HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/15/1995, 4 - GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT HILLSIDE PLANNING MAP AMENDMENT, TO MOVE THE DEVELOPMENT LIMIT LINE TO THE BASE OF THE SOUTH STREET HILLS, ON A PARCEL AT BRIDGE STREET (GP 57-95). II`NIIINII�IIIII�OI "II� MEETING DATE:
II II Ilf�ulllullul CiVJ of san lues oBispo e-�5 - C15
WW' COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 'TEm NUMBER: �(
FROM: Arnold B. Jonas, Community Development Directo,, h r
BY: Glen Matteson Associate Planner
SUBJECT: General Plan Land Use Element hillside planning map amendment, to move the
development limit line to the base of the South Street Hills, on a parcel at Bridge
Street (GP 57-95).
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution to approve a negative declaration of
environmental impact and to adopt the amendment.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approve the amendment.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission initiated this amendment at staff's request, so the development limit
line location would be consistent in this vicinity. The amendment would not allow additional
development, but would allow a replacement dwelling at the base of the hill if the existing
houses were destroyed. The attached Planning Commission Staff Report provides background
and analysis.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION/PREVIOUS REVIEW
Following a public hearing on June 28, the Planning Commission voted six to none (one absent)
to recommend approval. There was no public testimony.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may:
Deny the amendment.
Approve a different location for the development limit line, though it should be consistent
with the General Plan text policies concerning hillside protection; a substantially different
location would require additional environmental review and public notice before further
Council action.
Continue action.
ATTACHMENTS
Draft resolution approving amendment
Draft resolution denying amendment
Planning Commission Staff Report
Initial environmental study
Planning Commission minutes 6/28/95 BRDceDLL.cAR
7'
RESOLUTION NO. (1995 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT HILLSIDE PLANNING
DEVELOPMENT LIMIT LINE LOCATION AT THE BASE OF THE
SOUTH STREET HILLS NEAR BRIDGE STREET (GP 57-95)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings
on this amendment in accordance with the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the amendment comes to the Council upon the favorable recommendation
of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the change have been evaluated in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental
Guidelines.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council has considered the initial study
of environmental impact (ER 57-95), finds that there will be no significant impacts, and
approves a negative declaration.
SECTION 2. Findings. This Council, after considering the amendments and staff's analysis,
the Planning Commission's recommendation, and public testimony, finds that the amended
development limit line location is consistent with General Plan hillside planning text policies .
SECTION 3. Adoption.
A. The Land Use Element is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A.
B. The Community Development Director shall cause the change to be reflected in
documents which are on display in City Hall and which are available for public
use.
y�
City Council Resolution No. (1995 Series)
GP 57-95
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 1995.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
////wW
y o y
y3
EXHIBIT A
BRIDGE STREET DEVELOPMENT LIMIT LINE AMENDMENT GP57-95
HILLSIDE PLANNING MAP (PART)
ki
m q
1
0
it
COQ
NO
1
� I 11 \�` s• ��i 4U
i
jzS..
O 6VLLCT>�U <(�td't' Al.f✓ SHowN�
27rp� �L�VATlv1�1 Gvl�rTdvR �ltoT 6.Lt. S}-IoW�.1� Q
-•-•- PRvPER'S'`f LINE CNc^�- ,Cid ,s�1owN�
t�np EXJ5T11.tG �6tiELoQj,.�1x1+L�' LI1r1IT LtN>s.' IJORT41 .
00000 . PRcPas�p �pT^vELo{�ME:tJr LIM17 W1-tEFT=Jv_
RESOLUTION NO. (1995 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
HILLSIDE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT LIMIT LINE LOCATION AT THE BASE
OF THE SOUTH STREET HILLS NEAR BRIDGE STREET (GP 57-95)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings
on this amendment in accordance with the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the amendment comes to the Council upon the favorable recommendation
of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the change have been evaluated in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental
Guidelines.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council has considered the initial study
of environmental impact (ER 57-95), finds that there will be no significant impacts, and
approves a negative declaration.
SECTION 2. Findings. This Council, after considering the amendments and staff's analysis,
the Planning Commission's recommendation, and public testimony, finds that the amended
development limit line location is not consistent with General Plan policies concerning [provide
reference].
SECTION 3. Action. The proposed Land Use Element amendment 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 1995.
Mayor
City Council Resolution No. (1995 Series)
GP 57-95
Page 2
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
�2 ,n arvt,
it or y
CITY OF SAN LUIS OMM
PLANNING COMNIISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM s 3
BY: Glen Matteson, Associate Planner MEETING DATE: June 28, 1995
FILE NUMBER: 57-95
PROJECT ADDRESS: 271 Bridge Street
SUBJECT: General Plan Land Use Element amendment to move the hillside planning
development limit line, in the western part of the South Street Hills.
RECOMMINiDATION
(1) Review the initial environmental study and concur with the negative declaration; (2)
recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment.
BACKGROUND
Situation
The Planning Commission initiated consideration of this amendment at staffs request. Staff
suggested the change to accommodate reasonable use of the parcel in case the existing houses
were destroyed, and to make the development limit line location consistent with neighboring
properties. The General Plan provisions applying to this site result from the Hillside Planning
Program which was added to the Land Use Element in 1983, and included largely unchanged
in the 1994 update of that element.
Data Summary
Owners: John J. & Henrietta Lucas (property is in escrow to another party)
Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation: Open Space
Existing and Proposed Zoning: Conservation/Open Space with 5-acre minimum (C/OS-5)
Environmental Status: Negative declaration approved by Director for review and comment
May 30, 1995.
Project Action Deadline: Legislative action not subject to processing deadline.
Site Description
The subject site is a 7.3-acre parcel extending from the flat area and creek near Bridge Street
about halfway to the ridge of the western South Street Bills. Two houses with outbuildings and
yards occupy small parts of the site, one at the base of the hill and the other at about 235 feet
elevation, which is reached by a steep driveway. The attached initial environmental study
provides more information on slopes, sons, and vegetation.
Project Description
The General Plan Hillside Planning Map development limit line would be moved from this site's
northern boundary to approximately the 175-foot elevation contour (attached map). According
Planning Commission Stab Report GP 57-95
to the Land Use Element, the urban reserve line is the outer.limit to urban development and
provision of City services. For hills within theurban area, the development limit line serves
the same function. In hillside areas, the development limit line is typically the boundary
between residential or commercial designations and open .space designations. Criteria for
locating the development limit line include water service elevation, steepness of slope, access,
slope stability, fire hazard, sensitive plant communities, and visual impacts. In this area, the
175-foot elevation closely follows the change from nearly flat to steeply sloping ground.
The hillside development limit line is shown on a set of large maps which are published
separately from the rest of the Land Use Element. These maps, at a scale of 1 inch equals 200
feet, are overlays of 1974 aerial photographs and topographic drawings. (The attached map is
based on a tracing of the original Hillside Planning Map, which cannot be photocopied legibly
due to its darlmess. The original map is on file and available for viewing in the Community
Development Department.)
With the adopted line, neither of the existing houses could be rebuilt if destroyed, and City
water and sewer service cannot be provided to the property. The amendment would allow City
permit approval for a replacement dwelling in the flat area at the base of the hill if both of the
existing dwellings on this site were destroyed. It would also allow provision of City water and
sewer service to the existing house or a replacement house in the flat area at the base of the hill.
With either the adopted or proposed development limit line, both existing houses can be
maintained indefinitely.
With this proposal, there would be no change to the Land Use Map designation of Open Space,
or the zoning, which is Conservation/Open Space with 5-acre minimum.for a dwelling(C/OS-5).
The amendment would not allow any development in addition to that existing on the site. It
would not allow subdivision of the site.
The owner recently obtained a building permit to relocate a carportand,add 150 square-feet of
living space to the upper dwelling. These actions could be approved without public hearings
under the existing development limit line and the Zoning Regulations' provision concerning
nonconforming structures. No further development is proposed.
As part of this amendment, the map depiction of the developmentlimitline.along the west end
of Woodbridge Drive would be changed, so that it follows the southern,(hillside) side of the
existing street rather than the developed side.
EVALUATION
The change does not raise any substantial issues of consistency with text policies. Relevant text
policies of the land Use Element are 6.2.0 through 6.2.4 (pages 61 and.62): Open Space
Element Chapter A (pages 13 through 16) is also relevant.
Page 2
Planning Commission Stan Report GP 57-95
ALTERNATIVES
The Commission may recommend denial. The Commission may recommend approval of a
different location for the development limit line. Any different location should be consistent
with the General Plan text policies concerning hillside protection. A substantially different
location would require additional environmental review and public notice before further
Commission action. The Commission may continue action.
ATTACEM ENTS
Map # 1: Land Use Element Map (part) showing vicinity of proposed change
Map # 2: Zone Map showing site and nearby development
Map # 3: Hillside Planning Map (part) showing existing and proposed development limit line
locations and selected physical features
Initial environmental study
eencmi[..rca
Page /
BRIDGE STREET DEVELOPMENT LIMIT LINE AMENDMENT MAP #1
LAND USE ELEMENT MAP (PART) 0
NORTH 1 INCH = 1000 FEET
AREA UNDER CONSIDERATION •• PARCEL BOUNDARY
_ ..� vii Ai" �a \;vhj:\ �<\\:\ a ��i '' '\' ♦ X\ -./!/!
"� _ y fir!},.\\\ ac\ti� .� .. `.���'.:�� -c\�.. ♦\t' \�c\\\\\:\\\\♦
//ew//e/////
ur
ry / �i/r / '7
/I//I Ileee
VW
l ///!I//e// �•
I "ell
lopp
7,vk
. r.. ?S:_$. -ill� �%�7- �!.• %"/. . / / /%!:%/./�L'� \\ //i
V aer
ell
�'' _ \♦\\\\X' �_�.4':i_r Ana rr4"' `\• /! /',�'/ • \\ X`X�
••`Y _ _ \\\\\\X\\ �>:•. ��4 :'�'�•., 1. w \�\\\. \.M
•l.. �\'.yX\\\\ \\ :A j!F'� lis llr. :� •' '� r� " \\\\\\ \\ \
t7g.�Mµt, s ii['l::e-• %:o-::::5, r .`n �•'.y ;?r+� \\X\\.< \\X.\\.K:
!.\\\\\\\\\ -�SrrLL'PP3 vy\•3°'0Y9yp[ c...:'�:n,. _ "(t >. _ '- \\•\\\ \.`4\\!'
- .•� \\ \\\\\\ : .�• Ne =��y[�v;,Fi;li.>::��.:.::•-•SS.. � ..,•;r,�' ';�.: 'Via, X\\\\\\\ '
- \\\\\\\\\. '� i.. •vfl�,(>�. 'nis!' �1.�::�S �i�t.:.. • :-'.; =� h.r � •�.4�Z.\X\\.\\t't'
•• \\\\\\\\\ Q;:�.•.r.'LTr�.. �!y •fir:!:[•'P+,F, yr.r:: .:: �. Vl1\�X,\!
/ / \\\ ' ••' s::[[: TIrIu.0
1�.• IP y .4���' uf•:r:"^ae�;�p�;+;l.• .p•+r.� 4 +.� 6 '4
. il:. .,rib:LH:lI:a:C•:!'':-•6.'.'i...ViC il• s a. y �
hl
y-/D
t. MAP #2
BRIDGE STREET DEVELOPMENT LIMIT LINE AMENDMENT
ZONE MAP (PART) L ®`
NORTH 1 INCH = 200 FEET
. • .. -
•,m .�- OI. .� L}.M rim, 71.
� ,�,�j �•^:/O �.1-' /r� t a _., .�tF A•• •%..�.. ��N�
®-' .t ,•:.ice � ? sy _ •rV•R,a?-�5 I' =C.1t �' 'L • :.,� .4�~a�w r r� �::�`r. .'L ai S �.-
„ mt«+ �� U; X17 4s
• agar +t. _ ••t.S r f..
•,m`} ,i `.�!� 3 1QIQ0 'I�JIO TRKrax -S, o,�.�i •4 t4. ^4 "'+�
h®� f � •a 3 t�-.E` .5 .4 � �}. '��5`a�v5'- S 'r_ 7"x C
7fV,G690'. •Z'e`°"•:. .•Wb `� .:r!.. .r. •
f�
;arm .•- s�.'._� ^.w - `A .�. : yr5 ° �,5_-�'�''+ ..',. - •:_
Al
'��i,-.,S N,r,. ri•Le ru . '�r•°'oCeTr� .fi••�
Y`�- ::..s"¢`' p[:=s yr�'cQl,.i �iaa?-• .�_ ' ; _ 1
M., c .� T 4. •^' ae.niC. 'ry�;` �`.�' "Y+�•af4�'1... ` ,,.Y..�` f p G�.71 M• � .Y._. 'j0.'. -'G
wn ?i••,r �T'+uul:=- „re'r+�. �ma.r �'c�.,._s � {y .{ti.. -r'� : .•. .• a.�.-.:m•>�A;-
_:�� :3.A7�7 4 ++,' •'.os 9d• :� Af1=8"4a.=
`cL .
- .'�.�J,fy - }�:.z+�o_�i.,v�.;iK+�af�'�t7aF:+���*:Y:$]F+`��sBSSwu>.a=;r•a. -a .�� +C.-+F'; +no A57o�s.^ .'
0� ' BRI�GESTF2EET ,Y , :-'„' `Vs.QS
.. :ZOI'- 1-c;89=r' •."1`ntiTn' aa2�.�JaiT3.. '+C.�us.�.:7? - �•^..'•-� 'c- ,�1 -cA. V10S_ 4 ,:: .-. -
Vy+rb•a: +.'.. -,^, r,,,=...
a AIW-81` - _Asr.O• Asl•11 /nfi-L tr`> ae-•e n, •�SP.v •. rr. r ” ;.
ca¢ 74QAC wlsr-•aNruKrMs-a.a- .p-- 'Mg•pg4fi+ �fiT'.'..Ir+sCeeO-Og-afs0 - .4 ti+..;;,:_ �„ey1T-`�ts��n_
W .y 1 ti ''r•4 fnli'
•a-v.. 1..K 2'e• hi^rk.v. ♦ hr_ �` -x', a¢•!•SP
"vnx'Yc• -�';r', ••'^T. .{•'r._a• m Y - �. ..Aft
y` �`--et'i°' •s .- T'r° . i
r + r .re••mo� i ..,. - 'i" `+` .L
- '•;r�� .:� � •�✓ j F•«F a
AW
. ...• VL�. i /ate 2•iS15 q'..
a{ v- rY r � t^ a{• r iii ,•i'�,r yip-:
.. + Y: G-.�R•.iF�' S•f�^. • •-!<<y ��,V 1r, 'mss: a 7 _ S•c VV_'' ..]- �-+�+ "s i�J C
+ •-� v �J,f•sd • `i• r.�. ,� Af nom[•-ri M1 r r r.'F. ry19 ... �y•.
^
• J ., .� yds• �r y ,s -'li
i
y
� !� +br + �.�_,r4��-a �, �' > ti, G > 7Fv. -•^*`I v ��' r•� c. ,� y'la�,� �,.
ja,c:r _+ ,va "•�a�y, Z.. As '��"? + !n > a-� ,t w ♦^. :�f :t"jw�^.:„
4f.--c ' ✓c .ate }�-...•� , 5�_ ;
a v'�;K7'°AIOf ` gip�/t ` L� 1t`a. �i� " ~ s. _2''-.^'...'T• ~O
.M1.
/1� ,a.,+-g• q x.. .e• rmwT. ,r -. �+• y+ ss$.v.i,t� •i. "y-s Oi ^' �• '� ,J'"
-.�/-cO��'S�,i.''.•B�`. 4?':r -'S.Y ` -"1•-�,t "�.�?r jr1w�^.a.t >'-i7 +/ � �� ! � i
® 3�x� � 1"'/f.�1E,,.y 6r ']E�" a 4-.�.._+.�-'^x. �•.{T� r.�,�,'O�.. 'p`0��' ��
.sem' .*. s s .. -; •k -, f � , ,� -O�' 7 '+. ;'. i.�
C sw`^�==. = .y
r /Ira, '•.:._:2.S_�3 yam•'i %4�!, 'bz•-• `4 J- >l Jill
�w'1r �i lr' ~ /Sx ,r..� '.; ii.+,/•-�� ' r.,•r� vXYSe.y.
.."-�.� :-h 4 ,.a J,y�- "= .y�q`+y�P�• T :. y k^a. ... - �.'�' p ��'•� ' a ,a `Y
•:�-='a�w .2: ..__ -�.'iY 1 3tSS.�::, aTs X�'�` testy �/'�'r'{�� � X r'qp•" `F.� -i.. iii.. '1 >. '�'fa `' +
.-.1., 7.i r f._I?y'i!w ti-, ...t.` i%'i. 4ti•--. 3 •ti! • �•AyL's✓3^', „•ri •�S'`y .tr i'.u.7i,�..-�'T V. s ,
_� `L'x� rr Kt y��y.� O�:+_. - V�':t 1�"�' ./•Y 'G�S e + _`..'.']t��tG. .1 _v, A_•i-
Jill
'''a �" `?'�fw.rsY P'�.}`^^-' -{�.•�-.+`:•.icy fy:�'+'.t1�-'w,•.y�'fi'::° �� ..+.. ''Wu '6'.? �_�� r r->Y ( � t.
�.r• 4
..n �,?: _ '-Jt.+� {.+jr+. i'Y` ..•" S :r:!"- `-_-�."y,!-" y r ..yrs^ yc r
� •i- aT 1 A '
.r;F Yrt�'r't � -���>J*�R ! :r2,•,yw. r
-'• �i.la�- -'�:�:.. �:a.r:;, _- - -.+5 ^`,'== .}+Jawi ] r , �Sa s +S aG 'fit ,- iiJ `q `a>.�
_ .+!. ��'.:w"�-� 'sxia. _ � i'b,' - �';�w:.rv? _:;i.:S.,}" ._.r%':•%.. .��'
Y #L �� !'•irf^v`T1"_��''.w � � lS 1`• -` � "�
f Mr �� O
� +Y..
%
- r r •' ri 40. .. :-- S R
40
~ - r Y r'u"�' . .:y:i'mill • •a' 4
"iin
_ t ♦ a •- a. `�7�• .'Ef a t-/,P c S 'i'
r �. ter• •! s r� sv y '".! S'Xeir ss�a. +'- � �~�
- s r ri r-K•�i� - +�. .t+ 'r.Y:_ 9 v y y r`.a . �Fi�= fd^ 1 dR 'i�.� �yy. i .. ..`^. S^
- r y 'J.. a :=i-p�-:� ,� "_ •h"'+>S� r •].•l,•' -. -"n. G.�^`'�`�'.` �K "'+re Yf�/{OR�MItr A� -t ,.'-5a*
4i `. i Gr•- c r.r r y�� C �'1a..9- - .�'i :Y J l !};:K'7
. -r'1- -z'"tat a-T r �i� T '- a;lw�. Y •a n,e .lY!i�.._' a'34 35�z s��3r�..a'. 3xya. e-.� aha-.
' ..y, "r^.,�.,`r���ac.-y.F:.v: `ac .:ea.::...•- s�_`'ry.�ti..�"c-� lr''w+j,- � i�.X'` i:::.r�u:- :.>c;:.:��:.��?ri:SSpsv0.�P_�•-
' .-�l'�r � a •�,�fr"" v 4 R Y -• �~i ""��-ri` 'ti � a�"c��{' trTy�,j t s, � z`aRr''
Tr ..r- • C L 4:e '' r S.."--T .0 rt R.. i,s � 'i. Brie`-iC{ ✓.
BRIDGE STREET DE .LOPMENT LIMIT LINE AME_ MENT MAP #3
HILLSIDE PLANNING MAP (PART) GP 57-95
n
kl �.
M A
C:= SKIt'Ua s-r O
31
Iu„1 a
It
'1• ;' ,�
l l� c R x1U
IQ SpA! ��-
I
�1 ��, 'o�o �o.,�• a VAN. c 'Q
o�•�_-_ - -- o
i f1/
7 `
r
l
�J�p-
L
gUiLL?NCq �itdt' /s,L-tom SHow?•+�
25v-� EL�V/�T-Lv�.1 Gv1�YTdvR CI�vT atm. SHowN� Q
—••--.—. PF�vPER'S'Y L r N� C N ev-r is.L-L S t1 ow N�
aoa EXt ST'1 NU O3�ftiE�-oQ?+11x1-1T LIM tT Lt N�� Ko�T�t
INC
rr 200 1`� T
00000 PRoPoS�p D�VELoPMEt.sr LI MIT- 1. )I -k S: �/�
city of san tins oBispo
��i►��►►lilll. IiII�IIii� ilii�l INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
SITE LOCATION 2-7 1 FV LGA ASZ S�. APPLICATION NO.
PROJE�CTlDESCRIPTION Q14ja
�/'�!O�^'� Y1 �(���yl �I�A. OOCJf/��4YaD �C 6��i7�f'I✓�7�V TF7A � 15
APPLICANT 4=.t S -L-4::>
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION INCLUDED
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED
PREPARED BY 611 ski 1 1 � t�Sah �►S 5d. e vrr�� DATE 5 -4 9"95
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S A O DATE 5 f�D�96
Kf&o \&
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
I.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING '
II.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ................................................... ND
B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH...........................................
C. LAND USE ......................................................................... a
D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .............................................. IJ O
E. PUBLICSERVICES ................................................................ N O
F. UTILITIES......................................................................... f.10
G. NOISE LEVELS ..........
........................................................
H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS ....................
1. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... NO
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ..................................:............ pO
K PLANT LIFE..........
............................................................
LANIMAL LIFE..................................................................... N
M. ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL ................................. N O
N. AESTHETIC ...................................................................... N
O. ENERGYIRESOURCE USE .......................................................... N O
P. OTHER ..........................................................................
111.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
*SEE ATTACHED REPORT �r
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY 57-95
BRIDGE STREET DEVELOPMENT LIlVIIT LINE AMENDMENT
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND SETTING
The subject site is a 7.3-acre parcel extending from the flat area and creek near Bridge Street
about halfway to the ridge of the western South Street Hills. Two houses with outbuildings and
yards occupy small parts of the site, one at the base of the hill and the other at about 235 feet
elevation, which is reached by a steep driveway.
The City of San Luis Obispo proposes to change the General Plan Hillside Planning Map
development limit line location from this site's northern boundary to approximately the 175-foot
elevation contour (attached map). According to the Land Use Element, the urban reserve line
is the outer limit to urban development and provision of City services. For hills within the
urban area, the development limit line serves the same function. In hillside areas, the
development limit line is typically the boundary between residential or commercial designations
and open space designations. Criteria for locating the development limit line include water
service elevation, steepness of slope, access, slope stability, fire hazard, sensitive plant
communities, and visual impacts. In this area, the 175-foot elevation closely follows the change
from nearly flat to steeply sloping ground.
The amendment would allow City permit approval for a replacement dwelling in the flat area
atthe base of the hill if both of the existing dwellings on this site were destroyed. It would also
allow provision of City water and sewer service to the existing house or a replacement house
in the flat area at the base of the hill. With either the adopted or proposed development limit
line, both existing houses can be maintained indefinitely. With the adopted line, neither could
be rebuilt if destroyed, and City water and sewer service cannot be provided.
With this proposal, there would be no change to the Land Use Map designation of Open Space,
or the zoning, which is Conservation/Open Space with 5-acre minimum for a dwelling(C/OS-5).
The owner recently applied for a building permit to relocate a carport and add 150 square-feet
of living space to the upper dwelling, which are categorically exempt from environmental
review. No other development is proposed.
As part of this amendment, the map depiction of the development limit line along the west end
of Woodbridge Drive would be changed, so that it follows the southern (hillside) side of the
existing street rather than the developed side.
y iy
U. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW
H. Geologic & Seismic Hazards
Slope stability is a concern on the steep, serpentine-based hillsides. No slope instability or
substantial erosion as a result of the 1995 storms were observed on this site. The proposed
amendment would not affect hillside development potential.
K. Plant Life
L. Animal Life
The site is mostly grassland on alluvial (lower) and thin, rocky (upper) soils, with a few native
and nonnative trees on the level part. The upper elevations may contain rare plants which are
limited to serpentine-based soils in the San Luis Obispo area. The proposed amendment will
have no effect on hillside vegetation.
In. Spring 1995, a small stream was observed at the base of the hill. This stream is not
considered a "creek" by the City's Open Space Element. Also, there were small area along this
stream and along the road that had saturated soils. It is not known whether these saturated areas
would be classified as wetlands under applicable State or Federal criteria. The amendment is
not expected to have any affect on the wet area at the base of the hill.
N. Aesthetics
The flat area at the base of the hill is not visible from nearby residential areas, nor prominently
visible from nearby industrial area or public streets.
BRDCNBoULIES