are beyond City services. Uses Single family detached dwellings Accessory secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: The City does not support further subdivision of land within the City’s Greenbelt area; however, if any new lots are permitted, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). Planning Commission modified this table to include only those land use designations that reflect existing subdivided areas and to designate the remaining areas as AG/OS. Desire to have new subdivisions outside of urban area create lots no smaller than 20 acres in size and to only divide as part of strategy to secure additional open space is consistent with TF-LUCE direction. PH1 - 60 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-33 Designation Description Density / Intensity Unincorporated Residential Suburban RS Purpose and Application This designation is applied to areas that have been developed or subdivided to allow lower density residential development within otherwise predominantly open space areas near the edges of the city. These areas were subdivided under County jurisdiction and are beyond City services. Uses Single family detached dwellings Residential accessory structures Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: The City does not support further subdivision of land within the City’s Greenbelt area; however, if any new lots are permitted, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). Other Designations Unincorporated Agriculture and Open Space AG/OS Purpose and Application This designation provides for agricultural uses such as cultivation and keeping of livestock and/or to land or water areas that remain in a predominantly natural or undeveloped state. It provides for the protection and preservation of the community’s natural and historic resources, defines the urban boundary, and provides visual and physical relief from urban development. Open spaces may consist of small portions of a parcel such as small wilderness preservation areas or large tracts of land. Open Space purposes and uses are more fully described in the current Conservation and Open Space Element. Uses Agricultural Cultivation Keeping of Livestock Single family detached dwellings Public and quasi-public uses Protection and enhancement of resources in a natural state Protection of hillsides, Morros, and ridgelines Farming and grazing Creeks, marshes, watershed and floodplains Scenic resources Plant and animal habitat Historic and archaeological resources Passive recreation The City does not support any further subdivision of AG/OS properties except as part of a strategy for permanent agricultural and/or open space protection. However, if any new lots are permitted apart from such a strategy, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). PH1 - 61 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-34 1 GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICIES As part of the General Plan Update, integrating the concept of sustainability was an important aspect of the State grant. In reviewing the General Plan, a number of sustainability practices were already included in the General Plan. For existing and new policies and programs that support sustainability, this icon is shown at the end of the policy / programs title. See Policy 1.0.1 below as an example. 1.0 Overall Intent 1.0.1 Growth Management Objectives The City shall manage its growth so that: A. The natural environment and air quality will be protected. B. The relatively high level of services enjoyed by City residents is maintained or enhanced. C. The demand for municipal services does not outpace their availability. D. New residents can be assimilated without disrupting the community's social fabric, safety, or established neighborhoods. E. Residents' opportunities for direct participation in City government and their sense of community can continue. Policy 1.0.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 1.0.2 Development Capacity and Services The City will shall not designate more land for urban uses than its resources can be expected to support. Policy 1.0.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 1.1 Urban Separation Broad, undeveloped open spaces should separate the City from nearby urban areas. This element establishes a final edge for urban development. Policy 1.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. PH1 - 62 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-35 1.2 Urban Reserve Line There should not be major expansion of the urban reserve line because the urban reserve provides adequate capacity for new housing and employment up to the City’s desired maximum. This element seeks to establish an ultimate population capacity. Policy 1.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Land Use capacity occurs with Land Use designations. City does not have the ability to regulate population. 1.3 Urban Edges Character The City shall maintain a clear The boundary between San Luis Obispo's urban development and surrounding open land should be clear. Development just inside the boundary shall provide measures to avoid a stark-appearing edge between buildings in the city and adjacent open land. Such measures may include: using new or existing groves or windrows of trees, or hills or other landforms, to set the edge of development; increasing the required side-yard and rear-yard setbacks; and providing open space or agricultural transition buffers. Policy 1.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent. An additional example added. 1.4 Jobs/Housing Relationship The gap between housing demand (due to more jobs and college enrollment) and supply should not increase. Policy 1.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force determined that land use diagram and amount of land dedicated to housing and non-residential development should determine balance of uses. 1.51.4 Regional Planning The City will shall encourage regional planning and growth management throughout the county, and in cooperation with neighboring counties and the State. Policy 1.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and proper capitalization. 1.61.5 City Size and Expansion 1.6.11.5.1 Urban Reserve The City shall have maintain an urban reserve line containing the area around the city where urban development might occur (Land Use Element Map Diagram and Figure 2). Urban uses within this line should only be developed according to if consistent with City-approved plans, consistent with this element. Non-urban agricultural, open space, and wildlife corridor uses are also encouraged within the urban reserve, as interim or permanent uses shown on City-approved plans. PH1 - 63 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-36 Policy 1.6.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and proper reference to Land Use Diagram. 1.6.21.5.2 Expansion Areas The City shall designate Eexpansion areas adequate for growth consistent with these policies should be designated within the urban reserve line (Land Use Element Map Diagram and Figure 2.) Policy 1.6.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and proper reference to Land Use Diagram. 1.6.31.5.3 Interim Uses Expansion areas should be kept in agriculture, compatible with agricultural support services, or open-space uses until urban development occurs, unless a City- approved specific plan provides for other interim uses. Policies 1.6.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 1.71.6 Greenbelt (See also Section 6, Resource Protection) 1.7.11.6.1 Open Space Protection Within the City's planning area and outside the urban reserve line, undeveloped land should be kept open. Prime agricultural land, productive agricultural land, and potentially productive agricultural land should be protected for farming. Scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat, and undeveloped prime agricultural land should be permanently protected as open space. Policy 1.7.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 1.7.21.6.2 Greenbelt Uses Appropriate greenbelt uses include: watershed; wildlife habitat; grazing; cultivated crops; parks and outdoor recreation (with minimal land or landscape alteration, building, lighting, paving, or use of vehicles, so rural character is maintained); and home sites surrounded by land of sufficient size and appropriately located with respect to topography and vegetation to maintain the open character. Policy 1.7.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No changes proposed. 1.7.31.6.3 Commercial Uses in Greenbelt The City shall not allow Ccommercial development within the greenbelt areashall not occur unless it is clearly incidental to and supportive of agriculture or other open space uses. PH1 - 64 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-37 Policy 1.7.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent. 1.7.41.6.4 Parcel Sizes and & Density The City will shall encourage the County to create no new parcels within the greenbelt, with the exception of those permitted under thePolicy 1.8 following cluster incentive. Outside of clusters, allowed parcel sizes within the greenbelt should be no less than 10 acres and preferably 20 acres or largersmaller, and the number of dwellings allowed on a parcel should be no more, than designated by the 1989 San Luis Obispo County Land Use Element. Policy 1.7.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Remove reference to previous County Land Use Element and replace with desired sizes/density. 1.7.51.6.5 Building Design and Siting All new buildings and structures should be subordinate to and in harmony with the surrounding landscape. The City should encourage County adoption of regulations prohibiting new structures on ridge lines or in other visually prominent or environmentally sensitive locations, and allowing transfer of development rights from one parcel to another in order to facilitate this policy. Policiy 1.7.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 1.7.61.6.6 Wildlife Habitat The City shall ensure that Ccontinuous wildlife habitat – including corridors free of human disruption shall be are preserved, and, where necessary, created. Policy 1.7.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 1.7.71.6.7 Trees Outside City Limits The City shall preserve Ssignificant trees, particularly native species, outside its limits and in the greenbelt shall be preserved on lands owned or leased by the City or for which the City has an easement. For other areas in the greenbelt, the City will work with the County to protect these trees. Policy 1.7.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edit the policy to reflect the City’s jurisdiction over trees outside the city limits and to work with County to protect trees in unincorporated areas. PH1 - 65 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-38 1.81.7 Prime Agricultural Land 1.8.11.7.1 Agricultural Protection It is tThe City’s policy to encourage shall support preservation of economically viable agricultural operations and land within the urban reserve and city limits. The City should provide for the continuation of farming through steps such as provision of appropriate general plan designations and zoning. Policy 1.8.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 1.8.21.7.2 Prime Agricultural Land The City may allow Ddevelopment of on prime agricultural land may be permitted, if the development contributes to the protection of agricultural land in the urban reserve or greenbelt by one or more of the following methods, or an equally effective method: acting as a receiver site for transfer of development credit from prime agricultural land of equal quantity; securing for the City or for a suitable land conservation organization open space easements or fee ownership with deed restrictions; helping to directly fund the acquisition of fee ownership or open space easements by the City or a suitable land conservation organization. Development of small parcels which are essentially surrounded by urbanization need not contribute to agricultural land protection. Policy 1.8.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 1.91.8 Residential Clustering for Open Space Protection 1.9.11.8.1 Basis for Variation Parcel Sizes In the greenbelt, the City will may allow, and the City shall encourage the County to allow, smaller parcel sizes and more dwellings only when: 1. All new dwellings will be clustered contiguously in accordance with Table 1; 2. At least 90% of Tthe site area outside the cluster is permanently protected as open space; 3. Agricultural easements are placed on prime agricultural lands outside the cluster. Policy 1.9.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for clarification and to incorporate minimum open space requirements shown in Table 1. PH1 - 66 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-39 Residential Clustering for Open Space Protection Minimum non- cluster parcel size (acres) Minimum site area to be open space, outside cluster (percent) Minimum overall site area per dwelling (acres) Maximum Lot area (acres) 20 80 10 1 30 80 15 1 40 85 20 1 80 90 40 1 160 95 80 2.5 320 or more 95 160 2.5 Table 1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Delete Table - It is confusing and most important concept in table is the required open space. This requirement has been added to previous policy 1.8.1. 1.9.21.8.2 Means of Protection The City shall require that Oopen space is to be preserved either by dedication of permanent easements or transfer of fee ownership to the City, the County, or a responsible, nonprofit conservation organization. Policy 1.9.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 1.9.31.8.3 Public Access Areas preserved for open space should include public trail access, controlled to protect the natural resources, to assure reasonable security and privacy of dwellings, and to allow continuing agricultural operations. Public access through production agricultural land will not be considered, unless the owner agrees. Policy 1.9.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force supported original language – no changes. 1.9.41.8.4 Design Standards The City shall require Ccluster Development shall to: A. Be set back approximately 150 feet from public roads. B.A. Be screened from public views by land forms or landscaping vegetation, but not at the expense of habitat. If the visually screened locations contain sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, avoid development should be avoided in those areas and instead designed the to cluster in the form of vernacular farm building complexes, to blend into the traditional agricultural working landscape. C.B. Be located on other than prime agricultural land and be situated to allow continued agricultural use; PH1 - 67 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-40 D.C. Prohibit building sites and roads within stream corridors and other wetlands, on ridge lines, rock outcrops, or visually prominent or steep hillsides, or other sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element. E.D. Preserve historic or archaeological resources. Policy 1.9.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Specific 150’ setback is not always correct for all sites. 1.101.9 Growth Rates & Phasing 1.10.11.9.1 Overall Intent The City shall manage the city’s Overall Intent Ggrowth rates should to provide for the balanced evolution of the community and the gradual assimilation of new residents. Growth must be consistent with the City's ability to provide resources and services and with State and City requirements for protecting the environment, the economy, and open space. Policy 1.10.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. 1.10.21.9.2 Residential Growth Rate The City shall manage the growth of the Ccity's housing supply shall grow so that it does not exceed no faster than one percent per year, on average, based on thresholds established by Land Use Element Table 24, excluding dwellings affordable to residents with extremely low, very low or low incomes as defined by the Housing Element. This rate of growth may continue so long as the City's basic service capacity is assured. Table 2 4 shows the approximate number of dwellings and residents which would result from the one percent maximum average annual growth rate over the planning period. Approved specific plan areas may develop in accordance with the phasing schedule adopted by each specific plan provided thresholds established by Table 2 4 are not exceeded. The City Council shall review the rate of growth on an annual basis in conjunction with the General Plan annual report to ensure consistency with the City’s gradual assimilation policy. Policy 1.10.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. The table referred to in policy (now numbered Table 4), has been updated to reflect timeframe to correspond to the date of this update. Table 4: Anticipated One Percent City Population Growth Projection PH1 - 68 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-41 Table 2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The table has been updated to reflect California Department of Finance estimate for 2013. Future years were calculated by increasing the 2013 dwellings and population at a rate of one percent per year. 1.10.31.9.3 Phasing Residential Expansions Before a residential expansion area is developed, the City must have adopted a specific plan or a development plan for it. Such plans for residential expansion projects will provide for phased development, consistent with the population growth outlined in Table 24, and taking into account expected infill residential development. Policy 1.10.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Large expansion areas are identified in Section 8 are required to prepare a specific plan, and a phasing plan is required as part of all specific plans. 1.10.41.9.4 Nonresidential Growth Rate Each year, the City Council will shall evaluate the actual increase in nonresidential floor area over the preceding five years. The Council shall consider establishing limits for the rate of nonresidential development if the increase in nonresidential floor area for any five-year period exceeds five percent, except that the first 300,000 square-feet of nonresidential floor area constructed after 1994 shall be excluded from calculating the increase. Any limits so established shall not apply to: A. Changed operations or employment levels, or relocation or ownership change, of any business existing within the City at the time the limit is set; B. Additional nonresidential floor area within the Downtown core (Figure 4); C. Public agencies; D. Manufacturing, light industrial, research businesses, or companies providing a significant number of head of household jobs. Policy 1.10.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to delete outdated information related to exclusion of non-residential floor area constructed after LUE was adopted in 1994. No change in overall policy direction. Task Force added reference to head of household jobs in last bullet. PH1 - 69 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-42 1.111.10 Educational and Governmental Facilities Near the City 1.11.11.10.1 Overall Policy Communication and cooperation between the City and nearby government institutions is important and must be maintained, because changes in the numbers of workers, students, and inmates of the three major public institutions near the City directly influence the City's economic base, land use, circulation, and ability to manage growth. The City should shall continue to communicate with nearby government and educational institutions work with Cuesta College and Cal Poly to address proposed changes in numbers of workers, students, or inmates that have the potential to assure that enrollment growth addressed in their approved master plans will not result in any significant adverse land use or circulation impacts on the City or may negatively influence the City’s ability to manage growth. Policy 1.11.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and clarity and to delete extraneous text. 1.11.21.10.2 Cal Poly The City favors Cal Poly's approved master plan enrollment targets shall encourage Cal Poly not to change its 2001 Master Plan enrollment These targets should not be changed in a way that would exceed campus and community resources. The City favors shall encourage Cal Poly to provide additional on- campus housing, enhanced transit service, and other measures to minimize impacts of campus commuting and enrollment. Cal Poly should actively engage the community during updates of the Campus Master Plan and fully mitigate impacts to the City. Policy 1.11.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. 1.11.31.10.3 California Men’s Colony The City supports shall continue to communicateion and cooperateion with between the City and California Men's Colony (CMC). The City shall continue to work with CMC to identify resource constraints and to avoid adverse impacts of increased inmate population. Policy 1.11.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. 1.11.41.10.4 Cuesta Community College The City favors supports Cuesta College’s efforts to offer measures such as courses offerings at satellite campuses, on-line courses, and enhanced transit service to avoid housing and commuting impacts of increasing enrollment at Cuesta College. Policy 1.11.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for policies. No change in policy direction. PH1 - 70 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-43 1.121.11 Annexation and Services 1.12.11.11.1 Water and Sewer Service The City shall not provide nor permit delivery of City potable water or sewer services to the following areas. However, the City will serve those parties having valid previous connections or contracts with the City. A. Outside the City limits; B. Outside the urban reserve line; C. Above elevations reliably served by gravity-flow in the City water system; D. Below elevations reliably served by gravity-flow or pumps in the City sewer system. Policy 1.12.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Word “potable” added to clarify the service being addressed and changes to the Water and Wastewater Element approved by the Council in 2010. 1.12.21.11.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing The City may use Aannexation should be used as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate urban development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve line which are to be developed with urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs. The City may annex an area long before such development is to occur, and the City may annex areas which are to remain permanently as open space. An area may be annexed in phases, consistent with the city-approved specific plan or development plan for the area. Phasing of annexation and development will reflect topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed land uses and roads. (See also Section 7.0, Airport Area) Policy 1.12.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to delete unnecessary reference to Section 7.0. 1.11.3 Annexation of Cal Poly The City should analyze the suitability of annexing Cal Poly. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Desire to investigate the advantages of annexation, including capture of sales tax revenues, sharing of services, and so forth were brought up during Community Leader Interviews held during March 2012. 1.12.4 Annexation in Airport Area For Properties in the Airport aArea Specific Plan, a specific plan shall be adopted for the whole area. Until a specific plan is adopted, properties may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to the existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and PH1 - 71 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-44 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the property belonging to the applicant(s) accompanies the application for annexation; and 6. The applicant(s) agree to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area-wide infrastructure improvements according to a cost -sharing plan maintained by the City. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Created to address annexation of remaining areas within the Airport Area Specific Plan. Text was taken from existing Policy 1.12.3, Item A, and updated to reflect current circumstances. 1.12.5 Required Plans The City shall not allow development of any newly annexed private Lland in any of the following annexation areas may be developed only after until the City has adopted a specific or development plan for land uses, open space protection, roads, utilities, the overall pattern of subdivision, and financing of public facilities for the area. The plan shall provide for open space protection consistent with policy 1.12.5. A. For the Airport area, a specific plan shall be adopted for the whole area. Until a specific plan is adopted, properties may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to the existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the property belonging to the applicant(s) accompanies the application for annexation; and 6. The applicant(s) agree to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area-wide infrastructure improvements according to a cost - sharing plan maintained by the City. B. For the Orcutt expansion area, a specific plan shall be adopted for the whole area before any part of it is annexed. C. For the Margarita Area, annexation may occur following the City Council’s 1998 approval of a draft specific plan as the project description for environmental review. Except for City parks or sports fields, further development shall not occur until the City has completed environmental review and adopted a specific plan. City parks or sports fields may be developed before the specific plan is adopted, if environmental review for the park or sports field has been completed, and if the park or sports field is consistent with the General Plan and the draft specific plan most recently endorsed by the City Council. Private properties that are annexed before the specific plan is adopted shall be zoned Conservation/Open Space upon annexation, and shall be zoned consistent with the specific plan when it is adopted. D. For any other annexations, the required plan may be a specific plan, development plan under “PD” zoning, or similar development plan covering the entire area.The City shall not allow development of any newly annexed private land until the City has adopted a specific or development plan for land uses, open space protection, roads, utilities, the overall pattern of subdivision, and financing of public facilities for the area. PH1 - 72 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-45 Policy 1.12.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Item A was moved to a new, separate policy preceding this policy. Text related to Special Planning Areas was consolidated into one location as part of Section 8. NOTE: If Cal Poly were to be annexed, it would be exempted from this policy as it is a State facility. The word “private” was also added to the first sentence to clarify this. 1.12.6 Development and Services The City shall approve development in newly annexed areas Actual development in an annex in an annexed area may be approved only when adequate City services can be provided for that development, without reducing the level of public services or increasing the cost of services for existing development and for build-out within the City limits. as of July 1994, in accordance with the City's water management policies. The water management policies may allow part of the water retrofit credit that would be needed for build-out within the 1994 city limits to be used for annexation projects. Water for development in an annexed area may be made available by any one or any combination of the following: A. City water supply, including reclaimed water; B. Reducing usage of City water in existing development so that there will be no net increase in long-term water usage; C. Private well water, but only as an interim source, pending availability of an approved addition to City water sources, and when it is demonstrated that use of the well water will not diminish the City's municipal groundwater supply. Policies 1.12.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to be consistent with Water and Wastewater element updated in 2010. 1.12.7 Open Space The City shall require that Eeach annexation shall help secure permanent protection for areas designated Open Space, and for the habitat types and wildlife corridors within the annexation area that are identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. Policies concerning prime agricultural land shall apply when appropriate. Other area pProperties, which are both along the urban reserve line and on hillsides, shall dedicate land or easements for about four times the area to be developed (developed area includes building lots, roads, parking and other paved areas, and setbacks required by zoning). (See also the Hillside Planning policies, Section 6.2). The following standards shall apply to the indicated areas: A. Irish Hills Area properties shall dedicate land or easements covering an area in the hills at least equal to the area to be developed. (See also Hillside Planning section 6.2.6.H.) B. Margarita Area properties shall dedicate land or easements covering the hills above the elevation designated in the hillside planning section and riparian and wetlands areas as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. (See also Hillside Planning section 6.2.6.E.) C. Orcutt Area properties shall dedicate land or easements covering the Santa Lucia foothills and Mine Hill, as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. DA. Airport Area Specific Plan properties shall secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be PH1 - 73 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-46 paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City's southerly urban reserve line. E. Dalidio Area properties (generally bounded by Highway 101, Madonna Road, and Los Osos Valley Road) shall dedicate land or easements for the approximately one-half of each ownership that is to be preserved as open space. FB. Foothill Annexation: The northern portion of the Foothill property, and the creek area shall be annexed as open space. Development on this site should be clustered or located near Foothill Boulevard, with the northern portion of the site and creek area preserved as open space. G.A. Other area properties, which are both along the urban reserve line and on hillsides, shall dedicate land or easements for about four times the area to be developed (developed area includes building lots, roads, parking and other paved areas, and setbacks required by zoning). (See also the Hillside Planning policies, Section 6.2). Policy 1.12.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Text related to Special Planning Areas was consolidated into one location as part of Section 8. 1.13 Costs of Growth The City shall require the costs of public facilities and services needed for new development shall be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City shall consider a range of options for financing measures so that new development pays its fair share of costs of new services and facilities required to serve the project. The City will adopt a development-fee program and other appropriate financing measures, so that new development pays its share of the costs of new services and facilities needed to serve it. Policy 1.13 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Second sentence was rewritten to state a “range of options”. The concept of a development fee maintenance program was moved to be a new Program, as this is an implementation measure. 1.14 Solid Waste Capacity In addition to other requirements for adequate resources and services prior to development, the City must shall determine require that adequate solid waste disposal capacity will be available exists before granting any discretionary land use approval which would increase solid waste generation. Policy 1.14 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent. PH1 - 74 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-47 PROGRAMS See also Section 10, Implementation 1.15 Countywide Planning 1.15.1 County “RMS” The City will monitor reports offrom the County “resource management system” and advocate adherence to that system’s principle of assuring that there will be adequate resources and environmental protection before development is approved. Prog. 1.15.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for grammar. 1.15.2 Regular Coordination Meetings The City will shall advocate and help arrange annual quarterly coordination meetings among decision-makers planning directors of local jurisdictions in San Luis Obispo County, SLOCOG, LAFCO, Cal Poly, and APCD to discuss regional issues. Prog. 1.15.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Program changed to advocate continued quarterly meetings with local jurisdiction and planning organization planning directors. Elected officials represented as part of SLOCOG board. 1.15.3 Plans Summary The City will shall provide information to SLOCOG so that it can maintain help keep up to date a current summary of the land use plans of all agencies in the cCounty, showing areas designated for urban, rural, and open-space uses, and tabulating the capacities for various kinds of uses. Prog. 1.15.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Restate this as a policy and move to policy section. This is an appropriate role for SLOCOG. 1.12.3 Countywide Group The City will discuss with other jurisdictions the desirability of forming a countywide planning group. This group would be composed of representatives of the County; and each city. It could establish a regional plan, to define urban and rural areas and approximate capacities for different types of uses. Prog. 1.15.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources SLOCOG is already performing a regional planning function. See also the revised Program 1.15.2. 1.15.4 Project Review The City will continue to participate with the County in help establish a procedure for all jurisdictions in the County to formally reviewing and providing input on County local projects and general-plan amendments that have the potential to could have countywide impact the cCity or be inconsistent with City policies. PH1 - 75 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-48 Prog. 1.15.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This process was established since the last General Plan update. Program has been rephrased to a maintenance activity. 1.15.5 Regional Growth Management The City will shall advocate a regional growth-management program, which should include: A. Population growth no faster than the statewide average growth rate for the preceding year, and no faster than can be sustained by available resources and services, whichever is less. B. No significant deterioration in air quality, due to development activities for which local government has approval. C. Plans for large residential developments to include a range of housing types to provide opportunities for residents with very low, low, or moderate incomes. D. Voter approval for any significant change from oOpen sSpace, aAgriculture, or rResidential rRural use designations to urban land usesanother designation. Prog. 1.15.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. Edited Item D to associate with change in designation (a General Plan modification) rather than use. 1.15.6 Consistent Plans The City will shall seek County Board of Supervisors approval amending the County Land Use Element to make it consistent with this element within San Luis Obispo's planning area. The City will work with the County during updates of the County's plan for the San Luis Obispo planning area. Prog. 1.15.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Language edited to standardize writing style for programs. No change in direction. 1.15.7 City-County Agreement The City shall maintain will pursue a memorandum of understanding between with the City and the County governments, pledging that neither agency will approve a substantial amendment to its plan for San Luis Obispo's planning area without carefully considering the comment and recommendation of the other agency. The key feature of the memorandum would be the City's acceptance of the planned amount of growth and the County's agreement to not allow urban development within the planning area but outside the City. Prog. 1.15.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources City and County developed an MOU. No change in direction. PH1 - 76 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-49 1.15.8 Refined Planning Area Map The City will shall prepare and continue to maintain a refined Planning Area Map in the gGeneral pPlan. The City will seek to establish and maintain County concurrence for the Mmap, which applies to the City’s pPlanning aArea outside the urban reserve, including the City’s sphere of influence. The map will show: A. Areas to be kept in permanent open space, including scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat, and undeveloped prime agricultural land. B. Existing uses other than open space, relatively far from the City's urban reserve line, which may be maintained but which should not be expanded or made more intense, including institutional uses such as California Men's Colony, Camp San Luis Obispo, and Cuesta College, and scattered residential and commercial developments. C. Existing uses other than open space which may be considered for inclusion within the urban reserve line during the ten-year updates of this element, such as nearby groups of rural homesites. D. Any existing uses other than open space which should be changed, relocated, or removed to allow restoration of the natural landscape or agricultural uses. Prog. 1.15.9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 1.15.9 Maintain Development Fee Program The City shall maintain a development fee program that covers the costs associated with serving projects with City services and facilities. This maintenance will include periodic review of the fees collected to ensure they are adequate to cover City costs. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Component moved from Policy 1.13, Costs of Growth. PH1 - 77 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-50 2 CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS The City shall preserve, protect and enhance the City’s neighborhoods and strive to preserve and enhance their identity and promote a higher quality of life within each neighborhood. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources To be consistent with other sections, added a framework for the other policies in this section. Supports LUE goal 29, “Maintain existing neighborhood and assure that new development occurs as part of a neighborhood pattern.” 2.1 Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement 2.1.1 Neighborhood Identity The City shall assist residents to identify and designate neighborhoods. The City will shall work with residents to address neighborhood specific issues prepare neighborhood plans, to facilitate development of including enhancing a sense of place within neighborhoods. Policy. 2.1.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Revised to eliminate City designation of neighborhood boundaries per TF-LUCE direction. 2.1.2 Neighborhood Groups The City should shall encourage and support the formation and continuation of neighborhood planning groups composed of neighborhood residents. Policy. 2.1.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. Strong neighborhood relationships were discussed at the first community workshop and identified by all groups attending. 2.1.3 Neighborhood Traffic Neighborhoods should be protected from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should include measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, and bollards. Policy 2.1.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force added “bicyclists”. PH1 - 78 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-51 2.1.4 Neighborhood Connections The City shall provide Aall areas should have with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and sidewalk bicycle facilities pattern that promotes neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide continuous pedestrian paths throughout the cCity. Connectivity to nearby community facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting commercial areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that would increase cut-through traffic. (See also the Circulation Element.) Policy. 2.1.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to added reference to “open space”. Need to enhance connectivity between neighborhoods described during Community Leader Interviews (March 2012) and as part of Task Force Neighborhood Open Houses held July 28, 2012 and September 29, 2012. At Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012), 7 out of 10 groups supported a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian paths and 6 out of 10 groups supported a complete network of bicycle lanes and bikeways as very important neighborhood features. Community Leader Interviews expressed concerns that neighborhoods throughout the city are not well connected to one another and about neighborhood cut-through traffic From the 2012 Community Survey results: 52.6% of citizens wanted more bicycle infrastructure 43.6% of citizens wanted more sidewalk improvements and pedestrian connections 2.1.5 Neighborhood Open Links The City should shall treat streets, sidewalks, and front setbacks as a continuous open link between all among all areas of the Ccity and with all land uses. These features should be designed as amenities for light, air, social contact, and community identity. Policy 2.1.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 2.1.6 Neighborhood Amenities The City shall promote livability and safety for all residents. Characteristics of quality neighborhoods vary from neighborhood to neighborhood, but often include one or more of the following characteristics: A mix of housing type styles, density, and affordability. Design and circulation features that create and maintain a pedestrian scale. Nearby services and facilities including schools, parks, retail (e.g., grocery store, drug store), restaurants and cafes, and community centers or other public facilities. A tree canopy and well-maintained landscaping. A sense of personal safety (e.g., low crime rate, short police and emergency response times). PH1 - 79 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-52 Convenient access to public transportation. Well-maintained housing and public facilities. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Need for policy on neighborhood enhancement was described during the following: LUCE RFP, Task force Interviews (March 2012), Community Leader Interviews (March 2012), Community Survey (May-June, 2012), Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012), Community Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012), Community Workshop #3 (December 1, 2012), MindMixer input, Task Force neighborhood Open Houses (July 28, 2012 and September 29, 2012). LUE goals 10,17,18,34,36, and 37. 2.1.1 Neighborhood Enhancement The City shall promote infill development, redevelopment, rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse efforts that contribute positively to existing neighborhoods and surrounding areas. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Need for policy on neighborhood enhancement was described during the following: LUCE RFP, Task force Interviews (March 2012), Community Leader Interviews (March 2012), Community Survey (May-June, 2012), Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012), Community Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012), Community Workshop #3 (December 1, 2012), MindMixer input, Task Force neighborhood Open Houses (July 28, 2012 and September 29, 2012). LUE goal 29. 2.12.2 Residential Location, Uses, and Design 2.1.12.2.1 Mixed Uses &and Convenience The City shall promote Neighborhoods shall include a mix of compatible uses in neighborhoods to serve the daily needs of nearby residents, including schools, parks, churches, and convenience retail stores. Neighborhood shopping and services should be available within about one mile of all dwellings. When nonresidential, neighborhood-serving uses are developed, existing housing shall be preserved and new housing added where possible. If existing dwellings are removed for such uses, the development shall include replacement dwellings (no net loss of residential units). Prolicy. 2.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent. Support of neighborhood serving services supported by input received at Community Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012) and Task Force Neighborhood Open Houses, July 28, 2012 and September 29, 2012. About ½ of participants at Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012) cited importance of neighborhood centers. 2.1.22.2.2 Separation and Buffering The City shall seek to protect Rresidential areas should be separated or screened from incompatible and detrimental non-residential activities and facilities. including most commercial and manufacturing businesses, traffic arteries, the freeway, and the railroad. Residential areas should be protected from encroachment by detrimental commercial and industrial activities. Policy 2.2.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources PH1 - 80 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-53 Edited for style and to delete unnecessary text. 2.2.3 Housing and Aircraft New housing should not be allowed in areas where aircraft noise exposure and the risk of aircraft accidents are not acceptable. Policy 2.2.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources All airport compatibility will be covered in updated Section 7.0, Airport Area. 2.1.32.2.3 Residential Next to Non-residential In designing development at the boundary between residential and non-residential uses, the City shall make protection of a residential atmosphere is the first priority. Policy. 2.2.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 2.1.42.2.4 Street Access The City shall ensure Nnew residential developments or and redevelopments involving large sites, should be are designed to orient low-density housing to local access streets, and medium- or high-density housing to driveways accessible from collector streets. Major arterials through residential areas shall provide only limited private access or controlled street intersections. Policy 2.2.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 2.1.52.2.5 Neighborhood Pattern The City shall require that Aall new residential development should be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods. Policy. 2.2.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 2.1.62.2.6 Housing and Businesses The City shall encourage mixed use projects, where appropriate and compatible with existing and planned development on the site and with adjacent and nearby properties. The City shall support the location of mixed use projects and community and neighborhood commercial centers near major activity nodes and transportation corridors / transit opportunities where appropriate.Where housing can be compatible with offices or other businesses, mixed use projects should be encouraged. Policy. 2.2.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent. Tie to transportation corridors / transit added to enhance sustainability aspects. PH1 - 81 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-54 2.1.72.2.7 Natural Features The City shall require Rresidential developments should to preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and plants. Policy. 2.2.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. Task Force added wildlife corridors to list. 2.1.82.2.8 Parking The City shall discourage the development of Llarge parking lots should be avoided. and require pParking lots should be screened from street views. In general, parking should not be provided located between buildings and the public streets. Policy 2.2.9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style, to clarify the intent. 2.1.92.2.9 Compatible Development The City shall require that new Hhousing built within an existing neighborhood should be in be sited and designed to be compatible with the scale and in character with that of the neighborhood. All multifamily development and large group-living facilities should shall be compatible with any nearby, lower density development. Compatibility shall be evaluated using the following criteria: A. Architectural Character New Buildings should respect existing buildings which contribute to neighborhood historical or architectural character, in terms of size, spacing, and variety. A. Front Setback Patterns New development shall match the typical range of setbacks used in areas adjacent to the project. B. Landscaping New development shall repeat or enhance the landscaping provided in parkway areas (if any exist) along street frontages. C. Rhythm of Development New development shall reflect the rhythm of existing development in the area including features such as setbacks and façade widths along the front setback. Larger structures, such as multi-family (as allowed by the General Plan land use designation for the site) should replicate the spacing of structural components along the street frontage. D. Street Orientation New development shall match the general orientation of existing residential structures in the adjacent area and shall provide an inviting façade facing public streets. E. Architecture Architectural compatibility will be assessed based on a combination of factors, including height, scale, mass, form and architectural style. Desired outcome is PH1 - 82 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-55 a smooth transition between existing and proposed development, supporting a quality neighborhood. F. Privacy and Solar Access New buildings will respect the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings. (See also the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element.) G. Preservation of Natural, Historic and Cultural Features New development shall: a. Respect historic context b. Maintain mature trees on-site to the maximum extent feasible c. Protect stream corridors and natural drainages H. Housing Diversity A mix of housing types, and a range of density within a neighborhood is desirable (see also Policy 2.1.6). I. Parking New development: a. Outside of the Downtown In-lieu Parking Fee Area, new development will be required to provide adequate off-street parking to match the intended use. b. For multi-family, parking shall be sited and designed to minimize the visual impact from the public street. Policy 2.2.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Revised to expand the definitions of compatibility. Additional policy on compatibility discussed as part of Community Survey, Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012), Community Workshop #2 (9/27/12), and Community Workshop #3 (12/1/12). The policy proposed provides a set of factors that can be used in evaluating compatibility of new development with the existing neighborhood and to provide policy support for the Community Design Guidelines. 2.1.102.2.10 Site Constraints The City shall require new Rresidential developments shall to respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native vegetation, and significant trees. Policy 2.2.11 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. Task Force added “wildlife corridors”. 2.1.112.2.11 Residential Project Objectives Residential projects should provide: A. Privacy, for occupants and neighbors of the project; B. Adequate usable outdoor area, sheltered from noise and prevailing winds, and oriented to receive light and sunshine C. Use of natural ventilation, sunlight, and shade to make indoor and outdoor spaces comfortable with minimum mechanical support. D. Pleasant views from and toward the project; E. Security and safety. PH1 - 83 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-56 F. Bicycle facilities consistent with the City’s Bicycle PlanSeparate paths for vehicles and for people, and bike paths along collector streets; G. Adequate parking and storage space; H. Noise and visual separation from adjacent roads and commercial uses. (Barrier walls, isolating a project, are not desirable. Noise mitigation walls may be used only when there is no practicable alternative. Where walls are used, they should help create an attractive pedestrian, residential setting through features such as setbacks, changes in alignment, detail and texture, places for people to walk through them at regular intervals, and planting.) I. Design elements that facilitate neighborhood interaction, such as front porches, front yards along streets, and entryways facing public walkways. J. Buffers from hazardous materials transport routes, as recommended by the City Fire Department. Policy 2.2.12 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and content. Reference to separate paths revised to defer to the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. 2.1.122.2.12 Non-Residential Activities Residential areas may accommodate limited non-residential activities which generally have been compatible, such as child day care, elementary schools, churches, and home businesses meeting established criteria. Policy 2.2.13 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources TF agreed to retain. 1.13 Residential Expansion Areas 1.13.1 Specific Plans Specific Plans for the Margarita Area and Orcutt Area residential expansions shall include: A. Desired types and intensities of development, compatible with the surrounding area; B. Phasing of development and public facilities, subject to availability of resources; C. Measures to protect resources and open space, including, among other types, permanent wildlife habitats and corridors, and farm fields; D. Desired types of public facilities and the means to provide them, to City standards, including water supply, sewage collection, storm water drainage, streets, bikeways, walking paths, and passive and active park space; E. Desired levels of public services and the means to provide them, including fire, police, and schools; F. A variety of owner and rental housing, including a broad range of prices, sizes, and types. G. Trees to help reduce wind exposure, and water-frugal landscaping; H. Public parks and open space, and other land that is not to be built on, such as yards, and community gardens for multifamily areas; I. Dual water systems allowing use of treated wastewater for non-potable uses. J. Energy efficient design, utilizing passive and active solar features. K. Amenities to facilitate public transportation within the area; PH1 - 84 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-57 L. Opportunities for individuals or small groups, other than the specific plan developer, to build homes or to create living environments suited to small groups or to special needs. Prog. 2.3.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Text related to Specific Plans was consolidated into one location as part of Section 8. 1.13.2 Separate Paths Within the major expansion areas, bicycle and walking paths which are separate from roadways should connect residential areas with neighborhood commercial centers, schools, parks and, where feasible, other areas of the City. Prog. 2.3.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is addressed with special planning areas in Section 8. 1.13.3 Residential Neighborhood Designation The major residential expansion areas are shown as Residential Neighborhood on the General Plan Land Use Map. They may be developed as adequate utilities and services are made available. They should be developed as residential neighborhoods, with a wide range of housing types and costs, and supporting uses such as small parks, elementary schools, and shopping and services to meet the daily demands of neighborhood residents. The estimated residential capacities of the major expansion areas are shown in Table 3. These capacities are based on the amount of land suitable for development according to policies of this element, and average densities on the housing sites in the range of eight to ten dwellings per acre (excluding public streets, parks, and other land dedicated to public use). Prog. 2.3.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Residential expansion areas in current language refer to Orcutt Area, Margarita Area, and Irish Hills area. These areas have existing Specific Plans (OASP and MASP) that designate residential capacity or have already been constructed. New residential areas are addressed in Section 8. 1.13.4 Transfer of Development Credits For each major expansion area, Table 3 indicates a low capacity which may be developed without transfer of development credits and a high capacity which may be used with transfer of development credits. Development credits would be transferred from areas in the City, the urban reserve, or the greenbelt where development would be less appropriate, generally those designated conservation/open space or, on the County's map, agriculture or rural lands. Policy 2.3.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Residential expansion areas have existing Specific Plans (OASP and MASP) that designate residential capacity or have already been constructed (Irish Hills), therefore, Table 3 is no longer needed. For new specific plan areas, Section 8.1 defines a set of performance standards for each site. In order for a project to develop at levels above the Minimum level described, the concept of Transfer of Development Credits described here is maintained. See Section 8.1 for more details. TABLE 3: RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY OF MAJOR EXPANSION AREAS PH1 - 85 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-58 2.22.3 Residential Density 2.2.12.3.1 Density Categories The following residential density categories are established in (Table 41) within LUCE Planning Sub-area, and Table 2 for areas outside the LUCE Planning Sub- area but within the City’s Planning Area. For planning studies conducted, Table 5 provides a typical population density for each residential land use designation. Residential density is expressed as the number of dwellings per acre of net site area within the designation. In determining net area, the following types of areas are excluded: sensitive features such as creeks, habitats of rare or endangered plants and animals, and significant trees; land dedicated in fee to the public for streets or neighborhood parks. For the categories other than Rural Agriculture/Open Space, Residential Rural, Residential Suburban, and Low-Density Residential, densities are expressed in terms of a standard two-bedroom dwelling. This approach is intended to achieve population densities approximately like those indicated. More or fewer dwellings having different bedroom counts may be built depending on the number of people expected to live in a project, as indicated by the number of bedrooms. The population-density standards also apply to group residential facilities. (For allowed residential development in Office, commercial, and manufacturing districts non- residential designations, see the sections concerning those districts Table 1.) Policy 2.4.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This text will be replaced by a new section explaining density and intensity standards at the front of this element (following goals) in connection with the new uses and standard table (Tables 1 and 2). Sentence describing what is excluded from net acreage is included in new “Land Use Diagram and Standards” section. Population standards are recommended for elimination in favor of dwelling units/acre standards as the City cannot regulate land use based on population. Name of Area Approximate Number of Dwellings Low High Irish Hill 500 500 Margarita 1,100 1,200 Orcutt 500 700 PH1 - 86 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-59 Residential Densities Population Assumptions 1 1 This table is intended to reflect average population estimates to be expected with each designation and does not reflect densities the City is striving to achieve. Table 5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This table has been updated for consistency with Tables 1 and 2. Density change for Medium High Density residential is proposed to enable existing zoned areas to qualify as meeting HCD standards in meeting Regional Housing Needs Allocation capacity. Task Force asked that footnote be included. 2.2.22.3.2 Density Bonuses The City may shall approve a density bonus for a projects thatwhich will be: A. Be Provide a receiving site, within expansion areas or the downtown commercial core only, for development credit transferred to protect open space; B. Provide for the minimum percentage of Include affordable housing dwellings for elderly seniors or lower income households or affordable to the income groups specified in consistent with the requirements of State Law. Policy 2.4.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Revised to respond to State density bonus law. 2.2.32.3.3 Density Reductions and Site Constraints The allowed density of residential development shall decrease as slope increases. The City may require a residential project to have fewer units than generally allowed for its density category (Table 5), upon finding that the maximum density would have adverse environmental impacts or cause significant adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of future residents of the site, neighbors, or the public generally. Policy 2.4.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The first sentence may impact the density in mixed use development in non-residential land use categories. TF agrees to keep first line. Designation Average Population Density (Persons Per Acre) Maximum Dwelling Density (Units Per Acre) Unincorporated Agriculture/Open Space (AG/OS) 0.10 0.05 (1 du/20 ac) Unincorporated Residential Rural (RR) 0.106 .1 (1 du/10 ac) 0.05 (1 du/20 ac) Unincorporated Residential Suburban (RS) 10.106 10.05 (1 du/20 ac) Low Density Residential (LDR) 20 7 Medium Density Residential (MDR) 25 12 Medium - High Density Residential (MHDR) 40 1820 High Density Residential (HDR) 55 24 PH1 - 87 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-60 2.4.4 Rural Residential Rural Residential development consists of not more than one dwelling per ten acres. Suburban residential development consists of not more than one dwelling per acre. These residential categories are appropriate for areas that have been developed, or subdivided to allow such development, within predominantly open space areas near the edges of the City. These areas generally were subdivided under County jurisdiction, and are beyond City services. They will be limited to areas shown for such use in the 1989 County Land Use Element. (See also Greenbelt policies in the Conservation and Open Space Element.) Policy 2.4.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. Reference to 1989 County Land Use Element is obsolete. City designations that apply to unincorporated portions of the Planning Area are referenced in (Table 2). 2.4.5 Low Density Residential Low-Density Residential development should be primarily dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them. Such dwellings are generally detached, one- or two-story buildings, with private outdoor space separating them from neighboring dwellings. Other uses which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as parks, schools, and churches, may be permitted. Low-density development is appropriate within and next to neighborhoods committed to this type of development. Policy 2.4.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 2.4.6 Medium Density Residential Medium-Density Residential development should be primarily dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them, but in a more compact arrangement than Low-Density Residential. Such dwellings are generally one- or two-story detached buildings on small lots, or attached dwellings, with some private outdoor space for each dwelling. Other uses which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as parks, schools, and churches, may be permitted. Medium-density development is appropriate as a transition from low- density development to higher densities. Policy 2.4.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 2.4.7 Medium-High Density Residential Medium-High Density Residential development should be primarily attached dwellings in two- or three-story buildings, with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. Other uses which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as group housing, parks, schools, and churches, may be permitted. Such development is appropriate near employment centers and major public facilities. Policy 2.4.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. PH1 - 88 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-61 2.4.7 High Density Residential High-Density Residential development should be primarily attached dwellings in two- or three-story buildings, with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. Other uses which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as group housing, parks, schools, and churches, may be permitted. Such development is appropriate near the college campus, the downtown core, and major concentrations of employment. Policy 2.4.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 2.4.8 Affordable Housing The City will help conserve and increase residential opportunities for residents with very low, low, or moderate incomes. As explained more fully in the Housing Element, each development project should contribute in some way to the conservation or production of affordable housing, considering the opportunities and limitations for the project. The major residential expansion areas, in particular, should include a wide range of housing types and costs to meet the needs of various income levels and housing preferences. Policy 2.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Deleted here as it is appropriately addressed in the City’s Housing Element and in the specific plans developed for the major residential expansion areas referred to in this policy. Policies for new planning areas are located in Section 8. 2.52.4 Residential Land Protection 2.5.7.1 Large Areas Substantial areas designated for residential use should not be changed to nonresidential designations. Policy 2.6.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Duplicate of idea expressed in more detail under Policy 2.4.1, below. 2.4.1 Boundary Adjustments The City may adjust land-use boundaries in a way that would reduce land designated as residential, only if: A. A significant, long-term neighborhood or citywide need, which outweighs the preference to retain residential capacity, will be met, and; B. The need is best met at the proposed location and no comparable alternative exists. Policy 2.6.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 2.4.2 Density Changes The City shall approve re-zonings that increase density in existing residential areas only if it finds that the following are not adversely impacted: neighborhood character and identity; compatibility of land use; impact on services and facilities (including schools). In addition, the City shall find that proposed density changes PH1 - 89 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-62 meet policies related to neighborhood amenities (Policy 2.1.7); compatible development (Policy 2.2.9) and residential project objectives (Policy 2.2.11). NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Need for policy to protect neighborhood character, identity, and stability was described during the following: LUCE RFP, Task force Interviews (March 2012), Community Leader Interviews (March 2012), Community Survey (May-June, 2012), Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012), and Task Force neighborhood Open Houses (July 28, 2012 and September 29, 2012). Two property owners expressed interest in up-zoning residential property. TF-LUCE and Planning Commission provided direction that these types of smaller physical changes should be addressed through policy discussion. LUE goal 29. 2.4.3 Residential Conversion The City shall approve proposals to convert residential properties along major streets to office or commercial uses only when there already is a substantial non- residential character to the corridor, the proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use, and adequate off-street parking can be provided. Where appropriate, replacement dwellings shall be provided as part of the project. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Need for policy to protect neighborhood character, identity, and stability was described during the following: LUCE RFP, Task force Interviews (March 2012), Community Leader Interviews (March 2012), Community Survey (May-June, 2012), Community Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012), and Task Force neighborhood Open Houses (July 28, 2012 and September 29, 2012). LUE goals 29 and 35. 2.5 Student and Campus Housing 2.5.1 Cal Poly The City shall encourage Cal Poly California Polytechnic State University campus to build should provide housing opportunities for both faculty and at least 50% of all students. Existing on-campus housing should be retained. On-campus housing should increase be expanded at least as fast as enrollment increasesso the proportion of students living on campus can remain the same as in 1992. Consideration shall be given for housing for faculty and staff as student enrollment increases. Policy 2.7.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent of policy. Support for on-campus housing mentioned in the community workshops held to date. Reference to 1992 has been removed as proportion of students living on campus has actually increased since 1992. Additional reference to staff. 2.5.2 Cuesta College The City should shall encourage Cuesta College to facilitate student housing off- campus and close to transit and bicycle connections. The City shall discourage on- campus residential development due to environmental sensitivity of the Chorro watershed and the lack of other services near the Cuesta campus. Policy 2.7.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent of policy. Change also clarifies that this housing will be “off-site” as previously directed by Planning Commission due to sensitive resource issues and lack of other services near Cuesta campus. PH1 - 90 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-63 2.5.3 Amenities The City shall encourage development of attractive Mmultifamily housing likely to be occupied by students should to provide the amenities which that students may otherwise seek in single-family areas, to provide an attractive alternative. Policy. 2.7.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent of policy. 2.5.4 Location The City shall encourage the development of Hhousing likely to attract faculty, staff, and or students should be encouraged to locate close to Cal Poly, to reduce commute travel. Policy 2.7.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify intent of policy. Added proximity to transit and bike connections as locational criteria. 2.5.5 Fraternities & Sororities The City shall work with Cal Poly to develop a proposal to locate Ffraternities and sororities on campus for consideration by the CSU Board. If locations on campus cannot be provided, fraternities and sororities should be limited to located, in order of preference, (1) on campus; (2) in medium-high and high-density residential areas near the campus. Prog. 2.7.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to clarify there are two items to be addressed. Location on campus is now a separate statement and states how the City will work towards the desired end point. Currently, CSU regulations prohibit Greek facilities to be located on-campus. 2.5.6 Large Group Housing The City shall not approve Llarge group housing, other than fraternities and sororities, such as retirement homes or homes for handicapped, should not be located in areas designated low density residential areas. They may be located, but not concentrated, in medium-density residential areas. They may be concentrated in medium-high or high-density residential areas, or in suitable commercial or light-industrial areas, where services are convenient. Each large group housing proposal shall be evaluated through use-permit review. Policy 2.8.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to reflect the General Plan designation as the definition of an area’s use. 2.5.7 Small Residential Care Facilities The City shall continue to treat Ssmall residential care facilities should be treated the same as individual houses. Policy 2.8.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The City is pre-empted by state law from regulating small residential care facilities. PH1 - 91 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-64 2.6 Downtown In Downtown residential areas (Figure 4), the City should encourage the rehabilitation and maintenance of existing housing. Additional dwellings may be permitted, in keeping with density limits, provided that the existing character of the area is not significantly changed. Demolition of structurally sound dwellings shall be strongly discouraged. Policy 2.9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 2.7 Reduced Automobile Dependence in Downtown The City shall encourage the development of Downtown housing that minimizes the need for automobile use and minimizes the storage of vehicles in surrounding neighborhoods. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Climate Action Plan strategy 5.3. 34.5% of survey respondents were in favor of discouraging commuting by individual drivers and encouraging use of busses, bikes, vanpools, and carpools. LUE goal 35. PH1 - 92 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-65 PROGRAMS (See also Section 10, Implementation) 2.72.8 Updating & Enforcing Standards 2.8.1 Enforcing Standards The City will shall review, revise if deemed desirablenecessary, and actively enforce noise, parking, and property-development and property-maintenance standards. Staff to adequately enforce these standards will be provided. Prog. 2.10.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Last sentence removed as budget commitment is the purview of the City Council. 2.8.2 Updating Property Maintenance Standards The City will shall adopt and implement, and regularly review and update property- maintenance regulations focused on proper enclosure of trash, appearance of yards and buildings from the street, and storage of vehicles. The regulations will be periodically reviewed and updated. Prog. 2.10.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Trash, vehicles, and property maintenance have been addressed through Zoning Code updates. Policy changed to a maintenance item. 2.9 Multifamily Preferences &and Standards 2.9.1 Preferences The City will shall evaluate student housing preferences and consider revising development standards to better meet them in multifamily housing near campus. Prog. 2.11.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 2.9.2 Multifamily Open Space and Storage Standards The City willshall review, and revise, if deemed desirable, its standards for multifamily housing so that apartments will provide usable open space and storage similar to the requirements for condominiums. Prog. 2.11.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 2.10 Downtown Residential Development The City will shall consider adopting special development standards to guide addition of dwellings within dDowntown residential areas (Figure 4), to implement policy 2.89. The following should be included when evaluating new standards for this area: A. A new density category between the current Low Density (R-1) and Medium Density (R-2) designations: B.A. Requirements that new dwellings on lots with existing houses be above or behind the existing houses, and that the added building area be modestly sized PH1 - 93 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-66 and of similar architecture in comparison with the principal residences on the site and in the surrounding area; C.B. Requiring new buildings to reflect the mass and spacing of existing, nearby buildings; D.C. Requiring special parking and coverage standards; E.D. Requiring minimum amounts of usable open space. Prog. 2.12 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Updated for style. “A” deleted as City now allows secondary units, basically covering the need that “A” was originally designed to address. Much of Downtown area is already R-2. 1.14 Affordable Housing The City will adopt inclusionary housing and development-fee ordinances consistent with the Housing Element. Prog. 2.13 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Deleted here as it is addressed in the City’s Housing Element and has been completed. 2.11 Neighborhood Compatibility The City will consider new regulations, for Low-Density and Medium-Density Residential areas, to require special review for (1) incompatibly large houses, (2) replacement or infill homes in existing neighborhoods, and (3) accessory buildings with plumbing facilities allowing easy conversion to illegal second dwellings. The City will periodically update Community Design Guidelines for larger homes, infill housing and accessory single-story buildings. Prog. 2.14 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force wanted to retain and augment this program to include update of the CDG. 2.12 Neighborhood Wellness Action Plans To help residents preserve and enhance their neighborhoods, the City willshall: A. Identify neighborhoods and wWork with residents that request assistance to prepare neighborhood plans that empower them to shape their neighborhoods; B. Help devise strategies to help stabilize the rental/owner ratio, to maintain neighborhood character, safety, and stability; C. Help identify neighborhood problems, and undertake a wide range of focused development-review, capital-improvement, and code-enforcement efforts; D. Encourage the formation of voluntary neighborhood groups, so residents can become involved early in the development review process; E. Involve residents early in reviewing proposed public and private projects that could have neighborhood impacts, by notifying residents and property owners and holding meetings at convenient times and places within the neighborhoods. F. Provide appropriate staff support, possibly including a single staff person for neighborhood issues, and train all staff to be sensitive to issues of neighborhood protection and enhancement. Prog. 2.15 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources A. Resources are not available to prepare plans for all neighborhoods, and Task Force expressed concern regarding whether residents desire such plans for all areas. Program changed to a voluntary program that will PH1 - 94 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-67 apply as requested by neighborhoods. Other direction remains intact. 2.12.1 Residential Densities The City will evaluate alternatives to the current maximum number of dwelling units per acre (based on bedroom count) and height, parking, and setback standards, to regulate residential building intensity, and bulk and mass. Floor area limits will be considered. Prog. 2.16 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Maximum density for Medium High Density Residential proposed to change from 18 to 20 dwelling units / acre. TF decided to keep this policy. Program The City shall evaluate the potential to use portions of City-owned parking lots and structures for residents’ parking. Program The City shall require new housing projects in the Downtown area to provide residents with information and services to off-set vehicle needs, such as providing transit passes, providing space for hourly car rental services, and providing on-site bicycle storage facilities. Program The City shall evaluate the potential for development fees to fund new parking spaces in an additional parking structure for residents of new housing projects in the Downtown core. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources New programs proposed to address residential parking in the Downtown area. Need to address Downtown parking was discussed during Community Leader Interviews (March 2012), Community Survey (May-June, 2012), Community Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012), and Community Workshop #3 (December 1, 2012). 34.5% of Community Survey respondents were in favor of discouraging single-occupancy driving and encouraging the use of transit, car / van pools, and bicycles. Task Force added last program to address residential parking needs. PH1 - 95 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-68 3 COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES 3.0 Commercial Siting 3.0.1 Slope Commercial and industrial uses should be developed in appropriate areas where the natural slope of the land is less than ten percent. Policies 3.0.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force supported original wording. 3.0.2 Access The City shall require that Ccommercial and industrial uses should have access from arterial and collector streets, and should be designed and located to avoid increasing traffic on residential streets. Policies 3.0.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.0.2 Residential Area Except for neighborhood-oriented services and commercial uses, the City shall prohibit the Eexpansion of commercial centers and industrial uses into adjacent residential areas is prohibited. Policies 3.0.13 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources While convenience commercial in a neighborhood is desired, this policy seeks to limit larger commercial centers and industrial uses from expanding from outside a neighborhood into the neighborhood. 3.1 General Retail 3.1.1 Purpose and Included Uses The City should have areas for General Retail uses adequate to meet most demands of City and nearby County residents. General Retail includes specialty stores as well as department stores, warehouse stores, discount stores, restaurants, and services such as banks. Not all areas designated General Retail are appropriate for the full range of uses (see policies 3.1.2 and 3.1.5). Policies 3.1.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.1.23.1.1 Locations for Regional Attractions The City should focus its retailing with regional draw in the locations of downtown, the area around the intersection of Madonna Road and Highway 101, and the area around Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. PH1 - 96 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-69 Policies 3.1.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force supporting retaining this policy. 3.1.3 Madonna Road Area Retail Expansion No substantial additional land area should be added to the commercial centers at Madonna Road and Highway 101 until a detailed plan for the retail expansion has been approved by the City. The plan should describe the limits of commercial expansion, acceptable uses, phasing, and circulation improvements. Any permitted expansion should be aesthetically and functionally compatible with existing development in the area. Before approving an expansion plan, the City should consider an evaluation of how much it would transfer sales from existing retail areas in the City and whether the proposed uses could be developed in existing retail areas. Policies 3.1.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The General Plan update provides direction at the two major sites that could be used for commercial expansion, the Caltrans site on the east side of Highway 101 at Madonna Road and the Dalidio property off Madonna Road. Both sites have undergone review as part of the update process and will be assessed as part of the updates fiscal and circulation studies. For the Dalidio site, a specific plan will be required as part of new policies in this General Plan. These actions effectively address the policy described herein. See Section 8. 1.14.1 Mid-Higuera Enhancement The City shall consider the potential enhancement of underutilized commercial land along Higuera Street between Madonna Road and High Street. (See also Special Design Area, policy 8.5.) Policies 3.1.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This should become a program to revisit the Mid-Higuera Enhancement plan and see where zoning code changes or other implementation needs to occur to support the vision in the plan. See Section 8. 3.1.43.1.2 Specialty Store Locations The City shall direct Mmost specialty retail stores should be to locate in the Ddowntown Core, in the Madonna Road area, or the Los Osos Valley Road area, and in other community shopping areas identified by the Community Commercial district (see the Community Commercial section below) where they will not detract from the role of the dDowntown Core as the City's primary concentration of specialty stores; some may also be in neighborhood shopping centers so long as they are a minor part of the centers and serve neighborhood rather than citywide or regional markets. Policies 3.1.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and capitalization only. 1.14.2 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area (FAR) shall not exceed 3.0. Additional floor area, up to a FAR of 3.75, may be approved for projects in the downtown core. FAR may be approved up to 4.0 for sites in the downtown core that receive transfer of development credit for either open space protection or historic preservation, or that receive density bonuses for affordable housing. The Zoning PH1 - 97 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-70 Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. When dwellings are provided in General Retail districts, they shall not exceed 36 units per acre. So long as the floor area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in addition to nonresidential development on a site. (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) Policies 3.1.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.2 Neighborhood Commercial 3.2.1 Purpose and Included Uses The City should have areas for Neighborhood Commercial uses to meet the frequent shopping demands of people living nearby. Neighborhood commercial uses include smaller-scale grocery stores, laundromats, and drug stores. Neighborhood commercial uses should be available within about one mile of all residences. These uses should be located on sites not exceeding about four acres, unless the neighborhood to be served includes a significant amount of high density residential development. Small-scale specialty stores may be located in areas designated for neighborhood commercial uses as long as they will not be a major citywide attraction or displace more general, convenience uses. Policies 3.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.2.1 New or Expanded Areas of Neighborhood Commercial Use The City shall provide for Nnew or expanded areas of neighborhood commercial uses that: A. Be Are created within, or extended into, nonresidential areas adjacent to residential neighborhoods; B. Provide uses to serve nearby residents, not the whole city; C. Have access from arterial streets, and not increase traffic on residential streets; D. Have safe and pleasant pedestrian access from the surrounding service area, as well as good internal circulation; E. Be Are designed to be pedestrian-oriented, and architecturally compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods being served. Pedestrian-oriented features of project design should include: i. Off-street parking areas located to the side or rear of buildings rather than between buildings and the street; ii. Landscaped areas with public seating; and iii. Indoor or outdoor space for public use, designed to provide a focus for some neighborhood activities. Policies 3.2.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. PH1 - 98 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-71 3.2.2 Expanding Existing Neighborhood Commercial Areas The City should shall evaluate the need for and desirability of additions to existing areas of neighborhood commercial use only when specific development proposals are made, and not in response to rezoning requests which do not incorporate a development plan. Policies 3.2.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.2.3 Stores in Residential Areas The City shall allow for the continuation of Ssmall, individual stores within established residential areas may be retained when if they are compatible with surrounding uses. Other isolated commercial uses which that are not compatible with residential surroundings eventually should be replaced with compatible uses. Policy 3.2.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.2.4 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 2.0. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. When dwellings are provided in Neighborhood Commercial districts, they shall not exceed 12 units per acre. So long as the floor area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in addition to nonresidential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) Policies 3.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.3 Community Commercial 3.3.1 Purpose and Included Uses Areas for shopping centers that serve community-wide needs are designated Community Commercial. Community commercial areas are intended to provide for a wide range of retail sales and personal services within the context of distinctive, pedestrian-oriented shopping centers that serve customers and clients from all over the City. These centers may accommodate retail uses of a larger scale that would be inappropriate in the downtown, but proposed uses will be reviewed to ensure that they will not detract from the role of the downtown as the City's primary concentration of specialty stores. Policy 3.3.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. PH1 - 99 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-72 3.3.2 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 2.0. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect the existing or desired architectural character in the surrounding area. Dwellings may be provided in Community Commercial districts only as part of mixed use projects, where their density shall not exceed 36 dwelling units per acre. So long as the floor area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in addition to nonresidential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) Policy 3.3.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.3.1 Office Uses The City may allow Ccertain office uses with limited need for access to dDowntown government services may to be located away from the dDowntown in areas designated Community Commercial. Appropriate types of offices include those that provide direct "over-the-counter" services to customers and clients. Professional offices, and those identified by the Zoning Regulations as "production and administrative" offices may also be appropriate, particularly above the ground floor. Policy 3.3.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.4 Offices 3.4.1 Purpose and Included Uses The City should have sufficient land for Office development to meet the demands of City residents and the specialized needs of County residents. Office development includes professional and financial services (such as doctors, architects, and insurance companies and banks) and government agencies. The City should retain the regional offices of state and federal agencies. Not all types of offices are appropriate in all locations. (See office location policies below. Also see the Public Facilities section). Policy3.4.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.4.23.4.1 Office Locations A. All types of offices are appropriate in the dDowntown General Retail district, but are discouraged at street level in storefronts of the commercial core. B. All types of office activities are appropriate in the Office district which surrounds the dDowntown commercial area, though offices needing very large PH1 - 100 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-73 buildings or generating substantial traffic may not be appropriate in the area which provides a transition to residential neighborhoods. C. Medical services should be near the hospitals, and may also be located in other commercial areas of the City. D. Government social services and the regional offices of state and federal agencies should be near the intersections of South Higuera Street, Prado Road, and Highway 101 (Figure 5); E. Offices having no substantial public visitation or need for access to dDowntown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. F. Certain business and professional services having no substantial public visitation or limited need for access to dDowntown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. Examples of such uses are computer services, utilities engineering and administration, architects and engineers, industrial design, advertising, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, veterinarians, and insurance and financial services that do not directly serve retail customers. G. Certain business and professional services with limited need for access to dDowntown government services may be located in areas that are away from the dDowntown, and designated Community Commercial. Appropriate types of offices include those that provide direct "over-the-counter" services to customers and clients. Professional offices may also be appropriate, particularly above the ground floor. Policy 3.4.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Updated capitalization only. 3.4.33.4.2 Offices Outside Designated Areas The City may allow continuation and minor expansion of Eexisting office buildings outside the areas described in pPolicy 3.4.21 may continue to be used and may have minor expansions if they: A. Have access directly from collector or arterial streets, not local residential streets; B. Will not significantly increase traffic in residential areas; C. Will not have significant adverse impacts on nearby uses. Policy 3.4.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and update to policy reference. 3.4.4 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 1.5. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. When dwellings are provided in Office districts, they shall not exceed 12 units per acre. So long as the floor area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in addition to nonresidential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) Policy 3.4.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. PH1 - 101 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-74 3.5 Tourist Commercial Uses (For information on Tourist Commercial land use designation, see Table 1.) 3.5.1 Basis for Tourism The City shall promote San Luis Obispo as should be an attractive place for short- term stays, as well as an attractive destination for long-term visitors featuring The City should base its attraction on the character of the its community character, natural qualities, historic resources, and its educational and cultural facilities. The City should emphasize conference and visitor-serving facilities which have a low impact upon the environment and upon existing land forms and landscapes, and which provide low-impact visitor activities and low-impact means of transportation. Policy 3.5.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to add “historic resources as part of definition of community character. 3.5.2 Locations The City shall encourage integration of Vvisitor-serving uses should be integrated with other types of uses, including overnight accommodations dDowntown, near the airport, and near the train station; small-scale facilities (such as hostels or bed- and-breakfast places) may be located in Medium-High Density Residential and High-Density Residential Districts, where compatible. Visitor-serving uses are especially appropriate where such uses have already concentrated: along upper Monterey Street; at the Madonna Road area; at certain freeway interchanges; and in the dDowntown. Policy 3.5.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and capitalization only. Upper Monterey Street area further described as part of Section 8. 3.5.3 Appropriate Uses Tourist Commercial uses are those which primarily serve the traveling public. Tourist Commercial areas should accommodate motels, restaurants, service stations, recreational uses, and minor retail sales for the convenience of travelers. To assure adequate space for visitor-serving uses, areas designated Tourist Commercial should not include offices, general retail stores, auto repair, or business services. Policy 3.5.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.5.3.1 Residential Neighbors Site planning, building design, and types of activities for new tourist-commercial development adjacent to residential areas should be carefully reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission, the Planning Commission, or both, to assure compatibility. PH1 - 102 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-75 Policy 3.5.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Concept of compatibility with residential is covered for all non-residential uses under Policy 2.2.2. 3.5.3.2 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 2.5. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. When dwellings are provided in Tourist Commercial districts, they shall not exceed 12 units per acre. So long as the floor area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in addition to nonresidential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) Policy 3.5.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.5.4 Services and Manufacturing 3.5.4.1 Purpose The City should have sufficient land designated for Services and Manufacturing to meet most demands of the City, and some demands of the region, for activities such as business services, medical services, wholesaling building contractors, utility company yards, auto repair, printing, food manufacturing and other light manufacturing, and retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, plants). Areas reserved for these uses may also accommodate convenience restaurants and other activities primarily serving area workers. Policy 3.6.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.5.4.2 Appropriate Uses The following types of uses are appropriate in areas designated Services and Manufacturing. Certain areas designated Services and Manufacturing may be reserved through special zoning provisions for certain types of uses, to assure compatibility among the wide range of potential uses, and to assure adequate land for certain types of uses. A. Wholesaling, warehousing, and storage; Vehicle sales and rental; B. Retail sales of products which require outdoor areas or large floor areas for display and storage, such as warehouse stores, lumber and building materials dealers, home improvement centers, furniture and appliances stores, and plant nurseries; C. Repair shops, printing services, laundries, animal hospitals, sporting goods stores, auto parts stores, and some recreation facilities; D. Light manufacturing, research and development, and laboratories. (See also "Business Parks" in the Airport section, Section 7.9.) PH1 - 103 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-76 E. Offices having no substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. F. Certain businesses and professional services having no substantial public visitation or limited need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. Examples of such uses are computer services, utilities engineering and administration, architects and engineers, industrial design, advertising, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, veterinarians, and insurance and financial services that do not directly serve retail customers. G. Medical services may be allowed if proposed medical uses are found to be compatible with surrounding land uses, are located along commercial collector or arterial streets with convenient access to public transportation, do not significantly increase traffic in residential neighborhoods and are consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. Policy 3.6.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.5.4.33.5.4.1 General Retail and Neighborhood Commercial Uses The City shall not allow Nnew specialty stores, department stores, or neighborhood commercial centers should not to be developed in Service and Manufacturing- designated areas. However, existing uses such as supermarkets and drugstores may be expanded if: A. They are compatible with nearby uses; B. The expanded use will not divert trade from other general-retail or neighborhood-commercial areas which are better located to serve the expected market area. Policy 3.6.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.5.4.43.5.4.2 Access The City shall require Aaccess to Service and Manufacturing areas should be provided by commercial collector streets, to avoid customer traffic on residential streets or delivery routes which pass through residential areas. Driveway access onto arterial streets should be minimized. Policy 3.6.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.5.4.53.5.4.3 Air & Water Quality Industries locating or expanding in San Luis Obispo shall comply with all applicable air-quality and water-quality regulations. Policy 3.6.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources It is not required to have a policy to state projects shall comply with City, state, and federal regulations however Task Force wanted to retain. PH1 - 104 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-77 3.5.4.63.5.4.4 Utility Service The City shall require Services and Manufacturing uses should to connect to the City water and sewer systems, unless other means of providing service are identified in a City-adopted plan. Policy 3.6.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.5.4.73.5.4.5 Vehicle Sales A. Auto Park Way / Calle Joaquin The City shall encourage intends to create around Auto Park Way an easily accessible and attractive auto sales and service center around Auto Park Way and adjacent areas along Calle Joaquin (Figure 3). The City will reserve about 50 acres total for vehicle sales in this area, including the areas shown in Figure 3. (This amount is expected to be sufficient for relocation of dealerships located elsewhere in the City, plus expansion of dealerships in proportion to projected County population growth.) The areas shown for vehicle sales should be reserved for that use at least until the anticipated year 2004 update of this element, when the amount of reserved land may be reconsidered. If a plan for vehicle sales expansion onto prime agricultural soils is approved, it shall provide for permanent preservation of prime soils, within the urban reserve or greenbelt. If a plan for vehicle sales expansion into wetland or creek areas is approved, mitigation shall consist at least of restoration and permanent preservation, within the urban reserve or greenbelt, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. B. Other Areas Auto sales in areas of the Ccity other than Auto Park Way / Calle Joaquin should be minimized, in order to reinforce the auto sales center and to maximize space for other uses in other locations. Policy 3.6.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to reflect current conditions. Most of auto center has been developed, with some limited expansion along Calle Joaquin possible. Refer also to market study conducted on auto mall recently. New policy discussion in Chapter 8 will address possible uses and development parameters. PH1 - 105 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-78 Figure 3. Vehicle Sales Area at Auto Park Way Figure 3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Figure will need to be updated to reflect current auto center size and information from 2013 market study. TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 106 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-79 3.5.4.83.5.4.6 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 1.5. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. Dwellings may be provided only as caretaker quarters, as shelters (with discretionary review), or as part of a specially approved mixed-use development. The appropriate residential density would be set considering the maximum residential density allowed in any neighboring residential area. (Also, see the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) Policy 3.6.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 3.5.5 Overall 3.5.5.1 Dependent Care The City shall offer incentives to nNew development should be offered incentives for provision of child care and elder care for employees. Policy 3.7.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 3.5.5.2 Convenience Facilities The City shall allow cConvenience facilities serving daily needs, such as small food stores, branch banks, and child and elder care, and amenities such as picnic areas, will be allowed in centers of employment. Space for such amenities may be required within large commercial and industrial developments. Policy 3.7.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 3.5.5.3 Commercial Revitalization The City shall encourage the revitalization, upgrading, and beautification of commercial retail centers and conversion of strip commercial area to coordinated, complementary retail and service uses, and where appropriate, provision of housing on upper floors. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources New policy to maintain economic vitality and balance, sustainability, business attraction and formation, business retention, tourism, and entertainment. Supports Economic Development Strategic Plan and LUE goals 11 and 12. PH1 - 107 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-80 3.5.6 Mixed Uses The City encourages Ccompatible mixed uses in commercial districts should be encouraged. Policy 3.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Covered in new “Land Use Diagram And Standards” section at front of this element, but Task Force opted to keep. PH1 - 108 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-81 PROGRAMS (See also Section 10, Implementation) 3.5.7 Programs 3.5.7.1 Zoning Regulations The City will shall amend its Zoning Regulations to implement the commercial and industrial policies changes included in the 2014 General Plan update program. Prog. 3.9.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Revised to broaden the program to encompass all changes in the General Plan update. 1.14.3 Planned Development Zoning The City will amend the Zoning Regulations so the “planned development” approach can be used on any size parcel, in any commercial or industrial zone. Prog. 3.9.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This has been completed. 3.5.7.2 Neighborhood Uses The City will shall rezone to Neighborhood Commercial existing Service Commercial sites which have become neighborhood convenience centers, if: (1) they primarily serve a neighborhood rather than citywide market; and (2) they are appropriately located considering access and compatibility with other nearby uses. Prog. 3.9.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. 3.5.7.3 Tourist Information The City will consider establishing tourist information facilities near highway entries to the City, to reduce demands for on-site and off-site advertising by tourist- and general-retail uses. Prog. 3.9.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This has been replaced by a wayfinding policy (Policy 8.1.7 and Circulation Element Policy 8.1.7). 3.5.7.43.5.7.3 Dependent Care The City will shall provide zoning incentives and investigate a program coordinating commercial and industrial development for the provision of child care and elder care for workers. Prog. 3.9.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. PH1 - 109 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-82 3.5.7.53.5.7.4 Neighborhood Centers The City will shall identify suitable sites for new or expanded neighborhood centers as it prepares specific plans and development plans. Prog. 3.9.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. Updated to include reference to development plans. 3.5.7.6 Downtown Office Design The City will make more explicit its architectural review guidelines and revise its zoning standards, as necessary, to better achieve the desired architectural character of downtown areas zoned "office" and "residential-office," so the character and fabric of existing neighborhoods will be protected. Prog. 3.9.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Incorporated into Community Design Guidelines. 3.5.7.73.5.7.5 Auto Sales Relocation The City will shall provide incentives to encourage relocation of vehicle sales to the Auto Park Way area other compatible areas. Prog. 3.9.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. 3.5.7.83.5.7.6 Noise Control Zoning Regulations and Architectural Review Community Design Guidelines will include measures such as the following to prevent unacceptable noise exposure for residential areas or other noise-sensitive uses: location and shielding of mechanical equipment; location of truck loading, trash collection areas, and loudspeakers; landscaped setbacks or noise attenuation walls measures along property lines. (See also the Noise Element.) Prog. 3.9.9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. 3.5.7.93.5.7.7 Madonna Road Centers The City will shall investigate ways to encourage more intense commercial development within, and more cohesion between, the existing shopping centers on Madonna Road. Prog. 3.9.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Substantial commercial development has occurred in this area. Program has been restated to focus on relationships between centers. PH1 - 110 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-83 3.5.7.103.5.7.8 Tourism The City willshall: A. Encourage sufficient development of additional conference and meeting space to accommodate the demand for medium size conferences; B. Work with the Performing Arts Center City’s art community in promoting arts oriented tourism; C. Develop aggressive tourism marketing programs that highlight the City as a visitor destination; D. Develop concepts such as rail tours, sea cruises, historical tours, and bicycle tours; E. Encourage development of appropriate recreational facilities for bicycles, golf, tennis, equestrian activities, soccer, swimming, fishing, and eco-tourism. Prog. 3.9.11 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. New Program: The City shall amend the Community Design Guidelines to address transitions between neighborhood commercial development and adjacent residential neighborhoods. New Program: The City shall review zoning regulations to consider allowing visitor-service uses in office zones adjacent to community commercial zones in the Downtown and the Monterey Street southwest of Johnson areas. New Program: The City will investigate emerging technologies and trends to evaluate whether updates to zoning regulations are needed. New Program: The City shall implement the Economic Development Strategic Plan and other appropriate strategies for business retention and expansion with a focus on those providing head-of-household jobs. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force requested new programs to address high tech businesses and trends, visitor-serving uses, transitions to neighborhoods, and economic development. Planning Commission added “southwest of Johnson” to this program. PH1 - 111 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-84 4 DOWNTOWN 4.0Introduction “Downtown” is the area generally bounded by Highway 101, the railroad, and High Street (Figure 4). It embraces residential neighborhoods and touches five historic districtsincluding “Old Town”, as well as the “Downtown Commercial Core” and civic area, and less intensely developed commercial and office areas. The City has approved "A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center," as an advisory document, which covers an area nearly the same as the core identified in this element. See tThis separately published plan for an illustration of how downtown development may occur guides City review of development in the dDowntown. Policy 4.0 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to clarify. This is introductory text and not policy language, therefore, number removed. POLICIES 4.1 Downtown’s Role Downtown is the community’s urban center serving as the cultural, social, entertainment, and political center of the City for its residents, as well as home for those who live in its historic neighborhoods. The City wants its comercial urban core to be economically healthy, and realizes that private and public investments in the dDowntown support each other. Downtown should also provide a wide variety of professional and government services, serving the region as well as the city. The commercial core is a preferred location for retail uses that are suitable for pedestrian access, off-site parking, and compact building spaces. Civic, cultural and commercial portions of dDowntown should be a major tourist destination. Downtown's visitor appeal should be based on natural, historical, and cultural features, retail services, entertainment and numerous and varied visitor accommodations. Policy 4.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to fix capitalization. This is introductory text and not policy language, therefore, number removed. 4.0 Downtown Residential Downtown residential uses contribute to the character of the area, allow a 24-hour presence which enhances security and help the balance between jobs and housing in the community. Policy 4..2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This is introductory text and not policy language, therefore, moved here from policy language under “Existing and New Dwellings”. 4.0.1 Existing and New Dwellings Downtown residential uses contribute to the character of the area, allow a 24-hour presence which enhances security and help the balance between jobs and housing in the community. The City shall use the following when evaluating development in the Downtown area: PH1 - 112 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-85 Existing residential uses within and around the commercial core should be protected, and new ones should be developed. Dwellings should be provided for a variety of households including singles couples, and groups. Dwellings should be interspersed with commercial uses. All new, large commercial projects should include dwellingsresidential uses. Commercial core properties may serve as receiver sites for transfer of development credits, thereby having higher residential densities than otherwise allowed (See Policies 6.2.5 and 6.2.6). Policy 4.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to relocate introductory text and to highlight (using bullets) the several different thoughts being expressed in the policy. Planning Commission added reference to where TDCs may be used. PH1 - 113 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-86 Figure 4. Downtown Planning Area and Core PH1 - 114 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-87 Policy 4.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to relocate introductory text and to highlight (using bullets) the several different thoughts being expressed in the policy. 4.0.1.1 Dwellings and Offices The City shall continue to ensure that there is no net loss of residential units in Downtown. Residential uses within some downtown areas designated Office prior to this element's 1994 update should be maintained, or replaced as new offices are developed. The City should amend the Downtown Housing Conversion Permit process to preserve the number of dwellings in the Downtown Core (CD zone) and the Downtown Planning Area by adopting a “no net housing loss” program by amending the Downtown Housing Conversion Permit ordinance. The amendment shall ensure that within each area, the number of dwellings removed shall not exceed the number of dwellings added. Policy 4.2.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Zoning Code section 17.86 was updated in 2004 and includes a no net housing loss provision in Downtown. Code requires one to one replacement if project involves demolition or conversion of 51% of floor area of a housing unit or units. Revised to simplify policy and to delete implementation language. 35.3% of survey respondents favored housing opportunities as a most important quality of life factor. 4.0.2 Entertainment and Cultural Facilities Cultural facilities, such as museums and, galleries, and public theaters should be dDowntown. Entertainment facilities, such as nightclubs and private theaters shouldshall be in the dDowntown too. Locations outside Downtown may be more appropriate for facilities that would be out of character or too big for Downtown to accommodate comfortably, such as the major performing arts center on the Cal Poly campus. Policy 4.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to reflect importance of keeping Downtown vibrant with uses not found elsewhere. 4.0.3 Public Gatherings Downtown should have spaces to accommodate public meetings, seminars, classes, socialization and similar activities in conjunction with other uses. Downtown should provide a setting which is festive and comfortable for public gatherings. Policy 4.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force added “socialization”. 4.0.4 Walking Environment The City shall plan and manage Downtown should provide to include safe, exciting interesting places for walking and pleasant places for sitting. To invite exploration To this end: mMid-block walkways, courtyards, and interior malls should be well lit and integrated with new and remodeled buildings, while preserving continuous building faces on most blocks. Downtown streets should provide adequate space for pedestrians. PH1 - 115 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-88 There should be a nearly continuous tree canopy along sidewalks, and planters should provide additional foliage and flowers near public gathering areas. To maintain the downtown appeal for pedestrians, new buildings should not obstruct sunlight from reaching sidewalks on the northwest side of Marsh Street, Higuera Street and Monterey Street at noon on the winter solstice. Public Art should be placed along pedestrian paths. Traffic calming and pedestrian safety should be enhanced, where appropriate, through such features as road tables, pavement changes, bulbouts and scramble intersection signals. Landscaping should mitigate harsh micro-climates. (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) Policy 4.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Sentences converted to Bullets to emphasize individual points made. Reference to Council Resolution no longer necessary with update. Task Force added additional bullet points. New Policy: Civic buildings shall incorporate commercial activity at the street level where appropriate. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force wished to include civic buildings in desire for street level activity for pedestrians. New Policy: City shall promote a healthy mix of downtown street-level businesses that emphasizes retail stores, specialty shops and food service rather than bars or taverns. New policy: The Downtown should remain the focus for nighttime entertainment, cultural events and related activities. It should be a pleasant and safe place at all times. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources These two new policies reflect Task Force direction regarding mix of uses Downtown and alcohol outlets. 4.0.5 Public Safety The City shall ensure that Iindoor and outdoor public spaces should be are designed to be observable from frequently occupied or traveled places, to enhance public safety. Policy 4.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 4.0.6 Open Places and Views The City shall enhance the Downtown should to include many carefully located open places where people can rest and enjoy views of the surrounding hills; and Downtown should include some outdoor spaces where people are completely separated from vehicle traffic, in addition to Mission Plaza. Opportunities include extensions of Mission Plaza, a few new plazas, and selected street closures. Policy 4.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Task Force removed word “many” before “carefully.” PH1 - 116 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-89 4.0.7 Traffic in Residential Areas The City shall strive to protect Downtown residential areas should be protected from through traffic. Policy 4.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources TF change “should” to “shall strive” 4.0.8 Street Changes Street widening and realignment should be avoided. Policy 4.9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force opted to keep original language. 4.0.9 Parking The City shall ensure Tthere should be is a diversity of parking opportunities in the Downtown. Any major increments in parking supply should take the form of structures, located at the edges of the commercial core, so people will can walk rather than drive between points within the core. Retail uses outside the core, and professional office developments, may have on-site parking for customers and clients. Policy 4.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 4.0.10 The San Luis Obispo Creek The City shall protect San Luis Obispo Creek should be protected and restored it, provided this can be done in a manner that minimizes human impact on creek life. Walking paths along the creek in the dDowntown core should be provided and extended as links in an urban trail system, provided this will not further degrade wildlife habitat value of the riparian ecosystem. As properties that have encroaching buildings are redeveloped, the City should enforce a reasonable building setback from the riparian zone. (See also Resource Protection Sections in the Conservation and Open Space Element and Safety Element) Opportunities to open covered sections of the creek should be pursued. Policy 4.11 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. Input at Issues and Opportunities workshop and Future Fair support extending creek walk throughout its length. 4.0.11 Building Conservation and Compatibility The City shall ensure that Aarchitecturally and historically significant buildings should be are preserved and restored and that . Nnew buildings should be are compatible with architecturally and historically significant buildings, but not necessarily the same style. Policy 4.12 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. PH1 - 117 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-90 4.0.12 New Buildings and Views New dDowntown development nearby publicly-owned gathering places such as Mission Plaza, the Jack House Gardens, LC YC Cheng Park, and similar gathering spaces shall respect views of the hills., framing rather than obscuring them. Adjacent buildings shall be designed to allow sunlight to reach these open spaces, and when planting new trees the potential canopy shall be considered subordinate to maintaining views of hillsides. In other locations dDowntown, views will be provided parallel to the street right-of-way, at intersections where building separation naturally makes more views available, and at upper-level viewing decks. (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) Policy 4.13 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force edited to reflect Downtown’s role as most intensely developed urban core. Pedestrian views are blocked by even smaller buildings and the desire was to accommodate appropriate development Downtown. Reference to Council Resolution no longer necessary with update. 4.0.13 Noise Obtrusive sounds, including traffic noises and loud music, should be minimized. Desired activities which are noisy should be timed to avoid conflict with other desired activities which need a quiet setting. Policy 4.14 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. 4.0.14 Sense of Place To keep the commercial core's sense of place and appeal for walking, it should remain compact and be the City's most intensely developed area. Policy 4.15 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. 4.0.15 Design Principles The following principles should guide construction and changes of use within the commercial core. Policy 4.16 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Introductory text. No change. 4.0.16 Street Level Activities The street level should be occupied by stores, restaurants, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic, such as offices with frequent client visits. Stores and restaurants may occupy upper levels. Offices not having frequent client visits should be located above street level. Policy 4.16.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. PH1 - 118 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-91 4.0.17 Upper Floor Dwellings Existing residential uses shall be preserved and new ones encouraged above the street level. This new housing will include a range of options and affordability levels. Policy 4.16.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and clarification. 4.0.18 Continuous Storefront There should be a continuous storefront along sidewalks, at the back of the sidewalk, except for the Courthouse and City Hall blocks, plazas, recessed building entries, and sidewalk cafes. Policy 4.16.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. 4.0.19 Building Height New buildings shall fit within the context and vertical scale of existing development, shall not obstruct respect views from, or sunlight to, publicly-owned gathering places such as Mission Plaza, and should be set stepped back above the second or third level to maintain a street façade that is consistent with the historic pattern of development. Generally, new buildings should not exceed 650 feet in height. Tall buildings (50-75 feet) shall be designed to achieve multiple policy objectives, including design amenities, housing and retail land uses, such as: a. Publicly accessible, open viewing spaces at the upper levels b. Housing affordability in excess of the Inclusionary Housing Requirement c. Energy efficiency beyond State mandated requirements d. Adaptive reuse of a historical resource in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation e. A major pedestrian connection between Higuera Street and the Creekwalk, Monterey Street and the Creekwalk, between Higuera Street and Marsh Street, or at another acceptable mid-block location f.e. High residential density (e.g. above 24 units per acre) achieved by a concentration of smaller dwelling units g.f. Street level features such as a public plaza, public seating and/or public art h.g. Provide midblock or other significant pedestrian connections i.h. Increased retail floor area, including multi-story retail j.i. Directly implements specific and identifiable City objectives, as set forth in the General Plan, the Conceptual Plan for the City’s Center, the Downtown Strategic Plan and other key policy documents j. Receiving Transfer of Development Credits for open space protection or historic preservation k. Proximity of housing to convenient transit connections (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) PH1 - 119 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-92 Policy 4.16.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reference to Council Resolution no longer necessary with update. TF edited language in first sentence regarding context and added two bullet points. 4.0.20 Building Width New buildings should maintain the historic pattern of storefront widths. Policy 4.16.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. 4.0.21 Sidewalk Appeal Street facades, particularly at the street level, should include windows, signs, and architectural details which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalks. Policy 4.16.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. 4.0.22 Government Offices City Hall and the County Government Center should remain at their present locations. Additional local government administrative office space which cannot be accommodated within the existing city and county properties County Government Center should be developed nearby within the dDowntown. (See also Public and Cultural Facilities policies, Section 5.1). Policy 4.17 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and to include reference to both city and county office space in second sentence. 4.0.23 Commercial Buildings Outside the Core In General Retail areas adjacent to the commercial core, the pattern of buildings in relation to the street should become more like the core, with shared driveways and parking lots, and no street or side-yard setbacks (except for recessed entries and courtyards). Buildings should not exceed 45 feet in height. (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) Policy 4.18 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change. Reference to Council Resolution no longer necessary with update. PH1 - 120 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-93 PROGRAMS 4.0.24 Updating Downtown Concept Plan The City shall update the Downtown Concept Plan by 2016 and shall regularly update the plan as required to address significant changes in or affecting the Downtown area including the opportunity for meaningful public input. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The current plan is over 20 years old and needs an update and provisions for on-going maintenance. 4.0.244.0.25 Implementing the Downtown Concept Plan The City will shall consider including features of "A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center" (Downtown Concept Plan) in the approval of projects in the Downtown, recognizing that the plan is a concept and is intended to be flexible. as appropriate, in its Zoning Regulations, architectural review guidelines, engineering standards, and capital improvement program. Prog. 4.19 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and content. The Community Design Guidelines already reference the Downtown Concept Plan. 4.0.254.0.26 Visual Resource Study The City will shall undertake a study of visual resources within the dDowntown core area to identify potential locations for new public-owned open places with access to views of important scenic resources. The City will consider acquisition of one or more of these open places as resources permit. A range of options for property acquisition, including development agreements, will be considered, consistent with the City’s fiscal policies and objectives. (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) Prog. 4.20 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and capitalization only. Reference to Council Resolution no longer necessary with update. 4.21 Community Design Guidelines Update The Community Design Guidelines shall be updated to include guidelines for tall buildings within the downtown core area, with a particular focus on guidelines for architectural transitions between new development and existing buildings within the Downtown Historic District. Prog. 4.21 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This was completed by City. 4.22 Parking for Downtown Residents The City should revise the Access and Parking Management Plan (2002) to include a downtown access program for residents in the downtown core area. The revision should evaluate various strategies and long-term parking solutions and include implementation recommendations. Strategies and solutions that may be considered include, but are not limited to, components of Housing Element Programs 6.3.2, 6.3.3 and 6.3.4, in addition to: PH1 - 121 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-94 1. A fee based program to allow limited residential parking in downtown parking structures owned and operated by the City. 2. Criteria for on-site parking (requirements and prohibitions) based on project size, project location, site access criteria, housing type, and feasible alternative transportation options. 3. Determination if any downtown core streets should have driveway access restricted. 4. Vehicle parking and storage areas located outside the downtown core area, such as Park and Ride style lots, that can be used by downtown core residents. 5. The development of additional transit programs to increase options for downtown residents. 6. Credit towards parking requirements for projects that implement shared vehicle programs. (Amended 2007, Council Resolution 9872) Prog. 4.202 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Zoning Code and Parking management plan amendments have been completed. Reference to Council Resolution no longer necessary with update. 4.21.1 Expansion of Downtown Plaza The City shall explore the full or partial closure and re-design of the following street segments to effectively extend, either permanently or for special events, Mission Plaza on: Broad Street between Palm and Monterey Streets, and Monterey Street between the two connections with Broad Street. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Direction on physical alternatives and comments received during Community Workshop #3 (December 1, 2012) and Council direction on October 15, 2013. LUE Goal 25. TF change to say “explore” New Program: The City shall modify zoning regulations to allow efficiency units and variable density in the Downtown Core. New Program: The City shall work with the Downtown businesses and residents, the BID, and Chamber of Commerce to manage impacts from downtown drinking establishments, and if necessary, enact additional regulations to ensure that the late night environment in and near Downtown is safe and pleasant. PH1 - 122 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-95 New Program: The City shall develop a master plan for San Luis Obispo Creek in the Downtown area. New Program: The City shall prepare an inventory of uses in the Downtown Core. Particular attention shall be given to identifying uses at the street level as these uses directly impact the pedestrian experience and vibrancy of the Downtown. This information shall be used to target business support and attraction to achieve a desirable mix of uses in the Downtown. New Program: The City shall incorporate into its zoning regulations specific criteria for evaluating use permits for bars/taverns, night clubs and late night drinking establishments. New Policy Safety and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design The City shall ensure that new development is designed and constructed to address public safety and welfare. New Program The City will modify its Community Design Guidelines to enhance Safety and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. Changes shall include, but are not limited to, inclusion of design statements on: Enhanced lighting of building alcoves in Downtown area Wayfinding signs to better direct pedestrians and motorists in non-residential areas Visibility into entry and access points on non-residential buildings Design solutions that minimize the potential for graffiti New Program The City, working with the Downtown Association, businesses, landlords, and residents will consider emergency callboxes at strategic locations in the Downtown. New Program The City working with the Downtown Association, Downtown businesses and residents shall develop a program to encourage lighted storefronts and street frontages throughout the night. New Program All specific plans shall identify design features utilized to enhance public safety. New Program The City shall conduct a nighttime safety audit of key areas of the City to see where deficiencies in environmental design may exist and should be improved. Key Areas should be defined as areas experiencing higher crime than City average by SLOPD. Planning Commission changed “develop” to “consider” emergency callboxes since most people have and use cell phones. PH1 - 123 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-96 5 PUBLIC & CULTURAL FACILITIES 5.21 Introduction As the County seat and a cultural center for the region, San Luis Obispo plans to accommodate several types of facilities to support government and cultural services. This section describes preferred locations for various types of facilities. POLICIES 5.22 Public Facilities 5.22.1 Grouping for Convenience The City shall support the continued grouping of Ggovernment offices that provide similar types of services should be grouped for efficient service delivery. Policy 5.1.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 5.22.1.1 Private Businesses Within any area shown as a preferred location for public facilities, there may be compatible private businesses, so long as they do not displace the preferred public agencies. Policy 5.1.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standards table, Table 1. 5.1.2 Joint Projects The City shall work with other Ggovernment agencies should to cooperatively plan for new or expanded facilities. They City should encourage agencies to consider joint projects when mutual objectives can be met. Policy 5.1.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 5.1.3 Civic Center The City shall promote the continued location of the following uses in the There should be a dDowntown civic center (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the civic center, along with compatible businesses: A. City Council offices and meeting rooms, clerk, administration, finance, attorney, personnel, community development, utilities, and public works administration and engineering. Any additional space for these functions should be in or close to City Hall. B. County supervisors offices and meeting rooms, administration, courts, jury commissioner, clerk, auditor, assessor, counsel, district attorney, personnel, engineering, planning and building, environmental coordinator, and voter registration. Any additional space for these functions should be provided in or close to the County Government Center (Courthouse block). PH1 - 124 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-97 Figure 5. Public and Cultural Facilities PH1 - 125 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-98 Policy 5.1.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and capitalization only. 5.1.4 Health Care The City shall promote the location of the following uses in There should be a health-care areas on Johnson Avenue near Bishop Street (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the health care area: A. Public Health Department; General Hospital, Mental Health Services; French Medical Center on Johnson Avenue near Bishop Street. B. Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center and associated health facilities on Casa and Murray Streets. A. B. Other compatible public or private offices or health facilities. found to support the continued viability of General Hospital. If County General Hospital is to be rebuilt, the City will evaluate other sites within the City for public health care facilities, including consideration of convenient access from regional transportation systems. C. Policy 5.1.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and currency (reflect changed use of General Hospital and add additional health care area around Sierra Vista Regional Medical center. 5.1.5 Social Services The City shall promote the location of the following uses in There should be a social-services area on in the general vicinity of South Higuera Street near Prado Road (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the social services area: County Social and Homeless Services; California Employment Development and Rehabilitation; fFederal Social Security Administration. This area should have sufficient space to accommodate regional offices of sState and fFederal agencies. Policy 5.1.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and capitalization only. 5.1.6 Related Offices Public offices not named in policies 5.1.4, 5.1.5, and 5.1.6, but functionally related to them, should be located in the appropriate area. Policy 5.1.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is not needed based on rephrasing of Policies 5.1.3, 5.1.4 and 5.1.5. 5.1.7 Unrelated Offices Public offices not named in policies 5.1.4, 5.1.5, and 5.1.6, and not functionally related to the named offices, should be consolidated at the social services area, or they may be expanded at their present locations or within designated office areas. Policy 5.1.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is not needed based on rephrasing of Policies 5.1.3, 5.1.4 and 5.1.5. PH1 - 126 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-99 5.1.8 Different Offices Government and private activities of types not listed in policies 5.1.4, 5.1.5, and 5.1.6 may be established in these identified areas, so long as they are compatible with and do not displace the government functions which should be located in the areas. Policy 5.1.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is not needed based on rephrasing of Policies 5.1.3, 5.1.4 and 5.1.5. 5.1.95.1.6 Other Government Functions Some government functions which have been provided at certain locations in the City should be located close to related activities, though they should not be bound to any one of the identified centers. Such functions include: A. Probation - suitable for the civic center (courts), the County operational center on Highway 1 (sheriff), or the social services area; B. Alcohol and drug treatment programs - suitable for the social-services area or the health-care area. C. Peripheral locations should be pursued for service vehicle storage. Policy 5.1.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No change proposed. 5.1.10 Consolidation Desired It would be desirable to consolidate government agencies dealing with environmental quality, such as the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County Air Pollution Control District. Policy 5.1.11 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is not useful. Building Intensity Dwellings 5.1.11 Buildings in Public Facility areas will have a wide range of characteristics, since they can range from downtown offices and meeting rooms to fire stations and maintenance yards at the edges of the City. The appropriate building intensity for each location will be decided through use permit and architectural review. Generally, the ratio of building floor area to site area should not exceed 1.0 in outlying locations, and 2.0 downtown. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, generally to reflect the standards for these items in neighboring land use districts. Dwellings may be provided only as caretaker quarters, as shelters (with discretionary review), or as part of a specially approved mixed-use development. The appropriate residential density would be set considering the maximum residential density allowed in any neighboring land use district. Policy 5.1.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force preserved last part of policy. PH1 - 127 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-100 5.25.1 Cultural Facilities 5.2.1 Cooperation The City should shall cooperate with other agencies and with community groups to help provide facilities for a library, and for arts and sciences which meet broad community cultural needs. Policy 5.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 5.2.2 Mission Plaza Area The City shall promote the area around the Mission Plaza An appropriate area for cultural facilities is the vicinity of Mission Plaza (Figure 5). Policy 5.2.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 5.2.3 Community Arts Support The City will shall continue to support community arts programs through a variety of means, such as loans, grants, and help in obtaining sites. Prog. 5.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. Task Force moved this from program to policy. 5.2.4 Public Art The City will shall continue to encourage inclusion of appropriate public art in all projects as appropriate. Prog. 5.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section. City has a public art program supported by an in-lieu fee program. This language would support that implementation. Task Force relocated from program to policy. PH1 - 128 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-101 PROGRAMS 5.2.5 City and County Offices Downtown The City and County will shall continue to work to jointly develop a plan for meeting their additional downtown space needs in the Downtown. The City shall work with the County to They will coordinate site selection, building design, circulation and utility services, parking, means to reduce vehicle tripstrip reduction, and funding. Prog. 5.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Program revised to better reflect City / County roles. 5.2.6 Performing Arts Center The City, Cal Poly, and the Performing Arts Foundation will jointly develop a large manage the performing arts theatercenter on the Cal Poly campus. Prog. 5.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The center has been constructed but ongoing management still requires collaboration. 5.2.7 Land Acquisition The City will attempt to acquire work with community organizations to secure land for cultural facilities or Mission Plaza extension as sites become availablein the Downtown area. Prog. 5.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Propose to restate as a policy and move to policy section for the Downtown area. Rephrased City’s role to support this activity. 5.2.8 Facility Reuse The City will shall undertake a study of its surplus facilities for possible reuse by cultural and non-profit groups. Prog. 5.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and clarity. PH1 - 129 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-102 6 RESOURCE PROTECTION 6.0 Overall Resource Protection POLICY 6.0.1 Resource Planning It is the policy of tThe City to shall protect its unique natural resources and systems by including their considerations and needs within its planning program, and giving those considerations and needs a planning priority co-equal with that accorded other community needs. Under this policy, the City will make provisions for the continued existence of its natural resources within the community. The term “community” thus includes not only the urbanized human community, dominated by urban land development and technological systems, but also a natural community rich in biological and geological diversity, as well as a pre-urban human community with a strong agricultural base. Policy 6.0.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. PROGRAMS 6.0.2 Resource Mapping The City shall prepare and maintain geographic information systems-based maps of the Ccity, the urban reserve, and the planning area to guide in land use designations and decision-making. Maps for the city and urban reserve shall be in sufficient detail to highlight all significant natural resources and systems. Maps for the planning area may be at a lesser degree of detail. The maps shall show at least the following resources: native plant communities, wildlife habitats and corridors, aquatic ecosystems, productive or potentially productive soils (prime or other unique agricultural soil types), viewsheds, terrain, hillsides, greenbelt areas. The overlay maps shall also show development constraints such as flood hazard areas, geological hazard areas, soil hazard areas (subsidence, liquefaction), noise impact areas, airport hazard and noise areas, radiation hazard areas. The maps shall provide the basis of determining where urban development is most appropriate, and where other needs of the community outweigh the desire or need for urban development. As a result of the findings of these maps, the City shall re- evaluate its land use designations and future plans for undeveloped areas, and revise the LUE land use map accordingly. Prog. 6.0.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited capitalization and to move language from policy below into this policy. PH1 - 130 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-103 6.0.2.1 Land Use Element Map Revision The maps shall provide the basis of determining where urban development is most appropriate, and where other needs of the community outweigh the desire or need for urban development. As a result of the findings of these maps, the City shall re- evaluate its land use designations and future plans for undeveloped areas, and revise the LUE land use map accordingly. Prog. 6.0.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This is not a program and is unnecessary. 6.0.3 Resource Protection Once resource areas worthy of protection are identified, tThe City shall seek to protect resource areas deemed worthy of permanent protection by fee acquisition, them by easement, or other permanent means. Prog. 6.0.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 6.1 Open Space Policies (See also the Growth Management section) 6.1.1 Open Space and Greenbelt Designations The City shall designate the following types of land as open space: A. Upland and valley sensitive habitats or unique resources, as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, including corridors which connect habitats. B. Undeveloped prime agricultural soils which are to remain in agricultural use as provided in policy 1.8.2. C. Those areas which are best suited to non-urban uses due to: infeasibility of providing proper access or utilities; excessive slope or slope instability; wildland fire hazard; noise exposure; flood hazard; scenic value; wildlife habitat value, including sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element; agricultural value; and value for passive recreation. D. A greenbelt, outside the urban reserve, that surrounds the ultimate boundaries of the urban area, and which should connect with wildlife corridors that cross the urbanized area. E. Sufficient area of each habitat type to ensure the ecological integrity of that habitat type within the urban reserve and the greenbelt, including connections between habitats for wildlife movement and dispersal; these habitat types will be as identified in the natural resource inventory, as discussed in the "Background to this Land Use Element Update" and in Community Goal #8. Public lands suited for active recreation will be designated Park on the General Plan Land Use Element Map. The City may establish an agricultural designation. (See the Conservation and Open Space Element for refinements of these policies.) Prog. 6.1.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force retained this language after revising definition of Open Space in Table 1. PH1 - 131 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-104 6.1.2 Open Space Uses Lands designated Open Space should be used for purposes which do not need urban services, major structures, or extensive landform changes. Such uses include: watershed protection; wildlife and native plant habitat; grazing; cultivated crops; and passive recreation. The City shall require that Bbuildings, lighting, paving, use of vehicles, and alterations to the landforms and native or traditional cultural landscapes on open space lands should be are minimized, so rural character and resources are maintained. Buildings and paved surfaces, such as parking or roads, shall not exceed the following: where a parcel smaller than ten acres already exists, five percent of the site area; on a parcel of ten acres or more, three percent. (As explained in the Conservation and Open Space Element, the characteristics of an open space area may result in it being suitable for some open space uses, but not the full range.) Parcels within Open Space areas should not be further subdivided. Prog. 6.1.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 6.1.3 Agriculture Agriculture is generally open land where there has been a history of agricultural cultivation or keeping of livestock, which remains generally open and in such use. Prog. 6.1.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Definition of Agricultural designation is relocated to the new uses and standards table (Table 1). 6.1.4 Interim Open Space The General Plan Land Use Element Map shows desired future uses for most land within the urban reserve line. However, the City has not decided the best eventual use for some areas. Such areas are designated Interim Open Space, indicating that they will be suitable for urban development when certain conditions are satisfied. Examples of such conditions include demonstrated need for further urban development that cannot be satisfied on already urbanized land, provision of proper access and utility service, and environmentally acceptable reduction of flood hazards. The Interim Open Space designation is to be changed to an urban classification only when the conditions necessary for development can be satisfied and a certain type of development is approved. After further study, it may be found that permanent Open Space is an appropriate classification for areas initially classified as Interim Open Space. Prog. 6.1.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Interim open space designation is proposed to be eliminated as these restrictions are covered under Section 8.0, Special Planning Areas. 6.1.5 Interim Open Space Uses and Parcel Sizes Uses within Interim Open Space areas should be the same as in Open Space areas (policies 6.1.1 and 6.1.2). Interim Open Space areas should not be further subdivided until a development plan or a specific plan is approved (pursuant to policy 1.12.3), except to separate land to be dedicated in fee to the City, or other responsible public or nonprofit agency, for permanent open space. PH1 - 132 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-105 Prog. 6.1.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Interim open space designation is proposed to be eliminated. See comment on Policy 6.1.4. 6.1.6 Eventual Uses This element identifies intended uses for each area designated Interim Open Space. Such areas are discussed under Optional Use and Special Design Areas, and Hillside Planning. One area not discussed under those headings is about 11 acres between Los Verdes Park and San Luis Obispo Creek, which may be used for residential development if the flood hazard is mitigated without significant harm to the creek. Prog. 6.1.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Interim open space designation is proposed to be eliminated. See comment on Policy 6.1.4. Introduction 6.2 Hillside Policies As noted in the open space section of this element and in the Conservation and Open Space Element, San Luis Obispo wants to keep open its steeper, higher, and most visible hillsides. Some of the lower and less steep hillside areas, however, are seen as suitable for development, particularly where development is coupled with permanent open space protection of the more sensitive areas. This section focuses on where and how some hillsides may be developed. 6.2.1 The City shall maintain establishes comprehensive standards and policies for hillside development for the following reasons: A. To protect and preserve scenic hillside areas and natural features such as the volcanic Morros, ridge lines, plant communities, rock outcroppings and steep slope areas that function as landscape backdrops for the community. B. To set the limits of commercial and residential development in hillside areas by establishing a permanent open space green belt at the edge of the community. C. To protect the health, safety and welfare of community residents by directing development away from areas with hazards such as landslides, wildland fires, flooding and erosion. Policy. 6.2.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This is not a policy but an introduction to the topic. PH1 - 133 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-106 6.2.2 Development Limits The City shall establish and maintain clear development limit lines for Hhillside planning areas should have carefully chosen development limit lines, and special design standards for the hillside areas which can be developed. The location of the development limit and the standards should cause development to avoid encroachment into sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, and public health and safety problems related to utility service, access, wildland fire hazard, erosion, flooding, and landslides and other geologic hazards. Also, the development limit line and the standards should help protect the Ccity’s scenic setting. (Locations of hillside planning areas are shown in Figure 6. More precise locations of the development limit line and the urban reserve line are shown on large-scale aerial photographs on file at the Community Development Department; these are part of the Land Use Element.) Policy 6.2.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and content. Community Development Department does not have this information in an accessible format. Program 6.3.2 added to define / maintain development limit lines using GIS. 6.2.3 Development Standards The City shall require Ddevelopment – including buildings, driveways, fences and graded yard areas – on hillside parcels toshall: A. Be entirely within the urban reserve line or development limit line, whichever is more restrictive (though parcel boundaries may extend beyond these lines when necessary to meet minimum parcel-size standards), unless one of the following three exceptions applies: 1. A location outside the urban reserve line or development limit line is necessary to protect public health and safety. 2. New wireless telecommunication facilities may be appropriate on South Street Hills inside the three-acre leasehold already developed with commercial and municipal radio facilities, subject to use permit approval and architectural review and approval. Applicants shall comply with all other provisions of this section, and demonstrate that (a) new facilities will not individually or additively interfere with City radio equipment necessary for emergency response coordination, and (b) will not cause on-site radio frequency radiation levels to exceed exposure standards established for the general public by the American National Standards Institute. 3. Where a legally built dwelling exists on a parcel which is entirely outside the urban reserve line or development limit line, a replacement dwelling may be constructed subject to standards B through H below. PH1 - 134 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-107 Figure 6. Hillside Planning Areas Figure 6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Following Task Force review and agreement on current Hillside Planning Areas, map will be updated. PH1 - 135 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-108 B. Keep a low profile and conform to the natural slopes; C. Avoid large, continuous walls or roof surfaces, or prominent foundation walls, poles, or columns; D. Minimize grading of roads; E. Minimize grading on individual lots; generally, locate houses close to the street; minimize the grading of visible driveways; F. Include planting which is compatible with native hillside vegetation and which provides a visual transition from developed to open areas; G. Use materials, colors, and textures which blend with the natural landscape and avoid high contrasts; H. Minimize exterior lighting. Policy 6.2.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.2.4 Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines The City shall require that Bbefore development occurs on any parcel which that crosses the urban reserve or development limit lines, the part outside the lines shall be protected as permanent open space. Policy 6.2.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.2.5 Development Credit Transfer Any residential development credit obtained from Open Space designations outside the urban reserve line or development limit line should be transferred to land in the Downtown Core or Specific Plan areainside the lines. Policy 6.2.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Development credit transfer program has proven difficult to implement. Policy direction is still applicable. 6.2.6 Homesites Outside the Limit Lines Where homesites are to be developed outside the urban reserve or development limit lines, and beyond the City’s jurisdiction they within the City’s greenbelt, the City shall encourage the County to promote the transfer of development credits into the Downtown Core or Specific Plan area. If development is to proceed in these areas, the City shall encourage the County to only allow creation of home sites consistent with the following guidelines: A. Be on land sloping less than 15 percent; B. Have effective emergency-vehicle access from a City street or County road; C. Be on a geologically stable site; D. Have adequate water supply for domestic service and fire suppression; E. Avoid areas with high wildland fire hazard; F. Be next to existing development; G. Avoid significant visual impacts; H. Be clustered to minimize impacts and retain open space. PH1 - 136 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-109 Policy 6.2.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Revised to recognize County jurisdiction outside city limits, promote transferring development credits, and to promote clustering (Item H). 6.2.7 Hillside Planning Areas The City shall urge the County to implement the following Hhillside policies apply to all hills in and around the City. Specific policies to address particular concerns for the areas as shown on Figure 6 are listed below. For each of these areas, land above the development limit line should be secured as permanent open space. A. The Cal Poly - Cuesta Park area includes the hill east of Cal Poly and north of Highway 101 near Cuesta Park. Development should be separated or protected from highway traffic noise and should have adequate fire protection. The City shall urge the County to conduct Aarchitectural review should be required forof development of on lots fronting Loomis Street to address visual impacts of development. B. The Woodland Drive area includes vacant land where residential development may occur in the vicinity of the high school and residential or medical-care facilities may occur in the vicinity of the hospital. Before further subdivision or dDevelopment of any of certain vacant land near Woodland Drive (Figure 7) a specific plan or development plan should be approved. This plan should shall address the following:, in addition to relevant items as noted in policy 2.3.1. 1. The location and design of new public streets and private drives serving several owners, and any necessary changes to existing streets in the area; 2. Water and sewer systems, including new storage tanks, pumps, main pipes, and access roads, and changes to existing facilities necessary for adequate service to the area; 3. New parcels and existing parcels to be changed or combined; 4. Location of building sites on parcels next to or crossing the urban reserve line; 5. Areas to be kept open through easements or dedication of fee ownership; 6. A program for transferring development potential, consistent with these hillside planning policies; 7. Location of creek easements to provide flood protection and to protect existing creekside vegetation; 8. Phasing of development and public improvements. C. The Goldtree area extends up the hill from the Alrita Street neighborhood. This is a minor expansion area which can accommodate single-family houses. 1. In addition to meeting the usual criteria for approving minor annexations, this area should: i. Provide a gravity-flow water system giving standard levels of service to all developed parts of the expansion area and correcting water-service deficiencies in the Alrita Street neighborhood; ii. Correct downslope drainage problems to which development within the expansion area would contribute. iii. A development plan or specific plan for the whole expansion area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or PH1 - 137 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-110 developed. (Existing houses inside the urban reserve line need not be annexed along with any new subdivision) iv. All new houses and major additions to houses should be subject to architectural review. D. The Orcutt area includes land on the western flanks of the Santa Lucia foothills east of the Southwood Drive neighborhood and Orcutt Road. No building sites should be located above the development limit line. Before further subdivision or development of land between the 320-foot and 460-foot elevations, land above the 460-foot elevation should be secured as permanent open space. All building sites should be below the 460-foot elevation. E. The Margarita area includes the southern slopes of the South Street Hills. No building sites should be located above the development limit line. F. The Stoneridge area includes land on the northern slopes of South Street Hills. Development west of the end of Lawrence Drive should be subject to architectural review and to measures assuring that building sites will be stable. G. The Calle Joaquin area should allow the continuation of a commercial use for the existing building on the hill, but no further development. H. The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150-foot elevation, in conjunction with any subdivision or development of the lower areas. (See also Optional Use and Special Design Areas Section 8.) I. The Billygoat acres area extends into the Irish Hills above Prefumo Creek. No further development should occur beyond the urban reserve line. J. The Prefumo Creek area extends into the Irish Hills west of Prefumo Canyon Road. Development should be limited to areas within the urban reserve line with permanent protection of the creeks and upper hillsides. PH1 - 138 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-111 Woodland Drive Specific Planning Area Figure 7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Figure no longer needed. PH1 - 139 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-112 K. The Madonna Inn area includes land west of Highway 101 on the lower slopes of San Luis Mountain and the northeast slopes of the foothill bordering Laguna Lake Park. 1. A specific plan or development plan for the whole area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or further developed. (See also Optional Use and Special Design Areas, policy Section 8.9.) 2. Upon amendment to an urban designation, the area designated Interim Open Space may accommodate a generously landscaped, low-intensity extension of the existing tourist facilities. The City shall require that Ddevelopment locations and building forms respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. 3. The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. 3. Any plan for further development in this area must address reconfiguration of the Marsh Street interchange. L. The Luneta Drive area includes parcels which may be used for houseshousing, so long as new construction and major additions to the houses are approved by the Architectural Review Commission. Policy 6.2.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Orcutt Area covered now by specific plan. Woodland area acquired with Bowden Ranch and several of the Upper Goldtree lots were also dedicated at a later time. However, 2.5 acres just above Skylark still out there as well as remaining Upper Goldtree lots and County property. Changes to Madonna are intended to distinguish between this area and the Madonna property considered under Section 8 near LOVR. 6.3 Hillside Programs (See also Section 10 Implementation) 6.3.1 Designating Sensitive Sites Subdivision approval in hillside planning areas will shall include designation of "sensitive sites," which are shall be subject to architectural review. Prog. 6.3.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.3.2 Transfer of Development Credits The City will add a "development transfer" section in its Zoning Regulations, to encourage the transfer of residential development allowed on land outside the urban reserve line to suitable land within the line, regardless of land ownership. Prog. 6.3.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Development credit transfer program has proven difficult to implement through Zoning Regulations due to limited areas of use. Update to zoning regulation not required to implement where other policy direction accommodates action. Edits recommended to keep policy direction for hillsides here but provide greater detail regarding allowed uses in Chapter 8. PH1 - 140 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-113 6.3.2 Delineation of Development Limit Lines The City shall create and maintain a GIS layer to accurately document development limit lines as they are applied in the General Plan. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Old mylar maps need to be digitized to be readily accessible to decision-makers, staff, applicants, and public. 6.3.3 Architectural Community Design Guidelines Through architectural reviewCommunity Design guidelines, the City will establish the presumption presumes that all hillside development occurs on sensitive sites, where architectural review is required. The Community Development Director will screen all proposals to identify any which do not need architectural review. The City will mitigate the visual impacts of hillside structures, including revising the way maximum building height is determined. Prog 6.3.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources TF retained with edit in first sentence, “community design guidelines” and addition of program language from below. 6.3.4 Maximum Building Height The City will mitigate the visual impacts of hillside houses, including revising the way maximum building height is determined. Prog 6.3.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force combined with program above. 6.4 Creeks Wetlands, and Flooding Policies Introduction San Luis Obispo's aquatic ecosystems consist of creeks, Laguna Lake, floodplains, marshes, wetlands, serpentine seeps, and springs. These aquatic ecosystems provide habitat, recreation, water purification, groundwater recharge, and soil production as well as natural flood protection by reducing the force of floodwaters as they spread and decelerate over floodplains. Creeks, which are the most obvious of these systems because they flow under and through the City, provide wildlife habitat, backyard retreats, and viewing and hiking pleasures, in addition to carrying storm water runoff. When some creeks overflow during major storms, they flood wide areas beyond their channels (Figure 8). San Luis Obispo wants to avoid injury or substantial property losses from flooding, while keeping or improving the creeks' natural character, scenic appearance, recreational value, and fish and wildlife habitat. PH1 - 141 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-114 Figure 7. Creeks and Floodplains Add street names and make blue less opaque (more transparent). PH1 - 142 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-115 6.4.1 Creek and Wetlands Management Objectives The City should shall manage its lake, creeks, wetlands, floodplains, and associated wetlands to achieve the multiple objectives of: A. Maintaining and restoring natural conditions and fish and wildlife habitat; B. Preventing loss of life and minimizing property damage from flooding; C. Providing recreational opportunities which are compatible with fish and wildlife habitat, flood protection, and use of adjacent private properties. D. Recognizing and distinguishing between those sections of creeks and Laguna Lake which are in previously urbanized areas, such as the dDowntown core, and sections which are in largely natural areas. Those sections already heavily impacted by urban development and activity may be appropriate for multiple use whereas creeks and lakeshore in a more natural state shall be managed for maximized ecological value. Policy 6.4.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.4.2 Citywide Network The City shall include Tthe lake, creeks, and wetlands should be as part of a citywide and regional network of open space, parks, and -- where appropriate -- trails, all fostering understanding, enjoyment, and protection of the natural landscape and wildlife. Policy 6.4.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.4.3 Amenities and Access The City shall require Nnew public or private developments adjacent to the lake, creeks, and wetlands must to respect the natural environment and incorporate the natural features as project amenities, provided doing so does not diminish natural values. Developments along creeks should include public access across the development site to the creek and along the creek, provided that wildlife habitat, public safety, and reasonable privacy and security of the development can be maintained, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. Policy 6.4.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.4.4 Open Channels The City shall require Aall open channels should be kept open and clear of structures in or over their banks. When necessary, the City may approve structures within creek channels under the limited situations described in the Conservation and Open Space Element. Policy 6.4.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. PH1 - 143 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-116 6.4.5 Porous Paving Runoff Reduction and Groundwater Recharge The City encourages shall encourage the use of porous paving methods to facilitate rainwater percolation for . Parking lots and paved roof areas and outdoor hardscaped areas 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. Policy 6.4.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force focused policy on groundwater recharge. NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following new policies are designed to enhance protection associated with stormwater drainage and flooding. 6.4.6 Development Requirements The City shall encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and impervious coverage and avoid floodplain areas and, where feasible, any channelization shall be designed to provide the appearance of a natural water course. 6.4.7 Discharge of Urban Pollutants The City shall require appropriate runoff control measures as part of future development proposals to minimize discharge of urban pollutants (such as oil and grease) into area drainages. 6.4.8 Erosion Control Measures The City shall require adequate provision of erosion control measures as part of new development to minimize sedimentation of streams and drainage channels. 6.5 Creeks and Flooding Programs 6.5.1 Previously Developed Areas To limit the potential for increased flood damage in previously developed urbanized areas, the City will shall ensure new development complies with the City’s flood plain ordinance, setbacks, specific plans, and design standards to minimize flood damage and flood plain encroachment.: A. Ensure that infill, remodel, and replacement projects: 1. Do not displace more flood water than previous structures on a site; 2. Do not contribute floating debris to flood waters; 3. 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. B. Require new infill buildings to have greater setbacks than their older neighbors, when necessary to achieve the purposes of this section. C. Remove man-made obstruction from channels. PH1 - 144 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-117 D. Ensure that any new development in the watershed detains rather than accelerates runoff from development sites. Prog. 6.5.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Recommended by City Engineer to refer to implementation measures rather than include them here as state and federal standards change over time. 6.5.2 National Flood Program The City will shall administer the National Flood Insurance Program standards. Prog. 6.5.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 6.5.3 Creekside Care and Notification In maintaining creek channels to accommodate flood waters, the City will shall notify owners of creeks and adjacent properties in advance of work, and use care in any needed removal of vegetation. Prog. 6.5.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. New Program The City shall evaluate the feasibility of establishing a financing district or districts to address flood concerns in affected areas. Cost and benefits will be weighed in relation to the cost of flood insurance for affected property owners. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Task Force added this program in response to testimony from committee member. PH1 - 145 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-118 7 AIRPORT AREA POLICIES NOTE TO REVIEWER: The City is working with an airport safety expert to develop a new set of guidelines for development near the airport. Policies in this section apply to the Airport Area, as shown on Figure 8. 7.3.2 Regional Service The City shall support tThe airport’s will continued to serve service to the region, consistent with the approved Airport Master Plan. and FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. Policy 7.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources 7.3.3 Airport Land Use Plan Land use density and intensity shall carefully balance noise impacts and the progression in the degree of reduced safety risk further away from the runways, consistent with California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines. The City shall use the Airport Master Plan forecasts of aviation activity as a reasonably foreseeable projection of ultimate aviation activity sufficient for long-term land use planning purposes. Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan. Prospective buyers of property which is subject to airport influence should be so informed. Policy 7.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. Airport Safety Zones Airport Safety Zones shall be consistent with California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines and substantiated by the San Luis Obispo County Airport Master Plan activity forecasts as used for noise planning purposes. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Airport Noise Compatibility The City shall use the aircraft noise analysis prepared for the Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact Report as an accurate mapping of the long term noise impact of the airport’s aviation activity that is tied to the ultimate facilities development depicted in the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. The City shall use the 60 dB CNEL aircraft noise contour (FAA and State aircraft noise planning standard) as the threshold for new urban residential areas. Interiors of new residential structures shall be constructed to meet a maximum 45 dB CNEL. PH1 - 146 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-119 NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources 7.3.4 City Annexation and Services The City intends to shall actively pursue annexation of the Aairport Aarea as noted in the Airport Area Specific Plan. Airport Area land inside the urban reserve shall be considered for annexation if it meets the criteria stated in Policy 1.12.4 and provisions in the Airport Area Specific Plan. Annexation of areas that do not meet these interim annexation criteria may be annexed subject to completion of environmental and economic studies and a specific plan. Pending annexation: Any urban development approved by the County shall be consistent with City development standards; and Urban development and provision of adequate resources and services needed citywide shall be closely monitored. Policy 7.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. Interim criteria are no longer applicable since specific plan has been adopted. 7.3.5 Greenbelt Protection The City shall ensure aAnnexation of the Airport Area Specific Plan, whether it occurs as one action or several, shall be is consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. An Airport Area aAnnexation shall not take effect unless the annexed area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of the following methods: A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land-conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication, which that shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. Policy 7.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 7.3.6 Internal Open Space The City shall ensure The areas designated for urban uses in the Airport Area Specific Plan, but not necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as site amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. In addition, the City shall ensure wildlife corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved. Policy 7.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources First sentence is not necessary as an element doesn’t need to say you must comply with other elements. PH1 - 147 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-120 Figure 8. Airport Area Figure 9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Figure 9 will be updated once airport section is complete. Currently doesn’t show full extent of area covered by AASP. TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 148 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-121 7.3.7 Development Before Annexation A. Areas which are designated for eventual urban development in the Airport Area Specific Plan may be developed during the interim with rural residential or rural commercial uses. In such areas, County development standards and discretionary review should assure that projects will not preclude options for future urban development consistent with the City’s planning policies and standards. Before any discretionary County land-use or land-division approval for such areas, a development plan for the site should be prepared, showing that circulation, water and other utility, and drainage proposals will be compatible with future annexation and urban development; and conditions of approval should include payment of City fees required to mitigate traffic, housing, and open space impacts. B. Any development within the urban reserve approved by the County prior to annexation should comply with City standards for roadway cross-sections, bus stops, walking and bicycle paths, landscaping, view protection, setbacks, preferred site layouts, and architectural character. Policy 7.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Minor edits proposed. 7.3.8 Transit Service The City shall work with SLOCOG, the County, RTA, the Airport, and area businesses to extend tTransit service linking development sites with the citywide bus system should be provided concurrent with any additional urban development in the Airport Areato the airport and County areas south of the City. Policy 7.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Policy reworded to promote the continued efforts of this extension. 7.3.9 Specific Plan The City will prepare a specific plan for land uses, habitat protection, circulation, utilities, and drainage within the Airport Area. Policy 7.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The Airport Area Specific Plan has been completed and adopted. 7.3.10 Business Parks 2 Location and Uses Business parks may be developed in areas designated for them. Business parks are to accommodate research and development and light manufacturing in a campus like setting. They should provide high quality design of public and private facilities. Land designated for a business park should not be further divided or developed until the City annexes the area and approves a master plan for the business park. PH1 - 149 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-122 Policy 7.9.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standard table (Table 1). 7.3.10.1 Building Intensity Building location and intensity standards will be provided in a specific plan for each business park. The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 1.0. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Dwellings may be provided only as caretaker quarters or as part of a specially approved mixed-use development. The appropriate residential density would be set considering the maximum residential density allowed in any neighboring residential area. (Also, see the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) Policies 7.9.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Relocated to new uses and standard table (Table 1). PH1 - 150 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-123 PROGRAMS 7.3.11 Specific Plan The City will work with Airport Area property owners to complete a specific plan. Prog. 7.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources The Airport Area Specific Plan has been completed and adopted. 7.3.127.3.9 Airline Service and Impacts The City will shall continue to work with the County and regional airlines to assure that regional airline services are continued and expanded to adequately serve the needs of the population in the service area of the airport.and conditions in the vicinity of the airport are consistent with the Circulation Element policies. Prog. 7.11 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Policy has been refocused to address airline service. It is not necessary for policy to require compliance with another element. 7.3.137.3.10 Growth Management The City will annex the Airport area denoted in the Airport Area Specific Plan and accommodate incremental development consistent with the growth management policies, including those concerning adequacy of resources and services and development paying its own way. Prog. 7.12 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to clarify applicability to AASP. 7.3.147.3.11 Open Space Dedication and In-lieu Fees In approving development proposals, the City will assure that Airport Area properties noted in the Airport Area Specific Plan secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City’s southerly urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of open space dedication. Prog. 7.13 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited to clarify applicability to AASP. County Airport Land Use Plan The City shall continue to work with the County Airport Land Use Commission to strive to achieve consistency between the County Airport Land Use Plan and the City’s General Plan. If consistency cannot be achieved, the City shall preserve and maintain as a plausible alternative its constitutional land use authority to overrule the Airport Land Use Commission with regard to adopting General Plan policies that are consistent with the purposes of the PH1 - 151 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-124 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, State Aeronautics Act and State Law. Applicable sections of the Zoning Regulations and Specific Plans shall be amended accordingly. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources PH1 - 152 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-125 8 OPTIONAL USE & SPECIAL DESIGN PLANNINGFOCUS AREAS NOTE TO REVIEWER: The current General Plan contains a range of policies and programs that address the special needs of a number of specific locations in the community. These are referred to in the General Plan update as “Special Planning Areas”. As part of the update, these have been modified as follows: A. With the exception of the Downtown, which has its own section, all of the policy dealing with a specific location has been moved to this section. B. Each area will be detailed with issues to be addressed and the expected level of review. INTRODUCTION In and near the CityWithin the Planning Area are several areas where it is appropriate to consider a range or mix of uses which do not correspond with any one open-space, residential, commercial, or public designation used by this element. However, a particular use or mix of uses may not be desirable unless it is chosen in combination with a specific physical design which solves problems of relationships between activities within the site, and between the site and its neighbors. In addition, there are areas where special design concepts can help revitalization efforts. In optional use and special designSpecial Focus Aareas, the City intends to do one or both more of the following: A. Require a specific plan for areas with complex development parameters (e.g. land use mix, significant infrastructure needs environmental site constraints), prior to development. A.B. Make a choice about appropriate land uses based on information which will become available. In some cases, the choice will be connected with approval of a development plan, possibly with customized limits on specific activities and requirements for off-site improvements or dedications. B.C. Work with properties in areas where an Encourage innovative design approachconcepts which is needed to help revitalize and beautify the area. Each optional use and special design area that is mostly open land may be designated Interim Open Space until the City approves a plan for use of the area. Optional use and special design areasSpecial Focus Areas are designated by number on the General Plan Land Use MapDiagram, and are indicated on Figure 10. These areas and the guidelines for their development are listed below. (The number following the decimal point corresponds to the map number.). The following areas require a specific plan prior to development: SP-1 (Margarita), SP-2 (Dalidio), SP-3 (Madonna), and SP-4 (Avila Ranch). The special planning areas are those that present opportunities to develop customized land use approaches or special design implementation to enhance their appearance and achieve their respective development potential: Foothill Blvd., Upper Monterey, Mid- Higuera, Caltrans site, General Hospital site, Broad Street Area, Madonna Inn area, Sunset Drive-in, Pacific Beach, Calle Joaquin auto sales area, LOVR Creek area, and Broad Street at Tank Farm area. PH1 - 153 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-126 Figure 9. Optional Use and Special Design Focus Areas Figure 10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Figure 10 will be updated once Task Force and City Council input on sites is complete. TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 154 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-127 Short-term Plan Long-Term Plan Figure 11: Mid-Higuera Enhancement Plan Figure 11 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources It is not recommended to included other adopted plan graphics in General Plan, as they represent only a part of the adopted plan and can be misused out of context. PH1 - 155 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-128 POLICIES 8.3.1 Special Focus Areas To help guide the development of large land areas (previously referred to as “expansion areas”) and to provide guidance on the redevelopment of sites identified, the City shall use the following policy statements to guide their review and actions relative to these properties. 8.3.2 Specific Plan Areas 8.3.1.18.3.2.1 Specific Plan / General Plan Amendment The City shall require the completion and approval of a specific plan and associated General Plan Amendment prior to annexation (if applicable) and development of land within an area designated as a Specific Plan Area on Figure 10. The required General Plan Amendment will modify the General Plan Land Use Diagram to reflect the land use diagram from the approved specific plan, based on the land uses listed under “Performance Standards” for each site. For each specific plan site identified in this section, the location, purpose and performance standards for that site are defined. The performance standards section defines the following standards that must be met as part of the specific plan submitted for each site. Type. This defines the basic type of use being described. Designations Allowed: This defines the standard General Plan designations that can be used to describe the development proposed. See Table 1 for ranges allowed. % of Site: This defines the percent of each site (using the gross project site) that can be used for each type of land use. Minimum: This provides a minimum development assumed for each site. For residential and commercial types, these are not considered requirements, and a number lower than that shown can be proposed. Maximum: In order to exceed the minimum development for a given site, transfer of development credits or other permanent protection of open space would be provided. Development credits would be transferred from areas in the city, the urban reserve, or the greenbelt where development would be less appropriate, generally those designated conservation/open space or, on the County's map, agriculture or rural lands. The performance standards listed are to supplement other City requirements, standards, and Zoning Code requirements. If a conflict occurs, the most stringent standard shall apply. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources New policy needed to define that large development areas will require additional planning review and approval. Concept of transfer of development credits is relocated from existing Policy 2.3.4. PH1 - 156 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-129 8.3.2.2 Specific Plan Content All specific plans prepared for a Specific Plan Area must meet the requirements of State law and be comprised of four planning frameworks. Within each framework, the specific plan will provide the goals and policies that will guide future decisions on projects within the specific plan area. The plan will also include a detailed implementation plan that will identify responsibilities, financing requirements, and phasing / timing. The Land Use Framework will include the proposed land use pattern, actual development densities in each subarea on the project site, and development phasing. The framework will also include specifics on development standards. The Specific Plan prepared will provide complete guidance on the land use provisions that will guide future development within the Planning Area. At a minimum, these provisions will address the following topics. In consultation with City staff, other topics may be required depending on site specific needs. Land Use Classification. A land use classification system that clearly identifies the uses that may be allowed in each subarea. Based on the land use designations listed under “Performance Standards” section for each site, the specific plan will provide further details on development standards for each subarea. This classification system would use clear terminology to define and further describe allowable uses. Both the land use classification system and the uses allowed within the various subareas will provide for an overall mix of uses. General Site Planning and Development Standards. These standards will specify the requirements that would be applied to all development and land uses regardless of the applicable land use designation. These would address, as appropriate, sensitive resources; site access requirements; energy efficiency; fences, walls, hedges, buffers, and other screening; noise regulations; outdoor lighting standards; performance standards (e.g., air quality, glare, vibration, etc.), undergrounding of utilities; and other similar topics. Planning should also address how the development will be designed to enhance compatibility with adjacent properties. Development Standards. Development standards for each land use designation (e.g., building forms, design objectives, land use objectives, height limitations, setback requirements, site coverage requirements, etc.) will be organized in tables and graphically illustrated wherever possible. Housing Mix. The specific plan will discuss the proposed mix of housing types within the area. In keeping with the City’s Housing Element, affordable housing requirements and density bonus provisions and related incentives will be incorporated as appropriate. A key to the housing component will be to incorporate a mix of housing types, and to provide phasing mechanisms that ensure to the City the development of this housing mix as a part of each phase of the project. The Design Framework will provide detailed design guidelines that will be used as the specific plan is implemented / developed. The purpose of these guidelines will be to establish the expected level of design within the area while still maintaining project flexibility and innovation. The objective of this framework is not to dictate a specific design, but to establish design expectations. PH1 - 157 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-130 The design guidelines will be illustrated to help explain the intent and expectations. This part of the Specific Plan will also incorporate detailed landscaping standards. The Design Framework will also provide guidance on the integration of the streetscape into the overall project design. The framework will define public improvements and the public rights-of-way to define the overall character of the streetscape. The Circulation Framework will include the proposed circulation network system elements, design standards, and system phasing. This framework will address all modes of circulation as well as parking and loading standards if different from the standard City requirements. The Infrastructure / Public Facilities Framework will cover infrastructure requirements (water, sewer, storm drainage, electricity, natural gas, and communications) as well as parkland, schools, and other public facilities. For infrastructure, the framework will address the proposed trunk infrastructure system improvements and system phasing necessary to support implementation of the land use plan and financing mechanisms to implement planned facilities. PH1 - 158 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-131 8.3.2.3 SP-1, Margarita Area Specific Plan Update Location: The Margarita Area covers about 420 acres bounded by South Higuera Street, Broad Street, Tank Farm Road, and the ridge of the South Street Hills in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo. Purpose: Adopted in October 2004, the Margarita Area Specific Plan contains five key principles: open space and sensitive resource production, cohesive neighborhood creation, transit supporting land uses and densities, pedestrian environment, and minimizing infrastructure costs. The approved specific plan includes 868 residential dwelling units, as well as a business park, a neighborhood park, sports fields, and open space areas. Over 40 percent of the land area is designated as open space and 56 acres are designated as parks. The City shall consider this area as potentially appropriate to accommodate additional housing. Revisions to the Margarita Area Specific Plan will be required if residential development in excess of that accommodated in the plan is proposed. PH1 - 159 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-132 8.3.2.4 SP-2, Dalidio Specific Plan Area Location: This specific plan area is located in the southwest quarter of the city at the corner of Madonna Road and Dalidio Drive. The site is approximately 132 acres and is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is primarily flat topographically. The entire site is within the City’s Planning Area, but is outside the current city limits. Purpose: This project site should be developed as a mixed use project that maintains the agricultural heritage of the site, provides a commercial / office transition to the existing commercial center to the north, and provides a diverse housing experience. Protection of the adjacent creek and a well-planned integration into the existing circulation system will be required. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues. a. Provide land and appropriate financial support for development of a Prado Road connection. Appropriate land to support road infrastructure identified in the EIR (overpass or interchange) at this location shall be dedicated as part of any proposal. a. a. Circulation connections to integrate property with surrounding circulation network for all modes of travel. b. b. Connection to Froom Ranch and Calle Joaquin, if proposed, shall not bifurcate agricultural lands. Any connection to Calle Joaquin shall be principally a secondary / emergency access by design. c. Development shall include a transit center. Developer shall work with transit officials to provide express connections to Downtown area. d. Maintain agricultural views along Highway 101 by maintaining active agricultural uses on the site, and maintain viewshed of Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis. e. Maintain significant agricultural and open space resources on site. Land dedicated to Agriculture shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. f. Where buffering or transitions to agricultural uses are needed to support viability of the agricultural use, these shall be provided on lands not counted towards the minimum size for the agriculture / open space component. Provide appropriate transition to agricultural uses on-site. g. Integrate agricultural open space with adjacent SLO City Farm and development on property. h. Site should include walkable retail and pedestrian and bicycle connections to surrounding commercial and residential areas. i. Commercial and office uses shall have parking placed behind and to side of buildings so as to not be a prominent feature. j. Neighborhood Commercial uses for proposed residential development shall be provided. k. Potential flooding issues along Prefumo Creek need to be studied and addressed without impacting off-site uses. PH1 - 160 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-133 l. All land uses proposed shall be in keeping with safety parameters described in this General Plan or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. m. Historic evaluation of the existing farm house and associated structures shall be included. Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum Maximum Residential LDR MDR MHDR HDR 350 units 500 units Commercial NC CC 50,000 SF 200,000 SF Office/High tech) O 50,000 SF 150,000 SF Hotel/Visitor- serving 200 rooms Parks PARK 5.8 ac Open Space / Agriculture OS AG Minimum 50% 65 ac No maximum Public n/a Infrastructure n/a Planning Commission changed hotel rooms to 200 from 150 at the request of the applicant. PH1 - 161 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-134 8.3.2.5 SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area Location: This site includes just over 111 acres and is located directly west of the intersection of Los Osos Valley Road and Calle Joaquin. Purpose: The purpose of the specific plan is to provide design flexibility that will secure the appropriate development of the site while protecting sensitive environmental resources on the site. Development on the site should be a compact, mixed use project that provides workforce housing options and neighborhood commercial uses that support pedestrian and bicycle access. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues. a. Develop a design that is sensitive to environmental constraints and adjusts accordingly through design. Constraints include wetland protection, slope protection, historic structures, and open space protection. b. Maintain viewshed of surrounding mountains and secure steeper hillsides as protected open space areas. c. Variable height limits will be required to protect views of adjacent hills. d. Provide access to trails. e. Provide a plan for adequate and safe infrastructure, including appropriate points of access to Los Osos Valley Road. f. Address neighborhood commercial needs of new neighborhood. g. Provide connectivity to adjacent development. Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum Maximum Residential (Mixed Use) MDR MHDR HDR 200 units 250 units Commercial NC CR 200,000 SF 350,000 SF Parks PARK Open Space / Agriculture OS AG 50 % minimum Public n/a Infrastructure n/a PH1 - 162 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-135 8.3.2.6 SP-4, Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area Location: Avila Ranch is located on the north side of Buckley Road at the far southern edge of the City of San Luis Obispo. The three parcels that make up the Avila Ranch area comprise approximately 150 acres. The entire site is located within the Airport Area Specific Plan. Purpose: This area will be developed as primarily a residential neighborhood development with supporting neighborhood commercial, park, recreation facilities, and open space/resource protection. Within the project, emphasis should be on providing a complete range of housing types and afford abilities. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues: a. Provision of a variety of housing types and affordability levels. b. Modification of the Airport Area Specific Plan to either exclude this area or designate it as a special planning area within the Airport Area Specific Plan. c. Provision of buffers along Buckley Road and along eastern edge of property from adjacent agricultural uses. d. Provision of open space buffers along northern and western boundaries to separate this development from adjacent service and manufacturing uses. e. Provision of open space buffers and protections for creek and wildlife corridor that runs through property. f. Safety and noise parameters described in this General Plan and the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act; or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. g. Participation in enhancement to Buckley Road and enhancement of connection of Buckley Road to South Higuera Street. h. Appropriate internal and external pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections to the City’s circulation network. i. Implementation of the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan including connections to the Bob Jones Trail. j. Water and wastewater infrastructure needs as detailed in the City’s Water and Wastewater Master Plans. This may include funding and/or construction of a wastewater lift station. k. Fire protection and impacts to emergency response times. l. Architectural design that relates to the pastoral character of the area and preserves view of agrarian landscapes. m. Provision of a neighborhood park. PH1 - 163 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-136 Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum Maximum Residential LDR MDR MHDR HDR 500 700 Commercial NC 15,000 SF 25,000 SF Open Space / Agriculture OS AG 50%1 Public n/a Infrastructure n/a 1 Up to 1/3 of the open space may be provided off-site or through in-lieu fees consistent with the Airport Area Specific Plan. Required Open Space may be reduced up to 30% of the site proportionally to the amount of affordable housing provided on-site in a ratio consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation beyond inclusionary housing requirements. Planning Commission clarified the ability to pro-rate open space credit in proportion to amount of affordable housing provided on-site in excess of inclusionary housing requirements. PH1 - 164 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-137 8.3.3 Special Planning Areas NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following presents the other sites evaluated as part of the physical alternatives included in the General Plan Update plus some other sites carried over from the existing General Plan and not completed or otherwise addressed. The policies under Section 8.2 provide site specific guidance on the development / redevelopment of sites in the city. For sites that have existing development, In areas 8.1 through 8.5, renovation of streetscapes, landscaping, and building facades is encouraged. The City should work with shall require property owners to prepare area plans with land uses consistent with this section, as well as multi-modal circulation and infrastructure facilities as appropriate, containing design guidelines and implementation programs. Programs The City may consider include implementation incentives for redevelopment areas, such as variations from development standards and/or participation in the installation or financing of infrastructureor loan funds. INTRO Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Revised to address current content of section. 8.3.2 Madonna Road Regional Area Policy 8.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Existing General Plan contains no guidance on this area. No separate treatment of the existing commercial area is proposed. For Dalidio property, see Policy 8.1.4. 8.3.2.18.3.3.1 Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area This area, which includes land on both sides of Foothill Boulevard between Chorro and Santa Rosa, is currently developed as commercial centers that include highway and neighborhood serving commercial uses. At the affected property owners’ request, the boundary of this area on the north side of Foothill may be extended to include one or more of the existing commercial properties west of Chorro Street. The City shall work with property owners / developers to redevelop the area as mixed use (either horizontal or vertical mixed use) to include a mix of uses as described under the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial and Medium High to High Density Residential designations. The non-residential component of the project should include elements that serve the nearby neighborhoods. Examples include: specialty stores and services food service entertainment, and recreational facilities (except that movie theaters, nightclubs, bars/taverns and restaurants serving alcohol after 11 pm shall be prohibited). As part of this project, the City will evaluate adjustments to parking requirements to account for predominant pedestrian and bike access. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. Redevelopment plans shall include consideration of improving the existing complex intersections of Planning Commission asked that this section be broken into paragraphs and items bulleted where possible. No changes to content were made. PH1 - 165 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-138 Foothill/Chorro/Broad, the desirability of modifying Boysen at and through the property on the northeast corner of the area, and enhancement of pedestrian, bicycle and transit connections across Foothill and to the campus. Among other possible incentives, building height adjustments on the North side of Foothill may be considered with mixed use development. The Fire Station will be maintained or relocated within the area. Policy 8.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is blank in the existing General Plan. Language added to reflect Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives and comments received during Community Workshop #3 (December 1, 2012). Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. 8.3.3.2 Upper Monterey In the Upper Monterey area, the emphasis will be on revitalization and enhancement. The area above Johnson shall have an emphasis on land use compatibility and neighborhood preservation. The following actions will be pursued in this area. a. The City shall investigate adding the Upper Monterey area to the Downtown Parking District, thereby allowing in-lieu payment towards common parking facilities. b. The City shall integrate a new Downtown Transit Center in the Upper Monterey area along Santa Rosa Street and provide enhanced connectivity to the center from the Upper Monterey area. c. The City will work with hotels in the Upper Monterey area to provide shuttle service to the Downtown and Downtown Transit Center. d. The City will promote restaurant development in the Upper Monterey area, and include outdoor dining opportunities and other public activities oriented toward Monterey Street. North of California, these types of activities shall be prohibited on the creek side of buildings. e. The City will evaluate reconfiguring Monterey Street in this area to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to Downtown and to Cal Poly. f. The City will work with local hotels and Cal Poly to develop enhanced meeting rooms and conference facilities. These types of facilities would not be envisioned on the east side of Monterey north of California Street. No stand-alone conference center is envisioned in this area. g. The City will work with developers to assemble adjacent properties into lots of suitable size for redevelopment limited to areas southwest of California Street. h. The City will develop an Upper Monterey area master plan and design guide that will provide guidance on street enhancements, façade improvement programs, and pedestrian enhancement along Monterey Street. As part of this effort, the City will investigate the ability to apply form-based codes to guide future development and will involve residents in adjoining areas as Planning Commission modified the introduction to include emphasis on neighborhood compatibility; modified items d. and f. to reflect use compatibility concerns. All changes were provided in response to neighborhood concerns. PH1 - 166 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-139 well as business and property owners along Monterey Street as part of the public review process in development of the master plan/design guide. Particular attention will be given to creek protection, noise, safety, light and glare, and privacy impacts to adjoining neighborhoods . Program: The City will review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve residents to ensure that neighborhood concerns are addressed. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. 8.3.2.28.3.3.3 Mid-Higuera Area The City will prepare and adopt aupdate the plan for this multi-block commercial area to reflect current needs and changes that have occurred since the 2001 plan was adopted. showing any desired street and driveway changes, flood mitigation measures, and opportunities for a linear park along San Luis Obispo Creek. The plan could also serve as a "conceptual redevelopment plan," guiding private construction on sites affected by any widening of Higuera Street or San Luis Obispo Creek. (See Figure 101) Policy 8.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Covered by the Mid-Higuera Street Enhancement Plan that was adopted in 2001. Propose to reword for update of this plan. As plan is complete, and now reworded as an update, this should be moved to be a Program. 8.3.3.4 Caltrans Site While this area is within the Mid-Higuera Area, the unique qualities and opportunities provided by the site warranted special consideration in the General Plan. This area is planned for redevelopment from a Caltrans office and yard complex to a mixed use development. Commercial uses will be as described under the Tourist Commercial designation with some residential incorporated using a Medium High to High Density Residential component. Redevelopment plans shall consider the suitability of realignment of the Madonna/South Higuera intersection. The site should be developed to serve as a gateway into the community, with consideration of additional open space uses, retention and rehabilitation of the Master List historic structure, and retention of Heritage Trees on the site. Conference center-type uses are encouraged along with other appropriate tourist-serving uses as appropriate for the site. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. The site shall also include a park site north of Madonna Road. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. Planning Commission converted policy I into a program with minor modifications to language. PH1 - 167 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-140 8.3.3.5 General Hospital Site The General Hospital site includes County-owned property including the old hospital building (which is planned to remain as an office / treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) and will include the ability to support residential care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas. The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as Open Space. The City shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space outside of the urban reserve line as part of any development proposal. The undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will remain designated for Public uses. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. 8.3.2.38.3.3.6 Broad Street Area The City shall implement the South Broad Street Area Plan to (Appendix X) to create a safe, attractive and economically vital neighborhood with a mix of complementary land uses. The Area Plan shall: a. Encourage innovative design concepts that help revitalize and beautify the area. b. Facilitate housing development to meet the full range of community housing needs. a.c. Improve circulation safety and connectivity within the area and across Broad Sreet. Policy 8.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources This policy is blank in the existing General Plan. Addition reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. Direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013 was to complete this plan in keeping with endorsement provided by the City Council at their September 17, 2013 meeting. 8.3.2.48.3.3.7 Madonna Inn Area The Madonna Inn Area includes land west of Highway 101 on the lower slopes of San Luis Mountain and the northeast slopes of the foothill bordering Laguna Lake Park. This area may be developed further only if surrounding hillsides including area outside the Urban Reserve Line are permanently protected as open space. (See also hillside planning policiespolicy 6.2.6.K.) a. A specific plan or development plan for the whole area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or further developed. (See also Optional Use and Special Design Areas, Policy 8.9.) b. Upon amendment to an urban designation, the area designated Interim Open Space, may accommodate a generously landscaped, low intensity extension of the existing tourist facilities. This area may also be suitable for PH1 - 168 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-141 assisted and/or senior living facilities. Development locations should be clustered and building forms should respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and should maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. c. Land southwest of the Bianchi ranch house driveway, designated Interim Open Space, may accommodate a generously landscaped, low-intensity extension of the existing tourist facilities. Development locations and building forms should respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and should maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. d.c. The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. d. Any plan for further development in this area must address reconfiguration of the Marsh Street interchange and larger circulation issues throughout the area. e. Walking and biking paths shall be provided as appropriate to connect to the City’s network and to the Downtown, amenities along Madonna Road, and open space areas. Policy 8.9.1 Policy 8.9.2 Policy 8.9.3 Policy 8.9.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources To be consistent with other sites, the direction provided under existing Policies 8.9.1, 8.9.2, 8.9.3 and 8.9.4 were co- located and numbers replaced with letters. Additional policy direction regarding circulation, uses, and open space was provided by Task Force. 8.3.2.58.3.3.8 Sunset Drive-in Theater Area This 2538-acre area should be further developed only if flooding can be mitigated without significant harm to San Luis Obispo Creek. Until flood hazards are mitigated, continued agricultural use and low-intensity recreational use are appropriate. Any use drawing substantial regional traffic also depends on providing a full interchange needed infrastructure at Prado Road and extending Prado Road to connect with Madonna Road. Once flooding, and access, and agricultural preservation issues are resolved, and agricultural preservation requirements are met, the area would be suitable for government agencies' regional offices (see also Policy 5.1.6).development as a mixed use (horizontal or vertical) development with a mix of Commercial uses. Permanent open space shall be required in order to protect the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek. As part of future development, a full assessment of the Drive-in Theater site’s potential as a historic resource will need to be evaluated and addressed. Bicycle connectivity as referenced in the Bicycle Transportation Plan is an important component of future development of the area. PH1 - 169 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-142 The site may need to be designed to accommodate the Homeless Services center. Policy 8.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. 8.3.3.9 Pacific Beach Site This area is planned for redevelopment from current use as a continuation school, school office and park uses to commercial retail uses along Los Osos Valley Road and Froom Ranch Road and the remaining site maintained under a Park designation. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. 8.3.3.10 Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area These four vacant lots are suitable for commercial mixed use and other uses described under the Tourist Commercial designations. Portions of the site may be appropriate for use as auto sales, depending on market demand. Development of this area must address preservation of and transition to the agricultural parcels/uses to the northwest; connectivity to the Dalidio Ranch area; viewshed preservation; and treatment as a gateway to the City visible from Highway 101. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. 8.3.3.11 LOVR Creekside Area This area is heavily constrained by flood potential along the western boundary as well as limited circulation access to the site given its proximity to the proposed LOVR / Highway 101 interchange and its limited frontage on LOVR. Flooding and access issues must be resolved prior to developing Medium High Density Residential (in areas adjacent to existing residential uses). Agricultural Designations must be maintained along the west side of site. As part of future development, compatibility with adjacent residential areas to the east will be required. Permanent protection of the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek will need to be addressed as part of proposed development. The south side of the site will also need to accommodate relocation of LOVR right-of-way and changes related to the planned Highway 101 interchange. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. 8.3.3.12 Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site Located at the northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, this approximate 10 acre site will be used as a mixed use site, providing for a mix of PH1 - 170 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-143 uses as described under the Community Commercial and Office designations and residential limited to upper floors. Areas along the creek on the western edge of the site will be appropriately buffered to provide creek protections. Attention to connectivity, safety and comfort of bicycle and pedestrian circulation will be especially important in the development of this corner. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force and Planning Commission direction on physical alternatives. Reflects direction from City Council meeting held October 15, 2013. CalFire /Cal Poly-owned property on Highway 1 The City shall collaborate with Cal Poly in updating the Master Plan for development of campus property. Master Plan direction for this property shall address sensitive visual and habitat resources, circulation issues, impacts to City services, transition and potential impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force direction to remove Interim Open Space designation and provide policy guidance for future development. North Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll) Future development of this area shall address open space requirements under 1.12.7 and open space buffers in accordance with Conservation and Open Space Element policy 8.3.2. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access, and transition to existing neighborhoods. The steep hillside should be dedicated as Open Space and residential lots grouped at the bottom of the hill closer to Foothill. Development shall provide a parking lot and trail access to Bishops Peak. Circulation connectivity shall be provided to Los Cerros Drive. Density shall be limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force direction to remove Interim Open Space designation and provide policy guidance for future development. Alrita Properties Future development of this area shall address hillside planning requirements under 6.2.7 B. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access; visual impacts, and transition to existing neighborhoods. Additional analysis will need to occur in the LUCE EIR to evaluate potential water service issues. While there is a pump station nearby, more analysis is needed to determine if the City’s water distribution system can adequately serve development in this area. Density shall be limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Reflects direction from the Task Force direction to remove Interim Open Space designation and provide policy guidance for future development. 8.3.3 Santa Barbara Street Area Policy 8.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources PH1 - 171 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-144 Railroad District Plan has been adopted and guides development in this area. 8.3.4 Los Osos Valley Gap This 16-acre site should be developed if land in common ownership to the east is permanently preserved as open space. The following are possible uses for the area designated Interim Open Space. Vehicle sales; Multifamily housing; An open space corridor, trail, or both, to connect Laguna Lake Park and Prefumo Creek with the Irish Hills. Policy 8.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Deleted policy as this property has been developed with Target center development and open space dedication. 8.3.5 Dalidio-Madonna-McBride Area This approximately 180-acre area of prime farm land bounded by Madonna Road, Highway 101, Central Coast Plaza, and Prefumo Creek is in three ownerships. The City intends to preserve at least one-half of this signature working agricultural landscape at the southern gateway to San Luis Obispo as it existed in 1994. Policy 8.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Covered by new and expanded Policy 8.1.4. 8.3.5.1 Land southwest of the Bianchi ranch house driveway Land southwest of the Bianchi ranch house driveway, designated Interim Open Space, may accommodate a generously landscaped, low-intensity extension of the existing tourist facilities. Development locations and building forms should respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and should maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. Policy 8.9.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Information moved into Policy on the Madonna Inn Area. 8.3.5.2 West of Highway 101 The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. Policy 8.9.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Information moved (unedited) into Policy on the Madonna Inn Area. 8.3.5.3 Further development Any plan for further development in this area must address reconfiguration of the Marsh Street interchange. Policy 8.9.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources PH1 - 172 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-145 Information moved (unedited) into Policy on the Madonna Inn Area. 8.3.6 Irish Hills Area This approximately 110-acre area extends from Los Osos Valley Road to the base of the Irish Hills, and from Madonna Road to Auto Park Way. It shall be zoned Conservation/Open Space upon annexation, and shall be zoned for appropriate urban districts upon approval of development plans. Policy 8.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Covered by new and expanded Policy 8.1.4. 8.3.6.1 North of the Garcia Drive intersection About 38 acres northerly from the vicinity of the Garcia Drive intersection is designated Medium-Density Residential. This area may accommodate about 500 dwellings. There should be a range of housing types, with low-density, medium- density, and medium-high density development each occupying about one-third of the area. While a specific plan is not required, development plans (described in policy 1.12.3) are required and should include the following: A. Street intersections consistent with the Circulation Element and no driveway access, to minimize disruption of traffic flow along Los Osos Valley Road. B. Pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle access between any separate development sites, in addition to access provided by Los Osos Valley Road. C. Sufficient setbacks for traffic noise mitigation. D. Building heights, setbacks, and spacing to allow views of the Irish Hills from Los Osos Valley Road. E. Permanent open space protection of hill areas at least equal to the development area. Policy 8.10.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Deleted policy as this property has been developed. 8.3.6.2 South of the Garcia Drive intersection About 72 acres southerly from the vicinity of the Garcia Drive intersection is designated General Retail. While a specific plan is not required, development plans (described in policy 1.12.3) are required and should include the following: A. Street intersections consistent with the Circulation Element and no driveway access, to minimize disruption of traffic flow along Los Osos Valley Road. PH1 - 173 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-146 B. Pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle access integrating circulation among any separate development sites, in addition to access provided by Los Osos Valley Road. C. Building heights, setbacks, and spacing to allow views of the Irish Hills from Los Osos Valley Road. D. Permanent open space protection of hill areas at least equal to the development area. Policy 8.10.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Deleted policy as this property has been developed (Home Depot / Costco development sites). PH1 - 174 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-147 9 SUSTAINABILITY NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following presents a new goal and supporting policies and programs relative to enhancing sustainability. These additions build upon other existing and new policies in the Land Use and Circulation Elements marked with the sustainability icon NOTE TO REVIEWER: New Goal Proposed Support statewide and regional efforts to create more sustainable communities, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and develop transportation systems that support all modes of circulation. 9.3.1 Introduction The City shall take a leadership role in the county in the development of sustainable plans and programs to guide future development in the city and the region. 9.3.2 Regional Coordination The City shall work with SLOCOG to develop and periodically update the Sustainable Communities Strategy as part of the Regional Transportation Planning process and SLOCOG shall be encouraged to consider the City’s General Plan when developing the Sustainable Communities Strategy. 9.3.3 Sustainability Coordination The City shall review SLOCOG’s Regional Transportation Plan, including the Sustainable Communities Strategy, as it prepares and reviews updates to the General Plan, General Plan Amendments, specific plans, changes in zoning regulations, capital improvement plans and other infrastructure plans to determine consistency and allow for CEQA streamlining and eligibility for State transportation funding. 9.3.4 Climate Action Plan The City shall maintain and implement its Climate Action Plan to reduce community and municipal GHG emissions consistent with State laws and objectives. 9.3.5 Urban Heat Effects The City shall reduce heat effects of urban development by requiring new development to incorporate, as appropriate, features such as reduced hardscape, light or heat reflective roofing, and shade trees. 9.3.6 Natural Areas and Green Space The City shall continue to maintain and expand natural areas in and around the city to foster carbon sequestration while providing more open space for residents. PH1 - 175 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-148 9.3.7 Sustainable Design The City shall promote and, where appropriate, require sustainable building practices that consume less energy, water and other resources, facilitate natural ventilation, use daylight effectively, and are healthy, safe, comfortable, and durable. Projects shall include, unless deemed infeasible by the City, the following sustainable design features. A. Energy-Efficient Structure Utilize building standards and materials that achieve or surpass best practices for energy efficiency. B. Energy-Efficient Appliances Utilize appliances, including air conditioning and heating systems that achieve high energy efficiency. Incorporation of alternative energy systems (e.g. passive and/or active solar, heat pumps). C. Natural Ventilation Optimize potential for cooling through natural ventilation. D. Plumbing Utilize plumbing fixtures that conserve or reuse water such as low flow faucets or grey water recycling systems. E. Efficient Landscaping Include landscaping that reduces water use through use of drought-tolerant / native plant species, high-efficiency irrigation (drip irrigation), and reduction of the use of turf. Collection and use of site runoff in landscape irrigation is encouraged. F. Solar Orientation Optimize solar orientation of structures to the extent possible. G. Privacy and Solar Access New buildings outside of the downtown will respect the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings. PH1 - 176 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-149 9.3.8 Sustainable Infrastructure The City shall: A. Promote infrastructure expansion where it will be more efficient and effective, and does not promote growth inducement outside the urban reserve line. B. Focus infrastructure improvements in designated growth areas and contiguous to existing development. Program Climate Action Plan The City shall review and regularly update the Climate Action Plan and shall annually report to the City Council on implementation of the Climate Action Plan. Program Building Code Update The City shall regularly review and update its building codes and ordinances to identify revisions that promote energy efficient building design and construction practices. Program Incentive Program The City shall consider the feasibility of providing incentives for new and renovated projects that incorporate sustainable design features. Program LEED Certifiable The City shall design all new City facilities to meet the requirements specified for certification as LEED Silver construction or equivalent rating system. Program Renewable Energy Financing The City shall promote and pursue a wide range of renewable energy financing options including a renewable energy fund or loan program. Program Renewable Energy Choice The City shall evaluate the feasibility of a regional Community Choice Aggregation program to procure electricity from renewable resources. PH1 - 177 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-150 910 HEALTHY COMMUNITY NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following presents a new goal and supporting policies and programs relative to healthy communities, a Council-identified and grant objective. NOTE TO REVIEWER: New Goal Proposed Increase the overall health and wellbeing of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo by expanding access to healthy food and nutrition choices and through community design that fosters walking and biking. 10.3.1 Neighborhood Access All residences should be within close proximity to food outlets including grocery stores, farmers markets, and community gardens. 10.3.2 Local Food Systems The City shall support sustainable local food systems, including farmer’s markets, community supported agriculture, urban agriculture, and healthy food retailers. 10.3.3 Provide for Community Gardens The City shall continue to support the development of community gardens. 10.3.4 Encouraging Walkability The City shall encourage projects which provide for and enhance active and environmentally sustainable modes of transportation, such as pedestrian movement, bicycle access, and transit services. 10.3.5 Healthy Environment The City shall protect and maintain clear air and natural open spaces. Program The City shall regularly review and update master plans for City parks to designate areas for community gardens where appropriate. Program The City shall update the Community Design Guidelines to encourage the inclusion of communal gardens within multi-family residential developments with 10 or more units. Program The City shall work with the community to develop a resource guide to facilitate design that promotes a healthy and active lifestyle. PH1 - 178 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-151 1011 REVIEW & AMENDMENT 10.3.211.3.2 Comprehensive Reviews The City should shall conduct a comprehensive review of this element about every ten years, and at other times deemed necessary by the City Council, considering possible changes in citizen's preferences, technology, population characteristics, and regional plans. Policies 9.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 10.3.311.3.3 Amendment Proposals The City shall consider Aamendments to this element, requested by citizens or deemed useful by the Planning Commission or the City Council, will be considered by the City. Such amendments should be considered in groups, not more than four times each year. Policies 9.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 10.3.411.3.4 Annual Report The City will shall prepare an annual report on the status of the general plan, during the first quarter of each calendar year, to include the following: A. A summary of private development activity and a brief analysis of how it helped meet general plan goals; B. A summary of major public projects and a brief analysis of how they contributed to meeting general plan goals; C. An overview of programs, and recommendations on any new approaches that may be necessary. D. A status report for each general plan program scheduled to be worked on during that year, including discussion of whether that program's realization is progressing on schedule, and recommendations for how it could better be kept on schedule if it is lagging; E. A status report on how the City is progressing with implementing its open space preservation policies and programs; F. Updated population or other information deemed important for the plan. Policies 9.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. PH1 - 179 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-152 1112 IMPLEMENTATION 11.3.112.3.1 Introduction "Implementation" refers to all the City’s actions to carry out the general plan. Besides the programs described in previous sections, the City uses the following means of implementing the Land Use Element. The City’s actions taken pursuant to the following shall be under the following headings are to be consistent with the General Plan. INTRO Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style. 11.3.212.3.2 Zoning Regulations Zoning Regulations consist of the zoning map, lists of uses allowed in certain zones, property-development standards such as maximum building height and minimum parking, and procedures intended to give the interests of development applicants and other citizens fair consideration. IMP. 10.1 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No changes. 11.3.312.3.3 Subdivision Regulations Subdivision Regulations cover the division of land into parcels which can be sold, and set basic standards for streets and utilities. Imp. 10.2 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No changes. 11.3.412.3.4 Architectural ReviewCommunity Design Guidelines Community Design Guidelines are used by the staff, City Council, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission and other advisory bodies in the review of proposed development projects to help ensure that such projects meet the City's expectation for the quality and character of new development. Architectural review applies to the layout and outdoor appearance of new housing tracts, multifamily developments, hillside development, stores, offices, and manufacturing buildings, and remodeling of some downtown buildings and historical buildings. Imp. 10.3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Text updated to reflect the current use of Community Design Guidelines in the City’s review process. 11.3.512.3.5 Historic Preservation Ordinance, Guidelines, and Context Statement Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines are used by the staff, City Council, Planning Commission, Cultural Heritage Committee, and other advisory bodies in the review of projects within a historic district or on property with a listed historic resource to ensure protection of historic resources. The City’s Historic Context Statement provides information to support the review and identification of resources. PH1 - 180 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-153 NEW Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources New text added to reflect the current use of Historic Preservation Guidelines in the City’s current review process. 11.3.612.3.6 Grading Regulations Grading Regulations limit the amount and methods of reshaping the ground to accommodate development. Imp. 10.4 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No changes. 11.3.712.3.7 Budgets Budgets spell out how City funds will be obtained and spent, particularly the capital improvement program, a multiyear list of major facilities and equipment which the City will buy or build. The capital improvement program includes water sources and sewage treatment equipment, water and sewer lines, and streets and bridges. The Planning Commission reviews this program for conformity with the general plan. Imp. 10.5 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No changes. 11.3.812.3.8 Property Management Property management covers buying land for new City facilities and for public open space, and selling or leasing land no longer needed for a City government function. Imp. 10.6 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources No changes. 11.3.912.3.9 Development Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans Development plans, area plans, and specific plans bridge between general policies and actual construction plans. Imp. 10.7 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Add reference to “Area Plans” also. 11.3.1012.3.10 Public Planning Public Planning is a way for the City and its Citizens to help shape the City’s community’s future. environmental quality. Before considering private making a determination on proposals for a major development, such as a specific plan, special-design area, Downtown Concept Plan, or a large subdivision or planned development not within a specific plan, the City shall provide early and meaningful public notice in order to stimulate and encourage community engagement and provide ample opportunity for community input to decision-makers. Advisory bodies and City Council shall consider such input prior to taking action on a project. should conduct an evaluation of environmental opportunities and constraints, to which a private proposal can respond. Features to be examined include toxic contamination, airport operations, ground slopes, seismic hazards, soil and PH1 - 181 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-154 groundwater characteristics, wildlife habitats, scenic values and impacts, agricultural values, open space preservation, aquatic ecosystems, air quality, sustainability impacts, road and rail traffic noise, water and sewer service limits, access and circulation, and historic and archaeological resources. Imp. 10.8 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Adjust focus to public process and not duplicate description of Environmental Review below. 11.3.1112.3.11 Environmental Review The purpose of the City’s Eenvironmental Rreview process is to develop and maintain a high quality environment now and in the future. Some projects may be exempted from environmental review by state law or city procedures. For those projects subject to environmental review, features to be examined would include but not be limited to, toxic contamination, air quality, open space preservation, sustainability impacts, scenic values and impacts, airport operations, ground slopes, seismic hazards, soil and groundwater characteristics, wildlife habitats, road and rail traffic noise, water and sewer service limits, access and circulation, and historic and archaeological resources. is a formal way to inform the public and decision-makers of the expected consequences of their actions. Two common types of environmental documents are environmental impacts reports and "initial studies." Before When considering private proposals for a major development, such as a specific plan or special-design area, the City shouldmust conduct an evaluation of environmental opportunities and constraints, to which a private proposal can respond. The City is committed to early and meaningful participation by the community in the environmental review process to help inform the public and decision-makers of the potential environmental consequences of their actions. Features to be examined would include toxic contamination, airport operations, ground slopes, seismic hazards, soil and groundwater characteristics, significant wildlife habitats, road and rail traffic noise, water and sewer service limits, access and circulation, and historic and archaeological resources. Imp. 10.9 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style only. 11.3.1212.3.12 Interagency Communication City positions Ccommunicatedion, ranging from informal staff discussions to letters from the City Council lets to other agencies shall be consistent with the goals and policies in know the City’s position based on the general plan. Imp. 10.10 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Edited for style and clarity. Planning Commission reworded policy to clarify intent. Planning Commission modified Task Force language to clarify that some projects may be exempt from environmental review; and to distinguish this more descriptive narrative from legal CEQA requirements. PH1 - 182 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-1 CHAPTER 1 LAND USE PH1 - 183 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-2 CHAPTER 1 - LAND USE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 9 History .......................................................................................................................... 10 Public Participation ....................................................................................................... 12 Background to the 1994 Land Use Element ................................................................ 12 Community Values ....................................................................................................... 13 Preamble To The Land Use Element ........................................................................... 16 San Luis Obispo’s Vision .............................................................................................. 16 Community’s Goals ...................................................................................................... 17 ...................................................................................................... GROWTH MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 33 1.0 Overall Intent ...................................................................................................... 33 1.0.1 Growth Management Objectives ......................................................... 33 1.0.2 Development Capacity and Services .................................................. 33 1.1 Urban Separation ............................................................................................... 33 1.2 Urban Reserve Line ........................................................................................... 33 1.3 Urban Edges Character ...................................................................................... 33 1.4 Jobs/Housing Relationship ................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5 Regional Planning .............................................................................................. 34 1.6 City Size and Expansion .................................................................................... 34 1.6.1 Urban Reserve ........................................................................................... 34 1.6.2 Expansion Areas........................................................................................ 34 1.6.3 Interim Uses ............................................................................................... 34 1.7 Greenbelt ............................................................................................................ 34 1.7.1 Open Space Protection ....................................................................... 34 1.7.2 Greenbelt Uses .......................................................................................... 34 1.7.3 Commercial Uses in Greenbelt .................................................................. 34 1.7.4 Parcel Sizes and Density ........................................................................... 35 1.7.5 Building Design and Siting ......................................................................... 35 1.7.6 Wildlife Habitat .................................................................................... 35 1.7.7 Trees .......................................................................................................... 35 1.8 Prime Agricultural Land ...................................................................................... 35 1.8.1 Agricultural Protection ......................................................................... 35 1.8.2 Prime Agricultural Land ....................................................................... 35 1.9 Residential Clustering for Open Space Protection ............................................. 36 1.9.1 Parcel Sizes ........................................................................................ 36 1.9.2 Means of Protection ............................................................................ 36 1.9.3 Public Access ............................................................................................ 36 1.9.4 Design Standards ...................................................................................... 36 1.10 Growth Rates & Phasing ................................................................................ 36 1.10.1 Overall Intent ............................................................................................. 36 1.10.2 Residential Growth Rate ............................................................................ 37 1.10.3 Nonresidential Growth Rate ...................................................................... 37 1.11 Educational and Governmental Facilities Near the City ................................ 38 PH1 - 184 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-3 1.11.1 Overall Policy .............................................................................................. 38 1.11.2 Cal Poly ...................................................................................................... 38 1.11.3 California Men’s Colony .............................................................................. 38 1.11.4 Cuesta Community College ........................................................................ 38 1.12 Annexation and Services ................................................................................ 38 1.12.1 Water and Sewer Service ........................................................................... 38 1.12.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing ................................................................ 38 1.12.3 Annexation of Cal Poly ............................................................................... 39 1.12.4 Annexation in Airport Area.......................................................................... 39 1.12.5 Required Plans ........................................................................................... 39 1.12.6 Development and Services......................................................................... 39 1.12.7 Open Space ................................................................................................ 39 1.13 Costs of Growth .............................................................................................. 40 1.14 Solid Waste Capacity ...................................................................................... 40 1.15 Countywide Planning ...................................................................................... 41 1.15.1 County “RMS” ............................................................................................. 41 1.15.2 Regular Coordination Meetings .................................................................. 41 1.15.3 Plans Summary .......................................................................................... 41 1.15.4 Project Review ............................................................................................ 41 1.15.5 Regional Growth Management ................................................................... 41 1.15.6 Consistent Plans ......................................................................................... 41 1.15.7 City-County Agreement .............................................................................. 42 1.15.8 Refined Planning Area Map........................................................................ 42 1.15.9 Maintain Development Fee Program .......................................................... 42 ............. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS .............................................................................................................................................. 43 2.0 .................................................................................................................................. 43 2.1 Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement ...................................................... 43 2.1.1 Neighborhood Identity ................................................................................ 43 2.1.2 Neighborhood Groups ................................................................................ 43 2.1.3 Neighborhood Traffic .................................................................................. 43 2.1.4 Neighborhood Connections ................................................................. 43 2.1.5 Neighborhood Open Links .......................................................................... 43 2.1.6 Neighborhood Amenities ...................................................................... 43 2.1.7 Neighborhood Enhancement ............................................................... 44 2.2 Residential Location, Uses, and Design ............................................................. 44 2.2.1 Mixed Uses and Convenience ............................................................. 44 2.2.2 Separation and Buffering ............................................................................ 44 2.2.3 Residential Next to Non-residential ............................................................ 44 2.2.4 Street Access ............................................................................................. 44 2.2.5 Neighborhood Pattern ................................................................................ 45 2.2.6 Housing and Businesses ..................................................................... 45 2.2.7 Natural Features .................................................................................. 45 2.2.8 Parking ........................................................................................................ 45 2.2.9 Compatible Development ..................................................................... 45 2.2.10 Site Constraints .......................................................................................... 46 2.2.11 Residential Project Objectives .................................................................... 46 2.2.12 Residential Rehabilitation and Maintenance ........ Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3 Residential Density.............................................................................................. 47 PH1 - 185 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-4 2.3.1 Density Categories .................................................................................... 47 2.3.2 Density Bonuses ................................................................................. 48 2.3.3 Density and Site Constraints ..................................................................... 48 2.4 Residential Land Protection ............................................................................... 48 2.4.1 Boundary Adjustments .............................................................................. 48 2.4.2 Density Changes ....................................................................................... 49 2.4.3 Residential Conversion .............................................................................. 49 2.5 Student and Campus Housing ........................................................................... 49 2.5.1 Cal Poly ..................................................................................................... 49 2.5.2 Cuesta College .......................................................................................... 49 2.5.3 Amenities ................................................................................................... 49 2.5.4 Location ..................................................................................................... 49 2.5.5 Fraternities & Sororities ............................................................................. 49 2.5.6 Large Group Housing ................................................................................ 50 2.6 Reduced Automobile Dependence in Downtown ........................................ 50 2.7 Updating & Enforcing Standards ........................................................................ 51 2.7.1 Enforcing Standards .................................................................................. 51 2.7.2 Property Maintenance Standards .............................................................. 51 2.8 Multifamily Preferences & Standards ................................................................. 51 2.8.1 Preferences ............................................................................................... 51 2.8.2 Multifamily Open Space and Storage Standards ...................................... 51 2.9 Downtown Residential Development ................................................................. 51 2.10 Neighborhood Plans ...................................................................................... 52 ................................................................. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 53 3.0 Commercial Siting .............................................................................................. 53 3.0.1 Slope .......................................................................................................... 53 3.0.2 Access ....................................................................................................... 53 3.0.3 Residential Area ........................................................................................ 53 3.1 General Retail .................................................................................................... 53 3.1.1 Purpose and Included Uses ...................................................................... 53 3.1.2 Locations for Regional Attractions ............................................................. 53 3.1.3 Specialty Store Locations .......................................................................... 53 3.1.4 Building Intensity.......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2 Neighborhood Commercial................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2.1 Purpose and Included Uses ...................................................................... 53 3.2.2 New or Expanded Areas of Neighborhood Commercial Use .............. 53 3.2.3 Expanding Existing Neighborhood Commercial Areas.............................. 54 3.2.4 Stores in Residential Areas ................................................................. 54 3.3 Community Commercial ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3.1 Office Uses ................................................................................................ 54 3.4 Office .................................................................................................................. 54 3.4.1 Office Locations ......................................................................................... 54 3.4.2 Offices Outside Designated Areas ............................................................ 55 3.5 Tourist Commercial Uses ................................................................................... 55 3.5.1 Basis for Tourism ....................................................................................... 55 3.5.2 Locations ................................................................................................... 55 3.5.3 Appropriate Uses ......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.6 Services and Manufacturing ................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.6.1 General Retail and Neighborhood Commercial Uses ............................... 55 3.6.2 Access ....................................................................................................... 56 3.6.3 Utility Service ............................................................................................. 56 PH1 - 186 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-5 3.6.4 Vehicle Sales .............................................................................................. 56 3.6.5 Building Intensity ........................................................................................ 57 3.7 Overall ................................................................................................................. 58 3.7.1 Dependent Care ......................................................................................... 58 3.7.2 Convenience Facilities ................................................................................ 58 3.7.3 Commercial Revitalization .......................................................................... 58 3.8 Programs ............................................................................................................. 59 3.8.1 Zoning Regulations ..................................................................................... 59 3.8.2 Planned Development Zoning ..................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.8.3 Neighborhood Uses ............................................................................. 59 3.8.4 Dependent Care ......................................................................................... 59 3.8.5 Neighborhood Centers ............................................................................... 59 3.8.6 Auto Sales Relocation ................................................................................ 59 3.8.7 Noise Control .............................................................................................. 59 3.8.8 Madonna Road Center ............................................................................... 59 3.8.9 Tourism ....................................................................................................... 59 ........................................................................................................................... DOWNTOWN .............................................................................................................................................. 61 4.0 Downtown Residential ......................................................................................... 61 4.0.1 Existing and New Dwellings ................................................................. 61 4.0.2 Dwellings and Offices ................................................................................. 63 4.1 Entertainment and Cultural Facilities .................................................................. 63 4.2 Public Gatherings ................................................................................................ 63 4.3 Walking Environment .................................................................................... 63 4.4 Public Safety ....................................................................................................... 63 4.5 Open Places and Views ...................................................................................... 63 4.6 Traffic in Residential Areas ................................................................................. 64 4.7 Street Changes ................................................................................................... 64 4.8 Parking ................................................................................................................ 64 4.9 San Luis Obispo Creek ................................................................................. 64 4.10 Building Conservation and Compatibility ........................................................ 64 4.11 New Buildings and Views ............................................................................... 64 4.12 Noise ............................................................................................................... 64 4.13 Sense of Place ................................................................................................ 64 4.14 Design Principles ............................................................................................ 64 4.14.1 Street Level Activities ................................................................................. 65 4.14.2 Upper Floor Dwellings ................................................................................ 65 4.14.3 Continuous Storefront ................................................................................. 65 4.14.4 Building Height ........................................................................................... 65 4.14.5 Building Width ............................................................................................. 65 4.14.6 Sidewalk Appeal ......................................................................................... 65 4.15 Government Offices ........................................................................................ 66 4.16 Commercial Buildings Outside the Core ......................................................... 66 4.17 Updating Downtown Concept Plan ................................................................. 67 4.18 Implementing the Downtown Concept Plan .................................................... 67 4.19 Visual Resource Study.................................................................................... 67 4.20 Expansion of Downtown Plaza ........................ Error! Bookmark not defined. ....................................................................................... PUBLIC & CULTURAL FACILITIES .............................................................................................................................................. 69 5.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 69 5.1 Public Facilities .................................................................................................... 69 5.1.1 Grouping for Convenience.......................................................................... 69 PH1 - 187 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-6 5.1.2 Joint Projects ............................................................................................. 69 5.1.3 Civic Center ............................................................................................... 69 5.1.4 Health Care ......................................................................................... 71 5.1.5 Social Services .......................................................................................... 71 5.1.6 Other Government Functions .................................................................... 71 5.2 Cultural Facilities ................................................................................................ 71 5.2.1 Cooperation ............................................................................................... 71 5.2.2 Mission Plaza Area .................................................................................... 71 5.3 City and County Offices Downtown .................................................................... 73 5.4 Community Arts Support ...................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.5 Land Acquisition ................................................................................................. 73 5.6 Facility Reuse ..................................................................................................... 73 5.7 Public Art ............................................................................................................ 72 .................................................................................................... RESOURCE PROTECTION ............................................................................................................................................. 74 6.0 Overall Resource Protection .............................................................................. 74 6.0.1 Resource Planning .................................................................................... 74 6.0.2 Resource Mapping .................................................................................... 74 6.0.3 Resource Protection ............................................................................ 74 6.1 Open Space Policies .......................................................................................... 74 6.1.1 Open Space Uses ............................................................................... 75 6.2 Hillside Policies .................................................................................................. 75 6.2.1 Development Limits ............................................................................. 76 6.2.2 Development Standards ............................................................................ 76 6.2.3 Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines ......................................................... 78 6.2.4 Development Credit Transfer .................................................................... 78 6.2.5 Homesites Outside the Limit Lines ............................................................ 78 6.2.6 Hillside Planning Areas .............................................................................. 78 6.3 Hillside Programs ............................................................................................... 80 6.3.1 Designating Sensitive Sites ....................................................................... 80 6.3.2 Delineation of Development Limit Lines .................................................... 80 6.4 Creeks Wetlands, and Flooding Policies ............................................................ 80 6.4.1 Creek and Wetlands Management Objectives .................................... 82 6.4.2 Citywide Network ................................................................................ 82 6.4.3 Amenities and Access ............................................................................... 82 6.4.4 Open Channels .......................................................................................... 82 6.4.5 Porous Paving ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.4.6 Development Requirements ...................................................................... 82 6.4.7 Discharge of Urban Pollutants ................................................................... 83 6.4.8 100-year Floodplain ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.4.9 Erosion Control Measures ......................................................................... 83 6.4.10 Bird Attraction .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.5 Creeks and Flooding Programs ......................................................................... 82 6.5.1 Previously Developed Areas ............................................................... 83 6.5.2 National Flood Program ............................................................................. 83 6.5.3 Creekside Care and Notification ................................................................ 83 ...................................................................................................................... AIRPORT AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 84 7.0 ................................................................................................................................. 84 7.1 Regional Service ................................................................................................ 84 PH1 - 188 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-7 7.2 Airport Land Use Plan ......................................................................................... 84 7.3 City Annexation and Services ............................................................................. 84 7.4 Greenbelt Protection ..................................................................................... 84 7.5 Internal Open Space ........................................................................................... 85 7.6 Development Before Annexation ........................................................................ 87 7.7 Transit Service .................................................................................................... 87 7.8 Business Parks ..................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.9 Airline Service and Impacts ................................................................................. 88 ................................................................................................ SPECIAL PLANNING AREAS .............................................................................................................................................. 89 8.0 Special Use Areas ............................................................................................... 91 8.1 Specific Plan Areas ............................................................................................. 91 8.1.1 Specific Plan / General Plan Amendment .................................................. 91 8.1.2 Specific Plan Content ................................................................................. 92 8.1.3 SP-1, Margarita Area Specific Plan Update ............................................... 94 8.1.4 SP-2, Dalidio Specific Plan Area ................................................................ 95 8.1.5 SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area ............................................ 97 8.1.6 SP-4, Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area ........................................................ 98 8.2 Special Design Areas ........................................................................................100 8.2.1 Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area ......................................................100 8.2.2 Upper Monterey ........................................................................................100 8.2.3 Mid-Higuera Area .....................................................................................101 8.2.4 Caltrans Site .............................................................................................102 8.2.5 General Hospital Site ................................................................................102 8.2.6 Broad Street Area .....................................................................................102 8.2.7 Madonna Inn Area ....................................................................................102 8.2.8 Sunset Drive-in Theater Area ...................................................................103 8.2.9 Pacific Beach Site .....................................................................................103 8.2.10 Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area .................................................................104 8.2.11 LOVR Creekside Area ..............................................................................104 8.2.12 Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site ......................................................104 .................................................................................................................... SUSTAINABILITY ............................................................................................................................................106 9.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................106 9.1 Regional Coordination ................................................................................106 9.2 Sustainability Strategy ................................................................................106 9.3 Community Greenhouse Gas Reductions ..... Error! Bookmark not defined. 9.4 Municipal Greenhouse Gas Reductions ........ Error! Bookmark not defined. 9.5 Climate Action Plan ....................................................................................106 9.6 Urban Heat Effects .....................................................................................106 9.7 Natural Areas and Green Space .................................................................106 9.8 Sustainable Design .....................................................................................107 9.9 Sustainable Infrastructure .................................................................................108 .............................................................................................................. SAFETY BY DESIGN ................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 10.0 Controls on Alcohol Concentration in the City . Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.0.1 Formal Public Convenience or Necessity Process .... Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.0.2 Policy ........................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.0.3 Downtown Area ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. PH1 - 189 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-8 10.0.4 Outside the Downtown Area ........................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 10.1 Crime Prevention through Environmental Design .......... Error! Bookmark not defined. ......................................................................................................... HEALTHY COMMUNITY ........................................................................................................................................... 109 11.0 Neighborhood Access ........................................................................... 109 11.1 Local Food Systems .............................................................................. 109 11.2 Provide for Community Gardens ........................................................... 109 11.3 Encouraging Walkability ........................................................................ 109 ....................................................................................................... REVIEW & AMENDMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 110 12.0 ............................................................................................................................. 110 12.1 Comprehensive Reviews ............................................................................. 110 12.2 Amendment Proposals ................................................................................. 110 12.3 Annual Report .............................................................................................. 110 ................................................................................................................. IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................................................................................... 111 13.0 Introduction .................................................................................................. 111 13.1 Zoning Regulations ...................................................................................... 111 13.2 Subdivision Regulations ............................................................................... 111 13.3 Community Design Guidelines..................................................................... 111 13.4 Historic Preservation Ordinance, Guidelines, and Context Statement ........ 111 13.5 Grading Regulations .................................................................................... 111 13.6 Budgets ........................................................................................................ 111 13.7 Property Management ................................................................................. 111 13.8 Development Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans .................................. 112 13.9 Environmental Review ................................................................................. 112 13.10 Communication ............................................................................................ 112 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. San Luis Obispo Planning Area .................................................................. 11 Figure 2. Urban Reserve and Principal Expansion Areas ......................................... 20 Figure 3. Vehicle Sales Area at Auto Park Way ........................................................ 57 Figure 4. Downtown Planning Area and Core ........................................................... 62 Figure 5. Public and Cultural Facilities ...................................................................... 70 Figure 6. Hillside Planning Areas ............................................................................... 77 Figure 7. Creeks and Floodplains .............................................................................. 81 Figure 8. Airport Area ................................................................................................. 86 Figure 9. Optional Use and Special Design Areas .................................................... 90 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards within the LUCE Planning Sub-area ..................................................................... 23 Table 2. General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 3. Residential Clustering for Open Space ProtectionError! Bookmark not defined. Table 4. : One Percent City Population Growth Projection ..................................... 37 Table 5. Residential Population Assumptions .......................................................... 48 PH1 - 190 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-9 LAND USE ELEMENT NOTE TO REVIEWER: This version focuses on updates to the policy and program components of the Land Use Element. The Introduction and Community Goals will be updated as appropriate based on the changes approved for the policies and programs and will reviewed at a later meeting. Maps and illustrations have also not been updated at this time, and will be updated to reflect the agreed upon policy and program changes. INTRODUCTION The City's General Plan guides the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. It reflects consensus and compromise among a wide diversity of citizens' preferences, within a framework set by State law. The General Plan is published in separately adopted sections, called elements, which address various topics. The Land Use Element represents a generalized blueprint for the future of the City of San Luis Obispo. Required by State law, it is the core of the General Plan. Starting with conditions at the time of adoption, the Land Use Element sets forth a pattern for the orderly development of land within the City's planning area. This pattern should be based on residents' preference and on protection of natural assets unique to the planning area. The Element also describes the expected level of population growth resulting from construction of the kinds of housing units included in the plan, as well as the kinds of new commercial and industrial development that are responsive to the City's economic needs. The City's planning area coincides with the County's San Luis Obispo planning area (Figure 1), and can be generally described as extending to the ridge of the Santa Lucias (Cuesta Ridge) on the north and east; the southerly end of the Edna Valley (northern Arroyo Grande Creek watershed boundary) on the southeast; the ridge of the Davenport Hills on the southwest; and the ridge of the Irish Hills, Turri Road in the Los Osos Valley, and Cuesta College in the Chorro Valley on the west. The General Plan also defines a smaller geographic boundary, referred to as the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Planning Subarea which contains the urban land uses for the community (Figure X). The General Plan consists of eight elements, including the Land Use Element. These elements have the following key implications for the Land Use Element. The Circulation Element recognizes implications of land use policy on all modes of movement and establishes policies, standards, and implementation measures that work with the Land Use Element update and address both existing and potential circulation opportunities and deficiencies. The Housing Element goals, policies, and programs reflect the land use policies as they relate to residential development. Noise Element policies provide the appropriate protections needed to allow development and mixture of compatible uses while protecting residents and land uses from noise impacts. The Safety Element identifies hazards that influence the locations and types of land uses proposed. The Land Use and Safety Elements share several safety PH1 - 191 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-10 topics. The Land Use Element update adds to the Safety Element through the inclusion of safety through environmental design concepts and to airport safety policies and programs. The Conservation and Open Space Element addresses protection of open space amenities and resources in detail. The Land Use Element works with this element and incorporates concepts such as clustering and buffering open space areas in order to enhance their protection. The Parks and Recreation Element provides active recreation areas and facilities that are essential to neighborhoods. The Land Use Element works to incorporate parks and recreation into the larger land use alternative sites and enhance integration of these resources into neighborhoods. The Water and Wastewater Element provides policies and programs to support adequate services to the community. The Land Use Element includes alternatives that are in keeping with the services available and ensures that infrastructure is sized appropriately to serve future service needs and planning. Policies in the Land Use Element and the General Plan Land Use Diagram are designed to be consistent and complementary with all other General Plan elements. History The City's first General Plan, including land use and other elements, was adopted in 1961. A revised plan was adopted in 1966, following the County's first adoption of a plan for the San Luis Obispo area in 1965. The City adopted major revisions of its Land Use Element in 1972 and in 1977 and 1994. The current element is a revision of the 1994 version. PH1 - 192 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-11 Figure 1. San Luis Obispo Planning Area PH1 - 193 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-12 Public Participation Before adopting or revising any General Plan element, the Planning Commission and the City Council hold public hearings. The City publishes notices in the local newspaper to let citizens know about the hearings at least ten days before they are held. Also, the City prepares environmental documents to help citizens understand the expected consequences of its planning policies before the hearings are held. The City intends to re-evaluate this element about every ten years. Parts of it may be updated more often. There will be annual reports on how the plan has been implemented and changed. Anyone may suggest or apply for an amendment to the General Plan at any time, though state law limits on how often it can be amended in any one year. Background to the 1994 Land Use Element The following represents a historical perspective of the update to the Land Use Element conducted in 1994 and is taken from that Element: “ The City started work on updating this element with a series of public workshops in 1988. Also, the City took a public opinion survey and established committees to give advice on the element. The introduction to the 1977 Land Use Element contained a philosophical discussion of existing conditions and issues facing the City. The discussion is still valid today. Its premise is that the City and County, while still relatively rural and apparently capable of providing room for new residents, face some known and several undefined finite resources which may constrain growth. Furthermore, the introduction said, public attitudes towards the desirability of growth had changed since the City’s first General Plan; experience with growth had caused citizens and public officials to question whether growth, even well planned, produces benefits worth the social, economic and environmental costs and consequences. Despite such consistent and strong expression of community values, there has been continued, incremental degradation of the natural environment expressly valued by residents of San Luis Obispo. On the environmental side, the element stated that key resources known to have finite limits were water supply and air quality. All the basic resources -- land, water and air -- can accommodate some additional growth without severe impacts, but eventually and inevitably growth must stabilize and stop, or else exceed resource limitations with destructive social, economic and environmental ramifications. The purpose of the 1977 element, the Introduction said, was to apply planning methodologies to manage the rate and extent of growth so that irreversible environmental problems would not get out of hand before they were recognized. Concerns about environmental quality continue today, and are the basis for much of the General Plan. Votes of residents and the public opinion survey of residents done as part of the General Plan update have strongly reaffirmed the commitment of residents to preserve and enhance the environmental quality of our community. In the years since 1977 additional issues have become better defined. One, for example, is the maintenance of the remaining prime farmland in and around the City. The 1977 Element cited this as one of the primary issues facing planners, but failed to propose a concrete solution. As a result, irreplaceable agricultural land has been lost. The General Plan now proposes solutions to the continued irretrievable loss of this world-class natural asset. Another issue that was less well understood in 1977 is the preservation of important wildlife and native plant habitats. The PH1 - 194 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-13 General Plan now proposes preservation of such habitats, including planning based on the identification, mapping and monitoring of the community's existing natural assets. This element is an update of the 1977 element; it represents fine tuning rather than a new beginning.” Background to the 2014 Land Use Element Since adopting the Land Use and Circulation Elements in 1994, the City has updated and amended its General Plan elements multiple times. The City updated its Noise Element in 1996, its Safety Element in 2000 and 2012, its Parks and Recreation Element in 2001, its Conservation and Open Space Element in 2006, and its Housing Element in 2004 and 2010, and its Water and Wastewater Element in 2010. While the City made minor amendments to its Land Use and Circulation Elements in 2010 and 2005, respectively, the 2014 LUCE update is the most comprehensive update of these elements since 1994. The City initiated the LUCE Update in early 2012 with the support of a Sustainable Communities Planning Grant from the California Strategic Growth Council. The primary objectives of the Update were to respond to any changed conditions in San Luis Obispo, incorporate sustainable practices and policies, respond to new State planning requirements, and engage the community in a reaffirmation of the community’s vision and goals for the city’s future. The LUCE Update featured a community engagement program, which included a resident LUCE Task Force from diverse geographic areas of the City; a city-wide community survey; a series of six community workshops; open houses; on-line forums; and numerous other outreach efforts. Community Values Public attitudes and values are an essential part of what shapes planning documents. The residents of San Luis Obispo have expressed strong community values. Residents have consistently voiced their desire to preserve environmental assets and control excessive growth. There have been public votes on such issues, and all have expressed a preferred set of community values: In 1972, 70% of city voters rejected by referendum an environmentally- controversial annexation in the Edna Valley, the Danley Annexation. In June 1978, 62% of city voters amended the city Charter by initiative to allow voters to vote yes or no on annexations. In November 1978, when the first Charter-mandated votes on annexations were held, 58% of voters rejected the Foothills annexation, and 56% the Ferrini annexation. In 1983, 73% of city voters said the city should protect sensitive hillsides and consider purchasing open space in order to preserve it. Also in 1983, 69% of city voters said Port San Luis should not be used for offshore oil activities. In 1985, 71% of voters chose to amend the San Luis Obispo Charter to require that land annexed to the city can only be developed in consistency with the General Plan. PH1 - 195 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-14 In 1989, 68% of city voters said growth management regulations should apply to all development in the city. In 1991, 69% of city voters repealed by referendum Council-approved zoning for the Islay Hill/Arbors Tract. Also in 1991, in the midst of the worst drought in history, 56% of city voters said the city should not participate in the State Water Project. In a 1992 referendum, a similar percentage of city voters rescinded Council approval for joining the State Water Project. Measure P was approved by city voters in 1996 to amend the City Charter to add a water reliability reserve to protect the City from future water shortages. Also in 1996, 51.2% of city voters opposed Measure O, a City-wide assessment district for open space protection and park acquisition. In a special election in 2005, City voters voted on three separate measures to reverse City approvals for the MarketPlace Project, a mixed-use development proposed on prime farmland within the City’s Urban Reserve. These votes 1) opposed the General Plan land use changes (51.4%), 2) opposed changes to the zoning regulations map and approval of the development plan (51.5%), and 3) opposed the Development Agreement and Special Tax Reimbursement Agreement (52.8%), thereby rescinding previous City development approvals. In 2006, City voters supported (64.8%) a sales tax increase of one-half cent for eight years to protect and maintain essential services such as neighborhood street paving and pothole repair; traffic congestion relief; public safety including restoring eliminated traffic patrol; Fire Marshall and fire/paramedic training positions; flood protection; senior citizen services/facilities; neighborhood code enforcement; open space preservation and other vital general purpose services. In 2010, 80% of the voters opposed an initiative to amend the Margarita Area Specific Plan to change the approved alignment of Prado Road, thus retaining the circulation infrastructure identified in the Specific Plan. As voters, the people of San Luis Obispo have spoken clearly on environmental protection and quality of life issues. Citizens spoke equally clearly when polled by the City in 1988 as part of the Land Use Element update. The 585 poll respondents placed quality of life and environmental issues at the top of their concerns. Ninety percent of respondents listed the natural environment as their top quality of life concern. Asked, in an open-ended question, the City's greatest problem, the top response (42%) was excessive growth. (The next largest response, at 15%, was traffic.) Asked, also in an open-ended question, the City's greatest strength, 53% of responses concerned environmental quality and sense of community. Asked what reductions in quality of life they were willing to accept in return for greater economic growth, in the following areas a majority said “none”: air pollution, 83%; increased traffic and traffic noise, 67%; development on peaks and hillsides, 66%; PH1 - 196 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-15 development on farmland and ranch land, 51%; development harmful to creeks, 67%; overall pace of life, 51%. Asked to pick a growth rate from listed categories, 85% of respondents picked categories ranging from none (15%) to slower than the state and county (51%) to no faster than the county (19%). In conjunction with 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element Update, the City conducted a Quality of Life and Future Development Survey in the Spring of 2012. The survey was designed to compare current community attitudes with the results of the 1988 survey but did not duplicate some of the questions asked in 1988. The survey was distributed to 25,000 residents and businesses via utility bill inserts and direct mail. It was also made available online. The survey was completed by 2,029 people via return mail and 169 online, for a total of 2,198 respondents. The results of the 2012 survey largely reaffirmed many community values expressed in the 1988 survey, with some differences. Respondents to the 2012 survey rated the natural environment (71.1%) and crime (62.9%) as having the greatest impact on quality of life – echoing the sentiments expressed by respondents in 1988. Topics offered as San Luis Obispo’s greatest problem in 2012 are shown below: Greatest Problems 2012 Homelessness 19% Traffic/Congestion 10% Jobs Availability 9% Affordable Housing 9% When asked about the city’s greatest strength, the City’s natural setting took most of the top spots, as it had in the 1988 survey. When asked which of several listed approaches to determining allowable growth in the city they supported, respondents continued to support preservation of the natural environment. Sixty-six percent want to keep growth in existing areas and 60% support avoiding harm to the natural environment. In 2012, when asked to pick a growth rate from listed categories, 54.6% of respondents picked no change (maintain a 1% average growth rate); 23.7% supported some increase but less than or equal to the state or county; 10.6% indicated the residential growth rate should be tied to commercial development; and 11% indicated support for no growth limits at all. Other input from the 2012 survey indicated the strongest support was for open space and bicycle infrastructure: Facilities or services Respondents seeking more of these Respondents willing to pay more for these Acquiring and maintaining open space for peaks and hillsides 58% 54.1% Acquiring and maintaining open space for City greenbelt 54% 51.6% PH1 - 197 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-16 Acquiring and maintaining open space for creeks and marshes 53% 49.3% Bicycle infrastructure 52% 48.7% The Land Use Element must be understood as emerging from the context of the community’s past experiences and present attitudes. It is a document that charts a future course of concern with environment, society, economy and quality of life, and responds to the desires of the City’s residents. Preamble To The Land Use Element We, the people of San Luis Obispo, hold that we have the right to determine our community's destiny based on our community's values; that the future livability of our community will be driven by historical choices made from day to day, and not by inevitable forces beyond our control; that in an age when the livability of large, urban communities to our north, south, and east is being destroyed by incrementally accelerating environmental degradation and the breakdown of civility, we assert our desire to seek a different sort of future for our community; that, therefore, we direct our elected representatives and civic employees to preserve our community's natural environment and control excessive growth detrimental to the long-term sustainability of the community. San Luis Obispo’s Vision Our vision is of a sustainable community, within a diverse natural and agrarian setting, which is part of a larger ecosystem upon which its existence depends. San Luis Obispo will maintain its healthy and attractive natural environment valued by residents, its prosperity, and its sense of safety and community, within a compact urban form. Our community will have a comprehensible scale, where people know each other and where their participation in government is welcome and effective. The general plan outlines basic features of the city needed to sustain our livelihoods, our natural and historical heritage, and our needs for interaction and expression. The general plan is a benchmark in the continuing planning process, reflecting the desires of citizens with different backgrounds to sustain the community's qualities for themselves and for future generations. The City should provide a setting for comfortable living, including work and recreation. The City should live within its resources, preserve the relatively high levels of service, environmental quality and clean air valued by its residents, and strive to provide additional resources as needed. PH1 - 198 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-17 Community’s Goals Introduction Goals describe desirable conditions. In this context, they are meant to express the community's preferences for basic future directions. In the goal statements, "San Luis Obispo" means the community as a whole, not just the City as a municipal corporation. The statements also indicate what the City should do and what it should influence others to do. The goals state San Luis Obispo's basic positions on the extent, rate, composition, and financing of growth. The following Growth Management section includes policies and programs which offer more specific guidance on these topics. Later sections, dealing with parts of the City and with land-use categories, give more detailed direction on preserving neighborhoods and designing new development. Approach to Planning San Luis Obispo should: 1. Choose its future, rather than let it happen. San Luis Obispo should be proactive in implementing its vision of the future, and should work with other agencies and institutions to create our desired mutual future. 2. These policies and programs shall serve as a blueprint, guiding the City and its various entities in priority setting and resource allocation. It is understood that the availability of financial resources can and will affect the timing of implementation but shall not change the goals and intent. Environment San Luis Obispo should: 3. Protect and enhance the natural environment, including the quality of air, water, soil, and open space. 4. Protect, sustain, and where it has been degraded, enhance wildlife habitat on land surrounding the city, at Laguna Lake, along creeks and other wetlands, and on open hills and ridges within the city, so that diverse, native plants, fish, and animals can continue to live within the area. 5. Protect public views of the surrounding hills and mountains. 6. Recognize the importance of farming to the economy of the planning area and the county, protect agriculture from development and from incompatible uses, and protect remaining undeveloped prime agricultural soils. 7. Protect and restore natural landforms and features in and near the city, such as the volcanic morros, hillsides, marshes, and creeks. 8. Foster appreciation among citizens of the complex abundance of the planning area's environment, and of the need to respect natural systems. 9. Identify, map and monitor our community's natural assets to preserve and protect them. 10. Support statewide and regional efforts to create more sustainable communities, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and develop transportation systems that support all modes of circulation. 11. Encourage energy efficiency principles and practices in the City’s built environment. Society and Economy PH1 - 199 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-18 San Luis Obispo should be a well balanced community. Environmental, social, and economic factors must be taken into account in important decisions about San Luis Obispo's future. A healthy economy depends on a healthy environment. The social fabric of the community for both residents and visitors must also be a part of that balance. Therefore, complementary to the goals and objectives of this element, the City shall maintain and bi-annually review goals and objectives that promote the economic well being of the community. San Luis Obispo should: 12. Provide employment opportunities appropriate for area residents' desires and skills. 13. Provide goods and services which substantial numbers of area residents leave the area regularly to obtain, provided doing so is consistent with other goals. 14. Retain existing businesses and agencies, and accommodate expansion of existing businesses, consistent with other goals. 15. Emphasize more productive use of existing commercial buildings and land areas already committed to urban development. 16. Provide an adequate revenue base for local government and public schools. 17. Provide high quality public services, ensuring that demands do not exceed resources and that adequate facilities and services can be provided in pace with development. 18. Cooperate with other agencies in the county to assure that increases in the numbers of workers and college and university students in the San Luis Obispo area do not outpace housing availability. 19. Accommodate residents within all income groups. 20. Preserve existing housing which is affordable to residents with very low, low, and moderate incomes. 21. Actively seek ways to provide housing which is affordable to residents with very low, low, and moderate incomes, within existing neighborhoods and within expansion areas. 22. Encourage opportunities for elder care and child care within the city. 23. Enrich community cultural and social life by accommodating people with various backgrounds, talents, occupations, and interests. 24. Provide a resilient economic base, able to tolerate changes in its parts without causing overall harm to the community. 25. Have developments bear the costs of resources and services needed to serve them, except where the community deliberately chooses to help pay in order to achieve other community goals. 26. Provide for high quality education and access to related services such as museums, art galleries, public art, and libraries. 27. Serve as the county's hub for: county and state government; education; transportation; visitor information; entertainment; cultural, professional, medical, and social services; community organizations; retail trade. 28. Provide a wide range of parks and sports and recreational facilities for the enjoyment of our citizens. 29. Retain accessible, responsive, and capable local government. 30. Ensure that residents' opportunities for direct participation in City government and their sense of community can continue. PH1 - 200 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-19 31. Increase the overall health and wellbeing of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo by expanding access to healthy food and nutrition choices and through community design that fosters walking and biking. City Form San Luis Obispo should: 32. Maintain the town's character as a small, safe, comfortable place to live, and maintain its rural setting, with extensive open land separating it from other urban development. 33. Maintain existing neighborhoods and assure that new development occurs as part of a neighborhood pattern. 34. Create compact, mixed-use neighborhoods that locate housing, jobs, recreation, and other daily needs in close proximity to one another. 35. Keep a clear boundary between San Luis Obispo's urban development and surrounding open land. 36. Grow gradually outward from its historic center until its ultimate boundaries are reached, maintaining a compact urban form. 37. Foster an awareness of past residents and ways of life, and preserve our heritage of historic buildings and places. 38. Develop buildings and facilities which will contribute to our sense of place and architectural heritage. 39. Develop buildings and places which complement the natural landscape and the fabric of neighborhoods. 40. Focus its government and cultural facilities and provide a variety of business services and housing in the Downtown. 41. Provide a safe and pleasant place to walk and ride a bicycle, for recreation and other daily activities. 42. Be a safe place to live. PH1 - 201 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-20 Figure 2. Urban Reserve and Principal Expansion Areas TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 202 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-21 LAND USE DIAGRAM AND STANDARDS The most familiar part of any general plan is the Land Use Diagram – the illustration that shows the types and locations of existing and future development that the general plan envisions. The following describes how the designations for each land use are expressed and outlines the associated development standards for each of the designations shown on the City of San Luis Obispo’s General Plan Land Use Diagram. Land Use Diagram The Land Use Diagram designates land uses for the entire Planning Area. State planning law requires that the general plan cover all territory within the boundaries of the adopting city or county as well as “any land outside its boundary which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to its planning” (Government Code Section 65300). To carry out this directive, most cities formally delineate a “planning area” boundary in their general plans. The current update does not change the designated planning area but has an emphasis on infill and therefore a smaller Planning Sub-area has been identified to describe the area of focus for policies and land use changes. A copy of the Land Use Diagram is available from the City’s Community Development Department or by download from the City’s website. It is typical for the Land Use and Circulation Diagrams to be updated over time. Please check with the Community Development Department to ensure you have the current version. The Land Use Diagram also depicts the Airport Safety zone overlay for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. This diagram, together with the Airport policies and programs contained in Section 7.0, demonstrate how the City’s General Plan complies with the State Aeronautics Act (California Public Utilities Code, Section 21670 et seq.). For areas outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area and not otherwise designated on the City’s Land Use Diagram, these areas are designated as either AG/Open Space (for lands identified as part of the City’s greenbelt) or reflect Residential Suburban or Residential Rural land use designations (refer to section titled “Land Use Designations Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area” and Table 2). Development Standards State planning law requires general plans to establish “standards of population density and building intensity” for the various land use designations in the general plan (Government Code Section 65302(a)). To satisfy this requirement, the General Plan Land Use Element includes such standards for each land use designation appearing on the Land Use Diagram. Following are explanations of how these standards operate. PH1 - 203 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-22 Residential Designations Standards of building density for residential uses are stated as the allowable maximum dwelling units per net acre. For Medium-High and High Density residential categories a minimum density has also been identified. In determining net area, the following types of areas are excluded: sensitive features such as creeks, habitats of rare or endangered plants and animals, and significant trees; land dedicated in fee to the public for streets or neighborhood parks. Non-residential Designations and Mixed Uses Standards of building intensity for non-residential uses, such commercial and industrial uses, are stated as a range of floor-area ratios (FARs) that describe allowed development intensity. Dwellings may be provided in non-residential districts as part of mixed use projects. So long as the floor area ratio for the applicable designation is not exceeded, the maximum residential density (listed in Table 1) may be developed in addition to non- residential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) A FAR is the gross floor area of a building or buildings on a site divided by the site area. Floor area ratio does not include below grade or subterranean parking garages and basements or similar non-conditioned floor space. For example, on a lot with 25,000 square feet of land area, a FAR of 1.00 would allow 25,000 square feet of floor area which, depending on site constraints and development standards could be distributed on one floor or several floors. A FAR of 2.00 would allow 50,000 square feet of floor area and a FAR of 3.0 would allow 75,000 square feet of building area in this example. The diagram above illustrates conceptually how buildings of one, two, and four stories could be developed on a given lot with a FAR of 1.00. While FAR provides for the overall development size and intensity, it does not specify the form or character of the building. The guidelines for each designation describe key physical form characteristics envisioned for the designation. Other City regulations such as Zoning Codes and Community Design Guidelines will guide the form of buildings within a given FAR range. PH1 - 204 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-23 Land Use Designations within LUCE Planning Sub-area Within the LUCE Planning Sub-area, the General Plan Land Use Diagram includes residential, commercial, industrial, and other land use designations that depict the types of land uses that will be allowed within the LUCE Planning Sub-area. Table 1 identifies all of the designations along with their corresponding development intensity standards. Tables 1 and 2 provide same information: Designation. This column provides the name of each designation and the acronym used when referring to this designation. To the right of each name is the color that is assigned to this designation on the City’s Land Use Diagram. Description. In this column is a description of the purpose and application of each designation, followed by a general list of types of uses that could be allowed in that designation. The City’s Zoning Regulations provide further refinement and expansion of the list of uses allowed on any given property. For any given site, not all uses listed may be appropriate for a given property due to location, adjacent uses, other applicable General Plan policies, or other site specific issues. Density / Intensity. For residential designations, a maximum density is provided, expressed as dwelling units per acre (du/ac). For non-residential uses and mixed uses, a maximum FAR is provided. Table 1: General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards within the LUCE Planning Sub-area. Designation Description Density / Intensity Residential Designations Low Density Residential LDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for low density residential development having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them. These dwellings are generally detached, one and two story buildings with private outdoor space separating them from neighboring dwellings. Uses Single family detached dwellings Accessory Secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Low density development within and adjacent to neighborhoods committed to this type of development. Maximum Density: 7 du/ac PH1 - 205 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-24 Designation Description Density / Intensity Medium Density Residential MDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them, but in a more compact arrangement than Low-Density Residential. Such dwellings are generally one or two story detached buildings on small lots or attached dwellings with some private outdoor space for each dwelling. This type of development is appropriate as a transition from low density development to higher densities. Uses Single family detached dwellings Accessory Secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Maximum Density: 12 du/ac Medium-High Density Residential MHDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for primarily attached dwellings in two and three story buildings with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. This type of development is appropriate near employment centers, major public facilities, and transit corridors and nodes. Uses Single family detached dwellings Single family attached dwellings Multi-family dwellings Accessory Secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Maximum Density: 18 20 du/ac High Density Residential HDR Purpose and Application This designation provides for primarily attached dwellings in two and three story buildings, with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. This type of development is appropriate near Cal Poly, in the Downtown core, near employment concentrations, and near transit corridors and nodes. Uses Multi-family dwellings Single family attached dwellings Public and quasi-public uses (parks, schools, churches, e.g.) Maximum Density: 24 du/ac PH1 - 206 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-25 Designation Description Density / Intensity Commercial and Industrial Designations General Retail GR Purpose and Application This designation provides for goods and services adequate to meet most of the needs of city and nearby county residents. This designation is applied to Downtown, the intersection of Madonna Road and Highway 101, and the area around Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. Uses Specialty stores Department stores Warehouse stores Discount stores Restaurants Banks and other services Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 36 du/ac Maximum FAR: 3.0 3.75 in the Downtown core, or 4.0 in the Downtown core with a TDC or a density bonus Neighborhood Commercial NC Purpose and Application This designation provides for goods and services to meet the frequent shopping needs of people living nearby. Neighborhood Commercial uses should be available within a one-mile radius of residences. These uses should be located on sites not exceeding about four acres, unless the neighborhood to be served includes a significant amount of high density residential development. Uses Small scale grocery stores Laundromats Drug stores Small-scale specialty stores (provided they will not be a major citywide attraction or displace more general, convenience uses) Residential uses as part of mixed-use projects Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 12 du/ac Maximum FAR: 2.0 PH1 - 207 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-26 Designation Description Density / Intensity Community Commercial CC Purpose and Application This designation provides for shopping centers to serve community-wide needs. Community commercial areas are intended to be configured as distinctive, pedestrian-oriented shopping centers and may accommodate larger scale uses that are not appropriate in the Downtown Core. Uses Retail uses Personal service uses Specialty uses (provided they do not detract from the Downtown as the city’s primary concentration of specialty stores) Residential uses as part of mixed-use projects Offices that provide “over-the-counter” services to customers Professional offices, particularly above the ground floor Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 36 du/acre Maximum FAR: 2.0 Tourist Commercial TC Purpose and Application This designation provides for uses that primarily serve the traveling public. Uses Hotels Motels Restaurants Service stations Recreational uses Minor retail uses serving the needs of travelers Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 12 du/acre Maximum FAR: 2.5 PH1 - 208 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-27 Designation Description Density / Intensity Office O Purpose and Application This designation provides for offices use to meet the needs of city and specialized needs of county residents. Not all types of offices are appropriate in all locations. Uses Professional and financial services such as doctors, architects, insurance companies and banks Government offices Residential uses as part of mixed-use projects Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 12 du/acre Maximum FAR: 1.5 Services and Manufacturing SM Purpose and Application This designation provides for a wide range of service and manufacturing uses to meet the needs of the city and some demands of the region. Certain areas may be reserved through special zoning provisions for certain types of uses to assure compatibility among the wide range of potential uses, and to assure adequate land for certain types of uses. Uses Business and professional services with limited need for public visitation or access to government services such as computer services, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, insurance and financial services) Medical services located on commercial collector or arterial streets with convenient access to public transportation, that do not significantly increase traffic in residential neighborhoods Wholesaling, warehousing, and storage Lumber and building materials dealers Repair shops, printing services, laundries, animal hospitals, sporting goods stores, auto parts stores and some recreational facilities Light manufacturing, research and development, and laboratories Retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, furniture, appliances, and plant nurseries) Convenience restaurants and other activities Maximum Density: 24 du/acre Maximum FAR: 1.5 PH1 - 209 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-28 Designation Description Density / Intensity primarily serving area workers Caretaker quarters Homeless shelters Residential uses as part of mixed–use projects Public and quasi-public uses Business Park BP Purpose and Application This designation provides for research and development and light manufacturing in a campus setting and should provide high quality design of public and private facilities. Uses Research and development Light manufacturing Financial and Professional Services and Offices Small Retail Restaurants Caretaker quarters Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: Maximum FAR: 1.0 Other Designations Public PUB Purpose and Application This designation provides for public, cultural, and quasi-public uses to meet the needs of city and county residents. Uses City, County, and State offices and facilities – similar types of services should be grouped where possible. City and County government offices and meeting rooms should be located Downtown. Health care facilities, such as Mental Health and Public Health services (see Policy 5.1.4) Social services such as County Social Services, CA Employment Development and Rehabilitation, and Social Security Administration (see Policy 5.1.5) Cultural and public recreation facilities Compatible private businesses (provided they do not displace the preferred public agencies) Caretaker quarters Homeless shelters Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: Maximum FAR: 2.0 in Downtown, 1.0 in outlying areas PH1 - 210 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-29 Designation Description Density / Intensity Park P Purpose and Application This designation provides for public park facilities. Uses Passive recreation areas Walking paths Low activity facilities or incidental uses such as basketball courts Playgrounds Small community centers Public restrooms Public and quasi-public uses Recreation REC Purpose and Application This designation provides for outdoor recreational facilities. Uses Active recreation uses such as sports fields for soccer, baseball, football Golf courses Small community centers Public restrooms Incidental retail uses to support active recreation such as “snack shacks” Public and quasi-public uses Open Space OS Purpose and Application This designation provides for land or water areas that remain in a predominantly natural or undeveloped state and which is generally free of structures. It provides for the protection and preservation of the community’s natural and historic resources, defines the urban boundary, and provides visual and physical relief from urban development. Open spaces may consist of small portions of a parcel such as small wilderness preservation areas or large tracts of land. Open Space purposes and uses are more fully described in the current Conservation and Open Space Element. Uses Protection and enhancement of resources in a natural state Protection of hillsides, Morros, and ridgelines Farming and grazing Creeks, marshes, watershed and floodplains Maximum Density: 1 du/5 or more acres to be defined with each area PH1 - 211 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-30 Designation Description Density / Intensity Scenic resources Plant and animal habitat Historic and archaeological resources Passive recreation Agricultural AG Purpose and Application This designation provides for the agricultural uses such as agricultural cultivation and keeping of livestock and is applied to open areas that have historically been used for agriculture. Uses Agricultural cultivation Keeping of livestock Single family detached dwellings Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: 1 du/ 20 acres or 1 du/legal lot whichever is less PH1 - 212 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-31 Land Use Designations Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area Most of the land within the City’s Greenbelt, but outside the City limits (unincorporated lands), is designated by the County for Agriculture or Open Space. The City supports these land use designations and discourages any further subdivision of existing parcels unless such subdivision is expressly part of strategy to permanently preserve agriculture and/or open space. However, if any new lots are permitted apart from such a strategy, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater. Other portions of the Planning Area located outside of the LUCE Planning Sub-area (unincorporated lands) but within the City’s Greenbelt include areas that were subdivided under County jurisdiction for low intensity development and are beyond City services. Residential designations (RR, RS) shall be limited to those areas already largely subdivided and developed in the County as shown on the City’s Land Use Diagram. Table 2 identifies the City’s land use designations, along with their corresponding development intensity standards, for these areas. These designations are only used in unincorporated portions of the Planning Area. The City does not support further subdivision of land within these areas, generally; however, if any new lots are permitted they should be a minimum 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). TABLE 2: General Plan Land Use Designations and Development Standards Outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area Designation Description Density / Intensity Residential Designations Unincorporated Residential Rural RR Purpose and Application This designation is applied to areas that have been developed or subdivided to allow lower density residential development within otherwise predominantly open space areas near the edges of the city. These areas were subdivided under County jurisdiction and are beyond City services. Uses Single family detached dwellings Accessory secondary dwelling units Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: The City does not support further subdivision of land within the City’s Greenbelt area; however, if any new lots are permitted, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). PH1 - 213 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-32 Designation Description Density / Intensity Unincorporated Residential Suburban RS Purpose and Application This designation is applied to areas that have been developed or subdivided to allow lower density residential development within otherwise predominantly open space areas near the edges of the city. These areas were subdivided under County jurisdiction and are beyond City services. Uses Single family detached dwellings Residential accessory structures Public and quasi-public uses Maximum Density: The City does not support further subdivision of land within the City’s Greenbelt area; however, if any new lots are permitted, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). Other Designations Unincorporated Agriculture and Open Space AG/OS Purpose and Application This designation provides for agricultural uses such as cultivation and keeping of livestock and/or to land or water areas that remain in a predominantly natural or undeveloped state. It provides for the protection and preservation of the community’s natural and historic resources, defines the urban boundary, and provides visual and physical relief from urban development. Open spaces may consist of small portions of a parcel such as small wilderness preservation areas or large tracts of land. Open Space purposes and uses are more fully described in the current Conservation and Open Space Element. Uses Agricultural Cultivation Keeping of Livestock Single family detached dwellings Public and quasi-public uses Protection and enhancement of resources in a natural state Protection of hillsides, Morros, and ridgelines Farming and grazing Creeks, marshes, watershed and floodplains Scenic resources Plant and animal habitat Historic and archaeological resources Passive recreation The City does not support any further subdivision of AG/OS properties except as part of a strategy for permanent agricultural and/or open space protection. However, if any new lots are permitted apart from such a strategy, they should be a minimum of 20 acres in size or greater (also see Policies 1.6.1, 1.6.2, and 1.8.1). PH1 - 214 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-33 GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICIES As part of the General Plan Update, integrating the concept of sustainability was an important aspect of the State grant. In reviewing the General Plan, a number of sustainability practices were already included in the General Plan. For existing and new policies and programs that support sustainability, this icon is shown at the end of the policy / programs title. See Policy 1.0.1 below as an example. 1.0 Overall Intent 1.0.1 Growth Management Objectives The City shall manage its growth so that: A. The natural environment and air quality will be protected. B. The relatively high level of services enjoyed by City residents is maintained or enhanced. C. The demand for municipal services does not outpace their availability. D. New residents can be assimilated without disrupting the community's social fabric, safety, or established neighborhoods. E. Residents' opportunities for direct participation in City government and their sense of community can continue. 1.0.2 Development Capacity and Services The City shall not designate more land for urban uses than its resources can be expected to support. 1.1 Urban Separation Broad, undeveloped open spaces should separate the City from nearby urban areas. This element establishes a final edge for urban development. 1.2 Urban Reserve Line There should not be major expansion of the urban reserve line because the urban reserve provides adequate capacity for new housing and employment up to the City’s desired maximum. 1.3 Urban Edges Character The City shall maintain a clear boundary between San Luis Obispo's urban development and surrounding open land. Development just inside the boundary shall provide measures to avoid a stark-appearing edge between buildings in the city and adjacent open land. Such measures may include: using new or existing groves or windrows of trees, or hills or other landforms, to set the edge of development; increasing the required side-yard and rear-yard setbacks; and providing open space or agricultural transition buffers. PH1 - 215 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-34 1.4 Regional Planning The City shall encourage regional planning and growth management throughout the county, and in cooperation with neighboring counties and the State. 1.5 City Size and Expansion 1.5.1 Urban Reserve The City shall maintain an urban reserve line containing the area around the city where urban development might occur (Land Use Diagram and Figure 2). Urban uses within this line should only be developed if consistent with City- approved plans. Non-urban agricultural, open space, and wildlife corridor uses are also encouraged within the urban reserve, as interim or permanent uses shown on City-approved plans. 1.5.2 Expansion Areas The City shall designate expansion areas adequate for growth consistent with these policies within the urban reserve line (Land Use Diagram and Figure 2.) 1.5.3 Interim Uses Expansion areas should be kept in agriculture, compatible with agricultural support services or open-space uses until urban development occurs, unless a City- approved specific plan provides for other interim uses. 1.6 Greenbelt (See also Section 6, Resource Protection) 1.6.1 Open Space Protection Within the City's planning area and outside the urban reserve line, undeveloped land should be kept open. Prime agricultural land, productive agricultural land, and potentially productive agricultural land should be protected for farming. Scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat, and undeveloped prime agricultural land should be permanently protected as open space. 1.6.2 Greenbelt Uses Appropriate greenbelt uses include: watershed; wildlife habitat; grazing; cultivated crops; parks and outdoor recreation (with minimal land or landscape alteration, building, lighting, paving, or use of vehicles, so rural character is maintained); and home sites surrounded by land of sufficient size and appropriately located with respect to topography and vegetation to maintain the open character. 1.6.3 Commercial Uses in Greenbelt The City shall not allow commercial development within the greenbelt area unless it is clearly incidental to and supportive of agriculture or other open space uses. PH1 - 216 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-35 1.6.4 Parcel Sizes and Density The City shall encourage the County to create no new parcels within the greenbelt, with the exception of those permitted under Policy 1.8. Outside of clusters, allowed parcel sizes within the greenbelt should be no less than 10 acres and preferably 20 acres or larger. 1.6.5 Building Design and Siting All new buildings and structures should be subordinate to and in harmony with the surrounding landscape. The City should encourage County adoption of regulations prohibiting new structures on ridge lines or in other visually prominent or environmentally sensitive locations, and allowing transfer of development rights from one parcel to another in order to facilitate this policy. 1.6.6 Wildlife Habitat The City shall ensure that continuous wildlife habitat – including corridors free of human disruption are preserved, and, where necessary, created. 1.6.7 Trees Outside City Limits The City shall preserve significant trees, particularly native species, outside its limits and in the greenbelt on lands owned or leased by the City or for which the City has an easement. For other areas in the greenbelt, the City will work with the County to protect these trees. 1.7 Prime Agricultural Land 1.7.1 Agricultural Protection The City shall support preservation of economically viable agricultural operations and land within the urban reserve and city limits. The City should provide for the continuation of farming through steps such as provision of appropriate general plan designations and zoning. 1.7.2 Prime Agricultural Land The City may allow development on prime agricultural land if the development contributes to the protection of agricultural land in the urban reserve or greenbelt by one or more of the following methods, or an equally effective method: acting as a receiver site for transfer of development credit from prime agricultural land of equal quantity; securing for the City or for a suitable land conservation organization open space easements or fee ownership with deed restrictions; helping to directly fund the acquisition of fee ownership or open space easements by the City or a suitable land conservation organization. Development of small parcels which are essentially surrounded by urbanization need not contribute to agricultural land protection. PH1 - 217 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-36 1.8 Residential Clustering for Open Space Protection 1.8.1 Parcel Sizes In the greenbelt, the City may allow, and the City shall encourage the County to allow, smaller parcel sizes only when: 1. All new dwellings will be clustered contiguously; 2. At least 90% of the site area is permanently protected as open space; 3. Agricultural easements are placed on prime agricultural lands outside the cluster. 1.8.2 Means of Protection The City shall require that open space be preserved either by dedication of permanent easements or transfer of fee ownership to the City, the County, or a responsible, nonprofit conservation organization. 1.8.3 Public Access Areas preserved for open space should include public trail access, controlled to protect the natural resources, to assure reasonable security and privacy of dwellings, and to allow continuing agricultural operations. Public access through production agricultural land will not be considered, unless the owner agrees. 1.8.4 Design Standards The City shall require cluster Development to: A. Be screened from public views by land forms or vegetation, but not at the expense of habitat. If the visually screened locations contain sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, development should be avoided in those areas and instead designed to cluster in the form of vernacular farm building complexes, to blend into the traditional agricultural working landscape. B. Be located on other than prime agricultural land and be situated to allow continued agricultural use; C. Prohibit building sites and roads within stream corridors and other wetlands, on ridge lines, rock outcrops, or visually prominent or steep hillsides, or other sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element. D. Preserve historic or archaeological resources. 1.9 Growth Rates & Phasing 1.9.1 Overall Intent The City shall manage the city’s growth rate to provide for the balanced evolution of the community and the gradual assimilation of new residents. Growth must be consistent with the City's ability to provide resources and services and with State and City requirements for protecting the environment, the economy, and open space. PH1 - 218 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-37 1.9.2 Residential Growth Rate The City shall manage the growth of the city's housing supply so that it does not exceed one percent per year, on average, based on thresholds established by Land Use Element Table 4, excluding dwellings affordable to residents with extremely low, very low or low incomes as defined by the Housing Element. This rate of growth may continue so long as the City's basic service capacity is assured. Table 4 shows the approximate number of dwellings and residents which would result from the one percent maximum average annual growth rate over the planning period. Approved specific plan areas may develop in accordance with the phasing schedule adopted by each specific plan provided thresholds established by Table 4 are not exceeded. The City Council shall review the rate of growth on an annual basis in conjunction with the General Plan annual report to ensure consistency with the City’s gradual assimilation policy. Table 4: One Percent City Population Growth Projection Year Approximate Maximum Number of Dwellings* Anticipated Number of People* 2013 20,697 45,451 2015 21,113 46,456 2020 22,190 48,826 2025 23,332 51,317 2030 24,512 53,934 2035 25,762 56,686 Estimated urban reserve capacity 57,200 *2013 population based on CA Department of Finance data and projected based on 1% annual growth. 1.9.3 Phasing Residential Expansions Before a residential expansion area is developed, the City must have adopted a specific plan or a development plan for it. Such plans for residential expansion projects will provide for phased development, consistent with the population growth outlined in Table 4, and taking into account expected infill residential development. 1.9.4 Nonresidential Growth Rate Each year, the City Council shall evaluate the actual increase in nonresidential floor area over the preceding five years. The Council shall consider establishing limits for the rate of nonresidential development if the increase in nonresidential floor area for any five-year period exceeds five percent. Any limits so established shall not apply to: A. Changed operations or employment levels, or relocation or ownership change, of any business existing within the City at the time the limit is set; B. Additional nonresidential floor area within the Downtown core (Figure 4); C. Public agencies; D. Manufacturing, light industrial, research businesses, or companies providing a significant number of head of household jobs. PH1 - 219 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-38 1.10 Educational and Governmental Facilities Near the City 1.10.1 Overall Policy The City shall continue to communicate with nearby government and educational institutions to address proposed changes in numbers of workers, students, or inmates that have the potential to result in significant adverse land use or circulation impacts on the City or may negatively influence the City’s ability to manage growth. 1.10.2 Cal Poly The City shall encourage Cal Poly not to change its 2001 Master Plan enrollment targets in a way that would exceed campus and community resources. The City shall encourage Cal Poly to provide additional on-campus housing, enhanced transit service, and other measures to minimize impacts of campus commuting and enrollment. Cal Poly should actively engage the community during updates of the Campus Master Plan and fully mitigate impacts to the City. 1.10.3 California Men’s Colony The City shall continue to communicate and cooperate with the California Men's Colony (CMC) to identify resource constraints and to avoid adverse impacts of increased inmate population. 1.10.4 Cuesta Community College The City supports Cuesta College’s efforts to offer courses at satellite campuses, on-line courses, and enhanced transit service to avoid housing and commuting impacts of increasing enrollment at Cuesta College. 1.11 Annexation and Services 1.11.1 Water and Sewer Service The City shall not provide nor permit delivery of City potable water or sewer services to the following areas. However, the City will serve those parties having valid previous connections or contracts with the City. A. Outside the City limits; B. Outside the urban reserve line; C. Above elevations reliably served by gravity-flow in the City water system; D. Below elevations reliably served by gravity-flow or pumps in the City sewer system. 1.11.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing The City may use annexation as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate urban development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve line which are to be developed with urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs. The City may annex an area long before such development is to occur, and the City may annex areas which are to remain PH1 - 220 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-39 permanently as open space. An area may be annexed in phases, consistent with the city-approved specific plan or development plan for the area. Phasing of annexation and development will reflect topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed land uses and roads. 1.11.3 Annexation of Cal Poly The City should analyze the suitability of annexing Cal Poly. 1.12.4 Annexation in Airport Area Properties in the Airport Area Specific Plan may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to the existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the property belonging to the applicant(s) accompanies the application for annexation; and 6. The applicant(s) agree to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area-wide infrastructure improvements according to a cost -sharing plan maintained by the City. 1.12.5 Required Plans The City shall not allow development of any newly annexed private land until the City has adopted a specific or development plan for land uses, open space protection, roads, utilities, the overall pattern of subdivision, and financing of public facilities for the area. 1.12.6 Development and Services The City shall approve development in newly annexed areas only when adequate City services can be provided for that development, without reducing the level of public services or increasing the cost of services for existing development and for build-out within the City limits. 1.12.7 Open Space The City shall require that each annexation help secure permanent protection for areas designated Open Space, and for the habitat types and wildlife corridors within the annexation area that are identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. Properties, which are both along the urban reserve line and on hillsides, shall dedicate land or easements for about four times the area to be developed (developed area includes building lots, roads, parking and other paved areas, and setbacks required by zoning). (See also the Hillside Planning policies, Section 6.2). The following standards shall apply to the indicated areas: A. Airport Area Specific Plan properties shall secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not PH1 - 221 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-40 feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City's southerly urban reserve line. B. Foothill Annexation: The northern portion of the Foothill property, and the creek area shall be annexed as open space. Development on this site should be clustered or located near Foothill Boulevard, with the northern portion of the site and creek area preserved as open space. 1.13 Costs of Growth The City shall require the costs of public facilities and services needed for new development be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City shall consider a range of options for financing measures so that new development pays its fair share of costs of new services and facilities required to serve the project. 1.14 Solid Waste Capacity In addition to other requirements for adequate resources and services prior to development, the City shall require that adequate solid waste disposal capacity exists before granting any discretionary land use approval which would increase solid waste generation. PH1 - 222 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-41 PROGRAMS See also Section 10, Implementation 1.15 Countywide Planning 1.15.1 County “RMS” The City will monitor reports from the County “resource management system” and advocate adherence to that system’s principle of assuring that there will be adequate resources and environmental protection before development is approved. 1.15.2 Regular Coordination Meetings The City shall advocate and help arrange quarterly coordination meetings among planning directors of local jurisdictions in San Luis Obispo County, SLOCOG, LAFCO, Cal Poly, and APCD to discuss regional issues. 1.15.3 Plans Summary The City will shall provide information to SLOCOG so that it can maintain a current summary of the land use plans of all agencies in the county, showing areas designated for urban, rural, and open-space uses, and tabulating the capacities for various kinds of uses. 1.15.4 Project Review The City will continue to participate with the County in reviewing and providing input on County projects and general-plan amendments that have the potential to impact the City or be inconsistent with City policies. 1.15.5 Regional Growth Management The City shall advocate a regional growth-management program, which should include: A. Population growth no faster than the statewide average growth rate for the preceding year, and no faster than can be sustained by available resources and services, whichever is less. B. No significant deterioration in air quality, due to development activities for which local government has approval. C. Plans for large residential developments to include a range of housing types to provide opportunities for residents with very low, low, or moderate incomes. D. Voter approval for any significant change from Open Space, Agriculture, or Residential Rural designations to another designation. 1.15.6 Consistent Plans The City shall seek County Board of Supervisors approval amending the County Land Use Element to make it consistent with this element within San Luis Obispo's planning area. The City will work with the County during updates of the County's plan for the San Luis Obispo planning area. PH1 - 223 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-42 1.15.7 City-County Agreement The City shall maintain a memorandum of understanding with the County, pledging that neither agency will approve a substantial amendment to its plan for San Luis Obispo's planning area without carefully considering the comment and recommendation of the other agency. The key feature of the memorandum would be the City's acceptance of the planned amount of growth and the County's agreement to not allow urban development within the planning area but outside the City. 1.15.8 Refined Planning Area Map The City shall prepare and maintain a Planning Area Map in the General Plan. The City will seek to establish and maintain County concurrence for the map, which applies to the City’s Planning Area outside the urban reserve, including the City’s sphere of influence. The map will show: A. Areas to be kept in permanent open space, including scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat, and undeveloped prime agricultural land. B. Existing uses other than open space, relatively far from the City's urban reserve line, which may be maintained but which should not be expanded or made more intense, including institutional uses such as California Men's Colony, Camp San Luis Obispo, and Cuesta College, and scattered residential and commercial developments. C. Existing uses other than open space which may be considered for inclusion within the urban reserve line during the ten-year updates of this element, such as nearby groups of rural homesites. D. Any existing uses other than open space which should be changed, relocated, or removed to allow restoration of the natural landscape or agricultural uses. 1.15.9 Maintain Development Fee Program The City shall maintain a development fee program that covers the costs associated with serving projects with City services and facilities. This maintenance will include periodic review of the fees collected to ensure they are adequate to cover City costs. PH1 - 224 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-43 2 CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS The City shall preserve, protect and enhance the City’s neighborhoods and strive to preserve and enhance their identity and promote a higher quality of life within each neighborhood. 2.1 Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement 2.1.1 Neighborhood Identity The City shall work with residents to address neighborhood specific issues including enhancing a sense of place within neighborhoods. 2.1.2 Neighborhood Groups The City shall encourage and support the formation and continuation of neighborhood planning groups composed of neighborhood residents. 2.1.3 Neighborhood Traffic Neighborhoods should be protected from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should include measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, and bollards. 2.1.4 Neighborhood Connections The City shall provide all areas with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to nearby community facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting commercial areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that would increase cut-through traffic. (See also the Circulation Element.) 2.1.5 Neighborhood Open Links The City shall treat streets, sidewalks, and front setbacks as a continuous open link among all areas of the city and with all land uses. These features should be designed as amenities for light, air, social contact, and community identity. 2.1.6 Neighborhood Amenities The City shall promote livability and safety for all residents. Characteristics of quality neighborhoods vary from neighborhood to neighborhood, but often include one or more of the following characteristics: PH1 - 225 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-44 A mix of housing type styles, density, and affordability. Design and circulation features that create and maintain a pedestrian scale. Nearby services and facilities including schools, parks, retail (e.g., grocery store, drug store), restaurants and cafes, and community centers or other public facilities. A tree canopy and well-maintained landscaping. A sense of personal safety (e.g., low crime rate, short police and emergency response times). Convenient access to public transportation. Well-maintained housing and public facilities. 2.1.1 Neighborhood Enhancement The City shall promote infill development, redevelopment, rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse efforts that contribute positively to existing neighborhoods and surrounding areas. 2.2 Residential Location, Uses, and Design 2.2.1 Mixed Uses and Convenience The City shall promote a mix of compatible uses in neighborhoods to serve the daily needs of nearby residents, including schools, parks, churches, and convenience retail stores. Neighborhood shopping and services should be available within about one mile of all dwellings. When nonresidential, neighborhood-serving uses are developed, existing housing shall be preserved and new housing added where possible. If existing dwellings are removed for such uses, the development shall include replacement dwellings (no net loss of residential units). 2.2.2 Separation and Buffering The City shall seek to protect Residential areas from incompatible and detrimental non-residential activities and facilities. 2.2.3 Residential Next to Non-residential In designing development at the boundary between residential and non-residential uses, the City shall make protection of a residential atmosphere the first priority. 2.2.4 Street Access The City shall ensure new residential development and redevelopment involving large sites are designed to orient low-density housing to local access streets, and medium- or high-density housing to driveways accessible from collector streets. PH1 - 226 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-45 Major arterials through residential areas shall provide only limited private access or controlled street intersections. 2.2.5 Neighborhood Pattern The City shall require that all new residential development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods. 2.2.6 Housing and Businesses The City shall encourage mixed use projects, where appropriate and compatible with existing and planned development on the site and with adjacent and nearby properties. The City shall support the location of mixed use projects and community and neighborhood commercial centers near major activity nodes and transportation corridors / transit opportunities where appropriate. 2.2.7 Natural Features The City shall require residential developments to preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and plants. 2.2.8 Parking The City shall discourage the development of large parking lots and require parking lots be screened from street views. In general, parking should not be located between buildings and public streets. 2.2.9 Compatible Development The City shall require that new housing built within an existing neighborhood be sited and designed to be compatible with the character of the neighborhood. All multifamily development and large group-living facilities shall be compatible with any nearby, lower density development. Compatibility shall be evaluated using the following criteria: A. Front Setback Patterns New development shall match the typical range of setbacks used in areas adjacent to the project. B. Landscaping New development shall repeat or enhance the landscaping provided in parkway areas (if any exist) along street frontages. C. Rhythm of Development New development shall reflect the rhythm of existing development in the area including features such as setbacks and façade widths along the front setback. Larger structures, such as multi-family (as allowed by the General Plan land use designation for the site) should replicate the spacing of structural components along the street frontage. PH1 - 227 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-46 D. Street Orientation New development shall match the general orientation of existing residential structures in the adjacent area and shall provide an inviting façade facing public streets. E. Architecture Architectural compatibility will be assessed based on a combination of factors, including height, scale, mass, form and architectural style. Desired outcome is a smooth transition between existing and proposed development, supporting a quality neighborhood. F. Privacy and Solar Access New buildings will respect the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings. (See also the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element.) G. Preservation of Natural, Historic and Cultural Features New development shall: a. Respect historic context b. Maintain mature trees on-site to the maximum extent feasible c. Protect stream corridors and natural drainages H. Housing Diversity A mix of housing types, and a range of density within a neighborhood is desirable (see also Policy 2.1.6). I. Parking New development: a. Outside of the Downtown In-lieu Parking Fee Area, new development will be required to provide adequate off-street parking to match the intended use. b. For multi-family, parking shall be sited and designed to minimize the visual impact from the public street. 2.2.10 Site Constraints The City shall require new residential developments to respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native vegetation, and significant trees. 2.2.11 Residential Project Objectives Residential projects should provide: A. Privacy, for occupants and neighbors of the project; B. Adequate usable outdoor area, sheltered from noise and prevailing winds, and oriented to receive light and sunshine C. Use of natural ventilation, sunlight, and shade to make indoor and outdoor spaces comfortable with minimum mechanical support. D. Pleasant views from and toward the project; E. Security and safety. F. Bicycle facilities consistent with the City’s Bicycle Plan; G. Adequate parking and storage space; PH1 - 228 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-47 H. Noise and visual separation from adjacent roads and commercial uses. (Barrier walls, isolating a project, are not desirable. Noise mitigation walls may be used only when there is no practicable alternative. Where walls are used, they should help create an attractive pedestrian, residential setting through features such as setbacks, changes in alignment, detail and texture, places for people to walk through them at regular intervals, and planting.) I. Design elements that facilitate neighborhood interaction, such as front porches, front yards along streets, and entryways facing public walkways. J. Buffers from hazardous materials transport routes, as recommended by the City Fire Department. 2.2.12 Non-Residential Activities Residential areas may accommodate limited non-residential activities which generally have been compatible, such as child day care, elementary schools, churches, and home businesses meeting established criteria. 2.3 Residential Density 2.3.1 Density Categories The following residential density categories are established in Table 1 within LUCE Planning Sub-area, and Table 2 for areas outside the LUCE Planning Sub-area but within the City’s Planning Area. For planning studies conducted, Table 5 provides a typical population density for each residential land use designation. Residential density is expressed as the number of dwellings per acre of net site area within the designation. In determining net area, the following types of areas are excluded: sensitive features such as creeks, habitats of rare or endangered plants and animals, and significant trees; land dedicated in fee to the public for streets or neighborhood parks. For the categories other than Agriculture/Open Space, Residential Rural, Residential Suburban, and Low-Density Residential, densities are expressed in terms of a standard two-bedroom dwelling. This approach is intended to achieve population densities approximately like those indicated. More or fewer dwellings having different bedroom counts may be built depending on the number of people expected to live in a project, as indicated by the number of bedrooms. The population-density standards also apply to group residential facilities. (For allowed residential development in non-residential designations, see Table 1.) PH1 - 229 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-48 Residential Population Assumptions 1 1 This table is intended to reflect average population estimates to be expected with each designation and does not reflect densities the City is striving to achieve. 2.3.2 Density Bonuses The City shall approve a density bonus for projects that: A. Provide a receiving site, within expansion areas or the downtown commercial core only, for development credit transferred to protect open space; B. Include affordable housing for seniors or lower income households consistent with the requirements of State Law. 2.3.3 Density and Site Constraints The allowed density of residential development shall decrease as slope increases. The City may require a residential project to have fewer units than generally allowed for its density category (Table 5), upon finding that the maximum density would have adverse environmental impacts or cause significant adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of future residents of the site, neighbors, or the public generally. 2.4 Residential Land Protection 2.4.1 Boundary Adjustments The City may adjust land-use boundaries in a way that would reduce land designated as residential, only if: A. A significant, long-term neighborhood or citywide need, which outweighs the preference to retain residential capacity, will be met, and; B. The need is best met at the proposed location and no comparable alternative exists. Designation Average Population Density (Persons Per Acre) Maximum Dwelling Density (Units Per Acre) Unincorporated Agriculture/Open Space (AG/OS) 0.10 0.05 (1 du/20 ac) Unincorporated Residential Rural (RR) 0.10 0.05 (1 du/20 ac) Unincorporated Residential Suburban (RS) 0.10 0.05 (1 du/20 ac) Low Density Residential (LDR) 20 7 Medium Density Residential (MDR) 25 12 Medium - High Density Residential (MHDR) 40 20 High Density Residential (HDR) 55 24 PH1 - 230 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-49 2.4.2 Density Changes The City shall approve re-zonings that increase density in existing residential areas only if it finds that the following are not adversely impacted: neighborhood character and identity; compatibility of land use; impact on services and facilities (including schools). In addition, the City shall find that proposed density changes meet policies related to neighborhood amenities (Policy 2.1.7); compatible development (Policy 2.2.9) and residential project objectives (Policy 2.2.11). 2.4.3 Residential Conversion The City shall approve proposals to convert residential properties along major streets to office or commercial uses only when there already is a substantial non- residential character to the corridor, the proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use, and adequate off-street parking can be provided. Where appropriate, replacement dwellings shall be provided as part of the project. 2.5 Student and Campus Housing 2.5.1 Cal Poly The City shall encourage Cal Poly to build housing for at least 50% of all students. On-campus housing should be expanded at least as fast as enrollment increases. Consideration shall be given for housing for faculty and staff as student enrollment increases. 2.5.2 Cuesta College The City shall encourage Cuesta College to facilitate student housing off-campus and close to transit and bicycle connections. The City shall discourage on-campus residential development due to environmental sensitivity of the Chorro watershed and the lack of other services near the Cuesta campus. 2.5.3 Amenities The City shall encourage development of attractive multifamily housing likely to be occupied by students to provide the amenities that students may otherwise seek in single-family areas. 2.5.4 Location The City shall encourage the development of housing likely to attract faculty, staff, and students to locate close to Cal Poly. 2.5.5 Fraternities & Sororities The City shall work with Cal Poly to develop a proposal to locate fraternities and sororities on campus for consideration by the CSU Board. If locations on campus cannot be provided, fraternities and sororities should be limited to medium-high and high-density residential areas near the campus. PH1 - 231 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-50 2.5.6 Large Group Housing The City shall not approve large group housing in areas designated low density residential. They may be located, but not concentrated, in medium-density residential areas. They may be concentrated in medium-high or high-density residential areas, or in suitable commercial or light-industrial areas, where services are convenient. Each large group housing proposal shall be evaluated through use- permit review. 2.5.7 Small Residential Care Facilities The City shall continue to treat small residential care facilities the same as individual houses. 2.6 Downtown In Downtown residential areas (Figure 4), the City should encourage the rehabilitation and maintenance of existing housing. Additional dwellings may be permitted, in keeping with density limits, provided that the existing character of the area is not significantly changed. Demolition of structurally sound dwellings shall be strongly discouraged. 2.7 Reduced Automobile Dependence in Downtown The City shall encourage the development of Downtown housing that minimizes the need for automobile use and minimizes the storage of vehicles in surrounding neighborhoods. PH1 - 232 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-51 PROGRAMS (See also Section 10, Implementation) 2.8 Updating & Enforcing Standards 2.8.1 Enforcing Standards The City shall review, revise if deemed necessary, and actively enforce noise, parking, and property-development and property-maintenance standards. 2.8.2 Property Maintenance Standards The City shall implement, and regularly review and update property-maintenance regulations focused on proper enclosure of trash, appearance of yards and buildings from the street, and storage of vehicles. 2.9 Multifamily Preferences and Standards 2.9.1 Preferences The City shall evaluate student housing preferences and consider revising development standards to better meet them in multifamily housing near campus. 2.9.2 Multifamily Open Space and Storage Standards The City shall review, and revise, if deemed desirable, its standards for multifamily housing so that apartments will provide usable open space and storage similar to the requirements for condominiums. 2.10 Downtown Residential Development The City shall adopt special development standards to guide addition of dwellings within Downtown residential areas (Figure 4), to implement policy 2.9. The following should be included when evaluating new standards for this area: A. Requirements that new dwellings on lots with existing houses be above or behind the existing houses, and that the added building area be modestly sized and of similar architecture in comparison with the principal residences on the site and in the surrounding area; B. Requiring new buildings to reflect the mass and spacing of existing, nearby buildings; C. Requiring special parking and coverage standards; D. Requiring minimum amounts of usable open space. 2.11 Neighborhood Compatibility The City will consider new regulations, for Low-Density and Medium-Density Residential areas, to require special review for (1) incompatibly large houses, (2) replacement or infill homes in existing neighborhoods, and (3) accessory buildings with plumbing facilities allowing easy conversion to illegal second dwellings. The City will periodically update Community Design Guidelines for larger homes, infill housing and accessory single-story buildings. PH1 - 233 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-52 2.12 Neighborhood Plans To help residents preserve and enhance their neighborhoods, the City shall: A. Work with residents that request assistance to prepare neighborhood plans that empower them to shape their neighborhoods; B. Help devise strategies to help stabilize the rental/owner ratio, to maintain neighborhood character, safety, and stability; C. Help identify neighborhood problems, and undertake a wide range of focused development-review, capital-improvement, and code-enforcement efforts; D. Encourage the formation of voluntary neighborhood groups, so residents can become involved early in the development review process; E. Involve residents early in reviewing proposed public and private projects that could have neighborhood impacts, by notifying residents and property owners and holding meetings at convenient times and places within the neighborhoods. F. Provide appropriate staff support, and train all staff to be sensitive to issues of neighborhood protection and enhancement. 2.12.1 Residential Densities The City will evaluate alternatives to the current maximum number of dwelling units per acre (based on bedroom count) and height, parking, and setback standards, to regulate residential building intensity, and bulk and mass. Floor area limits will be considered. Program The City shall evaluate the potential to use portions of City-owned parking lots and structures for residents’ parking. Program The City shall require new housing projects in the Downtown area to provide residents with information and services to off-set vehicle needs, such as providing transit passes, providing space for hourly car rental services, and providing on-site bicycle storage facilities. Program The City shall evaluate the potential for development fees to fund new parking spaces in an additional parking structure for residents of new housing projects in the Downtown core. PH1 - 234 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-53 3 COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES 3.0 Commercial Siting 3.0.1 Slope Commercial and industrial uses should be developed in appropriate areas where the natural slope of the land is less than ten percent. 3.0.2 Access The City shall require that commercial and industrial uses have access from arterial and collector streets, and be designed and located to avoid increasing traffic on residential streets. 3.0.2 Residential Area Except for neighborhood-oriented services and commercial uses, the City shall prohibit the expansion of commercial centers and industrial uses into adjacent residential areas. 3.1 General Retail 3.1.1 Locations for Regional Attractions The City should focus its retailing with regional draw in the locations of downtown, the area around the intersection of Madonna Road and Highway 101, and the area around Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. 3.1.2 Specialty Store Locations The City shall direct most specialty retail stores to locate in the Downtown Core, in the Madonna Road area, or the Los Osos Valley Road area, and in other community shopping areas identified by the Community Commercial district (see the Community Commercial section) where they will not detract from the role of the Downtown Core as the City's primary concentration of specialty stores; some may also be in neighborhood shopping centers so long as they are a minor part of the centers and serve neighborhood rather than citywide or regional markets. 3.2 Neighborhood Commercial 3.2.1 New or Expanded Areas of Neighborhood Commercial Use The City shall provide for new or expanded areas of neighborhood commercial uses that: A. Are created within, or extended into, nonresidential areas adjacent to residential neighborhoods; B. Provide uses to serve nearby residents, not the whole city; C. Have access from arterial streets, and not increase traffic on residential streets; D. Have safe and pleasant pedestrian access from the surrounding service area, as well as good internal circulation; PH1 - 235 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-54 E. Are designed to be pedestrian-oriented, and architecturally compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods being served. Pedestrian-oriented features of project design should include: i. Off-street parking areas located to the side or rear of buildings rather than between buildings and the street; ii. Landscaped areas with public seating; and iii. Indoor or outdoor space for public use, designed to provide a focus for some neighborhood activities. 3.2.2 Expanding Existing Neighborhood Commercial Areas The City shall evaluate the need for and desirability of additions to existing areas of neighborhood commercial use only when specific development proposals are made, and not in response to rezoning requests which do not incorporate a development plan. 3.2.3 Stores in Residential Areas The City shall allow for the continuation of small, individual stores within established residential areas if they are compatible with surrounding uses. Other isolated commercial uses that are not compatible with residential surroundings eventually should be replaced with compatible uses. 3.3.1 Office Uses The City may allow certain office uses with limited need for access to Downtown government services to be located away from the Downtown in areas designated Community Commercial. Appropriate types of offices include those that provide direct "over-the-counter" services to customers and clients. Professional offices, and those identified by the Zoning Regulations as "production and administrative" offices may also be appropriate, particularly above the ground floor. 3.4 Offices 3.4.1 Office Locations A. All types of offices are appropriate in the Downtown General Retail district, but are discouraged at street level in storefronts of the commercial core. B. All types of office activities are appropriate in the Office district which surrounds the Downtown commercial area, though offices needing very large buildings or generating substantial traffic may not be appropriate in the area which provides a transition to residential neighborhoods. C. Medical services should be near the hospitals, and may also be located in other commercial areas of the City. D. Government social services and the regional offices of state and federal agencies should be near the intersections of South Higuera Street, Prado Road, and Highway 101 (Figure 5); E. Offices having no substantial public visitation or need for access to Downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. F. Certain business and professional services having no substantial public visitation or limited need for access to Downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. Examples of such uses are computer services, utilities engineering and administration, architects and engineers, industrial design, advertising, building contractors, labor and fraternal PH1 - 236 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-55 organizations, and insurance and financial services that do not directly serve retail customers. G. Certain business and professional services with limited need for access to Downtown government services may be located in areas that are away from the Downtown, and designated Community Commercial. Appropriate types of offices include those that provide direct "over-the-counter" services to customers and clients. Professional offices may also be appropriate, particularly above the ground floor. 3.4.2 Offices Outside Designated Areas The City may allow continuation and minor expansion of existing office buildings outside the areas described in Policy 3.4.1 if they: A. Have access directly from collector or arterial streets, not local residential streets; B. Will not significantly increase traffic in residential areas; C. Will not have significant adverse impacts on nearby uses. 3.5 Tourist Commercial Uses (For information on Tourist Commercial land use designation, see Table 1.) 3.5.1 Basis for Tourism The City shall promote San Luis Obispo as an attractive place for short-term stays, as well as an attractive destination for long-term visitors featuring its community character, natural qualities, historic resources, and its educational and cultural facilities. The City should emphasize conference and visitor-serving facilities which have a low impact upon the environment and upon existing land forms and landscapes, and which provide low-impact visitor activities and low-impact means of transportation. 3.5.2 Locations The City shall encourage integration of visitor-serving uses with other types of uses, including overnight accommodations Downtown, near the airport, and near the train station; small-scale facilities (such as hostels or bed-and-breakfast places) may be located in Medium-High Density Residential and High-Density Residential Districts, where compatible. Visitor-serving uses are especially appropriate where such uses have already concentrated: along upper Monterey Street; at the Madonna Road area; at certain freeway interchanges; and in the Downtown. 3.5.2.1 General Retail and Neighborhood Commercial Uses The City shall not allow new specialty stores, department stores, or neighborhood commercial centers to be developed in Service and Manufacturing-designated areas. However, existing uses such as supermarkets and drugstores may be expanded if: A. They are compatible with nearby uses; B. The expanded use will not divert trade from other general-retail or neighborhood-commercial areas which are better located to serve the expected market area. PH1 - 237 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-56 3.5.2.2 Access The City shall require access to Service and Manufacturing areas be provided by commercial collector streets, to avoid customer traffic on residential streets or delivery routes which pass through residential areas. Driveway access onto arterial streets should be minimized. 3.5.2.3 Air & Water Quality Industries locating or expanding in San Luis Obispo shall comply with all applicable air-quality and water-quality regulations. 3.5.2.4 Utility Service The City shall require Services and Manufacturing uses to connect to the City water and sewer systems, unless other means of providing service are identified in a City-adopted plan. 3.5.2.5 Vehicle Sales A. Auto Park Way / Calle Joaquin The City shall encourage an easily accessible and attractive auto sales and service center around Auto Park Way and adjacent areas along Calle Joaquin (Figure 3). B. Other Areas Auto sales in areas of the city other than Auto Park Way / Calle Joaquin should be minimized in order to reinforce the auto sales center and to maximize space for other uses in other locations. PH1 - 238 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-57 Figure 3. Vehicle Sales Area at Auto Park Way Figure 3 Style Clarity Currency Relocate Complete Relevance Resources Figure will need to be updated to reflect current auto center size and information from 2013 market study. TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 239 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-58 3.5.3 Overall 3.5.3.1 Dependent Care The City shall offer incentives to new development for provision of child care and elder care for employees. 3.5.3.2 Convenience Facilities The City shall allow convenience facilities serving daily needs, such as small food stores, branch banks, and child and elder care, and amenities such as picnic areas, in centers of employment. Space for such amenities may be required within large commercial and industrial developments. 3.5.3.3 Commercial Revitalization The City shall encourage the revitalization, upgrading, and beautification of commercial retail centers and conversion of strip commercial area to coordinated, complementary retail and service uses, and where appropriate, provision of housing on upper floors. 3.5.4 Mixed Uses The City encourages compatible mixed uses in commercial districts. PH1 - 240 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-59 PROGRAMS (See also Section 10, Implementation) 3.5.5 Programs 3.5.5.1 Zoning Regulations The City shall amend its Zoning Regulations to implement the changes included in the 2014 General Plan update program. 3.5.5.2 Neighborhood Uses The City shall rezone to Neighborhood Commercial existing Service Commercial sites which have become neighborhood convenience centers, if: (1) they primarily serve a neighborhood rather than citywide market; and (2) they are appropriately located considering access and compatibility with other nearby uses. 3.5.5.3 Dependent Care The City shall provide zoning incentives and investigate a program coordinating commercial and industrial development for the provision of child care and elder care for workers. 3.5.5.4 Neighborhood Centers The City shall identify suitable sites for new or expanded neighborhood centers as it prepares specific plans and development plans. 3.5.5.5 Auto Sales Relocation The City shall provide incentives to encourage relocation of vehicle sales to other compatible areas. 3.5.5.6 Noise Control Zoning Regulations and Community Design Guidelines will include measures such as the following to prevent unacceptable noise exposure for residential areas or other noise-sensitive uses: location and shielding of mechanical equipment; location of truck loading, trash collection areas, and loudspeakers; noise attenuation measures along property lines. (See also the Noise Element.) 3.5.5.7 Madonna Road Centers The City shall investigate ways to encourage more cohesion between, the existing shopping centers on Madonna Road. 3.5.5.8 Tourism The City shall: A. Encourage development of additional conference and meeting space; B. Work with the City’s art community in promoting arts oriented tourism; C. Develop tourism marketing programs that highlight the City as a visitor destination; PH1 - 241 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-60 D. Develop concepts such as rail tours, s historical tours, and bicycle tours; E. Encourage development of appropriate recreational facilities for bicycles, golf, tennis, equestrian activities, soccer, swimming, fishing, and eco-tourism. New Program: The City shall amend the Community Design Guidelines to address transitions between neighborhood commercial development and adjacent residential neighborhoods. New Program: The City shall review zoning regulations to consider allowing visitor-service uses in office zones adjacent to community commercial zones in the Downtown and the Monterey Street southwest of Johnson areas. New Program: The City will investigate emerging technologies and trends to evaluate whether updates to zoning regulations are needed. New Program: The City shall implement the Economic Development Strategic Plan and other appropriate strategies for business retention and expansion with a focus on those providing head-of-household jobs. PH1 - 242 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-61 4 DOWNTOWN “Downtown” is the area generally bounded by Highway 101, the railroad, and High Street (Figure 4). It embraces residential neighborhoods and touches five historic districts, as well as the “Downtown Commercial Core” and civic area, and less intensely developed commercial and office areas. The City has approved "A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center," as an advisory document, which covers an area nearly the same as the core identified in this element. This separately published plan guides City review of development in the Downtown. POLICIES Downtown is the community’s urban center serving as the cultural, social, entertainment, and political center of the City for its residents, as well as home for those who live in its historic neighborhoods. The City wants its urban core to be economically healthy, and realizes that private and public investments in the Downtown support each other. Downtown should also provide a wide variety of professional and government services, serving the region as well as the city. The commercial core is a preferred location for retail uses that are suitable for pedestrian access, off-site parking, and compact building spaces. Civic, cultural and commercial portions of Downtown should be a major tourist destination. Downtown's visitor appeal should be based on natural, historical, and cultural features, retail services, entertainment and numerous and varied visitor accommodations. 4.0 Downtown Residential Downtown residential uses contribute to the character of the area, allow a 24-hour presence which enhances security and help the balance between jobs and housing in the community. 4.0.1 Existing and New Dwellings The City shall use the following when evaluating development in the Downtown area: Existing residential uses within and around the commercial core should be protected, and new ones should be developed. Dwellings should be provided for a variety of households. Dwellings should be interspersed with commercial uses. All new, large commercial projects should include residential uses. Commercial core properties may serve as receiver sites for transfer of development credits, thereby having higher residential densities than otherwise allowed (See Policies 6.2.5 and 6.2.6). PH1 - 243 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-62 Figure 4. Downtown Planning Area and Core PH1 - 244 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-63 4.0.2 Dwellings and Offices The City shall continue to ensure that there is no net loss of residential units in Downtown. 4.0.3 Entertainment and Cultural Facilities Cultural facilities, such as museums and galleries should be Downtown. Entertainment facilities, such as nightclubs and theaters shall be in the Downtown. 4.0.4 Public Gatherings Downtown should have spaces to accommodate public meetings, seminars, classes, socialization and similar activities in conjunction with other uses. Downtown should provide a setting which is festive and comfortable for public gatherings. 4.0.5 Walking Environment The City shall plan and manage Downtown to include safe, interesting places for walking and pleasant places for sitting. To this end: Mid-block walkways, courtyards, and interior malls should be well lit and integrated with new and remodeled buildings, while preserving continuous building faces on most blocks. Downtown streets should provide adequate space for pedestrians. There should be a nearly continuous tree canopy along sidewalks, and planters should provide additional foliage and flowers near public gathering areas. Public Art should be placed along pedestrian paths. Traffic calming and pedestrian safety should be enhanced, where appropriate, through such features as road tables, pavement changes, bulbouts and scramble intersection signals. Landscaping should mitigate harsh micro-climates. New Policy: Civic buildings shall incorporate commercial activity at the street level where appropriate. New Policy: City shall promote a healthy mix of downtown street-level businesses that emphasizes retail stores, specialty shops and food service rather than bars or taverns. New policy: The Downtown should remain the focus for nighttime entertainment, cultural events and related activities. It should be a pleasant and safe place at all times. 4.0.6 Public Safety The City shall ensure that indoor and outdoor public spaces are designed to be observable from frequently occupied or traveled places, to enhance public safety. 4.0.7 Open Places and Views The City shall enhance the Downtown to include carefully located open places where people can rest and enjoy views of the surrounding hills; and outdoor spaces where people PH1 - 245 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-64 are completely separated from vehicle traffic, in addition to Mission Plaza. Opportunities include extensions of Mission Plaza, a few new plazas, and selected street closures. 4.0.8 Traffic in Residential Areas The City shall strive to protect Downtown residential areas from through traffic. 4.0.9 Street Changes Street widening and realignment should be avoided. 4.0.10 Parking The City shall ensure there is a diversity of parking opportunities in the Downtown. Any major increments in parking supply should take the form of structures, located at the edges of the commercial core, so people can walk rather than drive between points within the core. Retail uses outside the core, and professional office developments, may have on-site parking for customers and clients. 4.0.11 San Luis Obispo Creek The City shall protect San Luis Obispo Creek and restore it, provided this can be done in a manner that minimizes human impact on creek life. Walking paths along the creek in the Downtown core should be provided and extended as links in an urban trail system, provided this will not further degrade wildlife habitat value of the riparian ecosystem. As properties that have encroaching buildings are redeveloped, the City should enforce a reasonable building setback from the riparian zone. (See also Resource Protection Sections in the Conservation and Open Space Element and Safety Element) Opportunities to open covered sections of the creek should be pursued. 4.0.12 Building Conservation and Compatibility The City shall ensure that architecturally and historically significant buildings are preserved and restored and that new buildings are compatible with architecturally and historically significant buildings, but not necessarily the same style. 4.0.13 New Buildings and Views Downtown development nearby publicly-owned gathering places shall respect views of the hills.. In other locations Downtown, views will be provided parallel to the street right-of-way, at intersections where building separation naturally makes more views available, and at upper-level viewing decks. 4.0.14 Noise Obtrusive sounds, including traffic noises and loud music, should be minimized. Desired activities which are noisy should be timed to avoid conflict with other desired activities which need a quiet setting. 4.0.15 Sense of Place To keep the commercial core's sense of place and appeal for walking, it should remain compact and be the City's most intensely developed area. 4.0.16 Design Principles The following principles should guide construction and changes of use within the commercial core. PH1 - 246 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-65 4.0.17 Street Level Activities The street level should be occupied by stores, restaurants, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic, such as offices with frequent client visits. Stores and restaurants may occupy upper levels. Offices not having frequent client visits should be located above street level. 4.0.18 Upper Floor Dwellings Existing residential uses shall be preserved and new ones encouraged above the street level. This new housing will include a range of options and affordability levels. 4.0.19 Continuous Storefront There should be a continuous storefront along sidewalks, at the back of the sidewalk, except for the Courthouse and City Hall blocks, plazas, recessed building entries, and sidewalk cafes. 4.0.20 Building Height New buildings shall fit within the context and scale of existing development, shall respect views from, or sunlight to, publicly-owned gathering places such as Mission Plaza, and should be stepped back above the second or third level to maintain a street façade that is consistent with the historic pattern of development. Generally, new buildings should not exceed 50 feet in height. Tall buildings (50-75 feet) shall be designed to achieve multiple policy objectives, including design amenities, housing and retail land uses, such as: a. Publicly accessible, open viewing spaces at the upper levels b. Housing affordability in excess of the Inclusionary Housing Requirement c. Energy efficiency beyond State mandated requirements d. Adaptive reuse of a historical resource in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation e. High residential density (e.g. above 24 units per acre) achieved by a concentration of smaller dwelling units f. Street level features such as a public plaza, public seating and/or public art g. Provide midblock or other significant pedestrian connections h. Increased retail floor area, including multi-story retail i. Directly implements specific and identifiable City objectives, as set forth in the General Plan, the Conceptual Plan for the City’s Center, the Downtown Strategic Plan and other key policy documents j. Receiving Transfer of Development Credits for open space protection or historic preservation k. Proximity of housing to convenient transit connections 4.0.21 Building Width New buildings should maintain the historic pattern of storefront widths. 4.0.22 Sidewalk Appeal Street facades, particularly at the street level, should include windows, signs, and architectural details which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalks. PH1 - 247 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-66 4.0.23 Government Offices City Hall and the County Government Center should remain at their present locations. Additional local government administrative office space which cannot be accommodated within the existing city and county properties should be developed nearby within the Downtown. (See also Public and Cultural Facilities policies, Section 5.1). 4.0.24 Commercial Buildings Outside the Core In General Retail areas adjacent to the commercial core, the pattern of buildings in relation to the street should become more like the core, with shared driveways and parking lots, and no street or side-yard setbacks (except for recessed entries and courtyards). Buildings should not exceed 45 feet in height. PH1 - 248 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-67 PROGRAMS 4.0.1 Updating Downtown Concept Plan The City shall update the Downtown Concept Plan by 2016 and shall regularly update the plan as required to address significant changes in or affecting the Downtown area including the opportunity for meaningful public input. 4.0.2 Implementing the Downtown Concept Plan The City shall consider features of "A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center" (Downtown Concept Plan) in the approval of projects in the Downtown, recognizing that the plan is a concept and is intended to be flexible. 4.0.3 Visual Resource Study The City shall undertake a study of visual resources within the Downtown core area to identify potential locations for new public-owned open places with access to views of important scenic resources. The City will consider acquisition of one or more of these open places as resources permit. A range of options for property acquisition, including development agreements, will be considered, consistent with the City’s fiscal policies and objectives. 4.21 Expansion of Downtown Plaza The City shall explore the full or partial closure and re-design of the following street segments to effectively extend, either permanently or for special events, Mission Plaza on: Broad Street between Palm and Monterey Streets, and Monterey Street between the two connections with Broad Street. New Program: The City shall modify zoning regulations to allow efficiency units and variable density in the Downtown Core. New Program: The City shall work with the Downtown businesses and residents, the BID, and Chamber of Commerce to manage impacts from downtown drinking establishments, and if necessary, enact additional regulations to ensure that the late night environment in and near Downtown is safe and pleasant. New Program: The City shall develop a master plan for San Luis Obispo Creek in the Downtown area. New Program: The City shall prepare an inventory of uses in the Downtown Core. Particular attention shall be given to identifying uses at the street level as these uses directly impact the PH1 - 249 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-68 pedestrian experience and vibrancy of the Downtown. This information shall be used to target business support and attraction to achieve a desirable mix of uses in the Downtown. New Program: The City shall incorporate into its zoning regulations specific criteria for evaluating use permits for bars/taverns, night clubs and late night drinking establishments. New Policy Safety and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design The City shall ensure that new development is designed and constructed to address public safety and welfare. New Program The City will modify its Community Design Guidelines to enhance Safety and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. Changes shall include, but are not limited to, inclusion of design statements on: Enhanced lighting of building alcoves in Downtown area Wayfinding signs to better direct pedestrians and motorists in non-residential areas Visibility into entry and access points on non-residential buildings Design solutions that minimize the potential for graffiti New Program The City, working with the Downtown Association, businesses, landlords, and residents will consider emergency callboxes at strategic locations in the Downtown. New Program The City working with the Downtown Association, Downtown businesses and residents shall develop a program to encourage lighted storefronts and street frontages throughout the night. New Program All specific plans shall identify design features utilized to enhance public safety. New Program The City shall conduct a nighttime safety audit of key areas of the City to see where deficiencies in environmental design may exist and should be improved. Key Areas should be defined as areas experiencing higher crime than City average by SLOPD. PH1 - 250 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-69 5 PUBLIC & CULTURAL FACILITIES 5.21 Introduction As the County seat and a cultural center for the region, San Luis Obispo plans to accommodate several types of facilities to support government and cultural services. This section describes preferred locations for various types of facilities. POLICIES 5.22 Public Facilities 5.22.1 Grouping for Convenience The City shall support the continued grouping of government offices that provide similar types of services for efficient service delivery. 5.1.2 Joint Projects The City shall work with other government agencies to cooperatively plan for new or expanded facilities. The City should encourage agencies to consider joint projects when mutual objectives can be met. 5.1.3 Civic Center The City shall promote the continued location of the following uses in the Downtown civic center (Figure 5). : A. City Council offices and meeting rooms, clerk, administration, finance, attorney, personnel, community development, utilities, and public works administration and engineering. Any additional space for these functions should be in or close to City Hall. B. County supervisors offices and meeting rooms, administration, courts, jury commissioner, clerk, auditor, assessor, counsel, district attorney, personnel, engineering, planning and building, environmental coordinator, and voter registration. Any additional space for these functions should be provided in or close to the County Government Center (Courthouse block). PH1 - 251 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-70 Figure 5. Public and Cultural Facilities PH1 - 252 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-71 5.1.4 Health Care The City shall promote the location of the following uses in health-care areas on Johnson Avenue near Bishop Street (Figure 5). : A. Public Health Department; Mental Health Services; French Medical Center on Johnson Avenue near Bishop Street. B. Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center and associated health facilities on Casa and Murray Streets. C. Other compatible public or private offices or health facilities. 5.1.5 Social Services The City shall promote the location of the following uses in a social-services area in the general vicinity of South Higuera Street near Prado Road (Figure 5) : County Social and Homeless Services; California Employment Development and Rehabilitation; Federal Social Security Administration. This area should have sufficient space to accommodate regional offices of State and Federal agencies. 5.1.6 Other Government Functions Some government functions which have been provided at certain locations in the City should be located close to related activities, though they should not be bound to any one of the identified centers. Such functions include: A. Probation - suitable for the civic center (courts), the County operational center on Highway 1 (sheriff), or the social services area; B. Alcohol and drug treatment programs - suitable for the social-services area or the health-care area. C. Peripheral locations should be pursued for service vehicle storage. Dwellings Dwellings may be provided only as caretaker quarters, as shelters (with discretionary review), or as part of a specially approved mixed-use development. The appropriate residential density would be set considering the maximum residential density allowed in any neighboring land use district. 5.1 Cultural Facilities 5.2.1 Cooperation The City shall cooperate with other agencies and with community groups to help provide facilities which meet broad community cultural needs. 5.2.2 Mission Plaza Area The City shall promote the area around the Mission Plaza for cultural facilities (Figure 5). 5.2.3 Community Arts Support The City shall continue to support community arts programs through a variety of means, such as loans, grants, and help in obtaining sites. PH1 - 253 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-72 5.2.4 Public Art The City shall continue to encourage inclusion of public art in all projects as appropriate. PH1 - 254 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-73 PROGRAMS 5.2.5 City and County Offices Downtown The City shall continue to work to develop a plan for meeting additional space needs in the Downtown. The City shall work with the County to coordinate site selection, building design, circulation and utility services, parking, trip reduction, and funding. 5.2.6 Performing Arts Center The City, Cal Poly, and the Performing Arts Foundation will jointly manage the performing arts center on the Cal Poly campus. 5.2.7 Land Acquisition The City will work with community organizations to secure land for cultural facilities in the Downtown area. 5.2.8 Facility Reuse The City shall undertake a study of its surplus facilities for possible reuse by cultural and non-profit groups. PH1 - 255 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-74 6 RESOURCE PROTECTION 6.0 Overall Resource Protection POLICY 6.0.1 Resource Planning The City shall protect its unique natural resources and systems by including their considerations and needs within its planning program, and giving those considerations and needs a planning priority co-equal with that accorded other community needs. Under this policy, the City will make provisions for the continued existence of its natural resources within the community. The term “community” thus includes not only the urbanized human community, dominated by urban land development and technological systems, but also a natural community rich in biological and geological diversity, as well as a pre-urban human community with a strong agricultural base. PROGRAMS 6.0.2 Resource Mapping The City shall prepare and maintain geographic information systems-based maps of the city, the urban reserve, and the planning area to guide in land use designations and decision-making. Maps for the city and urban reserve shall be in sufficient detail to highlight all significant natural resources and systems. Maps for the planning area may be at a lesser degree of detail. The maps shall show at least the following resources: native plant communities, wildlife habitats and corridors, aquatic ecosystems, productive or potentially productive soils (prime or other unique agricultural soil types), viewsheds, terrain, hillsides, greenbelt areas. The overlay maps shall also show development constraints such as flood hazard areas, geological hazard areas, soil hazard areas (subsidence, liquefaction), noise impact areas, airport hazard and noise areas, radiation hazard areas. The maps shall provide the basis of determining where urban development is most appropriate, and where other needs of the community outweigh the desire or need for urban development. As a result of the findings of these maps, the City shall re- evaluate its land use designations and future plans for undeveloped areas, and revise the LUE land use map accordingly. 6.0.3 Resource Protection The City shall seek to protect resource areas deemed worthy of permanent protection by fee acquisition, easement, or other means. 6.1 Open Space Policies (See also the Growth Management section) PH1 - 256 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-75 6.1.1 Open Space and Greenbelt Designations The City shall designate the following types of land as open space: A. Upland and valley sensitive habitats or unique resources, as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, including corridors which connect habitats. B. Undeveloped prime agricultural soils which are to remain in agricultural use as provided in policy 1.8.2. C. Those areas which are best suited to non-urban uses due to: infeasibility of providing proper access or utilities; excessive slope or slope instability; wildland fire hazard; noise exposure; flood hazard; scenic value; wildlife habitat value, including sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element; agricultural value; and value for passive recreation. D. A greenbelt, outside the urban reserve, that surrounds the ultimate boundaries of the urban area, and which should connect with wildlife corridors that cross the urbanized area. E. Sufficient area of each habitat type to ensure the ecological integrity of that habitat type within the urban reserve and the greenbelt, including connections between habitats for wildlife movement and dispersal; these habitat types will be as identified in the natural resource inventory, as discussed in the "Background to this Land Use Element Update" and in Community Goal #8. Public lands suited for active recreation will be designated Park on the General Plan Land Use Element Map. The City may establish an agricultural designation. (See the Conservation and Open Space Element for refinements of these policies.) 6.1.2 Open Space Uses Lands designated Open Space should be used for purposes which do not need urban services, major structures, or extensive landform changes. Such uses include: watershed protection; wildlife and native plant habitat; grazing; cultivated crops; and passive recreation. The City shall require that buildings, lighting, paving, use of vehicles, and alterations to the landforms and native or cultural landscapes on open space lands are minimized, so rural character and resources are maintained. Buildings and paved surfaces, such as parking or roads, shall not exceed the following: where a parcel smaller than ten acres already exists, five percent of the site area; on a parcel of ten acres or more, three percent. (As explained in the Conservation and Open Space Element, the characteristics of an open space area may result in it being suitable for some open space uses, but not the full range.) Parcels within Open Space areas should not be further subdivided. 6.2 Hillside Policies As noted in the open space section of this element and in the Conservation and Open Space Element, San Luis Obispo wants to keep open its steeper, higher, and most visible hillsides. Some of the lower and less steep hillside areas, however, are seen as suitable for development, particularly where development is coupled with permanent open space protection of the more sensitive areas. This section focuses on where and how some hillsides may be developed. PH1 - 257 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-76 6.2.1 The City shall maintain comprehensive standards and policies for hillside development for the following reasons: A. To protect and preserve scenic hillside areas and natural features such as the volcanic Morros, ridge lines, plant communities, rock outcroppings and steep slope areas that function as landscape backdrops for the community. B. To set the limits of commercial and residential development in hillside areas by establishing a permanent open space green belt at the edge of the community. C. To protect the health, safety and welfare of community residents by directing development away from areas with hazards such as landslides, wildland fires, flooding and erosion. 6.2.2 Development Limits The City shall establish and maintain clear development limit lines for hillside planning areas, and special design standards for the hillside areas. The location of the development limit and the standards should cause development to avoid encroachment into sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, and public health and safety problems related to utility service, access, wildland fire hazard, erosion, flooding, and landslides and other geologic hazards. Also, the development limit line and the standards should help protect the city’s scenic setting. (Locations of hillside planning areas are shown in Figure 6. 6.2.3 Development Standards The City shall require development – including buildings, driveways, fences and graded yard areas – on hillside parcels to: A. Be entirely within the urban reserve line or development limit line, whichever is more restrictive (though parcel boundaries may extend beyond these lines when necessary to meet minimum parcel-size standards), unless one of the following three exceptions applies: 1. A location outside the urban reserve line or development limit line is necessary to protect public health and safety. 2. New wireless telecommunication facilities may be appropriate on South Street Hills inside the three-acre leasehold already developed with commercial and municipal radio facilities, subject to use permit approval and architectural review and approval. Applicants shall comply with all other provisions of this section, and demonstrate that (a) new facilities will not individually or additively interfere with City radio equipment necessary for emergency response coordination, and (b) will not cause on-site radio frequency radiation levels to exceed exposure standards established for the general public by the American National Standards Institute. 3. Where a legally built dwelling exists on a parcel which is entirely outside the urban reserve line or development limit line, a replacement dwelling may be constructed subject to standards B through H below. PH1 - 258 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-77 Figure 6. Hillside Planning Areas B. Keep a low profile and conform to the natural slopes; C. Avoid large, continuous walls or roof surfaces, or prominent foundation walls, poles, or columns; D. Minimize grading of roads; E. Minimize grading on individual lots; generally, locate houses close to the street; minimize the grading of visible driveways; F. Include planting which is compatible with native hillside vegetation and which provides a visual transition from developed to open areas; G. Use materials, colors, and textures which blend with the natural landscape and avoid high contrasts; H. Minimize exterior lighting. PH1 - 259 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-78 6.2.4 Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines The City shall require that before development occurs on any parcel that crosses the urban reserve or development limit lines, the part outside the lines be protected as permanent open space. 6.2.5 Development Credit Transfer Any residential development credit obtained from Open Space designations outside the urban reserve line or development limit line should be transferred to land in the Downtown Core or Specific Plan area. 6.2.6 Homesites Outside the Limit Lines Where homesites are to be developed outside the urban reserve or development limit lines, and beyond the City’s jurisdiction within the City’s greenbelt, the City shall encourage the County to promote the transfer of development credits into the Downtown Core or Specific Plan area. If development is to proceed in these areas, the City shall encourage the County to only allow creation of home sites consistent with the following guidelines: A. Be on land sloping less than 15 percent; B. Have effective emergency-vehicle access from a City street or County road; C. Be on a geologically stable site; D. Have adequate water supply for domestic service and fire suppression; E. Avoid areas with high wildland fire hazard; F. Be next to existing development; G. Avoid significant visual impacts; H. Be clustered to minimize impacts and retain open space. 6.2.7 Hillside Planning Areas The City shall urge the County to implement the following hillside. Specific policies to address particular concerns for the areas as shown on Figure 6 are listed below. For each of these areas, land above the development limit line should be secured as permanent open space. A. The Cal Poly - Cuesta Park area includes the hill east of Cal Poly and north of Highway 101 near Cuesta Park. Development should be separated or protected from highway traffic noise and should have adequate fire protection. The City shall urge the County to conduct architectural review of development on lots fronting Loomis Street to address visual impacts of development. B. The Woodland Drive area Development of vacant land near Woodland Drive (Figure 7) shall address the following: 1. The location and design of new public streets and private drives serving several owners, and any necessary changes to existing streets in the area; 2. Water and sewer systems, including new storage tanks, pumps, main pipes, and access roads, and changes to existing facilities necessary for adequate service to the area; 3. New parcels and existing parcels to be changed or combined; 4. Location of building sites on parcels next to or crossing the urban reserve line; 5. Areas to be kept open through easements or dedication of fee ownership; PH1 - 260 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-79 6. A program for transferring development potential, consistent with these hillside planning policies; 7. Location of creek easements to provide flood protection and to protect existing creekside vegetation; 8. Phasing of development and public improvements. C. The Goldtree area extends up the hill from the Alrita Street neighborhood. This is a minor expansion area which can accommodate single-family houses. 1. In addition to meeting the usual criteria for approving minor annexations, this area should: i. Provide a gravity-flow water system giving standard levels of service to all developed parts of the expansion area and correcting water-service deficiencies in the Alrita Street neighborhood; ii. Correct downslope drainage problems to which development within the expansion area would contribute. iii. A development plan or specific plan for the whole expansion area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or developed. (Existing houses inside the urban reserve line need not be annexed along with any new subdivision) iv. All new houses and major additions to houses should be subject to architectural review. D. The Orcutt area includes land on the western flanks of the Santa Lucia foothills east of the Southwood Drive neighborhood and Orcutt Road. No building sites should be located above the development limit line. E. The Margarita area includes the southern slopes of the South Street Hills. No building sites should be located above the development limit line. F. The Stoneridge area includes land on the northern slopes of South Street Hills. Development west of the end of Lawrence Drive should be subject to architectural review and to measures assuring that building sites will be stable. G. The Calle Joaquin area should allow the continuation of a commercial use for the existing building on the hill, but no further development. H. The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150-foot elevation, in conjunction with any subdivision or development of the lower areas. (See also Section 8.) I. The Billygoat acres area extends into the Irish Hills above Prefumo Creek. No further development should occur beyond the urban reserve line. J. The Prefumo Creek area extends into the Irish Hills west of Prefumo Canyon Road. Development should be limited to areas within the urban reserve line with permanent protection of the creeks and upper hillsides. K. The Madonna Inn area includes land west of Highway 101 on the lower slopes of San Luis Mountain and the northeast slopes of the foothill bordering Laguna Lake Park. PH1 - 261 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-80 1. A development plan for the whole area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or further developed. (See also Section 8.) 2. The City shall require that development locations and building forms respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. 3. The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. L. The Luneta Drive area includes parcels which may be used for housing, so long as new construction and major additions are approved by the Architectural Review Commission. 6.3 Hillside Programs (See also Section 10 Implementation) 6.3.1 Designating Sensitive Sites Subdivision approval in hillside planning areas shall include designation of "sensitive sites," which shall be subject to architectural review. 6.3.2 Delineation of Development Limit Lines The City shall create and maintain a GIS layer to accurately document development limit lines as they are applied in the General Plan. 6.3.3 Community Design Guidelines Through Community Design guidelines, the City presumes that all hillside development occurs on sensitive sites, where architectural review is required. The Community Development Director will screen all proposals to identify any which do not need architectural review. The City will mitigate the visual impacts of hillside structures, including revising the way maximum building height is determined. 6.4 Creeks Wetlands, and Flooding Policies San Luis Obispo's aquatic ecosystems consist of creeks, Laguna Lake, floodplains, marshes, wetlands, serpentine seeps, and springs. These aquatic ecosystems provide habitat, recreation, water purification, groundwater recharge, and soil production as well as natural flood protection by reducing the force of floodwaters as they spread and decelerate over floodplains. Creeks, which are the most obvious of these systems because they flow under and through the City, provide wildlife habitat, backyard retreats, and viewing and hiking pleasures, in addition to carrying storm water runoff. When some creeks overflow during major storms, they flood wide areas beyond their channels (Figure 8). San Luis Obispo wants to avoid injury or substantial property losses from flooding, while keeping or improving the creeks' natural character, scenic appearance, recreational value, and fish and wildlife habitat. PH1 - 262 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-81 Figure 7. Creeks and Floodplains Add street names and make blue less opaque (more transparent). PH1 - 263 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-82 6.4.1 Creek and Wetlands Management Objectives The City shall manage its lake, creeks, wetlands, floodplains, and associated wetlands to achieve the multiple objectives of: A. Maintaining and restoring natural conditions and fish and wildlife habitat; B. Preventing loss of life and minimizing property damage from flooding; C. Providing recreational opportunities which are compatible with fish and wildlife habitat, flood protection, and use of adjacent private properties. D. Recognizing and distinguishing between those sections of creeks and Laguna Lake which are in urbanized areas, such as the Downtown core, and sections which are in largely natural areas. Those sections already heavily impacted by urban development and activity may be appropriate for multiple use whereas creeks and lakeshore in a more natural state shall be managed for maximized ecological value. 6.4.2 Citywide Network The City shall include the lake, creeks, and wetlands as part of a citywide and regional network of open space, parks, and -- where appropriate -- trails, all fostering understanding, enjoyment, and protection of the natural landscape and wildlife. 6.4.3 Amenities and Access The City shall require new public or private developments adjacent to the lake, creeks, and wetlands to respect the natural environment and incorporate the natural features as project amenities, provided doing so does not diminish natural values. Developments along creeks should include public access across the development site to the creek and along the creek, provided that wildlife habitat, public safety, and reasonable privacy and security of the development can be maintained, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. 6.4.4 Open Channels The City shall require all open channels be kept open and clear of structures in or over their banks. When necessary, the City may approve structures within creek channels under the limited situations described in the Conservation and Open Space Element. 6.4.5 Runoff Reduction and Groundwater Recharge The City shall encourage the use of methods to facilitate rainwater percolation for roof areas and outdoor hardscaped areas where practical to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following new policies are designed to enhance protection associated with stormwater drainage and flooding. 6.4.6 Development Requirements The City shall encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and impervious coverage and avoid floodplain areas and, where feasible, any PH1 - 264 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-83 channelization shall be designed to provide the appearance of a natural water course. 6.4.7 Discharge of Urban Pollutants The City shall require appropriate runoff control measures as part of future development proposals to minimize discharge of urban pollutants (such as oil and grease) into area drainages. 6.4.8 Erosion Control Measures The City shall require adequate provision of erosion control measures as part of new development to minimize sedimentation of streams and drainage channels. 6.5 Creeks and Flooding Programs 6.5.1 Previously Developed Areas To limit the potential for increased flood damage in urbanized areas, the City shall ensure new development complies with the City’s flood plain ordinance, setbacks, specific plans, and design standards to minimize flood damage and flood plain encroachment. 6.5.2 National Flood Program The City shall administer the National Flood Insurance Program standards. 6.5.3 Creekside Care and Notification In maintaining creek channels to accommodate flood waters, the City shall notify owners of creeks and adjacent properties in advance of work, and use care in any needed removal of vegetation. New Program The City shall evaluate the feasibility of establishing a financing district or districts to address flood concerns in affected areas. Cost and benefits will be weighed in relation to the cost of flood insurance for affected property owners. PH1 - 265 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-84 7 AIRPORT AREA POLICIES NOTE TO REVIEWER: The City is working with an airport safety expert to develop a new set of guidelines for development near the airport. Policies in this section apply to the Airport Area, as shown on Figure 8. 7.3.2 Regional Service The City shall support the airport’s continued service to the region, consistent with the approved Airport Master Plan and FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. 7.3.3 Airport Land Use Plan Land use density and intensity shall carefully balance noise impacts and the progression in the degree of reduced safety risk further away from the runways, consistent with California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines. The City shall use the Airport Master Plan forecasts of aviation activity as a reasonably foreseeable projection of ultimate aviation activity sufficient for long-term land use planning purposes. Prospective buyers of property subject to airport influence should be so informed. Airport Safety Zones Airport Safety Zones shall be consistent with California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines and substantiated by the San Luis Obispo County Airport Master Plan activity forecasts as used for noise planning purposes. Airport Noise Compatibility The City shall use the aircraft noise analysis prepared for the Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact Report as an accurate mapping of the long term noise impact of the airport’s aviation activity that is tied to the ultimate facilities development depicted in the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. The City shall use the 60 dB CNEL aircraft noise contour (FAA and State aircraft noise planning standard) as the threshold for new urban residential areas. Interiors of new residential structures shall be constructed to meet a maximum 45 dB CNEL. 7.3.4 City Annexation and Services The City shall actively pursue annexation of the airport area as noted in the Airport Area Specific Plan. Airport Area land inside the urban reserve shall be considered for annexation if it meets the criteria stated in Policy 1.12.4 and provisions in the Airport Area Specific Plan. 7.3.5 Greenbelt Protection The City shall ensure annexation of the Airport Area Specific Plan is consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. Annexation shall not take effect unless the annexed area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of the following methods: PH1 - 266 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-85 A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land-conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication that shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. 7.3.6 Internal Open Space The City shall ensure areas designated for urban uses in the Airport Area Specific Plan, but not necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as site amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. In addition, the City shall ensure wildlife corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved. PH1 - 267 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-86 Figure 8. Airport Area TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 268 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-87 7.3.7 Development Before Annexation A. Areas which are designated for eventual urban development in the Airport Area Specific Plan may be developed during the interim with rural residential or rural commercial uses. In such areas, County development standards and discretionary review should assure that projects will not preclude options for future urban development consistent with the City’s planning policies and standards. Before any discretionary County land-use or land-division approval for such areas, a development plan for the site should be prepared, showing that circulation, water and other utility, and drainage proposals will be compatible with future annexation and urban development; and conditions of approval should include payment of City fees required to mitigate traffic, housing, and open space impacts. B. Any development within the urban reserve approved by the County prior to annexation should comply with City standards for roadway cross-sections, bus stops, walking and bicycle paths, landscaping, view protection, setbacks, preferred site layouts, and architectural character. 7.3.8 Transit Service The City shall work with SLOCOG, the County, RTA, the Airport, and area businesses to extend transit service to the airport and County areas south of the City. PH1 - 269 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-88 PROGRAMS 7.3.9 Airline Service The City shall continue to work with the County and regional airlines to assure that regional airline services are continued and expanded to adequately serve the needs of the population in the service area of the airport. 7.3.10 Growth Management The City will annex the Airport area denoted in the Airport Area Specific Plan and accommodate incremental development consistent with the growth management policies, including those concerning adequacy of resources and services and development paying its own way. 7.3.11 Open Space Dedication and In-lieu Fees In approving development proposals, the City will assure that Airport Area properties noted in the Airport Area Specific Plan secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City’s southerly urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of open space dedication. County Airport Land Use Plan The City shall continue to work with the County Airport Land Use Commission to strive to achieve consistency between the County Airport Land Use Plan and the City’s General Plan. If consistency cannot be achieved, the City shall preserve and maintain as a plausible alternative its constitutional land use authority to overrule the Airport Land Use Commission with regard to adopting General Plan policies that are consistent with the purposes of the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, State Aeronautics Act and State Law. Applicable sections of the Zoning Regulations and Specific Plans shall be amended accordingly. PH1 - 270 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-89 8 SPECIAL FOCUS AREAS NOTE TO REVIEWER: The current General Plan contains a range of policies and programs that address the special needs of a number of specific locations in the community. These are referred to in the General Plan update as “Special Planning Areas”. As part of the update, these have been modified as follows: A. With the exception of the Downtown, which has its own section, all of the policy dealing with a specific location has been moved to this section. B. Each area will be detailed with issues to be addressed and the expected level of review. INTRODUCTION Within the Planning Area are several areas where it is appropriate to consider a range or mix of uses which do not correspond with any one open-space, residential, commercial, or public designation used by this element. However, a particular use or mix of uses may not be desirable unless it is chosen in combination with a specific physical design which solves problems of relationships between activities within the site, and between the site and its neighbors. In addition, there are areas where special design concepts can help revitalization efforts. In Special Focus Areas, the City intends to do one or more of the following: A. Require a specific plan for areas with complex development parameters (e.g. land use mix, significant infrastructure needs environmental site constraints), prior to development. B. Make a choice about appropriate land uses based on information which will become available. In some cases, the choice will be connected with approval of a development plan, possibly with customized limits on specific activities and requirements for improvements or dedications. C. Work with properties in areas where an innovative design approach is needed to help revitalize and beautify the area. Special Focus Areas are designated by number on the General Plan Land UseDiagram, and are indicated on Figure 10. These areas and the guidelines for their development are listed below. (The number following the decimal point corresponds to the map number.). The following areas require a specific plan prior to development: SP-1 (Margarita), SP-2 (Dalidio), SP-3 (Madonna), and SP-4 (Avila Ranch). The special planning areas are those that present opportunities to develop customized land use approaches or special design implementation to enhance their appearance and achieve their respective development potential: Foothill Blvd., Upper Monterey, Mid- Higuera, Caltrans site, General Hospital site, Broad Street Area, Madonna Inn area, Sunset Drive-in, Pacific Beach, Calle Joaquin auto sales area, LOVR Creek area, and Broad Street at Tank Farm area. PH1 - 271 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-90 Figure 9. Special Focus Areas TO BE UPDATED PH1 - 272 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-91 POLICIES 8.3.1 Special Focus Areas To help guide the development of large land areas (previously referred to as “expansion areas”) and to provide guidance on the redevelopment of sites identified, the City shall use the following policy statements to guide their review and actions relative to these properties. 8.3.2 Specific Plan Areas 8.3.2.1 Specific Plan / General Plan Amendment The City shall require the completion and approval of a specific plan and associated General Plan Amendment prior to annexation (if applicable) and development of land within an area designated as a Specific Plan Area on Figure 10. The required General Plan Amendment will modify the General Plan Land Use Diagram to reflect the land use diagram from the approved specific plan, based on the land uses listed under “Performance Standards” for each site. For each specific plan site identified in this section, the location, purpose and performance standards for that site are defined. The performance standards section defines the following standards that must be met as part of the specific plan submitted for each site. Type. This defines the basic type of use being described. Designations Allowed: This defines the standard General Plan designations that can be used to describe the development proposed. See Table 1 for ranges allowed. % of Site: This defines the percent of each site (using the gross project site) that can be used for each type of land use. Minimum: This provides a minimum development assumed for each site. For residential and commercial types, these are not considered requirements, and a number lower than that shown can be proposed. Maximum: In order to exceed the minimum development for a given site, transfer of development credits or other permanent protection of open space would be provided. Development credits would be transferred from areas in the city, the urban reserve, or the greenbelt where development would be less appropriate, generally those designated conservation/open space or, on the County's map, agriculture or rural lands. The performance standards listed are to supplement other City requirements, standards, and Zoning Code requirements. If a conflict occurs, the most stringent standard shall apply. PH1 - 273 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-92 8.3.2.2 Specific Plan Content All specific plans prepared for a Specific Plan Area must meet the requirements of State law and be comprised of four planning frameworks. Within each framework, the specific plan will provide the goals and policies that will guide future decisions on projects within the specific plan area. The plan will also include a detailed implementation plan that will identify responsibilities, financing requirements, and phasing / timing. The Land Use Framework will include the proposed land use pattern, actual development densities in each subarea on the project site, and development phasing. The framework will also include specifics on development standards. The Specific Plan prepared will provide complete guidance on the land use provisions that will guide future development within the Planning Area. At a minimum, these provisions will address the following topics. In consultation with City staff, other topics may be required depending on site specific needs. Land Use Classification. A land use classification system that clearly identifies the uses that may be allowed in each subarea. Based on the land use designations listed under “Performance Standards” section for each site, the specific plan will provide further details on development standards for each subarea. This classification system would use clear terminology to define and further describe allowable uses. Both the land use classification system and the uses allowed within the various subareas will provide for an overall mix of uses. General Site Planning and Development Standards. These standards will specify the requirements that would be applied to all development and land uses regardless of the applicable land use designation. These would address, as appropriate, sensitive resources; site access requirements; energy efficiency; fences, walls, hedges, buffers, and other screening; noise regulations; outdoor lighting standards; performance standards (e.g., air quality, glare, vibration, etc.), undergrounding of utilities; and other similar topics. Planning should also address how the development will be designed to enhance compatibility with adjacent properties. Development Standards. Development standards for each land use designation (e.g., building forms, design objectives, land use objectives, height limitations, setback requirements, site coverage requirements, etc.) will be organized in tables and graphically illustrated wherever possible. Housing Mix. The specific plan will discuss the proposed mix of housing types within the area. In keeping with the City’s Housing Element, affordable housing requirements and density bonus provisions and related incentives will be incorporated as appropriate. A key to the housing component will be to incorporate a mix of housing types, and to provide phasing mechanisms that ensure to the City the development of this housing mix as a part of each phase of the project. The Design Framework will provide detailed design guidelines that will be used as the specific plan is implemented / developed. The purpose of these guidelines will be to establish the expected level of design within the area while still maintaining project flexibility and innovation. The objective of this framework is not to dictate a specific design, but to establish design expectations. PH1 - 274 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-93 The design guidelines will be illustrated to help explain the intent and expectations. This part of the Specific Plan will also incorporate detailed landscaping standards. The Design Framework will also provide guidance on the integration of the streetscape into the overall project design. The framework will define public improvements and the public rights-of-way to define the overall character of the streetscape. The Circulation Framework will include the proposed circulation network system elements, design standards, and system phasing. This framework will address all modes of circulation as well as parking and loading standards if different from the standard City requirements. The Infrastructure / Public Facilities Framework will cover infrastructure requirements (water, sewer, storm drainage, electricity, natural gas, and communications) as well as parkland, schools, and other public facilities. For infrastructure, the framework will address the proposed trunk infrastructure system improvements and system phasing necessary to support implementation of the land use plan and financing mechanisms to implement planned facilities. PH1 - 275 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-94 8.3.2.3 SP-1, Margarita Area Specific Plan Update Location: The Margarita Area covers about 420 acres bounded by South Higuera Street, Broad Street, Tank Farm Road, and the ridge of the South Street Hills in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo. Purpose: Adopted in October 2004, the Margarita Area Specific Plan contains five key principles: open space and sensitive resource production, cohesive neighborhood creation, transit supporting land uses and densities, pedestrian environment, and minimizing infrastructure costs. The approved specific plan includes 868 residential dwelling units, as well as a business park, a neighborhood park, sports fields, and open space areas. Over 40 percent of the land area is designated as open space and 56 acres are designated as parks. The City shall consider this area as potentially appropriate to accommodate additional housing. Revisions to the Margarita Area Specific Plan will be required if residential development in excess of that accommodated in the plan is proposed. PH1 - 276 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-95 8.3.2.4 SP-2, Dalidio Specific Plan Area Location: This specific plan area is located in the southwest quarter of the city at the corner of Madonna Road and Dalidio Drive. The site is approximately 132 acres and is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is primarily flat topographically. The entire site is within the City’s Planning Area, but is outside the current city limits. Purpose: This project site should be developed as a mixed use project that maintains the agricultural heritage of the site, provides a commercial / office transition to the existing commercial center to the north, and provides a diverse housing experience. Protection of the adjacent creek and a well-planned integration into the existing circulation system will be required. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues. a. Provide land and appropriate financial support for development of a Prado Road connection. Appropriate land to support road infrastructure identified in the EIR (overpass or interchange) at this location shall be dedicated as part of any proposal. b. Circulation connections to integrate property with surrounding circulation network for all modes of travel. Connection to Froom Ranch and Calle Joaquin, if proposed, shall not bifurcate agricultural lands. Any connection to Calle Joaquin shall be principally a secondary / emergency access by design. c. Development shall include a transit center. Developer shall work with transit officials to provide express connections to Downtown area. d. Maintain agricultural views along Highway 101 by maintaining active agricultural uses on the site, and maintain viewshed of Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis. e. Maintain significant agricultural and open space resources on site. Land dedicated to Agriculture shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. f. Where buffering or transitions to agricultural uses are needed to support viability of the agricultural use, these shall be provided on lands not counted towards the minimum size for the agriculture / open space component. Provide appropriate transition to agricultural uses on-site. g. Integrate agricultural open space with adjacent SLO City Farm and development on property. h. Site should include walkable retail and pedestrian and bicycle connections to surrounding commercial and residential areas. i. Commercial and office uses shall have parking placed behind and to side of buildings so as to not be a prominent feature. j. Neighborhood Commercial uses for proposed residential development shall be provided. k. Potential flooding issues along Prefumo Creek need to be studied and addressed without impacting off-site uses. l. All land uses proposed shall be in keeping with safety parameters described in this General Plan or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. m. Historic evaluation of the existing farm house and associated structures shall be included. PH1 - 277 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-96 Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum Maximum Residential LDR MDR MHDR HDR 350 units 500 units Commercial NC CC 50,000 SF 200,000 SF Office/High tech) O 50,000 SF 150,000 SF Hotel/Visitor- serving 200 rooms Parks PARK 5.8 ac Open Space / Agriculture OS AG Minimum 50% 65 ac No maximum Public n/a Infrastructure n/a PH1 - 278 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-97 8.3.2.5 SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area Location: This site includes just over 111 acres and is located directly west of the intersection of Los Osos Valley Road and Calle Joaquin. Purpose: The purpose of the specific plan is to provide design flexibility that will secure the appropriate development of the site while protecting sensitive environmental resources on the site. Development on the site should be a compact, mixed use project that provides workforce housing options and neighborhood commercial uses that support pedestrian and bicycle access. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues. a. Develop a design that is sensitive to environmental constraints and adjusts accordingly through design. Constraints include wetland protection, slope protection, historic structures, and open space protection. b. Maintain viewshed of surrounding mountains and secure steeper hillsides as protected open space areas. c. Variable height limits will be required to protect views of adjacent hills. d. Provide access to trails. e. Provide a plan for adequate and safe infrastructure, including appropriate points of access to Los Osos Valley Road. f. Address neighborhood commercial needs of new neighborhood. g. Provide connectivity to adjacent development. Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum Maximum Residential (Mixed Use) MDR MHDR HDR 200 units 250 units Commercial NC CR 200,000 SF 350,000 SF Parks PARK Open Space / Agriculture OS AG 50 % minimum Public n/a Infrastructure n/a PH1 - 279 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-98 8.3.2.6 SP-4, Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area Location: Avila Ranch is located on the north side of Buckley Road at the far southern edge of the City of San Luis Obispo. The three parcels that make up the Avila Ranch area comprise approximately 150 acres. The entire site is located within the Airport Area Specific Plan. Purpose: This area will be developed as primarily a residential neighborhood development with supporting neighborhood commercial, park, recreation facilities, and open space/resource protection. Within the project, emphasis should be on providing a complete range of housing types and afford abilities. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues: a. Provision of a variety of housing types and affordability levels. b. Modification of the Airport Area Specific Plan to either exclude this area or designate it as a special planning area within the Airport Area Specific Plan. c. Provision of buffers along Buckley Road and along eastern edge of property from adjacent agricultural uses. d. Provision of open space buffers along northern and western boundaries to separate this development from adjacent service and manufacturing uses. e. Provision of open space buffers and protections for creek and wildlife corridor that runs through property. f. Safety and noise parameters described in this General Plan and the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act; or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. g. Participation in enhancement to Buckley Road and enhancement of connection of Buckley Road to South Higuera Street. h. Appropriate internal and external pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections to the City’s circulation network. i. Implementation of the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan including connections to the Bob Jones Trail. j. Water and wastewater infrastructure needs as detailed in the City’s Water and Wastewater Master Plans. This may include funding and/or construction of a wastewater lift station. k. Fire protection and impacts to emergency response times. l. Architectural design that relates to the pastoral character of the area and preserves view of agrarian landscapes. m. Provision of a neighborhood park. PH1 - 280 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-99 Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum Maximum Residential LDR MDR MHDR HDR 500 700 Commercial NC 15,000 SF 25,000 SF Open Space / Agriculture OS AG 50%1 Public n/a Infrastructure n/a 1 Up to 1/3 of the open space may be provided off-site or through in-lieu fees consistent with the Airport Area Specific Plan. Required Open Space may be reduced up to 30% of the site proportionally to the amount of affordable housing provided on-site in a ratio consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation beyond inclusionary housing requirements. PH1 - 281 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-100 8.3.3 Special Planning Areas NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following presents the other sites evaluated as part of the physical alternatives included in the General Plan Update plus some other sites carried over from the existing General Plan and not completed or otherwise addressed. The policies under Section 8.2 provide site specific guidance on the development / redevelopment of sites in the city. For sites that have existing development, renovation of streetscapes, landscaping, and building facades is encouraged. The City shall require property owners to prepare area plans with land uses consistent with this section, as well as multi-modal circulation and infrastructure facilities as appropriate, design guidelines and implementation programs. The City may consider implementation incentives for redevelopment areas, such as variations from development standards and/or participation in the installation or financing of infrastructure. 8.3.3.1 Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area This area, which includes land on both sides of Foothill Boulevard between Chorro and Santa Rosa, is currently developed as commercial centers that include highway and neighborhood serving commercial uses. At the affected property owners’ request, the boundary of this area on the north side of Foothill may be extended to include one or more of the existing commercial properties west of Chorro Street. The City shall work with property owners / developers to redevelop the area as mixed use (either horizontal or vertical mixed use) to include a mix of uses as described under the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial and Medium High to High Density Residential designations. The non-residential component of the project should include elements that serve the nearby neighborhoods. Examples include: specialty stores and services food service entertainment, and recreational facilities (except that movie theaters, nightclubs, bars/taverns and restaurants serving alcohol after 11 pm shall be prohibited) As part of this project, the City will evaluate adjustments to parking requirements to account for predominant pedestrian and bike access. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. Redevelopment plans shall include consideration of improving the existing complex intersections of Foothill/Chorro/Broad, the desirability of modifying Boysen at and through the property on the northeast corner of the area, and enhancement of pedestrian, bicycle and transit connections across Foothill and to the campus. Among other possible incentives, building height adjustments on the North side of Foothill may be considered with mixed use development. The Fire Station will be maintained or relocated within the area. 8.3.3.2 Upper Monterey In the Upper Monterey area, the emphasis will be on revitalization and enhancement. The area above Johnson shall have an emphasis on land use PH1 - 282 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-101 compatibility and neighborhood preservation. The following actions will be pursued in this area. a. The City shall investigate adding the Upper Monterey area to the Downtown Parking District, thereby allowing in-lieu payment towards common parking facilities. b. The City shall integrate a new Downtown Transit Center in the Upper Monterey area along Santa Rosa Street and provide enhanced connectivity to the center from the Upper Monterey area. c. The City will work with hotels in the Upper Monterey area to provide shuttle service to the Downtown and Downtown Transit Center. d. The City will promote restaurant development in the Upper Monterey area, and include outdoor dining opportunities and other public activities oriented toward Monterey Street. North of California, these types of activities shall be prohibited on the creek side of buildings. e. The City will evaluate reconfiguring Monterey Street in this area to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to Downtown and to Cal Poly. f. The City will work with local hotels and Cal Poly to develop enhanced meeting rooms and conference facilities. These types of facilities would not be envisioned on the east side of Monterey north of California Street. No stand-alone conference center is envisioned in this area. g. The City will work with developers to assemble adjacent properties into lots of suitable size for redevelopment limited to areas southwest of California Street. h. The City will develop an Upper Monterey area master plan and design guide that will provide guidance on street enhancements, façade improvement programs, and pedestrian enhancement along Monterey Street. As part of this effort, the City will investigate the ability to apply form-based codes to guide future development and will involve residents in adjoining areas as well as business and property owners along Monterey Street as part of the public review process in development of the master plan/design guide. Particular attention will be given to creek protection, noise, safety, light and glare, and privacy impacts to adjoining neighborhoods Program: The City will review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve residents to ensure that neighborhood concerns are addressed. 8.3.3.3 Mid-Higuera Area The City will update the plan for this multi-block commercial area to reflect current needs and changes that have occurred since the 2001 plan was adopted. (See Figure 10) PH1 - 283 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-102 8.3.3.4 Caltrans Site While this area is within the Mid-Higuera Area, the unique qualities and opportunities provided by the site warranted special consideration in the General Plan. This area is planned for redevelopment from a Caltrans office and yard complex to a mixed use development. Commercial uses will be as described under the Tourist Commercial designation with some residential incorporated using a Medium High to High Density Residential component. Redevelopment plans shall consider the suitability of realignment of the Madonna/South Higuera intersection. The site should be developed to serve as a gateway into the community, with consideration of additional open space uses, retention and rehabilitation of the Master List historic structure, and retention of Heritage Trees on the site. Conference center-type uses are encouraged along with other appropriate tourist-serving uses as appropriate for the site. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. The site shall also include a park site north of Madonna Road. 8.3.3.5 General Hospital Site The General Hospital site includes County-owned property including the old hospital building (which is planned to remain as an office / treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) and will include the ability to support residential care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas. The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as Open Space. The City shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space outside of the urban reserve line as part of any development proposal. The undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will remain designated for Public uses. 8.3.3.6 Broad Street Area The City shall implement the South Broad Street Area Plan to (Appendix X) to create a safe, attractive and economically vital neighborhood with a mix of complementary land uses. The Area Plan shall: a. Encourage innovative design concepts that help revitalize and beautify the area. b. Facilitate housing development to meet the full range of community housing needs. c. Improve circulation safety and connectivity within the area and across Broad Sreet. 8.3.3.7 Madonna Inn Area The Madonna Inn Area includes land west of Highway 101 on the lower slopes of San Luis Mountain and the northeast slopes of the foothill bordering Laguna Lake Park. PH1 - 284 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-103 This area may be developed further only if surrounding hillsides including area outside the Urban Reserve Line are permanently protected as open space. (See also hillside planning policies) a. A development plan for the whole area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or further developed. b. Upon amendment to an urban designation, the area may accommodate a generously landscaped, low intensity extension of the existing tourist facilities. This area may also be suitable for assisted and/or senior living facilities. Development locations should be clustered and building forms should respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and should maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. c. The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. d. Any plan for further development in this area must address reconfiguration of the Marsh Street interchange and larger circulation issues throughout the area. e. Walking and biking paths shall be provided as appropriate to connect to the City’s network and to the Downtown, amenities along Madonna Road, and open space areas. 8.3.3.8 Sunset Drive-in Theater Area This 38-acre area should be further developed only if flooding can be mitigated without significant harm to San Luis Obispo Creek. Until flood hazards are mitigated, continued agricultural use and low-intensity recreational use are appropriate. Any use drawing substantial regional traffic also depends on providing needed infrastructure at Prado Road and extending Prado Road to connect with Madonna Road. Once flooding, access, and agricultural preservation issues are resolved, the area would be suitable for development as a mixed use (horizontal or vertical) development with a mix of Commercial uses. Permanent open space shall be required in order to protect the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek. As part of future development, a full assessment of the Drive-in Theater site’s potential as a historic resource will need to be evaluated and addressed. Bicycle connectivity as referenced in the Bicycle Transportation Plan is an important component of future development of the area. The site may need to be designed to accommodate the Homeless Services center. 8.3.3.9 Pacific Beach Site This area is planned for redevelopment from current use as a continuation school, school office and park uses to commercial retail uses along Los Osos Valley Road PH1 - 285 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-104 and Froom Ranch Road and the remaining site maintained under a Park designation. 8.3.3.10 Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area These four vacant lots are suitable for commercial mixed use and other uses described under the Tourist Commercial designations. Portions of the site may be appropriate for use as auto sales, depending on market demand. Development of this area must address preservation of and transition to the agricultural parcels/uses to the northwest; connectivity to the Dalidio Ranch area; viewshed preservation; and treatment as a gateway to the City visible from Highway 101. 8.3.3.11 LOVR Creekside Area This area is heavily constrained by flood potential along the western boundary as well as limited circulation access to the site given its proximity to the proposed LOVR / Highway 101 interchange and its limited frontage on LOVR. Flooding and access issues must be resolved prior to developing Medium High Density Residential (in areas adjacent to existing residential uses). Agricultural Designations must be maintained along the west side of site. As part of future development, compatibility with adjacent residential areas to the east will be required. Permanent protection of the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek will need to be addressed as part of proposed development. The south side of the site will also need to accommodate relocation of LOVR right-of-way and changes related to the planned Highway 101 interchange. 8.3.3.12 Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site Located at the northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, this approximate 10 acre site will be used as a mixed use site, providing for a mix of uses as described under the Community Commercial and Office designations and residential limited to upper floors. Areas along the creek on the western edge of the site will be appropriately buffered to provide creek protections. Attention to connectivity, safety and comfort of bicycle and pedestrian circulation will be especially important in the development of this corner. CalFire /Cal Poly-owned property on Highway 1 The City shall collaborate with Cal Poly in updating the Master Plan for development of campus property. Master Plan direction for this property shall address sensitive visual and habitat resources, circulation issues, impacts to City services, transition and potential impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. North Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll) Future development of this area shall address open space requirements under 1.12.7 and open space buffers in accordance with Conservation and Open Space Element policy 8.3.2. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access, and transition to existing neighborhoods. The steep hillside should be dedicated as Open Space and residential lots grouped at the bottom of the hill closer to Foothill. Development shall provide a parking lot and trail access PH1 - 286 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-105 to Bishops Peak. Circulation connectivity shall be provided to Los Cerros Drive. Density shall be limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. Alrita Properties Future development of this area shall address hillside planning requirements under 6.2.7 B. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access; visual impacts, and transition to existing neighborhoods. Additional analysis will need to occur in the LUCE EIR to evaluate potential water service issues. While there is a pump station nearby, more analysis is needed to determine if the City’s water distribution system can adequately serve development in this area. Density shall be limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. PH1 - 287 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-106 9 SUSTAINABILITY NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following presents a new goal and supporting policies and programs relative to enhancing sustainability. These additions build upon other existing and new policies in the Land Use and Circulation Elements marked with the sustainability icon NOTE TO REVIEWER: New Goal Proposed Support statewide and regional efforts to create more sustainable communities, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and develop transportation systems that support all modes of circulation. 9.3.1 Introduction The City shall take a leadership role in the county in the development of sustainable plans and programs to guide future development in the city and the region. 9.3.2 Regional Coordination The City shall work with SLOCOG to develop and periodically update the Sustainable Communities Strategy as part of the Regional Transportation Planning process and SLOCOG shall be encouraged to consider the City’s General Plan when developing the Sustainable Communities Strategy. 9.3.3 Sustainability Coordination The City shall review SLOCOG’s Regional Transportation Plan, including the Sustainable Communities Strategy, as it prepares and reviews updates to the General Plan, General Plan Amendments, specific plans, changes in zoning regulations, capital improvement plans and other infrastructure plans to determine consistency and allow for CEQA streamlining and eligibility for State transportation funding. 9.3.4 Climate Action Plan The City shall maintain and implement its Climate Action Plan to reduce community and municipal GHG emissions consistent with State laws and objectives. 9.3.5 Urban Heat Effects The City shall reduce heat effects of urban development by requiring new development to incorporate, as appropriate, features such as reduced hardscape, light or heat reflective roofing, and shade trees. 9.3.6 Natural Areas and Green Space The City shall continue to maintain and expand natural areas in and around the city to foster carbon sequestration while providing more open space for residents. PH1 - 288 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-107 9.3.7 Sustainable Design The City shall promote and, where appropriate, require sustainable building practices that consume less energy, water and other resources, facilitate natural ventilation, use daylight effectively, and are healthy, safe, comfortable, and durable. Projects shall include, unless deemed infeasible by the City, the following sustainable design features. A. Energy-Efficient Structure Utilize building standards and materials that achieve or surpass best practices for energy efficiency. B. Energy-Efficient Appliances Utilize appliances, including air conditioning and heating systems that achieve high energy efficiency. Incorporation of alternative energy systems (e.g. passive and/or active solar, heat pumps) is encouraged. C. Natural Ventilation Optimize potential for cooling through natural ventilation. D. Plumbing Utilize plumbing fixtures that conserve or reuse water such as low flow faucets or grey water recycling systems. E. Efficient Landscaping Include landscaping that reduces water use through use of drought-tolerant / native plant species, high-efficiency irrigation (drip irrigation), and reduction of the use of turf. Collection and use of site runoff in landscape irrigation is encouraged. F. Solar Orientation Optimize solar orientation of structures to the extent possible. G. Privacy and Solar Access New buildings outside of the downtown will respect the privacy and solar access of neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings. PH1 - 289 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-108 9.3.8 Sustainable Infrastructure The City shall: A. Promote infrastructure expansion where it will be more efficient and effective, and does not promote growth inducement outside the urban reserve line. B. Focus infrastructure improvements in designated growth areas and contiguous to existing development. Program Climate Action Plan The City shall review and regularly update the Climate Action Plan and shall annually report to the City Council on implementation of the Climate Action Plan. Program Building Code Update The City shall regularly review and update its building codes and ordinances to identify revisions that promote energy efficient building design and construction practices. Program Incentive Program The City shall consider the feasibility of providing incentives for new and renovated projects that incorporate sustainable design features. Program LEED Certifiable The City shall design all new City facilities to meet the requirements specified for certification as LEED Silver construction or equivalent rating system. Program Renewable Energy Financing The City shall promote and pursue a wide range of renewable energy financing options including a renewable energy fund or loan program. Program Renewable Energy Choice The City shall evaluate the feasibility of a regional Community Choice Aggregation program to procure electricity from renewable resources. PH1 - 290 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-109 10 HEALTHY COMMUNITY NOTE TO REVIEWER: The following presents a new goal and supporting policies and programs relative to healthy communities, a Council-identified and grant objective. NOTE TO REVIEWER: New Goal Proposed Increase the overall health and wellbeing of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo by expanding access to healthy food and nutrition choices and through community design that fosters walking and biking. 10.3.1 Neighborhood Access All residences should be within close proximity to food outlets including grocery stores, farmers markets, and community gardens. 10.3.2 Local Food Systems The City shall support sustainable local food systems, including farmer’s markets, community supported agriculture, urban agriculture, and healthy food retailers. 10.3.3 Provide for Community Gardens The City shall continue to support the development of community gardens. 10.3.4 Encouraging Walkability The City shall encourage projects which provide for and enhance active and environmentally sustainable modes of transportation, such as pedestrian movement, bicycle access, and transit services. 10.3.5 Healthy Environment The City shall protect and maintain clear air and natural open spaces. Program The City shall regularly review and update master plans for City parks to designate areas for community gardens where appropriate. Program The City shall update the Community Design Guidelines to encourage the inclusion of communal gardens within multi-family residential developments with 10 or more units. Program The City shall work with the community to develop a resource guide to facilitate design that promotes a healthy and active lifestyle. PH1 - 291 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-110 11 REVIEW & AMENDMENT 11.3.2 Comprehensive Reviews The City shall conduct a comprehensive review of this element about every ten years, and at other times deemed necessary by the City Council, considering possible changes in citizen's preferences, technology, population characteristics, and regional plans. 11.3.3 Amendment Proposals The City shall consider amendments to this element requested by citizens or deemed useful by the Planning Commission or the City Council. Such amendments should be considered in groups, not more than four times each year. 11.3.4 Annual Report The City shall prepare an annual report on the status of the general plan, during the first quarter of each calendar year, to include the following: A. A summary of private development activity and a brief analysis of how it helped meet general plan goals; B. A summary of major public projects and a brief analysis of how they contributed to meeting general plan goals; C. An overview of programs, and recommendations on any new approaches that may be necessary. D. A status report for each general plan program scheduled to be worked on during that year, including discussion of whether that program's realization is progressing on schedule, and recommendations for how it could better be kept on schedule if it is lagging; E. A status report on how the City is progressing with implementing its open space preservation policies and programs; F. Updated population or other information deemed important for the plan. PH1 - 292 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-111 12 IMPLEMENTATION 12.3.1 Introduction "Implementation" refers to all the City’s actions to carry out the general plan. Besides the programs described in previous sections, the City uses the following means of implementing the Land Use Element. The City’s actions taken pursuant to the following shall be consistent with the General Plan. 12.3.2 Zoning Regulations Zoning Regulations consist of the zoning map, lists of uses allowed in certain zones, property-development standards such as maximum building height and minimum parking, and procedures intended to give the interests of development applicants and other citizens fair consideration. 12.3.3 Subdivision Regulations Subdivision Regulations cover the division of land into parcels which can be sold, and set basic standards for streets and utilities. 12.3.4 Community Design Guidelines Community Design Guidelines are used by the staff, City Council, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission and other advisory bodies in the review of proposed development projects to help ensure that such projects meet the City's expectation for the quality and character of new development. 12.3.5 Historic Preservation Ordinance, Guidelines, and Context Statement Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines are used by the staff, City Council, Planning Commission, Cultural Heritage Committee, and other advisory bodies in the review of projects within a historic district or on property with a listed historic resource to ensure protection of historic resources. The City’s Historic Context Statement provides information to support the review and identification of resources. 12.3.6 Grading Regulations Grading Regulations limit the amount and methods of reshaping the ground to accommodate development. 12.3.7 Budgets Budgets spell out how City funds will be obtained and spent, particularly the capital improvement program, a multiyear list of major facilities and equipment which the City will buy or build. The capital improvement program includes water sources and sewage treatment equipment, water and sewer lines, and streets and bridges. The Planning Commission reviews this program for conformity with the general plan. 12.3.8 Property Management Property management covers buying land for new City facilities and for public open space, and selling or leasing land no longer needed for a City government function. PH1 - 293 Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Commission Version 12/16/2013 1-112 12.3.9 Development Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans Development plans, area plans, and specific plans bridge between general policies and actual construction plans. 12.3.10 Public Planning Public Planning is a way for the City and its Citizens to help shape the community’s future. Before making a determination on proposals for a major development, such as a specific plan, special-design area, Downtown Concept Plan, or a large subdivision or planned development not within a specific plan, the City shall provide early and meaningful public notice in order to stimulate and encourage community engagement and provide ample opportunity for community input to decision-makers. Advisory bodies and City Council shall consider such input prior to taking action on a project. 12.3.11 Environmental Review The purpose of the City’s environmental review process is to develop and maintain a high quality environment now and in the future. Some projects may be exempted from environmental review by state law or city procedures. For those projects subject to environmental review, features to be examined would include but not be limited to, toxic contamination, air quality, open space preservation, sustainability impacts, scenic values and impacts, airport operations, ground slopes, seismic hazards, soil and groundwater characteristics, wildlife habitats, road and rail traffic noise, water and sewer service limits, access and circulation, and historic and archaeological resources. When considering proposals for a major development, such as a specific plan or special-design area, the City must conduct an evaluation of environmental opportunities and constraints, to which a proposal can respond. The City is committed to early and meaningful participation by the community in the environmental review process to help inform the public and decision- makers of the potential environmental consequences of their actions. 12.3.12 Interagency Communication City positions communicated to other agencies shall be consistent with the goals and policies in the general plan. PH1 - 294 Attachment 6 RESOLUTION NO. (2014 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR PROCESS (GPI 15-12) WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of $880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, in June 2011, the City Council approved goals for the 2011-2013 Financial Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, five community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 31 Task Force meetings, seven Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones, provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant’s circle of influence; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended goals, policies, and programs in the Land Use Element based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and WHEREAS, endorsing the draft Land Use Element to be considered through the Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the draft Land Use Element after the environmental review process of the Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the Draft Land Use Element presented at the hearing on January 14, 2014 as amended by Council shall be considered through the environmental review process as part of the PH1 - 295 Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) Page 2 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update. SECTION 1. SPECIAL FOCUS AREAS. A portion of the project description to be considered as part of the EIR process includes the policies related to the General Hospital and North Side of Foothill sites shown in Attachment A in the Draft Land Use Element as modified by City Council, an official copy of which shall be maintained in the Office of the City Clerk referencing this Resolution. Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: RECUSED: Council members Carpenter and Ashbaugh The foregoing Resolution was adopted this _______________________, 2014. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________ Anthony J. Mejia, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _/s/ J.Christine Dietrick_____________________ Christine Dietrick, City Attorney PH1 - 296 Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) Page 3 ATTACHMENT A 8.3.3.5 General Hospital Site The General Hospital site includes County-owned property including the old hospital building (which is planned to remain as an office / treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) and will include the ability to support residential care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas. The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as Open Space. The City shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space outside of the urban reserve line as part of any development proposal. The undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will remain designated for Public uses. North Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll) Future development of this area shall address open space requirements under 1.12.7 and open space buffers in accordance with Conservation and Open Space Element policy 8.3.2. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access, and transition to existing neighborhoods. The steep hillside should be dedicated as Open Space and residential lots grouped at the bottom of the hill closer to Foothill. Development shall provide a parking lot and trail access to Bishops Peak. Circulation connectivity shall be provided to Los Cerros Drive. Density shall be limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. PH1 - 297 Attachment 7 RESOLUTION NO. (2014 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR PROCESS (GPI 15-12) WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of $880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, in June 2011, the City Council approved goals for the 2011-2013 Financial Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements; and WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, five community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 31 Task Force meetings, seven Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones, provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant’s circle of influence; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended goals, policies, and programs in the Land Use Element based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and WHEREAS, endorsing the draft Land Use Element to be considered through the Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the draft Land Use Element after the environmental review process of the Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the Draft Land Use Element presented at the hearing on January 14, 2014 as amended by Council shall be considered through the environmental review process as part of the PH1 - 298 Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) Page 2 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update. SECTION 1. DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT. A portion of the project description to be considered as part of the EIR process includes the goals, policies, and programs in the Draft Land Use Element as modified by City Council, an official copy of which shall be maintained in the Office of the City Clerk referencing this Resolution. Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Resolution was adopted this _______________________, 2014. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________ Anthony J. Mejia, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _/s/ J.Christine Dietrick_____________________ Christine Dietrick, City Attorney PH1 - 299 Page intentionally left blank. PH1 - 300 AGENDA -- CORRESPONDEi Date ' I Item JAN 2 8 2014 E. Jud to City Council, Jan. 28, 2014, Spm Item: LUCE Work, Input into EIR and Traffic Model 1. Thanks, good work so far, but serious questions remain: .Ammw� - Will the great comments of planner Jaime Lopes of Jan. 21 have consequences? Systematic planning, job housing balance etc.? 2. Traffic model: How will the well known statistics below go into the calculations? Americans - especially young people - are driving less and biking more. A SHIFT TO CAR -LITE LIFE �.tk,��r( ."PIt! F'r ISfQ fr- Zif�R.if A7 -tf a Why do we not use the model to test "out of the box" concepts instead of just the politically correct plans? Prado Rd. Fw. Interchange, Prado Rd.; near sport fields, alternatives at Tank Farm /Broad St. Intersection etc. (simulations are INEXPENSIVE and save millions of construction costs). In Model and EIR please apply the planning slogan of Cal Poly President Armstrong: RADICAL TRANSPARENCY! 3. Please put the following mandate into the Circulation Element: "The Urban Street Design Guide" of NACTO 2013 is the basis for SLO. (Many cities and DOTS have already done so) E. Jud, 665 Leff St., 7561729 P .e , ,a JAN 2 8 Wheefin2 Water Outside our Citv Limits: Circulation issues Jan Marx 1 -28 -14 If the City allows any kind of water service to properties outside our city limits, it will be facilitating development next to city limits, and in our greenbelt. (See attached minutes from 1983) This development outside our URL will have need road, bike path and pedestrian connections. It also could create the need for transit. The impacts and growth inducting implications need to be analyzed in the EIR. BACKGROUND "The City Council unanimously prohibited prohibiting the extension of water and sewer services for private use outside of City limits. March 15, 1983. (See CC minutes of 2 -1 -83) 2014 Municipal Code 13.16.010 City not to approve any provision of or entitlement to. After the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, the city shall not approve any provision or entitlement to water or sewer service for the use or benefit of properties outside the city limits. (Ord. 951 § 1, 1983) 13.16.020 Exceptions. This chapter shall not apply to: A. Any property duly annexed after the effective date of the ordinance codified herein; B. Any public or private party with which the city had an effective agreement for provision of services prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified herein; C. Properties which currently receive city water or sewer service without a previously effective agreement; D. Provision of sewer service to the Hidden Hills Mobile Home Park, as provided in the State of California Water Resources Control Board Order. No. WOO 824. (Ord. 951 § 2, 1983) * *The consultant's notes to 1.11.1 (1 -43 or PH 1 -71) say this long standing policy was modified for "style." The consultant states that "Word `potable' added to clarify the service being addressed and changes to the Water and Wastewater Element approved by the Council in 2010" * * This implies that Council approved the wheeling of potable water. This is not true. The Water Element A 7.3.4 says "Consider the potential to deliver available recycled water supplies to customers outside the city limits, including analysis of policy issues, technical concerns and cost recovery, provided it is found to be consistent with the General Plan." * *The Task Force did not discuss this issue (see notes of November 6, 2013) * *The Planning Commission may have referred to this issue obliquely in the context of urban sprawl, but did not specifically discuss wheeling water. See PH 1 -11, minutes of December 12, 2013 page 3 top paragraph. The PC minutes say that Kim Murry indicated that "the General Plan should provide the policy basis on which to respond to any County proposals" for development on land outside the city URL. AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE Date ` VTR Item #--20L. City Council Minutes Tuesday, February 1, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. Page 11 Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Mayor Billig, Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, Dunin and Griffin NOES: None ABSENT: None 12. UTILITY SERVICES OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS Council considered an ordinance prohibiting the extension of water and sewer services for private use outside of the City limits. Mayor Billig reviewed for the Council the ordinance provisions. The thrust of her concerns have been the current and future impacts on City residents of premature or ill- conceived projects approved by the County on the City's periphery. Past as well as recently approved projects have created serious potential health and safety problems for the City and its residents relating to waste disposal system failures, inadequate fire protection, water quality control, questionable grading, erosion, and runoff. She wanted a clear message sent to agencies that the City would not be supportive of coming to their rescue with water. Councilman Settle supported this as being a positive effort and could support the ordinance. Councilman Dunin stated he would support the ordinance as it is a standing policy. After brief discussion and on motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Griffin, the following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No: 951 (1983 Series), an ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo probibiting the extension of water and sewer services for private use outside of the City limits. Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig NOES: None ABSENT: None 10:40 p.m. City Council convened in Closed Session to discuss Litigation matters. 11:35 p.m. City Council reconvened, all Councilmembers present. There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Billig adjourned the meeting to Tuesday, Fepfu ry 8, 1983, at 12:10 p.m. (Pamela Vo es, C i; C rk t c APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 3/15/83 city of Mohns -sml h is owspo Water and Wastewater Table 5: Annual Recycled Water Usage Calendar Year Annual Recycled Water Usage in acre -feet - 2006 7.69 62.36 2007 2008 95.75 2009 137.36 A 7.1 Goal Number of Sites Using Recycled Water 1 I 11 17 Notes: 1- Partial year data reported, October through December 2006_ 2. The City initiated a Construction Water Permit Program (CWPP) on July 1, 2009_ Recycled water usage associated with the CWPP is included with annual recycled water usage. Source: City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department, 2010. A 7.1.1 Utilize recycled water for non - potable purposes, thereby offsetting the use of potable water. A 7.1.2 Maximize the use of the City's available recycled water supply for approved uses. A 7.2 Policies A 7.2.1 Recycled Water Supply The City will make available recycled water to substitute for existing potable water uses as allowed by law and to supply new non - potable uses. A 7.2.2 Accounting for Recycled Water The -City will add total recycled water usage from the prior year to the Citys water resource availability on an annual basis. A 7.3 Programs A 7.3.1 Expand the recycled water distribution system to serve customers in the Water Reuse Master Plan area. A 7.3.2 Review development proposals for projects within the Water Reuse Master Plan area to ensure recycled water is utilized for appropriate uses. A 7.3.3 Annual recycled water usage will be presented to the City Council as part of the annual Wafer Resources Status Report and will be added to the City's water resource availability per policy 3.2.1. A 7.3.4 Consider the potential to deliver available recycled water supplies to customers outside the city limits, including analysis of policy issues, technical concerns, and cost recovery, provided it is found to be consistent with the General Plan. 8 -20 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 3 Comm. Multari noted that the Commissioners need to refer to the Land Use Map to examine the areas that have not been developed and those that are designated Rural Suburban and Residential Rural. He expressed that these might become areas of urban sprawl. Community Development Deputy Director Murry displayed the map and indicated the areas around the Urban Reserve Line that already have been subdivided. Comm. Draze asked if the City will have input if the County rezones any of these areas. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated the City is provided a referral from the County for any discretionary project that occurs within the Planning Area. She indicated that the General Plan should provide the policy basis on which to respond to any County proposals. Comm. Multari suggested adding a policy stating that the City does not support further subdivision in the City's sphere of influence area to lots smallerthan 20 acres. Comm. Larson stated that he shares the same concerns and recognizes that this is a very difficult issue. He noted that the intent of Table 2 is to recapitulate the higher County zoning designations and define the City's desire to have lower densities in areas that might affect the City's plans for a green belt. He stated that while the City needs to be able to evaluate anything that affects a green belt around the City, it would be better to recognize the City's goal and develop policies without being so detailed. He supported the inclusion of a general and consistent policy statement and a clear graphic representation about the City's sphere of influence, the City limits, the green belt concept, and LAFC's policies and role. Comm. Stevenson stated that he agrees with Comm. Larson and thinks that Table 2 is not necessary. He noted that the County's policies about agricultural preservation are particularly strong, that the County honors the City's boundaries, and that any development that would come close to City boundaries would result in consultation with the City. He supported language stating the City's desire to preserve rural character of the area and the green belt. Comm. Multari stated that the Task Force struggled with this issue and the map was an attemptto acknowledge development and define the rest of the land as open space. Comm. Draze stated that there is a need to have some influence over lands that are close to, but not within, the City limits. He supported a statement stating that it is the City's desire to have development in these areas with no more than one dwelling per 20 acres. Comm. Stevenson stated language should refer to LAFCO's sphere of influence update, done every five years, which has provisions about how any proposals for land use changes would be handled between the City and County and is specific about general plan amendments. He suggested looking at language in Memorandums of Agreement the County has with other cities. Staff member Murry indicated the City has a Memorandum of Agreement with the Countythat provides for referrals and discusses how land use changes will be handled. The Commission proceeded through the legislative draft of the Land Use Element by chapter. PN 1 - 11 TF -LUCE Minutes November 6, 2013 Page 5 Policy 1.9.4 (page 1 -38): Minor revisions to language under sub - section A to read, "Be screened from public views by land forms or lands Gaping vegetation, but not at the expense of habitat. If the visually screened locations contain sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, avoid development should be avoided in those areas and instead designed as the clustered developm_e.nt in the form of vernacular farm building complexes, to blend the traditional agricultural working landscape. Policy 1.10.4 (page 1 -40): Task Force members provided minor language changes to retain the word "Council" in the first sentence, and to add, "or companies producing significant numbers of head of household jobs" to the end of subsection D. policy 1.11.1 (page 1 -41): Task Force members changed the language to read, "The City shall continue to communicate with nearby government and educational institutions to address proposed changes in numbers of workers, students, or inmates that have the potential to result in significant adverse land use or circulation impacts on the City or may negatively influence the City's ability to manage growth. Policy 1. 11.4 (page1 -41): Task Force opted to replace the word "plans" with "efforts ". olicv 1.12.6 (page 1 -45): Task Force revised proposed text to read, "The City shall approve development in newly annexed areas only when adequate City services can be provided for that development, without reducing the level of public services or increasing the cost of services for existing development and for build out within the City limits." Policy 1. 12.7 (page 1 -46): Task Force determined that subsection F was still needed to address future Bishop Knolls annexation. On a motion by Task Force Member Brown, seconded by Member Goetz to approve the Growth Management, Chapter with revisions and direction as noted. kip gv-el-) AYES: Committee Members Meyer, Rademaker, Bremer, Brown, Crotser, Goetz, Juhnke, Multari, Richardson, Rowley, Saunders, Whitney �jSGuff NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Committee Members Dandekar, Rossi, and Quaglino OT The motion passed on a 12:0 vote. I )(2,1 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: There were no further comments made from the public. SET TIME FOR NEXT TF -LUCE MEETING: NOVEMBER 7, 2013. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:06 pm. (.,Ityof Land Use THE GENERAL PLAN 4421.11 Annexation and Services a4241.11.1 Water and Sewer Service . .................. The City shall not provide nor permit delivery of City otp able water or sewer services to the following areas. However, the City will serve those parties having valid previous connections orcontracts with the City. A. Outside the City limits; B. Outside the urban reserve line; C. Above elevations reliably served by gravity -flow in the City water system; D. Below elevations reliably served by gravity -flow or pumps in the City sewer system. Polic 1.12.1 10, Ste ❑ Clan ❑ currencX 10 Relocate J ❑ Complete ❑ Relevance JE Resources Word "Potable" added to clarify the service being addressed and changes to the Water and Wastewater Element approved by the Council in 2010. 1.42.21.11.2 _Annexation Purpose and Timing The City may use_Aannexation should he its as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate urban development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve line which are to be developed with urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs. The City may annex an area long before such development is to occur, and the City may annex areas which are to remain permanently as open space. An area may be annexed in phases, consistent with the city - approved specific plan or development plan for the area. Phasing of annexation and development will reflect topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed land uses and roads. (See alsG Ca^tlnn port Area) Policy 1 12 2 10 5t e 10 Clari ❑ Currency I ❑ Relocate 10 Complete 10 Relevance 10 Resources Edited for style and to delete unnecessary referenceto Section 7.0. 1.11.3 Annexation of Cal Poly The Cjjty should analyze the suitability of annexing Cal Poly. NEW 10 Style © Clarity 1 ❑ Currency 1 ❑ Relocate 1 ❑ Complete 1 ❑ Relevance 1 ❑ Resources Desire to investigate the advantages of annexation, including capture of sales tax revenues, sharing of services, and so forth were brought up during Community Leader Interviews held during March 2012 1.12.4 Annexation in Airport Area F_qT__ perties in the Airport aArea Specific Plan_, a SpeG'fi(; plan shall be adopted for-the whole aFea. Until a specifiG plan is adopted, properties may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to the existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and \lercinn 1714AI' 11'A 1_111 PH1 - 71 / s V" r ' 4gk•�J `s F s � 1' t��rp •�� � 75� ' ! �`. *4r� � , ('`, tJr ' •y r }'r �s`7 i �y 'y �� � ` � � , a1. rT' fs U, r—Q -kr C 07 CL N � O (D a) Coll w� c CL N