Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/17/1992, 5 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DENYING A PROPOSAL (GP/R 1548) TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT MAP AND REZONE AN 11,315 SQUARE FOOT LOT FROM R-1 (LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) TO R-3 (MEDIUM-HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ON THE WEST lllu^I��II�IIIIIIIII II MEETIN DATE: city of san Luis o�ispo �- 1�- g�- COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director By: Whitney McIlvaine,.Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission action denying a proposal (GP/R 1548) to amend the General Plan Land Use Element map and rezone an 11,315 square foot lot from R-1 (low-density residential) to R-3 (medium-high-density residential) on the west side of Ferrini Road between Foothill Boulevard and North Chorro Street. CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt Draft Resolution No. 1 denying the appeal, and upholding Planning Commission action. BACKGROUND On January 29th, the Planning Commission (on a vote of 5 to 0, 2 absent) denied the applicant's rezoning request, finding that the site is not physically suited for the proposed density. At that meeting seven members of the public spoke against the proposal. A petition against the rezoning was also submitted, with 50 signatures. On February 7th, the applicant filed an appeal, and also a request to have his item reconsidered by the Planning Commission. On February 26th, the Commission (on a vote of 4 to 0, 3 abstentions) decided not to rehear the item. Attached to this report are: letters from the applicant; a January 29, 1992 staff report and February 26, 1992 memo to the Planning Commission; Planning Commission minutes and resolutions; and a letter and petition from members of the public. I In his appeal, the applicant's representative notes that he did not receive notice of the first Planning Commission in a timely manner. The City's standard noticing procedure was followed for this item. A staff report was also mailed to the representative post office box the Friday preceding the Wednesday hearing. It is possible there was a mix-up at the post office. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council may uphold the appeal (Draft Resolution No. 2 and Rezoning Ordinance) and approve the rezoning proposal. 2. Continue with direction to staff and/or appellant. city of San Luis OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT GP/R 15.48 March 17, 1992 Page 2 Attachments: - Draft resolution no. 1, denying.appeal - Draft resolution no. 2, upholding appeal j - Ordinance approving the rezoning - 1/29, staff report - neighbors' petition and letter - 1/29 minutes.and resolution -.2/26 Planning Commission memo, including letter and appeal from applicant i I I RESOLUTION NO. (1992 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL FROM THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION GP/R 1548, A REQUEST TO REZONE AN 11, 315 SQUARE FOOT LOT AT 200 FERRINI ROAD FROM "LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "MEDIUM-HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on application No. GP/R 1548 on January 29, 1992 , and determined to deny the application; and WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed that decision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the testimony and statements of the appellant, and other interested parties, and the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and WHEREAS the Council determines that the Planning Commission action was appropriate; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council resolves to deny the appeal and affirm the action of the Planning Commission, thereby denying General Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application GP/R 1548 as shown on Exhibit "A" , subject to the following finding adopted by the Planning Commission Resolution No. 5084-92 : SECTION 1. Finding. 1. The site is not physically suited for the density proposed. Resolution No. (1992 Series) GP/R 1548 Page 2 On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1992. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED City A 'nistrative Officer Q/V4//f/I�V tt rn Community Deve o ment Director RESOLUTION NO. (1992 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING AN APPEAL FROM THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION GP/R 1548 , A REQUEST TO REZONE AN 11, 315 SQUARE FOOT LOT AT 200 FERRINI ROAD FROM "LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "MEDIUM-HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on application No. GP/R 1548 on January 29, 1992, and determined to deny the application; and WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed that decision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the testimony and statements of the appellant, and other interested parties, and the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council resolves to uphold the appeal and approve General Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application GP/R 1548 as shown on Exhibit "A" , subject to the following finding: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The proposed change in land use is consistent with the purposes and intent of the general plan because it locates residential development close to community commercial centers and public facilities. 2 . The proposed change in land use is appropriate in the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent low- density residential development. 3 . The site is physically suited for the density proposed. 545 Resolution No. (1992 Series) GP/R 1548 Page 2 On motion of seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1992. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: City A inistrative Officer to ey Community Devto ment Director 5 -� ORDINANCE NO. (1992 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONE MAP FROM R-1 TO R-3 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 200 FERRINI ROAD WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held hearings to consider appropriate zoning for the subject properties in accordance with Section 65800 et. seq.' of the California Government Code; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Zoning Map Designation. That the property be zoned 11R-3" as shown on the map attached marked Exhibit "A" and included herein by reference. SECTION 2 . Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that the project' s Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the rezoning. SECTION 3 . Findings. 1. The proposed rezoning will not be detrimental to the health safety and welfare of persons living or working in the area or at the site. 2 . The proposed rezoning is consistent with the general plan. 3 . The proposed rezoning is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 4 . The rezoning will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, and has been granted a negative declaration. �� 7 Ordinance No. (1992 Series) Page 2 SECTION 4 . Implementation. A summary of this ordinance, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published, at least three (3) days prior to its final . passage, in the Telegram Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in said city, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its passage. INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City. of San Luis Obispo, at its meeting held on the day of 1992, on motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 5-8 Ordinance No. (1992 Series) Page 3 APPROVED: City A inistrative Officer t tt V Community Devel ent Director 5 -q EXHIBIT "A" A o O �� 01 cs � � 0 •• o N1•b�7•'V4 Vo .7Ql�� 7t) OLS N O mti o .. I w— 1•� D•tis �v O O `1,4. i tib R®1 -- R-3 ` N M1�S � • All-84 O �'`,,u • ave s 1S • MI}tI[•00 N 1 .71s7s 665 -135 A,O:-07 O J �D '� �ti ,V w�• :73 ARC87•10 M \ip0 . S O 169 54-4-4 -265 - � ?t aar5. O � LL W OGRB�f1 IAAC qI$S ARC 61-00 .c�, t 734,734 67o AR6e4-74 +ttc ao-a4 nt o w I ,,6 • ET.G aC•fSCSR imove 3o©Rin °v u1s15 - __ O O u0576 O O q[ o 1 i j El I TZ &70 (ob0 Co84 (a - i�D■T�'!`/L(L B v O - CHARLES CROTSER,A.iA C707) Poet ORks Box 1252(: tc-ao6 9q 64.79 San Luis ObiW,,CA 03408 43 BAS 6-BO A�oT•8; cLrArtws 7ca6 4 � uofv MEETING DATE: �H��b�ii�liilllip�►�mu�Pp''�I city of San 1UI S OBISPO ,-2 9-9a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEMNUMBER: JY: FILE# Whitney McIlvaine GP/R 1548 SUBJECT: Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Element map and rezone an 11,315 square foot lot from R-1 (low-density residential) to R-3 (medium-high-density residential) on the west side of Ferrini Road between Foothill Boulevard and North Chorro Street. RECOMMENDATION Deny the request. . BACKGROUND The applicants want to upzone a residential site to allow for construction of additional dwellings. The site is currently zoned R-1, but is bounded on the south and east by an R- 4 zone. By rezoning this site, the applicants intend to create a transition from the higher density projects to the single family character of the R-1 zone. Data Summary Address: 200 Ferrini Road Applicants: Ron Shriner and Charles Crotser Present Zoning: R-1 Present General Plan: Low Density Residential Proposed Zoning: R-3 Proposed General Plan: Medium-high Density Residential Environmental Status: The Director approved a negative declaration on January 15, 1992. Project Action Deadline: June 15, 1992 Site Description The site is an 11,315 square foot residential lot. It is relatively flat, sloping slightly to the street. The site is now developed with a single house. Significant vegetation includes 2 Siberian Elms and 2 White Poplars. Multifamily dwellings in an R-4 zone border the site to the south and east. Single family dwellings in an R-1 zone surround the site to west and north. The immediate neighborhood also contains an elementary school and city park. EVALUATION The applicants are proposing to rezone the site from R-1 (low density residential) to R- 3 (medium-high density residential). They would like to develop the lot with additional units. Current zoning and density standards allow only one dwelling on the site. An accessory apartment would also be allowed if zoning standards were met for a second dwelling unit. Densi : R-3 zoning would allow 4.68 density units. With R-3 zoning, the site could be 5- � I GP/R 1548 Page 2 January, 1992 developed with 9 studios, 7 one-bedroom apartments, 4 two-bedroom apartments, or a combinations of these dwelling types as long as the maximum allowed density is not exceeded. R-3 zoning would also allow a maximum building height of 35 feet, and a maximum lot coverage of 60 percent. The maximum height and coverage allowed in the R-1 zone is 25 feet and 40 percent. Lan Use: Allowed uses on the site would also be expanded as a result of the rezoning. Although the size and shape of the lot would preclude certain uses, the following is a list of all uses allowed in the R-3 zone, but not in the R-1 zone: Boarding/rooming houses, dormitories Convalescent hospitals Convents and monasteries (not likely...) Educational conferences Fraternities and sororities Homeless shelters Organization offices and meeting rooms Produce stands Residential care facility for more than 6 Schools Conclusion Staff does not support this proposal for three reasons. First, approval of the rezoning would set a precedent for spot zoning with the primary purpose of increasing a site's devdlopment potential. Secondly, The long narrow configuration of the lot would not easily accomodate development at a density allowed by R-3 zoning. And finally, staff does not agree that rezoning this single lot will provide an effective transition between the high density residential development and the single family housing. Rezoning this site from R-1 to.R-3 is more likely to erode the integrity of the R-1 character along Ferrini Road. If the neighborhood and the Planning Commission feel that low density zoning is no longer appropriate for this area, then a rezoning of the entire R-1 strip should be considered. In staff's opinion, this approach would better protect the continuity of the neighborhood. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Planning Commission may recommend that City Council approve the general plan amendment and rezoning, subject to appropriate findings. 2. The Commission may continue review, with direction to the applicants and staff regarding additional information needed. 3. The Commission may deny the request, citing appropriate findings. Commission GP/R 1548 , Page 3 January, 1992 action is final unless appealed to the Council. RECOABMNDAnON Staff recommends denial of the request, based on the following findings: 1. The site is not physically suited for the density proposed. 2. The request would result in a small island of R-3 zoning. Spot zoning with no clear public benefit is not consistent with the City's General Plan. Attachments: -vicinity maps -applicant's letter -initial study 513 ATTACHMENT E �.�.,••i 1 :.�:� ,)..�:r�J;.�k•3tR• 7':•J a` J .l +••�� :� '`+'.'y .; �d�..'�`J,:.::1•w:- }r.}� �j• . �.�w'J�ft�'� . j%�� j •'• i •.lJJ�'�`�i.�.7�J7. aw��ii''\i �,�J a. }7�.da��:J .f?�7 '-, i• •J,.)� i iat•Jgf ;_i'�7 .y1„}�}•.>, i'ap r.,, l.a.�\ ' r J " .+,rr. N. ��i y jy Jr• >,�1J_'11,.��J.•). 5.y.3�'!,�a:1•� J- N, ����jy•• >J �:, 7 I tJIY �wJ 'JJ '�+1.3v1, •�;),1 ' �3. '.._.i.',�y, yip• ,,3i.zJ ,,? ' .�: a>)ls `�..i•%.a:-'y� ;.�.l,�.dj�.�y y ti�li:�:li-� �: Gila �.. :�>;!i ,,,) . .-) yl�-W• pati. �a ♦/•ac=1 '•:� R'w .W.l:.. ..ice •�': ro' •j..o�.$'. t. �S.i+J:7.3'+ �:;i�j is •�. s,:•JV:-}� - am- ........................... :::::. • Win..;,,.�....s •:�.�.�\ � ti'•J.�. v1 .'v144, r •mm l� � .J 1 J.9 :JJ 1 M'- L d. h i y J a•: -•i• ••R N• —p.. ;ro:. ::•J-' 7 4 r'= - •uu•uw ........................ ••.••••• sseesesse e$' •••••••• ••Oe$•0•e $.J mossomi of nmm .. .................. ............. ......:::::.............. W seeeo r mee .....::::..... ............ •r t n• �. �h. r . `r •1✓•R rI- -r. r• r: r :-�w!�.:.'f' - .}.�.nr `.f.•t'+ is .'.�•�;-^.—. ,� ;,f,; :� :: .1Iy ,.f r ��• rl• !'7^ice r...r't -i.. ' .l_� `X+_�•('] n/`.>^'.MH'(.''` rfw�.. .'r�♦�.ry�••`^w(Ar•.}�/r• rt/�Z.'3n�� �';v.h�fR• ::K::.. . •�^rte:~. .�1' ••�.v"�J•-C `r..l��N''•' a Y':'•Y.?� �q>•f.!'.r�•J� �s� "i,-��.rJtet•� :\ �r'q�*r ^,.�^:r�.Eny 1;'�� n.r:••�:..' crt'�.�:r��n,[�f�.�h.f..�r5.'P/�i.'i�-.T:{�-f}..F :.1i: �► �.:C�I.p,ri'+:'"r[_♦r•Pirt•♦ •.%�M• •r�`{�•I♦'��'-n:i•:fti.!'�i:l�rvri>•�J.:L:�r.��:.•�•��:�••;:,�.•::.�:::�::. IL• .. ....... . R�-clhss,f7 S✓77� lam! R•�C��� �� REVZY-W )h L, 7D R•8 ,KEdIL M - HfOpf~/ oO--AJsrY ,e�srd�ivnh� C2d0 INI) CHARLES CROMER.AJA Pest Offfos Boz 1252G San Luis Obis J.CA 93400 CHARLES CROTSER November 15, 1991 ARCHITECT A.I.A. Planning Commission City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE : 200 Ferrini Drive Commissioners, The proposed change in zoning from R-1 to R-3 is based primarily on the adjacent land uses. This property is bounded on the south and the east by property zoned and developed as Rproperty (high density residential). To the north, the property is zoned-R-1 (low density residential). The request for re-zoning to R-3 is to create a transition from the higher density projects to the more single family character to the north. Due to the existing residential development in this neighborhood, we feel that this change in zoning, is consistant with the intent of the zoning ordinance, and general plan. In terms of this change in use as related specifically to the General Plan and its various elements, the density proposed will continue to meet the specific requirements as evidenced y existingg projects in.the area. Due to the size of this parcel, and the adjacency to existing R-4 zones, development of this parcel upon re- zoning would create negligible impact on city services, and related broad concerns as outlined in the General?Ian. We feel that the proposed use has been previously been demonstrated in this neighborhood, and is compatible with the surrounding uses. Probably more important in terms of the effect of this development will be specific details of site planning, landscape, and architecture. - Sincerely, Charles Crotser, AIA 5-15 city of san tuts osispo �® INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 200 Ferrini Road 48-91 SITE LOCATION APPLICATION NO. ezoning or an 11, 315 square foot lot from R-1 to R-3 to al �fiig�i0er Ic�ensi y resiclential development. Ron Schiner and Charles Cro ser APPLICANT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: IJ NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDf INITIAL STUDY QU19ED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED 1 riey cI vaine, Assistant Planner January 8 , 1991 PREPARED BY DATE COM UNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S A ION: DATE P4 Lw, 14- �,39 U, ul;- E %% e-', SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS I.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING II.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS NONE A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ................. .. .......... ........ . .... .. . ...... ONE B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH .......... ....... ............... . ... . ....NONE* C. LAND USE ................. ..................... . . ................... .. .. ........ ONE D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .................................... .......... ONE EPUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................ F. UTILITIES....................................................................... G. NOISE LEVELS ..... ............................................................. ONE H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS ............. .. ..... ONE I. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY .............................................. K PLANT LIFE ...................................................................... LANIMAL LIFE................................................................... NONE. M. ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL ................................................... ONE N. AESTHETIC . ............................ ......................................... ONE 0. ENERGYIRESOURCE USE .......................................................... NO E P. OTHER .......................................................................... NEdtkyf Ve'ff ,We?bN 'SEE ATTACHED REPORT 5 _/ ER 48-91 Page 2 I . DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The site is an 11, 315 square foot residential lot. It is relatively flat, sloping slightly to the street. The site is now developed with a single house. Significant vegetation includes 2 Siberian Elms and 2 White Poplars. Multifamily dwellings in an R-4 zone border the site to the south and east. Single family dwellings in an R-1 zone surround the site to west and north. The immediate neighborhood also contains an elementary school. The applicants are proposing to rezone the site from R-1 (low-density residential) to R-3 (medium-high-density residential) . They would like to develop the lot with multifamily units. Current zoning and density standards allow only one dwelling on the site. An accessory apartment would also be allowed if zoning standards were met for a second dwelling unit. R-3 zoning would allow 4 . 68 density units. R-3 zoning would also allow a maximum building height of 35 feet and a maximum lot coverage of 60 percent, versus 25 feet and 40 percent now allowed by the site' s R-1 zoning. Also, certain uses which are not allowed in an R-1 zone would be allowed by R-3 zoning. II . POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW �. Land Use Both the current general plan land use map and the map associated with the 1990 land use element draft show the area along Ferrini Street across from the elementary school as zoned for low density residential uses. This area is surrounded on three sides by high-density residential development. While it may be desireable to provide a smoother transition between the two zones, it is not likely a single lot rezoning will achieve this objective. Approving the request could establish an undesireable precedent for spot zoning without clear public benefit. However, since rezonings are subject to review by both the Planning Commission and the City Council , and since approval requires a finding of consistency with general plan policies, no further mitigation is necessary. F. Utilities With the site's current zoning, water use is projected to be roughly . 37 acre feet per year. If the site is rezoned and -the maximum number of allowed dwellings are constructed on the site, water use could rise to 1. 98 acre feet per year (based on the city' s 1990 water use factors) . Because of current drought conditions, the City Council has adopted the Water Allocation Regulations, which are expected to help correct the current imbalance between water supply and demand. These regulations mitigate water impacts of new development since they delay the issuance of building permits until adequate water supplies are available, or until the developer "earns" a water allocation by saving twice as much water as the use is expected to use through retrofitting existing development with water-saving fixtures. No further mitigation is necessary. 7 NEIGHBORS AGAINST REZONING WE THE NEIGHBORS OF 200 FERRINI RD. ARE AGAINST THE PROPOSED REZONING OF 200 FERRINI RD. TO AN R-3 HIGH DENSITY REZONING. ASYOU ARE AWARE, WE ARE NOW A HIGH DENSITY AREA AND ARE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH PARKING ETC. T HIS IS A FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD LIKE IT TO REMAIN AS SUCH. WE ARE TOTALLY SURROUNDED BY APARTMENTS AND CONDOS ALREADY AND ARE GRADUALLY BEING CHOKED OUT. THERE ARE ,JUST A FEW HOMES LEFT ON FERRINI RD. AND WE WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO REMAIN HERE. URf OHM DATE c 3. 6. ULod 7. 8• 9 �5LQ/-z z 9: ' 1 / ZZ-92, ,'a. y7 � -zz c/. 5-/8 14. Q J J .1 ke IcYO 16. 17. k,.n!. - tea -92- 18. 47y\ajim y ,f, L . y . 19 - a 35 F:;Ft ri n� SLD 21. X14� l=o f iy r' 3 24. 29. L Co 5 Ce, / - 3 - 10. 34. Z==:Z a 35. D 36!/�lQ�rui� �9u �c4Cc �L C7 I/3$ 37. a ISkn .4 /Gy 38. C . S F� 40. S c� ,41 �e, -P�e fi 6J-06 �f.L�r� t f1 I 5 ��l 1 e 41. 42. 43. I J• 44 96 45 241 46. 47 �7lF2— 48. ..� 53 9 &AWO 4-7�� l -�a 49 S x, S37 /-A 7 51. 52. 53 54 55 56 5'r 58 59. 60, 61 62 63. 64 65 66 67 s ao RECEIVED FEB 0 41"2 Odile Clause 300 Ferrini Rd CITY OF SM wIs o®isvo San Luis Obispo COMMUNRYMVELOPMExr CA 93405 January 23, 1992 Planning Commission City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 94705 Dear Sir or Madame: I am writing to urge you to deny the rezoning from R-1 to R-3 of the property located at 200 Fenini Rd. I have been living at 300 Ferrini Rd since 1978. At the time, there was a moderate number of apartment buildings on North Chorro, some being located behind my property. I did not mind, because the density was not high. Unfortunately, recently, there has been a great change on North Chorro. Alta Vista school was sold and replaced by condominiums; other condominiums were built right across the street; finally, further down the street, more high density condominiums replaced a couple of old houses. As a result, houses on Ferrini Rd have seen their privacy gradually shrink over the years. When we bought our homes, all the houses around the park/school were zoned R-1. These are the same houses and mostly the same people, and none of us wish to change anything on Ferrini Rd. I find it rather preposterous for an outsider to buy a piece of land on our street, and see nothing wrong in disturbing the peace of the people who have lived there for a long time, just so that he can make a profit. Zoning is supposed to protect us from such schemes, and I hope the Commission will respect it. I wish to add that the presence of a school on Ferrini makes it of the utmost importance to protect the safety of that street More dwellings means more cars, and more cars means more danger. As it is, too many cars are driving through Ferrini, cars coming from Los Osos Valley Rd, and cutting through Fenini in order to reach Cal Poly instead of remaining on Foothill. The city has not done what it should to prevent such a situation and to protect the safety of the school children. Finally, I am not opposed to see two houses sharing a driveway on that property. Something like this was done on lower Ferrini, between Cerro Romauldo and Ferrini, and it has worked very well. But please, no more condominiums! I won't be able to attend the meeting on January 29, but I hope that you will give your attention to this letter. Sincerely reyours, LGA-�-- Odile Clause Baa draf t D — .k P . C. Minutes January 29 . 1992 --------------------- ------------- - Item 3 . General Pla ideration of amending the Land Use Element map and zoning map to change the designations from Low-density Residential ( R-1 ) to Medium-high Density Residential (R-3 ) ; 200 Ferrini Road : Ron Shriner and Charles Crotser , applicant . -------------------------------------------------------------------- Greg Smith presented the staff report and recommended the Commission deny the rezoning based on two findings . Commr . Gurnee questioned that an R-3 zoning in between R-1 and R-4 zoning was spot zoning . Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing . The applicant was not present . Commr . Karleskint said the packet contained a letter from the applicant explaining his views . Anna Barbosa . 234 Ferrini Road , said the area is already a high density neighborhood and apartments and condominiums surround the R-1 area . She explained the lot is narrow and is two lots away from her residence . She said people are currently living in a small unit behind the main residence on the property . She said parking and traffic is already a problem on Ferrini Road . She felt that the applicant should have talked to the neighbors before purchasing the property , and the applicant would have found out that the neighbors objected to a change in density . Al Bonin, 272 Delmar Court , said Foothill Boulevard is becoming a main thoroughfare . He requested that the city consider putting a stop light at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Ferrini Road . He asked that the Commission consider the safety of the children at Teach School and deny the rezoning because it would increase traffic problems . Ben Dalfi (???) . 226 Ferrini Road , asked that the Commission deny the request because he did not want a 2-story house on the lot south of his lot , because there is already a two story condominium next to his lot on the north. Stephanie Blair . 348 Ferrini Road , said she agreed with the other speakers and felt the lot would be nice for a single residence . Roy Hanff , 569 Lawrence Drive , asked that the Commission deny the zoning change because the lot is too small to accommodate required parking for multi-family units . Vic Barbosa , 234 Ferrini Road , said 50 people have signed a petition against the rezoning . He said Stenner Glen currently has many vacancies . He asked that the Commission think about parents dropping off and picking up children at Teach School . 5 -d3 Edna Scurry 290 Ferrini Road , said she was against the rezoning because of the previous build-up in the area. She said she counted over 100 cars on Ferrini Road between 7 : 45 and 8 : 00 a .m . and observes' the same situation in the afternoon. She asked the Commission if a letter was received from her neighbor . Odill Clause ( ??? ) , and was informed the Planning Commission had a copy of the letter . Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing . Commr . Gurnee said he agreed with the neighbors . He said he was surprised that a design solution was not submitted with the rezoning application because the lot fs long and narrow . He said he understood the concerns of the residents in the neighborhood and could not support a zoning change that could possibly allow another fraternity . Commr . Gurnee moved to deny the request for rezoning . Commr . Karleskint seconded the motion. Commr . Gurnee said he did not believe the proposal was spot zoning and eliminated Finding 2 . Commr . Kourakis agreed the elimination of Finding 2 . Commr . Petterson said R-3 is usually an allowable transition from R-1 to R-4 , but is not appropriate here because of the density_ in the neighborhood . Commr . Kourakis noted that it would be possible to allow a granny uni on the site . VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Gurnee , Kourakis , Karleskint , Peterson . and Hoffman . NOES - None . ABSENT - Commrs . Williams and Schmidt . The motion passed. Commr . Kourakis said she was impressed with the neighbors ' concerns about their neighborhood . She asked Arnold Jonas to look into the possibility of a traffic light at the corner of Ferrini Road and Foothill Boulevard and asked that the Community Development Department find out if people are living in a second unit on the site that is not up to code as indicated by Mrs . Barbosa . of a1� tuffs oBispoItSC �! 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 January 31, 1992 Ron Shriner & Charles Crotser PO Box 12528 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Subject: General Plan Amendment & Rezoning GP/R 1548 200 Ferrini Road Gentlemen: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of January 29, 1992, denied your request to amend the Land Use Element map and zoning map to change designations from Low- Density Residential (R-1) to Medium-high Density Residential (R-3) on property at the above address. Denial is based on findings contained in the attached resolution. The decision of the commission is final unless appealed to the City Clerk within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by a decision of the commission. If you have any questions, please contact Whitney Mcllvaine at 781-7175. Si ere 1, Arnold B. Jonas, it ctor Community Development ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 5084-91 x-0% SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5084-92 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chamber of the San Luis Obispo City Hall, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 29, 1992, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application No. GP/R 1548, by Ron Shriner and Charles Crotser, applicants. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT & REZONING REQUESTED: To amend the Land Use Element map and zoning map to change the designations from Low-Density Residential (R-1) to Medium-high Density (R-3). PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: On file in the office of Community Development, City Hall. GENERAL LOCATION: 200 Ferrini Road. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT: Low-Density Residential. EXISTING PRESENT ZONING: R-1. WHEREAS, said commission as a result of its inspections, investigations, and studies made by itself, and in behalf and of testimonies offered at said hearing, has established existence of the following circumstances: 1. The site is not physically suited for the density proposed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application No. GP/R 1548 be denied. The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo upon the motion of Commr. Gurnee, seconded by Commr. Kourakis, and upon the following roll call vote: s-a0 Resolution No. 5084-92 General Plan Amendment & Rezoning GP/R 1548 Page 2 AYES: Commrs. Gurnee, Kourakis, Hoffman, Karleskint, and Peterson NOES: None ABSENT: Commrs. Williams and Schmidt Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary Planning Commission DATED: January 29, 1992 5-a7 II(I�I IIInnII11I I11nnI1I1I I{I{ IInnIIIII {II1 1 IIIIIYYI�I'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II I�I�I IIIIII IIICityOsAn suis oBispo. 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 MEMORANDUM TO: Gilbert Hoffman, Planning Commission Chairman FROM: Whitney McEvaine\,ssistant Planner DATE: February 26, 1992 SUBJECT: Reconsideration of commission's action to deny a rezoning proposal at 200 Ferrini Road: GP/R1548 Situation On January 29, the commission considered a proposal to rezone a residential lot from R- 1 to R-3. The applicant/representative, Charles Crotser, had a previous committment on that evening and requested the item be heard late in the agenda so he could be present. However, the meeting adjourned earlier than anticipated, and the applicant was not able to present his item. The commission's action to deny the rezoning has been appealed to the council In an attached letter, the applicant is requesting the commission reconsider the item. Alternatives If the commission decides to rehear the item, a new hearing would have to be scheduled to allow for compliance with noticing requirements. The item would be rescheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission on May 27th - during the next round of general plan amendment hearings. The appeal, now scheduled for the March 17th council meeting, would be put on hold until after the Planning Commission's May 27th meeting. If the commission decides not to rehear the item, the commission's action to denv the project would stand, and the appeal would be considered at the March 17th council meeting. Attachments: vicinity maps applicant's letter notice of action planning commission resolution Minutes from the January 29th planning commission meeting will be available. at the February 26th meeting. s-ag CHARLES CROTSER February 6, 1992 ARCHITECT A.I.A. RECEIVED Planning Commission FEB 0 11992 City 990 oPalm Street Obispo tr�OBIS�r San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 RE: GP/R 1548, 200 Ferrini Road Planning Commission Members, Last Wednesday,January 29, 1992,the Planning Commission denied.the above request for re-zoning.I have appealed this decision to the City Council(see attached letter),however, I would prefer that you re-consider this item at a future meeting so that I can present our proposal, and perhaps respond to the input that you received last week at the public hearing. When I arrived at the meeting,I was able to speak with Janet Kouralds and two others who attended the meeting.I learned that there was quite a bit of neighborhood opposition,and that there were a number of concerns raised about "spot zoning", high density,and related issues. I realize that the commission made the best decision that they could with the available information, however,under the circumstances,I would have preferred that the Commission take public testimony,then continue a decision until we could respond to specific concerns. Our intentions for the property in question,I believe,may be quite different than the neighbors and Commission may have understood.We met with staff several times to discuss the approach we should take to accomplish our goals,and this re-zoning request,at the time,seemed like the most appropriate path.Hindsight may prove otherwise. If you would kindly consider re-hearing this item,I will certainly be in attendance at the hearing.If you wish,I will also submit schematic plans in advance for your review,and after listening to the tapes of the meeting,I will attempt to meet with the concerned neighbors to work with.them towards a development that would be acceptable to the neighbors,to the City,and to the applicants. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely. Charles Crot:ser,applicant r'osl 0}1.cP So* '7?9C SB' L.d5 O`)e.. L.Uj -'C^6404 �� All city of sAnluis oaspo 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100•San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL In accordance with`the appeals procedure as authorized by Title I, Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code,the undersigned herebyappealsfrom the declsion of the Planning C omm i s s i o n rendered on January 29,1192 which decision consisted of the following (Le. set forth factual sltuadlon and the grounds for submitting this appeal. Use additional sheets as needed): Denial of GP/R 1548 - Re-zoning of 200 Ferrini Road from.R-1 to- R-3. ( See attached letter ) RECEIVED FEB 7 1992 QITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA The undersigned dl.5cussed the.decision being appealed with: Arnold Jonas on Monday February 3 DATE&TIME APPEAL RECEIVED: Appellant Charles Crotser , Applicant/Owner e Same Representative 266 .Craig Way, SLO, CA 93405 AT&M—W 546-8484 Phone l / gl�rn y�Clerk Calendared for. �;'S'/l .2- Copy o.AdmWstr We Offlcer COPY, tha'following department(s): �%nud Co . 5 3� CHARLES CROTSER February 6, 1992 ARCHITECTA A City Council City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 RE: GP/R 1548,200 Ferrini Road Council Members, Last Wednesday,January 29, 1992,the Planning Commission denied the above request for re-zoning. I would like to appeal their decision.The grounds for this request are as follows On the afternoon before the hearing,I happened to be at the Community Development Department,and asked about the status of the staff report and hearing date. I was told by the receptionist that the item had been scheduled for the following evening,and that the staff report should have been mailed out.I immediately contacted the planner assigned to this project,and requested a copy of the staff report which she gladly provided.The day of the hearing,I did receive in the mail,the"Initial Study"prepared by Whitney McIlvaine. For whatever reason,the staff report did not get to me until yesterday (2/5/92),along with the notice of the denial by the Planning Commission. Due to a previous committment the evening of the hearing,I was unable to attend the hearing until around 10:OOpm.Therefore,I typed a letter asking that the item be moved to the end of the agenda and that I would be back in town by 10:15 pm to represent this item.Needless to say,when I arrived at 10 pm,the meeting was over,and this request denied I feel that the item should have at least been continued until I could respond to the apparent concerns of those who spoke against this request. In the meantime,I am also requesting that the Planning Commission consider re-hearing this item at a future meeting.I feel that this would be the most appropriate forum for this request The circumstances surrounding this request are unfortunate,and perhaps I should have anticipated a short Planning Commission meeting,and asked for a continuance in advance.I simply want to have a fair hearing with adequate notice in order to prepare a proper presentation. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Charles Crotser,applicant POSL Oi!il.;". EO'a 2725 Jdn LIaD 0I)1;i!G. I_al.IJr li; Jd,alU Pho ., ,nun, 5-3