The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/16/1994, 4 - MS 78-94 (SLO COUNTY NO. 94-058): MINOR SUBDIVISION TO DIVIDE ONE 13,500-SQUARE FOOT PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS, WITH EXCEPTIONS TO LOT WIDTH AND DEPTH-TO-WIDTH RATIO REQUIREMENTS, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAN CARLOS DRIVE, BETWEEN BUSHNELL STREE Pea ��m�► I�IIIII��p�N��1 City Of San LUIS OBISPO ffij;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community D Welopment Director �Jo BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Planne SUBJECT: MS 78-94 (SLO County no. 94-058): Minor subdivision to divide one 13,500-square foot parcel into two parcels, with exceptions to lot width and depth-to-width ratio requirements, on the south side of San Carlos Drive, between Bushnell Street (unimproved portion) and Florence Drive. CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution adopting the negative declaration of environmental impact and approving the subdivision, with the exceptions requested. DISCUSSION Situation The applicant wants to divide a large lot into two lots, each 45' wide and 150' deep. The subdivision regulations require lots in the R-1 zone to be 50' wide, and to have a depth-to-width ratio not exceeding three. The applicant is requesting exceptions to these two requirements. Exceptions to subdivision standards are acted upon by the City Council. Data summary Address: 1023 San Carlos Drive Applicant/Property owner: Kenneth Bruce Zoning: Low-Density Residential, Special Considerations (R-1-S) '- General plan: Low-Density Residential Environmental status: Negative declaration, with mitigation, published on July 26, 1994 Project action deadline: October 20, 1994 Site description The site is a vacant rectangular lot, consisting of portions of three former lots, of irregular topography, sloping generally between 8 and 9% towards the railroad tracks. It lies near the westerly end of San Carlos Drive. The site is on the westerly edge of a low-density residential neighborhood, most of which was developed in the 1950's and 1960's. Homes near the site, however, are typically newer and larger. Proiect description The request is to divide the site down the middle into two parcels, each rectangular, fronting on San Carlos, and 6,750-square feet in area. City of San lues OBISpo di;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MS 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 2 EVALUATION 1. The exceptions requested. The applicant wants .exceptions to the subdivision regulations. The subdivision regulations require lots in the R-1 zone to be 50' wide, and the depth-to-width ratio to be no more than three. Each parcel is proposed to be 45' wide and to have a depth-to-width ratio of 3.33. 2. To grant an exception. The Council must make all of the following findings to grant any exceptions to subdivision standards: a. The property to be divided is of such size or shape, or is affected by such topographic conditions, that is impossible, impractical or undesirable, in the particular case, to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in this title. Comment. The properly could be divided into a deep-lot ("}lag lot")subdivision. There would be no width exception, but an area exception would be required (the access leg is not counted in the lot area). The subdivision regulations say that ",flag lots may be approved for subdividing deep lots where development would not be feasible with the installation of a standard street, either alone or in conjunction with neighboring properties, or where justified by topographical conditions. " It does not appear that a deep lot subdivision is justified or desirable in this case. The proposed division would create lots similar in shape and size to existing lots in this older neighborhood. The new lots would continue the existing lot pattern, while a deep- lot subdivision would not. Alternatively, the lot could remain as one large lot, suitable for the building of one or (with approval of an administrative use permit) two dwellings. This is an acceptable alternative, and one that is available to the applicant without Council approval. In this case, if any subdivision is to be allowed, it would be impossible to conform to the strict application of the regulations, because no subdivision of the property can be made that meets all standards. YM subdivision is to be allowed, the site will remain all one lot, which may be developed according to zoning standards. Such development could be either the construction of one large house or of two residences, either attached or detached. Development of the site as one large lot may result in a change to the character of the neighborhood. In this case, it may be considered undesirable to conform to the strict application of the regulations. b. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole reason for granting the modification. "��i �Hlllll�p All city of San WIS OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MS 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 3 Comment. Creating a deep-lot subdivision or developing the site as one lot would still likely be profitable to the applicant. The proposed subdivision appears the most logical way to make use of the site, and is consistent with surrounding properties. C. The modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity. Comment. With the proposed design, two developable lots,fronting on a standard street, . will be created. The lot widths are not significantly narrower than those in the surrounding neighborhood. . The depth-to-width ratio is slightly greater than the maximum, and has no potential for adverse impacts. d. Granting the modification is in accord with the intent and purposes of these regulations, and is consistent with the general plan and all applicable specific plans or other plans of the city. Comment. The exceptions will allow lots to be created that are consistent with the existing neighborhood pattern. Maintenance of neighborhood character is consistent with the general plan. In addition, the subdivision regulations say that"lots with a ratio of depth to width greater than three shall not be permitted unless there is adequate assurance that deep lot subdivision will not occur or that deep lot subdivision and subsequent development will be accomplished without detriment to adjacent properties." Comment. Each of the lots would be 6,750 square feet in area and 45' wide. The dimensions would not allow forfuture subdivision at all, muchh less a deep-lot subdivision. All required findings for the requested exceptions can be made. 3. Subdivision findings. To approve a subdivision, the Council must find that it is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. The Subdivision Map Act (Section 66474) also includes findings for denial of a subdivision, which, reversed, may be used as findings for approval. Findings for denial are: a. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (The proposed map in this case is consistent with the general plan, because it is a subdivision consistent with allowed density and zoning.) b. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. llll city of san tins OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MS 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 4 (The design is consistent with the general plan, because it is consistent with allowed density and zoning.) c. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. (7he site has no unusual characteristics and can support the proposed type of development.) d. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. (Phe site is less than 9% slope, has no significant environmental features, and can easily support two dwellings.) e. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (The site is not environmentally sensitive.) f. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. (There are no unusual characteristics of this site that would result in serious health problems if developed.) g. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. (According to the title report, no easements exist on the property.) The reverse of each of these findings can be made in this case. 4. Noise. The site is zoned R-1-S ("Special Considerations") because of the noise from the nearby railroad. Impacts on this'property from that noise are expected to be minimal now and into the future (see initial study), but outdoor areas should be protected by sound walls or other means. The one required mitigation measure notes this requirement. Incidentally, subdivision of the property substitutes for the use permit requirement for S-zone development. ALTERNATIVES The Council may approve the request with modifications to the suggested findings or conditions. The Council may deny the request, if it finds that it is inconsistent with any City goals or policies. '/ '��►►�►►uuniii�l1pn�d��N city of San WIS OBISpo oft Nil COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MS 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 5 The Council may continue action, with direction to staff and the applicant. Attached: In cket: Subdivision map Resolutions , Vicinity map Site plan Environmental initial study Letter from representative Neighborhood petition submitted by applicant RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series) ' A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO GRANTING APPROVAL OF MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 78-94 (COUNTY FILE 94-058) , DIVIDING ONE LOT INTO TWO WITH EXCEPTIONS TO LOT WIDTH AND DEPT-TO-WIDTH RATIOS, AT 1023 SAN CARLOS ,DRIVE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of the tentative map. of MS 78-94 and staff recommendations, and reports thereof,, makes the following findings: 1. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements are consistent with the general plan. 2 . The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the R-1 zone. 3 . The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious health problems, substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will not conflict with easements for access through, or use of property within, the proposed subdivision, because there are no recorded easements. 5. An initial study of environmental impacts was prepared by the Community Development Department on July 22, 1994, that describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Community Development Director has reviewed the environmental initial study and granted a Negative Declaration of environmental impact, with mitigation. The initial study concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, subject to the mitigationmeasures being incorporated into the project, and the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration and finds that it reflects the independent judgement of the City Council. Resolution no. (1994 Series) MS 78-94: 1023 San Carlos Page 2 6. The property to be divided is of such shape, that it is impossible or undesirable, in the particular case, to conform to the strict application of the subdivision and zoning regulations because 1) no subdivision of the site is possible without some exception•; and 2) development of the site as one lot may interrupt the historical pattern of lot design in this neighborhood. 7. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the subdivision and zoning regulations is not the sole reason for granting exceptions to lot width and depth-to- width standards. 8. The lot width and depth-to width exceptions will not be detrimental to the public health, safety; and welfare, or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity. 9. Granting exceptions to lot width and depth-to-width standards is in accord with the intent and purposes of the subdivision regulations, and is consistent with the general plan and all other plans of the city, because it allows continuation of a neighborhood development pattern. 10. The dimensions and size of the lots will assure that no deep-lot subdivisions may be made on these lots in the future. SECTION 2. Conditions. The approval of the tentative map for MS 78-94 is subject to the following conditions: 1. The subdivider shall submit a final map to the City for review, approval and recordation. The map shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of, a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor. The final map shall be prepared in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and Subdivision Regulations. 2 . All boundary monuments, lot corners and centerline intersections, BC's, EC's, etc. , shall be tied to the City's control network. At least two control points shall be used and a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final parcel map. A 5-1/4" diameter computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data for use in autocad for Geographic Information system (GIS) purposes, is also required to be submitted to the City Engineer. Any exception to this requirement must be approved by the City Engineer. Resolution no. (1994 Series) MS 78-94: 1023 San Carlos Page 3 3 . The subdivider shall provide individual electrical, cable television, and natural gas services and metering for each lot to the approval of affected public utility agencies and the City Engineer. 4. The subdivider shall extend the existing 8" public water main in San Carlos Drive across the entire property frontage, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Utilities Engineer. The subdivider may request reimbursement for off-site connections to the water main extension, in accordance with City regulations. 5. The subdivider shall provide individual water services and sewer connections for each lot, to the approval of the City Engineer and Utilities Engineer. 6. The subdivider shall construct street frontage improvements across the entire property frontage, per City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer (61-wide integral curb, gutter, and sidewalk) . 7. The subdivider shall remove the existing street barricade and pave the full width of the street across the property frontage, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Structural design shall use a T. I. = 5.5 and shall comply with City standards. That portion of unpaved street between this property and Florence Avenue shall be. graded and based to accommodate drainage, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer (a berm may be required to contain the water within the right-of-way limits) . An alternative pavement design may be approved by the City Engineer, to provide for continuity with existing paving on this street. The developer may be eligible for reimbursement for a portion of the expense, in accordance with Municipal Code section 16.44.091. 8. The subdivider shall construct a street barricade at the westerly end of the new street improvements, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 9. Lots shall be graded to direct drainage towards the street, to the approval of the City Engineer and Chief Building Official. 10. Street trees shall. be planted with 'the development of each lot, to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 11. An addressing plan shall be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director. 7 O Resolution no. (1994 Series) MS 78-94: 1023 San Carlos Page 4 Mitigation measure: 12. Plans for development of the lots shall include sound mitigation techniques, to the satisfaction of the -Community Development Director, including strategic locations of windows and combinations of sound walls and building walls, to limit noise exposure in outdoor use areas to 60 dB at projected city buildout. An acoustical analysis of proposed development may be required. 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 1994. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: t orn RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 78-94 (SLO 94-058) AT 1023 SAN CARLOS DRIVE (MS 78-94) BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public testimony, the subdivision request MS 78-94 (also known as SLO 94-058) , staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following finding: 1. The design of the tentative map and the proposed improvements are not consistent with the general plan. SECTION 2. The tentative map for Minor Subdivision 78-94 is hereby denied. 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 1994. l� .Resolution no. (1994 Series) . MS 78-9.4 Page 2 Mayor- ATTEST: City Clerk . APPROVED• - is R2-S N ' P® ' ^ - --�IS140P --STR1=Er W- FT-G—C/' II d •'I r• i •[Y[• ! AI :� ;:w O ' 7 I na J-'! il cm i ii mv L-- —1==s - - _ - SAM CARLOS DRIVE tall .Cz3 "S 1015 /ass ./071* ;095 .r:'~ :: R RSI r .. R�$�7.,•0 =C _ V 1 . - ..c11•a1 i :i C/O S— 5 T+ ' •1 LT�tib i '. GatvriC SCALE: •1 e s + ^:4 `•.• 'O, "4 'y ":,, 0 so 100 200 000 \O\ \ � �� TLp •�`• � +„�!d• '\•L„e yam,.,d ;,;I,,, /, �I��/ y�,��4/ � 1111///'•, , ',, I VICINITY MAP MS 78-94 NORTH 5Lo 94 ova 1023 SAN CARLOS .ST. m Z 2 p N H z 0 = to CV E S ; • ~ LL > - a U. 0 O � e U.0 ! s C ~ 00 � mOz S H Q m — z 0 �j Z 7n Oa f < m m ¢ Z ~ Q aNaa aW n r r o — Zy 00 1 0 <c o ¢ a J N S f = m Q 0 a i 0 _ • w_ a r� p 6 d ' � Q � O • f n . Q Q 4 O< e a . J J Iw Ad i 4 ` O O I F r s a 0 6 6 RLORtMOQ AV6NY6 oo • f ° W z i W, w t 'a\�w�-I I a i a 1 T. A ■ u ' • V 2 It E t ° O VBMN6L L OTR 6HT � � < city of San lues OBISpo � Am INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SITE LOCATION 1023 San Carlos Drive APPLICATIC24N 94 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Division Of one 13, 500-square foot 1 of into two., with exceptions to the lot width and width-to-depth ratio reguirerlents- APPLICANT Kenneth Bruce STAFF RECOMMENDATION: X NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED PREPARED BY DATE COMUNITY DEVELOPM{{ NT DIRECTORS CTl : ; DATE f ?z llbNlmo 1\ t l SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS L DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING II.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ................................................... YES* B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH.................................. ......... NONE* C. LAND USE ........................................................................ NONE D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .............................................. NONE* E PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................ NONE F. UTILITIES........................................................................ NONE* G. NOISE LEVELS ................................................................... V FC* H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... NnNR 1. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... MINE J. SURFACE WATER FLO'dJ AND QUALITY ............................ ......... ..... .... �JL11iTE K PLANT LIFE....................................... ............................... I4C1ItLE LANIMAL LIFE........ ............................. ................................ binur M. ARCHAEOLOGICAL!HISTORICAL .................................................... IlTnmE N. AESTHETIC ...................................................................... NnNv O. ENERGYIRESOURCE USE .. ..................... ...................................—NONE* P. OTHER .......................................................................... AoNr, 111.STAFF RECOMMENDATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION SEE ATTACHED REPORT sees ER 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Division of one lot into two, with exceptions to the lot width - and width-to-depth ratio requirements PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project is the division of one 90' X 150' undeveloped residential parcel into two parcels, each 45' X 1501 . The site is rectangular, flat, and contains no significant vegetation. The site is one lot removed from the railroad right-of-way, near the end of a partially-paved street. The site is within a low-density neighborhood, most of which was developed in the 19501's with modest homes. Lot widths in the vicinity range from 47 ' to 701 , with the majority being between 47' and 50' wide. POTENTIAL IMPACTS Community Plans and goals Subdivision regulations The City's subdivision regulations specify that lots in the Low- Density-Residential zones are to be a minimum of 50' wide and 90' deep, and a minimum of 6, 000 square feet in area. The regulations also say, "Lots with a ratio of depth to width greater than three shall not be permitted unless there is adequate assurance that deep lot subdivision will not occur or that deep lot subdivision and subsequent development will be accomplished without detriment to adjacent properties. " The proposed lots would each be 45' wide and 150' deep. Therefore, they would be 5' narrower than the minimum width, and would have a ratio of depth to width that is greater than three. The subdivider has requested exceptions to the regulations to permit this configuration. The subdivision regulations allow exceptions to lot configurations, if approved by the City Council. Analysis: The lot width exception would result in parcels that are 45' wide in a neighborhood where 47' and 50' are common lot widths. The proposed lot width appears consistent with the prevailing neighborhood character. The primary concern with lots that are narrower than the minimum standard is the potential for large homes to be constructed that would overwhelm the lots and change the character of the street. However, the City's yard standards require greater setbacks for higher walls, and limit coverage to no more than 40% of the lot. These provisions should result in homes that are proportionally the same as others in the city. Also, the trend is to build larger homes on lots of all sizes in the city at this ER 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 2 time. The width of the lots is not likely to either restrain or encourage this tendency. The depth-to-width exception would allow lots that are slightly more than three times as long as they are wide. Because of the width and area of the lots, there is no possibility that deep-lot subdivisions could be created from either new lot in the future. The City Council acts on subdivision exceptions, as part of its action on the subdivision itself. To approve an exception, the City Council must make all of the following findings: 1. The property to be divided is of such size or shape, or is affected by such topographic conditions, that it is impossible, impractical, or undesirable, in the particular case, to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in this title. 2 . The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole reason for granting the modification. 3 . The modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity. 4. Granting the modification is in accord with- the intent and purposes of these regulations, and is consistent with the general plan and with all applicable specific plans or other plans of the city. It appears that these findings can be made in this case. If they cannot, then the subdivision must not be approved. Conclusion: Less than significant. If the . City Council determines that the City's current development standards are not sufficient to protect the neighborhood character in this case, it may choose to place conditions on the map, limiting the size, coverage, or height of new homes. General Plan noise element Zoning regulations Adopted and draft elements: The adopted noise element sets standards for noise levels in residential zones. This element finds outdoor noise exposure of up to 60 dB L., (day-night weighted average) to be "normally acceptable" . The draft element says that residential uses on land that. is exposed to noise levels over 60 dB Ld. "should be permitted only after careful study and inclusion of ER 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 3 protective neasures as needed to satisfy policies of the Noise Element" . Policies of both the adopted and draft elements call for maintaining outdoor use areas that are exposed to noise levels no - higher than 60 dB, and call for interior noise exposure to be nd higher than 45 dB. The zoning regulations performance standards echo these policies. Current construction codes require that interior noise exposure be limited to 45 dB. Therefore, except when windows facing the noice source (railroad tracks) are open, normal building code compliance will result in compliance with noise element policies for interior spaces. Current noise contour maps (1990 noise levels) show the 60 dB noise contour line cutting across the southerly corner of the site, with the remainder of the site experiencing noise levels less than 60 dB. "Build-out" contours show the entire property experiencing levels between 60 and 65 dB. Therefore, if the property is developed with no protective measures, outdoor use areas may be exposed to noise levels in excess of 60 dB in the future. Conclusion: Significant. Recommended mitigation: * Plans for development of the lots shall include sound mitigation techniques, including strategic locations of windows and combinations of sound walls and building walls, to limit noise exposure in outdoor use areas to 60 dB at projected city buildout. An acoustical analysis of proposed development may be required. Population distribution and growth The subdivision would result in two residential lots, on which two residences may be constructed. The existing lot is sufficient in size to hold two homes, although an administrative use permit is required to allow more than one on an R-1 lot. Therefore, the lot division would result, at most, in the potential for construction of one more home than is currently possible in an area committed to residential development. Conclusion: Not significant. Transportation and circulation The site is near the end of a dedicated roadway that has been only partially improved. Access to the parcels is restricted by a barricade that stretches across the roadway in front. of parcel B. A sidewalk extends only to the end of the corner lot, one lot from the site. Therefore, physical access to the parcels is not currently available. However, City regulations require that ER 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 4 adequate access be provided to all parcels. In this case, paving . and frontage -improvements will be required. This requirement will mitigate any impacts. Conclusion: Not significant. ' Utilities The lot is not currently served by any utilities. An 8" water line is capped one lot to the east of the site. A sewer line runs the full length of San Carlos Drive. The subdivision regulations require extension of all utilities to new lots. This requirement must be met prior to final acceptance of the lots. Conclusion: Not significant.. City regulations will assure that services are provided to both lots. .Noise levels See discussion under "Community plans and goals" , above. Energy or resource use Water: Development of the lots will generate additional water use. The City's Water Allocation Regulations allow water to be allocated to .new development only when such water allocation does not affect the city's supply. This can happen only if the new use replaces a similar use of a similar size, or if water is provided by some other means to replace that used. One method, allowed .by the regulations, to obtain additional water is to retrofit existing plumbing fixtures. The City allows a developer to replace fixtures to save approximately twice as much water as the new development is expected to use. With these regulations in force, water allocated to new development will not have a detrimental effect on the available supply. In any case, additional development is possible with or without the land division. Conclusion: Not significant. ER 18-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Page 5 RECOMMENDATION Grant a negative- declaration of environmental impact, with the following Mitiaation measure: 1. Plans for development of the lots shall include sound mitigation techniques, including strategic locations of windows and combinations of sound walls and building walls, to limit noise exposure in outdoor use areas to 60 dB at projected city buildout. An acoustical analysis of proposed development may be required. ER 78-94 1023 San Carlos Drive Division of one lot into two, with exceptions to the lot width and width-to-depth ratio requirements In conformance with AB 3180, the following mitigation measures will be monitored as indicated below. Please sign the original and return to my office as soon as possible. Mitigation measure: 1. Plans for development of the lots shall include sound mitigation techniques, including strategic locations of windows and combinations of sound walls and building walls, to limit noise exposure in outdoor use areas to 60 dB at projected city build out. An acoustical analysis of proposed development may be required. Arnold Jonas Community Deve pment Director Ken Bruce Applicant �X20 TMSTOPOGRAPHIC MAP BERVICB (805) 5444" 440 Country Club Drive, Baa Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Steve a Franks RCE 30412 Subdivider Statement (MS 94-058; 1023 San Carlos Drive) The subdivider, Ken Bruce, wants to take a 90 foot wide by 150 foot deep, 13,257 square foot, undeveloped parcel and divide it into two parcels of 6,628.5 square feet each. The site is shown on the City's General Plan as single-family residential and is zoned R-1-S (Residential - Single-family with special considerations). The special considerations zoning is for the purpose of mitigating noise from the nearby railroad when development of the parcel occurs. The site is generally flat and has no significant vegetation_ The Subdivision Regulations require a minimum parcel area of 6,000 square feet; a minimum parcel width of 60 feet; and a minimum parcel depth of 90 feet for R-1 zoned sites. The subdivider is requesting an exception to the parcel width requirement to allow two parcels 45 feet wide. All other minimum parcel requirements are exceeded. It is felt that granting an exception to parcel width is acceptable because it would be similar to most other parcels in the vicinity and in this neighborhood which are 47 feet wide. It should be noted that the existing parcel is large enough to allow for two houses to be built and it is large enough and configured such that a flag lot subdivision could be done with no exception needed. The subdivider wants to subdivide the parcel as requested because it would fit better into the neighborhood than a flag lot. The ultimate short-range goal is to build an affordable house on each parcel. All required findings to grant the exception to parcel width can be made. The parcel fronts on an unimproved section of San Carlos Drive. The subdivider intends to install curb, gutter, sidewalk, and half street paving and extend water and sewer lines within the street right-of-way. It is recognized that these improvements are .required, but the subdivider requests all these improvements be deferred until the time of development of the parcels, which is guessed to be about two to three years from tentative map approval. We, as property owners in the neighborhood of the property at 1023 San Carlos Drive that is subject. to' Minor Subdivision (MS 78-94) SL 94-058, have reviewed the proposed lot split with owner Ken Bruce and support the approval of his tentative map. 004-764-010 Jesse & Bkanche Gomez , 1060 San Carlos Drive C� S 004-851-011 Jim Neville wh 1045 San Carlos Drive 004-762-017 Anthony & Angelina. Madruga 2386 Bushnell Street Q- 004-76z-ox3 Ruben & Roberta Vasquez 2383 Florence Avenue 0o46-762-020 Robert & Lori Lavine 2371 Florence Avenue 004 762-021 Richard D. Hawkins. 2365 Florence Avenue 004-852-004 Linda McDonald 1101. San Carlos Drive 0o4-852-019 Daniel D. Piet 1075 San Carlos Drive C( � 004-852-014 Linda & Spencer Meyer 2435 Leona Drive 4 I AGENDA ,...;c7i4�� ITEM # DATE Judy B. Alter 2425 Leona Ave. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6" U CDD DIR ❑ FIN DIR FLERO ❑ FIRE CHIEF NEY13PW DIR KIORIG 13POLICE CHF ❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR ❑ C F ❑ UTIL DER j° ❑ PERS DIR � ECEIV F. RECEIVED AUG 1 51994 AUG 1y94 cm OF SAN LUIS OBIS~ _•..n iertv nc+.r CITY COUNCIL SAN LUIS OBISP04 CA PETITION Fllblq4 � We, the undersigned, live near the proposed subdivision at 1023 San Carlos Drive (MS 78-94) and strongly oppose this project which would allow for the lot to be divided into two sub -sized lots. The proposed subdivision would increase the housing density of the area and tax the limited resources of the city. The only person who would benefit from this project would be the current owner of the property who would gain a considerable profit by either building two houses instead of one or selling off one or both of the proposed subdivided lots. NAME NI►clnwe( Wo14M4tv► A F�J botp SIGNATURE . I SCS �SShT Eft USX . lsi.. ADDRESS 1046 Sgn Carlos Ok. Z35r, ire maY\ es+fae. L i k z),q :5 Ef LE Y 4wilfl/ /J L )0 4-0 `SAv CARLos 2- YO ILov,+ . MVV►'�