HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/23/2003, BUS 1 - JOINT MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE CONSERVATION & OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF council -A3 D3
j agcnda aEpont ".N t
C I T Y OF SAN L U IS O B I S P O
FROM: John Mandeville,Community Development Directr
Prepared By: Mike Draze,Deputy Community Development Directof"'`-�
SUBJECT: Joint Meeting of City Council and Planning Commission on the
Conservation & Open Space Element of the General Plan (GPA and
ER 149-98)
PLANNING.COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On February 26, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council appoint a task
force to assist with the review of the draft update.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. That the Council and Planning Commission discuss the process for creating a Conservation
& Open Space Element of the City General Plan, and then direct staff to:
a. Update the existing policy comparison chart to make easier the review of the draft for the
public and Planning Commission.
b. At the earliest reasonable time, schedule a series of Planning Commission workshops so
that the Planning Commission has ample time to review the proposed draft, page by page
if necessary, prior to holding formal public hearings on the revised Conservation & Open
Space Element.
c. Proceed to the formal public hearings only after the Planning Commission has completed
the Housing Element Update.
2. After concluding the discussion and receiving input from the Planning Commission, if
consensus is not reached, the City Council should provide staff with direction as appropriate.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF- Overview Comments From the CAO
Beginning the formal review of a proposed Conservation & Open Space Element has proved to
be far more difficult and time consuming than anyone might have imagined when the process
started many years ago. This is unfortunate, given that the end result is expected to be entirely
positive: We will update woefully outdated conservation policies in some areas, and make other
progressive environmental policies easier to find, comprehend, and implement.
The difficulty we have found ourselves in has been somewhat of a surprise to the staff who have
worked on the task. This is because staff has followed a course established by Council several
years ago, utilized a contemporary "consolidation" strategy developed by the State Office of
Planning and Research (also endorsed by Council), and attempted (and at times succeeded) in
Council Agenda Report—Conservation& Open Space Element Process
Page 2
attracting ample and very helpful public input, such as in preparation of a"Species of Local
Concern" listing. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised about the process and the content of
the proposed draft. These concerns should be addressed. Thus far, however; they have been
discussed only in a conceptual way with the focus more on issues associated with"form than
"substance". As an example of how substantive review can help,Attachment 3 is very
important and illustrates the point quite well.
It is staff's hope that at the conclusion of the joint meeting of the Council and Planning
Commission, a strategy can be agreed upon for proceeding that will allow for all concerns to be
raised and substantively addressed through workshop and public hearing discussion and, where
necessary, amendment to the document. With such a process, staff believes that a Conservation
& Open Space Element can be adopted in a timely way —and in a way that protects and
strengthens the environmental ethic and policies of the community. In the absence of such a plan
for proceeding, given the work already before the Community Development Department,
Planning Commission and Council, this task may be delayed for a very long time.
The balance of this report attempts to summarize "where we've been" and then sets forth
suggestions for moving forward in a timely and productive way.
DISCUSSION
A Brief Introductory History
In late 1998, the City Council approved a scope-of-work for updating the 25 year-old Conservation
Element and the 17 year-old Energy Conservation Element. Jones and Stokes was hired to prepare
the update according to the approved scope-of-work. After nearly four years of mapping, analysis,
and public forms, a draft update was completed in early 2002. The draft—which included a matrix
that attempted to outline where the major changes could be found — was previewed with a small
group of citizens who felt that the scope, format and content of the draft and its support documents
were hard to track and compare to existing policy and General Plan text. The group recommended
that a legislative draft be prepared instead of the matrix.
While staff expressed reservations about attempting to prepare a formal legislative draft for such an
undertaking, in an effort to respond to these concerns, staff delayed distribution of the draft by about
six months and prepared a "sign-posted" legislative draft that attempted to track each proposed
change. As expected, the document was unwieldy and was not well received. Nevertheless, three
hearings with the Planning Commission were held, but discussion primarily focused on concerns
about the process, scope, and format of the proposed update. A substantial review of the specific
contents of the draft element has yet to occur.
In response to the concerns presented, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council
form a task force to assist in the preparation of a new update, based on a perception that City
General Plan elements are not updated and adopted without task force involvement. While a task
force could be helpful, the possible advantages must be weighed against the disadvantages of added
` "oZ
l
Council Agenda Report—Conservation & Open Space Element Process
Page 3
time and staff resources. In the past, such judgments have been made based on a sense of how
much policy might be changed through an update process, and a review of recent history shows that
task forces have been used selectively, not consistently, by the City. In the case of the Conservation
& Open Space Element, a task force was not included in the original Council approved work
program most likely because no one perceived major changes from current direction and policy to
be the end result. However, even without a task force, significant public input was included in the
work program, and has been an important part of the process, as discussed later. The resulting draft,
in staffs' opinion, strengthens existing policy, rather than weakens it and does not recommend major
changes in City direction,.as discussed in more detail in the remainder of this report.
Scope/Content and Format/Consolidation (or, have we followed the original direction and are
existing policy bases covered—even if the document is shorter?)
Background'
The Conservation Element was adopted in 1973 and is the oldest of our present General Plan
elements. The Energy Conservation Element was adopted in 1981, and is substantially out of date.
For several subjects, such as energy conservation in buildings, State and City policies and
standards have moved far beyond what was contemplated in the 1970's. Over the years, other
elements have been adopted, in some cases modifying or elaborating on policy areas addressed
by earlier elements. The result is related verbiage located in several different elements, making
it difficult for citizens and officials to find and understand all the statements that are relevant to a
particular issue. Since the adoption of the Conservation & Energy Conservation Elements, many
conservation policies have been adopted into the Open Space Element(updated in 1994), the Land
Use and Circulation Elements (updated in 1994), and the Housing element (updated in 1994). The
proposed new element would consolidate and replace (but not weaken) all of the existing
Conservation, Open Space, and Energy Conservation elements and would include the
conservation-oriented policies currently located in the Land Use, Circulation, and Housing
Elements.
Scope-Of-Work and Content
Several comments were made regarding the update's scope of work, and it has been critiqued from
both directions: (A) that the scope-of-work does not go far enough; or (B) that the actual work
product exceeded the approved scope-of-work. Descriptions of the scope-of-work for the update
are included in several documents, including the Council Goals for 1998-99, the Council Goal
Work Program Description from the 1997-99 Financial Plan, the Council agenda report authorizing
the work scope for the consultant contract, the work scope in the consultants contract, General Plan
Annual Reports for the years 1998—2001, and in Council Notes (See Attachment 1).
As these documents show, among other things, the Council-approved scope-of-work directed staff
to engage a consultant to provide a consolidation of related conservation policies, include a
community input strategy, prepare a plant and wildlife habitat inventory, and update the City's
energy conservation policies. The overall intent was to provide a more concise document that
t - 3
i
f
Council Agenda Report—Conservation& Open Space Element Process
Page 4
would help decision makers, the public, and staff quickly find relevant policies and programs but
without sacrificing policy.
Even with this goal, some policies and programs are amplified and strengthened in the proposed
draft. For example, with the assistance and support of the Natural Resources Inventory Group (see
roster, Attachment 2) and the City's Natural Resources Manager, the draft Conservation & Open
Space Element includes a detailed map of plant communities in and around the City of San Luis
Obispo. Most of these have been field checked, and the draft includes a listing of some 40"Species
of Local Concern", which identifies speciesthat are locally rare or notable and why, and what
conservation strategies are recommended to protect those species locally.
Staff anticipated that public discussion on the update could focus on policy language and the new
habitat mapping. To facilitate such discussion, two guides or roadmaps to the changes have been
prepared. As noted in Attachment 3,in many cases the revised policy language will have the same
effect as the existing policy language, and in some cases, such as the species that are being
protected, the new policies actually go beyond current policy.
Still, some of the public comment on the draft states that the update does not go far enough because
it does not include current conservation topics such as "sustainability" and the Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) program. While many existing policies in the draft support
these underlying concepts (without putting them under those particular headings), addressing these
topics specifically was not directed in the approved scope-of-work. The Planning Commission and
City Council can direct specific changes as the draft element goes through the review process;.
however, changes that require substantial new research and analysis may require a reallocation of
planning resources. (It is important to note that consolidating elements and updating policies does
not preclude substantial additions to the Conservation & Open Space Element in the coming years
as pan of future goal setting and budgeting processes. The element can be amended and
augmented up to four times a year,)
Some persons have expressed concern that if the new element has fewer pages or individually
numbered policies than the elements it replaces, there would be a lower level of environmental
protection. The number of pages or individually numbered policies is not a sound basis for
determining the effectiveness of proposed policies. What staff found when working on combining
the policies from the various elements was many redundancies (or near-redundancies) whereby
combining and minor wording change could significantly clarify the policies. This exercise alone
provided much of the condensing that took place. Much of the reduced volume is achieved, for
example, by not repeating essentially the same policy statements under separate headings for
wetlands,for grasslands, and for hills and mountains.
Earlier General Plan documents also contained extensive prose on background and educational
concepts. This was partly to explain to the decision makers the value in adopting goals, policies,
and programs. In staffs opinion, the public and decision makers have since become accustomed to
using the General Plan as a policy reference to guide decisions and the explanatory background
information no longer needs to be intermixed with the policies to legitimize them. The policies are
1 - 4
Council Agenda Report—Conservation& Open Space Element Process
Page 5
more easily reviewed with the background material contained in appendices to the elements. Most
of the "bulk" of the existing documents that is being replaced with the proposed Conservation &
Open Space Element falls in this category. On the other hand, such background could always be
retained, if desired, during the review process by the Planning Commission and Council.
Format and Consolidation
The approved scope-of-work noted that the new, consolidated element should be formatted in a
way that is consistent with other recent element updates and be easy for the public and decision-
makers to understand and use. Since 1994, all of the General Plan elements have been prepared
using the format of the Land Use and Circulation Elements. The proposed update has been
prepared using the same format. This will make it possible for all of the General Plan elements
to be put under one cover and read like a single document. The reason for this is to bring the
City's General Plan format up-to-date. The State Office of Planning and Research notes in
Attachment 4 that:
"In fact, where a decade ago many general plans were comprised of several stand alone
elements under separate covers, nearly all new plans are written as a single document.
The various elements are found in separate chapters or sections of that document."
Placing all the elements under one cover makes it much easier to keep them all integrated and
internally consistent, and is intended to strengthen agency policies by bringing them together in one
place, rather than having them fragmented or duplicated in several documents (whereby the margin
for error,confusion and potential policy conflicts increases substantially).
However, consolidating multiple policies cannot be coherently achieved simply by "cutting and
pasting"language from one document into another. In some cases several similar policies are being
melded into one policy. Variations in language need to be resolved. Also, changes are
recommended to improve implementation of Conservation & Open Space Element policies and
programs, based on the consultant's and staffs "on the ground" experience working with the policy
objectives and implementation programs.
With regard to which elements should or should not be involved in the update, it is important to
emphasize that the General Plan is the sum of.its parts, and thus a policy does not hold greater or
lesser status based on the element where it can be found.
Citizen Involvement In Preparing the Draft Element (and how this has added significantly
to the document and toward our natural resource_inventory goals)
As mentioned earlier, while a formal task force was not formed for this task, citizen involvement
has been an important part of the.process. More formally, the approved scope-of-work included
a community involvement strategy (Attachment 5). The community involvement strategy
consisted of two public workshops, as well as public hearings before the Planning Commission
and City Council to review a draft update. Noticing for the formal public forums or meetings
was thorough, and included strategies involving newspaper ads, directly mailed notices, and
i
Council Agenda Report—Conservation&Open Space Element Process
Page 6
utilizing the services of ECOSLO to announce the meetings to the environmental community. A
listing of both the formal and less formal public forums follows:
Date Forum
1999—2000 Natural Resources Inventory Group
March 2002 Natural Resources Inventory Group
March 2002 Public Forum At City Hall
April 2002 Tree Committee Public Hearing
April 2002 Cultural Heritage Committee Public Hearing
May 2002 Small Group Meeting W/Former EQTF Members
November 2002 Public Forum At City Hall
December 2002 Airport Land Use Commission
November 2002 Planning Commission Hearings
December 2002
February 2003
With regard to the less formal —but perhaps even more important — forms of input, during 1999
and early 2000 several informal meetings were held with interested citizens comprising the
Natural Resources Inventory Group (roster attached) and certain members of the former
Environmental Quality Task Force (EQTF); who were in a position to provide technical guidance
to the City's consultants as to the most important features of an updated Conservation & Open
Space Element. One of the first things that was agreed upon was a detailed vegetation map of
San Luis Obispo and vicinity. It was felt that such a map would form the basis for most
judgments about the appropriateness of land use planning decisions. Another important detail
was the concept of creating a listing of"Species of Local Concern".
The creation of a natural resources inventory for the area surrounding the City has been a
General Plan program (LUE 6.0,2) for some time, but there was disagreement on how detailed
such an effort should be, what it should focus on, and where. Eventually the compromise
concept of "species of local concern" arose and was agreed upon by staff, consultants, and
interested citizens. This effort culminated at a meeting on April 7, 2000, when members of the
Natural Resources Inventory Group, members of the former Environmental Quality Task Force
(EQTF), and other interested citizens attended a meeting at which this matter and the matter of
the creation of a position of City Biologist were the primary agenda items. Thus one of the more
contentious items of concern regarding the Conservation & Open Space element Update was
resolved. This was formalized by the City Council at a meeting on May 16, 2000.
The importance of these activities is to show the involvement at a "hands-on" level by interested
citizens, and the relationship that involvement had in important features of the update effort.
Citizen involvement was considerable at a practical, "meet the players" level and had a
� � LP
Council Agenda Report—Conservation& Open Space Element Process
Page 7
significant influence in the makeup of the document.
A concern has been noted that the work of the EQTF is being discarded or diminished in the draft
update. In 1994-95, the EQTF provided valuable input for 1994 Land Use Element and Circulation
Element revisions; and prepared "A Vision for Sustainability in San Luis Obispo" The EQTF
recommendations emphasized:
• Remaining committed to previously adopted environmental goals;
• Achieving a true, long-tern balance between consumptive economic activities and the
capacity of the natural environment;
• Having a centralized, qualified staff,responsible mainly for open space protection;
• Implementing natural habitat conservation.
Consolidation, not replacement, is one of the purposes of the draft update. Therefore, there is no
intention to reduce conservation policies or eliminate EQTF input. As shown in Attachment 3, a
careful analysis shows that many of the concerns about policies being deleted are not based on what
is actually contained in the draft update. Thus, the very important and influential work of the EQTF
continues to serve as a foundation for many of our conservation policies and practices, even if
proposed wording differs is some places in comparison to earlier language.
In terms of Planning Commission hearings thus far; several text changes were made to the draft as a
result of the first two hearings, but the Planning Commission ultimately decided on February 26 to
return the draft to staff with a recommendation that the Council appoint a task force to assist with
the review.
Considerations Before Involving A Task Force
The Planning Commission and several City residents are recommending that the Council appoint
a task force to provide public input for the Update.. As mentioned earlier, while a task force could
be helpful, the advantages of this added approach — at this late stage in the process - must be
weighed against the possible disadvantages. In the past, such judgments have been made based on a
sense of how much policy might be changed through an update process, and a review of recent
history shows that task forces are used selectively by the City. Outlined below are examples of
when task forces have been used and when they have not been used.
General Plan Elements Prepared With a Task Force
Land Use and Circulation Element(prepared concurrently 1994)
Open Space Element(1994)
Housing Element(1994,currently being updated)
'— r)
1 \�
Council Agenda Report—Conservation & Open Space Element Process
Page S
General Plan Elements Prepared Without A Task Force
Noise Element(1996)
Safety Element(2000)
Energy Conservation Element(198 1)
Parks and Recreation Element(2001)
Water and Wastewater Management Element(1996)
The staff recommendation that the update continue per the approved scope-of-work is primarily
based on two concerns, significant delays and the scope of the update. The staff time and
resources that a task force would require cannot be absorbed into the current Financial Plan's
work program unless a correspondingly large work program is delayed or new resources are
added to the Long Range Planning Program.
A task force process would likely require at least five or six months to review, discuss, and
produce a report on the update. As a comparison, the Housing Element Update Task Force
(HEUTF) has been meeting since January 2003 and is just completing their work. This task
force has taken eight months to do most of its work and has hurried to minimize delays in
meeting the State's December 31s`deadline for submitting a revised Housing Element. Most of
the City's other task forces have taken at least this long. The HEUTF has had 17 meetings,
requiring 17 agenda packets and related minutes. Staff resources are not available to add such a
substantial new undertaking to the existing work program.
During the fall of this year, and next winter and spring, the Long Range Planning Division is
scheduled to complete the Housing Element Update, the Margarita Area Specific Plan and the
Airport Area Specific Plan. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan and the City's LAFCo assigned
sphere of influence update will also be ready for public hearings. These existing projects involve
a substantial investment of City staff resources. We have learned through experience that long
delays in these projects can result in changed consultant personnel, information becoming dated,
and additional costs.
For these reasons, staff is recommending that the draft update be completed using the public hearing
process as the vehicle for public input rather than a task force..
Where To From Here: How Can We Proceed in a Helpful and Constructive Way?
Given the need to update very outdated documents and consolidate a great deal of overlapping
policy language, it is not easy to show language changes through 2a simple administrative draft.
Therefore, to simplify and summarize all the changes being proposed in the update, staff
prepared a matrix comparing the existing General Plan policies with the proposed policies. This
summary was released at the same time as the first draft update in February 2002.
While the legislative draft approach was well intended, most agree that it wasn't terribly helpful
due to its length. Staff suggests that we focus our remaining effort on the use of a policy
Council Agenda Report—Conservation & Open Space Element Process
Page 9
comparison table to show the proposed changes. The policy comparison chart developed to
show where the Conservation & Open Space Element policies came from is much easier to
follow and more easily shows where changes are proposed (example shown in Attachment 6).
Tracking and reviewing the proposed changes in this fashion does require a measure of trust and
a focus on substance, as discussed further below. Staff recommends that this document be
strengthened and made available with the update (Recommendation La.). Any added
suggestions from Commission or Council members on how the table can be improved are
welcome.
Beyond the use of such a tool, it will simply be necessary to engage in the difficult "pick and
shovel" work of plan review, page by page if needed. However; to make this task somewhat easier,
staff suggests that we schedule a series of Planning Commission workshops — as Commission time
permits — to begin tackling the task a little bit at a time. Formal public hearings will not be
scheduled until these workshops are completed, and only after the Commission has finished its
work on the housing element. Thus, no one should feel either pressured or rushed by the process—
but,at the same time, we can make progress and not bog down entirely.
Whatever approach is chosen to initiate the actual plan review, staff believes that the fears about
the weakening of policies can be addressed by clarification, amendment, or by retaining existing
language of the draft document. While the draft represents staffs best efforts to respond to the
initial scope-of-work, members of the public, the Planning Commission, and the City Council
may see some things differently, and changes will inevitably and appropriately be made. At the
same time, staff strongly believes that if we can simply engage in the process of content review, the
concerns will be addressed through explanation, clarification, or amendment. We need to trust in
the process and in the belief that when it is over, we all want the same thing: Strong and
progressive conservation and open space policies.
Follow-up Direction to Staff at Close of Joint Meeting Discussion
It is hoped that the City Council and Planning Commission can achieve a high level of consensus on
the follow-up to the joint meeting. If, however, after discussion this does not seem possible, then it
will be necessary for the City Council to consider the discussion and input gained from the joint
meeting, and direct staff and the Planning Commission according to Council's best judgment.
PUBLIC INPUT AND STAFF CONCURRENCES
As mentioned above, several efforts to acquire "public" input have been made, both formally and
less formally. Further input would result from the proposed Planning Commission workshops and
later, Commission and Council public hearings. Staff is also always available to answer questions
or discuss proposed changes with the public, if desired (the draft document, including the legislative
draft,has been made available for many months, in a variety of different ways).
Council Agenda Report—Conservation& Open Space Element Process
Page 10
In terms of staff involvement in the draft, City departments, including Administration (Natural
Resources Manager and City Biologist), Public Works, Utilities, and Parks & Recreation, have
reviewed the proposed element and summary of changes. These departments play significant roles
in implementing conservation policies involving land and facilities owned and operated by the City.
Many of these staff persons have primary responsibility for conservation and environmental
protection and would certainly not wish to weaken policy.
FISCAL EWPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which
found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. The proposed changes to the General
Plan are consistent with this previous determination because they do not re-designate land or
otherwise change the basic assumptions regarding land use in the City. The proposed General
Plan amendments will have a neutral fiscal impact because they reinforce existing policy
structure.
It will cost the City substantially more if we expand the work scope or start over with a Task Force.
Staffing a task force or substantially increasing the scope of the current update has not been
.budgeted for in the current Financial Plan. Staff resources would need to be reallocated to
accomplish these tasks in the current financial planning period or the Council will need to budget
for them in the next two-year financial planning period.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may:
1. Direct staff to revise the approved scope-of-work and revise the draft Conservation & Open
Space Element to eliminate consolidating policies from the Land Use, Circulation and Housing
Elements. This alternative is not recommended because it would not provide the improved ease
of use for decision makers and the public inherent in consolidated documents. It would also
result in a sharp change in course from the approved 1999 scope-of-work, and would
essentially start the process over.
2. Direct staff to revise the approved public participation program and return to Council with a
proposal for a task force to assist with the revisions to the Conservation & Open Space
Element, including a proposal for reallocating resources as necessary to serve the task force.
This alternative in not being recommended because it would significantly increase the time
and cost of completing the project. However, public input has been, and will continue to be,
an important part of the process. A foremost role of the Planning Commission is to provide—
as individual members and as a collective Commission — a forum for enhanced public.input
into City Council decisions. Staff hopes that this role can be supported and enhanced further
by adding a series of workshops prior to public hearings and a formal recommendation on the
proposed element.
I
Councilenda Report—Conservation& Open Space Element Process
Page 11
3. Direct staff to revise the approved scope of work to include additional conservation related
topics and bring the project back for consideration as resources are being allocated in the
next two-year financial plan. This alternative is not being recommended because it would
significantly delay the efforts to consolidate and improve the existing elements, although
such a work effort may be appropriate for a subsequent major update to the Element. Thus,
the Commission and Council could agree on a timeframe for updating the element in the
future.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Council approved Significant Operating Program Change and Council Goal
Work Program Description from the 1997-99 Financial Plan, the Council agenda
report authorizing the scope-of-work for the consultant contract, Council approved
Scope-of-Work for RFP, Consultant Contract, Council notes and General Plan
Annual Reports for the years 1998—2001..
Attachment 2: Roster of Natural Resource Inventory Group Members
Attachment 3: Analysis of Correspondence Policy Issues
Attachment 4: "Element Consolidation: Streamlining Local General Plans" - Governor's Office
of Planning and Research,July 1998.
Attachment 5: Scope-of-Work for Public Participation
Attachment 6: Sample pages from Policy Comparison Table
Attachment 7: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, 11-20-02, 12-18-02,and 2-26-03
COUNCIL READING FILE(Previously Distributed to Council and Commission Members):
Draft Conservation & Open Space Element
Draft Policy Comparison Chart
Legislative Draft
L:\GP\COSE\CAR COSE Sept 23(9-15).doc
City Of OBISPO
GENERALPLAN
CONSERVATION &
OPEN
1 PA
Hearing
Draft August
i tT�
Open Space
Pollution Control and Energy
�`^-+�_, £-'sem-�a�2� �'."'�.`„"'^iA�„��' • �{.��:A"�� �. ..� �� !
� p
.I`h fI 1:'�" M1 'Y `t Y � �� f a✓1' 1IIn��tC ��
ti - .)Y,� .t�r (� i� �'�w:-' �- <,7. i'" Y--u..�y'fs.s..ca H "•�9��w..n,.�
HabitatManagement
r
City of San Luis Obispo
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
OUR MISSION STATEMENT
Our mission is to serve all persons in a positive and courteous manner and help ensure
that San Luis Obispo continues to be a healthy, safe, attractive; and enjoyable place to
live, work, or visit. We help plan the city's form and character, support community
values, preserve the environment, promote wise use of resources, and protect public
health and safety.
OUR SERVICE PHILOSOPHY
The City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff provides high
quality service when you need it. We will:
• Listen to understand your needs;
• Give clear, accurate and prompt answers to your questions;
• Explain how you can achieve your goals under the City's rules;
• Help resolve problems in an open, objective manner;
• Maintain high ethical standards; and
• Work to improve our service.
Cover photos' Three major conservation issues facing the community are: maintaining a
limit to expansion on surrounding open land (upper left, northwest edge of the city on
Los Osos Valley Road); treatment of particularly valuable habitat areas within the city
(lower left, creek at the western end of Meadow Park); shifting to transportation modes
that result in less energy consumption, air pollution, noise, and pavement (right, a cyclist
in traffic at Broad and South.streets).
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation &Open Space Element
City Council
Allen Settle, Mayor
John Ewan Jan Howell-Marc
Christine Mulholland Ken Schwartz
Planning Commission
Jim Aiken Michael Boswell
James Caruso Allan Cooper
Alice Loh Orval Osborne
Natural Resources Inventory Group
Phil Ashley Ray Belknap .
Dr..David Chipping Don Dollar
Gary Felsman Pam Heatherington
Dr. V. L. Holland
Cultural Heritage Committee
Bob Schrage, Chair
Paula Juelke Carr Chuck Crotser
Margot McDonald Steve McMasters
Tom Wheeler Matt Whittlesey
Tree Committee
Steve Caminiti, Chair
Linda Hauss Teresa Larson (Parks & Recreation Commission representative)
Jim Lopes (Architectural Review Commission representative) Laura Rice
Administration
Ken Hampian, City.Administrative Officer
Wendy George, Assistant City Administrative Officer
Dr. Neil Havlik, Natural Resources Manager Dr. Michael Clark, City Biologist
Community Development Department
John Mandeville, Director
Michael Draze, Deputy Director for Long-range Planning
Glen Matteson, Associate Planner(Project Planner)
Utilities Department
John Moss, Director
Gary Henderson, Water Division Manager
Ron Munds, Utilities Conservation Coordinator
Consultants
Plant community information was developed
in conjunction with Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc.
i
Hearing Draft August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation& Open Space Element
A
The City's General Plan is made up of sections called "elements." Each element focuses on certain
topics as required or allowed by State law. According to State law, each element has equal weight
in defining City policies. In April 2001, the following elements comprised the City's General Plan.
Title Adoption or Last Major Revision Date
Land Use 1994
Housing 1994
Conservation & Open Space "
Circulation 1994
Noise 1996
Safety 2000
Parks & Recreation 2001
Water&Wastewater Management 1994
* Revision in progress combining former Open Space Element, Conservation Element, Energy
Conservation Element, and parts of several other elements.
This element was adopted [month day, year],
by City Council Resolution No. [xxxx).
Hearing Draft August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan 1 Conservation&Open Space Element
Contents
Introduction 1
Open Space
Introduction 5
Open-space setting 5
Open space in the urban area 7
Open-space buffers 7
Open space for safety 8
Open space protection: program outline 8
Public access to open space 9
Open space enhancement and restoration 9
Open space enhancement and restoration:
program outline 9
Avoiding and mitigating loss of
open space resources 10
Natural Communities
Introduction 12
Listed species 12
Species of local concern 13
Trees and other plants 13
Poisons 14
Natural communities: program outline 14
Water
Introduction 15
Water needs and impacts 15
Water use: program outline 15
Water quality 16
Water quality: program outline 16
Air
Introduction 17
Air Quality 17
Air quality: program outline 17
Energy
Introduction 18
Sustainable energy use 18
City form 19
Solar access 20
Solar collector appearance 21
Energy: program outline 22
Materials
Introduction 23
Reduction and recycling 23
Materials: program outline 24
Hearing Draft August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan conservation& Open Space Element
Native Minerals
Introduction 25
Reclamation of extraction sites 25
Potential mineral extraction activities 25
Views
Introduction 27
Landscapes and cityscapes 27
Viewing opportunities 28
Views: program outline 28
Cultural Heritage
Introduction 29
Historical and architectural resources 29
Archaeological resources 30
Cultural heritage: program outline 31
Glossary 33
Illustration Credits 40
Appendix A. Species of Local Concern
Appendix B: Acquisition of Open Space Lands
Appendix C: Management of Open Space Lands
Appendix D: Prime Agricultural Soils
Figures
Figure 1: Planning Area &Greenbelt 3
Figure 2: Open Space Resources inr and
near the Urban Reserve 6
Figure 3: Open Space Resources in a Subdivision 11
Figure 4: Creek Corridor 14
Figure 5 Scenic Roadways 26
Figure 6: Cultural Resources 32
Appendix A map: Habitat Types A-7
Appendix B map: Government Open Space B-3
Appendix D map: Prime Agricultural Soils D-1
Several of the maps in this element contain a note that relatively small features
do not appear. Various informational maps showing more detail, in paper or
digital form, are available at the Community Development Department.
Hearing Draft August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Introduction `'
t -
r
The City's General Plan guides the use and
protection of various resources to meet
community purposes. It reflects consensus
and compromise among a wide diversity of _ter
citizens' preferences, within a framework set
by State law. The General Plan consists of
sections, called elements, which focus on Hikers enjoy part of the city's open space setting.
certain topics.
In the early 1970's, the California Legislature made open space elements and conservation
elements mandatory parts of city and county general plans. San Luis Obispo adopted its first
Conservation Element and its first Open Space Element separately in 1973. The Open Space
Element was extensively revised and expanded in 1994, mainly to address protection of creeks,
plants, and wildlife. The City adopted its optional Energy Conservation Element in 1981 and its
optional Water and Wastewater Management Element in 1987. The 1994 Housing Element update
also contained policies on saving energy and water. The 1994 update of the Land Use Element
contained detailed policies on protection of archaeological and historical resources. The 1994
update of the Circulation Element established many policies on alternatives to trips in single-
occupant vehicles, which affect air quality and energy use. The Circulation Element also contained
a section relating roads to scenic resources.
This Conservation and Open Space Element combines and revises material from previous
conservation, open space, and energy conservation elements, as well as parts of the land use and
housing elements, and the scenic roadways section of the Circulation Element. It focuses on
protecting assets associated with land that is not developed with urban uses: open space for
farming, wildlife habitat, scenery, water supply, and separation between cities. It also addresses air
and water quality, energy sources and conservation, materials recycling, minerals, and cultural
resources. The Land Use Element of the General Plan focuses on the types and intensities of
development on land designated for urban uses. The Safety Element is concerned mainly with
avoiding hazards from fire, flood, unstable land, and aircraft flights, where agriculture and natural
landscape are often the most appropriate uses. The Parks and Recreation Element focuses on
open land, as well as facilities, which are intended for active recreational use.
In the General Plan, a goal is a desired end state or condition that the community wants to achieve.
A policy describes an approach to achieving a goal. A program is a specific action the City intends
to take to implement policy. Numbering of goals, policies, and programs is for ease of reference,
and does not imply relative importance unless so stated.
Hearing Draft I August 2002
San Luis Obispo General-Plan Conservation& Open Space Element
This page is intentionally blank.
Hearing Draft 2 August 2002
r i
= m
m
r
c
v �
cr
1 �
r r
0m ,
�cf j
High y 101
q 4-
`
J n�
m
O
7
9D
a �
ca cc
al CD
m m e v 0
v
co00 c
am w
nmm ma f > > 3 m030
? - - -3- 50 n0 to a o• = i m'CL IN 03 $ r
3
00 �,m Go C� CL -0 m m - O 7
CA
m r m m 0 1 m m .�_► m Q c
Co nm a m3 =� n p
S C m o op 05 138 < a ► m3 1120 m !
1� > ir > +'. m .m O c N
C) O O - *9 m 7 m � = we m to
r Q .. �m 7 �. Cd O "� Z 7 m
O Z� $ =0 � � � m 3 my o•- mn -`= o
c r0 m=' � v aoQ Se
n � 7C 0 mm o a o > > m � n
CL 3 3 3 °�- ° m°, g3 a ''' ma'o m
m mm m c 3 �� ° Cr
CD 0
m c 3 � a ta < m CL
� m
m 0
mm m
o m
�. m m v
m
3
N
San Luis Obispo General ► . ..i C. arvation &Open Space Element
San Luis Obispo is surrounded by largely undeveloped hills and valleys.
Open Space
Introduction
San Luis Obispo's desirability as a place to live, visit, and do business depends largely on its open
space heritage. As discussed in the Land Use Element's Preamble, Vision, and Community Goals,
community decisions must respect open space values.
Goal OS 1: A healthy and attractive landscape around the urban area, comprised of diverse
and connected natural habitats, and productive agricultural land.
Policy OS 1.1: Open-space setting
The City will preserve as Open Space or Agriculture the undeveloped and agricultural
land outside the urban reserve line, including the designated greenbelt, and will
encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to do so (Figure 1.)
Open Space is land or water area that remains in a predominantly natural or
undeveloped state, and is generally free of structures. Such lands protect and
preserve the community's natural and historical resources, define the urban
boundary, and provide visual and physical relief from urban development. Open
spaces may consist of small portions of a parcel or large tracts of land. Such lands
may include farming and grazing; creeks, marshes, watershed and floodplains;
scenic resources; plant and animal habitat; historic and archaeological resources;
and passive recreation areas.
Agriculture is generally open land where there has been a history of agricultural
cultivation or keeping of livestock, which remains generally open and in such use.
Hearing Draft 5 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation&Open Space Element
Figure 2: Open Space Resources in and near the Urban Reserve
Open Space-land to be kept largely 0 Urban Land
natural, including: Land to be kept open until the City approves an urban use
� Creeks
® Open Water&Wetlands Non-open space uses outside the urban area
Grassland Communities 0 Parks
- Agriculture-land for cultivation 0 Land outside the planning area 1 Kilometer
– – Urban Reserve Line
Relative) small features do not 1 Mile N
Relatively appear on this map. ��
Cueata Choffo
College 8 Valley GA
Carnp
San CMC.
dex
fry
Bishop Cal Poly
Peak C-) j
Los Osos
vartey a ea
Cerro .p
San Luis
t � G
� uth St
TankFarm
vs
f
S
r
Edna
Valley
Hearing Draft 6 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation &Open Space Element
Goal OS 2: Within the urban area, a network of open land encompassing particularly
valuable natural and agricultural resources, connected with the landscape
around the urban area. Particularly valuable resources are:
A. Creek corridors, including open channels with natural banks and vegetation
B. Laguna lake and its undeveloped margins
C. Wetlands and vernal pools
D. Undeveloped hills and mountains
E. Grassland communities and woodlands
F. Corridors that facilitate wildlife movement, for the health of individuals and
of species
G. The habitat of species listed as threatened or endangered by the State or
Federal governments
H. Prime agricultural soils in large, undeveloped parcels (Appendix D)
I. Groundwater recharge areas
J. Historically open-space settings for cultural resources
Policy OS 2.1 Open space in the urban area
The City will preserve as Open Space, or as Agriculture, the areas listed in Goal OS
2, and will encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to do so. (See
map, Figure 2.)
Policy OS 2.2: Open-space buffers
When activities close to open space resources within or outside the urban area could
harm them, ,the City will assure adequate buffers between the activities and the
resources. The City will encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to
follow this policy. Buffers associated with new development shall be on the site of the
development, rather than on neighboring land containing the open space resource.
Buffers provide distance in the form of setbacks, within which certain features or
activities are not allowed. Buffers may also use techniques such as planting and
fencing. Buffers should be adequate for the most sensitive species in the protected
area and should complement the protected area's habitat values. Buffers will be
provided in the following situations:
A. Between urban development, including parks and public facilities, and natural
habitats such as creeks, wetlands, and grassland communities, to address noise,
lighting, storm runoff, spread of invasive, non-native species, and access by
people and pets (see also the Safety Element for "defensible space" next to
wildland fire.areas);
B. Between urban development and agricultural operations, to address dust, noise,
odors, chemical use,.and access by people and pets;
C. Between agricultural operations and natural habitat, to address noise, chemical
use, sediment transport, and livestock access;
D. Between new development and cultural resources, to address visual compatibility
and access by people;
E. Between new development and scenic resources or the greenbelt, to address
view blockage, lighting and noise, and visual transition from urban character to
rural character.
Hearing Draft 7 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan'— ' Conservation &Open Space Element
Goal OS 3: Open Space where development would be unsafe. Generally; the following
locations are considered to be unsafe:
A. Airport clear zones, and other airport land use zones with an unacceptable
risk of aircraft crashes
B. Land astride active or potentially active earthquake faults
C. Land where risks of ground shaking, slope instability, settlement, or
liquefaction cannot.be adequately mitigated
D. Areas subject to flooding, where the frequency, depth, or velocity of
floodwaters poses an unacceptable risk to life, health, or property
E. Areas of high or extreme wild-land fire hazard
Policy OS 3.1: Open space for safety
The City will preserve as Open Space, or as Agriculture, the areas listed in Goal OS
3, and will encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to do so. (See
also the Safety Element.)
Open Space Protection: Program Outline
The City will do the following in support of open space protection. The City will encourage
individuals, organizations, and other agencies to take the same actions within their areas of
responsibility and jurisdiction.
A. Maintain the urban reserve line location, except where a relatively small enlargement of the
urban area is tied to permanent protection of substantial open land that did not previously
have assured protection. [See also part OS 6.C(3).]
B. Apply land-use designations and zoning consistent with General Plan goals and policies.
C. Set conditions of subdivision and development approvals consistent with General Plan goals
and policies.
D. Acquire land or interests in land. (See also Appendix B, "Acquisition of Open Space")
1) Obtain dedications of fee ownership or easements as gifts or in exchange for
development approvals.
2) Seek and use grants, donations, other revenue sources, and long-term financing
mechanisms to purchase fee ownership or easements.
E. Manage its open-space holdings and enforce its open-space easements consistent with
General Plan goals and policies. (See also Appendix C, "Management of Open Space")
F. Encourage transfer of development credit from open lands to lands designated for
development, or retirement of development credit.
G. Locate and design facilities consistent with General Plan goals and policies.
H. Encourage sustainable agricultural practices to protect the health of human and natural
communities, and to minimize conflicts between agriculture and urban neighbors.
1. Provide information for citizens, in particular landowners affected by resource-conservation
policies, and be open to conservation information provided by citizens.
J. Coordinate with agencies and organizations having :interest or expertise in resource
protection.
K. Avoid imposing taxes or fees that discourage retention of open space or agricultural uses.
L. Establish mutually respectful, long-term relationships with landowners and conservation
organizations such as land trusts.
Hearing Draft 8 August 2002
1
San Luis Obispo General Plan Cois�ervation &Open Space Element
Goal OS 4: Public access to open space that fosters knowledge and appreciation of open-
space resources without harming them, and without exposing the public to
unacceptable risk.
Policy OS 4.1: Public access
Public access to open space resources, with interpretive information, should be
provided when doing so is consistent with protection of the resources, and with the
security and privacy of affected landowners and occupants. Access will generally be
limited to non-vehicular movement, and may be only visual or limited to certain spots.
Public access to or through production agricultural land, or through developed
residential lots, will be considered only if the owner agrees. (Land for active
recreation is typically designated"Park." See the Parks and Recreation Element.)
Policy OS .5: Open-space enhancement andx°x
restoration
The City will enhance and restore
open space resources identified in
goals OS 1, OS 2 and OS 3, and will
encourage individuals, organizations,
and other agencies to do so.
Open Space Enhancement and Restoration:
Program Outline Volunteers help restore vegetation.
The City will do the following in support of open-space enhancement and restoration, in
coordination with other agencies and organizations. The City will encourage individuals,
organizations, and other agencies to take the same actions within their areas of responsibility.
A. Inventory natural areas that have been degraded, beginning with City-owned property, and
prepare a list of sites and activities, in priority order, for restoration efforts.
B. Establish self-sustaining populations of native species that were historically found in natural
habitat areas.
1) Re-vegetate disturbed and over-grazed upland areas, including grassland communities,
using site-specific or region-specific plants so far as practical
2) Re-establish native riparian (creekside) vegetation
3) Eliminate sources of water pollutants and improper water diversions
C. Remove invasive, non-native species:in natural habitat areas, and prevent the introduction
or spread of invasive, non-native species and pathogens.
D. Where allowed by City ownership, easements, or other agreements, remove man-made
elements such as buildings, paving, concrete lining of waterways, signs, and utilities, when
they are contrary to the purpose for the open space and they are not needed for public
health or safety, or for implementation of City plans.
E. Provide passage through previously established, man-made obstacles to wildlife movement
(such as suitably sized culverts under roads).
F. Remove trash, debris, and contaminants, using methods that minimally disrupt the open-
space resources.
G. Provide information for citizens, affected landowners in particular.
H. Enlist the help of volunteers and academic programs in restoring and monitoring habitat health.
I. Set conditions of subdivision and development approvals consistent with General Plan goals
and policies. (See also OS 6.)
Heating-Draft 9 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Policy OS 6: Avoiding and mitigating loss of_ooen space_resources
A. The City will permit loss of an open space resource encompassed by Goal OS 1 or
Goal OS 2 only when:
1) Preserving the resource would deprive the landowner of all reasonable use,
and acquisition by the City or a conservation organization is not feasible; or
2) There is a demonstrated need, based on public health, safety, or welfare, and
there is no practical alternative to loss of the resource, or
3) The resource is prime agricultural soil on a small parcel essentially
surrounded by urban development.
B. The extent of loss or degree of harm to the resource shall be minimized, consistent
with the justifications for any loss provided in part A above. Where creeks must be
modified for flood protection or bank stability, the modification shall be patterned
after natural conditions to the maximum extent feasible.
C. Loss or harm shall be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. Mitigation must at
least comply with Federal and State requirements. Mitigation shall be implemented
and monitored in compliance with State and Federal requirements, by qualified
professionals, and shall be funded by the project applicant.
1) For natural habitat that is relatively limited in extent (such as riparian or
wetland habitat) mitigation shall consist of creating twice the area of habitat, of
equal quality, in the following order of preference:
a) The same kind on the same site
b) The same kind on a different site (the site shall be within the San Luis
Obispo planning area)
c) A similar kind (such as seasonal wetland in place of freshwater marsh) on
the same site
d) A similar kind on a different. site (the site shall be within the San Luis
Obispo planning area)
Habitat created as mitigation should be located and designed to minimize the
need for long-term artificial support (such as supplying wetlands from a well
requiring energy and maintenance).
2) For a widespread habitat type or for farmland, mitigation shall consist of
permanently protecting an equal area of equal quality, which does not already
have permanent protection, within the San Luis Obispo planning area.
3) For projects involving enlargement of the urban reserve, mitigation shall
consist of permanently protecting an area not previously protected, that is
located and that has sufficient size (generally four times the area to be
developed) to secure a permanent edge to the city.
4) Individual small projects, each with an incremental impact on an extensive
resource, may provide mitigation through payment of a fee, to be used for
protecting that resource within the San Luis Obispo planning area.
5) The City may establish or participate in a "mitigation bank," through which
resources are protected. in a consolidated location ahead of the need to
mitigate impacts of individual, small projects. The City will work with other
agencies to assure successful operation of any mitigation bank that is
established.
Hearing Draft 10 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
D. Any development that is allowed on a site designated as Open Space or
Agriculture, or containing open-space resources, shall be designed to minimize its
impacts on open space values on the site and on neighboring land.
1) Hillside development shall comply with the standards of the Land Use Element,
including minimization of grading for structures and access, and use of building
forms, colors, and landscaping that are not visually intrusive. (See also Policy
V 1.1.13.)
2) Creek corridors, wetlands, grassland communities, other valuable habitat
areas, archaeological resources, agricultural land, and necessary buffers
should be within their own parcel, rather than divided among newly created
parcels (Figure 3). Where creation of a separate parcel is not practical, the
resources shall be within an easement. The easement must clearly establish
allowed uses and maintenance responsibilities in furtherance of resource
protection.
E. The City will encourage other agencies to follow this policy.
Figure 3
Open Space Resources in a Subdivision
Parcel before subdivision: Preferred subdivision: Acceptable subdivision:
Example of resources and Open space resources are Open space resources are
parcel boundaries in a separate parcel within easements
_._._._._............... ................
,I ,•-•-.-•-.r.-.•-•-•-,•-•-•-•-•I
creek corridor& : ' j i i i
wetland
I I
j i j i
j i i I
_._._._._._. - -._._._ _._._._._.-' --•_•_•_•- ..
-._.___. .-• •-•-•-•-•-
road road road
Hearing Draft 1] August 2002
San Luis.Obispo General Plan• Conservation &Open Space Element
Natural Communities
Introduction
"Natural Communities" refers to the web
of organisms, other than people, that live
in the area. Many of the physicalx 3 r T
requirements for natural communities are
provided by open space. Natural
communities give open space much of , t�
its value for human enjoyment. Natural
communities also have value in their own "
right, independent of their role as
sustainers of the human community or
as a pleasant background for it. ;, p
The health of a young steelhead trout is checked.
Goal NC 1: Within the San Luis Obispo planning area, self-sustaining populations of the
plants and wildlife that made up the natural communities in the area when
urbanization began..
Policy NC 1.1: Listed species
A. The City will identify the location, and habitat and buffer needs, of species listed
for protection. This information will be developed by qualified people early in the
planning and development-review process.
B. The City will establish and maintain records on the location of listed species. The
City will maintain, for public use, generalized maps showing known locations of
listed species. Specific site information may be kept confidential to protect the
resources.
C. The City will comply with State and Federal requirements for listed species.
D. The City will protect listed species through its actions on: land-use designations;
development standards; development applications; location, design, construction,
and maintenance of City facilities; land that the City owns or manages.
E. City actions that could impact listed species shall be consistent with Policy OS 6.
Subject to the approval of agencies with jurisdiction, the City may approve a
project where mitigation requires relocation of listed species, but only if there is
no practical alternative and relocation is limited to individuals or small parts of a
larger population, not the entire remaining population of a species. (If an agency
with jurisdiction determines that relocation of an entire population is needed for its
survival regardless of a project's development, the City may help with the
relocation.)
Hearing Draft 12 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation &Open Space Element
F. "Species listed for protection" are:
1) Classified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as:
a) "Endangered" - In danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range
b) `Threatened" - Likely to become endangered without protection and
management
c) "Proposed Endangered" or "Proposed Threatened" - Presently being
considered for endangered status
d) "Candidate, category 1" - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has sufficient data
to support listing as endangered
e) "Candidate, category 2" - needs U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service further data
on threats
2) Classified by the California Department of Fish and Game as:
a) "Endangered" - Prospects for survival are in immediate jeopardy
b) `Threatened" - Likely to become endangered without protection and
management
c) "Rare" - May become endangered if present environment worsens (only
refers to plants)
d) "Species of Special Concern" - Are not rare on a State scale, but are found
in limited locations
3) Classified by the California Native Plant Society as:
a) "List 1A, Plants of Highest Priority" - Presumed extinct in California
b) "List 1B, Plants of Highest Priority" - Plants rare and endangered in
California and elsewhere
c) "List 2" - Plants rare and endangered in California, but common
elsewhere
d) "List 3" - Plants about which more information is needed
e) "List 4" - Plants of limited distribution (a watch list)
4) Not listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of
Fish and Game, or the California Native Plant Society, but which can be
shown to meet the criteria of the California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines, Section 15380, "Endangered, Rare or Threatened Species."
Policy NC 1.2: Species of local concem
A. The City is concerned with maintaining healthy populations of native species in
the long term, even though they are not listed for protection under State or
Federal laws. These "species of local concern" are at the limit of their range in
San Luis Obispo, or threats to their habitat are increasing.
B. The City will identify the location, and habitat and buffer needs, of species of
local concern. This information will be developed by qualified people early in the
planning and development-review process. (These species are listed in Appendix
A, which may be revised by the City's Natural Resources Manager without
amending this element. Anyone may nominate species for the list)
C. The City will protect species of local concern through: its actions on land-use
designations, development standards, development applications; the location,
design, construction, and maintenance of City facilities; land that the City owns
or manages.
Hearing Draft 13 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan ' Conservation& Open Space Element j
D. The City will encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to protect
species of local concern within their areas of responsibility and jurisdiction.
Policy NC 1.3: Trees and other plants
A. Significant trees are those making substantial contributions to natural habitat or
the urban landscape due to their species, size, or rarity. Significant trees,
particularly native species, shall be protected. Removal of significant trees shall
be subject to the criteria and mitigation requirements of Policy OS 6.
B. Urban landscaping should incorporate native plant species, with selection
appropriate for location.
C. The City will continue a program to designate and help protect "heritage trees."
D. Grassland communities in the greenbelt and in designated Open Space areas
shall be retained.
Policy NC 1.4: Poisons
The City will avoid the use of poisons (pesticides and herbicides) unless there is no
practical alternative. When the use of a poison cannot be avoided, the type of poison
shall be selective (effect limited to the target species so far as possible) and it shall
be applied selectively.
Natural Communities: Program Outline
In addition to activities to protect and restore open space resources, the City will do the following in
support of natural communities. The City will encourage individuals, organizations, and other
agencies to take the same actions within their areas of responsibility and jurisdiction.
A. Implement the Natural Communities policies above.
B. Participate in any areawide planning efforts such as Habitat Conservation Plans under the
U.S. Endangered Species Act.
C. Participate in environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act and the
National Environmental Quality Act, for projects that could affect natural communities in the
San Luis Obispo planning area.
D. Maintain current information on habitat types and conditions, and the known and likely
locations of listed species, for use in planning and environmental review.
Fiqure 4: Creek Corridor - edges of riparian vegetation--01
creek corridor I creek
I setback setback I
I I I
I I 1
I I 1
I I '
1 I k r I
I •rte' y t. I
I '
I
top of bank top of bank
11
Hearing Draft 14 August 2002
i San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation &Open Space Element
Water
,tic:.... �"�'�... r y..0�• _�
1 .u
Introduction
Water is the fluid of life, essential for natural
and human communities. The Water and
Wastewater Management Element contains rf
detailed information and policies, focusing --�'' ,' j
on the relationship between urban water
demand and supply. The following goals andL
policies address water as a component of a P _;
sustainable community.
-'_ . . %.
The Water Reclamation Facility at Prado Road
prepares wastewater for safe re-use and dis-
charge to the creek.
Goal W 1: Urban water needs met without substantial harm to natural communities or
productive agriculture.
Policy W 1.1: Water use rate
In planning for urban water needs, the City will both assume and strive for the most
efficient available practices. The City will encourage other agencies to follow this
policy. `The most efficient available practices" means behavior and devices that use
the least water for a desired outcome, considering available equipment, fife-cycle
costs, social and environmental side effects, and the regulations of other agencies.
Policy W 1.2: Competition for supplies
The City will not substantially diminish groundwater available for agricultural use or
substantially damage wildlife habitat through reduced stream flows in obtaining long-
term sources of water supply. The City will encourage individuals, organizations, and
other agencies to follow this policy.
Water Use: Program Outline
The City will do the following in support of efficient water use, and will encourage individuals,
organizations, and other agencies to do likewise.
A. Landscaping
1) Choose plants that are suitable for the climate and their intended function, with an
emphasis on native and drought-tolerant plants.
2) Prepare soils for water penetration and retention.
3) Design and operate suitable and efficient irrigation systems.
B. Install, maintain, and replace low-flow fixtures and equipment.
C. Facilitate water re-use.
Hearing Draft 15 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan'- Conservation &Open Space Element
Goal W 2: Water quality in aquifers, Laguna Lake, streams, and wetlands that supports all
beneficial uses, including domestic supply, agriculture, and wildlife habitat.
Policy W 2.1: Water ouality
The City will employ the best available practices for pollution avoidance and control,
and will encourage others to do so. "Best available practices" means behavior and
technologies that result in the highest water quality, considering available equipment,
life-cycle costs, social and environmental .side effects, and the regulations of other
agencies.
Water Quality: Program Outline
The City will do the following in support of water quality, and will encourage individuals,
organizations, and other agencies to do likewise.
A. Design and operate its water supply, treatment, and distribution system (potential point
source of pollutants such as chlorine)..
B. Design and operate its wastewater collection and treatment system (potential point source
of pollutants such as untreated sewage and chlorine).
C. Design, construct, and maintain its facilities such as parks, buildings and grounds, and
parking (potential point sources for pollutants such as petroleum and non-point sources of
runoff contaminated with fertilizers, pesticides, litter, and vehicle residues).
D. Approve the design, construction, and operation of private facilities for which it has permit
authority (potential point sources for, as examples,. sediment from construction and
chemicals used in operations, and non-point sources for contaminated runoff).
E. Participate with other agencies, in particular the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board, in watershed planning and management.
F. In locations subject to flooding, not allow activities, such as outdoor storage, that would be
substantial sources of chemical or biological contamination during a flood, even though
buildings associated with the activities would meet flood-protection standards.
Vis- rc The Water Treatment Plant at Stenner
�y A Canyon processes drinking water. Several
- years ago the City had to decide an
`
= environmental trade-off: rely more on
"ozonation," which would require lots of
,t electricity, or continue to employ chlorine,
which entails risks in manufacture,
transportation, and use. The City chose
ozonation, while installing high-efficiency
pump motors to offset some of the added
electric demand.
Hearing Draft 16 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation &Open Space Element
Air
Introduction
We live at the bottom of a relatively -------------
shallow
—_�shallow `ocean of air" that sustains and
protects us. While progress has been
made in reducing toxic emissions from fill
individual sources, growth in the
number of sources and the
accumulation of gasses that produce
climate change are growing concerns.
An "inversion layer" is formed by stable air masses with
different temperatures,trapping pollutants.San Luis Obispo
has one of the lowest inversion layers in the state.
Goal A 1: Air quality that supports survival, health, and enjoyment.
Policy A 1.1: Atmospheric change
City actions shall help avoid undesirable climate change and deterioration of the
atmosphere's protective function, which result from the release of carbon dioxide and
other substances.
Policy A 1.2: Health standards
Air quality should meet State and Federal standards, whichever are more protective,
for human health.
Policy A 1.3: No decline
Air quality s' tId not decline from levels experienced during the early 1990's, when
the commurn,. s growth capacity was last re-examined.
Air Quality: Program Outline
The City will do the following in support of air quality, and will encourage individuals, organizations,
and other agencies to do likewise.
A. Employ best available practices in City operations. "Best available practices" means
behavior and technologies that produce the least air pollutants for a desired outcome,
considering available equipment, life-cycle costs, social and environmental side effects, and
the regulations of other agencies.
B. Help the Air Pollution Control District update and implement the County Clean Air Plan.
C. Consult with the Air Pollution Control District on all significant development.
D. Implement programs to reduce the number of single-occupant trips in fossil-fueled vehicles.
(See also the Circulation Element and the Land Use Element.)
E. Encourage Cal Poly and Cuesta College to restrict, and provide alternatives to, student use
of motor vehicles.
F. If measures proposed during the 1994 update of the Land Use Element and the Circulation
Element, mitigation decided during project review, or other programs or incentives intended
to offset significant air-quality impacts of growth prove to be ineffective, the City will amend
its General Plan to reduce its development capacity and will encourage other jurisdictions to
reduce theirs, so that air quality will not deteriorate unacceptably because of growth. The
City would then consider raising planned capacities to previous levels only if measures
effective in protecting air quality are carried out.
Hearing Draft 17 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan' Conservation&Open Space Element J
Energy
Introduction
Our dependence on fossil fuels makes it
difficult to avoid air and water pollution ,
,
and economic turmoil. One of the best .__: �
� .. �. .
things we can do for our environmental
and economic well-being is to use
energy more efficiently and shift to
cleaner, renewable, locally-controlled
energy sources. Solar water-heating panels for Sinsheimer swimming
pool were disconnected when their maintenance cost
became excessive.The site is being evaluated for solar-
electric generation,to run pumps.
Goal E 1: For the San Luis Obispo urban area, no overall increase in use of non-sustainable
energy, and the eventual replacement of non-sustainable energy sources with
sustainable sources.
Policy E 1.1: Best available practices
The City will employ the best available practices in energy conservation,
procurement, use, and production, and will encourage individuals, organizations, and
other agencies to do likewise. "Best available practices" means behavior and
technologies that use the least energy for a desired outcome, considering available
equipment, life-cycle costs, social and environmental side effects, and the regulations
of other agencies. Best available practices include use of sustainable sources.
Sustainable sources are naturally renewed in a relatively short time and avoid
substantial undesirable side effects. The following are sustainable energy sources.
A. Space conditioning through earth or building thermal mass to moderate day-night
differences
B. Space conditioning through earth mass to moderate seasonal differences
C. Space cooling through natural ventilation
D. Space cooling through reflectivity and shading
E. Indoor illumination by natural light
F. Solar space heating (direct at place of use)
G. Solar water heating (direct at place of use)
H. Solar voltaic (conversion of sunlight directly to electricity; preferred form is
structure surfaces at or near the place of use)
I. Solar thermal electric (conversion of sunlight to electricity through an intermediate
generator using a temperature differential)
J. Wind electricity generation, without substantial harm to wildlife
K. Geothermal
1) Preferred form: deep-heat sources not dependent on release of brine
2) Secondary form: near-surface sources requiring release of brine
L. Biomass: conversion of plant material to fuel, or to electricity through combustion,
in a sustained-yield cycle and with emission controls to protect air quality
Hearing Draft 18 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
M. Hydropower: electrical generation from falling water, without substantial harm to
wildlife, and where reservoir siltation will not eliminate the resource
N. Tidal, wave, or thermocline power: electrical generation from the ocean's tidal or
wave action, or difference in temperature due to depth, without substantial harm
to plants or wildlife
O. Conversion of any sustainable source to an intermediate fuel, such as hydrogen
produced by solar-powered electrolysis.
Policy E 12: City Form
The city's form should support energy efficiency and the use of sustainable energy
sources. Aspects of such form are:
A. Location and design of residences, workplaces, and facilities for all other activities
foster travel by other than motor vehicles. (See also the Land Use Element.)
B. The circulation system fosters travel by other than motor vehicles. (See also the
Circulation Element.)
.i-yxe
jj
f
As workplaces, dwellings, schools, and stores become more dispersed, it is harder to reach
desired destinations in energy-efficient ways. The Edna-Islay Area and other city
neighborhoods have several dwelling types, parks, neighborhood services, employment, and
bus stops within easy walking or cycling distance.
Hearing Draft 19 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Policy E 1.3: Solar access
A. To encourage use of solar energy, reasonable solar access shall be provided and
protected. The City will protect reasonable solar exposure for existing collectors and
likely locations of future collectors, both active and passive. Standards for the
subdivision and development of property should assure desirable solar access, as
described below. Protection beyond.that established by the City may be provided by
recorded agreement among private parties.
Land Uses and Site Conditions Desirable Solar Access
Conservation/open space and residential uses All south wails and all roof areas should
up to about 6 dwellings per acre, on sites of be unshaded during midday on the winter
one acre or more solstice.
Conservation/open space and residential uses Nearly all south walls and all roof areas
up to about 6 dwellings per acre, on sites of should be unshaded during midday on
less than one acre the winter solstice.
Residential uses between 6 and 12 dwellings All roof areas, nearly all second-story and
per acre, office uses, and neighborhood most first-story south walls should be
commercial uses, on sites of one acre or more unshaded during midday on the winter
solstice.
Residential uses between 6 and 12 dwellings Most roof areas, nearly all second-story
per acre, office uses, and neighborhood and most first-story south walls should be
commercial uses, on sites less than one acre unshaded during midday on the winter
solstice.
Residential uses at densities greater than 12 All roof areas and most.south walls
dwellings per acre, public facilities, and general should be unshaded during midday on
commercial and industrial uses on large the winter solstice.
parcels or in newly subdivided areas.
Residential uses at densities greater than 12 Most roof areas and some south walls on
dwellings per acre,public facilities, and general upper floors should be unshaded during
commercial and industrial uses within midday on the winter solstice.
downtown and other locations previously
subdivided into relatively small lots
B. In subdivisions, the layout of streets and lots shall provide and protect solar
exposure. To assure maximum control over potential shading features, the longest
dimension of each lot should be oriented within 30 degrees of south, unless the sub-
divider demonstrates that for certain lots any of the following applies:
1) The lots are large enough to allow desirable solar access regardless of lot
orientation;
2) Buildings will be constructed as part of the tract development, and the buildings
will be properly orientated, with adequate solar access.
3) Topography makes variations from the prescribed orientation desirable to reduce
grading or tree removal, or to take advantage of a setting that would favor
greater reliance on early morning or late afternoon solar exposure.
4) Topographical conditions, such as steep northerly-facing slope or shading by the
mass of a hill, make solar energy use infeasible;
3) The size of the subdivision combined with the existing orientation of surrounding
streets and lots preclude desirable lot orientation.
Hearing Draft 20 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Pian Coriservation & Open.Space Element
C. Solar access easements will be created within all new subdivisions, as provided in
the California Solar Rights Act, unless any of the following applies:
1) The subdivision incorporates a building development plan that will assure
desirable solar access;
2) Desirable solar exposure will be protected by the City's Zoning Regulations;
3) The subdivision establishes yard or height standards designed to assure
desirable solar access, supplementary to the zoning regulations, which would
make a system of easements for each lot unnecessary.
D. When solar collectors are proposed as part of a development, the plan for that
development will include features to assure adequate solar access.
E. Exceptions to the standards for desirable solar access may be made if any of the
following applies:
1) Shading would be an insignificant part.of the total solar exposure, in terms of
area, time, or both;
2) Structures on protected properties have an insignificant probability of being
modified or replaced, and likely collector locations are sufficiently protected in
spite of shading that would normally be unacceptable, or such structures already
have adequately protected collectors;
3) Shading is between lots in a subdivision for,which a customized system of solar
access easements will provide an adequate level of protection;
4) Use of solar energy is unfeasible due to topographical conditions.
Policy E 1.4:-Solar collector appearance
A. Solar collectors should be compatible with the appearance of the structures that
contain or support them. Features of compatibility are:
1) Location within the dominant lines of the building or roof;
2) Rooftop collectors match the roof plane as closely as practical; ends of mounting
racks covered with an architecturally compatible material;
3) Exposed mechanical, plumbing, and structural components minimized; where
visible, color same as roof, or a compatible color;
4) Location minimizes need to remove trees;
5) Where glare cannot be avoided by location or orientation, surface has low
reflectivity.
B. Retrofitting buildings with solar collectors should be subject to the lowest level of
discretionary review that will implement all City policies. Within historic districts, such
projects may be referred to the Cultural Heritage Committee.
Policy.E 1.5: Unwanted solar heat gain
Sites and buildings should be designed to avoid unwanted heat gain from solar
exposure. Features which provide shading at suitable times of the year and day
generally should be "passive" or automatic, avoiding the need for occupants to
manipulate them.
Hearing Draft 21 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan — Conservation & Open Space Element
Energy: Program Outline
The City will do the following in support of energy sustainability, and will encourage others to do so,
as appropriate:
A. Manage City operations for energy efficiency, including purchase and use of vehicles,
equipment, and materials.
1) Outdoor and indoor lighting;
2) Space conditioning and water heating;
3) Vehicles, travel, and traffic flow;
4) Office equipment.
B. Manage City operations for energy self-reliance and production of sustainable energy,
consistent with primary functions such as public safety, water supply, and wastewater
treatment.
C. Incorporate conservation and sustainable-energy sources in existing and new City facilities.
D. Minimize unnecessary obstacles to energy conservation and use of sustainable energy
sources in its regulation of private activities.
1) Provision of space for outdoor clothes drying, and void private restrictions on doing so.
E. Encourage alternatives to employees commuting as occupants of individual vehicles
powered by non-sustainable fuels.
F. Administer the State's building energy standards.
G. Encourage energy-efficient project design by emphasizing use of daylight and solar
exposure, shading, and natural ventilation, as opposed to designing a particular image and
relying on mechanical systems to maintain functionality and comfort. Educate City staff,
citizen advisors, developers, and designers on ways to exceed minimum State energy
standards.
H. Address solar access in all plans needing City discretionary approval, considering both
structures and vegetation. Shading by vegetation is also subject to the California Solar
Shade Control Act. This act prohibits the placement of vegetation that would shade a solar
collector on another's property, if the collector meets certain height and setback criteria. The
City will advise those seeking permits for solar collectors to document vegetation existing
when the collector is installed or built.
I. Participate in programs to retrofit existing buildings with energy-saving features such as
insulation, glazing, and fluorescent lighting fixtures.
Solar access is a valuable resource. The initial cost of solar-
electric systems at the point of use is still relatively high for
many installations. However, they can avoid the increasing
prices of utility-supplied power and they have virtually no
harmful effects. This installation on a San Luis Obispo home
is ideally situated on a south-facing roof, which is hard to see
from the surroundings.
Hearing Draft 22 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Materials
Introduction `
Several materials have limited natural
sources and few potential substitutes if
they were to be depleted. Also, finished
materials embody the energy used to +'
extract, refine, form, and transport them. L . -
These processes typically involve some W�
land disturbance and pollution at each }
step. Efficient materials use, re-use, and ,
recycling therefore represent energy
savings and pollution avoidance. With ! �,
encouragement from citizens and from s+
State government, much progress has
been made in avoiding the one-time use �; ,,, r •: �
• �tti y y 1� 1...r1 �� .+
and discard of materials. t„
However, inefficient recycling efforts can The City's curbside collection program separates
add to resource consumption and recyclable consumer containers and fiber from
pollution, if materials with low utility must compostible landscape materials, and from trash.
be transported Ion distances or harmful Convenient prevents
recycling conserves a limited
P 9 resource and prevents pollution. Other waste-reduction
components must be separated and efforts target large businesses and construction projects.
disposed of.
Several materials, notably metals and some types of glass and paper, have economic value that
encourages their recycling. For other materials, market prices alone may not be enough to avoid
disposal. Modem mass-production and consumption systems make it difficult for individuals and
local governments to deal with the "life cycles" of complex products and wastes. But more can be
done to imitate nature's scheme for using the residue of one process as the raw material for
another.
Goal M 1: Efficient use of materials.
Goal M 2: Minimum undesirable effects resulting from further use of materials.
Policy M 1.1: Best available practices
The City will employ the best available practices in materials procurement, use, and
recycling, and will encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to do
likewise. "Best available practices" means behavior and technologies that,
considering available equipment, life-cycle costs, social and environmental side
effects, and the regulations of other agencies:
A. Use the least amount of newly-refined materials for a desired outcome;
B. Direct the largest feasible fraction of used materials to further use;
C. Avoid undesirable effects due to further use of materials.
Hearing Draft 23 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan conservation& Open Space Element
Materials: Program Outline
The City will do the following in support of efficient materials use and recycling, and will encourage
others to do so, as appropriate.
A. Manage City operations for efficient materials use..
1) Substitute electronic information exchange for paper.
2) Reproduce paper documents as two-sided publications.
B. Manage City operations to foster re-use and recycling.
1) In publications, avoid using inks, papers, and plastics that inhibit recycling or that
produce pollutants in preparation for recycling.
2) Purchase products incorporating recycled materials.
3) Use plant trimmings for mulch and compost, while avoiding the introduction or spread of
invasive, non-native species and pathogens..
4) Make wood from tree removal available for mulch, milting, pulping, or heating,
depending on its characteristics and the volume available, while avoiding the
introduction or spread of invasive, non-native species and pathogens. Selection of trees
for City streets, parks, and grounds will take into consideration their eventual disposal.
5) Produce biosolids (sewage sludge) suitable for land application as an agricultural
fertilizer or soil amendment, under scientific and health-based criteria.
C. Coordinate local, and participate in regional, household and business waste-reduction and
recycling efforts.
Hearing Draft 24 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Native Minerals
Introduction
Native minerals are those occurring in the
San Luis Obispo area that have, or are
expected to have, economic value. Sand,
gravel, and stone used in construction, and
metal ores, are examples of economically
valuable minerals. State guidelines and rules
aim for continued accessibility of native
minerals, while avoiding significant harm to
the environment or human health from their
extraction. Several local hills have been mined or ouarried.
In the past, quarries and mines in the San Luis Obispo area produced basaltic stone for masonry,
"red rock" for road base and surfacing, and cinnabar, an ore of mercury. No quarry or mine
operations are expected to be re-activated or initiated. In the 1980's, a petroleum company asked
to explore City-owned land in the Lopez Lake area. The request was denied based on the
environmental qualities of the area.
Goal NM 1: Environmentally responsible reclamation of past mineral-extraction sites.
Policy NM 1.1: Old mineral-extraction sites
The City will implement the following policies and will encourage other agencies with
jurisdiction to do so.
A. Land-use designations for old mineral-extraction sites shall reflect risks associated
with them, and should generally be limited to Open Space, Agriculture, or Park.
B. Previously active mineral-extraction sites should be secured and reclaimed in
conjunction with any development approvals for land containing them. Securing
them means preventing access that entails unacceptable risk. Reclamation means
re-establishing ground contours and vegetation to the extent feasible, to enhance
and protect ground stability, water and air quality, wildlife habitat values, and views.
Goal NM 2: Environmentally responsible operation and reclamation of any mineral
extraction that may occur in the San Luis Obispo planning area.
Policy NM 2.1: Potential mineral-extraction sites
A. Mineral extraction will not be permitted within the city limits.
B. Easements for City open space will prohibit mineral extraction and surface entry for
extraction of oil or gas.
C. The City will encourage other agencies with jurisdiction to permit mineral extraction
only if significant impacts to human health and the environment will be avoided and
site restoration will be assured. Impacts to be addressed include air and water
quality, noise, habitat disruption, aesthetics, and ground stability. All phases of the
activity, including site access, must be addressed.
Hearing Draft 25 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Views
Introduction
San Luis Obispo has been favored with a
beautiful natural setting. Also, the community
has strived for attractive urban development.
Protection of these assets enhances
enjoyment and economic vitality. Protection
involves both the integrity of the resource • { =`
being viewed, and lines of sight to the
resource.
Goal V 1: Attractive landscapes and cityscapes. To see the land as it is and could remain...
Policy V 1.1: Natural and agricultural landscapes
The City will implement the following policies and will encourage other agencies with
jurisdiction to do so.
A. Natural and agricultural landscapes that the City has not designated for urban use
shall be maintained in their current patterns of use.
B. Any development that is permitted in natural or agricultural landscapes shall be
visually subordinate to and compatible with the landscape features. Development
includes buildings, roads, and utility lines and structures. (See also the Land Use
Element.) Key aspects of compatibility are:
1) Avoidance of visually prominent locations such as ridgelines, and slopes
exceeding 20 percent;
2) Avoidance of unnecessary grading, vegetation removal, and lighting;
3) Building forms and materials, and landscaping, that respect the setting, including
the historical pattern of development in similar settings, and avoid stark
contrasts;
4) Preservation of scenic land forms, vegetation, and rock outcroppings.
C. The City's non-emergency repair, maintenance, and small construction projects in
highly visible locations, such as hillsides and downtown creeks, where scenic
resources could be affected, shall be subject to at least "minor or incidental'
architectural review.
Policy V 1.2: Urban development
The City will implement the following principle and will encourage other agencies with
jurisdiction to do so. Urban development should reflect its architectural context. This
does not necessarily prescribe a specific style, but requires deliberate design choices
that acknowledge human scale, natural site features, and neighboring urban
development, including historical and architectural resources. Plans for sub-areas of
the city may require certain architectural styles. (See also the Land Use Element.)
Policy V 1.3: Utilities and signs
Concerning objects in and near streets, plazas, and parks: unnecessary features that
clutter, intrude on, or obstruct views should be avoided. Necessary features, such as
utility and communication equipment, and traffic signs, should minimize disruption of
attractive views, consistent with the primary objective of safety.
Hearing Draft 27 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation&Open Space Element
Goal V 2: Ample opportunities for viewing attractive features.
Policy V2.1: Public places, including scenic roadways
The City will preserve and improve views of important scenic resources from public
places, and encourage other agencies with jurisdiction to do so. Public places include
parks, plazas, the grounds of civic buildings, streets and roads, and publicly
accessible open space. In particular, the route segments shown in Figure 5 are
designated as scenic roadways.
A. Development projects should not wall off scenic roadways and block views.
B. Utilities, traffic signals, and public and private signs and lights should not intrude
on or clutter views, consistent with safety needs.
C. Where important vistas of distant landscape features occur along streets, street
trees should be clustered to facilitate viewing of the distant features.
Policy V 2.2: Private places
Projects should incorporate as amenities views from and within private development
sites. Private development designs should cause the least view blockage for
neighboring property that allows project objectives to be met.
Policy V 2.3: Outdoor lightinq
Outdoor lighting should avoid: operating at unnecessary locations, levels, and times;
spillage to areas not needing or wanting illumination, particularly skyward; glare (intense
line-of-site contrast); frequencies (colors)that interfere with astronomical viewing.
Views: Program Outline
The City will do the following to protect and enhance views, and will encourage others to do so, as
appropriate.
A. Locate and design public facilities and utilities consistent with General Plan goals and
policies.
B. Update and maintain architectural review guidelines, and design standards in plans for sub-
areas of the city.
C. Maintain and apply sign regulations consistent with General Plan goals and policies.
D. Conduct environmental review and architectural review consistent with General Plan goals
and policies.
1) Require evaluations (accurate visual simulations) for projects affecting important scenic
resources and views from public places.
2) Determine that view blockage along scenic roadways is a significant impact.
E. Review County proposed general plan amendments and development proposals for
consistency with City General Plan goals and policies.
F. Advocate State and County scenic highway designations and protective programs for scenic
routes connecting San Luis Obispo with other communities.
G. Place underground existing overhead utilities, with highest priority for scenic roadways,
entries to the city, and historical districts.
H. Not allow additional billboards.
I. Remove existing billboards through amortization, conditions of development approval, and
grants for enhancing open-space and transportation corridors, with highest priority for
scenic roadways, entries to the city, and historical districts.
J. Maintain and applyzoning and subdivision regulations consistent with General Plan goals
and policies.
Hearing Draft 28 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Pian Conservation& Open Space Element
Cultural Heritage - r
Introduction
•r.
Before Europeans arrived on the central "
coast, native Chumash and Salinan had
lived in the area for centuries. While �� p
many reminders of these people have
been destroyed, some evidence of their
presence remains, and should be -
respectfully studied and preserved. San
Luis Obispo began with the founding of
the Mission in 1772. Over the last 230
years, the community has experienced
many changes. The many older buildings - —
and historic sites that remain help us
appreciate these changes today. The Downtown San Luis Obispo has been a focal point
City wants to preserve these cultural for historic preservation efforts.
resources, which are tangible reminders
of earlier days in the community's life.
Goal CH 1: Understanding and appreciation of local patterns of human occupation.
Policy CH 1.1: Historical and architectural resources
A. Historical and architectural resources should be identified, preserved, and where
necessary and possible, restored.
B. Historically or architecturally significant buildings should not be demolished or
substantially changed in outward appearance, unless doing so is necessary to
remove a threat to health and safety and other means to avoid the threat are
infeasible. The street appearance of buildings which contribute to a
neighborhood's architectural character should be maintained.
C. Where preservation of a structure with historical or architectural value is not
feasible, the resource shall be documented and the information retained in a
secure but publicly accessible form. An acknowledgment of the resource should
be incorporated within the site.
D. Changes or additions to historically or architecturally significant buildings should
be consistent with the original structure. New buildings in historical districts, or on
historically significant sites, should reflect the form, spacing, and materials of
nearby historic structures.
E. The City should identify and protect neighborhoods or districts having historical
character due to the collective effect of contributing buildings, whether or not
significant individual buildings are present.
Hearing Draft 29 August 2002
i -
San Luis Obispo General Plan` , Conservation&Open Space Element
f
Policy CH 1.2: Archaeological resources
A. The City shall provide for the protection of both known and potential
archaeological resources. To avoid development on important archaeological
sites, all available measures, including purchase of fee interest or development
rights, shall be explored at the time of a development proposal. Where such
measures are not feasible and development would adversely affect identified
archaeological or paleontological resources, adequate mitigation shall be
required.
B. All Native American cultural sites and archaeological sites should be protected as
Open Space wherever possible.
C. Activities other than development, which could damage or destroy archaeological
sites, including off-road vehicle use on or adjacent to known sites or unauthorized
collecting of artifacts, shall be prohibited.
D. All areas proposed for development should be surveyed for significant Native
American resources before planning is finalized.
E. Development within an archaeologically sensitive area shall require a preliminary
site survey by a qualified archaeologist knowledgeable in Chumash culture, prior
to a determination of the potential environmental impacts of the project.
F. Where a preliminary site survey finds substantial archaeological resources,
before permitting construction, the City shall require a mitigation plan to protect
the resources. Possible mitigation measures include: presence of a qualified
professional during initial, grading or trenching; project redesign; covering with a
layer of fill; excavation, removal, and disposition under the direction of a qualified
professional.
G. Where substantial archaeological resources are discovered during construction or
other activities, all activities shall cease until a qualified archaeologist
knowledgeable in Chumash culture can determine the significance of the
resource and recommend alternative mitigation measures.
H. Native American participation should be included in the City's guidelines for
resource assessment and impact mitigation. Native American monitors should be
present during archaeological excavation, and during construction in an area
likely to contain cultural resources.
I. The City will respect the fact that sites may be culturally significant to Native
Americans even if they have lost their scientific archaeological integrity through
previous disturbance, that sites may have religious value even though no artifacts
are present, and that artifacts may have intrinsic value even if their archaeological
context has been disturbed.
J. The City shall establish and maintain archaeological site records about known
sites. Specific archaeological site information will be kept confidential to protect
the resources. The City will maintain, for public use, generalized maps showing
known areas of archaeological sensitivity.
K. The Native American community should be consulted as knowledge of cultural
resources expands and as the City considers updates or significant changes to its
General Plan.
Hearing Draft 30 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Cultural Heritage: Program Outline
The City will do the following to protect cultural resources, and will encourage others to do so, as
appropriate.
A. The City will maintain its Cultural Heritage Committee to:
1) help identify, and advise on suitable treatment for, archaeological and historical
resources;
2) develop information on historic resources;
3) foster public awareness and appreciation of cultural resources, though means such as
tours, a Web site, identification plaques, and awards;
4) provide recognition for preservation and restoration efforts;
5) communicate with other City bodies and staff concerning cultural resource issues;
6) provide guidance to owners to help preservation and restoration efforts.
B. The City will participate in financial assistance programs, such as low-interest loans and
property-tax reduction, that encourage maintenance and restoration of historic properties.
C. The City's Architectural Review Guidelines will provide specific guidance on the construction
of new buildings within historic areas.
D. The City will be prepared to assess the condition of historic buildings that may be damaged
by disasters, and to foster their restoration whenever feasible.
E. The City will maintain standards concerning when and how to conduct archaeological
surveys, and the preferred methods of preserving artifacts.
F. The City will help display artifacts that illuminate past cultures.
G. The City will work with agencies and citizens groups that are involved with cultural heritage
preservation.
H. The City will, consistent with health, safety, and basic land-use policies, apply building and
zoning standards within allowed ranges of flexibility, to foster continued use and re-use of
historic buildings.
j
Whether cultural resources are preserved in place
or moved, interpreting them for the public is an
important aspect of conservation.This display is in a
downtown parking structure, close to where the
materials were found.
Hearing Draft 31 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan servation.&Open Space Element
Figure 6: Cultural Resources
Areas with Historic overlay zone
0Vicinity of recorded archaeological site 1000 200 Q
® N
feet meters
Selected other principal architectural This map is for general information only, and
or historical sites (such as adobes) may be revised vAthout amending this element.
y�
0
Chinatown Mill Street District
cA District `•
Downtown
Dict Bowden/La Loma Adobe
' Railroad District
Old Town
0 District
�^1
a
o th
a
,o
Tank Farm Rd Rodriguez
Adobe
�o
Rr
d'f
Octagon Buckley Rd
Bam
Hearing Draft 32 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation&.Open Space Element
Glossary
Accessory Structure is a structure that is clearly subordinate or incidental and directly related to
the primary structure.
Active recreation means recreation facilities typical of urban parks, including play fields (such as
soccer or softball), school fields, community centers, tennis courts, picnic areas (group and
individual), golf courses and golf-related facilities, recreation resorts, and similar facilities.
Active trail corridor is a pedestrian or bicycle trail that typically is (1) used for commuting
purposes (provides direct access from school or work and residences), (2) located in an urban
area, (3) paved with an all weather surface, and (4) utilized by a significant segment of the City
population.
Candidate species are taxa the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or California Department
of Fish and Game (F&G) are considering for listing as endangered or threatened species.
City Limits includes that land within the corporate limits of San Luis Obispo where the City has
jurisdiction.
Clustering means grouping allowed development on a small area of the site, with the remainder of
the property protected as agriculture or open space. See the City's Land Use Element for clustering
densities.
CNPS means the California Native Plant Society.
Conservation means the use of less energy in any form than would otherwise occur. It may be
accomplished by greater efficiency (for example, more miles per gallon) or reduced activity (for
example, going to a nearby park instead of a distant park).
Conservation Plan is a document prepared by the City or a City designated representative which
specifies the care and management of specific open space sites. This plan outlines resources
existing on the site, resource preservation, allowed recreational uses, and other similar programs.
Creek is a waterway or portion of waterway designated on the Creek Map by a solid or dashed
blue, green, or dark orange line. Drainage ditches, concrete swales, underground culverts and
storm drains (as indicated on the Creek Map) are not considered a creek. Creeks located in the
greenbelt or Outer Planning Area are as designated by the USGS 7.5 Minute series quadrangle
maps or SLO County data.
Creek corridor is that area of the creek between physical top of bank on one side of the creek and
physical top of bank on the other side of the creek, or the area between the outer edge of the
riparian vegetation on one side of the creek to the outer edge of the riparian vegetation on the other
side of the creek (whichever is greater).
Creek maintenance means work within a creek corridor that involves the trimming of vegetation,
the use of herbicides or pesticides, removing debris or trash, removing vegetation necessary to
maintain flood control, or similar maintenance activities. Projects that involve creek alterations
should not be considered creek maintenance.
Hearing Draft 33 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan - Conservation&Open Space Element
Creek restoration is the process of restoring a creek to a more natural condition. Restoration
includes planting native riparian vegetation, removing wildlife barriers, providing fish ladders,
removing debris and trash, removing invasive non-native creek species, grading and changes to
the creek associated with creek restoration work, and other similar activities. Creek restoration is
not considered development.
Creek Setback means the minimum distance that development must be located from a creek's
physical top of bank or the outer edge of the riparian vegetation (whichever is greater). An
adequate creek setback should allow for future natural changes that may occur within the creek
corridor, and extend beyond the storm design capacity of a creek.
Development means the erection of structures (including agricultural buildings and accessory
structures such as decks and spas), the associated grading, vegetation removal, and paving
associated with structures; the subdivision of land, mining, excavation, and drilling operations.
Where creeks, wetlands, unique resources, sensitive habitat, and historical resources occur on-site
or may be affected, development also includes agricultural uses (such as tilling the soil, grazing,
agricultural grading, and similar uses) as well as grading (greater than 50 cubic yards), paving, and
vegetation removal (the removal of a tree or riparian vegetation such that a major portion of a creek
bank is exposed) whether such activities are associated with a structure or independent of a
structure. Enhancement or restoration of a natural resource is not considered development.
Endangered species are any taxa in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
their range as identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the California
Department of Fish and Game (F&G).
Energy means the capacity to change the characteristics of a material, most often its location or
temperature. In the realm of daily life, energy is never really used up, only changed from a more
useful state to a less useful state, with all forms eventually dissipating as heat.
Flood Prone means subject to a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation
of normally dry land from: (1) overflow of inland waters; and/or (2) the unusual and rapid
accumulation of runoff of surface waters from any source. Flood prone areas are areas within the
100 year flood plain (zones A and B on FEMA maps), but also include areas in which standing
water may accumulate after a relatively short rain or flood due to other sources of water such as
runoff from nearby land uses caused by inadequate local drainage facilities.
Gateways shall mean portions of the following roadways which are located within the greenbelt:
Highway 101 (excluding off-ramps and on-ramps), Broad Street (Highway 227), Los Osos Valley
Road; Highway 1, South Higuera Street, and Orcutt.Road.
Grassland Community is a community of plants of varying size, physical structure, abundance,
distribution, and taxonomic affinities typically dominated by herbaceous species but also consisting
of grasses and forbs introduced during the Spanish colonial period and a mixture of native
California grasses and forbs. Grassland communities provide adequate cover, range, and food
products for the plants and animals that typically live in the Valley Grassland Communities that can
be found in Central California, the interior valleys of the Coast Ranges, and along the coast of
central and southern California. Grassland communities within the City's planning area typically
contain many of the following native perennial grasses (next page):
Hearing Draft 34 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Koelaria macrantha Junegrass
Melica califomica California melic grass
M. imperfecta Melic grass
M. torreyana Torrey's melic grass
Nassella[Stipa]pulchra Purple needlegrass
N. [Stipa]lepida Slender needlegrass
N. [Stipa]cemua Nodding needlegrass
Poa secunda Perennial bluegrass
Greenbelt is land area surrounding the City's Urban Reserve Line (as depicted on the Greenbelt
Map). The greenbelt generally includes the northern part of the watershed for San Luis Obispo
Creek. The greenbelt may consist of private and public property composed of (1) open space area
that is preserved to define the limit to urban growth, (2) open space area utilized to protect
community and natural resources, (3) agricultural lands and associated agricultural uses, and (4)
rural lands and recreation. A greenbelt functions to preclude adjacent urban communities from
merging together by maintaining urban growth in designated urban areas.
Habitat buffer is an area around a sensitive habitat or unique resource that protects the resource
from development or associated impacts of development. A habitat buffer should: (1) be located
between sensitive habitat or unique resources and proposed, existing; or potential development; (2)
be a sufficient width and size to protect the species most sensitive to development disturbances
and to compensate for project impacts; and (3) be designed to complement the habitat value
associated with the sensitive habitat or unique resource and to protect such resource(s).
Hazards include landslides and soil creep, flooding, potentially active or active earthquake faults,
liquefaction areas, wildland fires, and dangers associated with locating too near to an airport
(aircraft crashes).
Insulation means a material or the property of a material that resists the flow of heat from one
place to another. Governmental codes and manufacturers' specifications use a measure called the
"R-value"for this property. The higher the value, the greater is the resistance to heat conduction.
Life-cycle cost means the total cost of buying and operating a building or a piece of equipment
over its useful fife.
Mitigation banking'is a method of resource or habitat protection. It is a method for compensating
for unavoidable impacts of development. It involves a public or private entity creating, restoring, or
preserving fish, plant, and wildlife habitats in advance of an anticipated need for actual mitigation.
When habitat areas are created a credit is created. When unavoidable impacts occur to habitat or a
resource as a result of development, the developer (whether public or private) may utilize an
existing credit created from previous successful habitat restoration, create an additional bank area,
or pay a mitigation fee (as specified by the City).
Mitigation fee is a fee paid to mitigate development impacts to creek, sensitive habitat, unique
resource, or similar resources. This fee is paid to protect existing resources or buy land for the
future protection of resources or habitat.
Hearing Draft 35 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Mitigation Monitoring Plan is a plan and program to insure the proper implementation of
mitigation measures identified in an environmental impact report or negative declaration with
mitigation. It typically involves a monitoring and reporting process to document the implementation
of all mitigation measures.
Mitigation Plan is a plan which provides for wetland mitigation and long-term preservation.
Morros are a chain of ancient volcanic peaks extending from Islay Hill to Morro Rock. These peaks
occupy a stretch of land approximately 12 miles long running in an east-west direction from the City
of San Luis Obispo to the seashore of Morro Bay. The Morros include the following peaks: Islay
Hill, Mine Hill, Terrace Hill; Cerro San Luis, Bishop Peak, Chumash Peak, Cerro Romauldo,
Hollister Peak, Cerro Cabrillo, Black Hill, and Morro Rock.
Native plants are those plant species present in California before the arrival of European explorers
and settlers.
Natural state means similar to how it would be found in nature (not altered appreciably by
humans). Providing a natural state on a hillside or creek is to provide plants typical to that resource.
Within a creek or wetland, an essentially natural state would allow some non-riparian vegetation
(which is or would not negatively impact that resource)to remain or be planted.
Open Space is land or water area which remains in a predominantly natural or undeveloped state,
and is generally free of structures. Such lands protect and preserve the community's natural and
historical resources, define the urban boundary, and provide visual and physical relief from urban
development. Open spaces may consist of small portions of a parcel or large tracts of land. Such
lands may include farming and grazing; creeks, marshes, watershed and floodplains; scenic
resources; plant and animal habitat; historic and archaeological resources; and passive recreation
areas.
Outer planning area is the land outside the City's greenbelt but within the County's designated
perimeter of the Planning Area.
Passive recreation means low-intensity recreational activities such as hiking, bird watching, nature
photography, trails, individual picnic areas, nature study, viewing stations, interpretive areas, and
similar uses.
Passive solar energy system (sometimes called a "direct" system) means a design that uses
landscape and architectural features to collect and store energy directly, without any external,
mechanical power source. Such systems are nearly always used for heating or cooling space within
a building. Many passive systems work best with some management by the occupant, such as
opening windows or closing curtains.
Practical alternative shall mean (1) the project's basic purpose could still be accomplished either
through a redesign or a reduction in massing, scale, or density, or (2) if changes are required to the
project's design, scale, or density, reasonable use of the subject property could still occur.
Reasonable use of the property in the case of new development may include less development
then indicated by zoning. In the case of additional development on an already developed site,
reasonable development may mean that no additional development is reasonable considering site
constraints and the existing development's scale, design, or density.
Hearing Draft 36 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Pian Conservation & Open Space Element
Prime farmland is the land that is best suited to producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed
crops. It must either be used for producing food or fiber or be available for these uses. It has the
soil quality, length of growing season, and moisture supply needed to economically produce a
sustained high yield crops when it is managed properly. Prime farmland commonly has an
adequate and dependable supply of moisture from precipitation or irrigation (as defined by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo, CA, 1984)..
Programs are actions which the City intends to take in pursuit of its goals and policies.
Proposed endangered and threatened species are those taxa for which a proposed regulation
has been published in the Federal Register, but not a final rule.
Rare species are taxa not necessarily threatened with extinction, but which occur in such small
numbers that they may become endangered if their environment worsens.
Restoration is the process of returning a resource to a more natural state. Restoration includes
planting vegetation native to that area, removing wildlife barriers, removing debris and trash,
removing invasive non-native plant species, and other similar activities. Restoration is not
considered development.
Riparian vegetation means vegetation and habitat characteristic of creeks or their edges.
Renewable energy source means a type of energy which is more or less continuously flowing
from source to 'potential user, such as sunlight, wind, tidal and wave action, growing plants,
geologic heat, and difference between temperature of layers of ocean water. Nonrenewable
sources include stocks of coal, oil, natural gas, uranium ore, and intermediate sources derived form
them. (The nuclear "breeder reactor" would in a sense be a renewable source once it is
successfully established along with a fuel and waste processing cycle.)
Retrofit means to install a system or devices in an existing building or vehicle.
Stream: see the "creek.°
Structure means anything assembled or constructed on the ground, or attached to anything with a
foundation on the ground.
Taxa refers to any species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, invertebrate,
or plant.
Threatened species are any species likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range as identified by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service or the California Department of Fish and Game.
Transfer of Development Credit is a program that allows a landowner (located in the City, the
greenbelt, or Outer Planning Area) to transfer a property's development potential to another
property located within the City, the greenbelt, or Outer Planning Area where development is
encouraged. Such a program transfers development from a site where development is discouraged
(sender site) to a site where development is encouraged (receiver site).
Hearing Draft 37 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation& Open Space Element
Scenic Resources are resources having high aesthetic qualities, such as hills and mountains;
creeks and other wetland resources; sensitive habitat and unique resources; and agricultural lands
that contain grazing or cropland.
Significant means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment, as
defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Significant wetland means those wetlands that are important because of their uniqueness or
because they provide habitat for rare, endangered, or threatened plants or animals.
Solar access means exposure of a solar collector or passive system to the amount and duration of
sunlight necessary for the successful operation of the system.
Solar collector means a device which transforms sunlight striking it into another form of energy,
such as heat, electricity, or chemical potential.
Scenic Resources are resources having high aesthetic qualities, such as hills and mountains;
creeks and other wetland resources; sensitive habitat and unique resources; and agricultural lands
that contain grazing or cropland.
Substitution means the replacement of one form of energy by another, as when fossil fuels
replaced animals for farm work and transportation, or when solar energy rather than natural gas is
used to heat water.
Thermal mass means a solid or liquid mass which absorbs, stores, and releases heat effectively,
such a tank of water or masonry wall which is warmed by sunlight and which gives off its heat at
night.
Urban Use is a relatively intensive use of land which normally requires City water and sewer
service; urban uses are nearly all the types of development accommodated in the following
categories of the Land Use Element: low-, medium-, medium-high, and high-density residential;
neighborhood, tourist, and general-retail commercial; offices; services and manufacturing; and
most public buildings. The following are not considered urban uses according to this document: (1)
structures proposed at a density typically associated with agriculture (such as a bam and a single
family dwelling); (2) agricultural support structures that need to be provided near agricultural
operations (such as cooling and storage facilities); and (3) clustered residential development
allowed through the County's Land Use Regulations where existing development rights are
clustered to protect agricultural land.
Urban Reserve Line (URL) includes land reserved for the urban expansion of San Luis Obispo
where the City will have jurisdictional control.
Vernal pools are low swales, or depressions (typically 12 to 18 inches in depth), in terraces where
water ponds for one to three months during the cool season and dries up during the early part of
the warm season.
Village Reserve Line is the boundary fora San Luis Obispo County land use designation of Village
Reserve. The Village Reserve area is an unincorporated area in which urban level development
may occur where consistent with the land use plans of San Luis Obispo County.
Hearing Draft 38 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Cei.yervation & Open Space Element
Wetlands means an area where one or more of the following attributes exist:
1. At least periodically, in years of normal rainfall, the plants supported by the land are
predominantly hydrophytes (thrive only in water or saturated soil).
2.. The substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil as defined by the United States Soil
Conservation Service.
3. The substrate is non-soil and is at least periodically saturated with water or covered by
shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year in years of normal
rainfall.
Where less than all three of the attributes specified above exist, delineation of an area as
wetland shall be supported by the demonstrable use of wetland area by wetland associated fish
and wildlife resources, related biological activity, and.wetland habitat values.
Winter solstice means the day—usually December 21—when the sun is lowest in the southern sky
and the period of daylight is shortest.. (The summer solstice is the day when the sun is at its most
northern position at noon and the period of daylight is longest. It occurs June 21.)
Woodlands are plant communities dominated by native trees such as oaks.
Hearing Draft 39 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan - Conservation &Open Space Element
Illustration Credits
All photographs in the body of this element were taken by City staff, except for the trout on page
12, which is by Aaron Nadig, courtesy of the Berkeley Digital Library project..
Hearing Draft 40 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conbarvation &Open Space Element
Appendix A: Species of Local Concern
The City is concerned with maintaining healthy populations of the following species in the long term,
even though they are not listed for protection under State or Federal laws. (Presence or absence of a
picture has no significance; pictures are not in proportion.)
Species Reason for Listing City Conservation Strategy
Plants
Clay Mariposa Lily Limited distribution; habitat loss. Designate sufficient, suitable habitat areas as
open space; survey designated potential
development sites before or at time of
development proposal, and protect, relocate, or
propagate individuals.
Club-Haired Mariposa Limited distribution; habitat loss. Designate sufficient, suitable habitat areas as
Lily open space; survey designated potential
development sites before or at time of
development proposal, and protect, relocate, or
propagate individuals.
Hoover Button Celery Limited distribution; habitat loss. Designate sufficient suitable habitat areas as
open space;survey designated potential
development sites before or at time of
development proposal, and protect, relocate, or
_prWagate individuals.
Fishes
Prickly Sculpin Dependence on stream habitat; Protect water quantity and quality,
habitat de radation.
Amphibians
Western Toad Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate likely habitat areas as open space;
and degradation. survey approved activity sites prior to activity, and
relocate individuals to suitable, safe habitat.
Califomia Newt Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate likely habitat areas as open space;
and degradation. survey approved project sites prior to activity, and
relocate individuals to suitable,safe habitat.
029
Re 'les
Western Skink Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space;
and degradation. survey approved project sites prior to activity, and
relocate individuals to suitable, safe habitat.
i
F
.i
Coast Homed Lizard Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space;
and degradation. survey approved project sites prior to activity, and
relocate individuals to suitable,safe habitat.
Hearing Draft A- 1 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation&Open Space Element
Species Reason for Listing City Conservation Strategy
Ringneck Snake Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space;
and degradation. survey approved project sites prior to activity, and
a relocate individuals to suitable, safe habitat.
Striped Racer Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space;
and degradation. survey approved project sites prior to activity, and
relocate individuals to suitable, safe habitat.
Birds
Raptors in general Reduction of prey species due to Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space;
habitat loss and degradation; manage City-owned open space to sustain prey
susceptibility to contaminants in populations; avoid introducing contaminants to
food chain. food chain; survey proposed activity sites prior to
activity, and avoid disturbing nesting individuals.
Maintain perches, including artificial ones.
Cooper Hawk Limited local distribution. In particular, survey proposed activity sites prior
to activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Sharp-Shinned Hawk Limited local distribution. In particular, survey proposed activity sites prior
to activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Golden Eagle Limited local distribution. In particular, survey proposed activity sites prior
to activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Y
Ferruginous Hawk Limited local distribution. See general measures for raptors.
Northern Hamer Limited local distribution. In particular,survey proposed activity sites prior
to activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
White-Tailed Kite Limited local distribution. In particular, survey proposed activity sites prior
to activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Prairie Falcon Limited local distribution. In particular,survey proposed activity sites prior
to activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Burrowing Owl Limited local distribution; loss of In particular, protect fields and creek-banks
burrowing sites that are used for containing, or suitable for,burrows; avoid
rest,cover,and nesting. disturbance of burrows by people and pets.
Herons in general Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands; protect rookeries
and degradation. and avoid activities adjacent to rookeries that
would disrupt nesting.
Hearing Draft A - 2 August 2002
i
i
San Luis Obispo General Plan - Conswriration& Open Space Element
Species Reason for Listing City Conservation Strategy
Great Blue Heron Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands; protect rookeries
and degradation. and avoid activities adjacent to rookeries that
K would disrupt nesting.
Black-Crowned Night Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands;protect rookeries
Heron and degradation, and avoid activities adjacent to rookeries that
would disrupt nesting.
Great Egret Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands;protect rookeries
and degradation. and avoid activities adjacent to rookeries that
would disrupt nesting.
Snowy Egret Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands;protect rookeries
and degradation. and avoid activities adjacent to rookeries that
would disrupt nesting.
r
J-
American Bittern Limited distribution;habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands.
and degradation.
Hearing Draft A - 3 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan— Conservation& Open Space Element
Species Reason for Listing City Conservation Strategy
Western Least Bittern Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands; in particular,
and degradation. survey proposed activity sites prior to activity, and
avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Long-Billed Curlew Limited distribution; habitat loss Protect and enhance wetlands; in particular,
and degradation. survey proposed activity sites prior to activity,and
nt` a avoid disturbing nesting areas.
T'
Vaux Swift Limited distribution. Survey proposed activity sites prior to activity,
and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Rufous Hummingbird Limited distribution. Survey proposed activity sites prior to activity,
and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
•M
Roadrunner Likely limit of historic range; Protect sufficient edge habitat(especially among
habitat degradation and reduced chaparral, grassland, and scrub communities).
prey within historic range.
Warblers in general Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
Yellow Warbler Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas. Survey proposed activity sites prior to
activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas.
Wrens in general Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
Vireos Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
Hearing Draft A - 4 August 2002
'I
San Luis Obispo General Plan Con�rvation& Open Space Element.
Species Reason for Listing Citv Conservation Strategy
Flycatchers Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
x,z predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
a
w�
Olive-sided Flycatcher Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats;in particular,
predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas. Survey proposed activity sites prior to
activity, and avoid disturbing nesting areas..
Grosbeaks Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats;in particular,
predation by pets and feral cat& avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
Sparrows (all native Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
species) predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
M�
Rufous-crowned Habitat loss and degradation; Protect riparian and edge habitats; in particular,
Sparrow predation by pets and feral cats. avoid scattered residential development in natural
areas.
California Gull Limited distribution. Avoid disturbance of.nesting areas.
{i d
chickspictured)
Loggerhead Shrike Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space.
and degradation.
Cafrfomia Homed Limited distribution; habitat loss Designate sufficient habitat areas as open space.
Lark and degradation.
Hearing Draft A - 5 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Species Reason for Usting City Conservation Strategy
Mammals
Mountain Lion Limited distribution; historic Avoid urban expansion into habitat areas;
pattern of treating lions and some manage City-owned open space beyond the
prey as pests; habitat loss or urban edge to provide suitable habitat.
` encroachment by human activities
-. (resulting in conflicts and killing of
lions, either intentionally or
through accidental vehicle strikes).
Black Bear Limited distribution; historic Avoid urban expansion into habitat areas;
pattern of hunting, and habitat loss manage City-owned open space beyond the
or encroachment by human urban edge to provide suitable habitat.
activities (resulting in conflicts and
killing of bears, either intentionally
or through accidental vehicle
strikes).
Shrews (all) Limited distribution; habitat loss Avoid urban expansion into habitat areas;
IL 7*. and degradation. manage City-owned open space beyond the
urban edge to provide suitable habitat.
Bats (all) Limited distribution; disruption of Survey proposed activity sites prior to activity,
roosting sites; possibly affects of and avoid roost sites or schedule activities to
pesticide contamination for some avoid roost disturbance, particularly when
species. immature bats are present; avoid use of
Big Free-tailed Bat pesticides that could affect susceptible species.
Pallid Bat
Insects
Monarch butterfly Interruption of mufti-generation Maintain sheltering groups of trees;survey
migrations due to loss of roosting proposed activity sites prior to activity, and avoid
sites; pesticide mortality. roost sites or schedule activities to avoid roost
disturbance, particularly when over-wintering
flocks are present; avoid use of pesticides near
roosts or around concentrations of host plant
(milkweed).
Picture Credits: Illustrations are modified from images maintained by the University of California at Berkeley,
Digital Library Project, originally provided by the following photographers, all associated with the California
Academy of Sciences:John Game; Dr. Lloyd Glenn Ingles; Jens V. Vindum;Gerald&Buff Corsi; Marguerite
Gregory, George W. Robinson;Jules Strauss;Andrea Jesse; Albert P. Bekker.
Hearing Draft A - 6 August 2002
•c - _ _ • • -• • - • • • r. �ai4` ••• • • rti • • •. • •
• r 1
•a ••c r • r • orr « ••
• A
i
..
` .... r 1
♦ ��lO1� �' �y '�{ �� r • �y}1 r )`� *T'��..I°jam
♦ ^ + �. � < � it �• �y�a. _ �`�� _
��-T` -�yy�� �� F �� y�{y ��4�TY]T♦3:•7/!y-rilylfllyy'lM•J ��
int-\v+�Q �1� �•. -�1-1 �����"^�:�rr�• ,`
000
Poi o+}�ro�or,�oo ��• � .�� � Fat �t,�� ?r�y`
rte. r��. �� "`y„yr�Y O�j•�, r r r r1 � r � � � � F
I?� )i
►♦� .�P�►ii�O�i�r r r�r+r. s �' lfri¢ i is• • �' •�
°��ltr*Qipio�o��°fir
T•T•T•Titic�i.' O.i.a.... 'i.�o • . s � f
rrr�h :
. . . { �►
IRE
OFA 4"41
mw
.W ��/r3o4*q Tv�vi' �b
ti a�araaoao�a
Y I
�Zr
r
-- • I • v //
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element
Appendix B: Acquisition of Open Space Lands
1. The City will strivefor the most effective protection of open space resources through its use of
public funds.
2. To be considered for City acquisition, a site must have value in one or more of the following
categories:
A) Valuable natural resources, such as habitat for listed species or species of local concern,
groundwater, or surface water;
B) Scenic qualities, cultural resources, or unusual geologic features;
C) Natural hazards to public health or safety, such as flooding or landslide, that make
reasonable development on the property unlikely;
D) Important opportunities for low-impact recreation, such as providing a trail linkage, or
valuable environmental education opportunities;
E) Proximity to land that is already permanently protected as open space, or the property is
close to land that is likely to be protected in the foreseeable future, thus forming or
potentially forming a continuous area of protected lands;
F) Productive or potentially productive agricultural land, or a meaningful buffer that would
protect agricultural operations;
G) Individually or cumulatively forms an important part of the City's greenbelt.
3. A site that meets one or more of the criteria in part 2 above should have high priority for
purchase if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A) The property, or resources on the property, are under threat of incompatible development or
irreversible damage;
B) The site has timely or attractive purchase considerations or conditions (for example, local
cash contributions are available or additional land area is available).
C) The site is one of the last sections providing continuous habitat or a wildlife corridor, or a trail
linkage;
D) The site is of sufficient size that resources are likely to remain intact, even if adjacent
properties are developed;
E) Purchase of the site would maximize the effectiveness of acquisition expenditures (for
example, purchasing one piece of property may guarantee that a second piece of property
remains in open space or agriculture, even though a public agency does not obtain the
second property.
4. The City should generally obtain fee ownership for:
A) Sites that may have or require frequent public access to or through them, such as a public
trail;
B) Agricultural lands when (1) there may be harmful impacts from current or future agricultural
practices, (2) the property could be leased back for continued agricultural use, or (3) public
access is desired;
C) Lands for which buying the development rights is almost as expensive as obtaining the land
in fee;
D) Lands that contain delicate habitat requiring monitoring and enforcement;
E) Land on which enforcing an easement would be difficult or costly.
Hearing Draft B- 1 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation& Open Space Element
5. A site that meets the criteria in parts 2 through 4 above should generally not be acquired by the
City as open space if:
A) The site is developed with facilities or structures, and thus would not be consistent with the
open space definition;
B) The site or resource can be obtained in a timely manner as a condition of City, State, or
County development approvals or agreements;
C) The site's values are primarily scenic, but the property cannot be readily viewed by the
general public;
D) Adjacent properties are being developed in a way that is likely to significantly diminish the
conservation values of the property in question;
E) Management of the property would be very costly, or the terms of an easement would be
unusually difficult to enforce;
F) The site cannot be acquired with reasonable effort in relation to its value or purpose;
6. The City should generally obtain an easement or development rights:
A) On agricultural lands where the cost of development rights is significantly less than fee
ownership;
B) Where continuation of the private use is compatible with the open space designation, and
management by the City is not required;
C) To protect views or scenic resources involving little or no public access.
7. The City will sell, exchange, or transfer an interest in open space lands, or relinquish a
permanent open space easement, only by approval of the City Council following a public
hearing, and only after a 60-day period in which the decision can be suspended pending
reversal by referendum.
Hearing Draft B -2 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan ;servation & Open Space Element
Government Open Space -Ownerships & Easements
City-owned open space National Forest - - Outer edge of greenbelt
® City open space easement Federal wildemess area Date of information:July 2002
® Other agency or organization State land with some Relatively small features
open space easement commitment to openness do not appear on this map.
County-owned land, — - Inner edge of greenbelt 1 Klometer 1 Mile
mainly for open space (urban reserve line) N
•I
I
� •
9 . . . . A
ay t 1 ane
U iii
r - - - - - - .
Bishop
C Peak 4e 3 �d
gra+ Ne
<�OscS Vane Cerro f
1 Rd San Luis
I
16-
M M M M M M M M M M M M
6-- - - - - - - - - - - -
Tank Farm Rd
Isla
Buckley Rd �.
I
I I
I I
I- r - - -
Edna Valley
t Imo '
Davenport
3� Hills
1
This area also has a conservation-
organtmOon easement
Hearing Draft B-3 August 2002
I
San Luis Obispo General-Plan Con.ervation & Open Space Element
Appendix C: Management of City-owned Lands
1. The City will manage land that it owns, or controls through lease or easement, to implement the
policies of this element, and will encourage other agencies to do so on their land. This Appendix
focuses on management practices for lands designated by the Land Use Element as Open
Space or Agriculture, but does not exclude other designations such as Park or Public.
2. On open space land that the City manages, the City may decide to permit more than one type of
activity or use. Where different uses may not be compatible, the following priorities will guide
decisions. The items listed under a priority heading are co-equal. (Land uses are subject to any
deed restrictions placed by owners conveying land to the City for open space purposes, and to
easements or rights retained by others.)
Priority 1
Protection of existing wildlife and natural habitat generally
Protection of existing listed species and their existing habitat, or re-establishment of such
habitat where damaged
Protection of public resources such as water quality (watershed runoff and groundwater
recharge)
Avoidance of threats to public health and safety, such as groundinstability(In the case of
vegetation management for wildland fire, separation between hazardous vegetation and
structures generally should be provided on the land containing the structure, by the owner
of the land containing the structure. Where vegetation management on City-owned land
is needed or desirable, management practices will minimize harm to wildlife habitat and
scenic resources.)
Public access and recreation.
Priority 2
Protection of scenic resources
Priori 3
• Scientific study
• Agricultural production
3. Any encroachment of a private use onto the City's land must benefit the City's ownership and
management objectives, and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. (See also#13.)
4. The City will adopt conservation plans (or master plans with conservation components)for large
parcels, and for small parcels where conservation challenges and solutions need to be clarified.
The preparation and adoption process shall foster participation by resource-protection experts
and by the public. On lands designated Park (such as .Laguna Lake, Mission Plaza, and
Meadow Park), the plans will provide for previously established recreational uses. They may
provide for expanded recreational uses that do not adversely impact listed species and that
minimize adverse impacts on other wildlife resources. The City's Lopez Canyon property
(outside the planning area) and Reservoir Canyon property will be managed as Open Space.
Hearing Draft C- 1 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan. Conse,.ation &Open Space Element
5. The City will coordinate law enforcement and emergency response for its open space lands with
all potentially affected agencies.
6. The City may lease land to other agencies or organizations for maintenance or service activities,
provided the lease agreement reflects all City policies and management objectives.
7. The City should lease lands designated Agriculture for continued agricultural use, provided the
lease agreement reflects all City policies and management objectives.
B. The City may provide services on or maintain resource-protection lands owned by others, where
warranted by adjacency to City-owned land and long-term resource-protection needs. Such
activity shall be subject to an agreement approved by the City Council. The costs for such
services shall be borne by the owner, unless the City Council determines that bearing part or all
of the cost is necessary to implement City policies.
9. The City will monitor its open space holdings often enough for timely discovery and response to
problems such as substantial hazards, encroachment, trespass, and degradation of resources.
10. The City may enlist volunteers, including community organizations and neighboring landowners,
to help monitor and maintain open space and recreational resources. Volunteers will receive
training appropriate to the tasks they will be performing, including recognition of situations and
conditions requiring professional response.
11. The City will maintain a publicly accessible inventory of the location and type of its open space
holdings and easements. The inventory will contain or be linked to documentation of the initial
condition, and the evolving conditions, of land and easement areas that it acquires.
12.When compatible with the primary purpose of the open space, the City should use revenue from
open space lands, such as agricultural lease payments; to fund open-space maintenance.. Such
revenues may also be used to acquire open space.
13. Mitigation for the impacts of private projects shall generally be conducted on private lands.
However, special circumstances may arise that justify use of City-owned land as a mitigation
site:
A. Where there is a clear City benefit from a transaction that involves the use of City land as a
mitigation site; or
B. Where General Plan goals will be furthered by the appropriate use of City lands for
mitigation purposes.
Private mitigation actions on City-owned land shall have a clear resource-protection or amenity
value to the site, and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. Mitigation at a City park
shall be subject to review and recommendation by the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Mitigation on City-owned open space shall be subject to review and recommendation by the
Natural Resources Manager.
14. The City may form an Open Space Committee to advise staff on open space acquisition and
management.
Hearing Draft C-2 August 2002
San Luis Obispo General Plan 'onservation&Open Space Element
Prime Agricultural Soils
This map shows Class I and Gass II soils as determined by the U.S. Resource
Conservation Service(formerly the Soil Conservation Service,)regardless of
whether they are irrigated. Class I and II soils are the best for crop production
based on their slope,texture,depth, and inherent fertility.When this element was
adopted, much of the prime soil in and near the city had been covered by
development or by Laguna Lake.
Q
N
� a
1 kilometer 1 mile
Highway 1
o
a
Tank Farn Rd
ey
o
o �
2
Davenport Hills 0,
Hearing Draft D- 1 August 2002
Mike Draze Fwd: Re: Meetin Se ter
Open S22r-9ementof the General Plan (O.O.OP 1
RL22
From: "D. & E. Dollar"<ddollar acbel[.net>
To: Mike Draze <MDraze@socity.org> �Date: 9/20/03 7:20AMsub'ect: L .• .
J [Fwd: Re: Meeting September 23, 2003-Conservation and Op
General Plan (0.0.0. (Unavailable Until September 23)))]
Please forward to Planning Commission-Thank you
>>>ddollar 09/19/03 11:27 >>>
City Council and Planning Commission,
(J. Mandeville, please forward to Planning Commission members-there is
no email address posted on the city web page, thank you.)
I will be unable to attend this meeting (I'll be out of town). The issue
is very important for the future of our city.Thoughtful and strong
proactive measures are appropriate to make an effective plan that
translates into real conservation and open space in our city.
1. Ease of use should not be the objective of any revision, but can be a
desirable part of the process. Effectiveness of the revision should be
the objective. How effective will city conservation and open space
actions be?We need to be proactive and not meet a minimum level, but
rather set the standard higher.
2. 1 noticed that current EIRs do not address the view or viewshed from
city owned open spaces as part of the visual resource component. This is
especially important when issues arise that are near of adjacent to city
open space, i.e. Costco.
3.This process needs much more public involvement at all stages. (I've
attached my comments from March 2002 on the Preliminary Hearing Draft of
the General Plan Resource Conservation Element).
4. 1 appreciate the work of the City Council, Planning Commission and
City Staff on this project and hope that San Luis Obispo can set high
zcc
RED FILE z` hA�J 0 FIFs �,wi �
Z.ATTOANIFY 2,PW 01P
ME�EGT'I�G AGENDA FeOLERK/0111Q ZPCL ICr CHF
= ITEM # $ 1 19 WT HEADS Ca PEC,, DIR
DATE k Pr_g ._ j L L DIR
2!r nU.A6e Ja HP D I R
�'�lartni ng
�Drnni55ion
Mike Draze- [Fwd: Re: MeetingSepterr' 23, 2003-Conservation and Open Spac^clementof the General Plan (O.O.OP(3�
quality standards that other cities will try to imitate.
Sincerely,
Don Dollar
2357 Banderola
SLO
General Plan Resource Conservation Element
My comments are listed by page number.
p. 5 Goal OS 1: after"around", add "and within".
Policy OS 1.1; first paragraph, after"outside" add "and within".
Include in Policy, that they apply to city managed or controlled Open Space (i.e.
easements)
p. 7 Goal OS 2; E, after"grassland" add "and plant"
Policy OS 2.2; E. add "lighting and noise"
p. 8 Open Space Protection: Program Outline
H. after"agriculture" add"consistent with best management"
I. change "conservation" to "protection"; the use of the term"conservation'
often implies human utilitarian uses, "protection' is more suited to our Open
Space policies
p. 9 Policy OS 4.1; first sentence before "landowners" add "adjacent"
p. 12 Policy NC 1.1 Listed Species;
C. After"city-owned" add"and managed"
Add a section F, that is worded similar to Cultural Resources, p. 30, J (to protect
natural resources from poaching/collecting/etc.)
p.13 Policy NC 1.2: Species of Local Concern
add section E. The City will develop a process for citizens and groups to nominate
species of local concern.
p.18 Goal E 1 —add a timeline for replacement of non-sustainable energy sources
Policy E 1.1 H. 2) add a maximum size limit
p.19 N. at end add "and or plants"
p.24 Materials. B. 5) after"scientifically" add " and health"
p.25 Policy NM 2.1 add section C "Easements for City Open Space will prohibit
mineral extraction."
p. 27 Policy V 1.1 C - need to clarify section, I think the Natural Resources Manager
should have the last word
Policy V 1.3 antennas and communication sites can adversely affect the viewshed,
in places where antennas or communication sites are near or adjacent to Open
Spaces, extra measures must be taken and the Natural Resources Manager should
be a major decision maker in the process
A-2 Raptors in general—seasonal closures may be needed in rock climbing areas of
City Open Space
B-1 2. C) need to exclude hazardous materials sites, especially where there is health
and or liability issues
B-2 5. C) I think this item should be deleted. There could be situations, where in the
long term, a parcel that is primarily scenic, but not viewable by the general public,
should not be excluded, if, in the foreseeable future, a connecting parcel may be
purchased or an easement conveyed, that would change that.
C-1 1. first sentence, after"owns"add "or manages"
2. first sentence, eliminate the term "multiple uses"; change "should" to "may" so
that is discretionary
first sentence—delete the word"accommodated", which is not appropriate, if the
activity is not appropriate; it does not need to be accommodated. Here, the
concept should be "permitted" and the Natural Resource Manager should be
the deciding person, not the Parks & Recreation Director. It may be appropriate
to have input on activities from the Parks &Recreation Director, but not be in
the role of decision maker for Open Space
second and third sentences—eliminate - Open Space is not park land, see
Municipal Code, Title 12, Chapter 12.22.020, and be consistent with that code
In Summary - #2 needs a rewrite, without the Priorities listed, the NR Manager is
the decision maker and consistency with MC, Title 12, Chapter 12.22.020
4. Change first sentence to adopt management plans for ALL Open Space,
regardless of size.
C-2 7. add that agricultural practices follow Best Management Practices
13. last paragraph, add "an Open Space group will review proposed private
mitigation on city Open Space, make a recommendation, forward that to the
Natural Resources Manager, who will in turn make a recommendation and
forward to the City Council for action"
Add a Number 14—The City Natural Resources Manager is in charge of all
Open Space day to day operations and any issuance of permits, exceptions to
policy and so forth. The Natural Resources staff and Park and Recreation staff
will work closely together for the furtherance of Open Space policies, goals and
projects.
Add a Number 15 —An Open Space group or committee of concerned citizens
and organizations will be formed to advise the NR Manager and the City on
issues related to Open Space. The Open Space group or committee will be an
advocate for Open Space.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If any of my comments are unclear,
please feel free to contact me for clarification.
Please keep me on the mailing, notification list for this Resource Conservation
Element update and for the Margarita, Airport and Orcutt area plans.
Sincerely,
Don Dollar
2357 Banderola Ct.
SLO 93401
781-0118
ddollar@pacbell.net
RECEIVED
SEP 2 2 2003
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce SLO CITY CLERK
1039 Chorro Street o San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3278
(805) 781-2777 C FAX (805) 543-1255 o TDD (805) 541-8416
September 22, 2003 David E. Garth, President/CEO
Mayor Dave Romero and Members of the City Council RED FILE
City of San Luis Obispo --- M I G AGENDA
990 Palm Street �j
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 DA EM'#`
Re:Joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission on the
Conservation & Open Space Element of the General Plan
Dear Mayor Romero and Council Members:
The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors supports the CAO
recommendation that you will have before at your special joint meeting on September 23
regarding the proposed Conservation &Open Space Element of the City General Plan.
This document is very relevant to the business community as a guide for measurable
conservation standards as well as a blueprint for our highly prized open space.
Consolidation will help to eliminate redundancy and make the policies more user friendly.
Efforts to make the document internally consistent so that policies are clear to the
community and modernized to meet today's lexicon is a laudable goal and does not result in
a "gutting' of the document as some would charge.
It is time to move forward and consider the element on its merits. We support getting on
with the process and request that you direct staff to update the existing policy comparison
chart, schedule a series of Planning Commission workshops, then proceed with formal
public hearings as the CAO recommends. Appointing a task force at this juncture is
unnecessary and counterproductive. The steps outlined in the CAO recommendation
provide ample opportunity for the public to comment and for the Planning Commission to
do a thorough review of the document.
Thank you for considering our request in this matter.
E COUNCIL TCDD DIR
Sincerely, Fer CAO ZFIN DIR
CACAO OFIRE CHIEF
20"ATTORNEY "` R'PW DIR
CLERIVORIG .2 POUCE CHF
4eeFerrero ElOEPT �
,HEADS 'REC OIR
Chairperson of the Board 2RI D RIR:
� C8)rVnt�Sn
Cc: Orval Osborne, Planning Commission Chair and Commission,Mem ers
Ken Hampian, CAO, City of San Luis Obispo
e-mail: slochamber@slochamber.org • websites: www.slochamber.org www.visitslo.com
ATTACHMENT .1