Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC-1115-2026 (APPL-0027-2026 -- 920 and 930 Rachel Ct.)RESOLUTION NO. PC-1115-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S DECISION APPROVING MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION ARCH-0529-2024 WITH AN EXCEPTION TO A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD AT 920 & 930 RACHEL COURT (C) WHEREAS, on January 15, 2026 the Community Development Director approved Minor Development Review application ARCH-0529-2024 with an exception to a Hillside Development Standard pertaining to excess retaining wall height and an associated tree removal application (TREE-0520-2024) for the construction of a multifamily residential project at 920 and 930 Rachel Court; Brian Rolph, applicant; and WHEREAS, on January 20, 2026, Mike McCormick filed an appeal of the Community Development Director’s decision to approve the Minor Development Review application with an exception to a Hillside Development Standard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, on March 11, 2026, to consider the appeal of the Community Development Director’s decision to approve the Minor Development Review application with an exception to a Hillside Development Standard; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: Minor Development Review 1. The project is consistent with the General Plan’s Land Use Element (LUE) because it is a multifamily residential development consistent with the requirements of the Medium-Density Residential (R-2) Zone District. The project is also an infill development near to services and facilities like parks, retail, restaurants, and public transportation, as called for in LUE Policy 2.2.7. The project incorporates design choices, such as the front setback pattern, the scale, and form and architectural style that are compatible with the neighborhood character as called for in LUE Policy 2.3.9. 2. The project is consistent with the General Plan’s Housing Element (HE) because the project would result in a higher residential density that contributes to the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA Resolution No. PC-1115-26 APPL-0027-2026 920 & 930 Rachel Ct. Page 2 production targets as called for in HE Policy 6.8, and it provides a design compatible with the existing neighborhood character as called for in HE Policy 7.1. 3. As proposed, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations because multifamily residences are an allowed use in the Medium-Density Residential (R-2) Zone. The project is consistent with the development standards outlined in SLOMC 17.18 (Medium-Density Residential), which includes, but is not limited to, density, lot coverage, setbacks, and height of structures. 4. The project is consistent with the policies of the Community Design Guidelines for multifamily and infill development. The design incorporates massing techniques and color palette choices complementary to the neighborhood’s craftsman architectural style. This includes, but is not limited to, wood panel and shingle siding and second-story front balconies. 5. As conditioned, the project provides adequate consideration of potential adverse effects on surrounding properties such as traffic, vehicular and pedestrian safety, visual, and scale, because the development (a) includes sufficient on-site parking; (b) will not result in parked vehicles that encroach to the public right-of-way or hinder line-of-sight requirements at an intersection; (c) incorporates design choices that are compatible with other developments in the surrounding neighborhood; and (d) incorporates building materials and colors consistent with surrounding residences. 6. As conditioned, the project would not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because it includes the construction of four residential units on a lot that allows for multifamily residential development and shall comply with all applicable Building Code and Fire Code requirements. Retaining Wall Height Exception 1. The proposed retaining wall height exception to facilitate construction of these residential units is consistent with the intent of the City’s Zoning Regulations and General Plan. The creation of these duplexes as proposed here provides infill residential development that is otherwise permitted by the City’s Zoning Regulations. The proposed design is consistent with every other development standard for multifamily residential development. Such development is also called for in HE Policy 6.8, requiring the City to support residential infill development for the purpose of meeting the 6th Cycle RHNA production targets. The proposed development also provides a design consistent with the existing neighborhood character as called for in HE Policy 7.1. 2. Due to the slope of the property, retaining walls are a necessary feature to maintain site integrity and manage drainage across the sloped site. The project has been designed to minimize the instances in which a retaining wall exceeds the allowed height while still providing the necessary support for the proposed structures and maintaining compliance with other grading requirements. Therefore, the proposed alternative provides a design solution that is equivalent to or better than the standards prescribed for quality, effectiveness, durability, and safety. 3. The instances in which retaining wall height exceeds the maximum allowable height are located within, at the rear, and along the side of the proposed development and will not impact any scenic resources. Additionally, as this is an infill development, the requested exception will not hinder opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest, and movement. Resolution No. PC-1115-26 APPL-0027-2026 920 & 930 Rachel Ct. Page 3 4. The proposed exception will not prevent the implementation of City-adopted plans, nor increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans, as the proposed development is consistent with the building pattern of adjacent and surrounding properties. 5. The property’s existing topography, especially areas with significant elevation changes, necessitates the requested exception so that a residential development similar to surrounding properties may be developed on this site. 6. This exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege because adjacent and surrounding properties in this area also feature retaining walls that exceed the maximum allowable height for such structures. 7. This exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the area of the project as the current design minimizes the heights of retaining walls to the furthest extent possible while still properly managing site drainage and site integrity as not to impact adjacent properties. The development itself, including the retaining walls, shall comply with all applicable standards as required of similar residential development. 8. A redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the property. The retaining wall height exception is necessary to allow a development that maintains prevalent design patterns in the surrounding neighborhood while still maintaining site integrity and properly managing site drainage. Requiring a redesign would require a reduction in the number of units that is otherwise allowed in the R-2 zone, therefore, denying reasonable use of the property. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review under Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is consistent with applicable General Plan policies and Zoning Regulations; is located on a site that is less than five (5) acres in size (0.5 acre); is surrounded by other urban uses (existing restaurants, temporary lodging, etc.); and is not a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species since it has been previously disturbed and landscaping cleared. Approval of the project will not result in significant effects related to (a) traffic because the project would not exceed the trip threshold (i.e., less than 110 daily vehicle trips) anticipated for Small Development Projects per the OPR CEQA Guidelines; (b) noise because the project would comply with exterior and interior noise limits outlined in Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control); (c) air quality because construction-related emissions are temporary; and (d) water quality because the project would implement drainage and stormwater improvements. SECTION 3. Action. The Planning Commission does hereby deny the subject appeal filed by Mike McCormick, and upholds the Community Devleopment Director’s decision to approve the Minor Development Review application with an exception to a Hillside Development Standard at 920 and 930 Rachel Court, under Minor Development Review application ARCH-0529-2024, based on the above findings, and subject to the following conditions: Planning Division - Community Development Department 1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in substantial compliance with approved plans. A separate, full-sized sheet shall be included in Resolution No. PC-1115-26 APPL-0027-2026 920 & 930 Rachel Ct. Page 4 the working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions of approval and applicable code requirements as Sheet No. 2. Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where these requirements are addressed in the plans. Any change to the approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director and may be subject to review by the Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. 2. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the color and materials identified in the Development Review application. 3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include recessed window details or equivalent shadow variation, and all other details including but not limited to awnings, cornices, and railings. Plans shall indicate the type of materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds, recesses, and other related window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high-quality materials for all design features that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible with the neighborhood character to the approval of the Community Development Director. 4. Windows proposed throughout the residential development shall comply with Community Design Guideline 5.2(G) where one or more windows proposed ten feet or less from a side lot line, or within 10 feet of another dwelling, shall be located and/or screened to provide privacy for the residents of both structures (e.g., orientation of windows, offsetting windows, translucent or glazed windows, etc.). 5. Plans submitted for the building plan check shall include the locations of all exterior lighting. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly labeled on building elevations and complement the building architecture. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut sheets in the submitted plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be consistent with standards outlined in Municipal Code Section 17.70.100 (Lighting and Night Sky Preservation). 6. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment, and other mechanical equipment, whether located on the ground, roof, or elsewhere on the structure or property, shall be screened from public view with materials that are architecturally compatible with the structures to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Public view includes existing views from all public streets and sidewalks. Gas and electric meters, electric transformers, and large water piping systems (e.g., backflow prevention devices) shall be completely screened from public view with approved architectural features and/or landscaping or located in the interior of the residence or property. Please note this requirement applies to the initial construction of the building and any subsequent improvements. 7. Plans submitted for the building permit shall include the landscape and irrigation plans. The legend for the landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans. Details on the proposed surfaces and finishes of hardscapes shall be included in the landscaping plan. 8. Plans submitted for the building permit shall include elevations and detail drawings of all proposed fences and/or walls. All proposed fences and walls shall be of high-quality materials such as pressure-treated wood fences, split-face block walls, etc. Fences facing the public right-of-way shall be constructed with the finished side of the fence facing the public right-of- Resolution No. PC-1115-26 APPL-0027-2026 920 & 930 Rachel Ct. Page 5 way. For the life of the fence, the owner shall conduct all necessary repairs and maintenance to ensure the fence and associated landscaping, located between the fence and property line, remain in a high-quality and orderly condition to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. All proposed fences, walls, and hedges shall comply with standards outlined in Municipal Code Section 17.70.070 (Fences, Walls, and Hedges). Housing Policies and Programs – Community Development Department 9. Per Section 17.138.070 of the City’s Municipal Code, this project is subject to the City’s inclusionary housing requirements. The building permit submittal shall provide an inclusionary housing plan that describes how the project intends to meet the inclusionary housing requirement for this project. If the project is to use the in-lieu fee option, provide calculations on the plans to identify the estimated in-lieu fees. If affordable units are to be provided within the project, identify the specific limits intended to be dedicated and the specific income levels of each unit (e.g., low-income, moderate-income, etc.). Urban Forestry – Community Development Department 10. Trees requested for removal (TREE-0520-2024) include one (1) tree onsite (33-inch DSH Pinus pinea (Italian Stone Pine)) as shown on the Development Review application. The project shall replant, at a minimum, five (5) trees onsite, with three (3) being along the frontage of Rachel Court. These street trees shall be large-canopied trees and sufficient space shall be allocated to accommodate their rootzones to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. All tree species, size, and location adjustments at any time are subject to City Arborist approval. All proposed tree plantings shall be shown on the landscape plan. 11. The new compensatory tree(s) shall be planted per the City’s Engineering Standards for Tree Planting before the final building approval has been completed. Provide photographic evidence to the City Arborist (wgault@slocity.org) that trees have been planted. All trees planted as part of a compensatory plan shall survive and be retained. Any trees that do not survive or establish in good health, to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, shall be replanted. 12. California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1972 prevents the removal of trees with active nests. To account for most nesting birds, removal of trees should be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1st and January 31st) and after the young have fledged. If removing trees during the nesting season (February 1st to August 31st), a qualified biologist shall inspect any trees marked for removal that contain nests to determine if the nests are active. If there are active nests, trees shall not be removed and may only be removed once a qualified biologist provides a confirmation memo that breeding/nesting is completed, and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the tree to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or City Biologist. 13. Trees not approved for removal shall be protected in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code and Engineering Standards and Specifications. Engineering Division 14. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a soils and geotechnical report for all proposed structures and drainage facilities and a final review letter from the soils engineer. This letter must state that the building plans have been reviewed and have been found to be in general conformance with recommendations in the report for evaluation of over-excavation and re-compaction depths and verify that structures on adjacent parcels will not be impacted by the over-excavation needed for site retaining walls and building foundations. Any soils Resolution No. PC-1115-26 APPL-0027-2026 920 & 930 Rachel Ct. Page 6 engineer special inspection notes and the special inspection program shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Building Official. 15. Prior to building permit issuance, provide a full, Detailed Erosion Control Plan as part of the Building Permit application, per Drainage Design Manual section 10.1.1 Se 3.7, for project areas on slopes greater than or equal to 10%. See Section 10.4 for Detailed Erosion Control Plan Requirements. 16. Prior to request for final inspection, applicant shall install new, preserve existing, or re- establish destroyed survey monuments in accordance with City of San Luis Obispo Engineering Standard 1010, Section 9.1. Applicant shall construct all new and replacement monuments per Engineering Standard 9020. 17. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit supporting documentation which demonstrates compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, Drainage Design Manual (DDM), and the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations (PCR’s). Supporting documentation shall at least include: a. A project drainage report b. A completed Stormwater Control Plan – form available on the City’s website (update to show PR2) c. A Stormwater Control Plan (update to show PR2) d. An Operations and Maintenance Manual for all proposed stormwater improvements proposed to comply with Performance Requirements 2. Utilities Department 18. Building permit submittal shall include a site utility plan showing the size of existing and proposed sewer and water services. The plan shall clearly identify any existing utility service infrastructure proposed for demolition, abandonment, or replacement. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards effective at the time the building permit is obtained. Engineer’s calculations shall be provided with the submittal of the building permit to conform water meter size, water service line size, and sewer lateral size. 19. The building permit shall include a final landscape design plan and irrigation plan and shall identify the square footage of landscaping proposed as part of the project. If greater than 500 square feet, applicant shall provide a Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) calculation. The project’s estimated total water use (ETWU) to support new ornamental landscaping shall not exceed the project’s maximum applied water allowance (MAWA). 20. The project is located within a capacity constrained area and shall meet the wastewater flow offset requirements per Chapter 13.08.396 of the City’s Municipal Code prior to building permit issuance, to the satisfaction of the Public Works & Utilities Director. The Wastewater Offset Flow Application and a PDF version of the project plans shall be submitted to the Utilities Engineer at wastewateroffset@slocity.org. Indemnification 21. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers, Resolution No. PC-1115-26 APPL-0027-2026 920 & 930 Rachel Ct. Page 7 or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. On motion by Vice Chair Tolle, seconded by Commissioner Jorgensen, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioner Cooley, Commissioner Munoz-Morris, Commissioner Jorgensen, Commissioner Kahn, Vice Chair Tolle, Chair Houghton NOES: None REFRAIN: Commissioner Flores ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 11th day of March 2026. __________________________ Tyler Corey, Secretary Planning Commission