Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/02/1997, 2 - CREEK BANK REPAIR PROJECTS, CITY PLANS 9553, 9555, 9664, 9750, 9679.
council °September 2,1997 j acEnaa izEpout CZ CITY OF SAN LUIS O B 1 S P 0 FROM: Mike McCluskey Prepared By: Wayne Peterson,City Engineer SUBJECT: Creek Bank Repair Projects,City Plans 9553,95552 96649 97509 9679. CAO RECOMMENDATION 1: Adopt Resolution Approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 91-97) for Creek Bank Repair Projects,City Plans 9553, 9555,9664,9750, 9679. 2: Approve Plans and Specifications for 5 Creek Bank Repair Projects, City Plan 9553 (3546 S. Higuera St., 35 Prado Road, and Prado Bridge); City Plan 9555 (3026/3046 Higuera St. and 236 Higuera St.); City Plan 9664 (Golf Course); City Plan 9750 (Pistol Range); and City Plan 9679 (Mariposa) and authorize the City Administrative Officer to advertise and award contract to lowest bidder if within the engineer's estimate for all projects combined when permits from approving agencies are committed. DISCUSSION These projects are intended to repair the creek .banks at 8 different locations. The repairs are necessary because of damage caused during major storms that occurred during the winter of 1995 and the resulting threat to adjacent improvements. The City is responsible for this work because it has either fee title or a maintenance easement for the creek that makes the City responsible to maintain the creek banks at these locations. The region was declared a disaster area by the Federal Government, making the cost of these projects eligible for full reimbursement by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Four of these projects have already received approval for reimbursement and four are going through an appeal process to gain approval. Staff of OES supports our appeal and have told us the they expect us to ultimately receive FEMA's approval for not just the cost of the repairs but also of all related costs such as the engineering of the plans and the preparation of the studies necessary to receive the agency permits. The City originally attempted to construct repairs at four of these sites but was denied a permit to construct by the Corps of Engineers. The reason for the denial was that the Corps was concerned about the repetitive nature of the damage. They required the City to prepare a Stream Corridor Management Plan for the creeks in.the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed prior to issuing any permits for work. This initial requirement was appealed because the preparation of a report meeting their guidelines would take several years and cost a half-million dollars. In the meantime the City would be prohibited from addressing the damage. The Corps modified their requirement and allowed the City to prepare the required study in two parts, the first to cover the reaches of creek that included the proposed repair work and the second to cover the remaining portions of San z-� Council Agenda Report - Creek bank repairs Page 2 Luis Creek and the other creeks in the watershed. The first phase of the required study was completed by Questa Engineering and conceptual designs for each of these sites were presented to the Council on May 6'h of this year. After the Council approved the concepts the CAO authorized an amendment to the contract with Questa Engineering for the Phase One work to allow the engineer to prepare the construction plans for the work. The projects are described in an attachment to this report to assist the Council in understanding what is covered in the plans. The costs of the work at each of the eight sites is being carefully segregated to allow a successful audit by FEMA when the projects are completed. To encourage participation by several different contractors and to ensure rapid completion of the projects this fall the projects have been divided into 5 separate contracts. The reasoning for how the engineer chose to combine the projects is given in the attached project descriptions. The project may not proceed without permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game. The Corps has reviewed the projects and on August 15`s advertised a notice of intention to issue an Individual permit. The advertisement allows 30 days for public response. In addition the steelhead in San Luis Obispo Creek were declared a threatened species by National Marine Fisheries Service on August 18, 1997. This leads to additional review by several Federal Agencies. The Corps is required to conduct either formal or informal consultation with other Federal agencies dependent on other agency concerns. This review can take as long as 135 days. The Corps of Engineers cannot issue the construction permit until that process is completed. This is a public hearing item. The Council should conduct a public hearing to receive comments from the public regarding the environmental detennination and the project.. After receiving testimony the Council may adopt the attached resolution approving the environmental document as submitted or as modified based on public and Council input. This must be done before the plans may be approved for advertising. Environmental Determination Working with Questa consultants and the City's Natural Resources Manager, the Community Development Department prepared an initial study of environmental impact and proposed a negative declaration subject to mitigation. This means that the multipart project would not have significant impacts,based on specific features to be included in design and construction, and that no further study would be required. Since the City Council has approval authority for the project, it is also charged with making the environmental determination. Council is asked to adopt by resolution the proposed "mitigated negative declaration." This action needs to reflect some changes to the projects that have been proposed since the initial study was completed, mainly aimed at further 2-2 Council Agenda Report - Creek bank repairs Page 3 reducing impacts to sensitive species, as explained below. Comments on the initial study and proposed negative declaration have been solicited by a newspaper notice and direct mail to interested agencies and individuals. During the City's public comment period,.one response was received: the July 26, 1997, letter from Phil Ashley with cover form"Appeal to the City Council"(attached). Mr. Ashley's main point was that at several locations the originally proposed projects would eliminate —and prevent the re-establishment of— sheltered pools at the toes of banks,which he claims are critical for long-term survival of steelhead trout. The initial study noted that San Luis Obispo Creek supports a steelhead population of concern and referred to the previous, more extensive discussions of its needs and status. It also identified nearly all of the project locations which provide pool habitat. In response to the comment letter, staff recommends additions to the initial study, including proposed mitigation (as shown in Attachment 6). The additions are: • Acknowledge the existence of pool habitat at the Hayward Lumber site; • As mitigation at each location where a sheltered pool may be affected, provide a sheltering structure as an integral part of whatever bank-stabilizing material is to be used. (This structure is expected to be a shelf between the first and second layer of rock-filled wire baskets, or a short section of concrete culvert pipe or a specially constructed table-type structure where rock rip-rap is used; these are intended to be durable, functional equivalents of the "lunker" approach referred to in Mr. Ashley's letter). Mr. Ashley's concerns about project extent will be at least partly addressed by reduced channel modifications in some locations (mainly the RRM and Pistol Range sites), where extent along the creek and into the creek are to be minimized. His-concerns about timing of construction will be addressed by requirements of the State and Federal wildlife protection agencies. An additional change to the recommended mitigation, in response to an informal comment from another source, will distinguish between steelhead on one hand, and pond turtles and red-legged frogs on the other, for relocation of any individuals found immediately before or during construction. When this report was written, the State Clearinghouse had not confirmed review of the initial study and proposed negative declaration by the State agencies that Clearinghouse staff decided should be provided copies. However, the consultants and City staff have been working with local and regional representatives of those agencies throughout project design and environmental review. The proposed mitigation measures have been structured so State agency requirements that have not been anticipated can be included through the normal permitting process, without contradicting any actions of the Council at this time. It should be noted that the mitigated negative declaration covers 11 sites. Only eight of the sites are being consider for construction at this time. The other three projects, dredging the Perfumo Arm of �-3 Council Agenda Report- Creek bank repairs Page 4 Laguna Lake, the removal of silts under the Marsh Street Bridge and the relocation of a building and bank restoration at the Black adobe can be done in the next two years under the authority of the mitigated negative declaration and the permits being sought from the Corps of Engineers. CONCURRENCES The City's Natural Resource Manager and the Community Development Department have reviewed the proposed projects for conformance with the City's adopted policies on creek habitat and flood protection. Their recommendations have been reflected in the project plans presented to the Council. OTHER AGENCY APPROVALS The projects have been submitted to the Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, National Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Regional Water Quality Control board for review and permits. As of the date this staff report was written it appears that all agencies are prepared to provide the necessary permits, but the exact date and specific conditions are not known. FISCAL IMPACT The cost of these projects. is expected to be born by FEMA. City staff has met with OES staff and discussed the status of our claims for reimbursement by FEMA. Initially FEMA has denied our request for reimbursement for the projects at 3026 Higuera St., 236 Higuera St., 3546 Higuera St. and at Fox Hollow Road. The other four project sites have been approved and in some cases we already have received some money. OES also has encouraged the City to apply for reimbursement for the Phase One and proposed Phase Two reports and the engineering costs for the design of these eight projects. The City has set aside money as follows. The source of the money is expected to be FEMA reimbursement. Upon completion of the projects and the Phase Two project the City should be able to bill for the construction costs and all of the engineering costs. The Council has budgeted for this work. See attachment Total funds budgeted available for this project. $1,031,590. Total estimated cost of five contracts $1,026,066. Council Agenda Report- Creek bank repairs Page 5 ALTERNATIVES The City Council may choose modify any of the designs or to not pursue any of the proposed projects. The Council should be aware that the designs have been carefully negotiated with the Corps of Engineers and any changes will need to be resubmitted to them for review. Also the Community Development staff will also need to review the consistency of any changes with the mitigated negative declaration that they have prepared. Staff sees no alternative to taking positive action to stabilize the creek banks and protect the adjacent private and public property in the flood damaged areas. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Resolution approving Negative Declaration subject to mitigation Attachment 2 -Map showing project locations. Attachment 3 -CAO Report authorizing engineering work. Attachment 4-Project Descriptions and estimates. Attachment 5 -Initial Study 91-97 Attachment 6- Additions to initial study responding to comments Attachment 7 - Phil Ashley letter Attachment 8 - Funds sources and estimates. Council Reading File' Plans and Specifications Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. (1997 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR CREEK BANK REPAIR PROJECTS, CITY PLANS 9553, 9555,9664,9750, 9679. The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo resolves as follows: Findings 1. On July 26, 1997 the City published and made available for public review a mitigated negative declaration based on an initial study of environmental impact, "San Luis Obispo Creek Corridor Management and Enhancement Plan: Selected Phase 1 Improvements" (ER 91-97), in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental Impact Procedures and Guidelines. 2. On September 2, 1997, the Council conducted a public hearing, which included consideration of comments on the published initial environmental study and changes to the project since it was first proposed,to further mitigate adverse impacts. 3. The Council has considered the initial study, and finds that the potential impacts will be mitigated to an acceptable level due to features incorporated into the project design and construction. These mitigation measures and monitoring responsibilities are identified in the initial study, on file in the Community Development Department. In making this determination, Council directs that additional information and mitigation measures be included in the action, based on the staff report and recommendation for the meeting of September 2, 1997; Council further determines that re-circulation of the initial study and proposed negative declaration is not necessary since the added material better responds to the existence and needs of sensitive species, and has no adverse secondary impacts. The City Council finds that the Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed creek projects, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. Action 1. The Council hereby approves a negative declaration. On motion of ,seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: J P� the foregoing fesolution was passed and adopted this day of 1997. Mayor --- - - - --- - ---- ATTEST: APPROVED as to form: — — - _ ti City Clerk A rney,` �I Attachment 3 CAO REPORT FROM: Michael D.McCluskey,Public Works Director Prepared by: Wayne Peterson,City Engineer SUBJECT: Contract Engineering Work for Creek Bank Repair Projects, 1995 Winter Storm City Plan 9605A RECOMMENDATION: 1)Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue a letter amending the contract between City and Questa Engineering to provide final construction plans for all eight projects,excluding project 466 Dana Street(26180), identified on Exhibit B of the Request for Proposals. 2)Approve budget amendment to transfer funds between accounts as described in the fiscal impact portion of this report. DISCUSSION: At the May 6`s Council meeting the council approved in concept the design concepts for doing repair work on creek banks that were damaged in the 1995 storms. Based on those concepts that staff received proposals from the Questa Engineering to prepare construction plans for eight of the nine sites damaged. The ninth site,adjacent to the Black Adobe on Dana Street, is to be addressed by staff without further assistance from the consultant. Staff and consultant feel that work in the creek at that location may not be necessary and that removal or relocation of the shed from the top of the creek bank may be the most appropriate solution. The cost of this work should be far below that amount currently budgeted and allows some of the money allocated to this project to be used to design two of the projects that currently do not have a budget. (See Fiscal Impact.) This project is proposed to be awarded to the consultant currently working on the flood management plan as anticipated both by the original RFP and the current contract. Staff has received letter proposals from Questa, for each of the eight project repair sites, that describe the work to be done and the products to be delivered to the City. The actual design parameters and concepts are all a part of the existing contract. It was the original concept in the RFP that the consultant chosen for the project would be most familier with the approved design criteria, the area, etc. and thus be least expensive and most qualified to provide construction documents. Staff told the Council in a memo last summer that they would be consulted prior to awarding a contract for the design of these projects. August 20, 1996 Staff Report said "If funding is available, contracts for the preparation of construction plans for the highest priority repair projects will be brought back to Council for approval,followed by lower priority projects. Likewise,should funding be sufficient,additional studies to decrease the magnitude of flood flows and work to revise the FIA flood information rate maps may be negotiated. This project does not include any work on the City's existing closed conduit(piped)system due to the expected cost of such an undertaking." Since that time the CAO awarded a contract to Questa Engineering for the Phase I portion of the Flood Management Plan. Also the Consultant met with the Council on May 6`h 1997 and reviewed the concepts for carrying out the repairs. The Council endorsed the concepts. The current contract with Z�� Questa provides for the preparation of the construction plans upon separate authorization from the City. In as much as the Council has seen the concepts for repair and approved them and as there is a budget for preparing the plans and that Council delegated to the CAO the authority to award the original contract, staff feels it appropriate for the CAO to delegate to the Director of Public Works the authority to approve the amendment of the contract to prepare the plans. Staff feels that, with the amendment in place, a memo to the Council in concert with the May 6t°meeting fulfills the intent of the August 23rd 1996 staff report. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff has been working with FEMA and Zone 9 to establish funding for each of the eight projects proposed to be designed under this contract. Staff has not received final approval from FEMA for the projects that they will fund. Nor has Zone 9 budgeted for the projects although the projects shown for Zone 9 funding are in the staffs recommendation that is going to the Board of Supervisors for approval. FEMA has sent money for three of the projects indicated in the following chart to be funded by them. According to their regulations the City must apply for the remaining funds after the projects are completed. PROJECTS REQUIRING BANK STABILIZATION AS A RESULT OF THE 1995 WINTER STORMS. FEMA Project Description Funding source Engineering Cost Estimated Remaining Number Cost Balance 95626 18 Mariposa FEMA 3,850. 58,000 -662. 26183 35 Prado Road FEMA 13,400. 330,000 136,000 93243 Prado Road Bridge FEMA 7,000. 52,000 29,800. 93252 Golf Course FEMA 5,700. 58,000 75,000. FEMA Total 29,950 498,000 240,138 93251 3026 Higuera Street General Fund or Zone 9 10,800. 141,000 128,900 95612 Fox Hollow Road General Fund or Zone 9 10,100. 45,000 0 D94 236 Higuera Street General Fund or Zone 9 11,500. 360,000 130,500 26182 3546 Higuera Street General Fund or Zone 9 11,500. 85,000 ,92,000 Total 43,900 631,000 351,400 26180 464 Dana Street Not recommended 5,100 14,000 68,800 The above Construction costs are based on a preliminary cost arrived at by the City's consultant. The Engineering costs are those contained in the proposals from Questa Engineering. Staff recommends that $16,000 be transferred from the balance in the 464 Dana Street project to Fox Hollow Road, $11,000, and 18 Mariposa, $5,000.There are separate city accounts for each construction project. This is necessary to segregate the costs as required by FEMA and Zone 9 for billing purposes. The total engineering cost for the 8 projects to be designed is $73,850. Funds budgeted for the projects are $591,538 z-9 Attachment 8 SOURCES OF MONEY AND ENGINEERS ESTIMATED COSTS OF EACH PROJECT. The Council has budgeted for this work in the following accounts. Project Balance Account 9553 92,048 9554 136,053 9555 128,928 9556 130,553 9557 52,808 9679 5,000 9664 486.200 Total funds budgeted available for this project. 1,031,590 Upon award of contract the staff will reallocate the money in each account in accordance with the actual bids and award amounts. The Engineers estimated cost for each project is listed below.: Contract Number Location Base Bid Add Alternative City Plan 9553 3546 S. Higuera St., 86374. 10080. 35 Prado Road, 253904. 55008. Prado Bridge, 36222. 6144. Total for Contract 376500 71232 City Plan 9555 3026/3046 Higuera St. 62004. 11520. 236 Higuera St. 163620. 23040. Total for Contract 225624 34560 City Plan 9664 Golf Course 34675. 9360. City Plan 9750 Pistol Range 47600. 7200. City Plan 9679 Mariposa 53780. 31700. Total for Five Contracts $738179. $154052. Total Estimated cost for five contracts including the add alternatives. $892,231. Contingency fund estimated at 15% 133.835. Total estimated cost of five contracts $1,026,066. Since these projects are subject to many unknowns during construction staff recommends a 15% contingency. Also because of the nature of the projects staff recommends that the funding for the projects be considered as a grand total with subtotals for each project. In other words if during the projects bidding and construction: one project .should cost :more and another less that staff be, allowed to move funds between the five projects: s. Attachment 4 INTRODUCTION The City, together with County Flood Control District Zone 9 have proposed 11 Bank Repair Projects to the regulatory agencies (Corps of Engineers, Regional Board, Department of Fish and Game) as part of a Stream Corridor Management Program for San Luis Obispo Creek and its tributaries. The projects were identified in the Management Plan developed by the City's Engineering Consultant, Questa Engineering Corporation. Conceptual designs focusing on soft, vegetated or biotechnical approaches (Softscape) were developed as part of the planning studies and have been accepted by the agencies. Detailed hydrologic and geotechnical investigations have now been completed by Questa Engineering, along with the necessary permit applications, CEQA documentation, and Habitation Mitigation and Monitoring Plans. We currently anticipate receipt of permits for the project from the regulatory agencies sometime in mid-September. Based on the hydraulic and geotechnical bank stability analysis, the concept plans for 8 of the sites damaged in the 1995 storms have been translated into Engineering Drawings (Plans and Specifications) by Questa Engineering. Their design work includes preparation of an Engineer's Estimate of probable construction costs. The Plans and Specification would be put out to bid by the Public Works Department. The City will need to wait to award contracts until after receipt of the permits. Work would be completed this Fall (October- November). Several of the Bank Repair projects proposed for construction at this time have been grouped together for bidding purposes: The Bank Repair projects are as follows: 1. Wastewater Treatment Plant Gold's Gym Prado Bridge 2. Mariposa Street 3. Hayward Lumber Yard (Former) RRM Building 4. City Golf Course on Prefumo Creek 5. Pistol Range The three projects not included in these descriptions and the proposed construction projects are included in the environmental review and permits to allow them to be considered in the next two years. They are dredging of the Prefumo Arm of Laguna Lake, the removal of silt under the Marsh Street bridge, and repair of bank damage at the Black adobe. The following provide a detailed description of each project and the Engineer's Estimate. Portions of the descriptions are italicized to indicate changes made in the project descriptions from what was originally considered in the initial environmental review and the current projects. Changes have been made in response to State, Federal, and City staff comments received during the process. Additional changes may be made as a result of the public hearing and direction by the Council. WWTP,GOLD'S GYM,PRADO BRIDGE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE (WWTP) The WWTP site is located on the west.bank of San Luis Obispo Creek, about 400 meters (1200 feet) downstream of the Prado Street Bridge. For cost efficiency reasons, the WWTP site will be repaired by the same contractor and at the same time bank repair work is being completed at the cross-channel and upstream Gold's Gym site, and the further upstream Prado Bridge site. However, separate base bid sheets are provided for each site and the Contractor will be required to keep separate cost accounting records so that repair cost information can be provided to FEMA for possible reimbursement. The WWTP repair site extends approximately 120 meters (394 feet) along the outside of a meander bend. Along the downstream edge of the site, immediately below the WWTP drying beds, approximately 2 m (6.6 feet) of bank were washed out in the 1995 winter storms. In addition, 6 m (19.68 feet) of existing gabion baskets were damaged and will require repair and/or removal/replacement: One basket lies in the streambed, but will be left as it provides a scour pool and important steelhead habitat. The Scope of Work for this site involves repairing the existing gabion basket and extending the baskets 100 m (330 feet) upstream and removing two eucalyptus trees. This work may require the removal/replacement of the chain link fence along top of bank. The gabion system design is 3 baskets wide (2.7 meters, 9 feet) at the base, extending 4 baskets (3.7 m or 12 feet) high to a single basket at the top. For toe stability, the bottom basket is buried nearly one complete basket in depth. The baskets are inclined 6 degrees into the bank. Installation of the gabion baskets will require over-excavation and backfill of the existing bank slopes. Much of the existing upper slope materials are rubbly and are unsuitable for use as engineered fill. This will require off-haul and disposal. Permeable fill materials derived from channel sediments will be used as backfill behind the baskets on the lower slopes. Compacted, engineered fill is to be used to rebuild the slopes above the baskets. The gabion baskets will be heavily vegetated by placing a layer of soil material on erosion control blankets between the top central section of each basket, inserting live willow cuttings to extend to the backfill, folding over the blanket, and constructing the next basket on top of this structure. Additionally, cuttings of wild roses and other plants indigenous to the creek will be inserted into the baskets as they are filled. The lowest basket, just above the channel bed, will not be planted, as this could cause local scour. A planting collar will be placed in the top basket and planted with coast live oaks. The 2:1 upper bank slopes will be protected by a coir erosion z-i3 control blanket and will be planted with various native trees and shrubs. Additional mitigation is provided by removing exotic trees and planting a 300 meter length slope on the west bank downstream of the repair site. Fish habitat is provided by placement of boulder clusters to form scour holes near the toe of the slope. Concrete lid structures will be placed strategically atop the lower slope (with willow cuttings on top) to provide an artificial overhang fish habitat structure. The scour hole will be rock lined, to provide stability. In addition to the gabion baskets revetment, a series of gabion deflectors will be placed to direct flow away from the threatened banks to the gravel bars on the opposite bank. These will also provide scour holes. These gravel bars will be partially excavated to initiate a newly aligned channel. Channel boulders will be placed within the new channel alignment. Although some of the material is useable as permeable fill material, behind the lower gabion baskets, there is a surplus of 600 cubic meters (795 cubic yards) that will require off-haul. GOLD'S GYM The Gold's Gym site is located on the east bank of San Luis Obispo Creek, approximately 150 meters (492 feet) upstream of the WWTP site. The street address is 3546 Higuera Street. San Luis Obispo Creek makes an east-to-west bend through this stretch. The east bank is oversteepened and primarily barren. The opposite (west) bank is covered with Arroyo willow in a low floodplain. At the toe of the west bank, immediately upstream of the Gold's Gym repair, is a willow vegetated sand/gravel bar. Heavy storm flows during the winter of 1995 eroded away approximately 6 meters (19.68 feet) of creek bank, along a length of approximately 76 meters (249.28 feet). This section constitutes the repair site. A section of 30 cm (11.7 inches) diameter corrugated metal pipe (storm drain), approximately 5 m (16.4 feet) long was also destroyed and is included in the repair project. Planted gabion baskets, similar in design to the WWTP site will be constructed to rebuild the bank toe at the Gold's Gym site. Rip-rap will be placed over filter fabric at a 2:1 slope at both ends of the constructed gabion wall. At least 2 trees at top of bank will be lost. The lowest gabion basket layer will be partially buried to 0.7 m (2.3 feet) deep. The structure will be 4 baskets (3.27 meters) high. As with the WWTP, permeable fill will be placed behind the baskets and compacted, engineered fill will be used to reconstruct a 2:1 slope above the baskets. The upper slopes will be protected by a coir erosion control blanket and will be replanted with native trees and shrubs. Additional site native tree/shrub planting, as project mitigation, will be conducted above LOVR, adjacent to the WWTP enhancement/mitigation site.As with the WWTP site, the lowest basket will include a lined scour hole and concrete li&artifcial overhang, to provide continued in-stream cover for steelhead and other fishes. PRADO BRIDGE Prado Bridge is located in a fairly straight section of San Luis Obispo Creek at the upstream edge of a meander bend. Downstream of the bridge, the lower banks are characterized as barren, A-/4 including a dislodged gabion structure. There are vegetated gravel/sand bars both upstream and downstream of the bridge. A 30 meter (94.4 feet) section of the east bank south of the Prado Road Bridge was washed away during high winter flows. This area's pre-washout slope protection consisted of concrete rubble and rock, approximately 0.5 meters (1.64 feet) thick, covered with 15 cm (5.85 inches) of concrete slurry. Two 30 cm (11.7 inches) thick sections of gabion baskets/Reno mattress were dislodged from their location at the bridge. In addition, a 3 m (9.84 feet) section of 46 cm (17.9 inches) PVC storm drain was left hanging unsupported above the washed out bank. The repair work includes some grouted rock installation immediately beneath the bridge abutment between existing sacrete and Reno mattress. Planted rip-rap will be placed below the grouted rock, extending 3 meters upstream of the bridge. In addition, a Reno mattress, 30 meters in length, will be placed beneath the storm drain. The dislodged gabion will be removed and rocks will be placed at the downstream end of the new Reno mattress (extending 5 meters downstream).The plans call for cutting back the bank above the installed Reno mattress at a 2:1 slope from the toe and installation of a coir erosion blanket planted with live willow stakes. The storm sewer will be repaired so that water discharges directly onto the underlying Reno mattress. The upper bank slopes will be planted with native trees and shrubs. The Scope of Work for these three sites (WWTP, Gold's Gym, and Prado Bridge) includes landscape maintenance (replanting and weed control and watering) for a 1-year period following acceptance of work, as part of the Base Bid. Maintenance for an additional 2-year period is an Add Alternate. The Engineer's Estimate for the WWTP project is a Base Bid of$253,904, with the additional 2- year landscape maintenance Add Alternate of$ 55,008. Maintenance could be performed by City crews. The Engineer's estimate for the Gold's Gym project is a Base Bid of $86,374, with a 2- year maintenance add alternate of$10,080. The Engineer's Estimate for Prado Bridge is a Base Bid of$36,222, with a 2-year maintenance add alternate of$6,144. .Z—/S MARIPOSA STREET BANK REPAIR SITE The Mariposa Street repair site consists of City lands within a meander bend in a residential neighborhood about 400 meters upstream of the Los Osos Valley Bridge crossing of SLO Creek. The FEMA repair site extends along the east bank on the outside of this bend. Approximately 46 meters of the east bank was severely eroded in 1995-96, exposing a 122 cm diameter RCP drain. In January 1997, large rock rip-rap was placed on a relatively steep (1.5H:1 V) slope as a Corps- approved emergency repair project. Some repair of the existing rock rip-rap, which was placed in difficult working conditions needs to be made. The west bank, opposite the bend, is a well vegetated gravel/cobble bar. Currently the bar forces flow against the bank, and could become an increasing problem. The scope of work for the Mariposa repair site includes: (1) adding additional rip-rap (0.1 - 0.3 meters in diameter)and soil to fill voids or gaps between the larger rocks along the 42 meters of previously installed rip-rap during the January 1997 emergency work; (2)placing rip-rap along 30 meters of toe of slope below existing rip-rap; (3) repairing existing coir blanket and revegetating on the upper slopes of the rip-rap installed in January 1997; (4) filling 8-meter linear void under RCP drain with cobbles and boulders; (5) removing undermined Monterey Cypress trees; and, (6) extending vegetated rock rip-rap, coir erosion blanket installation, and bank plantings upstream an additional 30 meters (98 feet). Channel boulders and a lunker structure will be installed within the rip-rap toe area to retain in stream cover for steelhead. Add alternates for the Mariposa site include: (1) extend rip-rap upstream an additional 32 meters and install 4 vegetated rock rip-rap groins (each 4 m x 2 m) to direct flood flows away from the bank area; and, (2) on the opposite side of the channel, along 90 meters of the west bank: (a) excavate gravel and vegetation 4 m back from existing toe of slope and use material to fill voids in rip-rap; (b) remove vegetation 2 m back from excavated area; and, (c) thin vegetation 1 m back from vegetation removal area. The Engineer's Estimate is a Base Bid of$53,780. Add alternates are an additional $31,700. s-i6 HAYWARD LUMBER AND RRM BANK REPAIR SITES The Hayward Lumber and RRM repair sites are two bank erosion areas, about 4 City blocks (1.5 km) apart. For cost efficiency reasons (shared mobilization and potential cut/fill balancing), they will be bid as one project. However, separate Base Bid sheets are provided for each site, and the Contractor will be required to keep separate cost accounting records so that repair cost information can be provided to FEMA for possible reimbursement. HAYWARD LUMBER The Hayward Lumber site, located at 236 Higuera Street, has had a long history of flooding and bank instability problems, dating back to the turn of the century, when it was the old San Luis Mill. The site is in a relatively straight section of San Luis Obispo Creek, which may have been realigned. Steeper stream gradients through this reach create high velocities, which have scoured and undermined the toe berm on the east bank, leading to historic streambed incision, bank undercutting and erosion of steep bank slopes. Upstream,just below the Bianchi Lane Bridge, the remains of a concrete grade control, which has been partially removed, provides some control over channel downcutting in this section. Heavy storm flows during the winter of 1994-95, eroded approximately 91 meters of the east bank, damaging a chain link fence, and undermining several trees, which fell into the creek. The bank was further damaged during the winter of 1995- 96 and 1996-97. It appears that part of the bank erosion was caused by flood return flows that break out of the channel upstream around Marsh Street Bridge, travel down Higuera Street and return to the channel through the Hayward Lumber yard. The existing banks have been inefficiently protected by a haphazard placement of concrete debris. This will require demolition and removal. Several (2) large alder trees growing along top of bank must be removed and replaced or protected. The Plans and Specifications for this site call for sloping the east bank back 4H:1 V from a point about 1 meter (3.3') above channel bed, elevation 46.25 m to elevation 47.25 m and sloping the upper bank back 2H:1 V from elevation 47.25'to 49'within the approximate 8 meters (25 feet) of City channel easement. Approximately 1,300 cubic meters (1,700 cubic yards) of soil is to be removed in the grading operation over a channel distance of about 82 meters (270 feet). Some of the cut material is potentially useable at the RRM project site, if properly segregated and compacted. However, much of the excavated material may be rubble, which will have to be disposed of properly. This can be accomplished in a small open area on City-owned land across the creek. This site will be regraded and planted. The existing east toe of bank will remain largely where it is, but will be supported by placed vegetated fiber rock rolls 0.5 m (18" diameter) and planted with live willow cuttings (rolls are 3 layers high). The lowest roll will be largely buried. A fiber roll made up of long lasting coconut fiber (coir) will be placed atop the upper rock roll. The graded bench and upper bank slopes will be protected by a long-lasting coir (coconut fiber) erosion control blanket, selected to provide protection against high velocity flows. The bench and upper slopes will also be planted with an assortment of native riparian trees and shrubs. Several loose boulders will be placed in the channel bottom to provide bed stabilization and local scour holes for fish habitat improvement. This is termed a rock vortex weir.A small length of the channel will also be fitted with a redwood table like lunker structure and local rock rip-rap to provide additional steelhead habitat. Flood return flows from Higuera Street will be guided to a 4 m (13 feet) wide opening in a constructed 30 cm (12-inch) asphalt concrete curb to discharge over a Reno mattress chute to the channel. The existing chain link fence will be reconstructed along the top of bank, along the City's channel easement. The Scope of Work for the Hayward Lumber site includes landscape maintenance (replanting and weed control, and watering), for a 1-year period following acceptance of work, as part of the Base Bid. Maintenance for an additional 2-year period is an Add Alternate. The Engineer's Estimate for this project is a Base Bid of $163,620, with the additional 2-year landscape maintenance Add Alternate of $23,040. Maintenance could be performed by City crews, who are already working on the City's enhancement site across the creek. RRM SITE The RRM site, located at 3026 Higuera Street, is approximately 400 meters upstream of the Prado Road Bridge. The problem area is located on the east bank of the creek on the downstream end of a bend. High storm flows in 1995 eroded approximately 200 cubic meters of the east bank. Three large eucalyptus trees were undermined and fell into the creek, creating a local scour problem within the City's creek easement. A six-meter high erosion scarp is threatening to undermine the narrow paved access road behind the former RRM building. The proximity of the building limits the amount of setback possible for bank improvements. Fill soils are present in the upper portions of the slope and are gradually sloughing away from the edge of the paved roadway and slope below. There are also signs of significant bank instability immediately upstream of the City's easement, but these are outside of the project limits for these FEMA repair sites. The Plans and Specifications call for protecting the toe of the bank slope and filling the scour hole with rip-rap, which will extend an average of 2.5 meters out from the current creek bank. This is the approximate 1994 channel bank toe. The designs do not have the channel toe impinging onto the current creek, but this will require careful construction and construction monitoring to insure. The rip-rap will be placed 1.5H:1 V. This is the upper limit of stability for angular rip-rap. The slope up to the RRM property will be restored by construction of a 5-meter high engineered fill, the upper 3.8 meters of which will be reinforced with a geogrid, which is .Z—/8 necessary for construction of the 1.5H:1 V slope. The geogrid consists of synthetic mats added as layers in the fill section, which provide additional stability to the steep slope. Approximately 22 meters(72 feet) of bank will be treated in this project. The project will include excavation of approximately 400 cubic meters of bank materials which is likely suitable as select backfill. Some importation of soil (from Hayward Lumber site) will be necessary due to the presence of unsuitable fill materials. The unsuitable fill will have to be disposed of off-site. Rip-rap will be an average size of 0.8 m (2.6 feet) and will be founded on bedding material overlying filter fabric on excavated native soils or bedrock. The reinforced fill will be protected by a long lasting reinforced erosion control blanket, selected to provide protection against high velocity flows. The slope would also be planted with a variety of native riparian trees and shrubs. A rock vortex weir will provide bed stabilization and local scour holes for fish habitat. Several channel boulders will be located at the toe of slope to provide a scour hole within the summer low flow channel. The scour hole and this immediate toe slope area will need to be reinforced to insure long-term stability of the slope. This will be accomplished by carefully selecting and placing angular rock, and coraling the rock in place with driven rebar. A fish habitat structure, termed a Lunker structure, will be placed at the scour hole. This consists of a table-like platform constructed of redwood(or a fiberglass composite material)placed at the toe, with the rock rip- rap placed, atop the structure. The rip-rap would be planted with willows to provide a vegetated overhang. The Scope of Work for the RRM site includes landscape maintenance (replanting and weed control, and watering), for a 1-year period following acceptance of work, as part of the base bid. Maintenance for an additional 2-year period is an Add Alternate. The Engineer's Estimate for the RRM repair project is a Base Bid of$62,004, with the additional 2-year landscape maintenance Add Alternate of $11,520. Maintenance could be performed by City crews. z-�y GOLF COURSE REPAIR SITE The Laguna Lake Golf Course site is located on Prefumo Creek above Los Osos Valley Road (LOUR). Prefumo Creek drains the steep wooded slopes of the Irish Hills and flows into Laguna Lake, which joins San Luis Obispo Creek downstream of the lake. Desilting of the Prefumo Creek atm of the lake, below LOVR is included in the Corps permit, but is not a part of this set of Plans and Specifications. Two pedestrian/golf cart, and maintenance access bridges cross Prefumo Creek within the golf course. The downstream bridge is located at the head of a realigned grass-lined trapezoidal channel that flows from the pedestrian bridge to the Los Osos Valley Road Bridge where the creek enters a culvert. Several areas of the creek bank upstream of this bridge are affected by soil sloughing, bank erosion, and bank failure due to undercutting at the primary creek channel. These will need attention at some time in the future, but not all of these erosion areas are part of this project. Bank failure at the downstream bridge has caused near vertical slopes adjacent to bridge abutments. The banks will continue to erode back and eventually encompass the bridge abutments, unless stabilized. Adjacent areas upstream of this bridge have experienced bank slope failure which is infringing into the Golf Course area. The Scope of Work is as follows: South Bank The slope upstream on the south bank will be stabilized by the installation of a geogrid reinforced engineered fill in order to achieve a 1.511:1 V slope. This steep slope is required to avoid infringement into the Golf Course. The layered engineered fill will contain a subsurface drainage system (see typical cross-section). The toe of the bank slope will be protected by a series of 0.4 m diameter rock rolls, vegetated fiber rolls, and filter fabric embedded in drain rock and rebar staked to the underlying soil. Fiber rolls insure toe support and erosion protection while providing a suitable planting medium for live willow cuttings. The surface of the fill will be protected by a reinforced erosion control mat. The erosion control blanket will be planted with willow and wild rose cuttings. The repair will extend for 50 meters upstream from the bridge. Slopes at the bridge will be stabilized by installation of a stacked sacrete (concrete sack) revetment extending up a distance of 3 meters from the channel bottom. Sacrete will be placed 10 meters upstream (abutting the layered engineered fill) and 10 meters downstream of the bridge. Asphalt rubble downstream of the bridge and exposed in the creek bank will be removed and replaced with vegetated rock rip-rap. The slope extending approximately 15 meters downstream of the bridge will be protected with a reinforced erosion control blanket. z-zo North Bank Slopes at the bridge will be stabilized by installation of a stacked sacrete revetment extending up to a distance of 3 meters from the channel bottom. Sacrete will be placed 6 meters upstream and downstream of the bridge. Rock rolls and vegetated fiber rolls will be placed as bank stabilization on either side of the sacrete wall, extending 20 meters upstream and 15 meters downstream of the bridge. The slope above will be protected with a coir erosion blanket. The Scope of Work for the Golf Course site includes landscape maintenance (replanting and weed control, and watering), for a 1-year period following acceptance of work, as pan of the Base Bid. Maintenance for an additional 2-year period is an Add Alternate. The Engineer's Estimate for this project is a Base Bid of $34,625, with the additional 2-year landscape maintenance Add Alternate of $ 9,360. Maintenance could be performed by City crews. ,Z-3J PISTOL RANGE REPAIR SITE The City's Pistol Range repair site is located on San Luis Obispo Creek, 400 meters (1,300 feet) above Highway 101. The Pistol Range address is on Fox Hollow Road. The repair site is located on the downstream edge of a meander bend. The north bank of the creek, below the practice range, is nearly vertical, about 7 meters high, and completely barren of vegetation. Heavy storm flows apparently moved a root wad from upstream and deposited it near the edge of the bank, below the range. The rootwad diverted flow against the bank, scouring out the bed and the bank along approximately 24 meters of creek bank. A cobble/gravel bar has formed downstream of the scour area. Immediately upstream of the repair site, below the water reservoir, the banks are well vegetated with willows. However, the channel is incised in this area and the toe berm is missing, making the banks potentially vulnerable. The scour hole and surrounding eroded bank area will be filled with well graded rock fill to re- establish the prior channel toe. The repair site dimensions are approximately 27 m (89') long by 8 m (26') deep. The rootwad log at the site will be anchored (roots into channel pointed slightly upstream) into the channel bed in a small trench and secured in place with several 2.54 cm (1") steel pipes driven through it into the bed sediments. It will also be weighted down with boulders. This will provide a scour hole and fish habitat during spring flows, but this part of the bank is above the summer low flow channel. The rootwad will create local scour holes for fish habitat. Geogrids (soil filled synthetic and coir geotextile blankets with the front end-wrapped) will be stacked oft top of the bed created by the log and boulder base. Layers in between the geogrids will be planted with cuttings of live willows, snowberry and wild rose. This project is a demonstration of alternative biotechnical approaches that are appropriate for natural areas of the creek, where protection of valuable bank top improvements is not as critical. Typically, a rootwad structure would, however, have additional tree boles. The Scope of Work for the Pistol Range site includes landscape maintenance (replanting and weed control, and watering), for a 1-year period following acceptance of work, as part of the Base Bid. Maintenance for an additional 2-year period is an Add Alternate. The Engineer's Estimate for this project is a Base Bid of $47,600, with the additional 2-year landscape maintenance Add Alternate of$7,200. Maintenance could be performed by City crews. Attachment 5 ���II�IIII IIII��IIIII�I�������III Illll cityO sAn lolls oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY 91-97 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1 . Project Title: San Luis Obispo Creek Corridor Management and Enhancement Plan: Selected Phase I Improvements 2. Lead Agency: City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works Department 955 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person: Environment Review: Glen Matteson, Associate Planner Phone: 805 781-7165 Project Design: Wayne Peterson, City Engineer Phone: 805 781-7200 4. Project Location: San Luis Obispo Creek, Prefumo Creek, Stenner Creek (following map) 5..,Project Sponsor: City of San Luis Obispo 6. General Plan Designation: The General Plan Land Use Element designates creek channels as Open Space. The proposed restoration and repair sites are bordered by Open Space, Public Facility, residential, and commercial land-use designations. 7. Zoning: The Zoning Map shows some major creek channel segments as Conservation/Open Space. The channel locations of the proposed restoration and repair sites are bordered by several types of zones, including open space, residential, and commercial. 8. Description of the Project The project's goals are: • repair previous erosion damage of some creek banks; • avoid damage to existing, adjacent structures from future erosion and flooding at certain locations, mainly by stabilizing creek banks; • restore the natural creek environment in certain areas, mainly by planting native plants and removing invasive, nonnative plants. /O The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include he disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. V� Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805) 781-7410. \ ER 91 -97 WORK SITES CAL O POLY ,Bishop Peak f ,Cerro San Luis -{ 6 s 1 Terrace G _ Hill � 6 y i _ f Zo 410 h �r � Sfreef r �flls 2 3 ® NORTH a 1000 FEET 500 METERS 0 22 See table in text for key to locations _. and references to more detailed maps. Z,� ,I The City proposes various combinations of restoring and stabilizing creek banks and enlarging creek channel capacity at 11 individual sites on San Luis Obispo Creek and its tributaries (preceding map). Of the 11 sites, nine are designated Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) repair sites, where work is to be completed before the 1997-98 rains start. The other sites have been identified as needing repair or improvement in the immediate future. The project includes reconstructing slope banks eroded by flooding in 1995, placing rock in various forms to stabilize the bottoms (toes) of channel banks, increasing channel capacity at the work sites so the restored creek can better contain future floods, and planting to help stabilize banks and improve riparian habitat. Project construction techniques and planting are intended to avoid or mitigate potential impacts to plants, wildlife, and water quality. Nearly all excavating, filling, and placing of large rock features will be done from the top of bank, using a long-reach excavator or grade-all. Slope planting and placing fabric slope stabilization will be done using small equipment, and by hand. The table on the following pages lists the individual sites and summarizes the proposed changes. The proposed channel modifications are based on a comprehensive analysis of the affected areas and their relationships with the watershed, and resulting recommendations, all prepared by a consulting firm that worked with City staff and involved agencies. Two reports contain this information: "Stream Corridor Management Plan for San Luis Obispo Creek, Phase l Study Area, Volume /" (Questa Engineering Corporation, May 2, 1997), and the companion "(Draft) Volume /l: Design Concept Plan" (Questa Engineering Corporation, June 27, 1997). These reports are available for reference at the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department, 955 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo. The Volume 11 report includes more potential work sites than are proposed by the City for construction under this Initial Environmental Study. Additional environmental review will be done if additional sites are proposed for projects. Also, additional environmental review will be done for the adoption of revised policies and standards for flood control and creek channel modifications, which. may follow from the reports cited above. A Phase II Report, to be available in late 1997 or early 1998, will identify stream corridor management needs, for other areas of San Luis Obispo Creek and the watershed that are downstream or outside the San Luis Obispo city limits. This work will be subject to the review and approval of San Luis Obispo County and the Zone 9 Flood Control District of San Luis Obispo County, as well as other reviewing agencies. 9. Project Entitlements Requested: City grading plan approval for creek bank repair and sediment removal; City Council approval of plans and specifications for the work other than repair and replaceme-- tasks to be done by city crews. 23 ,2—2..dr ^y N (n m a O N O «, 66 m O O O m CO m O O O O O O c n« O c E lC0Cv :• ` O f6 a) D. — m " E � 0ca Y � •- C �� F m o Lo LOn Lo 0 0 O O c d ip E LOCO N '•• t0 U .L. m p 7 W d v c n o . a o � c Oo � mti tCD tm ' Y ' 'M a) cn N I N CO O7 m tyi) (VN y T c c - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o L E J m O r, Ln c9 0o O o — m v7 p m V E c c c o)c « > y a) O L N d a1 O Y m '"' D. O E O L N U U N 7 7 LO _O m (P . U C ° d 'T' aD aio () o o � E ° 03 aa)) 0 r D � +� ? ° o o � o a ov m a' ° 0 y 01 E .. c E Y m D m o 3 0 3 g 3 3 ° 3 E ° ° 2 3 0 0 o U c m a o a o o >> o c y o 3 ° :3-0 a o �, OT + m 0 CD C O O y D p C N "O "O O T ? c Y : v v (a E > CL CD a c m d 3 a) 7 \ a - 7 m U aj Y m m '. �O C C m m a Y m E O O y m O «. U 7 U x a) 0 a) U to n t �' o y m c .4 m .c m o c o c —a°i c m E ° a W c a U ° '3 C) h O` `. 01 r h d m d 3 a U Y m a) 'C II t7p U O .p aO.. C Q C �+ c 7 .Y U C `_ .° O L U a7. •�.0 o N H C j (L N UO U m N 7 ° x m O C C .t.. w ` a) y .� c A `tl C E U) U c m a .. n ° E Y m m m m Q Q a 3 n o m . 3 v a) N m y c a� m -0 m 7 U U ` _N `+ ° N > C T S U ~ m C O V D. Y C - 3 m Y m y '° :: a) U E O - m .C) O 0 C .. (`a U O) m _ c E _ o y 0 3 0 m LO > m m ` m 7 N a.m. U v1 C y O m O m m m Q Qj O U p c - U o a Y ai . d o c a) c . m d a ° E 0 m � y U' N t O ° E �[ U O m .+-. a•;, m ° am-� E a• d C `. F U) .p y m o y o .o d U o f a) m c ° c O . - d 1O a 3 -° m m m �° E �[ m m O Vl m ° Y m i. •m O a) 0) C 7 N E 3 u, y 3 N n 7 ' m a i c) ° rn m E N m a) c N CO rn a) m W c o o c 3 M o c w c c .0 3 ° ) c > c m .D > d y •o m a+ - O - - O O Y '� a-. a=• O O C Y O O C Y m L .O U m .° m _� .0 .clz m �- "O m m o -0 m a) 2 m m O m a) E E -0 .O ° m T 0 m a-• < 0" < m < cm < 3 Q a U o m rn ° D � a 3 m `� > � 'E Cl a) N cc O m y O _n r L Y .. «+ Y Y C _ N = C a U) D CCO o o c y E ° (j a> m n a ° ° ° 4y oco 3 (U .m a m 7 L N L c 3 y C Y a C Y a) � � O C .D fn D. C ° m O N .0 O w — .. m c to E «� m (U p 7 cm a m n m ... c m E m ,� m c Em 3x 3 ' �) m7 Q) o '- rJo 7 't+ c G O Y m Y N O N E E E .0 m (90 W a C a) C a) a.+ v1 a) 'p U [A C -O L p C SIU X (6 C x m _d Hm m I D d �/0 U m pm � C � - U) m LL D m m D. m r+ cc C) a+ (n m c C m 7 m \ 7 \ L L C m O Q m N co c Ln N N (`7 t' O N'O m E T a0.. 00 (7J }' N E (A Cn T� Y m a+ (n 7 2 Co m d ++ m 2 0 0 m OT Q) O +Y+ CU c 0 m CL COCL 0 z E flc cc tm ¢ .n ¢ of u) mu y `� D m +� m w p -a OC $ E ° u mCD E Dc`o N ymjO. N ;p N 0m r- cc M D U) E � °coCD m m Q 2 Q E_ Q Q a C� U 2 U m W oCL Z II aNi m . m — O C O CD LL yc m r- N (h to (O r * Q m U m : E Z 24 .Zr E m O N Y oZS m O r- O U y U O O O O U o c a-O a O Cr EM cc m0" C `O `W C W d .W L y E « O m in O O O to O 3 W CD N LoO O cLi .L- co y, l0 f7 O a) (7 W 7 y CL Q H W N o O O O to t0 C C O C i d O t0 co •c0 . '� w N M O m vyi Y CL CD (D dY > Lo O O O L Uo LE J w `Wt0 T N p W coV O W 7 E U Ccn C OI c yCD T y U -O coJ aull aW+ d_ cn O - W X_ W O < O L y U O F O Co ° E m C O L m e C n Y m o O Ia N � ; W O c :4 c = °a o c 3 E y a) y C W _ C O 7 C E > 7 N W — y - ` U d o E o 2 o d M U o 3 a 3 j o oU c ,� 3 E 0 3 ° W O W U ti o o 0 0 0 O7 W �^ to W i+ W . Y L L W -Z L Q m c U 3 C < 3 5 m Q ° `c (D y o C (D 6 co m o v ? E m > _ co 3: -- 8 _ 3 oY � �? O 3 > 30 o 3 n L O o o \ v ° m ... '^ a O y W '^ .O - C O COTal W W o a) U 7 c a-, 0 C «. L -Y W U N «, Z , 7 t y co > -0 II w O E E O Y co -0 y 'co c a .0 Y a `0 v c •p o. ai W E f0 0 _ tm W W c IZ o O o v W 3 U .- c � -0 W m � C H OC U Q E v o o o y y E o °I a) m - CC ° O �' o L ami ° o U a y O 0 y W y L OO D 3 C O W .O j CO it — 9 �. .• y 0 7 C E ya) .. (D � YC w cA O W W CA C U O '0 0 m 7 m U `—" o v vn E 0) Q W m ° I a 01 W w ° EC- W Jm y -p W cm 0 W W W C W W -O 0I Y �+ C E W -O m c0 01 U +L+ W O C X CL C O o y CO W CI 7 C C (7 > W > 2 :c y W o o < ca •c «. a U a W 7 W ` Q W N ` cC Y W m \ L •y O W Y C 3 W E C _0 co c W o ,. o E m .. W E -0 d c C � aY� Ub3 CD 3 0 °a) m o o m < � Wmoo p O r ` E .-, cC o c c W y E ... c" O p aI W W c 3 0 . W EW mQ3 E os >_ v W E a� E E m -0O: co 0 7 .y :° cep W C O W W U W C W CC CD -0 = Oc C W 7 J L O W m 7 E C y C ca `LL W'O < LI tU � W � dCN tU O y -0 W E > to m Y E aI .. CC y WN Em YI 0 01" = cmCtoyWLZ� d a� C Eyppp O Cd aw° < G V Z o OEV n LU w c m W E = m LL a — d = 0 m II W rn Z — 0- y � cc o� D 0 CO ow 7 E n v CD W W LL -C aU m co t) O • < co U V: r o «"W E — Z CO 25 '�_27 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: San Luis Obispo Creek is the major waterway through the City of San Luis Obispo. The main stem of San Luis Obispo Creek flows southwest from its headwaters in the Santa Lucia Range to the Pacific Ocean at Avila Beach. Within the study area, the upper creek reaches flow through a sparsely developed valley before entering the urbanized reaches within the City. The section of Prefumo Creek involved in the project runs through the Laguna Lake Golf Course. The problems to be addressed by the proposed project resulted largely from an extensive wildfire in the upper San Luis Obispo watershed in 1994 and prolonged rains during the winter of 1995. The ensuing runoff eroded stream banks, causing up to five feet of scour in some areas. Recent erosion, sedimentation, and flow obstructions have altered conditions in and along the creeks. More detailed information is available in the Stream Corridor Management Plan for San Luis Obispo Creek, Phase l Study Area, Volume 1. 11 . Other public agencies whose approval is required: Permits required: California Department of Fish and Game - Streambed Alteration Agreement U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Form ENG4345 . Calif. Regional Water Quality Control Board - 401 Water Quality Certification Review required: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Review solicited: California Department of Historic Preservation - Historic Structures ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: This project would potentially affect the environmental factors checked below, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics Population and Housing Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources Resources Geological Problems Hazards Recreation Water Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Public Services Transportation and Utilities and Service Circulation S stems 26 FISH AND GAME FEES: There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefor, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regard to filing Fish and Game fees. The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on X attached sheets will be part of the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project may have one or more significant effects on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a"Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir. BY: 14 Sig ature i Dat John Mandeville, Long-Range Planning Manager Printed Name 27 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A"No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (for example, the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (for example, the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including impacts that are off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to thetiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (such as general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. z- so 28 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91 97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with a General Plan designation or zoning? 1, 2 X b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies 3, 4 X adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? X d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (such as impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from X incompatible land uses)? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or X minority community)? a, d, e) The project would not change land use, and zoning consistency is not an issue. The channel changes will not adversely affect agricultural land or connections within or between neighborhoods. b) Two adopted documents contain City policies on creek modifications: the Open Space Element of the General Plan, and the Flood Management Policy. The Open Space Element has several general goals and policies for creek corridors, which do not raise issues for this project. Two specific OSE policies are (paraphrased): - Approve creek alterations only if no practicable alternative is available, or to protect public health and safety. Creek alterations should use stabilization methods which maintain a natural (earthen) channel and provide for riparian vegetation. Non-natural bank stabilization methods that allow trees and shrubs, such as gabions and rocks, may be used, but only when there is no practicable alternative to natural creek alterations. Hard bank protection that does not allow for plantings (such as solid walls) may be permitt, only if there is no practicable alternative to the use'of bank stabilization materials that allow planting. - Enhance creek corridors and their habitat value by: (1) providing an adequate creek setback, (2) maintaining creek corridors in an essentially natural state, (3) restoring creeksto achieve a natural creek corridor, (4) planting riparian vegetation within creek corridors, and where possible, within creek setback areas, (5) prohibiting the planting of invasive, non-native plants within creek corridors or creek setbacks, and (6) avoiding tree removals within creek corridors except when determined appropriate by the City Arborist. Determination of "no practicable alternative" can be a matter of judgment. The project appears to conform with adopted policies. It proposes the natural-channel approach where space is sufficient to allow stable earthen slope banks, and various methods that include planting where creekside space is more limited. The proposed bank-stabilization methods are consistent with the Flood Management Policy's ranking of preferred treatments. The project is intended to comply with the Federal Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and California regulations concerning stream alterations. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population X projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (for example, through projects in an X undeveloped area or major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? X The project does not involve development or removal of dwellings. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: z-3i 29 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? X b) Seismic ground shaking? X c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? X d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? X e) Landslides or mudflows? X f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil X conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? X h) Expansive soils? X i) Unique geologic or physical features? X This project primarily involves the repair and restoration of creek banks which have become unstable or subject to additional erosion. To achieve this repair and bank stabilization, some banks will be reshaped to a stable slope of two horizontal to one vertical, or flatter. Some banks will be filled to approximately their pre-1995 contours. The completed project is expected to have a long-term beneficial impact by reducing erosion potential along the creek. It is likely that a"sediment starved" creek would flow faster and thereby become more erosive for unprotected areas, either by cutting the channel deeper or eroding the banks laterally. However, the areas affected by the project are an insignificant fraction of the watershed areas which can contribute sediment. Overall sediment loads are not likely to change significantly. The proposed "biotechnical" approaches emphasize erosion-control surfaces, such asplanted gabions and fabric nets, that can flex and settle without failing catastrophically as rigid structures do in extremely erosive flows. Construction activities can cause erosion. Proposed construction timing and other recommended mitigation will reduce such impacts to insignificance. (See "Mitigation Measures" section.) 4. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the X rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards X such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (including temperature, dissolved X oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water X body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water X movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception X of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h) Impacts to groundwater quality? X i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater X otherwise available for public water supplies? a) At two sites, bank erosion has been caused partly by flood waters entering the creek over a considerable length. The project would focus these"return flows" to chutes with protected surfaces. This is not a significant change. 30 2-3a Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated c) In the long term, the project will reduce water temperatures and turbidity (fine sediment) by establishing a shading tree canopy and reducing bank erosion. The project's porous and planted stabilizing materials will trap sediment, and the additional plants will help remove nutrients from the water. Short-term construction impacts will not be significant (see "Mitigation Measures" section). e) Boulder clusters may be added to the channel bottom to direct flows away from areas which have been eroded, .and to foster development of pools and protective bars of sand and gravel. Also, rocks may be placed to create low "falls" of less than 0.5 meter (18 inches), to reduce the slope of the stream bed , and therefor flow velocity, in limited areas. At one site (Mariposa), the City will consider diverting more of the flood flow, or possibly the low-flow channel, to the previously developed by-pass channel, by removing sediment at that channel's inlet. These changes are not significant, because they will not affect the total amount of water in the creek or the overall relationships between wetted area and riparian vegetation. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an 5 existing or projected air quality violation X (noncompliance with APCD Environmental Guidelines)? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause X any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? X There will be insignificant emissions from construction equipment. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or.traffic congestion? X b) Hazards to safety from design features (such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses X (such as farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby X uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? X e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? X f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative X transportation (such as bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts (in compatibility X with San Luis Obispo Co. Airport Land Use Plan)? There will be an insignificant increase in trips by workers and construction equipment. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal affect: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats X (including plants, fish, insects, animals or birds)? b) Locally designated species (such as heritage trees)? X c) Locally designated natural communities (such as oak X forest, coastal habitat)? d) Wetland habitat (marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? X e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X Continues next page 2 -33 31 Issues and Supporting Information Sources sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless. Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) The California Natural Diversity Data Base was searched and the creek was surveyed (Morro Group, for Questa Engineering, 1996). The site contains populations of, or suitable habitat for, at least five"species of concern:" Southwestern pond turtle (Federal C1, State SSC); Two-striped garter snake (Federal C2, State SSC); California red legged frog (Federal T, State SSC); California tiger salamander (Federal C2, State SSC); Southern steelhead (State SSC). The project is expected to have long-term beneficial impacts on species of concern, since it will increase the amount of escape cover, shading, deep pools, opportunities for nutrient uptake by plants, and increased buffering between sensitive species and urban neighbors. However, temporary habitat disruption or loss are concerns during construction. Several mitigation measures are recommended, involving worker education and well defined work areas and procedures, and supervision by a qualified biologist (see "Mitigation Measures" section). d) In total, the project will entail the disturbance of about 3,000 square-meters (0.74 acre) of waters or wetlands. These impacts will be mitigated by appropriately contouring the ground surface and by planting native species and removing invasive, non-native plants at the work sites and immediately upstream and downstream from the work sites. The project will result in no net loss of wetlands. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b► Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and X inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? San Luis Obispo Creek and its tributaries are not sources for sand or gravel used in construction. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including oil, pesticides, chemicals or X radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan X or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health X hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential X health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, X grass or trees? a) Whenever petroleum-fueled vehicles or equipment are used, there is a potential for accidental releases. The creek is especially sensitive to such contamination. Project specifications will include requirements for spill avoidance and prompt reporting and clean-up. (See "Mitigation Measures" section.) 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to "unacceptable" noise levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise X Element? There will be an minor, short-term increase in noise from construction equipment and related traffic. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X 32 �'�y Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) Other governmental services? X The proposed bank-stabilization techniques are intended to have maintenance requirements lower than the .no -project" option, and not significantly exceeding more environmentally disruptive options. Implementation of the project may increase short-term maintenance requirements. As with any new installation, there may be repairs, replanting and adjustments needed to assure the proper functioning of slope stabilization elements. In addition, pruning of planted vegetation to assure proper canopy development and acceptable flood resistance may be needed during the first three years. It is expected that the increased initial maintenance burden will offset potentially greater impacts such as bank failures, flooding, and loss of bank-top improvements if the project is not completed. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? X b) Communications systems? X c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution X facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? X e) Storm water drainage? X f) Solid waste disposal? X g) Local or regional water supplies? X The project will not affect utility demand or amount of supplies. It will have a beneficial impact by reducing the potential for service interruptions due to failure of pipes exposed by bank erosion. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? X c) Create light or glare? X Proposed bank-stabilization methods are intended to appear more natural than inflexible structures, and therefore are expected to be more attractive in the long term than features such as walls. Temporary disruptions from construction may be unattractive, but will not be significant. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? X b) Disturb archaeological resources? 6, 7 X C) Affect historical resources? 6, 7 X d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which X would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the X potential impact area? a) Paleontological resources have not been found and are very unlikely within the watershed, given its lack of sedimentary rock. b) No prehistoric archaeological resources are known to exist in the construction areas, but the watershed's long Chumash settlement means resources may be encountered. Standard mitigation for archaeologically sensitive areas is recommended (see "Mitigation Measures" section, part 13). c) There are no historic resources in the construction areas. The historic Black Adobe and an associated shed are threatened by creek erosion (site reference #8). The project is intended to protect this structure by stabilizing the adjacent stream bank. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks X or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X The project will not affect existing or planned parks or trails. 33 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, X reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered.plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Compared with no-project or conventional, inflexible bank protection, long-term impacts will be beneficial. Mitigation designed into the project is expected to reduce short-term impacts (construction disruption) to insignificance. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental X goals? The project is based on studies which take a long-term perspective of creek changes, including interactions between human actions and natural processes. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection X with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) Other, similar projects may be undertaken by the City, private landowners, or other organizations. At this time, none are proposed for simultaneous construction. Projects based on the same design principles and incorporating the same types of mitigation will not have cumulative, adverse impacts. d) Does the project have environmental effects which will T7 cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, X either directly or indirectly? The project will not adversely affect creek resources used by humans, nor the adjacent human community. 2-3,6 34 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 17. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to thetiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087. Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093, 321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988);Leonofff V. Monterey Board of Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990). This checklist does not rely on earlier analysis. However, the referenced reports (Stream Corridor Management Plan for San Luis Obispo Creek, Phase / Study Area, Volume /and Volume /Q provide more detailed discussion of environmental setting, project actions, alternatives, and potential mitigation measures. 18. SOURCE REFERENCES 1. General Plan Land Use Element, City of San Luis Obispo 2. Zoning Regulations, City of San Luis Obispo 3. General Plan Open Space Element, City of San Luis Obispo 4. Flood Management Policy, City of San Luis Obispo 5. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District, 1995 6. Historic Resources Survey Completion Report ,City of San Luis Obispo, 1983. 7. Historic and archaeological resource maps, City of San Luis Obispo Community, Development Dept. 1-37 35 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 19. MITIGATION MEASURES & MITIGATION MONITORING Mitigation measures are those features of a project which are specifically intended to avoid or reduce harm to the environment. Also, this listing relates the mitigation measures to the monitoring actions that will be taken to assure the mitigation is carried out and has the intended consequences. According to the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures are added to the project after it is originally proposed. For this creeks project, nearly all the mitigation measures described below were included in slightly different form in the original project description. They are presented here for emphasis and clarity. 1. Mitigation Measure: The City shall control the timing, sequence, and methods of construction, selection and maintenance of equipment, and the conduct of the contractor or workers, in accordance with the conditions and requirements of the forthcoming California Department of Fish and Game's "Streambed Alteration Agreement," the recommendations of the Stream Corridor Management Plan for San Luis Obispo Creek, Phase / Study Area, Volume /, and Volume ll: Design Concept Plan (Questa Engineering Corporation, 1997), and with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's anticipated "401 Water Quality Certification." Where more restrictive, the specific provisions of this initial study shall supersede the general provisions of the referenced documents. Monitoring Program: The City Engineering Department will inspect the construction operations daily to verify conformance with specifications and mitigations. The Natural Resources Manager will conduct periodic spot-check inspections to verify conformance with specifications and mitigations. A qualified Monitoring Biologist will be retained during work which could affect sensitive habitat. The Monitoring Biologist will inspect the work site each day, coordinate compliance with biological mitigation requirements, and prepared a daily log to document the presence or absence of any sensitive species and actions taken. 2. Mitigation Measure: Work areas in or adjacent to the channel shall be limited to those necessary for installation of slope stabilization, removal of sediment, or placement of features on the creek bottom. Work areas shall be clearly marked with survey flags, temporary fencing, or other means acceptable to the Monitoring Biologist. Construction access to other areas of the creek shall be prohibited. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 3. Mitigation Measure: Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by or under the direction of the Monitoring Biologist, within potential habitat for sensitive species. The Monitoring Biologist may designate exclusion zones based on such surveys. The Monitoring Biologist may prohibit the use of mechanized equipment within exclusion zones. To the extent possible, the City will require or perform measures to relocate individuals of sensitive species to suitable nearby habitat (see Mitigation Measure # 1. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 4. Mitigation Measure: Sensitive areas (vegetation, wildlife, or cultural resources) noted on the Construction Documents, or. identified by the Monitoring Biologist, will be protected with temporary construction fencing. Monitoring Program: Same as #1 . 2-38 36 Issues and Supporting Information Sources sources JPotentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 5. Mitigation Measure: Best Management Practices shall be employed to minimize erosion. These may include use of silt fences, straw bale dikes, temporary coffer dams and de-watering, and temporary protection during anticipated rain. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 6. Mitigation Measure: The City will provide orientation for the Contractor and all involved workers, to inform them of the biological conditions of the site, including sensitive species. Sensitive habitats and legal and listed status of each sensitive species, as well as potential penalties will be-described. Periodic briefings will be conducted to inform new workers of project concerns. Topics to be covered include: a) No pets, camping, or other personal use of the project site will be allowed. b) Killing wildlife or destruction of dens, nests or pools is prohibited. c) All food-realted trash items will be removed from the work site daily. d) Sightings, trappings, injuries or fatalities to identified sensitive species shall be immediately reported to the Monitoring Biologist. e) Protocol for encounter of sensitive species will be reviewed, and written handouts provided. Work areas, including earthwork, planting maintenance, and stockpile areas, shall be inspected daily before. beginning work. Any wildlife species found will be removed by biologists or allowed to escape. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 7. Mitigation Measure: Existing, mature, native trees removed as part of the project will replaced at a ratio of 3:1. Monitoring Program: The Monitoring Biologist, in collaboration with the City Arborist, will inspect and mark trees proposed to be removed. City staff will monitor replacement planting for survival, and arrange for additional planting as needed, to achieve the 3:1 replacement ratio at the beginning of the third growing season after project completion. 8. Mitigation Measure: Hazardous materials transfers, fueling, and other use of chemicals shall be restricted to staging areas away from the project site. Monitoring Program- The City Engineering Department will inspect the construction operations daily to verify conformance with specifications and mitigations. 9. Mitigation Measure: No work shall be conducted in any flowing stream without notification of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel. No obstructions or impediments to the migration of Steelhead or California Red Legged Frog shall be placed. in flowing streams. Monitoring Program: The Monitoring Biologist will inspect the site daily. The Natural Resources Manager will conduct periodic spot-checks to verify conformance. 10. Mitigation Measure: So far as possible, individuals of all sensitive species shall be removed from work areas before any construction activities. The Monitoring Biologist shall collect adult and juvenile specimens by hand, using a fine mesh dipnet. Two daytime and two nighttime surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologists prior to earth-moving activities, including the night before work begins. Vegetation that is proposed to be disturbed during construction may be removed to aid observations. Captured specimens shall be relocated to suitable habitat outside the project area. The biologists shall document the age, size, location of capture, and relocation site. During this work, the biologists will destroy invasive, nonr '• fauna. The Contractor shall immediately notify the Monitoring Biologi:,- Jf 37 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91 97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated any species of concern found by Contractor's personnel within the work area. Such specimens shall be captured by the Monitoring Biologist, placed in a clean container, and transported to a suitable habitat outside the work site. Special attention shall be taken to shade the container from direct sunlight and to maintain a moist environment. Monitoring Program: Relocated specimens of sensitive species shall be observed by the Monitoring Biologist, to determine the success of the relocation plan. At least one survey per week shall be conducted. After channel stabilization and revegetation are complete, the Monitoring Biologist shall prepare a report documenting the effectiveness of the protection measures. This report will describe the locations of all species of concern and injured or killed specimens. Information on these species identified in field surveys shall be sent to the Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB), administered by the Natural Heritage Program of the California Department of Fish and Game. Copies of the NDDB form and report shall be provided to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. 11. Mitigation Measure: Project work areas shall be revegetated as soon as feasible. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 12. Mitigation Measure: At each work site where water or wetlands are disturbed, resulting in reduced habitat value, a compensating habitat enhancement will be provided. The compensating enhancement will occur at the disturbance location and at approximately equal distances along the creek, upstream and downstream. The enhancement shall include contouring the ground surface or installing features that help form deep pools in the creek bed, and bank or bench areas suitable for wetlands vegetation. Native plant species will be planted, including trees that provide a canopy at maturity and understory plants to control erosion, take up nutrients, and provide food and shelter. Invasive, not-native plants will be removed. Monitoring Program: The Monitoring Biologist, in collaboration with the City's Natural Resources Manager, will inspect work locations at completion of the enhancement. City staff will monitor replacement planting for survival, and arrange for additional planting as needed. (This task is expected to be coordinated with the efforts of the San Luis Obispo County Land Conservancy and others, who enlist volunteers to help monitor and maintaining creek habitat values.) 13. Mitigation Measure: A qualified archaeologist will be retained to monitor excavation. If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources, or cultural materials, then construction activities which may affect them shall cease until the extent of the resource is determined and appropriate protective measures are approved by the Community: Development Director. The Community Development Director shall be notified of the extent and location of discovered materials so that they may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist. If pre-historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor will be retained to work with the archaeologist to document and remove the items. Disposition of artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws. A note concerning this requirement shall be included on the construction plans for the project. Monitoring Program: Community Development Department and Public Works Department staff will review construction documents and monitor compliance with them. �-y0 38 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 14. Mitigation Measure: During grading and earthwork operations, the site shall be regularly sprayed with water to reduce airborne dust. Monitoring Program: The City Engineering Department will inspect the construction operations daily to verify conformance with specifications and mitigations. The above mitigation measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts. Section 15070(b)(1) of the California Administrative Code requires the applicant to agree to the above mitigation measures before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is released for public review. I hereby agree to the mitigation measures and monitoring program outlined above. �1--- 1/2-3!97 "Wayn ' eterson, City Engineer Date Representative of Applicant i Creek projects IES 39 _ y� Attachment 6 ADDITIONS TO INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY 91-97 In the following excerpt pages, modified items are indicated by sI�aded.:pfmt.ing. �- YZ N m nt O N O Va�S m O O O Y c « m w o c o c o 0 °o CL v E m m a c o m « •— m Y E jp m m L w.- c ¢ m O t0 {O 10 O O O O 3 m m (p E W M N LO ci Y m 0 7 fA O ` CL Qcr N o y a e C o M M m o ccoo M m 'm L '� w M N N M W H G1 _ o' m «_Y m Y T _j 4- r O U) f07 coOO O C0 Ly O mo m M E U .4f C « L m m ai `o oyi a `o c m r Hv E Or w 0 m v m O ° m W m m m ° c o army mo ` « ° ° o � E ° . 3 mo � 3cc E m +� > a o o � owe. o � ai X ° Ey � � } cE � � o � 0 30 3 � 3 � 3 ° � Ea oo r « EOy2 � w 3o o Y a 3 O U c o o > o > i T o q > o m 4 vm cn o � co ° c om C ? ° p 0 ° — � m L � M 2 Qw Qa Qm Qom!cm .a Q3 � o em w v t O > m � " j w QY ? Y m Y m >, m M E >` N m my a C mC X >. a d ° m •' 3 m 3 � Y m a CO.- .0 cc V�. mw aC0 °—�°3 a«m;`. o;�m �w ae>' 5iCW C �j �-. ci '� •O m _;° mY «mC. ~7 WE o ° ° 0 x m � � wy 0 myEEor W = am m oo mav•CII In G C CL CyL oMMY m Co 0 O. a Y .4cWCO O XE . a m m CD o CD cca C _ Vw>c-0m m ° ° wM m C o w M 0 E ° -0 lo O m E 0 0 m CD mCm m mCE CD OmOa7 m 0 m w am z QO O E ° m m m m a mO w ° E w ° om r o oomo � Ema H ` .mCO wwmWo IL M mg � CL 3: yr m ac C O.•y0) mm 00 co ° O j m CD > >pC3O Cd3 Cca JmYoW — 0 OO O ° O m L � � � a " ° 'am EOEdo m ? oc® � m QQa « .0Mcm W � mmE � 0 N O m O Y Y c o o cots m ooEw m E am) a .0 > � � � c � aY�-Va3 m a m t H t m 3 m c ° Q eY m °� c ac O. c ° wm o m e ow — Y m d w E « Q p c 13 O. c m m m 3 OO L � c tM Em 3m 3w cow m ' Ear-0O= mo CL o E E � 7° m C O Y m Y N O •y w O m Co C m m M IM V X m c X m a W m m O m m m W to-0 O C ` N m LL O m m O. M ``. It m �`.. c0 m a z L M« 7 Q .0 N M tO N N M co E fA 0 0 ¢ d1 ¢ m �, ¢ D ¢ O m ¢ O m O f+ m C O m a ].*5 z E °c E c m ¢ 10 .0 ¢ v� � mrnU ` � � Fc a •c O oC E r ._ n m w �. IQ N .0 maZ a7 N ® a N 'D N 'Om •- f� W 7 mm E � ° ° mem E Q Q Q ° Q m ° U = J U o "' « o II EU m az = _ _ = a = _ _ m cc a cm m m m L p O`" m mt " • a s s • s U- -0 U mmm N M co ¢ S ; E Z w UCO 0 O ^ Y c Y m Lo v O O O O v o p W O O.a+ E cm c ' c `o m m a NE � 3 am LO 0 0 0 LO o 3m m Q m N LO O N ` m E M d O aL+ W O Om P7 m fn p° CL ¢ c � C. c c o Om — lob L > C N LO O O LO :0. 0 00 r E J � « m of .LG: LO 0 E (0 V oco w C U C X m _U C 0 W " CD r-m >V — E CD �L m0 a . a jcn a mc30 3 c3 m3 E ' mE CD m �� oa c co �Y m � 0 U c Y a y o E 0 3 a ° CD v 0 E o 0 0 o y � . m N W .. t > t . .. . L CQ m S rn W W ¢ 3 5 L0 ao p m L 'm W'0 5 L oWa c m "0 0 « E LO > «. ` 06 Z W W 0 o. y o a D ; 3 O o m " > c ° a W U w N O O'•0 W .•� �_ m'� Y Q m C 4) ca W�, 0 0 m c L _ Cb Cb E n m m o c o m 4 W cmi c U Y0mCO 0 E « +. .WYbam m, � o aco c 2 U Q E > cc c Y = 0 W 0 ` :a c' ai W Q y o o ° o cap. 0 0. o ° '.o ` a Y Qw 0 O r vi To ai L O W �+ •-,- O «+ E m v p L 0 0 3 a 0 C .0 m ; ... o _� O 3 WW ` W Y O 0 C a •0,W Y O. O W 'O..W. mW _° m O) C d 0 O a �. W 5 .0 .0 m - m m m a mCD r ,�+.h O W m ri lL m 0 W W W L C m CL O 3. O � W C'W J W Y a CD L m `m W am m a wa. m « .c E « � rA o:Lc ?� ° m .. m L c X C r a °R 2 .0 C..f0 m .._:. O..0 i+,W (� S O W >, Q w W m 0 0 -Q. mm w..-..d c - O-:r W m ` W Y Y m C.« '�O• L � C W cm o m EmmbE� m E � wm c a.L4W3� L03 CD m a0 0 oa ¢.. ... mm °� o ;., 3 o m W rz m c -W w a m o o m m 0 c o c m m E E W Q3 o cca '0 m mE EcWao� ,mo CL - .2 « :° Y E 7 Y m 0. C m W W o CD E c o m m c°i m e Co.a �'o c ° c oC m ° � a to W m ° m.. � m7 •`0E ° W .0 `L d C m a a s m 7 m _d m �. Oqt CmWamE > +W+ E m « C m Cc IL _C N ° a� 00.0y� Z E N O C c 0 W a > - m a � Lo Qcc E V m:— IIowEm y aZ 0 O w w w = wmc° �Cim W CD E O w m — O E m Z — — a m E �:5 0m 0 m a m.Z C 0a « m lu u.0) E w 00 C) O . :. ¢ m U Z m E �— vie Issues and Supporting Infon,._.ion Sources SourcesF .,ally Potentially Less Than No impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 5. Mitigation Measure: Best Management Practices shall be employed to minimize erosion. Thes. may include use of silt fences, straw bale dikes, temporary coffer dams and de-watering, and temporary protection during anticipated rain. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 6. Mitigation Measure: The City will provide orientation for the Contractor and all involved workers, to inform them of the biological conditions of the site, including sensitive species. Sensitive habitats and legal and listed status of each sensitive species, as well as potential penalties will be described. Periodic briefings will be conducted to inform new workers of project concerns. Topics to be covered include: a) No pets, camping, or other personal use of the project site will be allowed. b) Killing wildlife or destruction of dens, nests or pools is prohibited. c) All food-realted trash items will be removed from the work site daily. d) Sightings, trappings, injuries or fatalities to identified sensitive species shall be immediately reported to the Monitoring Biologist. e) Protocol for encounter of sensitive species will be reviewed, and written handouts provided. Work areas, including earthwork, planting maintenance, and stockpile areas, shall be inspected daily before beginning work. Any wildlife species found will be removed by biologists or allowed to escape. Monitoring Program: Same as #1. 7. Mitigation Measure: Existing, mature, native trees removed as part of the project will be replaced at a ratio of 3:1. Monitoring Program: The Monitoring Biologist, in collaboration with the Natural Resourcf. Manager and the City Arborist, will inspect and mark trees proposed to be removed. City staff will monitor replacement planting for survival, and arrange for additional planting as needed, to achieve the 3:1 replacement ratio at the beginning of the third growing season after project completion. 8. Mitigation Measure: Hazardous materials transfers, fueling, and other use of chemicals shall be restricted to staging areas away from the project site. Monitoring Program: The City Engineering Department will inspect the construction operations daily to verify conformance with specifications and mitigations. 9. Mitigation Measure: No work shall be conducted in any flowing stream without notification of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel. No obstructions or impediments to the migration of Steelhead or California Red Legged Frog shall be placed in flowing streams. Monitoring Program: The Monitoring Biologist will inspect the site daily. The Natural Resources Manager will conduct periodic spot-checks to verify conformance. 10. Mitigation Measure: So far as possible, individuals of all sensitive species except steelhead shall be removed from work areas before any construction activities. Steelhead will be-allowed .to..escape. The Monitoring Biologist shall collect adult and juvenile specimens by hand, using a fine mesh dipnet. Two daytime and two nighttime surveys shall be conducted by qualified biologists prior to earth-moving activities, including the night before work begins. Vegetation that is proposed to be disturbed during construction may be removed to aid observations. Captured specimens shall be relocated to suitable habitat outside the project area. The biologists shall document the age, size, location of capture, and relocation site. During this work, the biologists will destroy invasive, nonnative fauna. Th- Contractor shall immediately notify the Monitoring Biologist of any specit a-vs Issues and Supporting Infor.._don Sources Sources .tialy potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant ER 91-97 Issues Unless impact Mitigation Incorporated 14. Mitigation Measure: During grading and earthwork operations, the site shall be regularly sprayed with water to reduce airborne dust. Monitoring Program: The City Engineering Department will inspect the construction operations daily to verify conformance with specifications and mitigations. .15t. Mitigation Measure:.. Where..a bank-side.,pool.would .be.eliminated by the., project, a sheltering structure shell be provided an. integral part of whatever bank-stabling material is.to be:used.4Sdch a structure may be a projecting shelf between the first and secondfayer.of.gabions;,orwhere.rock rip-rap is used,.a short section;of_concrete.culvert,placed perpendicular to flow-or a table-type structure:: f"lunker'); - or .equivalent•'device: acceptable to. the Natural Resources:Manager, the. Community. Development Director, and the City Engineer.•The-structure may ,consist of.,concrete, timber, or coniposjte material.Thei inter of this rneasure is.toprovide, in the low4low channel;a dyrable,- estNtiically acceptable:.1 device'that:allows.steelhead to take-shelte from predators,jn-a setting similar to that created by a.steep or.overhanging bank.:The,City,recognizes that,thelong-term dynamics of the creek may result.'in the .installed shelters.being-more or less effective under varying conditions,includin9 theg rowth and washing=away of-shelte'ring vegetation. Monitoring Program: The Natural Resources•Manager,the Community.Development Director, and the `City<'.Engineer,. or-their. designated representatives will review the construction:-, documents, and Jnspect'.:the installation. of: the sheltering structures.. The above mitigation measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts. Section 15070(b)(1) of the California Administrative Code requires the applicant to agree to the above mitigation measures before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is released for public review. I hereby agree to the mitigation measures and monitoring program outlined above. Wayne Peterson, City Engineer Date Representative of Applicant Creek projects IES PR6 1 of 17 ity SA1 luis ouTo A'P' PEAL ' T� THE CITY COUNCIL In accordance with the appeals procedures as authorized by Title, 1, Chapter 1.20 of the rm San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of --t W f{lr C6/uA/tl J TV,-' rendered on rn which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds Vv lM for submilting.the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.) . �/� ��P�A�I�UG � G\ 7-h'E NE6A`I Vj� DEC-�A�cDAJ e 9l Ttl M I T VON7-1W jq!!�2 77tF, . 7;6 fw�sF-crCoo'cr puzac o2 PzIvArF aR9P- 5 PRJ ECr5 -11-ki Dt M-FMc5,H A 5T-kr--W5 �JATU- 2kL-Vr-M>A&nx ? 7� $YVIFa NtF-ft0AE2 A5 LOtr-5 i f f15 61\)V-- 1A) M 04711 R-r. e 5J.15 Pr Gt tPoV It9F�.l �tD1�-� flR6>Jsr) Il)UM 8E-P,a '?!-47� APP-[CA4.7r in t l,4 GrTzl.-,. TffE 1 bi t 7-I A L 5rubY6J�v vi- , [mt<ba:�UPo - 76 �I.4 11� C-r� • W 5.EW EZq , C kT—6A1UlC P6015 T- fA-F 60)4.- B. z D�7Re V A. d2#sEc?uCt 5 - P'isLT1:P '�© i tt�1Xkk JA p-"r F/JftTIVE i} he un erslgnedsse a easlonbeen appealed wlt : �CmRy77,VUE—b�Jt tb tAru rN / ma t rYT Ev9toPr►-1 rr Name/Department (Date) Appellant: 13rDl�Y�l51' * ��5� 1 A ��-r� Gr.. s�� i Name/Title 5"19EAA45 f}(. hAj(, t Mailing Address)�(& Zip ode) Home Phone Work Phone Representative: Nameffitle Mailing Address (& Zip Code) > For Official Use Only: V\ Calendared for Date & Time Received: b c: City Attorney > �e City Administrative Officer Copy to the following department(s): �C vF, P CITY OFSAN LULsaeLsro Original in City Clerk's Office COYWNI DEVELOP1EIRr �. 45 CAI1I .2-y7 z qf:51 A-M PH t&PrM51'f c9JTP�-Hl F_lw SND VU12'r"j„ESQ ittib lAJ UFie R T�` 6 5MAA5 MR.A )`Q& riA) x( 15 OP9 t5 J t) � HA VF- I3 3 )VOME j ttE (ftT-9( IVA5 A$JItW51tiY �� PS��M bRT�IBuTA,PI�S rOA "zOME tVORK. Uum, 2EcglVEb 'RF jN rTl�tl. STUDY b1 B 1.t�sr� 1- � A,4� rbc DF 7HE �xr��ivF�ss �A-eo �'6��f�tn7��L1�T©rc� u�J,ex�Rolu� tJDU-.> &JA AAPr&W 1OQV5=pc r jam A7iJt> D FAN r- P;?O(�SF. 7 D ri fF- A"-rt Glen rM I C57FER- UJL5E lM 6OMF1J>Esr ( CWL� kf;WWDM : J� A-r NtDSi Or 7�t-tE tf ;5iTE5 PWR75 A RDR rtitAllEDjPcTL FGQ9D UMK. f &4ajEI/C�Lee, 1\9 1 rIf 12 1�-f IN l'T11�L. Si7.C1��It�TPt��S�GN ^war Fiw DOC4 MF- r TRE k-x i 6Tr:� OF &PZ v � Twb e ' Po viPrLor �, � �7 S 95i lVE SPr5eOFS j4h,51T-Pr T a FO A-UY6PTE M k9YPWf&�4 b CCK BED �k� epi&)K Im FAc5z 1ti-latE DE:5wti 6A-96r,-� Pt.-A/u, w srvakA2- EF �� 5irP5 �PE�t Tc� f�T LLf�S i iA1]rF�2lvti i�Tv� �tlU D J G�vE�1 t-E Sf"�Ed-tt,� A1�9���� 54�CT�tGC�E.ST �U PMt> YZUM4F-S7 THr,- "R-b „li©mm, (MMtP-t4ATFJ,--4e -r-040 55 ' POTWVAL �F�CPVE SPEaF,5 HA517 t(". Oa5 Vab 5�Jf2itj, javr-jj1L.r-- 57-1 1-fr--A-b tN T-ap- 3"l o 6 "!tel P..Aw��(tjKa.V A6r- r FISH) l&) Ttft FiA5r PooL /Mnjabl&7€1-5' UPsrr� p pc (�r19�5 nit or- T�� � O�M mxIh Pj P-i P6vp2z1,p65gD C Appy Ucwfj s (7,r- Ttt1�"P2of05E b N)5TRuOTroK5 siTl,:: D scG�s �� " rA) 7PtE 1 M c-Fl A�, 5Z�bq-4 chl Ap26 L- 15 -rH(5 5ppukr-, l SAw to -ci ve,6j t 1.F 55mFat tvtD im TRF- 3" TD $ AT-- -ttP JAKI-W- 5j-Ub<e S i 1E- •�„DSU hP1 , 46 3-yd 3 l5� 1 5ka� .1c[vF�u11._3TBP4-tFF-Ptb av TttP� iL STD 6 "� 7�1 5r.2F- IZ�1��.,, I �.7"ccrznl� ra Ttt�SE SftNiE rGl9D P�l�s-Fefl5 S�b��V�l� AVti 7-HCU61-1 rT IvA5 6jMTtAr-) i AM tvITH SHAMU5 9Fba6,1/Y,) J,6v 9)lAbE W 7748 5&kotF, PML. 6F 517T: ® ^ND OAJF- /A) Tom. 5W -: P601- OF 5 iTEQ3 a,4 faE I Hkb &B:5�jO l�►-,2G .Si� TtftS �P121uG. I n.-V 5AU,7 77f3M C v7=.ItstL / b/�3 fit+ Zx v!� RA/ r;a liV r�ttE PS04- ?O' D"K 5MEAA�t OF 7 DISCUSS7-S L,ti tel. OF MOPMEb F149D CE�1�9TRDL P�JFL7'Si7�®. !{�t5 �AM�brf��LY�Gl9tJ_�"kE�M �j� O�f'QE�9.5� ✓1TE� C4Ulb 1 fi�F1.� B� vr�gUSL i'�l1Ml�fb OJe 5 �� ISDN. C[� Prl2; PrloPosAf9rT0 iT-t-r C-APIJPIR IA96 �tfEt E aktlb1A. 65}71tt5 /t�lo�c4btt�'�nl� �u�sb� L=Vrwmy-;5 (T1111'/2/97) FP-4M SPM 7Z� 7PM, AE &rcr S A)R--ru- R& , sou AAA-Aj 6rrz Amb I vl,;5 i-rte Au of retp- r�Po-5.Fb Cor;fx CP"-ST�IOA) .5l77::5 .1>CusOhb W ` TM 4U17<At- S��Y�x� P,- THE .;7- &U Fi E-Famo GwJ:6u ,+tcH upp-vi/ L w5irr=�vrAxxru�.cf:). Gih2 ft�b 5tfArv,Us u9ot.?r- ixr eeA3Du-cIvF-7o 5Eem9 ' dLW Gt,E S �L1f } b !ltd `YhE PMII 6F PR&PO5-'b SiT7-- 01 &:t7-GUE A iD o� tau H Af f- D 1 sCuSS�D PdOILABOuToZO `.POWA REAM A7 Pp&pv,5pb [Te-© Trig u6ttr, U6 tcrosmaca B 2 -r-ftAt7 .Duiz,Jl 5 metr��t�rva)vo6 Vtsi a b op-mor CAso61JL�5AW oN MOA9Dt!"4A J e) s; r-, p7 As l b(b TRF- P F�V1ou5 EWW1AL',1 L0,6 ,01-t-'50 5AU)SWP9Aj. ArGe l CYFAP4dk,Y) - Hj�b /A) TtfF- It 1 o 6 " H Sim(THD5E Ap,:Pu ib PLu56g M elia5 CDULb HAUS BjEW LAASE D 5+Er=t-HLo�b CAUSId� lil76 47 u >�;-F�f�J�b SPf�iU11� (�°r11U.5 !� ��CF�LSF2�bUb" /trt�l�2Y TRF �� f1l�lDG[9c A low &Pocc TH .plop UP cV AZctg r'o,, I - flf� u C"165) Witt L5 R=- Or Pi20PV.5,!tb SiTt=®- AL4n 1v1U M©A9D/ C19r 5AW A XM-oL� IA TRrz- ICU Am EA6F BAW P45i, &F P&A05FE-b C4>/J5rkuCrloXJ,5-1TF(V2 gAjb o . TaEsDAY E-VfW6W--' OMF. OF SCM1L&A 5 LZE !IJ ANO EAS 3A;Ux PW4 OF �iP20P5� Cpij5 o/U .51 TF,®, ` F-M.P4A.5lRF—7-HAT&M A9 AJi�-vF 'Ht: 774 L5 5'PPJ& dlZ`r.15 1 �-1TtfP-P- B`YMipS 1aF DP, WITH 'THF- 6TYs k-)Rlq wgp-f-fv9rTFi-IJ6 5ctrFPtilje-y czct�5c dr vucz .VmV � (90FEVPtTWJ 7E-tt5 aDrAI15 06,:IF Ulm �"41Z �R/GNT�tis�b ST�J-�f�1�AiZT1/t� P�uTG[�t�U gtf�Df�sF�v� "'P-51r APPl VAOfE6 THE P601- OR.bEr,- )Z t Fars 6M l5 OM L-le UVAK5 r 02 1.� �c�L[1/F11`)lL 5MEIAr-Ab`U*-r CAUA9 4-.f!P-CpQFUSEb LP177f s��y SPEcKl., � .bA ? 0�2 CD2`TI-t�T M�FZTE� YaTtfE �cs11 5 PECIE5 gp6a60 0/i O LZ vc��^6 P lP CE -- i-r-P PA6i�s�) (OR. 7 -YFt3 10A M1RVMAUI MAtPl JtBC ,Xr 5 7-0 14P M149ar&5 0,V77L /ALL SKI GIT'E-A)Eb R5H TWEE CAP4pb bfX0ti AAJ-b 2�5u nJOOAAj- PrGTI V t T<F5. !N Ttf t5 ,, .A7 P--P (};5;5 Ttt;-:: of�5�2V.Fa�C}t J19 'TEf D iST-tk)Gi ct51 E SAAAd�l, ARC-iE ,1G1 Vw1L. 5YpE1ttj5-4b 15 Ttt Y 2OU1zJ 7'D Tt tIfit, Y WD F [AJ::�) -M7-0dOS lAJ -MP- ,y,s SND � pir-PLUS, l4 TAA,/vED Dss vie c�ati7 orrTftt5 P01"7' SFC;iv TO P�CKfi[.c7`�1UV 1911„E t G(5iA,Y PITT-tr-k Tfi I�f�IC J, 4� S!/l7OCGl�ftl�S l'tf 1i2 C165�P5i RcAtL WA-.374 U56tAl-.L� Yre)- zK5 &E557, AeCaT i0 XVIter P A5 02 M rx9ctsPPo&t "art MA':7ri VF_ ttMD MOM AMertVr,- r6tj 5P�oE-5. 7�tt5 T Y(P� OF Gct 9&- 99`j" Vt 5 c.,,(A L STE��p pBSE,2 VP��GjV i c29,�K /5 F TD 1, ft1�9� 1�1 KATItEa2 Yft�rN 1 1 �l llGll.�� .s'n 48 _ .jJ'� �r P6Y-�s M40T 7AKKE A4AA9Y ttou/4�5 09 A-�RuQ6 Ea7-ME stM�� 6F F-fab 0 A0)V rN�� �b�Fr - t;7o�.I-l�l�b FISI-�IAS� P�DIpL� GPoU A'tr�'O -- �SP�1A-l1-Y��7�t� t:�1 R JGCV 11.� !lU Ttfg 44-/J 104U_5 6�=1� 7E AmrotzB� G( ktOJ 77M PP44J,5CT I/J 177A4 �r7,C 'r AA 9b ITS 5 EAI> OR VFW PO W- 774 1, :5 M5Ab ttAiBl7 Ar-ro,2 AVT' dF V!r l t PI?OP05Z� C©&Mei:�LP 1Fz'�'Si'rf55 ))1.5cc!�53g> IN T`t 1N t-cPr1. 57-UDeeT TnW A-6 < <ASDtcATM> Mvtar.55,��j 10.177AL 5n 'WAA3b 6�nz -=Plr TV5 Is t cMbPrZ- fm77tIs rtenb c�rinan�-PAnjE4:,,-r-P�M scT� ro A5 PA-5T-A&Ib ttA0l`rAT7Y9tTH RP,5 tblA.6 Fzt Avii+p, N k F A-r Tf m.5AMI=Tf&r-- HS 77'LS nex b 6OU-'` �- P=,ECT ttAS BP"�W GCi'JDL1Z 57UbV TFF(5 P ��W7 CPIJ cuREVJ7W its THE G rY Is CAPE 6Ec�,kust opvActous M)q:554:b u9)tfie&JR ,� IADC4 LDM95 7-R15 FJA9E7 THE P Ai 1-�°��°rio�. jns►tt CA-5F,6F SlD 6ZEEx1 A56F fHISTUESDAYS opnc/A , A-actStnm? TrFF- I-t5TttJ6 0 i RT M)j5b. l-r- is a r imcauct-j: vAtBiE TIfPe r Klinu9iA y, +a 7-1-ts usrre�.� o,AU ot-M KAofiJ6 49 6 SLS CrRE�EK iti AU of TrtfE MPO,51E--b PPoja-rffiRr-A r5 us crito�cTc u 'rt�� -f tl AABIT2�D .SG t,T1tL b0i-r lel; TiE- C1TW DID rFtK� E P( ubjFj,S ft PP24Pr AM15 AT-1..,5A5 i AS:5WAE 5TPaH&jb OJO/ SGT 7-HP- PMLS >W b MPEk i21 f4i�5 /tr 77ffF- PPCPO5Eb.5-175-- ,51vQ IF? MR UJH ,2 7 rttf CITY Aa trs ,64M5iu"ANrs CO.4b AlgrsE,;-:: 69 ll>RJT.f ri-4 s lV,rplou-r T-htj ij& -Tftl5 i"b u15TE WITH 77-T- A:5 l t FrOO 1hjffA 7- Nom &�F -FHE /t IM l77-AL Tab cr .517 !1 AA J> ?Y pgjbj6 f6 f Nom THE StTl�5 PrAr--.:511�B�D HA-Blr?rr TM to ftu-E PRoJTAcT tf&5 BEFN3 WI6(34)� 7D AA� 1/V A MhUkEie, 741,FT {yif,1.. rsPEuAW�, P.M-srl� Ttf�E BAfJ�DEP�� I,t9ttcn-f 15 Gaff EP-E AIZ67rOF Tffr- 5UM FS01-5''F Q:5-r S1A9GF- ":0. �+LCa. l5 NP-A2L�THE vAM.F-A5 SI Pte)GA-Btor) fYL577i5 .5TP-r-,P BPcOO 60tTH D ' 0j2&WDEPA(5ar P601S h7-TTT- YDE. OF rttE M5ri MV6KS U.9 IU- &Wr N.4 v THE fX l 571'A6 3- c,6u1?- PeoGS r© 21V1. Cmc c �1�.� l�fcs PRoB1.FM t5 r r-f�T 'Tft E2cc5r7l. CZaW,, AT t7"ftE 4"W ,,b-5 t M5 G(9k � TR E�u5rlZ, P&0G6 SC.or u2 atr bW�JA9( lflGtiER Fj&dS�7`7ic 5 C9NSii)wA,31- - bETrR -1-5 Fw1517ffE PR:54%Pcrbb iA-%�eD GfooV ,TW u OF--Pry >9-r r r� TCE OF THE 4/05ar, Stop Cesusxcs-j , gxsjfl "Cawb &tT iNTd rtqp- 6PJ�K BPb 51MrNft3 iAY, 5ZCUA1&6- W(R6 FLt,t�c 1IVAfiFiI.�G- P!�c�T -�F� SiD� PSG, �i2/�PrT ccv�. Tf-'tF,SE Ma-kw P601-5 Noroivye mcwDE/vimr 50 2�52. 7 7�t- MF2 f�il9� X21 Y ill. DRY5EA5DM 5'► - f Hjqe1TAr r-OR Pr-45r7 F UA,96)A& b 6Ml9 47 Bcc.T Tt .E MRU F 1-ftEs15 bw<5tbE .5- cou2 PM0,�?)AAVE A6 Zr�-r�b 5 Amb 014DW6 DV /l'6lk'G`TRE-A-( BAqVx F:::56-Pe- Tf-Wj R PPE.JbArMS A5 16R�) 5� /t-tib I�ClA36F{S�F�S. �� t5 1aTfZE tong Tti�� P��m� DP�st6fU IVU L WMW/9 TT= TtUSE B sabF Peas 5:�P 6jZ T7CAa-, TZ) TRr-- DRQ:5EP6P10 &F JUVLA c ,A Jjb iris Tc��^ a �,- h - DF 7f F-Yf RFAT-IWEb S LI-!tom Ill? 670 6' - 6J rAr-i IT-tS GSR 7T�E M05 T-YStoP1=b 9 IJK8) 649NF6arz.TtaD 15 BWK51.,bF P60LrS, lbPA cA .Br P1.14G� rm %rFtE 5!'T zNAS -b �o rHAr 5c©u-12 P Ls"MDn-� Nt�t uzAZ, <:��A_qbtTOAJ5 Et�v�Cgp: Ty is Ejfo L66 tc.�y Wf2PUMb &UZ:Z u R-K AT-AE - . �i2sr, MosT OF: 71tF- r w � G�fl 1 B`Y.Sr:IMNtF.l� VMS MF-ft3FWIr-5 i3WAR26WE BWOK &1, T E 0tfEA Witte M057-0F TRE bEal:'r--A AI FriF-S AMD 5C©UZ SLS SI-tC^HT£-5T---7 LlN1��el 7tt� ��'D Gni lrE: 8WOK6 ,P� UST1 iUt-ttCtt (5 T tfF- 5 -i-EE S �fftBc T `�t-t�N1�AuD e1 , n t p CE f WJ10F4 -FXL 7 (.5' ;E:C-6rfA-USa2 /WD UIJPA r-,,7r:GT�ABY awlc 2 YEC-70TAT 7W) I& A40-5"(:5-t5E<S TO 6E cAM 5)'r . F-A b ►fibIT7 : 50kZ � Tft-5TZFAA.-,L0 9 t5 �tt►21-4��C%tbt: JA.4 51 Z�-r3 RIF MPc-&9c-? Pt.P-C.E5 &4ZWW16 77-M SMPrLJL SCU4V EZ r-WU,U-0 MEMPZ lA) Di P PERE'r M lb SMSA A BED J-DCPCTTOV55 "WM OJJE Ctt��Ta TAS N.MKT A) M5 lt9Pff TD TtfESF. U9k1.L DFF14U�b 13AIUK5 U�F- - [uZ F7491s 2r-.-SLI)E A-A.9D -;!Zt l[VFX -rRW DMAPEr,5 P IA) 7VE agEAM OF,> Td C2EtTP-: 5TREAtw5eb .5:, rix s ans 7-HF-9z yr i b�7 AAW B� t l`9 77f E. SUMME25 FMO TT 1 �- TtESY f12F,- PI-prCF-l> W 7?fP-.5`7zEft4I 5uz-A"T- 1n THE- 4JIVE- OF 5lAMMFA2 6YP-E kA MD -ZOW5 W 7115 f ftT-OP- ,1[557577PEAAABE�D 5UMME12 a0GCL,b�� cn G L-�-TZOJ E5 A",-,T-/krjU '9TELe gEpLprE-Mp PW PC-Bj F J-E D Pta6 iAND DEr-,PF 12 At R9,E5 "1-RM- FC)Mi ti�EA�THE 5Tre-MM gi`tNKS. �>vD Tt+t2�l l31 �GG5E M>�-�Y� �t£�E �uUF1�t1.��Ltt-�tb i3M)K5 i DF, R�01S 51.107 L4-"UA) - THE BNU;6 kk91b ARE 1`-9— 1-P-AST PAP-T--`i .50Ealr=.PSD 13(-( 13AA)K.5 iDf- tO t t LOW A4A aTtEP, VE�6FTwok), P5 P12EVt 5�-`l'Ml J7" 5�17ED� FD/?- UAL, HE D Cft) 7 T::Ff B MK5 LbF- fWO 5 1A) PCO1.5 -ak-F U9ia BF CkER l-a) M.r M Bl 1 N-ocr ,ftF D RTI-�MP�`tll.Y TZ) 6GtI?V IUP- 1&) TTtEAA DulzlA Y--.s TEf:E 4OU-9 FGEY,Gl 9G(MMF-jZ PoWD FPra,5EA50.25t boll.L BE- "5ia(-A�6 -DctC'KS " PII2 77fE12 E6- 2F-71 ffE" AIVD ' JAX, FtSf�-� Pl�AT�5-- ALL. Si,l./li AAA--R PrIV� FARL.ee r-Al- .. 7 ikv [F AA Y c avwiL,E-Ti lP-40 V-2o(, b 5ap.,Ul c VL TTtE- F4t5ife PI CKI&* THEY P2ov tDgb '7EE1t2 A-W lAJ 774 :- E �P05E-J) Ctf1}-IJEL.13JED X1-5 ! 6�[vs)6�s�.�V M ftZTR.E55{�� �.[PRA-Pl O�Z BFlit9K H'ti%D BSD 1�u�D�RS Lc. 4-L PleF�6B4vs luD Pr�&T cTrt+E 8xt5i k - GCoD BPot9K51<bf 52 -Ord/ l 5 SCoulL � l-5 /�O� txGL Ttf TtfESE: pM1� T SSM �o [3F br:;5tG sPVC1 Fr c � j5L IM WAM 1N Fly-cT, Ar PWPosr::> Ir IT-Ift . Wttr�- A 4AR6f- STEL-ih = ,�2 PSG. �N� D ,P ,211.EXiS � Lpt5 T rP��2 Al-T-qE Tb.F- OF A S73F� f3N3K 1 Iz�iorerinz� 6 Wf ROL Al 9RK 10 PRr,-V1<IUV- A F:Ar�� �J1V HOUSF T;WM rUL ,b� IA -rO Tiff. CaEEK RA5 N1 AILD P4-lM)/JAT-Pvb Tftl5 PoOj�. 'Fat5 HA5 FROM WU -b� bftAg tVMAE�b f OR-,&WGCT,D dIr-'Tltl5 BW<4aA46TH CWbM TRE ffOU5F FA::DIvl I=P4a ,Thr-TO -YvP OF BWK. OIJVe A gap-V4—5 fw- Pooi ioij BA,V'K BDW,.br-ap, PILE, )Wb MUCH OF THE AC--5T&F T�4E 091 1MA-1, Ps4o�, 'WD bSE' (LFF,-F tfP6 Sig-TE.b 14) A-t.®A.6 F702TZOJJ &F TtfE IOWL�, (A)5T-hjlEb 8AIJK5tb.P-: FatLbre, Pl ,E. 4511IJG Mot F-1 'Acg:5vJ7rzM Cs /,�Oc,oBF IJG f�Of T 77f 15 S 1 T r:(2) AT- THE uF5774EA M " 6r-FH P. (WltKL�CiTYSThFFRn%D/SAuJON� fSTFF�.H�DMonyRYE�EruwG) IFH 15 Gn7�T Plt5e 1?-EI'rT T1tE N1ft �C9/�L. Pc L. 12 �If�1��J1�G^ AFT�P 7TfL ORJ61MAI- K W)Ot5 to)uF,7-tt15 cr� E -FuAT�taz Dikm g 6a ce DF,-sTr4cir , �UI� IJO b HSi T-AT AT TI+15 aW-�6 Mr-ETt nDS ARE IMAALLb I Ari�W AND G>Ac r Le1-L� bF-5i6N `T� TtfLS,F: It 1,u1 TJ- �. �5- IrUb� P203 r-CT 5c"Tr-5 To M St-er<F. P OiV OF 7TMSF-E-x1.5-'t),) ' 9ptkc5f bF- 56664Z, Perls ��b bPF,e r= rsb � �kcvFNt STS-V�jLkb 2-&1-:LIAOV7-&M ',tet tom.() T5 P S T Cv1 f i�tVE 56 ki l R CA W- i RP-PPrP .&-F— iM 1�CT H1�v �s (fk)rfj -9b I� cLs ti St;D Com. !O AcWr-,VP- -Tf15 PRCQE-CT PSN 7D THRFA INO L14EA:b A-Qp 7frFj2 53 �-ss �o GR4TICAIL BR-MK5t bE PALS f�l�D b � Ft..�S� 11�31D�S, .21�iee�c�; P;tib Bat.LbM NFA TO FLaO TD P2z)-VCDE IFtL FEFFL-GTof 5"C-tf7l-YWODE2CUT, 61/EnitA4,6-- geolQK5 fi9A 5 �4- TD t+l DE WdhM Td SPE -PP-EhAlo- R5. At.50, -tfE H PcRbS6&PF- Trtff MgAk5 TtfE BANK &WACEJUPT Tof 5MZ�PrM Fiou: MP4U6 TO OE VE9TtCAL K Erg TtfPr\3 514 PEI> TO baP�46ATT TH-F MML VERnC I- 8A,nJfg�5 Ca sbi: OUJETO T MRMPr Ya� PSD .F-Ct 57WCr 6F Ttf � DEQ �►Gs[D ,5 /V,b RJF . TitE- W T Rf ,,51OPF-b SKS :�FTffEPM-571AYI 1PRDP05-f�P D*51610 15 SLDP� �AU,6om"- A)1 DA) TF-X fH V kQ"E-: IVE25E`T4 Vl t�Prl, DF MDSE �1,�9TIV� �ts� mz�- WY,-) 5T-EL-fib PrN ww, moi' PMsP-P�L c7m5> Ar-)k G Nno At. lel? Tttt5 .At9r:4() DE561J1M T&) PPF,5EP-VE. Pr/JD PRDTr:�,CC r �k/�9 ff1J2 f-f"iT-ftT-j Ik) PVCCEDF THE V'ERTWAL,-Oth>I E/LPEVER-P�b MP-�b5 VEbCSCGl SF,D} D2G^,,mB iUE> a9c m lT, 4&v� N cmjc 8p- I"TD -77M fyzjr=]:fT7 P;s Sii�u�l� ole ° t�^l zr i-tl�(E�TS. SSE U-.91 11, WrVa=TttF,-' nWJE 5 -EPrb OWK3(DE l-F"MA) PIZm-r::LTtDk) tEDV1tJI%T2,6r:::5 Pr-5 TRF— vE4p-vc°r -- cwmLEvEgp�b ME(� t lOD57 ANb i �r17-tEcn��q [d �a /c U C�D J&" `Tf fr-, PInJ D .5c6NED lN72) A CAI. PoI.Y Flab w/uTIol,Flwsc".')0 At,5c, TD Pf',EP..]5EEE a? .ISrWC F J SC,D ST Lif b RSL, AEEPa f21 F l EF NASI M7j- I--tE l.f ,K BFB A-rTFtr-- ,G3AMC, Vt � IST 1� ftt-�ou�E� Tc� �u12 cc�c i'�tDc�rG�`tBiD�?1�t�7�1��5 (3Etll PG. C�(w -rr+ CRZE)C 841 6Tff FERW 6E THP,5E SPOU K5 iDF- 'Zt-S AJUb D P FF1� 450 CP-1VCAL 16 Te l-W Fi&) 56C kvcVA2, 6F 57' luau, �T� � � Ex15r. TO L5F. AN PPr/J LC. 54 !t TZ) R25H T46 PRWEX�rTf-fo-CV6H A,06 A4HTMZ HOW PCOM-to D�5(GI�1 MP 5Yr-�PAI> �vWAR aMbMTFtE A;55aN(PT70A) T?fE PUOU6 15 ItbEN &A,5D,(A)6 ' TK5 FLt4PCzo' GTZ� ?eF&ZL Ttfl5 ICi PMZ-� AJ:%> MMr2�k' t75 (25V I �UEA)CE5 7-WE u9AS THE- FUBQC (fctTZ;2JEMS) VOTE (59 EUE1V A FAI k POLL CSF Oak 64rio5 017-1; E 5 70 SF-E 1;:� 7-ff E5&[ PP29,2T TFR5 PP-035.GT &S 4;r$ bE516Asb GC9FIit--O XPJ5 p�> Alf 000 IT5 tf 1614 2[51< TO Sfit- r-Ab AMb TttM CPZ- 1G5 Aq&<A-TCG k5e�- . 61zxvj7kb, T u�acL 8E tiAT VP- vf-m6F—T W/J PL.P0JTFb ^-S #PA7M-CP TR-r-- PPzO35GT, O&cr t19L14ou.25 62 ciTRE1Z NPrTIVF- VF49)aTPrT-VU Pow /A)M `�F 6A-5io.Vy pRprp2 t4l�>l9b f i9u P46op CC"T?20!^ ffft2D5: ��,c�l-� 1 �E or I T G�.5 ale m&T bop-5 tj&)Y-tick- CAAJMI 0V' M IT7&/ctM FEIZ Tff�E- PEZMPrA9JE&�( ANN: E IMP " A CSC 1��Y bt=.5cGn9 P900 Exf7r- cc91a HAVE OM THEA" 3- 7 OAOK� ArA)D F CtIJ N-YD12W,&Y" GUgP/ 7T--i 5UP/1,) J7/45 a avEki 1 LV. 57-E D PT Mf PP- "EED 5ME5. r iAIJ7l4�5 �0}=T SC;ftiP� NATIVE 62 071HOW15E1 GLPTtFF- 56f ftA9D A 14A�6 rr cA,� rv '�!2 c�>uw .st7 Tx A&) SMvPt�C3 PoV ^ 12602L51--" DE5&:/M Eb FGWb (fO/J T74DL. r'R&)i5c7-) fr5^-4 �t FP-&f ESEb 1) r *"/ VJ i U- 4A VE cJ 5"MEL. -fE�b fbvb OrlfElg A4U, -T(f 5M:UF5 /�9 TFt 5Tg FF M 1T3 Tttt5 PRC.�E.CT BE JE CT-5 j/U6P- b `7Z) F12pT-LT 7W(-52 M 121 T r d`F PrQ3PrCE-fJr l 44%,-O S G� 92DkA;F- f'r906 0r 'TdCt9Uupjm6 FAiW Aft2.F) 6AfJ .5r; Aa:Y HLG f �SYDl2I�15� Gt9�/L S SL�GCS 'lU/l� &/l,? 2-6'7 55 ����Mme+ 5rn�xr �>:1�E hTS�T��}7 Fat FAD�uxc�ahPkC�t"Y l� 'i 1- 1s Proms SND AF-5t6m rT 9166 fr7z> ProTr:c�-s ANt,-rFe 62�K r3ro5 EM FOR-rTtr-- FeOFTLr4FAL-LaGIR Gf�5 Gt��S, u�sel-ub1� 'r�4��9�,5 C�o5�2.T� rte Cox. if aN 6m L '465.E55r=5 r+ I L FAOPM.b ScTP,51 Eve SA3 tiff A �YTtJrA ) tel, �iA0 avIl�9�j �r is VE2Y I-1KAY LP- -ME51�A-a Uj 11-L 5&6e l VE 7 I�15 GOIAJ'P A W tVioGtrTk 15 �� �fiAsTI<^Y DF�SlGl�9� rPR��Gv1rt L1T��. cP1z � Et�lztit . 5t M 07 IME .517-,t--- APA-40-57-21 sK bili-57-er 1 .RA5 tfM)-M5 b PgpD1V1 g"O< InUE TTf 15 yVJ42 AAJb TAL O^ 51TI�-D OA-5 A HA-frWAgb /-aMBE�e SCE &T215rj &-;cTT1fP- 4 HRS A �o"ofz2S' F�lT LSrzb oFTF-�� ',Mb 3W'TTW- u90/Z51 TtfM-C,:Sr,c W F� 71f15 a-,20JMR 15 A .:9nA4L PAgT OF Tar-- (f I`rYs tEP6F-IAEl tr Mft BF PST P-:[�iCAO R-15K. Al n© 5TrEF- GTS- Res Ru Dze .cc9tSr-w-eD�ubED T AWL)F- VWRX) FLOOP COADT>WI- FPtJ- g:-c5r. oA � U5LO GAY 66)attti 1 (,c. LI-k,MTer- AaJ-F--TZ) siE�E -Tt,=-,Z PAERt ro CCK stT� u'�r�-t �r�s►�� un�z�. �t-,eL� ,��u.��, �v�; sb u9 t ri. "rte " ioP-A R 5-id)RM5 As 1J 1176'?)1g73) IW,b 7WE Tc c:r., '' IN TtfE ICF-T-5f-&�/v OF t�6�S� f OVF- tiYV MDfzE Ar/mA4H.Nk7P— .y 2tsK TtiAA) SnAAE- Mm2. a< �f %lc ffiti}D D IRT��b � ti Tl�u Ai Tt � T3)P EFSAMr, - 749P.-E, is &9oMI&t 6 ft-r-TtfF- P15T&�. i:z° �Al is CJ�i Tl:®� (,!A?D�I? A�?� icG�1DNEp1d R-7`2cS K Thr t5 13>�ISK 7,P_�. 'RM, TNS. 6L-CE ltv MOST tMMFb), JE P�J?1L '��tTF Q)) ItT u-90a:5 f GP6F,,'OMI-Y If R5 A -F::Ea-) OF-ItWD- 56 a-sg 13 e ttE ecu n� M-� P tfF 915K .F-vW vicrtt PfA) EL� MaDo o ul Tm T1+F 6 YY� ovir eX T IWb -Gi1`S, -P�L�,f�tG(�1��0}P�PrLAA05�'-0 �� �6 y�ojrr kF-K�y��w.��� 7 P caul P-V p1V U, mi ' T+)k /�L`�KF- M)b 1 tf:F- 1`!oo a'�rzoRk S >2 5 of L 5 AAb 77-fF- FIWD 5Te6E P IA,15(Dirt>f- MIZ ZMclro AAZ r-�er` J tA%ukve�r lg:?7� Ttf15 1JVTRS BLAO<TdPfYRzl:fA REMAII 95 UAJDAMP69b. u.Y xT1 ,RN1D2E Tt+F- oAcv, 'PNP-M OUi brAy--;o 15 59T BAS ABOUT A:5)` f7>CAk7ftEE&5TA96 OWK T P AtZ 15 k�5T AT P45K OF FikL,ljA.& W T7fF- VI) l c aw15 7tfF- P�tc TrfAT ttA5 8� Oz ,A 1N -rte Pu.BztC UQnAXs AP-PAJMMI�Vr? !N 7746 (0- PRO 5ED Pt6hr=> M516M;-FdEZE L5 FA2"�2,E S AT- P-16< TZ� Si�t Ehb ftNt TifF- 5 FCGs t-t5rM ,c "4Z�1I 2 Tb te>T0fi- f POJ�T OF4Vi2jE 1f LT�WA tot>V7T-2, 1 Via BE IMP055154p-T�9 6T--215 F1ADL5rE T705 I P12QJECr) EVk-AU IF 2[- Ofb7 SE-Fof1 E TFtEP-)ldA3S w J :5'v'7cRr! j 7R A-� T1tr,—R� 15 A T 915K ECD%,%ONt IGA44!,J TO � R9 MOV AL. NZOJ U� IF TRE- PRCO 1=GT 15 BCQ L:r T�tL5 FAIL NOD ax"Tf-k. f -s Tli P, Pmp<jrr--D TaE6- Rjb%4 7p'-t&vjE Pz t&,i c 1,mc-E ?� 114p1 CA7r,5&P;a -r 77- 15 PP-DJ EGT L- T- &15 I f PfVE TTi-r-- 4.SncII b PigDuONIZ 0ISCU55 IN OPW F�fth�A Pru r,-MVlaOtJ etJTPrL- AA -b ECW0&AtC PROS NO OkI5 EFTaE x -- T , � Tc M a rki5 F 1L mb w+Arrm Tv TrtE T 1U E ,5� W glib 17-5 t-tAB1T74 AND UAJbE� �O � CtACen tsTAWLE5 5fa4X> I Fe 6TY`915), A5 i7-151Ua- A)PP lz-�P 66W5lDMIA)6� 5Tft<-l&)5 -17415 MA551 VE &�4LK PWJELTT7t15 FfU,6Ak,V 2g-f 57 CAO Saturday,July 26,1997 3x C.O•Yri� M&wt Its 1,1997, in the Council CASE NUMBER: E ECUTIVEOFFICEF Hearing Room (Room 91. PR 026187 By KATE MmcHU H LEGALS upstairs in City Hall. 990 To all heirs, benefi•DEPUTY CLERK Palm Street to consider cavies. creditors, conti .kjy IS211/.W .c the following: gem creditors. and per, fsOTICEDf 1. 2211 Broad Street sons who may otherwise PUBLIC PUBLIC NOTICES Use Permit 9 esate. orbththeELAr be interested HEJYIs. ApDI.A 97. 7;ntax, or Doth,of ELEA D°°°� lWpst 19, Request to allow etrondetl r'r^a: 7:00 anions comer trailer as NOR L KENNEDY. Placa: 2D8 Fft�t A PETITION Ms been Ltemporary use; C•N tiled Dy Andrew M.Ken-ROp pe Me Res er Longdon and comment on the DI zone;Goodwill Industries,nedy in the Superior tdrrua mpator. g app6r"'r' Court of California.Coun. Legal Ads San Almond$treat rector's determining 2 We Buchan Street t titan Lui1Obiapa. NOnCE OF THE FI continued San Luis Obispo,cA (within twenty says 0f this Variance Appl. V 95-97; Y THE PETITION reouests OF WRITTEN REP( 9x Clare= notice).Also,anyone may Request t°a00w reduced that Andrew M. Kennetly f H T E BOARD 288AlLongden comment on a determina- OF THE from 288 Luis Ob street feet Yard less than 10 re apps need as personal PLETON COMMU' San Luis Obispo,CA tion when ths project is feet for an unenclosed reDrosentativs to adminis previous pg. p considered by a City hear. g SLANTS TO SEC- FICTITIOUS parkin apse°: R•2-h ter Ina elute of the deco• Thu business is eon '.^g body. A pudic Mar•zone:Richard Greene,so.dent• 61621.2 OF THE c FICTITIOUS BUSINESS ducted '^9 will be eat for ronsid• NAME STATEMENT by a general pan plicant THE PETITION repuecta ERNMEI4T CODE AN nenni0. oration and Daastble PLEASE NOTE: Any authority to administer THE TIME AND PLAC FILE NO,B7.155a /s/Anha Fordo atlopdon of its the elute under Arse Inde- TRANSACTING Negative court challenge to the HEARING THEREON BUSINESS This statement we Dsctaratlon wish Mh19a-actions taken on these pendent Administration THE BOARD OF Of filed with the county CIS tion Mee°uree. items of Exmtn Act (This au•TORS OF THE TEN 07/09/W may De limited he a[o TON COMMUMTY S THE FOLLOWING PER- tof y Son Luis Obispo Coun City CouncilHearing Belly; considering onry theta is.`on,l rep allow the per- ry on JUL 7,1997. HeeingDasues raised at the public canal representative wit to ICES DISTRICT, SONS ARE GOING BUSt CERTIFICATION Hearing Date: P take many ours approval.without Nodes b NESS AS: ng nearing described in this Beforerta court ainvary thatbee a rwritten epare�rt I HEREBY CERTIF 7ohDetermined Be}orotakln CK NAILS THAT THIS COPY IS Time:7:00 sound•or in written tare• p certain very pian repo 1528 Wast Branch Sister CORRECT COPY OF THE pant' spondenca delivered to important actions,npwey.,Sidi DrePyreO and Arroyo Grand°,CA 93420 Hearing Location: Coun•the of San Luis Obis•or. the tM Bwrd Saer Quincy N ORIGINAL STATEMENTPg ON personal r°p+e-ol tine 7arn�bbpn • 74391 Sea[°PL ON FILE IN MY OFFICE Chamber po R or prior m• the sentadve will be required munily Services Di Westminster,CA 92628 JULIE L RODEWALD 990 Palm Street Public nearing. m give nodce to interest'containing a descri. COUNTY CLERK FJuly2LIM O,fi3p ad persons union "of each WrC01 of Tiffany Nguyen BY CATRINA M. or mors Ydomstlon have waived node or 3109 Cubban St CHRISTENSEN on the proposed Project wrsemed to the p dOp°rn receiving s Santa Ars,CA aid sewer service°dA DEPUTY CLERK its onvherlmedu(effects. - posed action.) The Inds• This bralnasa b con- EXPIRES:07/07/2002 PrOPoaed mitigation mea. • �Y� Pendent administration Ign. &,cal Yea ,les ducted by a general pen. 121926: 7.1997 d1= sures.dry erMrpunemel `B Sin W1s 011 aWrority will be ranted 1998. tivougb ,nus nlQuin Procedures and deadline, CULTURAL HERITAGE unless an Infers to par.1997, anter,s /s/Thisey Nguyen FICTITIOUS BUSINESS please contas:C COMMITTEE son flits an objection m chachars drainageedso This statement was NAME O.97-1 ENT the pe" If and shows and sa era rid of FILE NO.W-1668 Project Planner: JULY 28.1997 and of it fi1a0 with the County Clark ametdtt M of San Luis Obispo Coun• TRANSACTING Glen Matteson 0105)781• The Cultural Heritage��C°of�nt�a�charge for yeah parer IV on JUL 15,1987. BUSINESS 7165 Committee will hold a dna- g acid fieeel yearn,toga CERTIFICATION. Jam 1997 Notice Date:.July 26,1997 regular meeting at 5:30 �' with penalties ther A PETITION for deter. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOLLOWING PER s/Amold Jana• P.m., Monday, July 29, wdsitdl are unp■N, mina of of er confirms. THAT THIS COPY IS A SON IS GOING BUSINESSCommunity Development 1987 N the Council Hear-Irian of roe the c r conformity property gt pasuh CORRECT COPY OF THE 'A Director Pal Room, Gil' Hall, 990 ro or belonging der a sung �°rg`°prescribe.3 ORIGINAL STATEMENT CAPRI'°` CONSTRUCTIONJiyrt947 Palm Street Tnia is a ver a Ordinance Hoa 80-3 CO. av79J97 pots°unser so 'On the T 947 and 9z- JU FILE IN MY OFFICE. public meeting and any iia ProDete Code so 'On JULIE L CL RODEWALD 275 Harbor St IB I ry Templeton Come COUNTY CLERK Mono Bey CA 93442 � °^e may comment on Na 1365015 JOINED with Ne ty Sa vitae Dbtriti By S.L MILLER Dennis M.Say, �Qty GF items. petition m administer the Notiea is also giver. DEPUTY CLERK 215 Harbor St 09 Iii tarn W1s OatspO For more information• estate. port int Mono call or visit the Communi• A HEARING on the per"a Anthers re EXPIRES:07/15!2002 Bal'•CA 83442 ARCHITECTURAL ry Development Ds tion will be held on Jul Prepared end fled This business is con a Pan- Y the Board e. Juh 19r!6•ap929•t997 tlk96lST ducteo REVIEW COMMISSION mem on the lower level of 28, 7997,at 9:00 A.M.in W on Individual, Templeton Cotnmt FICTITIOUS US B EMENT /a/pptrdb M.coprfa August 4,1997 City Half 1781.7172)or tall Dept. 4 located at 1050 Services District Dar NAME STATEMENT The Architectural Re•Jeff Hoak at(791.71M Monterey Sues',San Luis Thia statement was 1- mg a descriptioncald FILE N0.87.7553 r,ew Commission will Obispo.CA 93409 of S with the County Clark s/Amatl B.Jonas. IF YOU OBJECT m the receiving of real dor TRANSACTING of San Lzds Obispo Coun not° its regular meeting Directorran ng of thepetition.met ser weld at 07/15/97 Non ER IFI 1997. scheduled for 5:00 D97.Community Development You should a e men]sear Ju during Monde appear at Nd year July ), _ THE FOLLOWING PER. CERTIFICATION Y.Mr9rat 4,7997,JWy26.1997 ON9793 nearing arta sura your fiscal SON IS DOING BUSINESS I HEREBY CERTIFY R m.the Lound, Hearing NOTICE OF GENERAL objsceians or file written thicafghwhom June 1bo THAT THUS COPY IS Room.City Mall,990 Palm whose weed abeta AS: CONTRACTORS ogecuons with the court service charges are PATCHES CUSTOM CORRECT COPY OF SH Stray[ to review the The Housing Authority before the hearing. Your and Payable, and QUILTING ORIGINAL STATEMENT siignis) and/or projecttsl of SLO is inviting bids for appearance may be in amount of the ON FILE IN MY OFFICE listed below. This is a each on= for chars t 825 Riverside Ave.93 JULIE L RODEWALD located at 8 its office 4ersa or by Your atter- Peso Robles,CA 934x6 public msadrg ■rid any rotated at x87 Leff SL ^eY COUNTY CLERK one 4 SOLI ARE A CREDI.Y°en. together a 11 5693 La zVerLockhart BY S.L MILLER rruy Aminate before SLC.work tenor d care• ion. ihich tea 1• Cres Loma Verde Or. DEPUTY CLERK the Commission takes at•ria and Anterior oamoli-TOR a a e dowase tleou on, which are un. Creston.buillmon EXPIRES:07/15/2002 tion [Number in pares tiers, concrete Bnwets. for o!dee tlecaaaim with with the In Cada Thia y ahead id tares Juh IS1a: 79.19W tMsis b Ora City file partition walla cabinet, rrrtrst Ne your claim thlwith the charges ductatl by an trrdlvlduaL number). interior and limited aateri• rho court and mail a taPy scribed -by Ordlnr /s/Srerfine Lockhart PLEASE NOTE: Any 01 finishes. doors, win. ca es personal ropresenh Nos. 182, 15-93, This statement was court challenge to the down electrical plumbing ative appointed by the lana 12-96 and Orrin filed with the Co actions taken on these and structural modKcs' No.97.2 of Use Temp untl'Cleric , �Or coon within four months I of San Luis Obispo Cows-Ij li&sin IWs OBI items may be limited to tions.MVAC system,limit•from the date of fintiCommuniry Services asuance of letters as Pro. ry on ER IFI 1997. NOTICE OF considering only arose is ed reroofing end office i. vitt e willridad in section 9to0 a:i Notice is fuNmr F cE11TIFt(JLTIER raised mceivedat Bim be I HEREBY CERTIFY DETERMINATION heariin described the public received it the Authority's onTues. Coca. California or fi ng 199 Tuesaey,A.—.- THAT THIS COPY 15 E DETERMINATION ISAHER 9 r in written ee In this dace until t PM on Tues• Cotte. The time for filing.1997 at 7 p.m.at 206 CORRECT COPT OF THE NOTICE IS HEREBY notice,or in written mare•say.August 19,1997. dsarin will flat eapire be•i Street Templeton ORIGINAL STATEMENT GIVEN drat the City of Se sDondence delivered-to A Bid Bond. Perform• fore four months from the Meeting Room, Ter ON FILE IN MY OFFICE Luis Obtapo'.commusirs1W the City of San Luis Obis angio and P■ymefit Band hearing date noticediton.CaIM°mk6 b the JULIE L RODEWALD Development Director Ms Po aL or Prior to, the and peymant o!prevailing above. I arta Plans for ■ p COUNTY CLERK determined That f7te b Public hearing. wages an required,all as YOU MAY EXAMINE I nearing on said raps By S.L MILLER [owing project b guardled Prplaa'131: sat fort)+ in dna Invitation tM file kept by the court.At sad Public hesrin( DEPUTY CLERK for adoptlon da Nosed"t. 7090 BbAop Street:to Bid and the contract If you are a person Inter-,Board of Directors EXPIRES:07/1S2= Declaration with Midge Architectural review of documents. ested in the estate, you Mar and consider a 11916;4x929,1997 fiviii two new houses on NU. The invitation to Bid may fila with the court a',ections and uan M with the In sent protea. FICTITIOUS BUSINESS ones wdh the California°1Oe lots;R-1•S zona:.Ben and the proposed fomes formal Request for 5Da'fain written reports NAME STATEMEVT ry CamP.SPPliacant of contract documents, tial Plates of the filing dr. Notice is further Environmental Quality mcludinp plana and sDeei- an inventory and apprais .ria[it the Beard 0f L1 FILE N0,CTIN 0 Act: (ARC 50.87) fieadding are on file at al in elate assay or c: TRANSACTING Project Number: ER 91-�%lAmold Jonas, an do of the Tamp BUSINESS 1 Director Architmhtural Production y petition or account as'rommuniry Services Juty7,19117 97 Services' office at 444 Provided in section 1250-ri t adapts said rat Project AppOeant:City at Community Development Hi uan, Suite 201, San 0f tM Celifdmia Probate p THE FOLLOWING PER. jury 24 497 it Code.A Repuest far SDe.7r revises, charges SONS ARE DOING BUSH San Las Obispo a.EM Luis Obispo, CA. Copies tial Notice form is avails ducegs. or modifies NESS AS: Project Address: (No of the documents may be :her d thereon. dw CAPITOUO PARK WEST Specific Address)11 sites obtained at the once. Ole from the court clerk. Inpaad charges tag 3x85 Sacramento Drive on local creeks f�Qty Oj: A mandatory job walk Attorney for Petitioner: .rith perlsldes dorso. Do. �cl 9if1 ICRC ONSpp GERALOuvE E. CHAMPi, said wan,as Stated San Wil Obispo.CA Project Description: The will be MId n 1 PM on 93401 City Proposes various Thursday. Au cast 7, at ION :added t reports,&I& AD}AINISTRAT7VE 417 Leff St.SL 1345 Broad Smoot added m me off for the Pumas Brod gam and stays of reamdrg PERM rs For more information San Luis Obispo.CA San Luis Carryon Road and stabillxlnp croak PUBLIC HEARING call Richard Crutchfield at 93401 .afacting clsae San Wil Obispo,CA links and°nlerying treat TM City of San Lula 543-479. By:/s/GERALDINE E. •nail constitute a Anita channel capacity at 11 s Anila See C Officer t Zoning Hearing Juh 19n7S 1997 iv®596 CMAM%ON individual ■hes on San g 9 ,grecse the l Pro 3055 Luis Canyon Road mi ODispo Creek■nd ib Mann watl 2030• public NOTICE OF ATTORNEY FOR ••m.ls of real pro San Luis Obispo,fJA tributaries mr9 at 2:30 p.m. or PETITION TO PETITIONER ,sest:ribed in the Wt FILED JULe.1997 93405 _ Anyots 7fjaY review later on Fr{day August ADMINISTER ESTATE OF .:ud d and slta0 ELEANOR L KENNEDY LARRY D.REtNER i.:caeca DY Qre IDA erj_/` 58 1/ Lunkers. The bank cover and rock is designed to be inundated at bankfull stage. This is the Illinois adaptation to the original Wisconsin lunker(Roseboom et al, 1992). Inundation of the rock has proven attractive to fish. Original design incorporates the use of oak as building material. Redwood will be used in view of its resistance to fungus. The rebar may need to be keyed into the stream bed by drilling holes, due to shallow depth to bedrock in some areas. Figures 5-15, 5-16, and 5-17, show the side, front, and top view, respectively, of the bank cover. 5/8"Reinrorcing Rod 5 Foot Lengths Blocking Board Top Stringer I.cc w 1 �'� lotl T Oak Blocks 6-8Inch Dia. _ Drilled with 5/8-Auger Bit III i{ Ilr� t� ` Inch Drilled Backboard Bottom Stringer 4 Feet Figure 5-15. Side View of Lunker. Source: Roseboom et al, 1992 59 Structures are built using 2 inch thick oak planks varying in width(8-12 inches). 518"Reinforcing Rod 5 Foot L.engtlts Structures are nailed together w --- tth 20D common spike Blocking Board 2Inch Oak Planks \ Backboard s I �� � • t I ^J T 't ' Top Stringer m r��_ `4 �'t - I(� , i ' 6-8 Inch I 1 t 8 Feet r r Bottom Stringer Figure 5-16. Front View of Lunker. Source: Roseboom et at, 1992 8 Feet • r 24-30 Inches ;-- — - –r i� 4 Feet • � l i � 1 i T • Oak Blocks 6-8 Inch Dia. 8-12Inche3 Drilled with 5/8"Auger Bit Figure 5-17. Top View of Lunker Source: Roseboom et at, 1992 60 2 4 Z. l.ur�KEK M TIAC,tfmEkT 3 17 The bank behind the lunker will be excavated to allow lunker construction. After the lunkers are constructed, geotextile fabric will be placed along the excavated bank, then backfilled with the rock. Willow posts will be joint planted within the rock. A more detailed description of the joint planting follows this section. Figure 5-18 illustrates the position of the lunker within the rock revetment. 10 TOT l6 day. 2deg. 0 p 36 Scale ome 4.1 jt. (feet) Ch.araneI It• s jt. 1.5 jt. Figure 5-18. Lunker and Revetment. The extents of the rock revetment, i.e.,the upstream and downstream ends, will be tied into the bank by keying rock deeper into the bank. Every effort should be made to note potential key-in areas during,construction. Key-in areas should be stable, e.g., existing bedrock extending high above the thalweg. Such an area exists at Cross-Sections 10 and 61 .Attachment 8 SOURCES OF MONEY AND ENGINEERS ESTIMATED COSTS OF EACH PROJECT. The Council has budgeted for this work in the following accounts. Project Account Balance 9553 92,048 9554 136,053 9555 128,928 9556 130,553 9557 52,808 9679 5,000 9664 486.200 Total fonds budgeted available for this project 1,031,590 Upon award of contract the staff will reallocate the money in each account in accordance with the actual bids and award amounts. The Engineers estimated cost for each project is listed below.: Contract Number Location Base Bid Add Alternative City Plan 9553 3546 S.Higuera St.(Golds Gym), 86374. 10080. 35 Prado Road (Wastewater Treatment 253904. 55008. Facility), Prado Bridge, 36222. 6144. Total for Contract 376500 71232 City Plan 9555 3026/3046 Higuera SL(RRM) 62004. 11520. 236 Higuera SL(Hayward Lumber) 163620. 23040. Total for Contract 225624 34560 City Plan 9664 Golf Course-Total 34675. 9360. City Plan 9750 Pistol Range-Total 47600. 7200. City Plan 9679 Mariposa-Total 53780. 31700. Total for Five Contracts $738179. $154052. Total Estimated cost for five contracts including the add alternatives. $892,231. Contingency fund estimated at 15% 133.835. Total estimated cost of five contracts $1,026,066. Since these projects are subject to many unknowns during construction staff recommends a 15% contingency. Also because of the nature of the projects staff recommends that the funding for the projects be considered as a grand total with subtotals for each project. In other words if during the projects bidding and construction one project should cost more and another less that staff be allowed to move funds between the five projects. MEETIAGENDA ATE '2"9� ITEM #. .. E(3MTTEAM CDD DIR AO 0 FIN DIR ❑ FIRE CHIEF August Zgth, 1997 ❑ PW DIR ❑ POLICE CHF❑ REC DIR Dear Councilmembers, ❑ PERS DIR In keeping with our long record of concern with protection of riparian ecosystems, we of Life on Planet Earth have two specific requests relating to your proposed Phase I Flood Control Project. First, in the light of the threatened listing for steelhead, please require that protective features such as lunkers be designed into the extensive project hardscape to maintain existing pools and the deeper riffles. Long-term monitoring of the effectiveness of these features, with prompt corrective action if needed, must be an integral part of this mitigation. Second, haste makes waste, and the stampede to meet an impossible pre-rainy- season timetable is likely to create more havoc than it prevents, partite if forecasts of an early-arriving and intense rainy season prove accurate. Given that it could take up to 135 days for the Corps to consult with other agencies before actually issuing a permit, rushing to immediate construction upon permit issuance would likely cause construction to take place wig the season when sudden rises in water could cause delays, cost overruns, and all sorts of environmental havoc in and downstream from the construction areas. Ongoing construction during a flood season only increases the likelihood of the bank and streambed erosion the project purports to prevent. We thus request that you follow the example set by the California Department of Fish and Game when they required the Department of Water Resources to avoid Coastal Branch construction in or near streams from October through April. The rainy season delay will allow time for environmental safeguards and mitigations to be designed into the project. Thank you for holding a public hearing and allowing us to comment on a project that, if done hastily without adequate environmental protective features, threatens the integrity--and the steelhead population--of the very creek it purports to protect. For Life and Planet 1Earth, eric �NLGhlhy ; 7365- V4;(� /Aae.�((-r1�5 LM Ecouncil "-�°- A ac,Enaa aEpoat 3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Arnold Jonas,Community Develop nt Director�a Prepared By:Judith Lautner,Associate Planner SUBJECT: U 81-97: Appeal of Planning Co ssion's action approving an amendment to a fiaternity's use permit to allow conversion of a storage building into two bedrooms, at 720 and 126 Foothill Blvd. CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving the appeal, thereby denying the use of the storage building for bedrooms. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution denying the appeal, thereby upholding the Planning Commission's action approving use of the storage building for bedrooms. DISCUSSION Situation: The applicants want to convert an existing storage building into two bedrooms and to convert two existing bedrooms at 720 Foothill into a dining room. Because the site is governed by a Planning Commission use permit,allowing a fraternity,an amendment to that use permit is required to allow this change. The Planning Commission approved the amendment on July 9, 1997. The owners of adjoining property appealed that decision.Appeals of Planning Commission actions are heard by the Council. Evaluation 1. Staffs recommendation for denial. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission deny the request. The fraternity wants to convert the storage building into bedrooms so that two bedrooms in the building at 720 Foothill can be converted to one dining area. A large dining room can be an invitation to non-residents of the fraternity to visit and can provide space for activities that are not allowed by the use permit. The provision of additional meeting or recreational space may result in more frequent visits by non-resident fraternity members and friends, and an increase in automobiles and noise at the site. In addition, the introduction of permanent living quarters in a non-inhabited storage building so close to the adjacent apartments has the potential for increased noise disturbance to the neighborhood. The neighborhood is developed at a rate higher than present density regulations would allow. This means that private space and quiet is at a premium here. The City cannot control all of 3-� U 81-97 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 2 the actions-of its residents. But in regulating fraternities the City is recognizing the unique nature of this type of use and the potential for disturbance it represents. The use is more than eight persons living in a house. The house is a meeting place for a much larger group of young people, many of whom may not be sensitive to the needs of the neighborhood. Therefore, any change that could result in greater use of the site by non-residents needs to be reviewed carefully. The Planning Commission and Administrative Hearing Officer have periodically reviewed the use permit several times, as required by the conditions of approval. At most of these hearings, neighbors have expressed concerns particularly about the use of the rear of the lot. For a time, the storage shed was used illegally for recreational purposes, and this use tended to attract visitors who were noisy until late at night. Visitors and residents also use the parking lot for outdoor activities and often drive in late at night, and allegedly talk and shout loudly in the parking lot. One of the primary reasons these activities disturb the neighbors is that existing apartments at 140 Ferrini and 772 Foothill are close to the property line and many bedrooms face this property's rear yard. The block wall constructed as part of the initial approval process helps screen some of the noise and lights from the vehicles, but cannot be expected to protect these sensitive areas from loud talking, shouting, basketball playing, and other outdoor play late at night. The concern of staff and the neighbors is that the introduction of bedrooms at the rear of the lot would result in increased activity and therefore noise. This fraternity has many limitations on its activities because of the relatively small size of the lot and the nearness of a great many neighbors. (See attached vicinity map for an overview of the number of apartments close to the site.) 2. The Planning Commission's action. The attached Planning commission staff report explains the request and presents a staff recommendation for denial. The Planning Commission found that the change in use had greater potential to alleviate current noise concerns than to exacerbate them, and therefore approved the request. Commissioners (see minutes, attached) supporting the motion believed that the creation of a dining-meeting area inside the building would encourage fraternity members to conduct more business inside, and that the creation of bedrooms within the storage building would discourage any further use of that building for recreational activities,and provide some monitors(the bedroom residents)for activities in the adjacent parking lot. 3. The appellants' concerns. The appellants(see letter of appeal, attached)are worried that the storage building,which was used(without approval)as a recreation building for a time,would again be used for that purpose if anything other than storage is allowed inside it. They fear that an active use of the building will encourage fraternity members to congregate in that area and create noise,which would be objectionable to nearby residents. The rear yard of the fraternity site is the more sensitive portion of the site, because it is adjacent to high-density apartments, some of which were built closer to the property line than would now be allowed. 3-z U 81-97 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 3 4. Conversion will be simple structurally. The storage building was built to standards for habitable buildings, and will therefore be easy to convert to such a use. The Planning Commission did require that the access be changed so that all access will be from the south side of the building. CONCURRENCES The Building Division concurs that conversion of the'storage building to bedroom use will be simple.No other departments had concerns with the request. FISCAL EUPACT Approval or denial of the request will have no effect on the City's finances. ALTERNATIVES The Council may approve the appeal,thereby denying the conversion.The building would have to remain as a storage building. The Council may continue consideration,if additional information is needed. Direction should be given to staff and the applicants. The Council may deny the appeal,approving the amendment,with modified conditions. Attachments draft resolutions vicinity map Planning Commission report for July 9, 1997 minutes of Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 1997 applicant's statement floor plan from U1449A file (1989 use permit application) Letter approving continuation of use at last review hearing by Administrative Hearing Officer letter of appeal 3 -3 RESOLUTIONNO. (1997 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY DENYING USE OF A STORAGE BUILDING FOR BEDROOMS AT 720 AND 726 FOOTHILL BLVD. (U 81-97) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 9, 1997 and approved an amendment to an approved use permit allowing a fraternity, to allow use of a storage building for bedrooms; and WHEREAS,Al and Elinor Bonin filed an appeal of that action; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on September 2, 1997 and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act, because it is the use of an existing facility with no significant expansion of that use; 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 Planning Commission application U 81-97, and the Planning Commission's action, the appellants' statements, staff recommendations,public testimony,and reports thereof,makes the following finding: 1. The change from storage to bedroom use will intensify uses at the site and such intensification is not compatible with the surrounding high-density neighborhood. SECTION 2. Appeal approvaL The request for an exception to use an existing storage building for bedrooms is hereby denied, and therefore the Planning Commission's action is overturned, and the use permit denied. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this 2'day of September 1997. 3-Y Resolution no. (1997 Series) U 81=97 appeal 720 aMt' Foothill Page 2 Mayo%AllenSettle -- - - - ATTESTc City.Clerk Bonnie Gawf -- — APPROVED AS TOTORM 9 ty _ rney a Jor en— _ RESOLUTIONNO. (1997 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'SACTION, THEREBY APPROVING USE OF A STORAGE BUILDING FOR BEDROOMS AT 720 AND 726 FOOTHILL BLVD. (U 81-97) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 9, 1997 and approved an amendment to an approved use permit, allowing a fraternity, to allow use of a storage building for bedrooms;and WHEREAS,Al and Elinor Bonin filed an appeal of that action; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on September 2, 1997 and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action,and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under Section 15301, Class I of the California Environmental Quality Act, because it is the use of an existing facility with no significant expansion of that use; 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 Planning Commission application U 81-97, and the Planning Commission's action, the appellants' statements, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following finding: 1. The conversion of the storage building into bedrooms and of two existing bedrooms into a dining room is not an expansion of the use and the change is more likely to mitigate noise problems than produce them. SECTION 2. ARpeal denial. The appeal of the Planning Commission's action approving the change in use is hereby denied, and therefore the Planning Commission's action is upheld. SECTION 3. Conditions. The approval is hereby subject to the following conditions, as approved by the Planning Commission: 1: Residential occupancy of the site is limited to eight residents. 2. A minimum of nine parking spaces shall be provided on-site. 3. The permit is for residential use only. Fraternity activities conducted at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard shall be limited to meetings of the executive council and any other meetings and gatherings involving a total of 15 or fewer fraternity members and guests. 3 --6 Resolution no. (1997 Series) U 81-97 appeal 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 2 The use of amplified sound equipment shall not be allowed. No hosted fraternal events on the site shall be allowed (for example, rush events, little sisters). Basketball or other outdoor recreational activities shall cease at dusk. 4. If a reasonable complaint, as defined by the Community Development Director, is received in writing by the Community Development Department, A. The complaint shall be forwarded to the Interfraternity Council and the Planning Commission within one week of receipt for review and comment. The names of the people filing the complaints shall not be included without their consent. Copies of all correspondence will be sent to the Dean of Students and the fraternity. B. The complaints, and the comments from the Interfraternity Council if received, shall be forwarded by the Planning Division to the Planning Commission for consideration at the commission's next available meeting. 5. No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on this site are allowed between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. 6. A fraternity identification sign may be installed on the building in accordance with the City's sign regulations. 7. The applicant shall institute and maintain a neighborhood relations program. This plan shall include at least the following elements: A. Quarterly training of all members in community relations. Dates of these training sessions shall be submitted to the Community Development Director. B. A program to inform neighbors in a timely manner of upcoming events at the fraternity or elsewhere. C. Submission of names and telephone numbers of responsible persons to the Community Development Department and to apartment property managers and neighbors within two blocks in all directions of the fraternity. Responsible persons shall be available during all events and 3�7 Resolution no. (1997 Series) U 81-97 appeal 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 3 at reasonable hours otherwise to receive and handle complaints. Evidence of implementation of said plan shall be submitted to the Director for review within 30 days of Planning Commission approval of this application. Failure to implement said plan will be grounds for revocation of this permit. 8. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard area shallnot be used for storage of furniture or other items. 9. The use permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer in two years (approximately January 17, 1999). At the review hearing, the Hearing Officer may add, delete, or modify conditions of approval or may revoke the use permit. 10. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of this permit. 11. All ingress and egress shall be from the south side of the former storage building. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this god day of September 1997. 3 -� Resolution no. (1997 Series) U 81-97 appeal 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 4 Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk Bonnie Gawf APPROVED AS TO FORM: r/rllner6rorren 3 �� ice+Ae y; + sas e O ♦44C�9A.4 � � , g .G a M y y v A N y/•�v dV OOIO�� R 6 ywe )S^ S n`VA• ° r �e iZg e Ley v 1 ? O N ? n* Al 1-84 e'er\ `+`to s ° E. w Off' 1� a Ws �O �,• 75465 6 \14 91 //Bo�O A101 O a w1e1-BT O O / /J/B�s SS• \VV \,L,�s ��i JC � \V4 \gyp 7G r 1 \e6 �6b Or d • ` •173 ARC 7-10 _ _.S \ \ 0 1r I` \ ? �� n 3 O/y i S IGT ,f � 'O C + Y. II]7G CA.In K -wi (133) Ir o., t•1•a w Zz ANS. 3 Q a LL, F1 5 y o CRO-OI sl v■ _—N RC A01-00 8A 3t•BI r aa}Ts4 \I AAL TI.7tnL,11.1318 L7p Y � ARC tT.IMAI,t1•t] TR/J-%4 $ 1R,dtclo•9C ww r73s 94'"C/i8-9t $araRrn c= A0^r*°V's A1+.B9. u°376 O O a%�3 r0]o NAccv-les t!•s ` wec TR 2112(118-12) T-CTA,AJ4-TI 1e,re MK o G80 694 69G 1. ' Arc T1-xans 7oi6 7f0 7Zp 7Z6 730 7 7736 7io 77s 77 787 BLVD. FOOTHILL (707) 7'll - 7A3-771 B,A5G-9 L,%-GV 81374 77$•777 7TT-787 TTI 713 A•F BA 30.80 +,w-44A A14L•B3 �S%-L" f•crc eR 1B-� ' se- V4,145 •n AIo7-B/ CLGfA z-s,c AMC66- venae �Tr1 f-CTA MIaRY. T43A GL-64A ARC K-Iv7AS °021] N 110-6 ARC Bhn4nL REST, fe S4 O ClaAasR] 7a]0 uefo! ARC 66-60 731 wA e134t 787 RBST. w11T•M SA.1•el pp 14 AAM ta•tl ��a+7 ER y[~60 111pyy ARc 7li;1 GAR IMT Ina 01.210 - T9$ �1riA Jv/ra C T6n 783 naA E 4 7AWArrY ewu _ M[a37LfS 77$ "i11A vlRl F L (TOT) 1<an1ILL RA1]1]•72C ruzA `O!e••L4 1'1 uea.11; . W AS%-T 1 .. •AIT. br-r7. AAC 7s-1Ti,b VAU,7'( 747 s� M•-TS lev•64C 4,10-4,54N UI3hB,1513 t'l-GSA 771 LUCK7 . ,n S(liERIG(P.ITl A3lyl Pa�T+fILL Air..si Mt73•BG A10 4L oso 54 ATt VICINITY MAP U 3_96 NORTH 720 FOOTHILL A 3-ia CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF WORT MEM# a BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner MEETING DATE: July 9 1997 FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development eview Managel�v FILE NUMBER: U 81-97 PROJECT ADDRESS: 720 - 726 Foothill Blvd. SUBJECT: Amendment to an approved use permit allowing a fraternity, to allow use of a storage building for bedrooms. RECOMMENDATION Deny the amendment, finding that the change will intensify uses at the site and that such intensification is not compatible with the surrounding high-density neighborhood. BACKGROUND Situation. The applicants received approval of a use permit in 1991, to establish a fraternity at the site. The fraternity built a storage building at the rear of the site in 1992. In February 1996 the fraternity requested an amendment to the use permit to allow use of the storage building for recreational activities. This amendment was denied, based on a finding that the change would be detrimental to persons living or working in the vicinity because of its potential to generate noise near many apartment bedroom windows. Now the applicants are asking to convert the storage building into two bedrooms and a bath, and to change the floor plan inside the 720 Foothill building to create a dining area where two bedrooms are currently. Data Summary Address: 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Applicant: Delta Upsilon Fraternity Property owner. Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation Representative: The Law Offices of Bonne Bridges Mueller O'Keefe &Nichols Zoning: High-Density Residential (R-4) General Plan: High-Density Residential Environmental status: Categorically exempt: Class 1, Section 15301: operation and minor alteration of existing structure, involving negligible expansion of use beyond that previously existing. Project action deadline: September 2, 1997 U 81-97 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 2 Site description The site is an L-shaped lot containing two apartment buildings in front, a parking lot in the rear, and a storage building in the L at the rear. The two buildings are used as a residence for the fraternity. The surrounding area includes high-density apartments, single-family residences, and a shopping center. Project Description The project is the amendment of an approved use permit to allow use of a storage building for bedrooms, with the related remodeling of the interior of 720 Foothill to create a dining room. The attached statement from the representative describes the project more fully. EVALUATION 1. The applicants want more dining area. The application, attached, says that there is a need for a dining room so that residents can eat together, rather than in their bedrooms. The statement says that there are no dining rooms in either building and no living room in 726 Foothill. The applicants would like to convert the two bedrooms on the easterly side of 720 Foothill into a large dining room. The two bedrooms would be replaced in the storage shed at the rear of the property. 2. Changes have taken place over the years. The residential buildings on site were constructed in 1953. The building permits indicate that a residence and an office were constructed. From later correspondence, it appears that the building at 726 Foothill was used as a chiropractic office for several years. When the property was purchased by the present owners, it was used residentially. Correspondence and the earlier applications (starting in 1989, with a use permit request for a fraternity that was denied) also show that some changes have been made without permits. Correspondence refers to the residence at 720 Foothill as a "two-bedroom residence", while current plans show it with three bedrooms. The 1989 use permit application included floor plans, showing that the building at 726 Foothill had two bedrooms plus a living room and kitchenette. The current amendment application refers to this building as a three-bedroom residence. Although floor plans have not been submitted, it appears that the living room area has been converted to bedroom area. Therefore, it appears that the building at 720 Foothill may have previously had a dining room, in the place of the bedroom opposite the kitchen, and that the building at 726 Foothill previously had a living room. The buildings have been remodeled to provide six bedrooms U 81-97 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 3 and to eliminate these living areas. Now the applicants want to make up for their loss by using the storage shed for two of the bedrooms. The changes to these buildings appear to have been done without permits. Permits can be obtained for them, however, because the zoning allows more than six bedrooms on this property. 3. The request makes some sense. The floor plans show most of the floor area currently being used as bedrooms. For the eight residents of the fraternity (the maximum allowed by the approved use permit), it is appropriate to have a dining area. The location chosen for a new dining hall would be approximately 250 square feet, generous for eight or even fifteen, the number of persons who can meet at the site for any specific event. (See use permit conditions, attached.) 4. But it may lead to intensification of the use. A large dining room can be an invitation to non-residents of the fraternity to visit and can provide space for activities that are not allowed by the use permit. The provision of additional meeting or recreational space may result in more frequent visits by non-resident fraternity members and friends, and an increase in automobiles and noise at the site. The neighborhood is developed at a rate higher than present density regulations would allow. This means that private space and quiet is at a premium here. The City cannot control all of the actions of its residents. But in regulating fraternities the City is recognizing the unique nature of this type use and the potential for disturbance it represents. The use is more than eight persons living in a house. The house is a meeting place for a much larger group of young people, many of whom may not be sensitive to the needs of the neighborhood. Therefore, any change that could result in greater use of the site by non-residents needs to be reviewed carefully. 5. Previous hearings verified the sensitivity of the site. The Planning Commission and Administrative Hearing Officer have reviewed the use permit several times, as required by the conditions. At most of these hearings, neighbors have expressed concerns particularly about the use of the rear of the lot. For a time, the storage shed was used illegally for recreational purposes, and this use tended to attract visitors who were noisy until late at night. Visitors and residents also use the parking lot for outdoor activities and often drive in late at night, and allegedly talk and shout loudly in the parking lot. One of the primary reasons these activities disturb the neighbors is that existing apartments at 140 Ferrini and 772 Foothill are close to the property line and many bedrooms face this property's rear yard. The block wall constructed as part of the initial approval process helps screen some of the noise and lights from the vehicles, but cannot be expected to protect these 3 - i3 U 81-97 720 and 726 Foothill Blvd. Page 4 sensitive areas from loud talking, shouting, basketball playing, and other outdoor play late at night. This fraternity has many limitations on its activities because of the relatively small size of the lot and the nearness of a great many neighbors. (See attached vicinity map for an overview of the number of apartments close to the site.) ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission may approve the amendment, as planned or with modifications. The Commission may continue the discussion. Direction should be given to staff and the applicants. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Other departments had no concerns with this request. Attached: vicinity map applicant's statement floor plan from U 1449A file (1989 use permit application) Letter approving continuation of use at last review hearing by Administrative Hearing Officer 3-p`l Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 , Page 6 / being moved back to the correct locatioo ould ensure better views from the neighboring driveway and it would be in keeping wi the ordinance. Commissioner Jeffrey stated the fenc does not obstruct traffic in any way. Commissioner Ashbaugh can support a motion. The fence can be made to comply by merely trimming off 2'. He is concetne bout the character issue with the neighborhood. It's important to maintain setbacks and adh a to the ordinance. Commissioner Whittlesey concurred. Chairman Senn has been persuaded by th testimony. He can't make the safety finding. The testimony has been clear the fence d es not impact the visual sight plan. He is persuaded by the question of the setback d can support the motion. AYES: Commissioners Ewan, Koura is, Whittlesey, Ashbaugh, and Chairman Senn NOES: Commissioner Jeffrey ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioner Ready The motion carried 5-1. 2. 720-726 Foothill: U 81-97: Request to allow use of storage building for bedrooms; R-4 Zone; Delta Upsilon Fraternity, applicant. Associate Planner Lautner presented the staff report and recommended denying the amendment, finding that the change will intensify uses at the site and that such intensification is not compatible with the surrounding high-density neighborhood. . Commissioner Ewan asked the number of persons occupying the property. Associate Planner Lautner stated the limit is eight by use permit condition. The Zoning Regulations have set a maximum number of person/acre for group housing. In the R4 Zone the maximum would be up to 55 persons/acre. This would translate to 13 or 14 at this site. Commissioner Kourakis noted the use permit allows executive meetings of up to 15 persons. Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 Page 7 Chairman Senn felt after reading the staff report this is a good idea because it doesn't intensify the number of people on site and provides better living conditions. Associate Planner stated this has been a very sensitive site. There have been a number of complaints and there have been citations issued. Staff is being cautious. Development Review Manager Whisenand stated one of the issues has been the interface with the neighborhood. The adjacent apartments are very close to the shared property line. There have been problems with noise and uses in the back yard area. Staff is concerned about putting the fraternity use closer to this shared property line. Commissioner Ewan stated the proposed uses would be moved to the front of the property. He asked if the fraternity has the correct setback. Development Review Manager Whisenand replied yes. . Commissioner Ewan asked if the adjacent property has the correct setback. Associate Planner Lautner replied no. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if staff has contacted the applicant regarding somehow mitigating potential noise. Associate Planner Lautner replied yes, they are willing to make modifications to the building or use permit to mitigate sound. Commissioner Kourakis stated there a combination of uses on the site. There's a residential use, an assembly use, and an organizational/fraternal activity use. There seems to be a problem with the organizational activity that is beyond normal residential activity. Assistant City Attorney Clemens noted one of the conditions of the use permit does say no hosted fraternal events on the site shall be allowed. There were no further questions/comment and the public comment session was opened. PUBLIC CON MENT: Norbert Lipper;308 San Nicholas Ct.,Laguna Beach, Alumni Corp. representative, stated he is somewhat pleased with the staff report even though it denies the request. He perceived the biggest problem being the relocation of bedrooms. He„pleased the only concern staff has is the 250 s.f. area being made into a dining room!o"r Mr. Lippert stated this fraternity has been at this location since 1988. One of the issues in the staff report has to do with fraternity history. Regrettably in the late '80s the fraternity 3 -�� Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 Page 8 had problems. Members at that time are longer here. The climate of fraternities has changed substantially in recent years. As the alumni president,he deals with issues of alcohol,parties, and risk management. It always seems past history is brought up. There is a use permit in place that completely restricts activities that occur on the property. Item #3 states the permit is for residential use only and no hosted fraternal events shall be allowed. The fraternity has a weekly membership meeting and it's not conducted at the house. All events are conducted off site. He's never attended a hosted event on the property. Mr. Lippert stated they want to establish a presence in SLO. He has reviewed the noise complaints for the last two years and there have been a total of four violations and one citation. This is in line with most R-4 high-density residential/student housing areas. There have been five hearings;the first occurring in '92. Hearing review periods have been extended and are only held before the hearing officer. Things have improved and the mitigation measures have been working,but there has been no loosening of use permit restrictions. There is a restriction prohibiting outdoor activities after dusk. Mr. Lippert stated the property was bought in '88 with an investment of$80,000 to improve the property to meet planning/parking requirements,remodeling, and install noise barriers. Since that time they've made no substantial improvements. The building is 1,700 s.f. and houses eight people. They would like to convert the 460 s.f. shed in the back to residential use. This would add value to the property and provide a better living place for fraternity members. They're not asking for any increases in the use of the property, variances, or loosening of restrictions. Improvements will help market the fraternity to new members. Fraternity memorabilia will be better displayed with the improvement. The proposed building will be to residential standards with plumbing, sewage, and electricity. The property meets all zoning, setback and parking requirements. Mr. Lippe stated the proposal willbe used for normal residential use. There's a 6'high masonry block wall. The method for allocating rooms in the fraternity is based on seniority. These room6will go to members who have lived in the house for a while, juniors and seniors, with experience in neighbor relations issues and in the requirements of the use permit. Individuals living in the new facility will recognize that the city can revoke the use permit. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if Mr. Lippert would be willing to mitigate any potential noise by sound proofing the room. Mr. Lippert stated they will do whatever it takes. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if they would be willing to clean up the front yard. Mr. Lippert replied yes. All issues can be resolved. 3-/7 Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 Page 9 Commissioner Ashbaugh noted the parking area currently has 12 spaces. Associate Planner Lautner stated that's the way it was originally built. Commissioner Ashbaugh suggested elimination of the rear most parking spaces and replacement with landscaping to improve neighbor relations. Mr. Lippert stated they can contact the city arborist to discuss landscaping. Parking spaces wouldn't need to be removed. Mark C=4, Delta Upsilon attorney, 1060 Palm St., asked if the Commission received his letter. The Commission was in receipt of the letter. Mr. Connely received a letter from the Cal Poly police chief which described the activities of the current fraternity members and their attempts to be good citizens. He distributed this letter. Al Bonin, 272 Del Mar Ct., owner of the Lanai Apts., stated his apartments contain 24 units. They are adjacent to the fraternity and he's not in favor of any amendments to the use permit. Amendments would open the door for more party places. The last few months they've had any peace for the first time in eight years. He feels the fraternity wants more members and parties. Mr. Bonin described a packet distributed to the Commission, explaining the fraternity history and noise disturbances his tenants endure. He's not asking for the revocation of the existing use permit,but if the noise disturbances continue he will. He displayed listed police calls to the site from '92 when the shed was built. His tenants have moved out of their bedrooms to get peace. He has 11 bedrooms 6' from the property line. The conversion will be a party place. The parking lot is a recreation area with a basketball court/hoop. They have called the city to request inspections. He's called the police reporting excessive noise complaints. After the police leave the noise starts again.. Noise disturbances persisted and he's hired an attorney. His tenants are moving out. Guidelines should be established and the fraternity should obey laws. If not, the use permit should be revoked. The shed and the parking lot should be declared out of bounds. Commissioner Kourakis questioned Mr. Bonin about his setback. Mr. Bonin stated his building was built to code approximately 30 years ago. The code has since changed. He added that his tenants don't disturb the neighborhood. Commissioner Ewan asked if he has students in his apartments. 3 -i8 Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 Page 10 Mr. Bonin's stated that many of his tenants are school teachers,professional, and nurses who work nights and sleep during the day. Elinor Bonin, 272 Del Mar Ct., stated some tenants and neighbors weren't able to attend this hearing. There have been problems since the storage shed was built. The shed has been used as a recreation area and the fraternity has a plan to extend the deck closer to the sidewalk. The fraternity has had parties with drinking. If the shed becomes bedrooms, they will be able to facilitate more people and this is an invitation for disturbances. Mrs. Bonin stated this property was posted on June 26 but the signs were taken down. She wasn't aware of this hearing until she was told by a neighbor: She didn't receive notice by mail. Commissioner Whittlesey asked if there is an on-site apartment manager. Mrs. Bonin replied yes. He couldn't attend the hearing because he's out of town. Commissioner Whittlesey asked if the manager has been contacted by the fraternity with regards to being good neighbors. Mrs. Bonin doesn't know of any organized advertised events taking place. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if she's aware of the conditions of the use permit. Mrs. Bonin replied yes. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if the fraternity lived up to the conditions, would she then have objections to the conversion. Mrs. Bonin replied no, if they would be quiet, considerate, obey laws, and didn't have loud music/parties. Jim Smith, 2246 Sar(pt Ynez Ave., has observed activities at this location for 5-6 years and is opposed to this change. There is too much noise and a constant parade of parties and police at this location. It's been well documented. There has been a brief period where they've slowed down a little bit. This is recognized sensitive site that is surrounded by apartments and businesses. Approving this change will make matters worse. Jan Smith, 2246 Santa Ynez Ave.,remembers being in college and feels students keep different hours. There are bedrooms within feet of this shed. She's the BonAdaughter and helps with management of the apartments. This has been an ongoing saga. is Mr. Lippert showed on the overhead where the shed vAll be located. He's checked the police report records and noted some incidences may not have been related to this 3 -�y Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 Page 11 fraternity. There seems to be a concern the bedrooms will be converted to a recreation facility. It will be fully converted to residential use and will not be converted to recreational facilities. Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Ewan asked if the Commission�s,can limit the size of the dining room. Development Review Manager Whisenand replied yes, it's related to the use permit request. Commissioner Ashbaugh asked if staff received any other correspondence. Associate Planner Lautner replied no. Commissioner Ashbaugh is concerned about the posted notice being removed. Commissioner Whittlesey asked when the application was submitted. Associate Planner Lautner replied June 4. Commissioner Whittlesey didn't see notices posted at any of the sites for this evening's hearing. Commissioner Jeffrey asked how use permit-enforcement-is handled. Associate Planner Lautner stated on a complaint basis to the Community Development Department. Noise complaints are directed to the police. Assistant City Attorney Clemens receives copies of all noise citations. Commissioner Ashbaugh moved to approve the amendment to the use permit. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jeffrey Commissioner Ashbaugh doesn't support the argument the conversion will create additional opportunities for enhanced activities. The addition of the dining room and enlarged common area will help alleviate problems at the rear of the property. This is an R-4 neighborhood with people living in close proximity to each other. This fraternity is trying to improve its operations. Commissioner Kourakis cannot support the motion. She has concerns about the mixing of uses on this site and the potential for enlarging some of the uses. 3- 20 Draft Planning Commission Minutes July 9, 1997 Page 12 Commissioner Ewan is concerned about the intensification of the use on this property. Commissioner Whittlesey believes the use permit already has sufficient means and mechanisms to control activities. She noted there may be an enforcement issue with this situation. Chairman Senn concurred with Commissioner Whittlesey. The fraternity has made additional investments in the property and are at greater risk and are more likely to adhere to conditions. Commissioner Jeffrey feels placing bedrooms in the back and the common area up front will help mitigate noise. Commissioner Jeffrey suggested asking the applicant to provide sound proofing to the walls common to the apartment complex. Commissioner Ewan asked if it's possible to eliminate the widows facing the adjoining property. Development Review Manager Whisenand expressed a concern regarding placing conditions that could be in conflict with building codes. Commissioner Ashbaugh feels the door facing the apartment complex should be eliminated or noise attenuation added. Commissioner Ewan suggested amending the motion so the conversion is designed so that all ingress/egress be from the south side. Commissioners Ashbaugh and Jeffrey accepted the amendment to the motion. AYES: Commissioner Ashbaugh, Jeffrey, Ewan, Whittlesey, and Chairman Senn NOES: Commissioner Kourakis ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioner Ready The motion carried 5-1. The Commission also recommended that only one ingress/egress door used to be located on the southerly side of the conversion, if permissible by building code standards. 43 308 San Nicholas Ct Laguna Beach, CA92651 — (714) 560-5733 (work) June 2, 1997 Judy Lautner City of San Luis Obispo Department of Community Development 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Subject: Request to Amend Use Permit U1515 for Delta Upsilon Fraternity at 720-726 Foothill Boulevard Dear Judy: The Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation, property owner at 720-726 Foothill Blvd., in conjunction with Delta Upsilon Fraternity, applicant, requests Planning Commission approval to amend the subject use permit to allow use of the existing storage building at the rear of the property for residential occupancy. The structure is currently identified in the existing use permit as storage only. If the amendment is approved, it is our goal to relocate two of the existing small bedrooms in the 720 building to the remodeled storage building and to provide a dining area in the 720 building. A revised site plan, details and the reasons for our proposal, along with a review of potential noise concerns are included with the planning application. In the seven years since the initial use permit was approved, we have made no substantial improvements to our property. Prior to the initial use permit approval in April 1991, the Alumni Corp. invested $80,000 to upgrade the property and meet the requirements of the use permit. We believe the requested amendment is minor in nature and will have no negative impacts on our neighbors. The change we are requesting will allow us to improve the value of our property, make it easier to attract tenants, and will substantially improve the living conditions for the fraternity members by expanding the living space and providing normal and reasonable dining accommodations. The Planning Department conducted a 2-year public review of the approved use permit on January 17, 1997. As with prior reviews, the hearing officer found °The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses". Based on the minor nature of our proposed use permit amendment and the positive outcome of public review hearings over the years, 3. 2Z we request that staff give serious consideration and subsequent approval to our amendment request. _ Mark Connely and I will represent the applicant, Delta Upsilon Fraternity, at the upcoming public hearing. We request that any notices, correspondence, in addition to staff findings (if available) be forwarded to Delta Upsilon Fraternity and: Norbert Lippert 308 San Nicholas Ct. Laguna Beach, CA 92651 (714) 560-5733 Mark B. Connely, Attorney Law Offices of; Bonne, Bridges, Mueller, O'Keefe, Nichols 1060 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA93401-3221 (805) 541-8350 If their are any questions or concerns regarding our proposal, Mr. Connely or will be more than pleased to discuss and review any issues that staff may be concerned with. Sincerely, l N�orbert Lip ert Alpha Upsilon Alumni Crop, President Property Owner c: Delta Upsilon Fraternity Mark B. Connely, Attorney Planning Commission Members 3- � 3 June 2, 1997 Use Permit U1515, Delta Upsilon Fraternity Requested Use Permit Amendment The Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation (property owner) in conjunction with Delta Upsilon Fraternity, requests Planning Commission approval to amend the current Fraternity Use Permit at 720/726 Foothill Boulevard to allow use of the existing storage building for residential occupancy. The structure is currently identified in the existing Use Permit as a storage facility. It is our goal to modify the building to accommodate two bedrooms and a bathroom as noted on the attached plans. Any building modifications would of course be subject to building department review. Reason For Requesting Amendment . Our current property consists of two separate buildings with approximately 1,700 square feet of living space for the eight residents. Converting the storage shed to residential use will economically add 460 square feet of living space to our existing property. If approved, we plan to relocate two bedrooms from the existing building at 720 Foothill to the remodeled storage building. This will allow us to provide a formal dining area at the 720 location. For this reason we are not requesting an increase in the number of residents on-site. The 720 location is currently permitted for residential use and will continue to be used as such. After remodeling, it will still contain an existing large bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living room area, and a new dining room. Due to no change in use, and with the assumption that normal residential use includes a dining room, we assume interior only modifications to the 720 property would not need to be included in the use permit amendment but will require building department review and approval. We believe that our proposed changes will provide substantial benefits to us as the property owner along with the residents, while having no negative impact on the surrounding community. Approval of the Use Permit amendment will allow us to: • Expand and improve overall living conditions for our tenants. • Allow the Alumni Corporation to better attract tenants with the improved facilities. The smaller rooms in the 720 property were always difficult to lease. • Provide for normal and reasonable dining accommodations. The smaller building at 726 Foothill has no dinning room or living room. Fraternity members end up eating in their rooms. The 720 location has a small living room where members are required to eat in their rooms or at the coffee table. • The proposed changes will allow the fraternity sufficient room to display fraternity memorabilia and history. Site Conditions The existing storage shed is located at the rear of the property and is constructed to residential standards. The building also meets current property set-back requirements. A majority of the required building modifications will be internal and should not be disruptive to 3. 2d neighbors. Any modifications will be subject to the building department's review and approval. Though located near apartment buildings at the rear of our property, the proposed use is strictly residential and will not be disruptive to neighbors.. _ Property Zoning and Parking The property is zoned High Density Residential (R-4) with an allowable occupancy of 14. Current occupancy is well below the property limit. The site currently has 12 parking spaces which is well above the current parking requirement of 9 spaces. The proposed amendment has no impact on parking or zoning limits. Noise Concerns Our prior request to allow the storage shed to be used as a recreational facility was denied due to concerns that this type of use would likely be disturbing to neighbors and would cause an increased demand on parking. In order to alleviate these concerns, we are requesting the facility be permitted for residential use only. The Use Permit was originally approved in April 1991. To meet the requirements of the Use Permit and to upgrade a property that was in very poor condition, the Alumni Corporation has invested an additional $80,000 in the property. Included in this investment, is a city required 6' noise attenuation masonry block wall surrounding virtually the entire property. We recognize and understand noise concerns expressed by adjacent property owners when the storage shed was first proposed as a recreational facility. It's current proposed use as a residential facility should alleviate these concerns for the following reasons: • The building meets all property set-back requirements and is constructed to residential standards. • It will only be used for normal residential use. • Room allocations are based on seniority. The proposed facility will provide the quietest and most desirable accommodations. Individuals living in these rooms will most likely be juniors or seniors and will have lived at the fraternity for one to two years. They will be more mature and well aware of neighbor noise issues and concerns. • Individuals living in the new facility recognize that it's use was allowed for by a Use Permit amendment which is subject to review by the Planning Commission. • The Alumni Corporation will be making a substantial financial investment in our proposed modifications. We will not allow our investment to be jeopardized. • In addition to the above, we are willing to work with building department staff to include noise reduction landscaping/trees between the proposed facility and neighboring pa ments. orbert Lip rt, Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp., President li a � I • � I I _ a m ' p I i ! a p • I I f_ • O I a p • C O < I N ° • O 1 e • �— r 9 m _ • _ O C m x T it . m �>Z o POSL p ,iv i w /21=SIv�_'T1.0� m C ► a .. - x O O � r 1 / x � L a m •1 i—JL1 �: 1m • a T� IZ a - • p _ m m O I p � r�• i - _f0 'fir?II I � ,r- a m � T 2 OI 5 m � ► m J m i ! . I • ° a n U V y i •\ ` 726 -72,/,:p F71Al YPtal� rill 1 GPLM 6� CL P�Ot.NI FNuoS(�7 a WKM a44E uP broRm KITGN, ! p I LtV�r.i4 � (.IVn�4 Roo M RM. I j� I p FOOTRILL 60ULEVA j 3-z7 II City OSAn tuis OBISPO 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 January 21, 1997 Delta Upsilon Fraternity 720 Foothill Boulevard San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 164-94 720-726 Foothill Boulevard Dear Gentlemen: On Friday, January 17, 1997, 1 conducted a 2-year public review of an approved use permit (U1515) allowing a fraternity at the above location. After reviewing the information presented, I approved continuation of the use, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1 . The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity. 2. The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The use is exempt from environmental review (Class 3, Section 15303 - conversion of existing small structures from one use to another). Conditions 1 . Occupancy of the site is limited to eight residents. 2. A minimum of nine parking spaces shall be provided on-site. 3. The permit is for residential use only. Fraternity activities conducted at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard shall be limited to meetings of the executive council and any other meetings and gatherings involving a total of 15 or fewer fraternity members and guests. The use of amplified sound equipment shall not be allowed. No hosted fraternal events on the site shall be allowed (for example, rush events, little sisters). Basketball or other outdoor recreational activities �� shall cease at dusk.O 3 -144 The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. 4. If a reasonable complaint, as defined by the Community Development Director, is received in writing by the Community Development Department, a.) The complaint shall be forwarded to the Interfraternity Council and the Planning Commission within one week of receipt for review and comment. The names of the people filing the complains shall not be included without their consent. Copies of all correspondence will be sent to the Dean of Students and the fraternity. b.) The complaints, and the comments from the Interfraternity Council if received, shall be forwarded by the Planning Division to the Planning Commission for consideration at the commission's next available meeting. 5. No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on this site are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. 6. A fraternity identification sign may be installed on the building in accordance with the City's sign regulations. 7. The applicant shall institute and maintain a neighborhood relations program. This plan shall include at least the following elements: a.) Quarterly training of all members in community relations. Dates of these training sessions shall be submitted to the Community Development Director. b.) A program to inform neighbors in a timely manner of upcoming events at the fraternity or elsewhere. c.) Submission of names and telephone numbers of responsible persons to the Community Development Department and to apartment property managers and neighbors within two blocks in all directions of the fraternity. Responsible persons shall be available during all events and at reasonable hours otherwise to receive and handle complaints. Evidence of implementation of said plan shall be submitted to the Director for review within 30 days of Planning Commission approval of this application. Failure to implement said plan will be grounds for revocation of this permit. 8. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside the storage building. 9. The use permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer in two years (approximately January 17, 1999). At the review hearing, the Hearing Officer may add, delete, or modify conditions of approval or may 3 -z9 revoke the use permit. 10. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of this permit. 11. The use of the shed shall be limited to storage only. My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision. If you have any questions, please call Judy Lautner at 781-7166. Sincerely, /ona Whisena d Hearing Officer cc: Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation 96 W. Campbell Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 3-30 ������i� �����II�IIH����►���u� h city of SADWIS OBISPO 1jjj& APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL In accordance with the appeals procedures as authorized by.Title, 1, Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of XAbVIAA, C/km1tr1e,d CX;Ae u e/-9'7)rendered on TL5- 9 /9rr,7 which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds for submitting.the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.) . • r�li7�GT +F'hISl7t1J /1'1.E/!T 7�+3 R �(lE P62<1t<p' ¢LLO W Lr2G 7Zt,6 �E�T+E uP/S/LON 770( 776 Fa aTH14Z_ -r. L . O.� C� �/3 VO-f -O AXE: '4 J-r0/Z�46rC- Slt6D Fc e -&g� /Zoc to S. 9l6 SFIer-D A.*-s Q 66^-) c c J ED t`<x c[.fi�4 Fa R �6r�Etc D cl NL Vt64.r O N a ;C- cc jL 16 {D G. CSO s.s . •¢zLQW< 7�c1 /eog v S co N cvoccld <rLG2c�4=CE .> rE 4S q GE of fits f,�6D 90 �rZsf�'coN <9-r211 � DrzOQ/stl , ccs .9`�iar fs 7^/&,Lto; -�.Q4F�lL Carr-ssfrc,ur �+irj 'V 1��occs dJorSE Dr�f[c.4drrs,� 7% !s Cost ✓ Eri'scoN ds D6vrED : Iters Nor . G��vF�tBGE ikv-air, spa .¢ Hrq�L� l�E-vstTp �VErGr�B�e kook . The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with: J�Orrf,- 4Wr.yER Assocr%afs 7h tn.5g on Name/Department (Date) Appellant: ,41- 7a DS Z. Name/Title omvew or- "-rks Guvk;" r ' �Mailing Address (& Zip ode) Cfa S� 0 0 Home Phone Work Phone ' Representative: 1(77-o.a,vc-- �r ©6 Decca c,� Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zip Code) For Official Use Only: Calendared for lp-c�'9 Date & Time Received: c: City Attorney City Administrative Officer Copy to the'following department(s): ' RECEIVED 0ONAS yAIAAJb eau 7 v&,e J U L 2 1 1997 SLO CITY CLERK Original in City Clerk's Office 3 —3/ MEETING AGENDA DATE ITEM �J�ALMSTREET 7ffi Gw Qmas Or .. SAN Luis 08mm CA 93401-3221 Bonne (805)541-8350•FAx(805)541-6817 Bridges Mueller PLEASE RPrme TO FILE. 7'Keefe -& DIREC[DIAL Nichols MAm B. CONmaix PxorwwN coxroan ATTORNEY RECEIVED .)FP 0 2 1997 SLO CITY COUNCIL September 2, 1997 - [Ptr:LERKIORIG CDD DIR O FIN DIR O FIRE CHIEF San Luis Obispo Cit Council NEY E3 PW DIR P Y D POLICE CHF City Hall ❑ REC DIR 990 Palm Street O UTIL DIR San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 U PERS DIR Attention: Council Members Dave Romero, Kathy Smith, Dodie Williams, Vice Mayor Bill Roalman, and Mayor Allen Settle. Subject.: Item #3 • Appeal - Fraternity Use Permit (U-81-97) . Dear Council Members: I am the attorney for the Delta Upsilon Alumni Corporation, initially the applicant, and now the respondent. I have three fundamental concerns that I would respectfully submit for your consideration. First, for the Planning Commission Hearing on July 9, 1997, I personally submitted a letter, outlining my response to Staff's initial recommendation, and attached a letter from Walt Lambert, Coordinator of Greek Affairs at Cal Poly, outlining the various efforts Delta Upsilon has made to contribute positively to this community. Also, at the hearing, I presented a letter from L. Thomas Mitchell, Chief of Police for Cal Poly, further attesting to the good citizenship and positive contributions from Delta Upsilon. The Planning Commission acknowledged receipt of this material, and such acknowledgment is reflected in the minutes. While I am certain it was just an oversight on Staff's part, none of these materials were provided to you in the agenda report I had the opportunity to review today (I have been out of town since August 20. ) Attached to this letter are copies of my July 29, 1997 letter, the letter from Walt Lambert and the letter from L. Thomas Mitchell. I would request that these materials be considered before any action is taken on this appeal. ORANGE COUNTY LOS ANGELES . . ] /� SANTA BARBARA RIVBRSIDB 1750 E FooRm S�Surre 450 3699 WRQ BLw,l Orn Ame >•°% 801 GARm S>mr.Surra 300 3403 10®STR=Sorre 800 P.O.Box 22018 Los ANmL=CA 90010.7119 SANr.+BARRAR&CA 93101-5502 P.O.Box 747 SANu ANA.CA 92702-2018 (113)480-1900•FAx(213)738.5888 r` .�, (805)965-2992•FAx(805)962-6509 Rry R,CA 97501-0747 (714)835-1157.FAx(714)480.2585 (909)788-1944•FAx(909)78246% Second, Delta Upsilon has repeatedly stated it is willing to work with Staff to reduce noise. At the Planning Commission hearing, a significant amount of time was spent considering different building adjustments to hopefully minimize noise. One of the solutions was to require all entry and exit through one south-facing door (that is, opposite from the apartments towards the back wall) . This was agreed to by Delta Upsilon. Delta Upsilon indicated it was willing to further sound proof and change some landscaping if that would help. Staff, however, has never conveyed any alternative to outright denial. Third, Staff's CAO report, especially its description of the Planning Commission's Action (page 2, paragraph .#2) , is incomplete. As noted, the building of a dining room will hopefully facilitate members to gather inside the main house and away from the back area, and converting the back shed into a bedroom will hopefully help control noise in the back area. However, that was not the only conclusion reached by the Commissioners. A review of the minutes indicates the Commissioners confirmed that the proposal met all building requirements and that all of the noise related concerns were already covered by the use permit itself. Moreover, in the initial Staff recommendation, Staff itself conceded, "The request makes some sense. " (p. 3-13, para. #3. ) Now, however, Staff has left out of its report to this Council any positive acknowledgement that having a dining room in a facility with eight residents "makes some sense. " There is no explanation for this omission. In conclusion, Delta Upsilon has worked hard to improve its relations with the City and to make a positive contribution to the community. Their request is reasonable, and was initially acknowledged as such by Staff in its original recommendation. It is reasonable to have a dining room for a residential area that houses eight people. Delta Upsilon is not asking to increase its residential density. As a property owner, Delta Upsilon is asking to reconfigure some of its buildings to better the living conditions of its residents. As a neighbor, Delta Upsilon has already agreed to place one door on the south side of the building to decrease noise, and has agreed to work towards creating a better relationship with its neighbors. The Planning Commission action was appropriate and should not be reversed. It is respectfully submitted the appeal should therefore be denied. Very truly yours, BONNE, BRIDGES, MUELLER, OIKEEFE & NICHOLS Professional Corporation Mark B. Conne For Delta Upsi n Alumni Corporation Enclosures 1660 rA�1A1 STREEr THE LAW OMM Or 3lerbUa OBWO.CA 93401-3221 Borgne 805)541-8350•FAx(805)541-6817 Bridges Mueller YKeefe Ig vtp REFPR IL)m v. Nichols Mmm B. CONNBLY PWFMMAL GOaroxAnon ATTORNEY July 9, 1997 San Luis Obispo Planning Commission City of San Luis Obispo Department of Community Development 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Attention: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner Subject: Supplemental Material Submitted in Response to Staff Report Your File No: U 81-79 Project Address: 720-720 Foothill Boulevard Hearing Date: July 9, 1997 Dear Ms. Lautner: I received in the mail yesterday the Planning Commission Staff Report recommending denial. While I will be at the hearing tonight to present my client's case for approval, I would like to . take this opportunity to address some of your comments in writii)q . and to provide you with further information. As a courtesy, I would request that you forward this letter to the Planning Commission members for their review before the hearing. My interpretation of your report is basically that there is nothing particularly wrong with the requested amendment, but that you are worried the addition of a dining room may increase noise and use. I conclude this given your .statements on page 3, 11 3- 4: "The request makes some sense. . . . But it -may lead to intensification of the use. . " You then go on to report Or. historical concerns regarding noise in 5. I would submit that your concerns about noise and use intensification--from a historical perspective--are not a legal or reasonable basis to deny the requested amendment to permit a property owner to have a dining room and still maintain sufficient bedrooms for eight residents in the context of this application. ORANGE COUNTY LOS ANGELES .��) � 1 SANTA BARBARA ki4R85[n6 1750EFwmRSTx=sure450 3699Was=&mIOn1FW= 801 GA ST ..Sm 300 340310nzST=SwmaW P.O.B=22019 Lm AN=zL CA 90010.2719 SANTA B&uA"CA 93101-5502 P0.BOr.747 SANG.ANA.CA 92702-2018 0113)480.1900•FAx a13)738-5888 /' '�k (803)965.2992•FAX(805)962-6509 Rrvmmq CA 92501-0747 (714)835-1157•FAx(714)480-2585 (909)788-1944+Fps(909)782,4666 Judith Lautner Re: Delta Upsilon U 81-97 July 9, 1997 Page 2 Yes, there have been some noise problems in the past. But this application is made in the summer of 1997--not 1989, not 1992, and for that matter, not 1995. Your parade of possible problems is based on actions taken by students and fraternity members who are mostly, if not entirely, graduated and gone, and arises out of a time period when the city had a serious problem with all forms of civil disruption. The most memorable example, of course, being the small riot during our old-style Poly Royal. People, however, change. Is Delta Upsilon forever to "pay" for the alleged sins of their predecessors--students, fraternity members, and out-of-area hoodlums--such that even requests that you concede "make[] some sense" are to be routinely denied by staff? Furthermore, Delta Upsilon has taken its citizenship in this community seriously, and has either corrected or is actively attempting to correct some of the past problems: As attested to in the letter from Walt Lambert, the Coordinator of Greek Affairs at Cal Poly, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, Delta Upsilon has become--through hard work, a renewed focus on non- alcoholic activities, and community service--an outstanding fraternity. Your concerns and factors for denial, however, focus on the past. Perhaps this was simply an oversight. Perhaps you simply needed further information. It is in this spirit that I address this letter and attach the letter from Mr. Lambert in the hope of giving you reason to reconsider. It seems to me that we are at a cross-roads. There may be some use restrictions that could be agreed upon to allow approval. But to recommend outright denial of a request for a dining room that "makes some sense" based on the history noted is unreasonable. Please call me if you have any questions or would like to have any further information prior to the hearing tonight. Very truly yours, BONNE, BRIDGES, MUELLER, O'REEFE & NICHOLS Professional Corporation Mark B. Connel For Delta Upsilon Alumni Corporation, Applicant JUL. 9 '97 4:39PM P.2 (ALPOLY C:ALIFOANIA I PLY-1.7HNI1. STATE UNMRYITY SAN I•Uls 0-mism, CA 93407 PUBLIC SAVETY SE•RY10Ee L.MvI:RRITY POLICE (;SUS)75G•'L:6! July 9, 1997 To: Whom It May Concern: re: Delta Upsilon I have been involved with the members of Delta Upsilon fraternity since my arrival at Cal Poly in May of 1994. During that time I have noted that this fratemity has been a leader in their involvement on campus in responsible behavior. Members of Delta Upsilon have taken leadership roles in several campus organizations dealing with the prevention of violence. Members have provided escort service on the campus during the evening hours without compensation along with other fraternities. Of particular note is the representation from Delta Upsilon of Jeff Mueller as the Student Chairperson of the campus V.I.P. team. This group is the most active in preventing violence through education and presenting non-alcohol related events on and off campus. It is noteworthy that Delta Upsilon has sponsored their own non-alcohol related events during the past year, when these events have traditionally been alcohol related. Please feel free to contact me at anytime regarding this matter at (805) 756- 2281. Sincerely, L. Thomas Mitchell Chief of Police TaE CALUORNIA STATF 1 TNIVpRS(TY 07/09/97 WED 15:39 FAX 805 756 5836 STU.LIFE CPSUSLO [a 001 CALPOLY California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo,CA 93407 Student Life and Activities (805)756.2476 • Fax(805)756-5836 July % 1997 To Whom It May Concern, This is a letter of support for the Delta Upsilon Fraternity and their chapter house modifications request from the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission. This fraternity has excelled as a chapter here on campus as well as in the community. They have recently received a number of awards from the national honor fraternity, Order of Omega, one of which was being awarded the Outstanding Fraternity award. The chapter has also been involved in a number of philanthropy and community programs. Members of the fraternity have taken the leadership of a new program on campus, the VIP (Violence intervention and Prevention Program) and used their resources to offer alternative non alcoholic social events for all students on campus as one part of the program. As a community member and resident, the chapter has demonstrated a professional approach to concerns about their chapter house from their neighbors. Their consultation and communication efforts have led to a well thought out plan that will correct the existing concerns some of their neighbors have. They are aware of the potential problems they have as a fraternity in a highly visible area and have chosen to actively address these problems and come up %Ith a solution that should benefit all parties involved. The Glifarnla Sram U&Wcnlq.Bakeafteld•(]arid Maa4•Ghirn•Q..m.npar Hili.•pre.n... HarWanl•HumWdc•irmp Baath•Is..Aniisln•Maririmn Aaadnmy- Munterty&n•H.rrhridpc.Pomona .Sacramento.San Bernardino•San.Mesa• San Franctam.San Jose.San Luis Obispo.San Mamas.Sonoma•Smni.laus 07/09/97 {PED 15:40 FAI 805 756 5836 STUMFE CPSUSLO 2002 As a reminder, this chapter was asked many years ago by city officials to vacate and sell their property that was in a high residential area and to rek)cate in a properly zoned location. They did that and are now trying make their new location a better place for all concerned. Y highly recommend that their modifications request be approved. Sincerely, Walt lambert Coordinator of Greek Affairs Pr CiYC�13oUNCIL ❑ FJDIR MEETING AGENDA-,��i:pAll 0 ❑ FDATE 9"Z�97 YTEM # ORNEY ❑ P UKCERK/ORIG ❑ P ❑ AIGMT TEAM ❑ R ❑ ❑ U ❑ P TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL: THE DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY LOCATED AT 720-726 FOOTHILL,HAVE APPLIED FOR USE PERMIT U-81-97(AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW USE OF A STORAGE SHED FROM STORAGE TO BEDROOMS). WE,THE NEIGHBORS IN THE FOOTHILL-FERRINI AREA,REQUEST THAT THIS AMENDMENT BE DENIED. MOVING THE BEDROOMS TO THE STORAGE SHED AND ALLOWING THE CONVERSION IN THE FRONT HOUSE WILL INTENSIFY USES AT THE SITE WHICH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH-DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD! NAME ADDRESS DATE _ . C 2= �r,�/ 7o t? oma J U ' C., a . �s 1J"- S Y/-, Zo Z :�- azo a Z� rUJ Ln � - `77 div 6C94 a blo C rJ ,� C. S. L.o. 8 a :;;,,V25 4/ a a9 9 Tv �o ovf ' 8- a6- Q7 / $_ 92 �-,,Z6 `97 - s coo yk 9 t r 1 • • r . •• t t r t • • t r • t t r • •• • t • • t r r • t t • • t • • • t t t • • r t • • • r t r : • • •• r ._I_ . . / iii _ _�/ �• :� / �� .� ' WK MOR XA �1ME,- U Pi Owl • / M 0142 r ! W, A �s T.�/� ., R + I/ a 1'IAIF - L,�� / . r u FA 1/L _ r / �' • it MEETING AGENDA ITE ITEM #_3 rOa1 OUNCIL CDD DIR 0 ❑ FIN DIR AO ❑ FIRE CHIEF ATIORNEY ❑ PW DIR CLERKIORIG ❑ POLICE CHF Sept. 29, 1997 I'.IGMTTEAM ❑ REC DIR ` CIUTIL DIR Honorable Mayor Allan Settle andE3 PERS DIR Members of the City Council : Re: The Delta Upsilon application to make the storage shed into living quarters 20 feet from the nearest apartment house. We oppose this request because of the conflicting lifestyle in proximity to a densely populated residential neighborhood. This location was never appropriate for a fraternity. That fact would be compounded by turning the shed into bedrooms with coming and goings at all hours . Any rooms should be added to the main buildings . We hope you will deny this request. �S`1'innc'erely, Henry Doreen Case 244 Albert Drive San Luis Obispo, Calif. RECEIVED AUG 99 1997 SLO CITY COUNCIL METING AGl A DATE ITEM #--- - 272 Del Mar Court San Luis Obispo Ca. 93405 August 20, 1997 San Luis Obispo City Council Members 990 Palm Street Re: Amendment to an approved use permit allowing the Delta Upsilon tb use a storage building for bedrooms. Your city planning department staff recommended that this amend- ment be denied--their reasons are: 1. Quote: "One of the issues has been the interface with the neigh- borhood. The adjacent apartments are very close to the shared property 'line. There have been problems with noise and uses in the backyard area. Staff is concerned about putting the fraternity use closer to this shared property line. " '2. Quote: "This has been a very sensitive site. There have been a number of complaints and there have been citations issued. Staff is being cautious. " 3. Quotet "Deny the amendment,finding that the change will intensify uses at the site and that intensification is not compatible with the .surrounding high-density neighborhood. " We own the Lanai Apts at 140 Ferrini and 706 Foothill. We and other property owners in the Foothill-Ferrini area are in complete agreement with your city planning staff's recommendation--that the amendment. be denied. Our apartment complex and others in the area constitute an extremely high-density neighborhood. There are a total of 102 units housing approx- imately 260-270 residents withih. '300 -feet bf:.the fraternity property line, and 38 of these units allv share a side-yard property line with the fraternity. The Lanai Apts. have 11 bedrooms within 6 feet of this shared property line. Both the storage shed and the parking lot with the basketball hoop and court are used -for recreation continually in violation of the use permit. The packet that you have shows the numerous "noise disturbance" [5312) calls by tenants to the police department since the shed was built in 1992. The packet also shows the numerous hearings and inspections - that were held throughout the years. Neighborhood noise complaints were made known at these hearings. Ddspite warnings by city officials, police department citations and arrests , the noise disturbance problem still persistp-and particularly during fall,winter, and spring quarters. Converting the shed to bedrooms and enlarging the main house create areas that will be an invitation for large noisy gatherings. Our tenant' s petition enclosed in your packet is their request that this conversion be denied. Sincerely, EOD DIR � 13 F❑FIN DIR Alcide Bon❑FIRE CHIEF ❑PW DIRL❑POLICE CHF lnor in ❑REC DIR ❑UTIL DIR 0 PERS DIR HISTORY OF DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY 1. Fraternity applied for a use permit at 720-726 Foothill and received approval in 1991--approved conditions were for 8 residents- never more that 15 persons at any one time--no amplified sound equipment--no hosted fraternity events. 2 . Permits and construction of the storage shed started in March 1992- intended for a shed but was never used as such (note numerous "5312 noise disturbanc calls to police sinde shed was built until present) . (Note photos showing debris in back and sides of shed in violation of Condition 8) . Basketball hoop and court was erected. Shed usage and basketball games generate a lot of noise. 3. "Noise disturbance 5312" calls to police continues. Neighbors requested that the fratermity activities and shed usage as a recreation room be investigated by city. Ron Whisenand, city Administrative officer held a public hearing on January 6 ,1995-- - it was determined at that meeting that the shed was to be used only as intended--storage only. Another meeting held on January 17, 1997 also set the same condition-storage only. 4. Fraternity requested an amendment to the use permit to allow use of shed for recreational activities--neighborhood requested that this conversion be denied. It was denied by the Planning Commission by s 5 to 0 vote on on February 14,1996. Use of shed continued to be for recreation in violation of city ruling. "The Lanai" Apartments has 11 bedrooms only 6 feet from the fraternity property line. There are 102 apartment units housing approximately 260 to 270 Inhabitants within 300 feet of the fraternity property line. 5. Noise disturbances continue. We requested again that the city investigate the usage of the storage shed. Rob Bryn made an inspection on September 19,1995--results were "Shed has been converted into a recreation room with a bar"--violates M.C . 17 22 012 Use Permits Violation UAC 301--altered structure: U.H.C . 1001(n) improper occupance. There are numerous violations in the packet. 6. On July 9, 19979 the fraternity requested to allow use of storage shed to bedrooms (U 81-97) , In spite of the city planning staff' s recommendation to deny this request it was approved by the Planning Commission. We appealed on July 21,1997 )and sent a letter to the City Council requesting that the hearing date of September 2,1997 be accepted (as has been stated) . That this date was convenient for.us'-and other, .propetty .owners-and neighbors who were unable to attend the July 9,1997 hearing. Summary Allowing the conversion of the shed to bedrooms should be denied, past experience and the history of this fraternity show that they cannot live in peace with their neighbors--they violate the conditions of their use permit. If the conversion occurs, the shed will be . used as a dormitory-& ' recreation area and the main house will..be opened into a larger recreation usage and will attract large noisy-.- gatherings. TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL: THE DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY LOCATED AT 720-726 FOOTHILL,HAVE APPLIED FOR USE PERMIT U-81-97(AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW USE OF A STORAGE SHED FROM STORAGE TO BEDROOMS). WE,THE TENANTS OF THE LANAI APARTMENTS,REQUEST THAT THIS AMENDMENT BE DENIED. MOVING THE BEDROOMS TO THE STORAGE SHED AND ALLOWING THE CONVERSION IN THE FRONT HOUSE WILL INTENSIFY USES AT THE SITE WHICH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH-DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD! NAME ADDRESS DATE v c i D lv�tn e-) Ferr-i n 21' 1 f v Fe- 42-7 TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL: THE DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY LOCATED AT 720-726 FOOTHILL.HAVE APPLIED FOR USE PERMIT U-81-97(AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW USE OF A STORAGE SHED FROM STORAGE TO BEDROOMS). WE,THE TENANTS OF THE LANAI APARTMENTS, REQUEST THAT THIS AMENDMENT BE DENIED. MOVING THE BEDROOMS TO THE STORAGE SHED AND ALLOWING THE CONVERSION IN THE FRONT HOUSE WILL INTENSIFY USES AT THE SITE WHICH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH-DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD! NAME ADDRESS DATE 117 ISG �c,/ntn,�✓ �J - /L� 7a Funj cAl U ♦r Shared index Browse (nc. No. OPB. . . kecei Date. . . . Location... m a a a m a a a a a a s a a a a a a a m a NVEK DRB. 9225404 15912 11:54 0515-32 728 FOO MILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9232533 18813 68:18 87-66-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 1232995 63260 22:52 07-09-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 923;3668 27775 68:88 87-18-92 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9236577 59350 01:02 08-01-12 720 FOO MILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9241168 29965 18:36 69-14-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 545E 9 1244445 68646 22:41 1@-09-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531' 9314812 £2 21:15 82-b2-93 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 450 f 9314013 44758 21:16 0242-93 120 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 1331 9 9336868 55358 17:25 68-14-93 72b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 � 9339232 88690 22:28 01-12-33 12@ FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 934"3448 88698 @1:25 ib-16-93 72b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5'312 9346064 8865@ @1:02 11-t6-93 120 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312; 9413884 73158 17:46 @2-82-94 720 FOOIHILL 54 - 1415766 99'385 01:01 82-113-34 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9419b26 99984 88:12 83-19-94 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 94205;;2 ' 993 3 00:03 @4-02-34 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 � 9421335 88840 62:53 64-b9-94 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 1424761 11'M @@:54 @5-98-34 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 942-827 99903 23:06 06-02-94 72b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILbN) 5;31' 9436159 E2 21:@2 08-15-34 729 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 45b 9436168 18813 21:b2 86-16-94 720 FOOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5415 9 1439118 88@40 12:24 99-18-34 729 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9442404 -31685 15.2! lb-88-94 72b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 55 " 1444813 99'3@5 23:10 1@-28-34 72@ FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 446926 90750 15:13 11-15-94 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9'x13889 11170 0@:@3 @2-62-35 726 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9517327 10813 16:34 @3-81-95 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9521855 99187 0@:31 06-02-35 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9532082 50675 23:16 87-88-95 72b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9539142 33810 23:s6 @9-d1-35 12@ FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9540497 99987 23:2@ 09-15-95 72b FUOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9547818 11770 23:43 11-08-95 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) 5312 9548814 59906 bb:b9 11-10-95 728 FOOIHILL BL (DELIA UPSILON) 2322 1612575 83999 15:34 @1-22-36 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) 2328 9 goerd 4aif S auef-r tea% Z�2o eLApg1 �'f� rd�l c1Y mo �► u �r1E�o�cS �iVO�: r 1) ow 2 3 2S ,. p .— � T T Y saw Or SIJ 6S t Tc 0 Ar O �" Shared Index Browse Inc. No. OP#. . d kecei mate. . . . Lication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . NVER DRL 5216837 37317 04:34 02-23-32 140 FERRINI RD (LANAI ANTS) 2325 9225917 73942 17:43 65-69-92 7-f2 FOOTHILL DL (FOOTHILL APTS) 5312 9221517 65852 09:31 06-1@=32 FOOTHILL $L $ FERRINI RD 5567 9231851 66450 66:45 66-38-52 100 FERRINI RD, ELK OF' 5227 9233869 13542 15:28 01-16-32 771 FOOTHILL 8L (LUCKYS) 8305 9244445 66646 22:41 16-69-52 726 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5314 9252@67 68646 22:21 12-17-92 710 FOOTHILL 8L, 4 531 9252166 55356 16:21 12-18-92 266 MADONNA km 5504 9 9318584 15972 87:83 01-06-33 14@ FERRINI RD, 6 5818 9 9311456 15972 15:57 61-13-93 140 FERRINI RD (LANAI APTS) 2325 9 9312984 45852 22:22 61-24=33 14@ FERRINI SD, 1 5818 9 9322772 88846 22:44 64-16-93 146 FERRINI RD (LANAI APTS) 5307 9343446 886'3@ 01:25 10-16-53 128 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 5346668 88656 61:62 11-66-93 726 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 5415166 '39'3@5 01:81 02-13-14 728 FOOTHILL SL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5311p 9418755 66456 6638 63-17-94 716 F-OO1H1LL DL 8 53i2 5421760 66450 2341 04-12-14 711 FOOTHILL 8L= (LUCKYS) 4390 5424161 55565 60:54 6L, 08-54 728 F00YHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 5423071 37317 23:24 05-18-34 771 FOOTHILL 8L (LUCKYS) 53 9431-147 45852 23:47 88-36-94 573 FOOTHILL DL (F OOT HILL SQUARE) 5312 943'3624 .2@032 23:44 89-15-14 375 FOOTHILL 8L (FOOfHILL SOUARE) 5312 435523 55563 22:56 65-17-94 686 FOOTHILL DL 5312 i517327 19813 16:34 03-91-35 720 FdOfHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 9519444 458-2 22 u.54 W-19--95 152 FLRRINI fpm 5312 j522748 88583 11:83 04-19-35 140 FERRINI RD (LANAI APPS) 2325 5523164 999K 66:37 64-28.95 975 FOOTHILL BL (FOOTHILL SQUARE) 5312 '3521855 59167 00:37 06-82-95 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) :;31= 9544467 31885 15:17 10714-55 FERR1NI RD 8 FOOTHILL DL 5227 '3546140 13508 23:45 1@-26=j:+ 116 FUUfHfLL OL, 8 5312 5x48614 59%6 66:65 11-16-55 720 FOOTHILL DL (UELIA UPSILON) . 5312 S3 2 fl �Sc�f�tiGc o � Fme Avi-~\ Jaz Oilho WOO a I. VE-4Z= =WW r+H 4mmoo am M UMMZE-4EE+W O HH0%4 --H 1. Na a4--. �! ova aUUwaa44U � U 1p ••H aaa O Oa r-C UMOB040A V Q' H • UUUUUUUU I • HHHHHHHH • aaaaaaaa i� � • mmmmmmmm q • oa000aao � � IU • aaaaaawa � � • WWWWWWWW `I • mmmmmmmm HHHHHHHH � h v • HHNNHHHH • 00000000 • zzzzzzzz � mcnv�v�cnmcncn w WWWWWWW -r+ aaaaaaaa 14 zZZZZZZZ d DOODUUUD . CGGC�GGGG . of o0D000DU c000000a00 aaaaaaa U H UUUUUUUU z zzzzzzzz • aaaaaaaa • mmmmmmmaa aaaaaaaa • aaaaaaaa • HHHNHHNH • s=acsz=acac f~ EEE+E•+HHHH O 00000000 •r• 00000000 -P Wfr40444rZOGr4k.[Z4 go U 00000001D O NNNNNN NN • �D�D�D�D�D�D�o�O to chmCA(Ammma1 W • II111111 d • C1a1�1�00•-II�a1 Q O ririNNONNri O toqr v w cro%o w a 0000000H • e-IN[4.-C1Nf*_M%0 O MrMO%DODMO $4 ,•Z„ MNNM[�NNN O NMd'd'1ONM�0 U W NNNNMVVV 41 a1a10►a1a1mmm aH l CO . �r.�6� San Luis Obispo Police Depart-ment Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** r. ncident 9622391 Received 00 :18 Dispatched 00 :23 Arrived 00 :23 Cleared 00 :23 Date 04-13-96 Dispatcher 68330 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. BONIN, AL Address 140 FERRINI, 12 Phone -NONE Inc. Type *PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** RP BELIEVES PARTY MAY BE BREAKING UP, WILL CALL BACK IF NEEDED ** ** SCANNER Units/Officers 68330 Ruth, Lurinda NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 9 CALL CANCELED Gang AI P Case ® .,,.n Luis Obispo Police Depa.,:ment Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9623272 Received 23 :34 Dispatcher{ 23 :4'2 Arrived 23 :48 Cleared 23 :55 Date 04-19-96 Dispatcher 52340 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. MURRAY, DAVID Address 140 FERRINI, 11 Phone 783-2862 Inc . Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** JASON MILLER ** Units/Officers 99908 Stephen W. Stratton NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 8 DAC ISSUED Gang S AI P Case . J i Luis Obispo Police Dep, ment Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** 3 Incident 9624237 Received 00:33 Dispatched 01 : 04 Arrived 01 :10 Cleared 01 :29 Date 04-27-96 Dispatcher 52340 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. GEHLEN, RANDY Address 140 FERRINI Phone 543-5162 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** DAC TO JEREMY CRISP ** Units/Officers 99907 Frigillana, Raymund, C. NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PURL Dispo. 8 DAC ISSUED Gang S AI P Case Luis Obispo Police Dep; ment Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9624303 Received 13 :43 Dispatched 13 :45 Arrived 13 :47 Cleared 14 : 06 Date 04-27-96 Dispatcher 88207 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. BONIN,AJ Address 140 FERRINI Phone 543-6200 Inc. Type NOISE NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** UNF - RP CONT ** LOUD BASKETBALL PLAYERS Units/Officers 65852 Mullin, John J. NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 3 UNFOUNDED Gang AI 'P Case Luis Obispo Police Depa_ .vent Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *.** 1 .. Incident 9636762 Received 01:02 Dispatched 01 :14 Arrived 01: 17 Cleared 01:20 Date 08-08-96 Dispatcher 68330 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (** PARTY PREMISE **) Comp. LEDESMA, CHARLA Address 140 FERRINI RD Phone 781-9236 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** QOA - QOD ** 6 PEOPLE FRATERNITY HOUSE X FROM SLO BAKE Units/Officers 73190 Rendon Jr. , Gilbert S . NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL 59350 Lincoln, Eric P. Dispo. 7 GOA/UTL Gang S AI P Case San Luis Obispo Police Department Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** .cident 9642287 Received 00 :48 Dispatched 01'c30 Arrived 01:35 Cleared 02 :20 late 09-21-96 Dispatcher 28434 Jur. Grid H7 Sector .105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (** PARTY PREMISE **) GUS Comp. GEHLAN, RANDY Address 140 FERRINI, 12 Phone 543-5162 .nc. Type *PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL dotes/Other Information ',C* AR - CITE - DAC ** - 0:AYON,CESAR 040874 Jnits/Officers 56450 Nemeth, Gary NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 2 ARREST Gang S Al P Case - r man Luis Obispo Police Department Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9643253 Received 19:43 Dispatched 20 :53 Arrived 20 :53 Cleared 20 :55 Date 09-27-96 Dispatcher 20823 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (** PARTY PREMISE **) Comp. BONIN, AJ Address Phone Inc. Type *PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** UTL ** 2B13 10-22 at 20:09 TIMEDIS 20:03 LOUD PARTY Units/Officers 66450 Nemeth, Gary NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PURL Dispo. 7 GOA/UTL Gang S AI P Case 1 •1� r u _1 Luis Obispo Police Depv. -ment Incident Record **** For Official Use Only .*** Incident 9646206 Received 01: 08 Dispatched 02 : 00 Arrived 02 : 02 Cleared 02 :13 Date 10-19-96 Dispatcher 28434 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 726 FOOTHILL BL Comp. WENGERT, BRUCE Address 140 FERRINI, 19 Phone 544-0919 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** DAC CRISP, JEREMY ** Units/Officers 99910 Christopher Kirby NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL 27238 Costa Jr. , Anthony L. Dispo. 8 DAC ISSUED Gang S AI P Case ALL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARi.:vS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS ADur'TED THESE CONDITIONS_ ALL WERE VIOLATED AS SHOWN IN THE PHOTOS BELOW I 3. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard o area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside o the storage building. 10. Failure to complycwith_any of the above conditions or code requirement's, or Y 6 � conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity ! of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of.this U E' permit. U �1. The use of the shed shall be limited to storage only. 4 ^ PHOTOS TAKEN ON 8-5-97 r ' �...- - :,,: �• - � by � ---��. low Ir Y R � r Si I I' s I r•^a.•.' jyi' •` `,•9 _ '~pp'a:'•ci`"~.; +' t. _1.c. •.- „ 1. G ,` .`iia• Y ,, FF !t �lrj _ `W ,i re rY _a IIIAd City Of SAn tuis OBISPO 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 January 21, 1997 Delta Upsilon Fraternity 720 Foothill Boulevard San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 164-94 720-726 Foothill Boulevard Dear Gentlemen: On Friday, January 17, 1997, 1 conducted a 2-year public review of an approved use permit (U1515) allowing a fraternity at the above location. After reviewing the information presented, 1 approved continuation of the use, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1 . The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity. 2. The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The use is exempt from environmental review (Class 3, Section 15303 - conversion of existing small structures from one use to another). Conditions 1. Occupancy of the site.is limited to eight residents. 2. A minimum of nine parking spaces shall be provided on-site. 3. The permit is .for residential,.use=only. Fraternity activities conducted at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard shall betlimited_to, meetings of the executive council and any other meetings and gatherings involving.a:.total-of A5 ior fewer-fraternity members and--guests. The use of amplified sound equipment shall not be allowed. No hosted fraternal events on the site shall be allowed (for example, rush events, little sisters). Basketball or other outdoor recreational activities L shall cease at dusk. /D The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities. V Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. 4. If a reasonable complaint, as defined by the Community Development Director, is received in writing by the Community Development Department, a.) The complaint shall be forwarded to the Interfratemity Council and the Planning Commission within one week of receipt for review and . comment. The names of the people filing the complains shall not be included without their consent. Copies of all correspondence will be sent to the Dean of Students and the fraternity. b.) The complaints, and the comments from the Interfraternity Council if received, shall be forwarded by the Planning Division to the Planning Commission for consideration at the commission's next available meeting. 5. No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on this site are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. 6. A fraternity identification sign may be installed on the building in accordance with the City's sign regulations. 7. The applicant shall institute and maintain a neighborhood relations program. This plan shall include at least the following elements: a.) Quarterly training of all members in community relations. Dates of these training sessions shall be submitted to the Community Development Director. b.) A program to inform neighbors in a timely manner of upcoming events at the fraternity or elsewhere. c.) Submission of names and telephone numbers of responsible persons to the Community Development Department and to apartment property managers and neighbors within two blocks in all directions of the fraternity. Responsible persons shall be available during all events and at reasonable hours otherwise to receive and handle complaints. .Evidence of implementation of said plan shall be submitted to the Director for review within 30 days of Planning Commission approval of this application. Failure to implement said plan will be grounds for revocation of this permit. 8. The;site-shall be maintained.in.._a.clean,and orderly_.mannej..-�The_rearz-yard area:shall_not-be-used.far..storage.of-fUrn ituretor.Lother_Atems;!ex cept2inside :the-storage:building,. 9. The use permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer in two years (approximately January 17, 1999). At the review hearing,.the Hearing Officer may add, delete, or modify conditions of approval or may revoke the use permit. 10. Fa lure to'comply"With any of the above-conditions-or-code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of this, permit.- 11. The•use of,the shed shall be limited to storage only.. My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision. If you have any questions, please call Judy Lautner at 781-7166. Sincerely, 4ona Whisena d Hearing Officer cc: Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation 96 W. Campbell Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 e . 8 O s as • �s 41 O� +• •' R-4 "% O O Will, O +n ' OR aa0 % •� L 0094 6 e 'JZ 09 ,. +. L; u� " s:•.s .'� ' V � C •Oi "p0� R-4 a - 0 C Qa a + tri 1-10 + O •+•.IF O t Z //�auo. i ... O .W_ • r ..n W LL C-N •.a,• ..►,ti I i I••an�i O m F/F A,. Iro • ,.•w ae• a4� • • ' ='= FOOTHILL -Sj• • „� (701) ,. ,,,.,, ,w.rw ,.� ,.a•.• .... ti ,W MM•f, Ya1•� .M•Y YhF •aa� M•••M � o•a a•w .t ain., rY O Fs,� ,•u• .ra•asyaa �.• fr. , •at may, y �. Ya a•4a• o • _ ^ Yar rYM O1 Y•L �.a�.�i � rr }MIR �..:•iC �• ••� r� •f•�''� VICINITY MAF' V t5 its NORTH 07#1 ^ arid► 12& LAW OFFICES OF M. SCOTT R,AD OV I C HOF COUNSELF. HODGES �u'1N� . �� b POSTS O DANA STREET JOHNOFFICE BOX 106 /��fj/LCl �ry2L �v� SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93406 / O Cdky�lKCd PH (805) 541-4200 /JO /sF 0ts7�c�a�•t�-1 CE3 FAX (805) 541-4293 4-72_5 scriCt Gam/ C2� �1� S A ICC— S!'O March 5, 1996 Delta Upsilon Fraternity 720 Foothill Boulevard San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Re: Lanai Apartments To Whom It May Concern: My offices have been contacted by Al and Elinor Bonin regarding their apartments located at 140 Ferrini in San Luis Obispo, blown as the Lanai Apartments. The Bonins have had numerous complaints from their tenants of the noise levels generated in your parking lot as a result of ongoing recreational activities. Apparently, that parking lot is being used for purposes other than parking. The noise levels have disturbed the peace of the tenants and several have threatened to leave the premises because of this ongoing problem. I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding the City ordinances that apply to your circumstance. If the situation does not immediately improve, then I will advise the Bonins to take all legal action necessary, including injunctive relief and damages. The Bonins will reevaluate this matter in the next 30 days. Very trul yours, M!SCOTT RADOVICH MSR:jb l c: Al & Elinor Bonin Miscl6anin.1y LAW OFFICES OF • M. SCOTT ir RADOVICH r 5S0 DANA STREET OF COUNSEL POST OFFICE BOX 106 JOHN F. HODGES SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93406 PH (805) 541-4200 FAX (805) 541-4293 March 12, 1996 Norbert Lippert 308 San Nicholas Court Laguna Beach, CA 92651 Re: Lanai Apartments To Whom It May Concern: My offices have been contacted by Al and Elinor Bonin regarding their apartments located at 140 Ferrini in San Luis Obispo, known as the Lanai Apartments. The Bonins have had numerous complaints from their tenants of the noise levels generated in your parking lot as a result of ongoing recreational activities. Apparently, that parking lot is being used for purposes other than parking. The noise levels have disturbed the peace of the tenants and several have threatened to leave the premises because of this ongoing problem. I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding the City ordinances that apply to your circumstance. If the situation does not immediately improve, then I will advise the Bonin to take all legal action necessary, including injunctive relief and damages. The Bonins will reevaluate this matter in the next 30 days. Very truly yours, SCOTT RADOVICH MSR.jb c: Al & Elinor Bonin Mise\Bonin2.lor • LAW OFFICES OF r M. SCOTT RADOVICH 550 DANA STREET OF COUNSEL POST OFFICE BOX 106 JOHN F. HODGES SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93406 PH (805) 541-4200 FAX (8051 541-4293 March 12, 1996 Alpha Epsilon Alumni Corp. 96 West Campbell Ave. Campbell, CA 95008 Re: Lanai Apartments To Whom It May Concern: My offices have been contacted by Al and Elinor Bonin regarding their apartments located at 140 Ferrini in San Luis Obispo, known as the Lanai Apartments. The Bonins have had numerous complaints from their tenants of the noise levels generated in your parking lot as a result of ongoing recreational activities. Apparently, that parking lot is being used for purposes other than parking. The noise levels have disturbed the peace of the tents and several have threatened to leave the premises because of this ongoing problem. I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding the City ordinances that apply to your circumstance. If the situation does not immediately improve, then I will advise the Bonins to take all legal action necessary, including injunctive relief and damages. The Bonins will reevaluate this matter in the next 30 days. Very truly yours, COTT RADOVICH MSR:jb c"''�Al &Elinor Bonin Mise1110nml.1tr ZONING INVESTIGATION CASE •MANAGEMENT REVIEW Location: 12U--72C. -Sob-}jM2 - Date: q.-25-95 Stage I Request .for Investigation Form. ( y) Open=form completed ( ) ; Closed-reporting person declined. to" identify ( ) Open-incomplete information ( ) closed-no applicable violation discernable on information provided ( ) Other: Stage II Investigation ( ) Administrative material mailed or delivered ( ) Open-initial site visit complete, violations probable ( ) -Open-written notice sent ' compliance date ( ) Closed-initial site visit complete-.unfounded or. corrected ( ) -Closed-second site visit complete, violation(s) corrected ( ) Open-second site visit complete., violation(s) continue ( ). Open- certified letter sent compliance date ( ) Open-notice issued ( ) Open-referred city attorney ( ) Closed-violations) corrected ( 74-J Open-referred to appropriate department/agency -}-cJ . ( ) Open-other Closed-other �0lS� J2 �S�Ccr2��tv1C2✓ GQ[a f eve a E-_r /Ya�s:-s� Stage .III Investigation �Gtf � ill U�GA . S'K� ccS�-cam <NS�p��4�5 ( ) Final site visit prior :to prosecution._ � ?5;CYt1'0,v ( ) Citation issued qBTUcrS, ( . ) Notice to show cause hearing(s) or to C:r ca AJ1 ( ) .Closed-by city attorney lYl=c - 7<. �'� O 4'0 UGo &v-ff-o N ( ) Open-pending legal/court action &., �. 36c &0L &RL-.P ( ) Closed-adjudicated of CAJ):I;nAR.apMA OccccA*-hcy Ready forinsp.. is Date: M T W Th F AM PM i��llllllllllllll� IIIIIII�IIIIIIII INSPECTION REQUEST a� crty of san Lws owpo rr BUILDING&SAFETY DIVISION � � y > Job Address 4' Suite m . Contact Phone i r; N IZ n - \ T.Pole.......................❑ T-Bar Ceiling............. Water Heater.__..._.[ m Foundations.............❑ Roof Diaph.Nail.......E) Grading/Dralnage $ 47 Slab Pro-saturation Sheer Wall Nall.........❑ Parking Lot...............[ ® 0 �1 gg � SlabStael .................❑ DWVTest..................❑ Water Service .......[ WT F= i l l Wall Steel/Block.......❑ E)d.Lath/Stucco ......❑ Sewer Lateral...........[ UI y d Floor Framing...........❑ Insulation..................❑ Elect Meter............. N I 1 n Rough Mechanical ..C3 Dry Wall Nail.............❑ Bluecard..„...___.__.[ 0 Plumbing O O Rough g g••••••❑ Shower Pan/Lath..-.[D Prefinal.....................[ Mn MRough Electric..........❑ Gas Line Test...........❑ Final Approval..........[ tcn 7 Framing.....................E] Fireplace/Stove........❑ Reinspection._......_.[ 'w g Z , V, COMMENTS: LU xm ta $ (L Z t p O C; N aa) F y Z ¢ Q u•e a w a m a w W E p' eeea� J •r� y W LL al 0 v` O a u \ N a ,• E c � � ju � >' G u h Cn VLU wor � D Vrz Liz LU q n { O y Z v �' yU (} a Vo �' N M O , O v ; V c� m W , t, .v e D Q , a (L az a o 272 Del rear Court San Luis Obispo, Ca 93405 September 18, 1995• Jeffrey W. . Hook' . Planning Dept San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 Dear Sir: A Public Hearing was held on January 6, 1995 in the Council Hearing room regarding an Administrative review of a Planning commission Use• Permit (U1515)f6r •Delta Upsilon Fraternity located at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard. (see.+attached agenda) At this meeting it was determined that the building at the rear of the fraternity premises was to be used as intended-for storage only. Since this meeting the building has been used continuously as a recreation gathering place complete with a pool table, etc. Our tenants have been very tolerant with the noise, but it has now reached a point that we request that the city check this shed as to its use and stop it being used for anything but a storage shed. Our apartment complex (The Lanai ) at 140 Ferrini and the fraternity property at 720 and 726 Foothill are contiguous. Our sideyard setback is 'six feet. Their rearyard setback is only six feet instead of--the ten feet code requirement. The buildings are very close together. As recent as September 9. 1995 about 11: 30: p.m, the police were called but the noise continued until 2: 30 a.m. causing the tenants to move away from their rear bedrooms and sleep on couches in the living- room. On September 12, 1995 at 9: 20 p.m. my wife and I checked the premises at 140 Ferrini and heard noise and music coming from the shed. We contacted some fraternity members and told them that the tenants could no longer tolerate .the noiee: We hereby request that this complaint be investigated regarding the violation of the building' s usage. Sincerely, Alcide J. oninn, - 543-6200 Elinor K. Bonin 543-6200 MEMO DATE: am/ 9.,95 FROM: M Ellery TO: R Bryn SUBJECT: 720-726 Foothill The�astorage*-biri4d ng�at:.the-�reat�of=-property_:::has—been-converted . ilit-,oi-ma-y--recr•eat-i°on=r-.00m.&with:.a,.bar.. iIIIIIIIIIIIII I III I�IIIIIIII IIIII MEMORANDUM CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO: Rob Bryn FROM: Jeff Hook DATE: September 18, 1995 SUBJECT: Request for investigation: Delta Upsilon Fraternity. Rob: Attached is a Request for Investigation from Mr. and Mrs. Bonin. After talking with them, it appears that their setback concerns are not an issue, since as-built setbacks on both sides appear to meet zoning requirements. This complaint may be grounds for PC review of the use permit. You may want to talk with Ron or Arnold about that. Let me know if you have questions. Thanks. H i[ C�Yt2�"►1 ! SS,r o aJ S r12 C4 LSF' 7*6 Sk R R 5-,6 r �-o AJ 4-1, k-r4M. �r,S ��rn�-�t�enc—.� w•4-s 1>�vi� /�i �' j�l�-�'1 h � C��►'I t s-�'t oma/ O �c/ � � �a ® c���c^. f Ready for inspection: C' i; t M, T W Th F AM PM I�!!!IIIIIIIIiIIiIll�ill;Ill!Illl�lilll INSPECTION REQUEST p � my of San IMS OBISPO BUILDING&SAFETY DIVISION Job Address -7 7-0 Suite Contact .. I;;firts-n Phone I (� T.Pole.......................❑ T-Bar Ceiling.............❑ Water Heater............❑ Foundations.............❑ Roof Diaph.Nail.......❑ Grading/Drainage....❑ Slab Pre-saturation..17 Sheer Wall Nail.........❑ Parking Lot...............❑ Slab Steel .................❑ DWV Test..................❑ Water Service...........❑ Wall Steel/Block.......❑ Ext.Lath/Stucco ......❑ Sewer Lateral...........❑ Floor Framing...........❑ Insulation ..................C3 Elect.Meter............... Rough Mechanical ..❑ Dry Wall Nail.............El Bluecard....................❑ Rough Plumbing......El Shower Pan/Lath.....C3 Pre-final..................... Rough Electric..........❑ Gas Line Test...........❑ Final Approval..........El Framing.....................ED Fireplace/Stove........❑ Reinspection ............❑ COMMENTS: Ar_, _ f+�.c... `Tor Ir, ir•�x� L�e.�.'4� n 4e-D1 Are7 ��� �I�I��II,II�IIIIIIIIIIIIII�I�I IIIIIiIIIII '''iliillllllii�l!�ili' �I�III �I 11 cityof sAn oaspo -- 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 10/04/95 ALPHA UPSILON ALUMNI CORP A 96 W CAMPBELL AV CAMPBELL,CA 95008— SUBJECT: Notice of Code Violation 720 FOOTHILL Dear Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. : On 09/19/95, Community Development Department staff inspected property you own at 720 FOOTHILL. Staff. noted that- the storage buildingiat the rear. of .the property .had been converted ,to .a recreation room' with a bar. Please be aware that the situation described above does not meet building/zoning ordinance regulations, and appears to violate San Luis Obispo Municipal.- Code Sections (s) : M.C. 17 . 22 . 010 __Use Permit Violation U.A. C. 301 Alter-ed Structure U.H.C. 1001 (N) .. Improper Occupancy We request that you take action to comply with these ordinance requirement(s) by immediately ceasing. occupancy of the altered structure and returning it. to a storage building or obtaining the necessary permits for conversion. Your property will be reinspected on or about 10/19/95 to determine if further enforcement action is necessary. If you have uestions, please call me at (805) 781-7186. Sinc Rob Br n Neighborhood Services Manager cc: H. Hannula, Building Permits Coordinator H The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities. Il .�..I Telcrnmmiinirafinne flnviro}nr'thn IloaF fA051 7R1-7dln_ �c city of san luis obispo CORRECTION NOTICE T0: Rob Bryn . FROM: Mark Ellery SUBJECT: 720 Foothill / Rec room DATE: November 2, A 995 The permitted storage room that was converted into a tecreation room still remains. Occupants stated that they have made an application to allow this conversion and in the mean time use of the room has ceased. MY of san lull ~Ispo CORRECTION NOTICE 990 Pal Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 rr 7781-7 810 G ❑ 781 -7 NTNG❑ 78PUBLIC O781 WORKS ❑ 1.7380 JOB ADDRESS � ~ 7l/r,4�' � TYPE OF INSPECTION: The following discrepancies of city and/or state codes need correcting: You are hereby notified that the above discrepancies shall be reinspected for accep- tance. Where discrepancy will be concealed, have It inspected before covering. CALL FOR REINSPECTION r+ ,/ INSPECTO DATEOrd 7 ✓f DO NOT LOSE OR RE/MIVE THIS TAG sM A-- October 20, 1995 Rob Bryn 990 Palm Street P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, California 93403-8100 Dear Rob: This letter is follow-up to our phone conversation of October 20, 1995 regarding the October 4, 1995 Notice of Code Violation. The code violation concerned the questionable use of the storage shed located at 720 Foothill Blvd. The violation notice was originally sent to the Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. treasurer. received a copy of the notice on October 19th. Per our conversation, the Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. will be requesting a Use Permit modification to allow for a recreational facility on the property. The application should be submitted within the next thirty days. In addition, the storage shed will only be used for it's intended purpose. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me at (714) 560-5733. Sincerely, Norbert Lip ert President, Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. c: Delta Upsilon Fraternity Alpha Upsilon, BOD RECEIVE ® OCT 2.6 t495 CRY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO BUILDING DIVISION ZONING INVESTIGATION CASE •MMAGEMENT REVIEW Location: /e�q7o y J Date: Stage I Request for Investigation Form. ( ) Open-form completed ( ) Closed-reporting person declined. to' identify ( ) Open-incomplete information ( ) Closed-no •applicable violation discernable on information provided ( ) Other: Stage II Investigation ( ) Administrative material mailed or delivered (� Open-initial site visit complete, violations probable. - ( )Open-written notice sent compliance date ( ) Closed-initial site visit complete-.unfounded or. corrected ( -Closed-second site visit complete, violation(s) corrected ( X ) Open-second site visit complete, violation(s) continue _ Open- c_ertified i letter sent compliance date ( ) Open-notice issued Open-referred city attorney ( Closed-violations) corrected ( O en-r ferred to appropriate department/agency S ( ) Open-oAer Closed-other /&4 Z 5'S` - � �ELF.arB.�rrs AuaT- /ham Stage III Investigation ( ) Final site visit prior to prosecution. ( ) Citation issued ( ) Notice to show cause hearing(s) ( ) .Closed-by city attorney ( ) Open-pending legal/court action ( ) Closed-adjudicated . I ?TPE, city of san h, OBISPO ImagoCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.(805)781-7180 1 V 0— U O 1 990 PALM STREET • SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA 93601-3249 DATE TIME Z l Io NAME(FIRST,MI LE.LAST) RESIDENCE ADRESS CITY BUSINESS ADDRESS CITY DRIVERS LICENSE NO. STATE BIRTHDATE VEHICLE LICENSE NO. STATE YEAR OF;VEHICLE ;" MANE MODEL .; aOpYSTYLE; .; .COLOR X. LOCATION OF OFFENSES)COMMITED ' RFFORNSE(S)CODE.SECTION DESCRIPTION �A MC517 17.040A Furniture&equipment in yard-prohibited MC 417.17 0408 Materials storage in yard-prohibited ❑ MC 417 17 040C Storage of items/parts in yard-prohibited ❑ MC 417.17 060A No furniture orequipment on roofs ❑ MC 410 36 233 Parking in yard ❑ MC48 04 020(f) Failure to store trash containers ❑ C 0764SE-ZdJAC f-` Exp /anatiory� P(Compliance mandato within 72 Kours. ❑ See reverse ❑ Must be corrected by & ` ZL, Time ❑ No reinspection required. Self-initiated field activity Cl Cleared-Unfounded Municipal Code violations are punishable bbyy✓Uffine and/or incarcerate//n.9 9(/L\/� ISSUED SYMmg DATE / / / ❑ Cleared-no further action By Date White-File Pink-Reinspect Yellow-Site copy 17.95 l ��►�� G j2Zj�� �� � �� Il I P I R E C E I V E D SES. 2-3 jA V NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS c:T REQIIEST O ROSECUTION ' Location: Owner: Tenant/Resp. Party (if applicable) : G� G Date of 1st Notice: J�/ �y2nd Notice ` /CS Violation: (Code Sec. ) Description: v✓lil i`i i '7' fllJ / Notes/Comments: Date Referred to City Attorney: 7 95S Yes No Photos attached: ( (_) Notices attached: ( (_) Report attached: (_) (_) CITY ATTORNEY STATUS Defendant Name: Mailing Address: Code Violations: Infraction Misdemeanor Attorney Letter mailed: Final Inspection. Yes No DMV ordered: Date Complaint Filed: Arraignment. Date: Plea: Further Proceedings: s Disposition: Adlbk 9 x •1 Z � c D p co N D a \, n 2i CL 7I w CDm o m CAz rh C v N: � 3 m � 0 �o z -n O d ? { a CL O 3 m N R m N" y RL 3 �= w 0 � m � N . \(D ID v c o O O X d 8 CA co 3 d 3 = m cn :3 ° D m O 70 0 0 IOD MM m �. o d � 3 m 1 d A rn f u m n }w r 1 K4 j ]J �1 IT *,Moo 21-104 06 - � t tl i I' 1V - L Y•14 Lf '. i, i•. I 272 Del Mar Court San Luis Obispo, Ca 93405 August 1, 1997 San .Luls Obispo City Council 990' Piilm'-Street San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401 SUBJECT U 81-97 720-726 Foothill, Amendment to an approvedcuse permit allowing a fraternity, to allow use of a storage building for bedrooms. To. the Mayor and City Council Memberst The decision of the Planning Commission has been appealed to the City Council. This matter has been scheduled for review by the City Council on September 2, 1997• We wish to confirm this date. Our attorney has cleared this day on her calender. Several neighbors and residents in the neighbor- hood, who were unable to attend the Planning Commission hearing on July 9, 1997, will be able to Attend the' September'. 2;1997 meeting. We will be out of town from September 16,1997 to September 21,1997 attending a professional seminar, and unable to attend a September 16,1997 meeting We request the hearing be held as scheduled on September 21 1997 and not extended past the forty-five days according to the Municipal Code. Sincerely, Retain this document for future Council rneetirg Alcide J. Bonin Date, it agerdzed .L'ar Elinor K. Bonin OrqpUNCIL 2rfDD DIR AO ❑FIN DIR WCAO ❑FIRE CHIEF 4TTORNEY ❑PW DIR I CLERKIORIG 13POLICE CHF ❑M Mfg T TEAK ❑REC DIR [3 � !]UTIL DIR O PERS DIR JENChS LAW GROUP September 2, 1997 Honorable Allan Settle, Mayor Honorable Bill Roalman Honorable Dave Romero Honorable Kathy Smith Honorable Dodie Williams San Luis Obispo City Hall 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 RE: U 81-97 Honorable City Council Members: I represent the Appellants in this proceeding, Al and Elinor Bonin. The Bonins are the owners of a 22 unit apartment house situated directly behind the site in question. The Bonins filed their appeal of the Planning Commission decision to permit the conversion of a storage shed to two bedrooms because this expanded use is detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding community. It is patently unfair to allow expansion of a use permit that would, by expanding the use in a way that was not originally contemplated by the use permit application,permit a few young men to impact the lives of the hundreds of people who live within a 300 foot radius of their fraternity. A. Background The members of Alpha & Epsilon Fraternity, Inc. (the "Fraternity"). commenced living at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard in 1988. At the time of initial use, they were operating at the Fraternity without a use permit. The City of San Luis Obispo received complaints about the use in August 1988 and requested that the Fraternity make a use permit application. The Fraternity responded by letter and indicated that they were preparing an application. Several months passed and no application was received. After the City received additional complaints that the apartments at the site were continuing to be used as a Fraternity and that the behavior of the residents was objectionable to the neighbors, the City Attorney The Promontory cited the residence for a zoning violation. The Court heard the case on April 26, 1989 and found members operating the Fraternity without a use permit and placed +i_Higuera Srreer the Fraternity on probation for one year. One requirement of that probation was that the Fraternity apply for a use permit within thirty days of the April date. The San Luis obisp o Fraternity applied on June 6, 1989, about six weeks after the judge's action. The use permit application included plans to remodel and add to the apartments and to California oµ01-3867 rELEPHONE: So,.544.1890 FACSIMILE: 805.544.1984 Honorable City Council Members September 2, 1997 Page 2 construct a parking lot at the rear. The original design of the two apartments included two bedrooms and a living/dining area at 720 Foothill, and three bedrooms and a living room at 726 Foothill. Both of these buildings appear to have been modified,without permits, to eliminate these living and dining areas and create additional bedrooms. At this initial use permit application, the Planning Commission heard testimony from several neighbors and owners of adjacent properties. Much of the testimony related to specific problems caused by the Fraternity members and their guests, with noise, parking problems, parties and other disruptive behavior. Testimony was also presented by other citizens who do not live or own property near the site, but who were prior neighbors when the Fraternity was situated on Palm Street. Eventually, because of neighbor complaints, the Fraternity's use permit for the Palm Street location was revoked by the Planning Commission. Based upon this public testimony, the Planning Commission in considering the application for the Fraternity's use permit on August 9, 1989, found that the use was incompatible with the neighborhood and a threat to the health, safety and welfare or persons living or working nearby and denied the permit. The City Council disagreed with the findings of the Planning Commission and approved a use permit for the Fraternity in April of 1991,provided that the Fraternity comply with 11 conditions dealing with noise and extent of use. B. Site Descidption The site , zoned R-4, is a large L shaped lot containing two one story buildings at the front of the site and a small storage shed on the back portion of the L. The area in between the two buildings is a paved parking lot accommodating L2 cars. The site is surrounded by apartments on three sides, and is across the strec� from a shopping center. There are 102 apartments within 300 feet of the site and. 41 more nearby. My client's apartment complex, the Lanai Apartments, have '_1 bedrooms within six feet of the shared property line. C. The Storage Shed Permits for construction of a "Storage Shed"were filed with the San Luis Obispo City Building Department in the Spring of 1992. Although ostensibl-v intended for storage, it was clear from the subsequent use history of the shed d a-L the building was never intended for that use. Following the construction of tht storage shed in March, 1992, there were increased noise disturbances and. DAC violations at the site [see Exhibit A attached hereto]. Eventually,because of the ongoing disturbances, disruptive behavior and excessive volume of noise, particularly at night, neighbors filed a complaint with the City and requested that the use of a shed as a recreational facility be investigated. On January 6, 1995, a:t the one year administrative review of the use permit allowing a fraterniti at the Honorable City Council Members September 2, 1997 Page 3 site, the hearing officer noted that "a complaint was received and [the fraternity] representative acknowledged the use of an auxiliary structure [the storage shed] as habitable space." The hearing officer concluded that "Further use of this space is prohibited unless or until the structure meets occupancy requirements and is cleared for use." Yet on October 4, 1995, the City of San Luis Obispo sent a letter to the Fraternity noting that the storage shed had been converted to drecreation room with a bar in clear violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Sections M.C. 17.22.010 (use permit violation); U.A.0 301 (altered structure); and U.H.C. 1001(N) (improper occupancy). More than a month later, in a City of San Luis Obispo Correction Notice,it was noted that "the permitted storage room that was converted into a recreation room still remains." The Fraternity then requested an amendment to the use permit that would sanction their improper use of the storage shed. Again, the neighboring residents appealed to the Planning Commission to deny this expanded use. On a 5 to 0 vote, the Planning Commission denied the recreational use of the storage facility on February 14, 1996. On January 17, 1997, Hearing Office Ronald Whisenand again conducted a 2-year public review of the use permit for the Fraternity. At that hearing, he approved continuation of the use, subject to several conditions. Among these conditions was the express requirements that "8. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside the storage building." As the recently taken attached photographs show [attached as Exhibit B], the Fraternity has maintained an ongoing violation of this condition for quite some time. D. The Conversion of the .Stnrage Shed to Bedrooms Despite ongoing noise violations, complaints and problems with the Fraternity in its current location, the Fraternity now proposes to modify the storage shed to two bedrooms and a bath. The Fraternity would have this City Council overlook the continuous violations associated with the storage shed and the fact that the storage shed has been improperly used for illegal purposes since it was constructed. Even as of August 5, 1997, the Fraternity was in clear violation of condition 8 of its use permit concerning the use of the storage shed as the photographs in Exhibit B show. At my clients request, each of you had the opportunity to see for yourself that the Fraternity does not appear capable of complying with the clear requirements of its current use permit. Moreover, the storage shed is located within six feet of eleven bedrooms, with 33 units sharing the back property line. The Applicant would like to persuade this City Council that the residents of the converted structure will "most likely be juniors or seniors and will have lived at the fraternity for one to two years. They will be more mature and well aware of neighbor noise issues and concerns." This Honorable City Council Members September 2, 1997 Page 4 is simply mere speculation and in fact runs contrary to the rude and disruptive attitude that all Fraternity members and guests have taken when asked to quiet down. [See letter of Randall Gehlen attached hereto as Exhibit C]. To date, none of the Fraternity members has demonstrated that they have the requisite level of maturity or consideration that would warrant any expanded use of the property whatsoever. According to the Applicant's application, the reason for requesting the conversion is to "provide for normal and reasonable dining accommodations." I would suggest that these accommodations already existed before the Fraternity's illegal modification of the structures. If they desire additional dining space, there is no reason that they could not eliminate one of the bedrooms to return the structure to its original condition,with a full living and dining area.. E. The. Expanded 11--e-Must Not Be. Sanctioned. City Staff recommends a denial of the use permit application. They correctly note the noise problems inherent in a Fraternity residence situation and introduction of new living space in close proximity to neighboring residences. Any change that could provide more space and party areas to any of the Fraternity's residents is an invitation for more noise problems. The block wall adjacent to the back edge of the property is clearly insufficient to protect nearby occupants from increased noise and activity. Bedrooms in the adjacent apartment buildings are very close to property lines and vulnerable to noise in the back area of the. Fraternity houses. Any intensification of use, given the sensitivity of the site,is likely to have a negative effect on the neighborhood. A review of the Planning Commission transcript indicates that some members of the commission believed that permitting bedrooms in the storage shed would minimize the noise concerns. It would appear that this characterization by the Planning Commission was based on the inappropriate assumption that the storage shed was and could be used as a recreational area-not as the storage shed it was permitted to be. For example, one Commissioner stated "I guess the question I have that comes to mind is the use that's being moved to the front of the property away from the neighbors is what we could term recreational use or dining use, depends on how late the dining goes. So is it really impacting the neighbors more by having the bedroom use in the back?" [See excerpt of transcript of July 9, 1997 Planning Commission Hearing attached hereto as Exhibit D]. Further, despite an utter lack of authority for the proposition, one of the Planning Commissioners relied on the fact that the storage shed bedrooms would be "occupied by more senior students who will be quieter." [Id.]. Finally, one of the other commissioners observed that "I'm more in favor of allowing a use that is allowed to occur on the site irrespective of it being handled by fraternity people because I think we already have sufficient ways to mitigate any activities that are impacting the neighborhood." [Id.] As the continued use and permit violations by the Honorable City Council Members September 2, 1997 Page 5 Fraternity indicate, the present means of mitigation are insufficient. Moreover, it is unfair to the other neighborhood occupants to require them to constantly ask their neighbors to be quiet, to be subjected to uncivilized responses and to come back yet again.before this City Council to request that the entire use permit be eliminated. The burden should not rest with the neighbors. The Applicant must bring forth the evidence that its activity and requested use will not further impact the surrounding residences. This it has not done and cannot do. The Appellants request to deny the expanded use permit should, therefore,be granted. Respectfully submitted, JENCKS LAW GROUP I Dawn K McGee DKM:rr Enclosures q:dlm\bonin\memos\dtywu.mm r Shared Index Browse Inc, No, Opp... Recei Date. .. . Location. .. . . ..................... . NYER DR#4 9225404 15`31'2 11:54 05-05-32 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9232533 10813 00:18 07-66-92 720 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9232395 63268 22:52 07-09-92 728 FOO HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9233808 27775 80:80 87-10-92 720 FOOTHILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9236577 59350 01:02 08-07-12 128 FOO MILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9241168 29985 18:30 89-14-92 728 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 545 9 9244445 60645 22:41 10-09-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9314812 E2 21:15 02-82 X33 728 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 4581 1 9314813 44758 21:16 02-02-93 120 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 1331 9 9336868 53350 17:25 68-14-93 728 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 2 9339232 88610 22:28 0'3-12-33 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9343448 88698 81:25 1@-16-93 720 FOOTHILL OL (ALPHA UPSILON) `,312 9346069 86696 81:82 11-96-93 720 FOOTHILL OL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312; 9413884 73158 17:46 82-82-94 720 F00 HILL 54 - 13415165 998345 01:01 02-19--94 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9419825 99`384 #6:12 03-19-94 728 FOOTHILL K. (ALPHA UPSILON) 5"312 94205%'12 195 i3 09:03 94-02-34 729 FOO MILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9421335 88848 82:53 @449-94 728 FOOTHILL l(L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531'22- 5424761 3125424761 59915 99:54 95-98-34: 720 FOO MILL OL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312. 9401727 99963 23:86 06-02-94 728 FOOTHILL . bL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 3436159 E2 21:92 b8-16-34 728 FOOT-HILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 45= 9436168 18813 21:82 08-16-94. 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5415 9 5435598 88040 12:24 99-18-34 729 FOOTHILL OL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 94424@4 31885 15:29 It-08-94 728 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 55 '3444813 99905 23:19 10-28-34 729 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) +31� r9446928 98158 15:13 11-13-94 728 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 5 9513889 '31170 09:93 02-kit-35 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9517327 18813 16:34 83-61-95 720 FOOTHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5"312 3521855 999@7 09:37 06-02-35 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 532882 58675 23:16 87-88-95 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9539142 33810 23:,'36 89-81-35 728 FOOTHILL OL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9548497 99987 23:28 89-15-95 728 FUOIHILL DL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9547878 91770 23:43 11-08-95 120 FOOTHILL OL (DELTA UPSILON) 5312 9548@14 99906 06:09 11-1@-95 720 FOOTHILL DL (DELIA UPSILON) 5312 '3512515 83949 15:34 01-22=36 720 FOOTHILL OL WELfA UPSILON) 2328 9 2. 20 A.* � r- 3 2wS - pc rry TK a w*T Exhibit A Shared index Br owse i� `t� rt'��,rjj�� Ines'' No. .UP#■ kecex: Uatie. . . a Locations . a a a a as a a a a a a s a a• s a a a a a a a 17t�L1� Y�11■ ''3216837. ' 17., 04. .X.02=2.3-52 .14@ FERRINI FSB .,{LANAI. APES) 232; 92259#"7 7:��j42 ., #7:43 � - -S2. 3/2�_F007HILL BL ' tf�iiiTHILL WITS) :.. . 5312 9229517 fi5852 . @9:31 06-10-2': OOiHILL 8L .8 F£RRINI RD 9231851 65450 : .06:45 06-38-92 IYO FERRINI RD � DLK Cit 27 =rr 9233889 73942 .15:20 01=16-32 771 FOOTHILL 8L (LUCKYS) 305 9244445 68646 . .22:41 10-0j-92 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5315 3252@67 60646 22:23 12-17-92 710 FOOTHILL 8L 4 531P, 9252166 59350 16:21 12-18-92 260 MADONNA RD ' 558 931@584 15972 87:03 01-06-33 140 FERRINI RD 6 5504 9 � 9311456 159-72 15:57 81-13-93 MY FERRINI RD (LANAI APTS) 2325 9 9312984 45852 22:22 01-24-33 140 FERRINI RD, 9 58-18 9 9322 72 88040 22:44 04-16-93 146 FERRINI R)t (LANAI APTS) 5301 9343440 88690 X1:25 10-16-33 120 FOOTHILL AL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 0 9346669 886% ' .0j W 11-06-93 728 FOOTHILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 94.15765. 99'385= 01.:01 02-19-'34 720 FOOFHILL 8L (AL}SHA UPSILON) 531" 9418755 66458. 00:38 63-17.-94 710 FOO-MILL 0L, 8 5312 942MO 66459 2.3:41 '84=12-94 111 FOO f HILL BL (LUOKYS) 998 94247 1 9 9 911:54 0 -08-94 728 F0OTH1L K' (ALPHA UPSILON) 531' 942 07.1: 313f"7 2,x:24 85-10-34 771 F OO F HILL 8L (LUCKYS) 531,. 9437147! 45852, 23:4.7 08-30794 975 FWIH!LL 8L (FODiHILL SWARF) 212 9433624 .2@032 23:.4.4 09-15-94- 975 FOOTHILL 8L (FOOTHILL SQUARE) 5312 4s j2 9TJ"S 2260 WI-17-94 680 FOOTHILL BL 53'12' rl511321 10813 16:34 03=01-35 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 9519444 45852' 22:54 63-19-93 152 FERRINI RD 531 Jt 2eeA8 B�Sa'�' 19:83 94-19-35 140 FERRMI RD (LANAI APfS) -8. 952'3-164 9'j9�6 � 232; 00:37 M-28-95 9'1.5. F001 HILL K (F OOi HILL SQUARE) 5312 954446-- '31887 00:31 06-02-j5 7.20 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 95444fi.t 31085 15:1..7. #8-14-95 FERklNI RD 8 F�OOiHILL 8L 6227 �3:i4614 . �3�3�18 8:41. 18-25-3► 710. FOOTH&L. NL, 8 531 9;48014. 95986. 00:0 11-10-95 720 FOO HILL kL (LELiA UPSILON) 5312 �vdlse � 7 Exhibit A Shared Index Browse Inc, No. GFlaa ■ kecex bateaaa • Locationaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasaaaaaaaaaaa NVER Df#a 9225404 15972 11:54 0545-32 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9232533 10813 86:18 07-66-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53l� 9232995 63268 22:52 07-09-92 720 FOO HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) -a1-2 9233888 27775 06:80 07-18-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9236577 59358 01:02 08-07-32 720 FOOI�lILL TSL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9241160 29985 18:38 09-14-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 545 9 9244445 60646 22:41 10-09-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 331 9314812 E2 21:15 82-82-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 450 1 9314813 44758 21:16 02-02-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 1331 9 9336868 5K5@ 17:21 68-14-93 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 9339232 8869@ 22:20 69-12-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9343448 88698 01:25 58-16-93 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 '3346@6@ 88650 @1:02 15-@6-33 720. FOO HILL -BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312: 9413684 73190 17.:46 02-02-94 720 FOOTHILL 54 - 941t-166 '39'385 @1:01 02-19-34 129 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9419b26 99`384 88:12 83-19-94 720 FOOTHILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 942@`;;2 '399@3 @@:03 94-02-94 129 FOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9421335. 88848 82:53 b4-b`3-94 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 � 94247161 9'3'3ti5 id:-�4 95-08-34 729 FOOFHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 942tIt? 99.963 23:(!6 b6-82-94 7�0 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) @air 94351;;9 £2 :.; 21:' 08-56=34 721 FOO fRILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 450 94361,6b i881.3 21:62 88-16794 72b RO1HIL4 BL MPHA UPSILON) 5415` 9439.39 6'8949 12:24 09-18-34. 12t FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 23?-f 94.42484 3i8ab 1;.x:29 18-88 94 72b FO01 HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 55 944.48is 'j99@5 23:10 10-28-34 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53f2 44 9.20 9875b 15:13 11-15-54 76 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9513889. 9117@ @A:t3 02-@2-35 '729 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) :312 9517321 14813 18:34 JQ-81-95 720 FOOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9527855 99907 0@:31 06-02-35 723 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9532082 56675 23:1.6 87-88-95 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 95357.42 3381@ 23:116 @9-09-35 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 � 9540457 99987 2:x:28 89-15-95 72b F001HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 95478.18 91.77 23:.43 11-08-35 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELM UPSILON) 21.2 95484114 99986. 88:8`3 11-18-95 720 F•OOiHILL BL (UELIA UPSILON) 5"312 '3612575 83999 1.5:34 91=22-36 720 FOOTHILL SL ("DELfA UPSILON 2320 9 eLA Fxhibit.A ::PAGE 1': ;' ` ;::• 11:47. 02'. 14 . JAN 1 Inc:L' No:' Dte. ..:: : . Locat. NCIC, as Verified. . . N. . . DISPOSITIO 962.2391 .04-13-96 720.:FOOTHILL .BL M/C. .LOUD/UNREAS :NOISE/PUBLIC CALL CANCELED 9623272. 04-19-96 720- FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC DAC .ISSUED ' 9624237 . 04-27-96- 720' FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC DAC ISSUED .9624303 04-27-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC UNFOUNDED 9636762 08-08-96 720- FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC GOA/UTL : 964228709-21-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/.C. LOUD/UNREAS .NOISE/PUBLIC ARREST 9643253' 09--;27-961720 FOOTHILL BL M/CLOUD./UNREAS NOISE PUBLIC GOA/UTL 964,6206 .10-19-96 726 :FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC DAC ISSUED 8 ,Records Processed Exhibit A ALL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARI' I THROUGHOUT THE YEARS ADS ''ED THESE CONDITIONS_ ALL WERE VIOLATED AS SHO. IN THE PHOTOS BELOW S. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside the storage building. 10. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of this permit. 11. The use of the shed shall be limited to storage only. PHOTOS TAKEN ON 8-5-97 s ftw � �y1.' J•' •` . RA .F a _ f e. _ x x August 25, 1997 City Council,City of'-San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 9340I-3249 Re: Appeal- Delta Upsilon Use Permit - 720 Foothill Dear City Council Members: My wife and I first moved into the Lanai Apartments behind Delta Upsilon Fraternity in the Fall of 1992. During the five years we have lived here,we have endured the noise,profanity, and late night parties put on by the Fraternity. There have been numerous times that my wife and I have been awakened in the early morning hours by loud voices and partying by Delta Upsilon members. The storage shed in which they hold many of these late night parties is located less than 20 feet from our bedroom window. On more than one occasion I have had to ask them to be quiet through my bedroom window. After a Planning Commission meeting in February of 1996,where the Commission denied the fraternity's request to turn the storage room into a "recreation area,"the noise tapered off a bit. While there has still been shouting and profanity late at night,there has not been as many parties next to our bedroom window. We are concerned that the recent use permit allowing the fraternity to convert the storage building into two bedrooms is just a roundabout way of getting their "recreation area." I would also like to mention an incident during the day when members of the fraternity were using their parking lot as a playground,as they often do,and the ball they were throwing shattered one of the windows of our apartment. Broken glass went all over our personal computer. A few days after the window was replaced I heard the ball hit the window again, this time with no damage. When I asked them to refrain from throwing toward the apartments I was replied to rudely. Another game the boys are fond of playing is "smash the stereo, VCR,or some other household appliance." just recently, they all got together to smash up a couple of mopeds and other assorted items that were laying around near the storage shed (which I believe was their way of cleaning up the area). They all got together with some beer and large sticks and starting beating on the mopeds and screaming profanities. Frankly,I find this behavior frightening. In closing, I urge the members of the members of the City Council not to grant the request made by Delta Upsilon Fraternity. I urge you to take any steps possible to ensure that conduct such as that displayed by these fraternity members is punished rather than rewarded. Please do not allow them to "live"any closer than they already do. Sincerely, zaz,�- Randall A. Gehlen 140 Ferrini #12 Exhibit C I 1 ` y i � I guess the question I have that comes to mind is the use that the use that's being put at the back of the properties are bedrooms and the use that's being moved to the front of the property away from the neighbors is what we could term recreational use or dining use, depends on how late the dining goes. So is it really impacting the neighbors more:by having the bedroom use to the back. I can maybe speak from personal experience. I live next door to a fraternity and almost in every room in that fraternity, they had stereos, and when I was going to school and that's where I had my stereo is in my bedroom. That's fairly close and that's one of the issues we've heard in the past is loud noises late in the evening. So I'll just leave you with that. I think that as a storage, there's not much noise that occurs from a storage building, or shouldn't occur, but as a bedroom, even though people sleep in there sometimes, there will be studying in there, waking up in the morning, getting ready, and that's typically, I like some music when I wake up in the morning. To follow this further, the correct setback is there? Yes, on this property, yes. Is it the correct setback on the property next to it? No, at least not in the rear. Are those apartments to the rear of it? Yes. And the occupancy in those apartments? I don't know the density. I think the owners of the apartment building are here. I'd like to know the type of occupancy when they come up to talk in that apartment building. 22 apartment units, and I'm not sure exactly where those are in relation to how many are actually facing that rear building. Go ahead, David? Has staff contacted the applicant and asked them if they would be willing to mitigate any potential noise from the bedroom by maybe sound? They are will to make modifications to the building or to their use permit, whatever it takes. To mitigate sound from the bedroom area. As far as that would be possible. 5 Exhibit D It was February 1996 when they came in to ask to have that converted from the shed to the rec room. Right. So it was about a year and four months later. Okay, thank you. to just tough on noticing, I didn't see notices posted at any of the sites for this evening's agenda, so I don't know what's going or not going on, just to let you know it's rampant. Any other questions of staff? Just for my information, how is enforcement handled for the use permit? On a complaint basis. But if somebody complains, then we follow through, if there has been a violation. Complaints to? .� To the Community Development Department. Or, of course, if it's direct immediate noise activity, then they call the police, and that's what usually happens. Additionally, when I receive copies of all noise citations, I review each one of them whenever it involves fraternity, I sent Judy a memo and let her know the details of the citation, so there's that double checking system there. Any other questions of staff? Okay, back to my previous question, is anybody prepared to make a motion. I guess if there are no further questions, I'm prepared to move, contrary to staff recommendation, that we approve the amended use permit. Then I'll make just a couple of quick comments in support of this. It seems to me that the argument that the conversion of bedrooms will create additional opportunities for intense activity in the rear of the property. I would observe just the opposite is likely to happen, or could conceivably happen, because the bedrooms themselve are, as the applicant has stated, going to occupied by more senior student whn will b uieter. In addition, it seems to me some of the activity that now takes place out in the parking lot does take place because there's no other arena for it to occur on the site. It seems to me with the addition of the dining room being enlarged to a common area at 720 Foothill, that there would be some opportunity to carry that on indoors towards the front of the property. You have to remember, too, this is an R-4 neighborhood. It's an intense area, people live in close proximity to each other, there is no issue with the density at this location at this point. There is an enforcement issue, there's a continuing enforcement issue and I don't think this particular proposed, it seems to me this is a fraternity that has cleaned up its act and is trying to improve the type of operation that it runs there overall. So I'm generally not as concerned as staff about the additional dining area, so I would make that motion. 19 Exhibit D Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? I guess I do want to state that I'm not going to support the motion. I will support staff's position. Actually, I have gone through the same thinking John has, and it's certainly a possibility, yet I do have great concerns about the mixing of uses on this site as I stated at the beginning and the potential for enlarging some of those uses. That's it. Anybody else wish to make comments? I think I'll follow-up on that comment. I'm concerned about the intensification of the use on the property. And also the investment in that property which could cost some slowness in denying a continuation of this use permit. I think this is mired in the use permit portion of it as a fraternity use and I can understand the neighbors' concern with noise from the property. That intensification creating more noise and more problems for the neighbors is a big concern of mine for neighborhood areas in the community and this certainly fits into that. Go for it. The only comments that I would add to it are I believe that the use permit already has sufficient means to control as much as possible in an R-4 neighborhood the activities that are taking place: If we're not making use of them, and we're not enforcing them, that's another whole issue. But if I'm reading here if no meetings or gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on the site can take place after the hours of 10:00, how do you have a really loud patty with eight people that are only the people living at the site? It doesn't feel to me like we're enforcing what's already on paper. And I don't think restricting the shed from turning into a bedroom is going to make a change in that. So I'm more in favor of allowing a use that is allowed to occur on the site irrespective of it being handled by fraternity people because I think we already have sufficient ways to mitigate any activities that are impacting the neighborhood. And just as a side comment, I don't know that senior students are more or less quiet given that as you get shorter, perhaps you're taking fewer units, and maybe the pressure's not on, so that's not an argument that I would Qive any cre to. But I do believe there are enough mechanisms here for us to feel comfortable with, and I would feel comfortable supporting the motion. I'll support the motion also, and my reason is exactly the same as Commissioner Whittlesy stated, coupled with the fact that if they make an additional investment in this property, they are at greater risk and are more likely to adhere to the conditions. Is there any other comments anybody wishes to make? Actually I'll be in support of the motion also, and for all the reasons so eloquently outlined by Mary and John and yourself. And I also feel that, if anything, this could probably be a mitigation to any future noise by placing the bedrooms in the back and bringing any of the activities that they are allowed to do up front away from those apartments, so I think it probably would be a good situation for the neighborhood. 20 Exhibit 1✓ .-� -?� X997 August 25, 1997 City Council,City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 Re: Appeal-Delta Upsilon Use Permit - 720 Foothill Dear City Council Members: My wife and I first moved into the Lanai Apartments behind Delta Upsilon Fraternity in the Fall of 1992. During the five years we have lived here,we have endured the noise,profanity, and late night parties put on by the Fraternity. There have been numerous times that my wife and I have been awakened in the early morning hours by loud voices and partying by Delta Upsilon members. The storage shed in which they hold many of these late night parties is located less than 20 feet from our bedroom window. On more than one occasion I have had to ask them to be quiet through my bedroom window. After a Planning Commission meeting in February of 1996,where the Commission denied the fraternity's request to turn the storage room into a "recreation area,"the noise tapered off a bit. While there has still been shouting and profanity late at night,there has not been as many parties next to our bedroom window. We are concerned that the recent use permit allowing the fraternity to convert the storage building into two bedrooms is just a roundabout way of getting their "recreation area." I would also like to mention an incident during the day when members of the fraternity were using their parking lot as a playground,as they often do,and the ball they were throwing shattered one of the windows of our apartment. Broken glass went all over our personal computer. A few days after the window was replaced I heard the ball hit the window again, this time with no damage. When I asked them to.refrain from throwing toward the apartments I was replied to rudely. Another game the boys are fond of playing is "smash the stereo,VCR,or some other household appliance." just recently,they all got together to smash up a couple of mopeds and other assorted items that were laying around near the storage shed (which I believe was their way of cleaning up the area). They all got together with some beer and large sticks and starting beating on the mopeds and screaming profanities. Frankly, I find this behavior frightening. In closing,I urge the members of the members of the City Council not to grant the request made by Delta Upsilon Fraternity. I urge you to take any steps possible to ensure that conduct such as that displayed by these fraternity members is punished rather than rewarded. Please do not allow them to"live"any closer than they already do. z ly, Randall A. Gehlen 140 Ferrini #12 AM IN; ROME ming-Amwn I�01 4ro! WWI- am r - 2 ,+ YVL .1 r1t, C 6,fvu- 7h - �rd AilUA,44)' 4-0 � 1.. �►c �n a'1 �� �� J lay !• _ i ' i C•," I. /.,; 7 _ � � lel �� � ..'.� Il n : •�: � I .ice � /ll�Jr�� i •i�l��/I kit � i • J I A� � .4W- VEETV02- AvtrdDA 272 Del Mar court DATE ITE;I # J San Luis Obispo Ca. 93405 August 20, 1997 San Luis Obispo City Council Members 990 Palm Street Re: Amendment to an approved use permit allowing the Delta Upsilon tb use a storage building for bedrooms. Your city planning department staff recommended that this amend- ment be denied--their reasons are: 1. Quote: "One of the issues has been the interface with the neigh- borhood. The adjacent apartments are very close to the shared property line. There have been problems with noise and uses in the backyard area. Staff is concerned about putting the fraternity use closer to this shared property line. " '2. Quote: "This has been a very sensitive site. There have been a number of complaints and there have been citations issued. Staff is being cautious. " 3. Quote: "Deny the amendment.finding that the change will intensify uses at the site and that intensification is not compatible with the .surrounding high-density neighborhood. " We own the Lanai Apts at 140 Ferrini and 706 Foothill. We and other property owners in the Foothill-Ferrini area are in complete agreement with your city planning staff's recommendation--that the amendment be denied. Our apartment complex and others in the area constitute an extremely high-density neighborhood. There are a total of 102 units housing approx- imately 260-270 residents withifi: '300 -feet bfnthe fraternity property line. and 38 of these units all.. share a side-yard property line with the fraternity. The Lanai Apts. have 11 bedrooms within 6 feet of this shared property line. Both the storage shed and the parking lot with the basketball hoop and court are used -for recreation continually in violation of the use permit. The packet that you have shows the numerous "noise disturbance" (5312) calls by tenants to the police department since the shed was built in 1992. The packet also shows the numerous hearings and inspections - that were held throughout the years. Neighborhood noise complaints were made known at these hearings. DOspite warnings by city officials, police depArtment citations and arrests , the noise disturbance problem still persist&-and particularly during fall.winter, and spring quarters. Converting the shed to bedrooms and enlarging the main house create areas that will be an invitation for large noisy gatherings. Our tenant' s petition enclosed in your packet is their request ; that this conversion be denied. Sincerely, Alcide Boni ff IN DIR �Zv❑FIN DIR❑FIRE CHIEF inor Bonin Y ❑PW DIR RIG ❑POLICE CHF AM ❑REC DIR ❑UTIL DIR 0, 0 PERS DIR HISTORY .OF DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY 1. Fraternity applied for a use permit at 720-726 Foothill and received approval in 1991--approved conditions were for 8 residents- never more that 15 persons at any one time--no amplified sound equipment--no hosted fraternity events . 2 . Permits and construction of the storage shed started in March 1992- Intended for a shed but was never used as such (note numerous "5312 noise disturbanc calls to police since shed was built until present) . (Note photos showing debris in back and sides of shed in violation of Condition 8) . Basketball hoop and court was erected. Shed usage and basketball games generate a lot of noise. 3. "Noise disturbance 5312" calls to police continues. Neighbors requested that the fratermity activities and shed usage as a recreation room be investigated by city. Ron Whisenand, city Administrative officer held a public hearing on January 6 #1995-- It was determined at that meeting that the shed was to be used only as intended--storage only. Another meeting held on January 179 1997 also set the same condition-storage only. 4. Fraternity requested an amendment to the use permit to allow use of shed for recreational activities--neighborhood requested that this conversion be denied. It was denied by the Planning Commission by s 5 to 0 vote on on February 14,1996. Use of shed continued to be for recreation in violation of city ruling. "The. Lanai" Apartments has 11 bedrooms only 6 feet from the fraternity property line. There are 102 apartment units housing approximately 260 to 270 inhabitants within 300 feet of the fraternity property line. 5. Noise disturbances continue. We requested again that the city investigate the usage of the storage shed. Rob Bryn made an inspection on September 19,1995--results were "Shed has been converted into a recreation room with a bar"--violates N.C . 17 22 . 012 Use Permit: Violation UAC 301--altered structure: U.H.C.1001(n) Improper occupance. There are numerous violations in the packet. 6. On July 9, 1997, the fraternity requested to allow use of storage shed to bedrooms (U 81-97) , In spite of the city planning staff's recommendation to deny this request it was approved by the Planning Commission. We appealed on July 21,1997',Iand sent a letter to the City Council requesting that the hearing date of September 2,1997 be accepted (as has been stated) . That this date was convenient for .us i and. other, .property .owners-sand:,neighbors who were unable to attend the July 9,1997 hearing. Summary Allowing the conversion of the shed to bedrooms should. be denied, past experience and the history of this fraternity show that they cannot live in peace with their neighbors--they violate the conditions of their use permit. If the conversion occurs, the .shed will- be.. used as a dormitory-&-7 recreation area and the main house will..be opened, into a larger recreation usage and will attract large noisy... gatherings. T •H TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL: THE DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY LOCATED AT 720-726 FOOTHILL,HAVE APPLIED FOR USE PERMIT U-81-97(AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW USE OF A STORAGE SHED FROM STORAGE TO BEDROOMS). WE,THE TENANTS OF THE LANAI APARTMENTS,REQUEST THAT THIS AMENDMENT BE DENIED. MOVING THE BEDROOMS TO THE STORAGE SHED AND ALLOWING THE CONVERSION IN THE FRONT HOUSE WILL INTENSIFY USES AT THE SITE WHICH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH-DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD! NAME ADDRESS DATE OW AJE,t_ drt « rk iH L g(k�7 Kli 0 x`77 i . o�,c.C.vr2 I CS Fe r-r i in T � j _� g'/ ;L—c/-7 10 � /KG FF_R2 /Nl ���- •� � l• 1 41) All E I v4 fc, e m ` l S-j 3\7 7 ti4uA-,,� W e / r. 1 t TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL: THE DELTA UPSILON FRATERNITY LOCATED AT 720-726 FOOTHILL.HAVE APPLIED FOR USE PERMIT U-81-97(AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW USE OF A STORAGE SHED FROM STORAGE TO BEDROOMS). WE,THE TENANTS OF THE LANAI APARTMENTS,REQUEST THAT THIS AMENDMENT BE DENIED. MOVING THE BEDROOMS TO THE STORAGE SHED AND ALLOWING THE CONVERSION IN THE FRONT HOUSE WILL INTENSIFY USES AT THE SITE WHICH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH-DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD! NAME ADDRESS DATE -14,1A - ( w"E-) 'S A 7 7a F c)A► tilkM e (lug ] Raj ru -70is C ,i H I (,� �� 0�7 U Shared Index 8rorse Lnc. No, OP#. . . Recei bate. . . . Location. .... .. .. .. . .. . .. .... . ... . . NVEK Dk#. 9225484 15912 11:54 85-85-32 728 FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9232533 16813 88:18 87-86-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9232995 63268 22:52 87-89-92 728 FOOI*HILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9233888 27775 88:86 87-16-92 729 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9236577 59358 81:82 88-87-32 128 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9241166 29965 18:38 89-14-92 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5452 9 9244445 68646 22:41 1049-92 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531' 9314612 E2 21:15 62-82-93 729 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 45@fl 9314013 44758 21:16 8242-93 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 1331 9 9336668 59356 17:25 88-14-93 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 � 9339232 88698 22:28 0'3-12 93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9343446 88698 61:25 16-16-93 726 F WIH ILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9346860 88650 81:02 11-06-93 728 FOOMILL SL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312; 9413864 73156 17:46 62-82-94 726 FOOTHILL 5 1415766 9'7'305 01:01 02-19-34 120 FOOTHILL SL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9419626 99984 66:12 63-19-94 729 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5"312 9428552 99'303 80:03 94-02-34 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9421'3'35 88646 62::3 64-69-94 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA MILOS) `,`312 1424761 99'305 00:54 d5-08-14 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9427'727 99963 23:65 66-02-94 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53i' 9436159 E2 21:02 08-16-34 720 FOO ILL SL (ALPHA UPSILON) 45,e 9436166 16813 21:62 68-16-94 728 FOOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 541` 9 9439198 88048 12:24 09-18-94 729 FOOTHILL SL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9442404 .31685 13:29 16-88-94 7e6 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 55 " 1444813 99985 23:10 18-28-94 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 446529 98756 15:13 11-15-94 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 232 9 9513889 11778 80:83 92-02-95 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9517327 18813 16:34 63-61-95 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9527855 99987 89:31 86-82-95 120 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9532882 56673 23:16 67-68-95 728 FOOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 � 9539742 33810 23:36 61-89-35 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9548497 99967 23:26 69-15-95 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9541878 11710 23:43 11-08-95 720 FOOTHILL 8L (DELTA UPSILON) 5312 9548814 99966 68:69 11-18-95 728 FOOTHILL BL (DELIA UPSILON) 5312 L�6l 900 12515 8315:34 01-22-36 728 FOOTHILL SL (DELTA UPSILON) 2328 9 2' 2,0 2� t 9 q z — _ ,vp `A NO I SC-7 Ora) ot4" • �` �' t Y *0 Aon rc,� z 3 2S - Parry TKa F' T .- s �7j /�aLrGL� d�Gs lSSGtL�O r �¢2 �S7 A-ftO 1�y S�l 6S r �c c /v o T Shared Index Browse Inc. No. OP#. . . Recei Date. .. . Location. .. . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . KVIR DR#4 '3216831 37317 84:34 82-23-52 148 FERRIC RD (LANAI APES) 2325 9225917 73942 17:43 05-69-92 772 FOOTHILL BL (FOOTHILL APTS) 5312 9229517 65852 89131 06-18-'12 I:ilOMILL BL & FE RIHI RD 5567 9231851 66456 66:45 66-38-92 188 FERRINI RD, BLK OF' 5227 3233889 13142 15:28 0"1=16-32 771 FOOTHILL 8L (LUCKYS) 838 9244445 68646 22:41 18-89-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 5252867 M46 22:29 12-17-92 118 t:OO f HILL BL, 4 531 9252166 59358 16:21 12-18-92 289 MADONNA RD 5584 9 9318584 15972 87:83 01-06-33 148 FERRINI RD, 6 5818 9 9311456 15972 lb:57 81-13-93 146 FERRINI RD (LANAI APTS) 2325 9 .9312984 45852 22:22 81-24-33 148 FERRINI RD, 9 5818 9 9322772 88848 22:44 b4-16-93 146 FERRlNI RD (LANAI APTS) 5:187 13343448 88610 81:25 10-16-93 128 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9346666 88696 81:62 11-66-93 t2b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) W2 9415766 '39'385 41:01 02-19-94 128 FOOMILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9418755 6645b 66:38 63-17-94 716 FOOTHILL BL, 8 5312 9421768 66450 23:41 04-12-34 111 FOOMILL 8L (LUCKYS) 99@ 9424161 99`165 bb:54 bb-b8-94 72b FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9425071 37317 23:24 05-18-34 711 FOOMILL DL (LUCKYS) 531' 9431747 45852 23:47 b8-3b-94 975 FOOTHILL BL (FOOTHILL SWARE) 5312 9439624 .213032 23:44 N-15-94 975 FOOTHILL 8L (FOOTHILL SQUARE) =312 439923 999b3 22:56 b9-17-94 68b FOOTHILL BL 5312 5517327 10813 16:34 0.3-01-35 720 FdOfHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 '9519444 458;2 2e:54 b'3-19{15 152 FERRINI RD 5312 9522748 88589 19:83 t4-19-35 140 FERRINI RD (LANAI APES) 2325 9523-164 999K bb:37 b4-28.95 975 F001HILL BL (FOOTHILL MARE) 5312 1521855 59581 00:31 06-82=i5 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9544467 "31885 15:17 10-14-95 FERKNl RD & FOOTHILL BL 5227 5846140 59508 23:43 10-26=33 110 F OO MLL 6L, 8 5312 9548614 99966 b6:by 11-I0-95 726 FOOTHILL BL (DELIA UPSILON) 5312 S-) t 2 wolse is ru2 �NC-e fl l sc Aao,-Gc 0 + File AL.o-w\ 2, N Ch z a I. VEE Z=D W I rIH 4mmoo am po V] C�V]V�ZEEEw O Na ow aUUw4aa(�au �, 1p mn VGC OU' a000qw U � .• UUUUUUUU • HHNHHNHH • aaaaaaaa � i►� � • mmmmmmmm ,� • oaooaxxx � � • aaaaaaaa � • WWWWWWWW • WV1WtAd�dltAdl • HHNNNNNN zzzzzzzz h Cl ytntntAtAU�WO .� 444444 am -H aaaaaaaa 00000000 . IA a00DDD000 00000000 U H UUUUUUUU z xxxxxxxx • aaaaaaaa • mmmmmmmm aaaaaaaa • aaaaaaaa • NNNNHNNN • xxxxxxxx C E+E#EEE-EEEE -ri 00000000 b wwwwwwww U 0000000%0 O NNNNNNNN • �o�o�o�o�o�o�o�c rA a�rno�o►o►o�o+rn m • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 d • !'1011�I�OOrll�o► U d rIrINNONNrI O 0 11111111 $4 � ��r�aaoo►o►o a �O o000000rl � • rlNnP c%2r lc %o to O MP-mowwoo m z m"Nmr%mNN O NN7VV%DNMW U W NNNNe• -w-w- • N 00 wwwwwww%o 9 4 c mmmo►c+mmm - aN CO a San Luis Obispo Police DepartMent Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** ncident 9622391 Received 00 :18 Dispatched 00 :23 Arrived 00 :23 Cleared 00 :23 Date 04-13-96 Dispatcher 68330 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location. 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. BONIN, AL Address 140 FERRINI, 12 Phone -NONE Inc. Type *PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** RP BELIEVES PARTY MAY BE BREAKING UP, WILL CALL BACK IF NEEDED ** ** SCANNER Units/Officers 68330 Ruth, Lurinda NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 9 CALL CANCELED Gang Al P Case I ® Sa.. Luis Obispo Police Depari.Laent Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9623272 Received 23 :34 Dispatches 23 :4-2 Arrived 23 :48 Cleared 23 :55 Date 04-19-96 Dispatcher 52340 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. MURRAY, DAVID Address 140 FERRINI, 11 Phone 783-2862 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** JASON MILLER ** Units/Officers 99908 Stephen W. Stratton NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 8 DAC ISSUED Gang S AI P Case E Luis Obispo Police Depa. ant Incident. Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9624237 Received 00 :33 Dispatched 01: 04 Arrived 01:10 Cleared 01:29 Date 04-27-96 Dispatcher 52340 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. GEHLEN, RANDY Address 140 FERRINI Phone 543-5162 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** DAC TO JEREMY CRISP ** Units/Officers 99907 Frigillana, Raymund, C. NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 8 DAC ISSUED Gang S AI P Case 1J S Luis Obispo Police Depai ent Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9624303 ® ` Received 13 :43 Dispatched 13 :45 Arrived 13 :47 Cleared 14 : 06 Date 04-27-96 Dispatcher 88207 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) Comp. BONIN,AJ Address 140 FERRINI Phone 543-6200 Inc. Type NOISE NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** UNF - RP CONT ** LOUD BASKETBALL PLAYERS Units/Officers 65852 Mullin, John J. NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 3 UNFOUNDED Gang AI P Case S Luis Obispo Police Depai ..gent Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** 0 Incident 9636762 `-_�� •;4;. Received 01: 02 Dispatched 01 :14 Arrived 01: 17 Cleared 01 :20 Date 08-08-96 Dispatcher 68330 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (** PARTY PREMISE **) Comp. LEDESMA, CHARLA Address 140 FERRINI RD Phone 781-9236 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** QOA - QOD ** 6 PEOPLE FRATERNITY HOUSE X FROM SLO BAKE Units/Officers 73190 Rendon Jr. , Gilbert S . NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL 59350 Lincoln, Eric P. Dispo. 7 GOA/UTL Gang S AI P Case San Luis Obispo Police Department Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** .cident 9642287 Received 00 :48 Dispatched 01c30 Arrived 01:35 Cleared 02 :20 late 09-21-96 Dispatcher 28434 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (** PARTY PREMISE **) GUS Comp. GEHLAN, RANDY Address 140 FERRINI, 12 Phone 543-5162 .nc. Type *PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Totes/Other Information t* AR - CITE - DAC ** - kP:AYON,CESAR 040874 7nits/Officers 56450 Nemeth, Gary NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 2 ARREST Gang S AI P Case Luis Obispo Police Department Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 964325315 ` Received 19 :43 Dispatched 20 :53 Arrived 20 :53 Cleared 20 :55 Date 09-27-96 Dispatcher 20823 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 720 FOOTHILL BL (** PARTY PREMISE **) Comp. BONIN, AJ Address Phone Inc. Type *PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** UTL ** 2B13 10-22 at 20 :09 TIMEDIS 20 :03 LOUD PARTY Units/Officers 66450 Nemeth, Gary NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Dispo. 7 GOA/UTL Gang S Al P Case - 1 . Sa.. Luis Obispo Police Department , Incident Record **** For Official Use Only *** Incident 9646206 Received 01:08 Dispatched 02 :00 Arrived 02 : 02 Cleared 02 :13 Date 10-19-96 Dispatcher 28434 Jur. Grid H7 Sector 105 Map 158 Location 726 FOOTHILL BL Comp. WENGERT, BRUCE Address 140 FERRINI, 19 Phone 544-0919 Inc. Type PARTY NCIC Rep. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL Notes/Other Information ** DAC CRISP, JEREMY ** Units/Officers 99910 Christopher Kirby NCIC Ver. 5312 M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBL 27238 Costa Jr. , Anthony L. Dispo. 8 DAC ISSUED Gang S AI P Case ALL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS ADOPTED THESE CONDITIONS ALL WERE VIOLATED AS SHOWN IN THE PHOTOS BELOW 3, The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner, The rear yard area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside ib the storage building, ,9 !0, Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute rounds of permit, V g revocation of this ' N1, The use of the shed shall be limited to storage only, PHOTOS TAKEN ON 8-5-97 i p V Z phi ttt s i � S 9 � Y y0 � _ 3 t i �7 Y S 3 3e` lk 77 4 kf k a v y '1 i i ��►������II��81111111111 P►►iii�i�i�►� I II city of s ,s oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 January 21, 1997 Delta Upsilon Fraternity 720 Foothill Boulevard San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 164-94 720-726 Foothill Boulevard Dear Gentlemen: On Friday, January 17, 1997, 1 conducted a 2-year public review of an approved use permit (U1515) allowing a fraternity at the above location. After reviewing the information presented, I approved continuation of the use, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1 . The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity. 2. The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The use is exempt from environmental review (Class 3, Section 15303 - conversion of existing small structures from one use to another). Conditions 1. Occupancy of the siteislimited to eight residents. 2. A minimum of nine parking spaces shall be provided on-site. 3. The permit is for residential use only. Fraternity activities conducted at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard shall be limited to meetings of the executive council and any other meetings and gatherings involving a total of 15 or fewer fraternity members and guests. The use of amplified sound equipment shall not be allowed. No hosted fraternal events on the site shall be allowed (for example, rush events, little sisters). Basketball or other outdoor recreational activities L shall cease at dusk. /O The city of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services. programs and activities. V Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. , 4. If a reasonable complaint, as defined by the Community Development Director, is received in writing by the Community Development Department, a.) The complaint shall be forwarded to the Interfraternity Council and the Planning Commission within one week of receipt for review and comment. The names of the people filing the complains shall not be included without their consent. Copies of all correspondence will be sent to the Dean of Students and the fraternity. b.) The complaints, and the comments from the Interfraternity Council if received, shall be forwarded by the Planning Division to the Planning Commission for consideration at the commission's next available meeting. 5. No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on this site are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. 6. A fraternity identification sign may be installed on the building in accordance with the City's sign regulations. 7. The applicant shall institute and maintain a neighborhood relations program. This plan shall include at least the following elements: a.) Quarterly training of all members in community relations. Dates of these training sessions shall be submitted to the Community Development Director. b.) A program to inform neighbors in a timely manner of upcoming events at the fraternity or elsewhere. c.) Submission of names and telephone numbers of responsible persons to the Community Development Department and to apartment property managers and neighbors within two blocks in all directions of the fraternity. Responsible persons shall be available during all events and at reasonable hours otherwise to receive and handle complaints. Evidence of implementation of said plan shall be submitted to the Director for review within 30 days of Planning Commission approval of this application. Failure to implement said plan will be grounds for revocation of this permit. B. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside the storage building. 9. The use permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer in two years (approximately January 17, 1999). At the review hearing,.the Hearing Officer may add, delete, or modify conditions of approval or may revoke the use permit. 10. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of this permit. 11. The use of the shed shall be limited to storage only, My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision. If you have any questions, please call Judy Lautner at 781-7166. Sincerely, 4ona Whisena d Hearing Officer cc: Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corporation 96 W. Campbell Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 ,:tea n IL I� Al N ,]� /••CCC o ` Iq 4c •�'r 0 , ' O %R-4 ' alto L♦I Vy O � O O m w f O / [wt O t� O a wim.fw .♦a r o _�_ a [.._W �.. �. .M 6.971 ` . a •' uisr.r Z j O rwr. q ww• r r.0 Veen .•aY 5 FOOTHILL -$L11fl • ,y „, (7•+) ns.179 .rw n. raM "'• r •W M M'I. M.•. .Y..l gLaM Z WY•wf w.N yl f,•Y [at• wy r KY••rgl ..Zme O AN .K� Mia• •K•ry &••r f EE �. w[ w ntr `/•'�,��' M Yr rw� ahW Y`ri••..a.wy •� 1,012 VICINITY MAP V 15 lis NORTH Z.D arid, 12o& �o, -h i LAW OFFICES OF '. : .. c�/,Gla A�7o�AVGys M. SCOTT R,ADOVICH OF COUNSEL SSO DANA STREET IOHN F. HODGES i �n POST OFFICE BOX 106 SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93406 PH (805) 541-4200 &a /„re! .d t5t�,��,�� CES FAX (805) 541-4293 4-i-L sc L 4--t-t 'AJ March 5, 1996 Delta Upsilon Fraternity 720 Foothill Boulevard San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Re: Lanai Apartments To Whom It May Concern: My offices have been contacted by Al and Elinor Bonin regarding their apartments located at 140 Ferrini in San Luis Obispo, known as the Lanai Apartments. The Bonins have had numerous complaints from their tenants of the noise levels generated in your parking lot as a result of ongoing recreational activities. Apparently, that parking lot is being used for purposes other than parking. The noise levels have disturbed the pzace of-the tenants and several have threatened to leave the premises because of this ongoing problem. I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding the City ordinances that apply to your circumstance. If the situation does not immediately improve, then I will advise the Bonin to take all legal action necessary, including injunctive relief and damages. The Bonins will reevaluate this matter in the next 30 days. Very trul yours, r M/SCOTT RADOVICH MSR:jb c: Al & Elinor Bonin M;sc\Bcnin.hr LAW OFFICES OF • M. SCOTT RADOVICH x 550 DANA STREET OF COUNSEL POST OFFICE BOX 106 JOHN F. HODGES SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93406 PH (805) 541-4200 FAX (805) 541-4293 March 12, 1996 Norbert Lippert 308 San Nicholas Court Laguna Beach, CA 92651 Re: Lanai Apartments To Whom It May Concern: My offices have been contacted by Al and Elinor Bonin regarding their apartments located at 140 Ferrini in San Luis Obispo, known as the Lanai Apartments. The Bonins have had numerous complaints from their tenants of the noise levels generated in your parking lot as a result of ongoing recreational activities. Apparently, that parking lot is being used for purposes other than parking. The noise levels have disturbed the peace of the tenants and several have threatened to leave the premises because of this ongoing problem. I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding the City ordinances that apply to your circumstance. If the situation does not immediately improve, then I will advise the Bonins to take all legal action necessary, including injunctive relief and damages. The Bonins will reevaluate this matter in the next 30 days. Very truly yours, SCOTT RADOVICH MSR:jb c: Al & Elinor Bonin Mise\Bunin2.la LAW OFFICES OF M. SCOTT RADOVICH 5S0 DANA STREET OF COUNSEL POST OFFICE BOX 106 JOHN F. HODGES SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93406 PH (805) 541-4200 FAX (8051 541-4293 March 12, 1996 Alpha Epsilon Alumni Corp. 96 West Campbell Ave. Campbell, CA 95008 Re: Lanai Apartments To Whom It May Concern: My offices have been contacted by Al and Elinor Bonin regarding their apartments located at 140 Ferrini in San Luis Obispo, known as the Lanai Apartments. The Bonins have had numerous complaints from their tenants of the noise levels generated in your parking lot as a result of ongoing recreational activities. Apparently, that parking lot is being used for purposes other than parking. The noise levels have disturbed the peace of the tenants and several have threatened to leave the premises because of this ongoing problem. I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding the City ordinances that apply to your circumstance. If the situation does not immediately improve, then I will advise the Bonin to take all legal action necessary, including injunctive relief and damages. The Bonins will reevaluate this matter in the next 30 days. Very truly yours, 7ACOTT RADOVICH MSR:jb c -AI & Elinor Bonin INise�Elo®l.ltr ZONING INVESTIGATION CASE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Location: -17-0 --72C> mod} 11 ?'" Date: ' -25-95 Stage I Request for Investigation Form. O Open-form completed ( ) Closed-reporting person declined. to, identify ( ) Open-incomplete information ( ) Closed-no 'applicable violation discernable on information provided ( ) Other: Stage II Investigation ( ) Administrative material mailed or delivered ( ) Open-initial site visit complete, violations probable . ( ),Open-written notice sent ' compliance date ( ) Closed-initial site visit complete-.unfounded or. corrected ( ) •Closed-second site visit complete, violation(s) corrected ( ) Open-second site visit complete, violation(s) continue ( ). Open- certified letter sent, compliance date ( ) Open-notice issued ( ) Open-referred city attorney ( ) closed-violation(s) corrected ( 7y Open-referred to appropriate department/agency -fie ( ) Open-other _ Closed-other Misr J? f's Cakd m ft Es Reg 4-c-ST 7� _ Stage .III Investigationy 7 In flag 7 GAYM ( ) Final site visit prior :to prosecution._ ! Jz'D,v _ ( ) Citation issued No iQsFS'uc77 s ( . ) Notice to show cause hearing(s) deo L .r�co .vim ( ) Closed-by city attorney 41,C - 17< ;L-3• 0!a - Gist PR Mir_ Ilto Civ fio�v S{Rtcc�tc/iE - ( ) Open-pending legal/court action k•4G 36� 4-47'e ( ) Closed-adjudicated [ictfc. (001 CAJ) 1;f2A&6psA _ OGG C.t P iC-n c'f -------------------- Ready for inspec•+i,),,. 1 Date: M T W Th F AM PM lig►�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII���IIIIII INSPECTION REQUEST J, l =OF SM IMS OBISPO BUILDING&SAFETY DIVISION f Job Address 4' Suite m , n o m Contact Phone ; as N ¢ J \ T.Pole......_...._......._❑ T-BarCeiling_.._._❑ Water Heater............[ 0 Zm ' Foundations.............❑ Roof Diaph.Nail..._E) Grading/Drainage Slab Pre-saturation..❑ Sheer Wall Nall.........❑ Parking Lot'-- J t O U' I� a� Slab Steel .................❑ DWVTest....._..........❑ Water Service...........[ 0111111EN S ` F 1 L } Wall Steel/Block.......❑ Ext.Lath/Stucco ......❑ Sewer Lateral...........[ a O tT- Q U I m a Floor Framing...........❑ Insulation_....._._.._❑ Elect.Meter.......__❑ rn 1 1 R rx F in Rough Mechanical ..❑ Dry Wall Nail.........._[3 Bluseard.,�.__.__[ •) 0 Plumbing`✓ O O Rough 9 g......❑ Shower Pan/Lnth.....❑ Pro-final.....................[ viiiiiiiiii Rough Electric..........❑ Gas Line Teat...........❑ Final Approval..........lam [ NZ Framing._..................❑ Fireplace/stove......... Reinspection........ $ COMMENTS: LUcc x aN.,., Z i y, U p a, F y z m ¢ .aa, m cc y F e>_ N o w E o L; y W W • LL °' LL 0 �- a LL t CL � r LLQ E 0 W of- �' � �` � e � F � N ,_ q Q' a o Oc► v� ► tpC, � 0 CL as 7 272 Del Mar Court San Luis Obispo, Ca 93405 September 18, 1995• Jeffrey W. . Hook' Planning Dept San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 Dear Sir: A Public Hearing was held on January 6, 1995 in the Council Hearing room regarding an Administrative review of a Planning commission Use Permit (U1515)for -Delta Upsilon Fraternity located at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard. (see.!attached agenda) At this meeting it was determined that the building at the rear of the fraternity premises was to be used as intended-for storage only. Since this meeting the building has been used continuously as a recreation gathering place complete with a pool table, etc. Our tenants have been very tolerant with the noise, but it has now reached a point that we request that the city check this shed as to its use and stop it being used for anything but a storage shed. Our apartment complex (The Lanai ) at 140 Ferrini and the fraternity property at 720 and 726 Foothill are contiguous. Our sideyard setback Is 'six feet. Their rearyard setback is only six feet instead of'-the ten feet code requirement. The buildings are very close together. As recent as September 9.1995 about 11: 30: p.m. the. police were called but the noise continued until 2: 30 a.m. causing the tenants to move away from their rear bedrooms and sleep on couches in the living- room. On September 12, 1995 at 9: 20 p.m. my wife and I checked the premises at 140 Ferrini and heard noise and music coming from the shed. We contacted some fraternity members and told them that the tenants could no longer tolerate the noise. We hereby request that this complaint be investigated regarding the violation of the building' s usage. Sincerely, Alcide J. ffonin 543-6200 41 ku7LZX�_- Elinor K. Bonin 543-6200 MEMO DATE: 9/19/95 FROM: M Ellery TO: R Bryn SUBJECT: 720-726 Foothill The storage building at the rear of property has been converted into a recreation room with a bar. �IIIIIIIIIII� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII MEMORAJ"UM CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO: Rob Bryn FROM: Jeff Hook DATE: September 18, 1995 SUBJECT: Request for investigation: Delta Upsilon Fraternity. Rob: Attached is a Request for Investigation from Mr. and Mrs. Bonin. After talking with them, it appears that their setback concerns are not an issue, since as-built setbacks on both sides appear to meet zoning requirements. This complaint may be grounds for PC review of the use permit. You may want to talk with Ron or Arnold about that. Let me know if you have questions. Thanks. �Yl L ^'YL C is C O AJ '��yt'►-t h �Gc� I� - .�l1 h I6�s1 D M C---yyt KSF 7%;F S'hd R.1 -5 �'� x,7.4-1, a/ 4 /v O c/P c ' 1 Ready for inspection: i✓ T W Th F AM PM l�!I�illlllllillil�i� III�I�III I �I INSPECTION REQUEST M o�san tins ompo BUILDING&S-AFETY DIVISION Job Address -?7_0 r ro inG •, Suite �q Contact t' . l,43f*Y1 Phone SYC� T.Pole.......................❑ T-Bar Ceiling.............❑ Water Heater............El Foundations .............El Roof Diaph.Nail.......❑ Grading/Drainage....❑ Slab Pre-saturation.. Sheer Wall Nail.........❑ Parking Lot...............❑ Slab Steel .................❑ DWV Test..................❑ Water Service............. Wall Steel/Block.......❑ Ext.Lath/Stucco ......❑ Sewer Lateral...........1 Floor Framing...........❑ Insulation..................❑ Elect.Meter..............❑ Rough Mechanical ..❑ Dry Wall Nail.............❑ Bluecard..................... Rough Plumbing......❑ Shower Pan/Lath.....❑ Pre-final.....................❑ Rough Electric..........❑ Gas Line Test...........❑ Final Approval..........1] Framing.....................❑ Fireplace/Stove........❑ Reinspection ............ COMMENTS: _ re.C_ Y or,- rT, � : L e.�Y1 1 'A CJ CIC,��.P, 48.91.91 7 Are Cly of sAn oaspo ►►,►I 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 10/04/95 ALPHA UPSILON ALUMNI CORP A 96 W CAMPBELL AV CAMPBELL, CA 95008— SUBJECT: Notice of Code Violation 720 FOOTHILL Dear Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. : On 09/19/95, Community Development Department staff inspected property you own at 720 FOOTHILL. Staff noted that the storage building at the rear of the property had been converted to a recreation room with a bar. Please be aware that the situation described above does not meet building/zoning ordinance regulations, and appears to violate San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Sections (s) : M.C. 17 . 22 . 010 Use Permit Violation U.A.C. 301 Altered Structure U.H.C. 1001 (N) Improper Occupancy We request that you take action to comply with these ordinance requirement (s) by immediately ceasing. occupancy of the altered structure and returning it. to a storage building or obtaining the necessary permits for conversion. Your property will be reinspected on or about 10/19/95 to determine if further enforcement action is necessary. If yogh estions, please call me at (805) 781-7186. Sinc Rob B Neighborhood Services Manager cc: H. Hannula, Building Permits Coordinator y The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities. Telecommunications Device fnr'the Deaf(8051781-7410. city of san luis obispo CORRECTION NOTICE TO: Rob Bryn . FROM: Mark Ellery SUBJECT: 720 Foothill / Rec room DATE: 'November 2, 1995 The permitted storage room that was converted into a recreation room still remains. Occupants stated that they have made an application to allow this conversion and in the mean time use of the room has ceased. i I ' ��i����!�!►Iiliiili '' iii'' ary R R ECsan I C OTI O N NOTICE 990 Pal Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 f 7781-7 8I0 G ❑ 781-7171LANTNG PUBLIC 781-7200781 WORKS 1.7380 JOB ADDRESS (i- TYPE OF INSPECTION The following discrepancies of city and/or state codes need correcting: eso �2 You are hereby notified that the above discrepancies shall be reinspected for accep- tance. Where discrepancy will be concealed, have it inspected before covering. CALL FOR REINSPECTION G _ INSPECTO DATE DO NOT LOSE OR RE VE THIS TAG sM October 20, 1995 Rob Bryn 990 Palm Street P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, California 93403-8100 Dear Rob: This letter is follow-up to our phone conversation of October 20, 1995 regarding the October 4, 1995 Notice of Code Violation. The code violation concerned the questionable use of the storage shed located at 720 Foothill Blvd. The violation notice was originally sent to the Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. treasurer. 1 received a copy of the notice on October 19th. Per our conversation, the Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. will be requesting a Use Permit modification to allow for a recreational facility on the property. The application should be submitted within the next thirty days. In addition, the storage shed will only be used for it's intended purpose. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me at (714) 560-5733. Sincerely, Norbert Lip ert President, Alpha Upsilon Alumni Corp. c: Delta Upsilon Fraternity Alpha Upsilon, BOD RECEIVE ® OCT 2 6 1495 CITY OF SAN UA OSISPO suwm DIVISION ZONING INVESTIGATION CASE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Location: /� d Date: ' Stage I Request for Investigation Form. ( ) Open-form completed ( ) Closed-reporting person declined. to identify ( ) Open-incomplete information ( ) Closed-no *applicable violation discernable on information provided ( ) Other: Stage II Investigation ( ) Administrative material mailed or delivered (� Open-initial site visit complete, violations probable - ( )Open-written notice sent compliance date ( ) Closed-initial site visit complete-.unfounded or. corrected ( ) -Closed-second site visit complete, violation(s) corrected (�) Open-second site visit complete, violation(s) continue ( ) Open- certified letter sent compliance date ( ) Open-notice issued ( ) Open-referred city attorney 7-XS ( Closed-violations) corrected ( 0 en-r ferred to appropriate department/agency ( ) open- er "'\ ) Closed-other ZL,� • Z 5'S - � �Fl�.rt�r,rrs iyar /77t!;—. Stage III Investigation ( ) Final site visit prior to prosecution. ( ) Citation issued ( ) Notice to show cause hearing(s) ( ) .Closed-by city attorney ( ) Open-pending legal/court action ( ) Closed-adjudicated , - 1 Fh. `i�s ;r' [ city of San tL, OBISpo ImamCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.(805)781.7180 N_ 601 990 PALM STREET • SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA 93401-3249 ® ® A DATE / TIME Z53 7 &P NAME(FIRST.MI LE,LAST) RESIDENCE ADRESS CITY BUSINESS ADDRESS CITY DRIVERS LICENSE NO. STATE BIRTHDATE VEHICLE LICENSE NO. STATE YEAR OF VEHICLE. =' MAKE MODELBODY STYLE. DOLOR LOCATION OF OFFENSE(5)COMMITED 7ZQE_E „ /� (—1 NSE(S)CODE.SECTION DESCRIPTION ) Ii�S lJ/ A.FFMC 417.17-040A Furniture&equipment in yard prohibited I�MC41717.040B Materials storage in ❑ MC 41717 040C Storage of items/parts in yard-prohibited ❑ MC 417 17 060A No furniture or equipment on roofs O MC 410 36.233 Parking in yard Q MC 4 8 04 020(ff Failure to store trash containers c a � 1 Exp a natio /�/ //���,�/)n w ✓�U�J G �/, /C�Vf� / !.� Compliance mandato within 72 ouurs. f� ❑ See reverse I❑\\ Must be corrected by L Time ❑ No reinspection required. Self-initiated field activity ❑ Cleared-Unfounded Municipal Code violations are punishable by fine and/or incarcerate n. ISSUED BY/jIgg ✓ZW 6AYDATE / /9 ❑ Cleared-no further action By Date White-File Pink-Reinspect Yellow-Site copy 17-95 4, io: , 'i'�,t• icy: ti tea.. .. , _ SI R E C E I V ED SEP; 2.3 NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCENZNT ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS C!", RE IIEST O ROSECIITION Location: / owner• Tenant/Resp. Party (if applicable) : 2 gC Date of 1st Notice: � 2n/dam Notice Violation: (Code Sec. ) ��d� < '/ / , 0 0 Description: e�✓VO �T i 'T /lull r r Notes/Comments: Date Referred to City Attorney: Yes No Photos attached: Yes No (_) Notices attached: Report attached: CITY ATTORNEY STATUS Defendant Name: Mailing Address: Code Violations: Infraction Misdemeanor Attorney Letter mailed: Final Inspection, Yes No DMV ordered: Date Complaint Filed: Arraignment. Date: Plea: Further Proceedings: Zi7-7 Disposition: �10fT. ti • J jos c $ mi co o „ a n (D (D U) En N `z N O y Z }, z �. �- ♦ us m mn m co C w E > z > � mn o N W CL m O y 3 y- t3 N m ' \N N G �.ffDD p' O O t C Z a N XCO M 8 \ 3 d c tXo Q (OD m m � yfp S 3 fD ID co CD m o o fa m k'Y�Y N ry 1.� N ''/.. �•1 — �Y 1J i 91/c• .�^ t I,r rl . • �hl. _ I �rr G. ITT fir, LY ':1Rf 1 r L �[r d 3 7\ r r [, -� p Fri wri.4" .s.. W.SMA WRA�+a�/ • I 1 it ..�..� _.n_�� � ��..• ���'.__.�.�.. • r it . WIMA V. a 1 . 2 — -- - -vi' --a- - --�'---- - _ ----- --- - - ---- - -� -- -- - ---- _ Cin - - ' -- �� � -- - GJh� -417 - ----- - - - - -- -- --tet - - - AlL ------ -VuQ- --` - -L epc -- 0\11 CZL'ad. + rLwo J41h hut C�, blei t O,t-O � �� 1 MA TWO Mal . � M"O .VolkwT, IM L' �leir�/ I MY W10 W" Aid Flo W,0 WAV No 174 � J % . 1I � .I' � I_ August 25, 1997 City Council,City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Re: Appeal- Delta Upsilon Use Permit - 720 Foothill Dear City Council Members: My wife and I first moved into the Lanai Apartments behind Delta Upsilon Fraternity in the Fall of 1992. During the five years we have lived here,we have endured the noise,profanity, and late night parties put on by the Fraternity. There have been numerous times that my wife and I have been awakened in the early morning hours by loud voices and partying by Delta Upsilon members. The storage shed in which they hold many of these late night parties is located less than 20 feet from our bedroom window. On more than one occasion I have had to ask them to be quiet through my bedroom window. After a Planning Commission meeting in February of 1996,where the Commission denied the fraternity's request to turn the storage room into a "recreation area,"the noise tapered off a bit. While there has still been shouting and profanity late at night,there has not been as many parties next to our bedroom window. We are concerned that the recent use permit allowing the fraternity to convert the storage building into two bedrooms is just a roundabout way of getting their "recreation area." I would also like to mention an incident during the day when members of the fraternity were using their parking lot as a playground,as they often do,and the ball they were throwing shattered one of the windows of our apartment. Broken glass went all over our personal computer. A few days after the window was replaced I heard the ball hit the window again, this time with no damage. When I asked them to refrain from throwing toward the apartments I was replied to rudely. Another game the boys are fond of playing is "smash the stereo,VCR,or some other household appliance." just recently,they all got together to smash up a couple of mopeds and other assorted items that were laying around near the storage shed (which I believe was their way of cleaning up the area). They all got together with some beer and large sticks and starting beating on the mopeds and screaming profanities. Frankly, I find this behavior frightening. In closing,I urge the members of the members of the City Council not to grant the request made by Delta Upsilon Fraternity. I urge you to take any steps possible to ensure that conduct such as that displayed by these fraternity members is punished rather than rewarded. Please do not allow them to 'live"any closer than they already do. Sincerely, 4az-.0" Randall A. Gehlen 140 Ferrini #12 12� YY/ . 7, 7 JENCKS LAW GROUP September 2,.1997 Honorable Allan Settle, Mayor. Honorable Bill Roal man Honorable Dave Romero Honorable Kathy Smith Honorable Dodie Williams San Luis Obispo City Hall: 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 RE: U 81-97 Honorable City Council Members: I represent the Appellants in this proceeding, Al and Elinor Bonin. The Bonins are the owners of a_22 unit apartment house situated directly behind the site in question. The Bonins filed their appeal of the Planning Commission decision to permit the conversion of a.storage shed to two bedrooms because this expanded use is detrimental to the health, safetyan_d welfare of the surrounding community. It is patently unfair to allow expansion of:a use permit that would, by expanding the use:in a way that was not originally contemplated by the use permit application, permit.a few young men to impact the livesof the hundreds of people who live within a 300 foot radius of their fraternity. A. Background The members of Alpha 6t Epsilon Fraternity, Inc. (the "Fraternity"), commenced living at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard in 1988. At the time of initial use, they were operating at the Fraternity without a use permit. The City of San Luis Obispo received complaints.about the use-in August 1988 and requested that the Fraternity make a use permit application. The Fraternity responded by letter and indicated that they were,pre.paring.an application. Several months passed and no application was received. After the.City received additional complaints that the apartments at the site were continuing to be used as a Fraternity and that the behavior of the residents was objectionable to themeighbors, the City Attorney The Promontory cited the residence for .a zoning violation. The Court heard the case on April 26, 1989 and found members operating the Fraternity without a use permit and placed 41_Higucra Screcc the Fraternity on probation for.one year. One requirement.of that probation was that the Fraternity apply fora use.permit within thirty days of the April date. The 5a„L,,;,Obispo Fraternity applied on June 6, 1989,.about six-weeks after the judge's action. The use permit application included plans to remodel and add to the apartments and to California 934or;667 TELEPHONE: 805.544.1390 FACSIMILE: 305.544.1984 v` ;Honorable�City Cou_ncil�-Members September 2'_.1997 Page 2 construct a,parldng lot at the rear. The original design of the two apartments included two bedrooms aat720 Foothill ,and three bedrooms Anda llivmg,room at'726 Foothill Both of'these buildings ap ear to!have •been modified;without per nits-,to celiminate these eliv ng and dining area`sand ` create;additionali beds_ooms. At this Imtialruse permirapplication;the PiAnhing4Commisston heard testimony from several.neightioisdandaowners�of adjacent properties. Much-of the testimony relateTd,to specifieµproblem_s;caused`.by theF=eternity members and their _guests,with,noise;pailanggprollems; panics'and°other disruptive,behavior. Testiniony was:also presented%y otlier�ctt gM w !4do not live;or own propeify ,near the sue;,'bu`t who were,priorneiglibors when{tlie:Fraternity-was s tuated,on. Palm;Street Eventually;;because;of- ghbor�c_ &ffit_4 hi tataniry's'use permit fo= the:Palm:Street location`was revoked.by.fhe;PlanninglCommiss on ;Based upon this pubhc testimonythe Planning Commission'in considering. the applicauonF#or the Fraternity's use'p�ermitron August 9,.1989,,found.aliat the useswas-incompatible with e,' eigliborhood[a d a�thieat to�the health;,safety;and F welfare or persons hgmgor,workingnearby�and;demed;thelpermiL The n:. Council,dim-gree'-d, an approve a L :' use,permit�for the Fraternity m�AOAl of11991,-provtdet.theTraternnity'comply. >" ivOw 11on :cditions dealing witu noise:aad extent'of use, B,. .-site D ccribtinn,_, f The site :zoned R-4,As a large Lshaped;lotjcontammgtwo,one story) ' buutl`dtngs at the'front of.ethe1siterand`als all storage shed on[he baek,portion of the L: The area in between the two buildings is a payed parlang lot- commodatiii 12 cars` The,site is surrouudedliy apartments otr three sides', and is across the streei. froinr�a shoppingcenfer. Thereaare 1'02;;apartments within 300°feet of the,site-and 41 m__ ore nearby. My client's apartinenf.complex, the Lanai Apar[me_nts; have bedroomsrwitliin six>feet of the sharedlgroperiy line. - o. .. _ _ - C. Th S orage Shed Pernuts for construction,of a "Storage Shedr were filed;wtth,the),San Luis Obispo City Bnildmg Department in the Spring of.1992 Altliough.ostensibly in[end`ed:for storage, it was cl'eaaaaar frotu the the use lustorysof;the sued,that. tlie'bnildng was°never intended for that ruse: Followmg;thetconstructton of'the storage sued m March'„092, t$ere,were tact easedrioseadisturbanees and.DAC ,violations at the site [see Exhibit Aattached.hereto] - :Eventually-j$ecause,of the ongoing d turbances,`d srupaygibehavior and+;excessive volume ofxnoise , particularly at night, neighbors filed a' complaint ah the,City,and reotsted'that the use o'f a�shed as arre&eati& al'f rdlity lie investigated 0f.Jantiaty 6, 1_995; at the:one year':admmstrative review o£tfie use permit.allowing;`a frte"rnt the r t W� ry ^f •. it -" it. n r t S � % � '' � ,IS;�. Honomble'City-Ci3ad :Members . September;2, 1'99T a Page 3 ;Mti;the heanng,officer,noted that "arc ompIaint was received:and Itlie Eaternity]� re presen[auveradmowled'ged the use of an aI�xi iary;`sstructure_[the,,s£o ' haSltalileispace- They eanng•officer concluded hat"`Further se ofah sispaceris '' ` piolubi[edlunless or unill the.structure�meets;occupancyrequirements�and�isx.y deaazed for,use Yet,on.October 4,1995 „the City,of�SanFLi isiObispo sent�a'letterr. to the Fratemltynotmgtlthat thes tortied been converted toa,reerea[IonE room with a bar'in clear;violation of SanlLuis is OA' umcipal Code Sections 's ' nw` f• M-C ,17:22 OJ10(use pTr`mit'o a"non),i�U"A`C 30(alteied,s>tzucture);;and 1001(IN);(improper occupancy). More%than a;m_o h�later; in'jaCityof;San.L`uis �' t a ObispoPCorrecnon Notice„u w`a"slnoted that the permitted storage room that . i. "converted into,a;recrealion room$tlll_remamc." `The Fraternity then requested'an amendment to�the use permirthat would r1 + ry.., '�_ x ? , sanction their7uiiproper u f the rage shed;`Again,gthe Re-ighboring residents .N x ?k. appealed to�the Planning Commission�toydenyYt!9'eipfan&d use ,Ona , . , , 0.0 ��� � Q , z ihe,Pllan�aing Commission denied the recreatlonaltiuse of the storageEfacllity,ona Tebrua '14' 11996.. N. n}�� On January 17;4T997; Heanng Office Ronald Whlsenand again condom nctedFa e. 'L °2-year'pubhc ehew of theusepentm for;thezFrate ty` Atm-4 t bearing,-lie approved onnnuation of the ns as�nbj ctto several condi[ions r'Amongfithese��>x i �� "condi[ions was the ey}lress�a iiirements that``8 The site she 1111 be•maintained in•at .1” :��_._Y_0. -,p _r Q i - 'a...t ,... clean and orderly manner Thereat yardarYeashall no[b�e�used for storageiof x funnture•or oilier Items;-except inside the}storage building'F Ag,-the-.c ntly taken r attaclied"photographs show,[ftachedias�EAubit'B], th"e Fraternity hasrmain[ained s _ m " ankiongoing violation.of this condl�-- ti or quite:some time r ~r � y _D Tlh onverciolrf th oStns a Shed to=Bedroornc - - - t 1 4 � 1. .,.� ,� _ n y 1H. '9 Lh•y Despite ongoingno se vl latlons„compla� rots ands problems with the _ Fraternity imW current l COeo anon the Fraten ty no io ores`to modsLry the storage ' '^ -do I.:.-_ !'� .-rj fn i l '>. PptokMo=/ gr shed,to twollbedrooms and a bath The Fratesnitywould have;thi°s City�Councif overlook the con'tlnuou`swibl`ations associated WithLtlie sforageished ari_d"thelaet, — .�.I ter. .-�L.f :.: 1 f"-�' r _ f � . that the storage shed has been improperlyyusedor illegal purposes since it was` 6yr constructed 'Even as of August_5,1997, thetiFraternity was inaclear violation of condition-8 of its,use penmt concezning the use 6 Ahe,siorage shedsas the` photographs,in Exhibit B show. At my:dients,request;,)eacWdf you,liad;tlie opportunitytolsee for yourself that d e:;Fraterintyfdoess notl appear'capable`of v r F complying wlthFthe clear requirements ofits use permit .•� s b :. f ! is 1 , f Moreover, the storage shed is located within six feet-of.eleven.bedrooms, with 33 Hints s] anngutlie'Iback,proplerty dine T e°Appliccant,would like^to ersuad`e' p� } thisCity Councilrthat the residents ofrthesconverted tructure will "•most likely be I, �^ ;jiiniors,or seniors�an will�have llvedi,at4,the,fra.`temity.�for oneFto two years They � will be more mature andwell aware of'neighbor noise issues and concerns','Thisb rn i Honorable City Council Members• Septemb i2, 1997 Page is simply`-"mere speculation andIn fact runs contrary:to the rdd'e and^disruptive; altitude that All"TriterniymenNesand guesfs have,takewwhen,asked to quiet - down. j'See,letter,of Ratidall�Gehlen attached fiereto;as�Exliiliit C]'.To date;`none'of' the F,raterni y,members:has d`emdustrated.lhat jihey'ha*e the requisite level of .__ matunry or consideration'that warrant any expanded use�of the property', - K _ - whatsoever: According to tP.he Apphcant'sbapplicationj the reasohofor requesting t$'e conversion is to".`provid'e"�for no mal;arid reasonable dining accommodations." I world sugge§-thA thi9e5accommodatioiisfqlready,existe1dbefore the Fra"ternrty's � 'illegalmodificaton of the structures 'iIf they;desire additional'dining space,,there is no reason`thartliey could n66elimJiiate one;of the ibedrooms to retum the. ' structure-to its:•o`nginal:condition,with:-,a full':li'ving and dining area.. ;• E The:Firn rid d� lc 'Mus Not B _San tjon d'. �' y CityStaff...recommendsaa denialr.of the.use permirapplicaUion,; Tliey` correctly=note the noise probl'eins,rnherent in a Fraternity residence situation and introductionjof new livi g;spaceam close,prommity tomeighbonng residences. Aff' change that could provide more space and parry area! !id any of,the Fraternity's residents is'`anxinvitanonrformo=e�noise problems Tlie block wall adjacenud the' i back,edge of the :;property is clearly msufficient�to,protect:nearb..:occupants from ^ ` ' s. increased noisesand activity. Bedrooms>m the adjacen"t apartmentbuildings are very cl'oose torproperty lines and�uliierableaonoise`in the}rack area of"the f� Fraternity houses Any intensification ofAuse;'given the sensitivityofahe site,;is; likely;io have a negative effect on the ueighborhoodl A`r_eview of the planningCommis siongt=anscnpt indi'caates thaf some`:" members of the commission believed that permitting�liedfOrds1ii'tUstorage shed, would imn,m, e tfie noise concerns It;would;appear that;t hisxharacierizat on;by the planning Commission was„liase7d�on thesinappropnateassumption.,that the `tgiageshed was"and eould,be`nsed a-s:a recTe_ational area not as.ihe;storage shed [was pemutted)`to be. f r example„a+Commissioner,`stated19 guessothe• question I have that comes to minds is'the usenthat's beingrtnoved'to'the front of the property away from the neighb s,is1what we+could term reereationahuse or dining use, depends on!how late the dining goes 'So ig st really impacting"the neighbors more,by t4ving+the bedroom use°m the]back?'''[See excerpt of transcript of July 9, L 4-997T- Hearing attached!heretgas Exliiliit D] Fur-"they;.despite an utter4ack,of authori_ for the ro ositioni, one of,the Planning-Commissioners rehedldhsthe fact that hVstorag shed;bedrooms wouldlie'",occupied by-more seniorrstudents�who will be quieter 1[Id ] Finally, oneYof the other commissionersiobserved that"I'm more in'fivor of allowing a`use�that'ts ---owe 'to occur on the site irrespective,of.it,'betng�handled liy fraternity peoplebecause I j tliink weigh eady=have snfficrent ways'to,;mitigate any actMfiesrth`at'are rmpa¢ting , the neighborhood:"I[Id!>i]I As,the conriniiediuse:and permit,violations'by�ikc., ,, `. :;Honorable:Ci CoiuncilMembers 'September 2, 1997 - Page 5 Fratermtgmdicate, the.present means:of tniagauoh,gje insufficient•. Moreover,•it s unfair tobtheotlier neighborhood occupants to''iequire them to constantly ask their neighbors to be:quiet;toube subjected to uncivilized:responses and,to:come liack yet' again before tliis City Couneil,to request that'the en a=use permit be eliminated: The burden should ndt , The�Apphcant.must-bring,forth the) evid`enceithat is activity;and requested,-use ill w ,nor further unpact the surrounding; residences ;This it has not,done,and cannot'do` The Appellantsarequest to deny , alie,exparided�usepermit shotl_d, therefore,!be:;granted! -' _ r Respectfully subitiittedi ,. J.EN C K'S• 'LAW G R OU^P.. lei- - B Dawn K.M 4 cGee Enclosure_s - �.dl��On1II�IDGIDOS�CI COO.mm . r _ Inc, ``'' }1 Date. .. . Shared Index Index Brorse NV L �r/�ya� ncNo, Or#11■ kecel Date/ /1 ■ Loca tion/ 1111111/1011110/1111/11111 NVER DRAll 9225404 15972 11:54 @5-05-92. 720 FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9232533 10813 88:10 07-66-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9232995 63260 22:52 07-093-'32 720 FOO *HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9233808 27775 00:06 61-10-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9236577 59350 01:02 08-01-92 720 FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 . 9241168 29965 10:38 09-14-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 545 9 9244445 60646 22:41 10-09-92 720 FOOMILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 - 9314612 E2 21:15 02-62-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 4501 1 9314813 44758 21:16 02-02-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 1331 9 9336068 39356 17:25 68-14-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 � 9339232 88690 22:20 0'3-12-33 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9343446 886% 61:25 16-16-93 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9346068 8865d 01:02 11-06-93 720 FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312. 9413804 73190 17:46 62-02-94 720 FOOTHILL 54 '3415766 1343'305 01:01 02-19-34 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531' 9419626 9.3964 66:12 03-19-94 720 FOOTHILL YL. (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 942 52 99%J 00:03 04-02-34 720 FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9421335 88646 62:53 64-69-94 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9424761 99945. 00:54 d5-i8-9k729 FO.O(HILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312. 9427.127 99963 23:06 66-02=94 720 FOOTHILL X (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9436159 E2 21:02. d8-16-34 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 45 94:16166 16813 21.:02 08-16-94. 720 FOOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5415 9 9439'3'38 88048 12:24 d9-18-'34 720 FOOMILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9442404 31885 15:29 i6-08-94 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 55 ' 444813 '3'3.305 23:16 10-28-'34 7'20 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 _�� r951416928 90756 15:13 11-15-94 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 513889 91170 00:03 02-02-35 '720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 '1327 10813 16:'34 63-61-95 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 527855 999@7 @0:37 06-02-95 728 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9532982 56675 23:16 87-68-55 720 FOOIHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) `,:312 � 953'3142 33810 23:46 09-09-35 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9540497 99967 23:20 69-15-95 720 F001HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9547878 91110 23:43 11-08-95 720 FOOTHILL 8L UELTA UPSILON) 5312 9548014 99966 66:09 11-16-95 720 FOOTHILL K (DELIA UPSILON) 5:312 9612575 83990. 15:34 01-22-96 720 FOOTHILL 8L CDMA UPSILON) 2320 9 220 2Ltp4,,z le'�-T� ,2325 .. "perry TKa irT Exhibit A j,j( Snared index browse I�{a' No. ;OP#■ aa . kecel. Date. . . . ..Locat3.ona ■ aaaasaaooa0asaaaaaaaaaaa ■ NVER DROB 9216837 _3:'317 X4:34 02-23-'32 14@' F�'tRINI RD ..(LANAI. APfS) 2325 . .9225917 73'542 . 17:43. ,6b= 6-%2, 7724DOTHILL BL (FOOTHILL APTS) 5312 9229517 65852 89:31 0640-92 .EOOfHILL 8L- 8 F£RRINI RD 5587 9231851 66456 : _66:45 66-36-92 166 FERRINI RU; 8LK OF 5227 9233889 13942 .15:26 07-16-32 771 tOOT"HILL 8L (LUEKYS) 8365 9244445 6@646 22:41 16-69-92 726 FOOTHILL 6L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5311 9252@67 66646 ' 22:2'3 12-17-92 710 FOOTHILL 6L, 4 531' 9252166 59356 16:21 12-18-92 266 MADONNA RD 5584 9 9318584 15972 @7:@3 01-06-33 148 i=ERRINI RD, 6 5818 9 9311456 159/2 15:57 61-13-93 146 FERRINI RU (LANAI APTS) 2325 9 9312984 45852 22:22 @1-24-33 14@ rERRINI RDS9 5818 9 9322772 88648 22:44 64-16-93 146 FERRlNi RD (LANAI APTS) 5X 9343440 88690 01:25 10-16-93120 EOOrHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9346666 88696 ' 1W 11-d6-9;3 726 FOOTHILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) 5"312 9415166, 99'305: 81:01 @2-1'3-'i4 720 FOOfHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 531e 9418755 66456 '66:38 63-#r 94•..716 F-061HILL 6L, .8 5312 l42I7fi@ 56450 23:41 64-12-'i4: [/1 FOOTHILL 8L (LUEKYS) ` 1390 94 4.1 '1 99'x:415: 6e 54 65-08-94� 720 Fuui"HiLL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) b3 . 942�g-71.. 3131t_ 23a24.: 05-1@-34. 771 FOOTHILL 8L (LUCKYS) 531' 943144% 45852: B:47 6a-38794 975 FOOIHiLL 8L GOOlHiLL SQUAME) 5312 94,rA2.4 2NSLa 23:4.4 @9-15-it 176 FOO-fHILL 8L ( OOfHILL SQUARE) 5312 43592-3 959ps- 22:56 69-17-94 6a6 F061HiLL BL 5312 '3511321 10813: 16:34. @3-01-35 120 FOOL-HILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 9519444 4be:8 22:54 63-13=95 352 FLRRIN! RD 5312. '3522`148 8858'3: 1'3- @3 04-11-93 140 EEriKNI RD (LANAI AV@ 232 9523764 99b6::31 4-28-95 975. F001HILL HL (FUUTHiLL SQUARE) 5312 '3521 s:i- '3`3'se1 06:31 06-02-55 124 WHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 5544464it,- 31885 15:17: 16-14-9 FEkk1NI RD 8 FOOlHiLL BL. 5291. 35 , ' 4 l' 9'3'368: 2,':4'3.. 10-26-95 lid FOO(HILL. 8La 8 5312 9548614. 99906. 66:d9 1146-9:, 20: FOO)HILL BL' (DE'LlA UPSILON) LS ,,V z •v. 4r.e� Z C._XS Exhibit A 1 14 i Shared Index Browse NV L�/ Inc. No, DAB..• kecei Date, ,, , Location, ,,, , , , , ,, , ,, , , ,,,, , ,,, , , , , NVER DR#4 9225404 15912 11:54 05-05-32 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9232533 16813 88:18 87-06-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53't 9232995 63268 22:52 07-09-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9233888 27775 88:86 87-16-92 726 FOOTHILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9236577 59350 81:82 88-87-32 728 FOO�MILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9241168 29965 10:38 89-14-92 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 545 9 9244445 60646 22:41 1@49-92 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531' 9314612 E2 21:15 82-62-93 726 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 458 1 9314813 44758 21:16 02-@2-33 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 1331 9 9336860 5535b 17:25 b8-14-93 728 FOOTHILL ISL (ALPHA UPSILON) 53 9339232 88690 22:2@ 09-12-93 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 934344b 88696 61:25 18-16-93 728 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 934606d 88699 01:92 11-06-93 720. FOOtHILL -BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312; 9413864 73196 17.:46 b2-82-94 726 FOOTHILL 54 .- 941V66 '3944 CAI 02-19-34 720 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 9419626 91964 0012 03-19-94 728 FOOTHILL ISL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 '34213552 999@3 69:93 @4-02-34 720 FOO MILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9421335 88.040 62:853 64-b9-94 720 FOOTHILL ISL (ALPHA atSILON) 5312 � 9424761 99'3t5 NZ-54 9S-0-414 720 FOOMILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 942-1,/2? 9.9963 23:86 b6-62-94 720 FOOTHILL ISL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5311 9436159 t2 :.;:- 21::.02 08-16-94 720 FOdt'HILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 450 943616b MD 21:02 66-16794 726 F•OOMILL ISL (ALPHA UPSILON) 541`,`9 -343.3'3.30 gaA 12:24 09-18-94 720 FOOTHILL 8L (ALPHA UPSILON) 23�5j 9442464 31885 15:2� A-08-94' 120 FOO!HILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) bb 944.461ts an-m 23:1@ 10-28-34 120 FOOTHILL k (ALPHA UPSILON) 531 4 &Wb 9675b 15:13 11-15-94 72b FOOTHILL 1SL (ALPHA UPSILON) 2325 9 9513849- 9177@ 90:t3 0242-35 '721 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9517321 16813 16:34 63-81-95 728 FOOTHILL K (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9521855 99907 0@:31 86-02-35 120 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9rrs3n82 56675 23:1.6 0-148-95 72b FOOTHILL ISL. (ALPHA UPSILON) `312 � 9539142 33814 23:.56 09-09-35 120 FOOTHILL BL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 95484:97: 959907 23:20 09-15-95 720 FOOTHILL ISL (ALPHA UPSILON) 5312 9547818 91.11@ 23:.43 11-08-35 120 FOOTHILL BL (DELTA UPSILON) 531.2 9548014 99906. 60:89. 11-10-95 720 FOOTHILL bL (DELIA UPSILON) 5312 '3612515 833911 15:34 01-22-96 120 FOOTHILL BL (17£LTA UPSILON) 2320 9 Z X20 ; (�O.2A� Exhibit A ICZ4 PAG.E.: 1;: 11:47:02 14 JAN 199 Locatioi . . . NCIC as ...Verified. . . . . DISPOSITION. . . . 9622391 04-13-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/C .LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC CALL CANCELED : 9623272 04-19-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC DAC ISSUED 9624237 04-27-96- 720 FOOTHILL BL M/CLOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC DAC ISSUED .962.4303 04-27-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC UNFOUNDED 9636762 08-08-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC GOA UTL : 9642287. 09-21-96 720 .FOOTHILL BL M/C. LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC ARREST 9643253 09-27-96 720 FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD./UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC . GOA/UTL , 9646206_ .10-19-96 726 FOOTHILL BL M/C LOUD/UNREAS NOISE/PUBLIC DAC ISSUED S .Records.: Processed Exhibit A . i . ALL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARIC THROUGHOUT THE YEARS ADO" 'D THESE CONDITIONS_ ALL WERE VIOLATED AS SHOW.. IN THE PHOTOS BELOW S. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. The rear yard area shall not be used for storage of furniture or other items, except inside the storage building. 10. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or conduct of the use so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use, is prohibited and may constitute grounds of revocation of this permit. 11. The use of the shed shall be limited to storage only. PHOTOS TAKEN ON 9-5-97 NIL e ul, � - i` N W August 25, 1997 City Council,City of'San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Re: Appeal- Delta Upsilon Use Permit - 720 tbotltill Dear City Council Members: My wife and I first moved into the Lanai Apartments behind Delta Upsilon Fraternity in the Fall of 1992. During the five years we have lived here,we have endured the noise, profanity, and late night parties put on by the Fraternity. There have been numerous times that my wife and I have been awakened in the early morning hours by loud voices and partying by Delta Upsilon members. The storage shed in which they hold many of these late night parties is located less than 20 feet from our bedroom window. On more than one occasion I have had to ask them to be quiet through my bedroom window. After a Planning Commission meeting in February of 1996, where the Commission denied the fraternity's request to turn the storage room into a "recreation area,"the noise tapered off a bit. While there has still been shouting and profanity late at night,there has not been as many parties next to our bedroom window. We are concerned that the recent use permit allowing the fraternity to convert the storage building into two bedrooms is just a roundabout way of getting their "recreation area." I would also like to mention an incident during the day when members of the fraternity were using their parking lot as a playground,as they often do,and the ball they were throwing shattered one of the windows of our apartment. Broken glass went all over our personal computer. A few days after the window was replaced I heard the ball hit the window again, this time with no damage. When I asked them to refrain from throwing toward the apartments I was replied to rudely. Another game the boys are fond of playing is "smash the stereo,VCR,or some other household appliance." Just recently,they all got together to smash up a couple of mopeds and other assorted items that were laying around near the storage slied (which I believe was their way of cleaning up the area). They all got together with some beer and large sticks and starting beating on the mopeds and screaming profanities. Frankly, I find this behavior frightening. In closing, I urge the members of the members of the City Council not to grant the request made by Delta Upsilon Fraternity. I urge you to take any steps possible to ensure that conduct such as that displayed by these fraternity members is punished rather than rewarded. Please do not allow them to "live"any closer than they already do. z ly, 4 Randall A. Gehlen 140 Ferrini #12 Exhibit C I I guess the question I have that comes to mind is the use that the use that's being put at the back of the properties are bedrooms and the use that's being moved to the front of.the property away from the neighbors is what we could term recreational use or dining use, depends on how late the dining goes. So is it really impacting the neighbors more.by having the bedroom use to the back. I can maybe speak from personal experience. I live next door to a fraternity and almost in every room in that fraternity, they had stereos, and when I was going to school and that's where I had my stereo is in my bedroom. That's fairly close and that's one of the issues we've heard in the past is loud noises late in the evening. So I'll just leave you with that. I think that as a storage, there's not much noise that occurs from a storage building, or shouldn't occur, but as a bedroom, even though people sleep in there sometimes, there will be studying in there, waking up in the morning, getting ready, and that's typically, I like some music when I wake up in the morning. To follow this further, the correct setback is there? Yes, on this property, yes. Is it the correct setback on the property next to it? No, at least not in the rear. Are those apartments to the rear of it? Yes. And the occupancy in those apartments? I don't know the density. I think the owners of the apartment building are here. I'd like to know the type of occupancy when they come up to talk in that apartment building. 22 apartment units, and I'm not sure exactly where those are in relation to how many are actually facing that rear building. Go ahead, David? Has staff contacted the applicant and asked them if they would be willing to mitigate any potential noise from the bedroom by maybe sound? They are willing to make modifications to the building or to their use permit, whatever it takes. To mitigate sound from the bedroom area. As far as that would be possible. 5 Exhibit D It was February 1996 when they came in to ask to have that converted from the shed to the rec room. Right. So it was about a year and four months later. Okay, thank you. to just tough on noticing, I didn't see notices posted at any of the sites for this evening's agenda, so I don't know what's going or not going on, just to let you know it's rampant. Any other questions of staff? Just for my information, how is enforcement handled for the use permit? On a complaint basis. But if somebody complains, then we follow through, if there has been a violation. Complaints to? J To the Community Development Department. Or, of course, if it's direct immediate noise activity, then they call the police, and that's what usually happens. Additionally, when I receive copies of all noise citations, I review each one of them whenever it involves fraternity, I sent Judy a memo and let her know the details of the citation, so there's that double checking system there. Any other questions of staff? Okay, back to my previous question, is anybody prepared to make a motion. I guess if there are no further questions, I'm prepared to move, contrary to staff recommendation, that we approve the amended use permit. Then I'll make just a couple of quick comments in.support of this. It seems to me that the argument that the conversion of bedrooms will create additional opportunities for intense activity in the rear of the property. I would observe just the opposite is likely to happen, or could conceivably happen, because the bedrooms thernsSellyz are, as the applicant has stated, going to occupied by more senior student whn will b Teter In addition, it seems to me some of the activity that now takes place out in the parking lot does take place because there's no other arena for it to occur on the site. It seems to me with the addition of the dining room being enlarged to a common area at 720 Foothill, that there would be some opportunity to carry that on indoors towards the front of the property. You have to remember, too, this is an R-4 neighborhood. It's an intense area, people live in close proximity to each other, there is no issue with the density at this location at this point. There is an enforcement issue, there's a continuing enforcement issue and I don't think this particular proposed, it seems to me this is a fraternity that has cleaned up its act and is trying to improve the type of operation that it runs there overall. So I'm generally not as concerned as staff about the additional dining area, so I would make that motion. 19 Exhibit D 4 Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? I guess I do want to state that I'm not going to support the motion. I will support staff's position. Actually, I have gone through the same thinking John has, and it's certainly a possibility, yet I do have great concerns about the mixing of uses on this site as I stated at the beginning and the potential for enlarging some of those uses. That's it. Anybody else wish to make comments? I think I'll follow-up on that comment. I'm concerned about the intensification of the use on the property. And also the investment in that property which could cost some slowness in denying a continuation of this use permit. I think this is mired in the use permit portion of it as a fraternity use and I can understand the neighbors' concern with noise from the properry. That intensification creating more noise and more problems for the neighbors is a big concern of mine for neighborhood areas in the community and this certainly fits into that. Go for it. The only comments that I would add to it are I believe that the use permit already has sufficient means to control as much as possible in an R-4 neighborhood the activities that are taking place: If we're not making use of them, and we're not enforcing them, that's another whole im. e. But if I'm reading here if no meetings or gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on the site can take place after the hours of 10:00, how do you have a really loud parry with eight people that are only the people living at the site? It doesn't feel to me like we're enforcing what's already on paper. And I don't think restricting the shed from turning into a bedroom is going to make a change in that. So I'm more in favor of allowing a use that is allowed to occur on the site irrespective of it being handled by fraternity people because I think we already have sufficient ways to mitigate any activities that are impacting the neighborhood. And just as a side comment, I don't know that senior students are more or less quiet given that as you get shorter, perhaps you're taking fewer units, and maybe the pressure's not on, so that's not an argument that I would Qive anv creede= to. But I do believe there are enough mechanisms here for us to feel comfortable with, and I would feel comfortable supporting the motion. I'll support the motion also, and my reason is exactly the same as Commissioner Whittlesy stated, coupled with the fact that if they make an additional investment in this property, they are at greater risk and are more likely to adhere to the conditions. Is there any other comments anybody wishes to make? Actually I'll be in support of the motion also, and for all the reasons so eloquently outlined by Mary and John and yourself. And I also feel that, if anything, this could probably be a mitigation to any future noise by placing the bedrooms in the back and bringing any of the activities that they are allowed to do up front away from those apartments, so I think it probably would be a good situation for the neighborhood. 20 Exhibit D rye O August 25, 1997 City Council, City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 Re: Appeal-Delta Upsilon Use Permit- 720 Foothill Dear City Council Members: My wife and I first moved into the Lanai Apartments behind Delta Upsilon Fraternity in the Fall of 1992. During the five years we have lived here,we have endured the noise,profanity, and late night parties put on by the Fraternity. There have been numerous times that my wife and I have been awakened in the early morning hours by loud voices and partying by Delta Upsilon members. The storage shed in which they hold many of these late night parties is located less than 20 feet from our bedroom window. On more than one occasion i have had to ask them to be quiet through my bedroom window. After a Planning Commission meeting in February of 1996,where the Commission denied the fraternity's request to turn the storage room into a "recreation area,"the noise tapered off a bit. While there has still been shouting and profanity late at night,there has not been as many parties next to our bedroom window. We are concerned that the recent use permit allowing the fraternity to convert the storage building into two bedrooms is just a roundabout way of getting their "recreation area." I would also like to mention an incident during the day when members of the fraternity were using their parking lot as a playground,as they often do,and the ball they were throwing shattered one of the windows of our apartment. Broken glass went all over our personal computer. A few days after the window was replaced I heard the ball hit the window again, this time with no damage. When I asked them to refrain from throwing toward the apartments I was replied to rudely. Another game the boys are fond of playing is "smash the stereo, VCR,or some other household appliance." just recently,they all got together to smash up a couple of mopeds and other assorted items that were laying around near the storage shed (which I believe was their way of cleaning up the area). They all got together with some beer and large sticks and starting beating on the mopeds and screaming profanities. Frankly, I find this behavior frightening. In closing,I urge the members of the members of the City Council not to grant the request made by Delta Upsilon Fraternity. I urge you to take any steps possible to ensure that conduct such as that displayed by these fraternity members is punished rather than rewarded. Please do not allow them to "live"any closer than they already do. z ly, 4 Randall A. Gehlen 140 Ferrini #12 Will NAM • I�� / i Mpff dil/ IMMMUN Iia WA / !.�/. •' Ie :_� �►y1/ I i I i •� �I i ';A* 101 ! ■ / I -- -- - - - - - - w -K - --- U vv� PI (i . -- cl c c� , �� r, _' a s_ I .■R � �� J r r �� �i � • WAY PAN M I b I� I1/ i � i ^ � �l 1 �4� � � r' �yf G dfi / ABY$ ft 1 w r - K� }K Yy i Altr . ,- � ��'�'�., -�"5'�'- �'&`- ,f :�2r'` s"' -..�:yx;� �,'�'i'; � 1 i�a��� ���YEyv�r�'� ._.:.<�'�'—�"„=_.:_. r r +5•�}),... °";i^r-�-!}.. 4 r 3 P i ` ! L,(JT �eG F`LA'S° HOLIJE a, \ a } T } T — __ ....... .. ... ' : s f .,, �� w,''�r �!' ,y .>.� ..,,.,. .,,,- ,.,.< �,.�`' .,ate^.-�.}�� ♦ - 7 � ,I Sa a T S? "a_" i ._t�. f1l IT, V _.. _IRA'— TD 'Ar?K i G TOT 3 � a � n x M• w 9—SF-I,ED 11±.0303 92F31VAT 2 0 FT 17 _TW F`T?L'-" A TT _ 9--E,HC rj FARKS IPTG L.'DT PF nA a-van a x y n l 6 "m � -�v zi�� ,v Y^'C;^•'� L� '.-\ .�.? L b y'l`i�Y i iT+' I r " v HxSv, x �S 5 :�w � a N� i .r x sx' l �`✓ f r i' P 4 J � k N 3 d ,.,y. .,,.. � z •.,`� �'� ;�5^-,+s asa • � ����,..-f��'��,e;.:�; "�m`� �,�,,�3'���, ��?�� "',-�s=."lif-.* `fie 4 iy�. ��r� � . , 21 r Ste,CC5/.4'✓."h3VdaYF' :cr.yZ,1 Novi VZ Wof FROM TI AMY! E3APTS—SHEET3 Sc ArT. CCS Tom`-TJ RE i•T :-IT �i�O:J ?FT 19— 03HET7 s FAP.3SS 3G L.CT A counat ° Da. j acEnaa nEpoin CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Arnold Jonas, Director of Community Development Qq0 Prepared By: Bill Statler,Director of Finance JJ John Mandeville,Long-Range Planning Man g SUBJECT: Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report eparation CAO RECOMMENDATION • Approve a contract with the firm of Walace Roberts & Todd for consultant services in the amount of$627,322 for preparation of a specific plan for the Airport Area, related facilities master plans and an environmental impact report • Approve a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $82,322 to fully fund the contract as follows: General Fund: $44,182 and Utilities Enterprise Funds: $38,140. • Amend the interim airport area annexation fee from $15,328 to $15,538 in order to reflect this increased cost from earlier estimates. DISCUSSION Overview Pursuant to previous Council direction, the consultant selection process for the Airport Area specific plan, related facilities master plans and environmental analysis is reaching a conclusion.. After a rigorous review and interview process, staff is recommending the firm of Wallace Roberts & Todd (WRT) to lead a team of consultants to complete the work. Wallace Roberts & Todd is a fine which included Ian McHarg, author of"Design with Nature", as an original partner. The focus on the environmental setting and existing natural processes has remained fundamental in the firms approach to planning. With regard to the City's project, WRT proposes to evaluate environmental considerations at the outset, and as a reference throughout of their planning and design process, rather than as a requirement in the final phase. All of the involved City departments support the selection of the team lead by WRT. The scope of work has been finalized to the mutual agreement of staff and WRT. Upon contract approval by the Council,the WRT team will begin their work,consistent with the time-frame previously presented to the Council. Background/Brief Summary of the Consultant Selection Process The consultant selection process included the following milestones and resulted in the selection of the consultant team described below: Council directed staff to issue a request for proposals for consultant March 11, 1997 preparation of a specific plan for the Airport Area, master plans for related water, sewer, drainage facilities, and environmental review documents for these plans encompassing the Margarita Area. March 27, 1997 RFP was distributed to about 70 firms and advertised in the Hawkins/Mark- Tell consultant newsletter. April 21, 1997 Pre-proposal meeting held at City Hall to answer consultant questions on RFP. �a Council Agenda Report-Airport Area Specific Plan Contract Approval Page 2 May 29, 1997 Consultant proposals due, eight consultant teams submit proposals. A staff team consisting of the Community Development Director, Finance June 23, 1997 Director, Utilities Department Director, Public Works Department Director, Long-Range Planning Manager, and an Associate Planner ranked the proposals and"short-listed"three consultant teams. June 24 to July 20 Team members conducted extensive background and reference checks on the "short-listed"firms. The three top ranked consultant teams were interviewed by a staff team July 21, 1997 consisting of Community Development Director, Finance Director, Utilities Department Director, Assistant City Administrative Officer, Long-Range Planning Manager, Public Works Manager, Natural Resources Manager, and Economic Development Manager. As outlined in the RFP,proposals were evaluated based on the following criteria: • Understanding of the work required by the City • Quality and responsiveness of the proposal • Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of the work required by the City • Recent experience in successfully performing similar services • Proposed approach in completing the work • References • Background and related experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this project • Proposed compensation While compensation was just one of many factors considered in selecting the recommended, the following is a summary of proposed compensation by the three finalist firms: Short-Listed Consultants Proposal Cost Wallace Roberts&Todd $651,400 Robert Bein,William Frost&Associates 621,700 Envicom 847,600 As discussed below, the WRT final proposal costs have been reduced by $24,100 based on subsequent negotiations with them in finalizing the workscope. It should also be noted that while the three finalist costs ranged from $621,700 to $847,000, other proposals ranged as high as$1 million. Summary of Project Team Qualifications The consultant team headed by WRT was chosen as the best qualified to do the work needed by the City. WRT is an environmental planning, urban design, landscape architecture and architecture firm with a philosophy that environmental conditions should be a determinant of design. They have experience with numerous relevant projects. The WRT team includes the following sub- consultant firms: • Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc. - An environmental science consulting firm well known for wetland restoration projects and environmental impact report preparation will have the lead . responsibility for identifying environmental design considerations and preparing the EIR. Airport SP Contract.doc y-� Council Agenda Report-Airport Area Specific Plan Contract Approval Page 3 • David Taussig and Associates, Inc. -A firm specializing in municipal finance and development economics will have the lead responsibility for preparing the financing plan. • Fehr and Peers Associates-A traffic and transportation planning firm with City experience will have the lead responsibility for preparing the circulation plan. • Boyle Engineering - A national engineering firm with a local office and experience in the City will have the lead responsibility for preparing the water and storm drainage master plans. • Brown and Caldwell -A national utilities engineering firm with experience in the City that will have the lead responsibility for preparing the wastewater master plan. What Follows Executing the Contract After the Council approves the consultant contract, staff and the consultant team will begin work to complete the needed plans as quickly as possible. Even so, as previous staff reports have noted, the planning process will likely take up to 18 months. The hearing process for adoption of the plans will take an additional 4 to 6 months. Annexation proceedings for property in the Airport Area will take several additional months. The focus of the planning will be to integrate existing City policy, environmental design practices, and infrastructure plans. To do this the consultant team will prepare the environmental analysis and infrastructure plans concurrently. The planning process will be multi-disciplinary with feedback on a variety of levels to produce practical plans that are uniquely oriented to the Airport Area and the City. The detailed scope of work is incorporated by reference into the consultant contract and is available for review in the Council reading file. The consultant team's work will include infrastructure plans, an infrastructure financing program, and an environmental impact analysis addressing the infrastructure master plans and the Airport Area and Margarita Specific Plans. Because the Airport Area and the Margarita Area will share many infrastructure components, the planning and environmental analysis will analyze the two areas together. This will provide the best possible integration and coordination among the public facilities and mitigation measures associated with eventual development in the two areas. The consultant team will also analyze alternative locations for the City's Urban Reserve Line to seek a solution for the problem of annexing the industrial property south of the County Airport (Strassbaugh et al)while possibly leaving the Airport as an unincorporated property. Stakeholder Involvement In The Process An important consideration in this effort is developing a strategy for keeping stakeholders and interested parties informed of progress and issues as milestones in the process are reached. The planning process will include a public outreach program that will disseminate information through several vehicles including newsletters, an internet web site for status reports, Council Notes, and Town Hall meetings. The City's Economic Development Manager will serve as a liaison to property owners during the planning process. Individuals who provided funding for the planning and who helped develop the RFP will be provided with briefings as requested and as project milestones are reached. Similar briefings will also be offered to any community group or Airport SP Contract.doc 11-3 PCoun�Agenda Report-Airport Area Specific Plan Contract Approval interested individuals who request them. There are many stakeholders involved in this planning effort. The outreach program will be designed to provide access to project information and status reports to anyone with an interest. With regard to the Council's consideration of approving the consultant contract, City staff has kept those property owners contributing to the funding of the specific plan informed throughout the consultant selection process. All property owners have been sent notice of the September 2' Council meeting and the related staff recommendation. Other interested parties have also been provided information concerning the September 2'd action (e.g. Manufacturers' Association, ECOSLO). FISCAL E%IPACT As summarized below, the proposed contract will cost $627,322 compared with a current project budget of$545,000: Cost Summary Budget WRT Airport Area Other Areas Total Proposal Variance Infrastructure Plans Water 70,000 30,000 100,000 107,611 7,611 Sewer 70,000 30,000 100,000 66,700 (33,300) Circulation 70,000 70,000 59,650 (10,350) Storm Drainage 70,000 70,000 107,989 37,989 subtotal-Infrastructure Plans 280,000 60,000 340,000 341,950 1,950 Financing Plan 50,000 50,000 25,500 (24,500) Urban Design Plan/Plan Preparation 75,000 75,000 120,500 45,500 Environmental Impact Report 80,000 1 80,000 109,372 29,372 TOTAL-BASE PROJECT 485,000 60,000 545,000 597,322 52,322 Optional Services Record of Survey 17,200 17,200 Planimetirc Mapping - 12,800 12,800 TOTAL-ALL SERVICES 1 485,000 60,000 1 545,000 1 627,322 1 82,322 As reflected above, our cost estimate for the infrastructure planning work was very close to the proposed cost by WRT-within$1,950. The major cost variances are in the areas of environmental review,plan preparation,and optional surveying and mapping work as follows: ■ Environmental review. The proposed cost is about $29,000 more than we originally estimated. We believe there are three key reasons for this: • The environmental issues are more complex than we originally envisioned. • Performing the environmental review concurrently with plan preparation allows environmental conditions to determine the design approach and allows for any needed mitigations to be an integral part of the recommended plan. While it is more desirable to design a project to fit into its environment than to analyze the environmental effects of a project atter completing a design,it is a more expensive approach. Airport SP Contract.doc �- y Council Agenda Report-Airport Area Specific Plan Contract Approval Page 5 • Alternatives will be evaluated in greater depth than is normally the case. ■ Plan preparation. While costs for preparing an urban design plan and drafting the specific plan were included in our initial estimate, we did not specifically include costs for project management and coordination. At this point, it is clear that simply managing this project and ensuring adequate "stakeholder" involvement — given the number of separate disciplines involved, its overall complexity and level of community interest — will be a major work effort on its own. We believe that the increased cost in this area is largely attributable to this factor. In this context, $45,500 represents 7% of the total project cost, which we believe is a reasonable cost for needed project management and community participation efforts. ■ Surveying and mapping. The specific plan could be prepared as a stand-alone document without these optional services, and the initial budget did not specifically include cost for this work. However, they will be useful tools in preparing the plan, and more importantly, will be required at some time in the future during plan implementation. Doing this work now, which will facilitate plan preparation, is the most cost-effective approach to accomplishing what will be needed later. Funding the Supplemental Costs As detailed below,we recommend that the$82,400 supplemental cost be funded as follows: General Fund $44,182 Utilities Enterprise Funds 38,140 TOTAL $82,322 Allocation of Financing Plan and EIR Costs The recommended allocation of costs by funding source is based on a combination of direct cost areas for infrastructure and plan preparation, and an apportionment of financing and EIR costs to these"direct cost" categories. This ensures that the enterprise funds pay their fair share of the costs of preparing financing plans and performing environmental review on those components of the specific plan that benefit them: Direct Financing Plan EIR Cost Percent Allocation Percent Allocation TOTAL Infrastructure Plans Water* 112,711 30.3% 7,727 22.9% 25,033 145,471 Sewer* 71,800 19.3% 4,922 14.6% 15,947 92,669 Circulation 59,650 16.0% 4,089 12.1% 13,248 76,988 Storm Drainage* 127,789 34.4% 8,761 25.9% 28,382 164,932 Urban Design/Plan Prep 120,500 24.5% 26,763 147,263 TOTAL 492,450 100.0% 25,500 100.0% 109,372 1 627,322 * Includes apportionment of record of survey and planimetric mapping services totalling$30,000 as follows: water (17%--$5,100);sewer(17%--$5,100;and storm drainage(66%--$19,800). Airport SP Contract.doc y s' Council Agenda Report-Airport Area Specific Plan Contract Approval Page 7 Budget Airport Area Other Total Revised Variance Water Fund 70,000 30,000 100,000 145,471 45,471 Sewer Fund 70,000 30,000 100,000 92,669 (7,331) Utilities Enterprise Funds Subtotal i 38140 CDBG 171,000 171,000 171,000 - Property Owners 155,000 155,000 155,000 - General Fund 19,000 19,000 63,182 44,182 ,TOTAL.-BASE PROJECT 4851000. _^ 60,000_ .: $45,000 627,322:1 82,322 Interim Airport Area Fees The current interim airport area fees are based on an estimated plan cost of$390,000 (low end of the cost range, exclusive of the estimated cost of$60,000 for water and sewer plans for the balance of the City - 11% of the total estimated cost). To reflect the increased cost of this plan, it is recommended that the interim planning fee be increased from $15,328 per developable acre (excluding open space fees of$2,500 per acre) to $15,538, an increase of$210 per acre (1.4%), summarized as follows: COSI Cost Per Acre" Original Cost 390,000 $488 Revised Cost(ExcludingCity-Wide Portion Estimated 11%of Total 558,000 698 Variance - ... 210 Current Fee Per Acre 15,328 Revised Fee Per Acre $15,538 ' Based on 800 developable acres per the Interim Airport Area Annexation Financing Plan Fiscal Impact Summary While the cost of this work is greater than we originally estimated, we believe it is reasonable given the preliminary nature of our initial cost estimate, the other proposals we received, and the overall complexity of this project. Accordingly, we recommend appropriating additional resources needed ($44,200 from the General Fund and the balance from the water and sewer funds). It is important to note that while initial City costs will be higher than we originally anticipated, this cost will be fully funded by future development in the area, and our interim fees are recommended for adjustment based on this. ATTACHMENT Agreement with Wallace Roberts&Todd Consultant proposal summary letter ON FILE IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE-AGREEMENT EXHIBITS A. City's request for proposal for consultant services B. Proposal from Wallace Roberts&Todd C. Letter of clarification regarding workscope Airport SP Contract.doc ATORCHMENT 1 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this day of . by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City,and WALLACE ROBERTS&TODD,hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on March 27, 1997, City requested proposals for consultant services for the preparation of a specific plan for the Airport Area, an environmental impact report and related facilities master planning per Specification No.97-38. WHEREAS,pursuant to said request, Contractor submitted a proposal which was accepted by City for said services. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and covenants hereinafter contained,the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of this Agreement is made and entered, as first written above,until acceptance or completion of said services. 2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. 97-38, Contractor's revised proposal dated August 22 1997, and City letter to Contractor dated August 25, 1997 are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement 3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing the services and work products as specified in this Agreement,City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefore compensation as set forth in Exhibit A,attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement 4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement and said specifications. 5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification, or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the Council of the City. 6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, .shall constitute the complete agreement between the patties hereto. No oral agreement,understanding,or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect,nor shall any such oral agreement,understanding,or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. 7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows: City City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Contractor Stephen D.Hammond c/o Wallace Roberts&Todd 121 Second Street San Francisco,CA 94105-3605 8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. AT=: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A Municipal Corporation By: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR b� By: me 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O OO O O O O w a y inoo 0aW) 000tn Oo 00 Doom 0 J ep EQ '4L�a= O NID N LO 0) !.- O Q Q 00 00 1000 N r of 3r fr Oia corgi C-4 60 O7 Q CD mRNr N w r w w V!o'f N ff!r!9 O N N r N 0 r r y� m C C -f w w w M Mw ww wwt9N 4011, mImo::: tmcp C m U N .�' 1: m c0 N N r E E w LL T C 7 E mo) C 00 O O O O .0 8 a N O O N y La a ca VZ C6 r Dei u'i yj U m LL ==;= 61->N9 w w fA w C a Y r r h �"� O - O 00 00 O `d0 _ a n, f� 00 m r U — `' C7 r --iCD A p a L m ':-�: E9 69 N r I* Y C m _:.rw 69 w XCCC — Y m a v; � � td o00000000 0 00 00 00 0 x0000 NN cDCK) O M OtCJ 00 00 DO f�- N10V V V 0 A NO N o $ U O _,:.:.. rM � OPf� NCDr R hQ O � C6-or c0 U) O e9 V!fA r fA 69 r r w cD di fA f7 N N c0 N CD m m .i:.. fA 6%w w fH W3, 6-31613, r O E m m w � mv o0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 O E •� (Q �:;'_: to O N n t0 N O 'O a 7NM EA r r N W c E _. w Ess w W CO a o o O o o 0 00 0 00 0 W oam w a ~- LOo LOtoin o 00 co Z mY E N Nr0 8] NA r O � '.. w� fHwr w rr w m j . 4D ,...:... w fA w L m r m m m — V/ y O G - J cm@ $ o c o ° mCD Q o m a c Q m t O m L m > d com W0 N Y = LLC y L C: CD °LU cn CD >` a m op c W2, an d LL m � � y'': c no >. a0 cE u,),. r.- cQ c c m c c m –m amo W U a C°rnccrn mo •E � � � oo o ? yo0Ea m LL – — W.. � m oaa > Q > o3m �m W E = – a) - - 0 ma O _ y. O y c E o CO am m m ` oij y01LOto = 000000 =0 00000 00000000 00 ,.,p 01001000 - t00 OON 0000100010 N N LO to t--v 1n V 0i0 _ CO CO t00r t0P0O V W 0r OCD � 010 V "�= 0110 r LO 04 -- NOM 'q� , NO m N N t: CSF(S t 603.CM - wwrwwM r r e 60 V ww wwr 6%V).V r r w w w w w w w w to w to - F �Q 0000 O co O O OO W V V ~. --__ CD co aD M N co N ".:_;i: O m COO_ p N N = .,.. N w W w w w w w w O O O = 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 010 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 w O O O O IL Lo NA _ t0000 0 g t0 10 t0 {0 Nr C6 T-7 rM m CO l+j V;{L w w w w w w w w w w w w w O O O O O O O U w wCOp O 0 co 1. w m O C w W w w O o 0 O O O m 000 -- 10 a O -_- M O N O O h A LO tq O - N N O -_ cc O M O O t` 1• mwww - w w Nw N 0 69 NN w w w ww Z:f y 1t0 NN - NNNN oto t1a V r CD -11a'v r r r r to 7 www - wwww w .::LL.• w a 00 00000000 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 O 10 E` ON000� I'�' NN1�N nCCOO� -.:LL.. t0N tONNLO V Nt010 �n NC I� rCA - - V rr r w0: rr CV NNr NM 0101 w w 603161.:p 40 w w w w w w w w Nw w w D.. E g U) f/) M AL. C CJ U Z` m . m c o r t U 3 � y y m c c c E LUf: n ; °C -w: a c m 10 g c to �' mo F. cmccc a m m CD `p; m O m J`: co to H d m 0 Z E F- Q' > a v cd m � d m o c Z_ c m e U Co 06 0om 0 o EE � :. mm v� UyE cts c Ico c a J:.. to W W moi _.-. o >, m2 .. C m E c cW mw m pp a` cmEm mm -~:` mEyolm 0Emm10 oloai cdio —mm. UC _(9 my� mH � « cc W (D OmCOEmo, E � o FLEo m +(7S G m « C 0 .0 SZ` Emcaca :Z' mm :� to « mw - m qa 017 pZ � � :° v :° �: w !j m0 m � > wow nm 0 v CL r c y -C, a 5 7 €y Q: _ m LL y A m m y v E H v fA �im v7rcmcm mr nm ;a:,: am q w. amoom wc2 -- m mn am O � W' eco0Ir0CJ a,. U- 33m0` s3, U5OMti E r � NM 0rNthV toV rNC? 7 'OrNM V O <OP � r MM N.• �„� rr rr r �. rr QNNNNNCV N O M LU r w 1y M U): r _ -. N Q H y N a: F IL F m i. 0000 O O Cl O 0000 OO OO OOO Ln L000 ON 00000 N J NCO V N 00 00 CO CON CSN CO CO NOOOr OC� O M 1-7 CO N CA Of Of r v rl:1`Cn T Cli L W CD Ld T CO CO CD N C+1 1: O - 69-443,49 N LO CA V!W fA C9 EA to W C9 68.69.69!F)M T N N .. CA fa O O O O O O O O O -- W C/4 M O O'O M O O r r N T EA K!CA fn N � W O 00 00 O O O 0000 O O O CA Lr) U) OO 000 O Cn00 OO O CL '_. - NN NIN rrN U')1• NQ co Ln CO LL `= O O r r r T CV Tbl>Nqe T Wq M fA W !A vi w Cf! C N V w w w w w o 0 J T A w O O 0 O O O O 0 0 0 W N W Cn In O 0 0 40 O T T C. (Q (0 H m (fl C19 w �' � V '- N N 0 0 0 0 0 00 000 OOOo N N 000 U) U) 00 000 In 001q N A y }........ CO v O t�- 1-- 00 CO Co N N Ln N CA 1A C7 aV7 N A m O OD l0 r r C•'f T r r < !A 19 tli co W CA&V EA Cfl 419. /A EA C9 rW► CA r CA = 00 0 00 OO 000 o OO 0 0 E0/) ON O N OO 00 IV V � c O < O O 0 N C C N N N N O T N C9 C7 T N 0r7 W IWV!" CH CA V) N NO o0 O O 0 W W W'. 13 E co w` E m o' c ¢ :° o CL W c as a 2' o a m m p Im p; E c p c c o v j:LL< c � m m CL p.. co V d' p c O.c C O d 2 m a �: ." W = O U) = c m c m w of fir•, Z CW O c r_ N ..9'�: C o m m m m a m m c m E m e 05 m �0 � � m Cw � c c F', cW co a = m � 1 � J m c W G _ O in O m 0 :. LL c m ❑ m Q O o o — m •c 2: c m m 3 a E ai m � in o E m w` mLL � w °8 mw � �; "ami E CCO y O U- C n- m pp of in of c in a .�, a = z a m D U v = E 2 m =�. > c A m o m m m m o h m H t7= CD 0 2' IX m m.N ° maw m ° c U o V' ca C j o a � a _ � � m p Z W Ev .. a > ma via m rn �a O p . °�ca v mLL �o m m ; 7G:, c a' ._ o o C C1 m m c c c o AL 4 0 ,0 r my m W H c UU) J., m C � afA � � 06 LLLLd Vr w:., e �oc mH �_ � LLc Q:. � Emo amEm .�, 0 e O C R w 2 l0 c9 ._ ::2 W C •O C c o c d, m4a0 EN � ❑ EaU LL:: QLLQ LLC.) = TNM •pr W r OT N crNM CTN CO CrTT 4 C1 D0 U. 4 .41 LLTrT LLNNN LU T CV C7 R .::W r N lQ: Ym Y Y Y 'WEO Y Y _. m m m m a. F H CL r- y r// = LLACE ROBERTS & TODD ATACHMENT 2 Environmental Planning Urban Design Landscape Architecture Architecture May 28, 1997 John Mandeville Long-Range Planning Manager City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Airport Area Specific Plan, EIR and Related Facilities Master Planning Dear Mr. Mandeville: WRT is pleased to have this opportunity to submit a proposal for consultant services to prepare the Airport Area Specific Plan, EIR and related Facilities Master Plans. This is exactly the kind of important and challenging assignment that excites us professionally, and one for which WRT and the specialized team we have assembled is unusually well qualified. The firms that are joining us for this assignment bring together a unique balance of creativity,technical excellence, and local knowledge and experience. The majority of the team also brings a successful track record of working together on similar specific plan and environmental assessment programs. Wallace Roberts & Todd has an extensive portfolio of similar community planning assignments and through them, we have developed an outstanding track record for successfully implemented plans, particularly in relation to industrial areas and sensitive environmental issues. Jones&Stokes Associates,Inc.will be leading the EIR preparation portion of the project,bringing to bear the extensive experience of over 1,650 completed environmental and natural resource reports and studies completed for public and private clients throughout the western United States. David Taussig and Associates, Inc. will offer their specialized skills in municipal finance and development economics, honed in numerous similar projects completed for public and private clients throughout California and the Southwestern States. The firm was chosen 121 Second Street San Francisco, CA 94105-3605 415 541 0830 415 541 0944 fax Kathleen A. Garcia, ASLA/CA 2371 Philadelphia, PA Coral Gables, FL San Diego, CA Jl�/ 7 WALLACE' -90BERTS v TODD - - -- - - - Mr:John Mandeville May 28, 1,997 Page Two 'for this team because of its reputation for innovative methods and creative .approaches to unique development issues and atypical municipal finance problems. Fehr & Peers Associates provides advanced skills in traffic and transportation planning and engineering for both the public and ,private sectors. They have completed numerous projects in San Luis Obispo and bring in-depth knowledge of local conditions and a head-start on understanding the complex issues associated with the local circulation -issues. Boyle Engineering is a nationally-recognized leader in the field of municipal engineering that also has a local office in San Luis Obispo. Based on its previous work with the City of San Luis Obispo and other San Luis Obispo County communities, the firm brings an invaluable understanding of local infrastructure and service conditions to the project. in addition,their presence in San Luis Obispo will provide a local venue from which the consultant team can operate when in town. I Brown and Caldwell is an internationally recognized civil and environmental engineering firm that applies a dynamic, creative approach to infrastructure issues. Like Fehr&Peers Associates and Boyle Engineering_, Brown and Caldwell brings an understanding of local conditions based on its .previous work on the City's Wastewater Management Plan. We look forward to the opportunity to work with the City,the landowners, and the San Luis Obispo community to create an attractive, environmentally sensitive,and economically viable plan for the Airport Area. We believe that our team can provide the City with a superior product,which can be enthusiastically adopted by the City Council, area landowners, and the community, and which will lead directly to the creation of high quality development in the Airport vicinity, if there is any anything in this submission that needs clarification, or if there is any additional information that I should supply abdut-WRT and its team members, please don't hesitate to call me. Thank your consideration, _tephen D. Hammond anaging Director, San Francisco 7 City of San Luis Obispo - AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, FACILITIES MASTER PLANS, AND EIR Consultant Team Team Qualifications WALLACE ROBERTS & TODD The WALUCE ROURTS&TODD team brings a winning combina- Stephen Hammond tion of qualifications to this project: Project Manager Nationally-recognized design and planning Ruth Dutack,AICD excellence coupled with strong environmental Project Urban Designer and technical expertise; Unique design solutions that derive from and JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES, INC. respond to the local context,including social, Richard Rust cultural,economic,aesthetic and environmental EIR Project Director factors; Environmentally sound development solutions BOYLE ENGINEERING that protect and enhance natural systems while Christine Ferran,PE enriching the human experience; Engineering Project Director Scientific expertise to creatively incorporate environmental factors into successful engineer- BROWN & CALDWELL ing and design solutions; Robert M.Finn Wwwwater Project Engineering Experience with the Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies to expedite necessary regulatory permits; PEERS Jamesamen M..Daisa,P.E. In-depth knowledge oflocal infrastructure and Transportation Project Director transportation issues; A track-record of working together successfully DAVID TAUSSIG AND ASSOCIATES, INC. on similar specific plans and environmental Susan Goodwin assessment projects. Financing Project Director Project interview Monday,July 21, -7 , /