HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/16/2005, PH 5 - CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING, EIGHT LOT RESIDENTIAL COMMON INTEREST SUBDI j acEnba Re' oRt pHs__
CITY OF SAN LUIS 0 B I S P 0
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development'Directo
Prepared By: Jaime Hill,Associate Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL .PLAN AMENDMENT AND
REZONING, EIGHT LOT RESIDENTIAL COMMON INTEREST
SUBDIVISION WITH EXCEPTIONS FOR TANDEM PARKING AND
REDUCED SIDE YARD SETBACKS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW, FOR A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE SEVEN
NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES (GP/R, TR, ER, 9-05; 499
BRIZZOLARA).
CAO RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission, take the following actions on the project:
1. Adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element map
to change the land use designation for the site from Low-Density Residential to Medium-
Density Residential (Attachment 9)
2. Adopt a Resolution' approving the vesting tentative tract map for an 8 lot residential
common interest subdivision, including exceptions for tandem parking and reduced side
yard setbacks (Attachment 10); and
3. Introduce an Ordinance that changes the zoning on the subject property from Single-
Family Residential with Special Considerations (R-1-S).to Medium-Density Residential
with Special Considerations (R-2-S) (Attachment 11).
DISCUSSION
Situation
The applicant has proposed a project to build seven new one-bedroom homes, and retain the
existing three-bedroom home, on approximately 0:77 acres of underveloped property, located on
Brizzolara Street between Stenner Creek and the newly constructed sound wall adjacent to
Highway 101 (see Vicinity Map, Attachment 1). Entitlements requested include a.General Plan
Land Use Map Amendment changing the designation of the site from Low Density Residential to
Medium Density Residential; rezoning of the property from Low Density Residential with
Special Considerations (R-1-S) to Medium Density Residential with Special Considerations (R-
2-S); approval of a tentative map involving eight lots; exceptions to allow tandem parking and ,
reduced side yard setbacks; environmental review, and architectural review of building plans and
site improvements.
.5a,.
Council Agenda Report
GP,.R,TR, ER, 9-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 2
Previous Review
On June 29, 2005, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 (Christianson recused herself, Boswell
was absent, and Loh voted no) to recommend approval of the proposed project to the City
Council; Planning Commission Resolution #5425-05 and the draft minutes from the meeting are
attached to this report (Attachments 3 and 4). On August 1, 2005, the Architectural Review
Commission reviewed the project plans, providing direction to the applicant on changes that
should accompany plans submitted for final approval.after Council action on.the project. The
follow-up letter,to the applicant describing the ARC action is also attached to the end of this
report(Attachment 6).
Data Summary
Address: 499 Brizzolara Street
Applicant/Property Owner: Kelly Gearhart
Representative: Jamie Kirk, Kirk Consulting
Existing Zoning: R-1-S (Low-Density Residential with the Special Considerations overlay)
Proposed Zoning: R-2-S (Medium-Density Residential with the Special.Considerations overlay
Existing General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Proposed General Plan: Medium-Density Residential
Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Community
Development Director on July 7, 2005:
Site Description
The project site includes approximately 33,541 square feet (0.77 ac). Existing trees on the site
include several fruit and avocado trees which will be removed, and a magnolia tree near the
Brizzolara Street frontage and several pine trees which will be retained. The site is undeveloped
except for Lot #1, which has a 3-bedroom residence which will remain and detached garage that
Will be replaced-. The project site abuts Brizzolara Street on its northwesterly boundary and
Stenner Creek on its southeasterly boundary. The top of creek bank has been defined on the tract
map and a 20-foot setback established consistent with the City's Creek Setback regulations. The
character of the proposed development is similar to residential development in the vicinity
making it consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. The north easterly boundary of the site
abuts an R-3-S zone with an existing multiple family housing unit, and the southwesterly
boundary abuts an R-1-PD zone that is also developed with attached multi-family housing units.
The creek bed and existing vegetation substantially separates the site from the existing
development across the creek.
Proiect Description
The project is a common interest subdivision of an existing 0.77-acre site into eight small lots,
and the construction of seven one-bedroom dwellings (and rehabilitation of the existing
residence) on the site. The applicant is proposing to leave the existing 3-bedroom dwelling on the
property, demolish the existing garage and construct a replacement garage closer to the residence.
The new homes would be designed as individual detached units with attached garages. Including
Council Agenda Report -
GP, R, TR,ER, 9-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 3
the garages, the homes have two levels and a maximum height of 28-feet. Parking would be
provided in private single car garages, with seven tandem spaces, and 4 on-site parking stalls.
The tandem parking on Lots 2-7 would be an uncovered space in the driveway; Lot 1 has been
designed with a 40-foot long garage, which is sufficient length for covered tandem parking. The
unit on Lot 8 has been sited only 8-feet from the edge of the sidewalk to maximize separation
from the creek setback at the rear of the lot. Here the applicant has proposed the second on-site
parking space for the unit as an uncovered parking space along the eastern side of the unit. A 20-
foot wide private roadway with landscaped parkways and detached sidewalks will serve the units
from Brizzolara Street. The driveway and common open space area will be a commonly held
easement through all of the parcels and maintained by a homeowners association. Instead of
typical airspace condominiums, or traditional attached townhomes, the units will be detached and
on their own small lots.
Private open space for the units is provided primarily within small ground level yard areas, and
an additional common open space area is proposed for the rear of the site adjacent to the creek..
Amenities in this common open space area include a picnic bench, barbeque, and arbor with
additional seating. Thirteen tree removals (various fruit and avocado and one pine)are proposed
with the site development. Both the City's Urban Forrester and Natural Resources Manager have
been to the site and confirmed that the existing condition of the property does not support any
important habitat and that the trees scheduled for removal are unhealthy landscape features. Both
have also commented that the proposed landscape plan will provide a diverse palate of native and
other appropriate drought-tolerant species appropriate for the creek-side setting. A Magnolia and
several pine trees will be retained and incorporated into the new development.
Evaluation
The Planning Commission has reviewed the project and recommended specific findings in
support of the proposed subdivision and site improvements. The attached Planning Commission
Staff Report (Attachment 5) provides a detailed description and evaluation of the proposed
subdivision and associated public improvements. This Council Agenda Report will focus on
core issues with area residents and others who have provided comments to staff, the Planning
Commission, and the Architectural Review Commission during public hearings on the project.
These core issues along with a brief staff analysis are as follows:
A.Density/Neighborhood Character
The project proposal involves rezoning the property to Medium-Density Residential (R-2), which
would increase the potential density of the site. Although this represents an intensification of
land use when compared to the existing use of the site, it is consistent with the development of
the bordering residential properties and consistent with density and infill policies of the General
Plan. The Planning Commission Staff Report includes a comparison of the project's density with
that of the surrounding neighborhood as well as addresses these infill policies.
Staff and the Planning Commission support the proposed density of development for two primary
reasons. First, rezoning the project site would provide a transitional change to allow a
moderately intensive designation of the property and the development of small single family
dwellings between the Medium-High Density Residential (R-3-S) development to the north and
��3
Council Agenda Report
GP, R,TR, ER, 9-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 4
Low Density" Residential (R-1-PD) development to the south. The proposed concept will provide
for a transition of residential density along Brizzolara Street consistent with direction provided in
the General Plan, LUE Policy 2.4.6, while remaining compatible in scale and character with the
neighborhood as directed by LUE Policy 2.2.10 and HE Policy 7.2.2. Additionally, although the
property to the south is designated R-1, it has been developed as a planned development, and as
such appears very much like a multi-family development project. Second, the Planning
Commission was supportive of the infill potential of the site and felt that the proposed lot
configuration and small ownership units was an effective use of the land and would provide fora
unique housing type within the City.
B. Habitat
One of the nicer site amenities is its location adjacent to Stenner Creek. Although the creek
creates development constraints when designing the project, the applicant has been able to
comply with setback requirements and use the creek area as a project amenity, consistent with
LUE Policies 2.2.8 and 2.2.11. The setback area would be heavily landscaped with plant species
appropriate to the creek corridor and would be developed with a barbecue,picnic area, and arbor.
Some neighbors feel that this site provides important habitat for riparian and bird species.
However, both the City's Urban Forrester and Natural Resources Manager have toured the site
and found that it does not contain any trees of importance or riparian habitat. The trees scheduled
for removal are unhealthy ornamental fruit trees which would be replaced by a mixture of native
and other drought tolerant species. To address the neighbor's concern, the Planning Commission
did recommend a condition which required the sidewalk along Lot 1 be altered in order to save
the mature Magnolia Tree. The applicant has since revised the plans to reflect this change. In
staff's opinion, landscape improvements associated with the project would restore some integrity
to the riparian corridor by providing a good mix of native and ornamental drought tolerant
species, and would be an improvement to the current state of the site (see Environmental
Document, Attachment 7).
C. Traffic and Circulation
The General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the property would increase the number of
dwellings allowed on the site from 7 units per acre to 12 units per acre. The applicant is
proposing to construct seven 1-bedroom dwellings and maintain the existing 3-bedroom dwelling
in its current location and configuration. The Institute of Traffic Engineers Manual estimates that
single-family homes generate an average of 10 vehicle trips per day. A total of seven new homes
might generate 70 trips per day on average. A neighbor has expressed concern that the trips
generated would create a potential safety concern as there are several children in the
neighborhood who commonly play within the street. However, the Public Works Department
Transportation Division has evaluated the project and the existing street systems and determined
that with the project, Brizzolara Street and the intersection of Nipomo and Peach Streets will
continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. Additionally, construction of the proposed
project would include continuation of the sidewalk along Brizzolara and through the project,
which would be an improvement to the existing pedestrian path which is not continuous.
5 -�
Council Agenda Report _ --
GP, R, TR, ER, 9-05 (499 Brizzolara)
'Page 5
D. Architectural Review
In its initial conceptual,review of the project, the ARC was generally favorable of the project and
the site design, and provided nine points of direction for the applicant to incorporate into plans
for final approval (Attachment 6). The most significant changes are to eliminate the sidewalk
and parkway from one side of the drive to allow for larger rear yards and storage space in the
garages, and to design an alternate drainage basin with a porous paving system in the driveway
rather than the basin shown in the creek setback, to allow the slope of the creek bank to be
reduced to no more than 3:1. These and other changes to the building floor plans and landscape
design will enhance the amount of usable area in the units and on the site;and facilitate the sense
of place within the project. Revised plans will go back to the ARC for final approval if the
General Plan Amendment, rezoning,.and subdivision are approved by the City Council.
CONCURRENCES
Project plans have been evaluated by Public Works, Utilities, Fire, the. Natural Resource
Manager, the Urban Forrester, and Building Division staff. Initial project plans were revised by
the applicant based on input from these departments in order to meet City standards, improve the
project design and make it more sensitive to the environment. Subsequent comments have been
incorporated into this report as conditions of approval or code requirements.
ALTERNATIVES
1: The Council may deny project. This action should be taken if the Council is not supportive
of the proposed General Plan Amendment and zoning of the site or the design of the
common-interest subdivision (Attachment 12).
2. The Council may continue discussion if additional information is needed. Direction should
be given to staff and the applicant.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Vicinity map
Attachment 2: Reduced Scale Project Plans
Attachment 3: Planning Commission Resolution No. 5425-05
Attachment 4: Draft Planning Commission Minutes from July 13, 2005
Attachment 5: Planning Commission Staff Report for July 13, 2005 without attachments
Attachment 6: ARC follow-up letter from the August 1, 2005 ARC action granting schematic
approval to the project with direction and draft meeting minutes.
Attachment 7: Initial Study of Environmental Impact and Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Attachment 8: Letter from Neighbor
Attachment 9: Draft Resolution approving the General Plan Amendment
Attachment 10: Draft Resolution approving the tentative map and exceptions
Attachment I I: Draft Ordinance rezoning the project site from R-1-S to R-2-S
Attachment 12: Draft Resolution denying the project
5 _15
sl�l� Vn ,.
lug. ,�,�i I� �
Attachment 2
I US HIGHWAY 101
g I I
45 09 B R I Z Z O L A R A STREETPunnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
C;SEaM-PfR
MM czzl"
--7
69'o
o
1p
o 5 VIM*W (2j*
so!.!99 ps 02 N2
1;gg X A A AN r opt L14 21
A • go
2 — i I B's
E;j 2,1Z
Mimi
N1-
I_9 N
�-Pr-
3933933 7
Hi.4
5v ANO
- C) Vi�
N
Imi A
gd� M
P F6j■ iI
g rn
Cn
&\
PRO -4
R F J;- A-'., to
X9R
13
M
Z TEL
9541
ASL t '
If
S*rEAf
MS Eli
C
> K
�I III
M
Z
Ile 4- CIE 2 Ca
ZA M
ZZ
M
Qz
MA
EIN el a
33 3ro
1,
5 - 7
Attachment 2
irl � ! I s TI� L ! � �'I�
'a, t
l3fj
I will
Milt
M4 YseitC
Inn
9 ; ; �-�% ?;\,�� I %,i � I ,II 000
77
0=2
JA
CD
LL-1
5r
V5
ICE
MV
5-K
2
6
•aa a. i va
-
8 hr O 9 F
\i.\ Ti
l
g:=its L�
7
\
77
I
I - i
T
t I -
_ .. I ��• a �E
IF+
-
pj$ �p
w
+- - -- r --- - - ; --r
'41 --�
- T _
\ 133US VBV10ZZW6
:M_aa=a o•000 Baa
h
lw
MAE
O.it 0 h 1
�um���� � ®1d+0'� i� 'O •roa_r�e000_ ��a.
nllnr � 0 ',fa
• - Ili/10'Oo'► '"�`�` r
Irl/
�7ii`oF�:o:��roo,
�i�oro �r
was,
Ism
. • r
u �
•
•
•
Attachment 2
• 4 � U �w
JN
• i
!i
D
r _
r. 1 eke 1:, pf
, P 1�IIr
I---- m —
r..�r 5
MFlmr
\ I _
\ � it I ✓ , ISI
L __ ____ �__ ________________zt ___ L_ _ ---------- ---------j._____ .
J_-- ------ __ _
\: eauva 02M e -
o
� v
5 -ll
Attachment 2
0
if Jul
ye
I I r ieaQ
i
I
I I I g
1 Mo
o :
tt
f_
I
r
v i �_ga9A
24 u m
A•
� Oyy
LLI
p1I i itli �Ptl I 11 t�l P1�!! n1'1"iii
I
—-—-—-—-—- ----- — — —
irus vavionlae ;,l
e3: H
>PA n
� 1
l0t AVMNSIH (j
v
5 -1 Z
Attachment 3
RESOLUTION NO.$425-05
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE AND SIDE YARD SETBACK AND TANDEM
PARKING EXCEPTIONS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 499 BRIZZOLARA
STREET; TR/ER/GP/R 09-05 (Tract 2691)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
July 13, .2005, for the purpose of considering application TR/ER/GP/R 09-05, a request to
Amend the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map to allow an eight-lot residential
common interest subdivision with exceptions to allow reduced side .yard setbacks and tandem
parking; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding
recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impact and the mitigation monitoring program prepared for the
project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning.Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff;
presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, 13E IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following
findings in support of the project approval as a recommendation to the City Council that includes
amending the General Plan Land Use Map from Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density
Residential, amending the Zoning Map from Low-Density Residential with Special
Considerations (R-1-S) to Medium-Density Residential with Special Consideration (R-2-S), and
approving a Preliminary Development Plan and Common Interest Subdivision as shown within
the project exhibits:
A.-General-Plan Mai)-findings
1. Amendment of the General Plan Map from Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density
Residential is consistent with the General Plan text policies that encourage the
preservation and expansion of existing residential neighborhoods and increased
residential density in close proximity to existing services.
1 A Medium-Density residential land use designation is appropriate for this site since it
allows a transition between the existing Medium-High Density Residential (R-3-S)
5- 1
Attachment 3
GP/R/ERrM 09-05 Planning Commission Resolution 5425-05
499 Brizzolara Street
Page 2.
development to the north and Low Density Residential (R-1-PD) development to the
south
3. A Medium-Density residential land use is appropriate for the site and compatible with the.
land use pattern of adjacent properties along Brizzolara Street.
4. The land use amendment and project will implement the City's goal of maintaining a
compact urban form by increasing the maximum density allowed and more fully utilizing
the potential of this site, which is close to the downtown planning area and is within
walking distance to shops and services.
5. Allowing the land use amendment will implement the City's Housing Element Policies
that encourage sustainable and affordable housing projects.
B. Subdivision MaQfindings
1. As conditioned,the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with
the General Plan Map for Medium Density Residential because each dwelling has access
to a satisfactory private and communal open space area sheltered from ambient noise
sources, and the development would occur as part of the neighborhood pattern along_
Brizzolara.
2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because it is an under-
developed site that is adjacent to an existing street right-of-way and is close to public
transit and associated services.
3. Asconditioned, the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development
because the site is adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood and there are existing
roadways and services available to serve the development in accordance with City
standards.
4. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat because the site contains provisions to preserve and protect the creek.
5. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious
public health problems because the development is of a similar scale to surrounding
development. Additionally, new construction will be designed to meet existing building
and safety codes.
6. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large; for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision because no such easements exist.
7. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project adequately identifies and evaluates
the potential impacts associated with this project and where impacts are potentially
significant, mitigation measures are provided to reduce these impacts to less than
significant levels.
8. The project will be reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Commission for
consistency with the Cornniunity Design Guidelines prior to approval.
9. All affected public facilities, services, and utilities are adequate to serve the proposed
51 L(
Attachment 3
GP/R/ER/TR 09-05 Planning CommissionResolution 5425-05
499 Brizzblara Sweet
Page.3
project.
10.The location, size, site planning, building design features, and operating characteristics of
the project are suited to the characteristics of the site and surrounding neighborhood, and
will be compatible with the character of the site, and the land uses and development
intended for the surrounding neighborhood by the General Plan.
11. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size, configuration topography, and other
applicable features (as conditioned), and has appropriate .access to public streets with
adequate capacity to accommodate the quantity and type of traffic expected to be
generated by the use.
12. As conditioned, the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed project will
not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working
in the vicinity of the proposed use, or detrimental or injurious to property and
improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
C. Findings to allow other yard building height exceptions and tandem parking
1. The request for 5-foot side yard setback reductions to allow building heights in excess of
12-feet are minor exceptions that contribute to the compact form of the project and are
appropriate given the size of the units and overall scale of the project.
2. The side yard setback reductions are minor in nature, involving only an insignificant
portion of total solar exposure available in the side yards.
3. No significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are likely to
result from the side yard setback reductions as 10 feet will be maintained between
structures on adjacent properties.
4. Tandem parking is a logical parking design solution for some of the units since the
tandem parking spaces will be for the exclusive use of the occupants of each unit
supplying the tandem parking.
5. There will be adequate parking available for the development as ample guest parking will
be provided for those visiting the site.
Section 2. Environmental Review. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, with the following
mitigation measures and monitoring program.
Cultural Resources
1. In the event archaeological resources are unearthed or discovered during any grading or
construction activities all work shall cease, and the City of San Luis Obispo Community
Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered
materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be
accomplished in accordance with state and federal law.
.2. In the event archaeological resources are found to include human remains, or in any other
case where human remains are discovered during construction, the County Coroner is to be
5-15
Attachment 3
GP/R/ERfM 09-05 Planning Commission Resolution 5425-05
499 Brizzolara Street
Page 4
notified in addition to the Community Development Department so that proper disposition
may be accomplished.
Monitoring Program:
Community Development Department Staff will ensure compliance with standards through
periodic site inspections during project construction.
Hydrology and Water Quality
3. The drainage easement along the Northerly boundary shall be a minimum of 157feet wide or
the storm drain shall be relocated to the proposed main driveway within a 15-wide easement.
4. The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter
of Map Amendment(LOMA), or,Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to final acceptance
of any development. Any lots or building pads, identified in the hydrology study to be
subject to flooding during a 100 year storm shall be graded to provide minimum pad
elevations of at least 1 foot above the 100 year storm elevation.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community
Development Department staff..
Noise
5. The final project design shall comply with all recommendations of the April 18, 2005
acoustical analysis prepared by Dohn Associates for the attenuation of indoor noise levels at the
project site.
6. The final project design shall include an earthen berm with dense plantings along the
Brizzolara Street frontage. Plantings shall include groundcover, large bushes and hedges, and
trees to maximize the effectiveness of the berm in reducing noise transmission. Additionally, a
six-foot high sound wall shall be constructed 10-feet back from Brizzolara Street along the
portion of Brizzolara Street adjacent to the 10-foot.rear yard of Lot 5.
7. The final project design shall be revised to show.the second-story bedroom on Lot 5 on the
eastem.side of the home, farthest from Highway 101 noise..
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community
Development Department staff.
Public Services
8. The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs shall be panted red and properly signed and
stenciled as a"Fire Lane" per the Fire Department's "Developer's Guide" in order to prohibit
parking in unauthorized areas and preventing access in case of emergencies. The prohibition
from parallel parking along the street shall be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the
5 rf�co
Attachment 3
GP/R/ERrM 09-05 Planning Commission Resolution 5425-05
499 Brizzolara Street
Page 5
City.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community
Development Department staff.
Traiisportation/Traffic
9. The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a
requirement, to be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the City, that all garages must
be available for parking a vehicle at all times.
10. The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a
requirement, to be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the City, that there be no
parking in the driveway of Lot 8 at any time.
11. The uncovered parking space along the east side of Lot 8 shall utilize pavers or a comparable
perineable paving material. Details of the materials that will be used shall be included on the
final project design.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the
Community Development Department staff.
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community
Development Department staff.
Utilities and Service Systems
12. The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned and maintained by the
Homeowner's Association.
13. The subdivider shall place underground; all existing overhead utilities along the public street
frontage(s), to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and utility companies..
14. The final project shall be designed to include locations for the collection of recyclable'
materials and sufficient space shall be provided for each unit to store a waste wheeler for
recycling service from the local garbage company.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the
Community Development Department staff.
Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council approval of application ER/TR/GP/R 9-05, subject to the following conditions and
5-17
Attachment 3
GP/R/ER/'IR 09-05 Planning Commission Resolution 5425-05
499 Bri_zaolara Street
Page 6
code requirements.
1. An affordable housing agreement consistent with the draft affordable housing proposal
shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Director
prior to proceeding to the Architectural Review Commission, following approval of the
applicable entitlements by the City Council.
2. The project shall be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission to review the
project design for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines following
approval of the Common Interest Subdivision by the City Council.
3. No parking, paving, or site construction shall be allowed within the creek setback unless
Approved as part of the common interest subdivision and development as shown on the
approved plans.
4. The applicant shall pay Park In-Lieu Fees prior to recordation of the Final Map,
consistent with SLO Municipal Code Section 16.40.080.
5. Pursuant to Government Code Section.66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend,indemnify
and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers.and employees from any claim,
action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set
aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating
thereto, including but not limited to environmental review.
6. Prior to the occupancy of the new units a covenant shall be recorded to ensure that new
bedrooms are not added in the future. The covenant for Lot l shall state that the unit not
exceed 3-bedrooms, while the homes on Lots 2-8 shall be restricted to 1-bedroom each.
7. The sidewalk adjacent to lot 1 shall be modified so as to allow the Magnolia Tree to be
retained.
Conditions and code requirements from other departments;
The following code requirements are included for information purposes only. They serve to give
the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project. This is not
intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check
process.
The following are some of the code requirements required of the proposed subdivision,this
list of code requirements is not intended to be a comprehensive list. The project is subject
to all City codes and standards in effect at the time of a technically complete application.
Right of Way/Access
1. Additional public right-of-way or public pedestrian easements may be necessary to
accommodate driveway approach improvements required for Americans with Disabilities
Act(ADA) compliance, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
Attachment 3
GP/R/ER/TR 09-05 Planning Commission Resolution 5425-05
499 Brizzolara Street
Page 7
2. Complete street improvements along Brizzolara Street are required and shall be constructed in
accordance with the most current City regulations, City of San Luis Obispo Engineering
Standards,and Standard Specifications (improvements include but are:not limited to: integral.
curbs, gutters &2m sidewalks, full width street pavement,ement, signing, striping, barricades, street
trees, street lights,etc.).
3. The subdivider shall dedicate a 2m wide public utility easement and a 3m wide street tree
easement across the frontage of each lot. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous
with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
4;, The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs shall be panted red and properly signed and
stenciled as a"Fire Lane" per the Fire Department's "Developer's Guide" in order to prohibit
parking in unauthorized areas and preventing access in case of emergencies.
5. The project
pubic improvement plans shall identify the locations of the required bicycle
parking areas per the City standards.
Water,Sewer& Utilities
6. The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned and:maintained by the
Homeowner's Association.
7. The subdivider shall place underground, all,existing over-head utilities along the public street
frontage(s), to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and utility companies.
Grading&Drainage
8. The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter
of Map Amendment (LOMA), or, Letter of Map Revision (LOMR)prior to final acceptance
of any development. Any lots or buildingpads, identified in the hydrology stud t b
- y o . e
subject to flooding Outing 4 100-yr st.orn-I shall be graded to provide minimum pad elevations
of at least 1 foot above the 100-yr storm elevation.
On motion.by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Osbome and on the following
roll call vote to wit:
AYES- Commissioner Millers, Osborne, Carter, and Vice-Chair Aiken
NOES: Commissioner Loh
REFRAIN- Commissioner Christianson
ABSENT: Chairperson Boswell
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 13 day.of. J --, 2005.
,0�Ron a I �sen d, Secretary
Pla ningg Co ssion
Draft Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 4
July 13,2005
Page 3
mitigated. She pointed out that the General Plan identified the sites for expanded auto
sales and recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment.
Commr. Aiken indicated his support for staff's recommendation to approve the General
Plan Amendment. He noted that the half of the site designated Open Space was
appropriately set aside for on-going agricultural as well as protection of other sensitive
site resources such as the riparian area and recommended approval of the General
Plan Amendment.
2. 499 Brizzolara Street. GP/R, TR, ER 9-05: General Plan Amendment and Rezone
from R-1-S to R-2-S, vesting tract map to create common interest subdivision with 8
residential lots; R-1-S zone; Kelly Gearhart, applicant. Continued from June 29,
2005. (Jaime Hill)
Commr. Christianson stepped down from participation due to a potential conflict of
interest because she owns property in the vicinity.
Associate Planner Jaime Hill presented the staff report, recommending that the
Commission recommend that the City Council: approve a resolution amending the
General Plan Land Use Element map to change the Land Use designatimfor the site
from Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density Residential and approve a Mitigated
Negative Declaration; adopt an ordinance changing the zoning on the subject property
from Single-Family Residential with the Special Considerations overlay (R-1-S) to
Medium-Density Residential with the special consideration overlay (R-2-S); and adopt a
resolution approving the vesting tentative tract map for an 8-lot residential common
interest subdivision, including exceptions for tandem parking and reduced .yard .
setbacks.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Representative Jaime Kirk of Kirk Consulting further explained the project.
Carol Anderson, 505 Brizzolara Street #7, spoke against any development on the site
due to the creek habitat and importance of the existing trees on the site.
Jacklyn Ames, 490 Brizzolara Street, expressed her concerns with the tree orchard and
the wildlife in the creek area and opposed the project.
Steve Delmartini, 3910 Broad Street, supported this project because it conforms to the
General Plan.
COMMISSION_COMMENTS:
This recommendation was based findings and conditions as recommended by staff with
two amendments; 1) That a covenant be recorded on title for each of the units on lots 2-
8 that limits them to one-bedroom dwellings. The covenant for lotA shall limit the
dwelling to the existing 3 bedroom (Carter), and; 2) The sidewalk.adjacent to lot 1 shall
be redesigned so as to allow the Magnolia tree to be retained (Osbome).
5'�
Attachment 4
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
July 13, 2005
Page 4
Commissioners noted that the project was an appropriate infill project, is consistent with
the neighborhood pattern, and would supply more than adequate parking to meet their
needs and would not negatively contribute to the existing limited street parking.
Commissioner Loh voted against the project as she did not feel that it would provide the
quality of housing that is desired, and that reducing the number of units could .result in
some of the tree clusters to be saved..
It was the consensus of the Commission to continue.the meeting past 11:00 p.m.
On motion by Commissioner Miller to adopt the Planning Commission Resolution which
recommends _that the City Council: Approve a resolution amending the General Plan
.Land Use Element. may to change the Land use designation for the site from Low-
Density Residential to Medium-Density Residential and approve a Mitigated Negative
Declaration; Adopt an ordinance changing the zoning on the subiect property from Low-
Density Residential with the Special Considerations-overlay-(R-1-S) to Medium-Density
Residential with the special considerations-overlay (R-2-S) and. Adopt_ a resolution
approving the vesting tentative tract map for an 8 lot residential. common interest
subdivision including-exceptions.for tandem parking_and reduced yard setbacks with an
added conditions: That a covenant be recorded on the title for each of the units on lots
2-8 that limits them to one-bedroom dwellings. The covenant for lot 1 shall limit. the
dwelling to the existing 3 bedrooms The sidewalk adjacent to lot 1 shall be redesigned
so as to.allow the Magnolia tree to be retained. Seconded by Osborne..
AYES: Commrs. Miller, Osborne, Aiken, and Carter
NOES: Loh
ABSENT: Commr. Boswell
ABSTAIN: Commr. Christianson
The motion carried on a 4 :1 vote.
3. 3210, 3212, 3220, 3230, 3240 Broad Street. PD, ER 78-05: Plan Development
rezone to expand allowable uses for The Village Marketplace, and environmental
review; C-WS zone; Dan Lemberg, applicant. (Phil Dunsmore)
This item was continued to a date uncertain without discussion to allow input from
County Airport Land Use Commission.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
3.. Staff
A. Ron Whisenand gave.an Agenda Forecast of upcoming items and projects.
4. Commission
A. Biennial Review of PC Bylaws.
The Commission recommended no changes to the Bylaws.
Attachment 5
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ITEM#2
BY: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner (78177165) MEETING DATE: June 29, 2005
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Deputy Director- Development Reviev i
FILE NUMBER: GP,R,TR,ER 9-05
PROJECT ADDRESS: 499 Brizzolara
SUBJECT: Request to amend the General Plan and rezone the property at 499 Brizzolara Street,
to accommodate an 8 lot residential common-interest subdivision with exceptions for tandem
parking and reduced side yard setbacks, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Planning Commission resolution which recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve a resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Element map to change the land
use designation for the site from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and
approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 9-05).
1 Adopt an ordinance changing the zoning on the subject property from Single Family
Residential with Special Considerations (R-1-S) to Medium Density Residential with Special
Considerations (R-2-S).
3. Adopt a resolution approving the vesting tentative tract map for an 8 lot residential common
interest subdivision, including exceptions for tandem parking and reduced side yard setbacks.
BACKGROUND
Situation
The City has received an application to amend the General Plan Land Use Map and rezone this
single parcel, and to subdivide the 33,541 square foot (0.77 acre) site for an eight lot residential
project. The property is presently developed with a single family dwelling which will remain,
and a detached garage which will be demolished and rebuilt closer to the residence. The
proposed development would include the construction of seven new one bedroom dwellings,
each with an attached single car garage, for a total of eight units including the existing dwelling.
The homes are proposed as a Common Interest Subdivision, with individual lot ownership and a
commonly held easement for access and open space. The applicant is also requesting approval of
7 tandem parking spaces and side yard setback exceptions within the proposed development. The
project is subject to environmental review, and an Initial Study of Environmental Impact and
Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared.
Alachment 5
GP, R, TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 2
Data Summary
Address: 499 Brizzolara Street
Applieant/Property Owner: Kelly Gearhart, 6205 Alcantara, Atascadero Ca. 93422
Representative: Jamie Kirk, Kirk Consulting
Zoning: R-1-S (Low Density Residential with Special Considerations)
Genera! Plan: Low Density Residential
Environmental Status: A Mitigated.Negative Declaration was recommended by the Community
Development Director on July 7, 2005.
Site Description
The 33,541 square foot site is located on Brizzolara Street directly across from the recently
constructed Highway 101 sound wall, and is currently developed with a single family residence
and detached garage. The project site abuts Brizzolara Street on its northwesterly boundary and
Stenner Creek on its.southeasterly.boundary. The top of creek bank has been defined on the tract
map and a 20-foot setback established. City of San. Luis Obispo Natural Resources Manager
inspected the site and verified the creek setback. The north easterly boundary of the site abuts an
R-3-S zone with an existing multiple family housing unit, and the southwesterly boundary abuts
an R=1-PD zone that is also developed with attached multi-family housing units. The property on
the opposite side of Stenner Creek is zoned R-3-H. The creek bed and existing vegetation
substantially separates the site from the existing development across the creek. Trees on the site
include several fruit and avocado trees,.,a magnolia tree'near the Brizzolara Street frontage, and
two pine trees.
The neighborhood is a mix of housing (attached and detached), school facilities and small office
commercial areas. There is no retail commercial area in,the immediately vicinity, but the site is
within easy walking distance of the downtown. The character of the proposed development is
similar to those in the vicinity making it consistent with the surrounding neighborhood.
*' rf`I� '��I�' s .fZ� d. �� ., A'�N e ���� K''�'19�. t i ry 1 r�• n's'n t r � r
�T' ti r .� ayar•M y7v= p .IJ � �I rT�'�`p��I St!�, I _A '�
�'�y w '`•� �Y.•.r 1.0. 4� ' �' 11 y•Nk ��1 j6�,' .���a1 J.
t � r
I
rte. •. 'tjh , t tr'•� t Ir ( y . . .� 1 ) t"y ti
+I"�" i ♦ � �lr�� ij J s
_S. 1 '/�,�y' '���A J ''1 . Yl Y} m( ( [r,.�F.y I • �'l,'1 FI In-I'�
i?' / �s r „��p#fir � it�p�/r itf 4T'!�� 1 � 1 � ��r.r. - 1 •�I .o r �lr� � �,I •,
All :'t'_a,, 1•. ,;1_• ''a,r
i
. �I ar1�•1', rt. f „�..�I .�,�tIR'JI !.-y
Ilk 'i
s �i I a r. �� n�}t 'y � }�} ✓I's y �s>ay p. �. 1h`ny 41,.ya �Ir16 i i 1 r �' tiit
• i i[' I .I. , '.'i � � ,�G�jy�I -0 rt� .V '",SL�a�Y ��.� Y�yes .�`+. i�(� b ' _L.
�y I #i+ :.1 y M::�Mn •'M r h •� 11.1 ' r � rKw.,
h ,
3 � ''''yy�. �a ! n .( t..,,SSM. W (kms M1� � � Y. :•
�t1(4`f t �.. ,y �1y� I a.. '¢ ` 1J ', ifn'Py`�i� i. .• ( } •'
r
q r J �I ✓� ;eL r.i ....K.. ».erg +l T i b t'tt•4•R(x"Si
AL
• �e
Z.14�,r
r ••II j�'It1� � r AMM, I I��. . �� ♦ �A1 l;: � t�r s�� �
St !F4 P
Iy�{
Attache went 5
GP, R,TR,ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 4
Proiect Description
The applicant is proposing a General Plan Land Use Map Amendment, changing the designation
of the site from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. The new Zoning
Designation on the property would likewise be changed from Low Density Residential. with
Special Considerations (R-1-S) to Medium Density Residential with Special Considerations (R-
2-S).
The project is a common interest subdivision of an existing 0.77-acre site and the construction of
seven one bedroom dwellings and maintenance of the existing residence on the site, for a total of
8 dwellings. The applicant is proposing to leave the existing 3-bedroom dwelling on the property,
demolishing the existing garage and constructing a replacement garage closer to the residence.
The new homes would be designed as individual detached units with attached garages. Including
the garages, the homes have two levels and a maximum height of 28-feet. Parking would be
provided in private single car garages, with seven tandem spaces, and 4 on-site parking stalls.
The tandem parking on Lots 2-7 would be an uncovered space in the driveway; Lot 1 has been
designed with a 40-foot long garage, which is sufficient length for tandem. The unit on Lot 8 has
been sited only 8-feet from the edge of the sidewalk to maximize separation from the creek
setback at the rear of the lot. Here the applicant has proposed the second on-site parking space for
the unit.as an uncovered parking space along the eastern side of the unit. Privateopen space is
provided primarily within small ground level yard areas. A common open space with shade trees
is proposed for the rear of the site adjacent to the creek. Additional amenities in this common
open space area include a picnic bench, barbeque, and arbor with additional seating. Fourteen
tree removals (various fruit and avocado, one magnolia, and one pine) are proposed with the site
development. A 20-foot wide private roadway with landscaped parkways and detached sidewalks
will serve the units from Brizzolara Street: The driveway and common open space area will be a
commonly held easement through all of the parcels and maintained by a homeowners association.
Instead of typical airspace condominiums, or traditional attached townhomes; the units,will be
detached and on their own small lots.
EVALUATION
Land Use and Neighborhood.compatibility
The primary consideration of this application is the change of this property from a Low Density
Residential designation (R-1-S) to a Medium Density Residential designation (R-2-S). In
consideration of the site's location, between Medium-High Density Residential (R-3-S)
development to the north and Low Density Residential (R-1-PD) development to the south, a
transitional, change to allow a moderately intensive designation of the property and the
development of small single family dwellings appears to be reasonable (See Attachments 2 and
3, General Plan and Zoning map exhibits). The proposed concept will provide for a transition of
residential density along Brizzolara Street, which is predominantly residential, with a mix'of
attached and detached units. The Planning Commission should carefully examine the
5'�s
A'tachinent 5
GP, R, TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page,5
surrounding land use pattern in order to ensure neighborhood compatibility prior to taking action
on the project. The request to rezone the property to Medium Density Residential (R-2) zoning
appears reasonable to staff as it will provide for a transition of density along Brizzolara. The
possibility of rezoning the property to Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) zoning was
explored but determined to be undesirable at this site and considering the proposed project. A
medium-high density- designation would continue the pattern of low-density residential
development directly adjacent to relatively high-density property, and could potentially lead to
compatibility issues with development of the site. Further, an R-3 designation would require that
some or all of the units on the site be attached and.the common interest.subdivision be changed
to a condominium project, a significant modification from the current.development proposal.
Staff has evaluated the project with respect to consistency with the City's General Plan, and
development related codes, including the Zoning Regulations and Subdivision Regulations. The
Planning Commission should consider each of the following issue areas prior to offering
direction to the applicant or making a recommendation on the subdivision and Mitigated
Negative Declaration to the City Council.
1.General Plan Consistency
In order to approve the proposed General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and subdivision, the City
Council must find that the project is consistent with the General Plan. The following is an
analysis of General Plan policies, goals and objectives that may pertain to the proposed project.
Each of the general plan excerpts are in italics, with a staff response following.
LU 1:18.2: Helping the Air District. Along with other agencies and organizations, the City will
help the Air Pollution Control District update and-implement the County Clean Air Plan. The
City, working with involved agencies and organizations, will help implement programs to reduce
the number of single-occupant trips in gasoline and diesel-fueled vehicles, including restrictions
on, and alternatives to, car access for Cal Poly and Cuesta.
The proposed project is five blocks from the central bus terminal located next to City Hall. It is
also located within convenient bicycling and walking distance to both the Downtown and Cal
Poly. Increasing the allowable density at this site would enable additional people to live in close
proximity to transit and downtown services.
LU Policy 2.L3: Neighborhood Traffic. Neighbors should be protected from intrusive traffic.
All neighborhood streets and circulation improvements should favor pedestrian and local traffic..
Vehicle traffic on residential streets should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design
should include measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured
crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed bumps, and bollards.
The proposed project is pedestrian in both location and character. Occupants can easily walk or
bicycle into the downtown. The site is only five blocks away from the bus transfer station next to
A'tachi-ent 5
GP, R,TR,ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 6
City Hall. Additionally, it is on a dead end street that has no commercial or business, and traffic
is both quiet and slow moving.
LU Policy 2.1.4., .Neighborhood Connections. All areas should have a street and sidewalk
pattern that promotes neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous
sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other and with public
and commercial services to provide continuous pedestrian paths throughout the City.
The proposed project involves complete frontage improvements along the Brizzolara Street
frontage, where a gap in the sidewalk currently exists. The public sidewalks will connect with the
frontage improvements along the private street, which have been designed as detached sidewalks
with landscaped parkways.
LU Policy 2.LS. Neighborhood Open Links. The City should treat streets, sidewalks, and front
setbacks as a continuous open link between all areas of the City and all land uses. These features
should be designed as amenities for light, air, social contact, and community identity.
The proposed project has been designed with lateral sidewalks to link the existing neighborhood
to the open space area at the creek. Together with the relatively narrow street width, variable
street yard setbacks, and front porches, the design of the subdivision is an inviting continuation
of the existing neighborhood..
LU Policy 2.2.6: Neighborhood Pattern. All residential development should be integrated with
existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this impossible, the new development
should create new neighborhoods.
The proposed project is an example of good infill development taking advantage of a currently
underutilized site. The site is located within an existing neighborhood,near public transportation,
shopping and schools, and the character of the design fits the density pattern of the area.
LU Policy 2.2.8 Natural Features. Residential developments should preserve and incorporate as
amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and
plants.
The majority of the site has been previously developed with. ornamental landscaping and trees.
However, Stenner Creek passes through the rear of the site, and together with the associated
vegetation provides a nice natural amenity. The proposed project utilizes this space for common
outdoor use space, enhancing it with amenities such as benches, arbors and a barbeque.
LU Policy 2.2.10. Compatible Development. Housing built within an existing neighborhood
should be in scale and in character with that neighborhood. All multifamily development and
large group-living facilities should be compatible with any nearby;lower density development.
.5�7
A*tachment 5
GP, R, TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page_?
The proposed development has been designed to fit in with the adjacent development, while
providing an interesting variation. Brizzolara Street is currently developed with a mixture of
attached and detached small units. Additionally, the proposed density is also similar to that which
adjacent properties have been allowed.to develop.
A)Architectural Character. New buildings should respect existing buildings which contribute to
neighborhood historical or architectural character, in terms of size, spacing, and variety.
The design of the proposed project is an interesting and unique urban form. The dwellings will be
compatible with the existing multi-family development in the area, while injecting additional
character and style. Architectural review of the proposed development is required, and although
the general form of the project is attractive, there are opportunities to increase visual interest by
added variation of colors,materials, and decorative features.
B) Privacy and Solar Access. New buildings will respect the privacy and solar access of
neighboring buildings and outdoor areas, particularly where multistory buildings or additions
may overlook backyards of adjacent dwellings.
The lay-out of the proposed project, while simple and compact, respects the privacy and solar
access of both adjacent properties and the properties within the project itself. The lots and
structures have been designed with 10-foot rear setbacks both for provision of yard space and to
reduce overlook concerns of adjacent property owners. The applicants have requested side yard
setback reductions to allow building heights in excess of 12-feet with 5-foot setbacks. The side of
the structure closest to the front door is 17-feet in height, which would require a 6-foot setback,
and the side closest to the garage door is 23-feet in height, which would require a 7.5-foot
setback. The applicant has requested exceptions to allow both of these side yard setbacks be
reduced to 5-feet. These minor exceptions contribute to the compact form of the project and are
appropriate given the size of the units and overall scale of the project.
LU Policy 2.2.12:Residential Project Objectives. Residentialprojects should provide:
A)Privacy,for occupants and neighbors of the project;
The project includes satisfactory private open space areas and private entries with front porches
for each of the units. Despite the requested setback exceptions, 10 feet is maintained between the
units, and there do not appear to be any significant overlook issues.
B) Adequate usable outdoor area, sheltered from noise and prevailing winds, and oriented to
receive light and sunshine;
The project includes a satisfactory amount of adequate usable outdoor area that is sheltered from
noise through a combination of private yard space and balconies, and common recreational areas
adjacent to the creek. The acoustical analysis for the project concludes that as designed the
exterior noise levels will exceed the 60 dBA recommended by the City's Noise Element, with
5���
i
Attachi went 5
GP, R,TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 8
exterior noise levels ranging from.70 MA on second level decks on lots closest to Brizzolara to
62 dBA on areas nearest the creek. Staff recommends additional mitigation measures to reduce
exterior noise levels in these outdoor use areas, including the incorporation of a landscaped
earthen berm within the Brizzolara Street street-yard and a six foot high sound wall, setback 10
feet from.Brizzolara Street, along the rear yard of Lot 5, in-lieu of the typical privacy fence that
would be allowed there. Incorporation of these features and provision of alternative refuge in the
form of common outdoor use areas adjacent to the creek will satisfy the requirement for useable
outdoor area. An additional mitigation measure has been recommended to reduce interior noise
levels in the bedroom of Lot 5 by reversing the second-level floor plan so that the bedroom is one
the eastern side of the home, farthest from Highway 101 noise.
Q Use of natural ventilation, sunlight, and shade to make indoor and outdoor spaces
comfortable with minimum mechanical support; D)Pleasant views from and toward the project,
The project is designed with adequate solar orientation and landscaping to allow for sunlight and
shading. The view into the site will be predominantly along the sight-line of the street area
directly towards the creek. Views of the homes may be partially obscured by the landscape berm
along the Brizzolara frontage, which is necessary for noise reduction. However, the integrated
planting plan, landscaped parkway and detached sidewalks will visually connect the project to
the existing neighborhood.
E) Security and safety; F) Separate paths for vehicles and for people, and bike paths along
collector streets;
The private street has been designed to be 20-feet wide, with landscaped parkways and detached
sidewalks wrapping both sides of the street. Current plans show both the parkways and sidewalks
ending at the rear lots rather than connecting at the end of the street. Staff recommends that the
parkways and sidewalks both be required to wrap along the terminus of the road to create
complete pedestrian passageway and convenient access to the common recreation area.
G)Adequate parking and storage space;
As designed,,the project generates a parking requirement of 18 parking spaces, (2 spaces for the -
existing residence, 2 spaces for each new dwelling, and 2 guest parking spaces. Although
typically only 1.5 spaces are required for one-bedroom dwellings, because each lot within a
common interest subdivision must provide for its own parking needs two spaces each are needed.
The site has been designed with 14 parking spaces, including 8 single car garages, 4 on-street
spaces, one tandem space within a garage on Lot 1, and one uncovered parking space in the side
yard of Lot 8. The applicant has requested to provide the additional required spaces in tandem on
Lots 2-7. All of the.driveways except for that of Lot 8 provide a minimum of 18-feet from the
face of the garage to the beginning of the sidewalk, which is adequate for parking a vehicle
without overhanging the public access way. The proposed plan provides adequate parking as two
guest parking spaces beyond those required have been provided and conditions have been
ment
Attach
GP, R, TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 9 -
proposed to ensure that the garages.be available for vehicle parking at all times. Additionally;
Brizzolara Street is a single-loaded dead-end road that typically has street parking available.
H)Noise and visual separation from adjacent roads and commercial uses.
The project site is subject to excessive noise from Highway 101. Proposed noise mitigation
measures such as the landscape berm, short sound wall, and noise-dampening construction
techniques have been utilized to reduce noise impacts on the future residents. The development
will comply with City setback requirements and be separated from the adjacent road by the
public sidewalk, and standard street yard setbacks that will be enhanced with a landscaped berm.
1) Design elements that facilitate neighborhood interaction, such as front porches, front yards
along streets, and entryways facing public walkways.
The project has been designed to facilitate neighborhood interaction by inclusion of features such
as front porches and entry doors that face the front of the units and the public walkway. A
continuous sidewalk links the new street to Brizzolara, providing linkages between the existing
neighborhood and the new development, as well as within the development itself.
J) Buffers from hazardous materials transport routes, as recommended by. the City Fire
Department.
The City Fire Marshall has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with this standard and
does not have concerns.
Land Use Element Policy 2.4.6:Medium Density Residential Development should be primarily
dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and .
neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them, but in a more compact arrangement
than Low-Density Residential. Such dwellings are generally one- or two-story detached
buildings on small lots, or attached dwellings, with some private outdoor space for each
dwelling. Other uses which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as group
housing, parks, schools, and churches may be permitted. Medium-density development is
appropriate as a transition from low-density development to higher densities.
The project provides a pleasant and compact arrangement of uniquely designed small two story
houses on small individual lots. The site lies between properties within the Low Density
Residential land use category and Medium High Density Residential land use category. Parks, a
school, and shopping are nearby as well as central public transportation nodes. The site is
surrounded by higher density residential developments and the small detached units will provide
.an alternative housing option for person's looking to reside in the area. Amending the land use
designation to Medium Density Residential will provide a transition between neighboring higher
and lower density land use categories which is the appropriate use of the Medium Density
Residential category as detailed in the General Plan. As discussed above, an alternative
5_3°
Almchi went 5
GP, R; TR,ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 10
designation of Medium High Density Residential would dictate significant changes in the type of
housing and ownership allowed on the site and could be problematic in terms of neighborhood
compatibility.
Land Use Element Goal 31. Grow gradually outward from its historiccenter until its ultimate
boundaries are reached, maintaining a compact urban form.
The project helps the City achieve this goal by increasing the maximum density allowed' at the
site and more fully utilizing its potential. The site is close to the downtown planning area and is
within walking distance to shops and services, maintaining a compact urban form and
appropriate transition from the historic center outward.
Housing Element Policy 3.2.1. Encourage the rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of sound
or rchabitable housing rather than demolition. Demolition of non-historic housing may be
permitted where conservation of existing housing would preclude the achievement of other
housing olijectives or adopted City goals.
The project includes the maintenance of the existing unit.and reorientation of the garage to allow
for further development of the site.
Housing Element Policy 6.2.1. Consistent with the growth management portion of its Land Use
Element and the availability of adequate resources, the City will plan to accommodate up to
2,909 exempt and non-exempt dwelling units between January 2001 and July 2009. Cal Poly
University intends to provide up to 1,178 housing units on State land during the planning period.
The project adds seven new housing units while maintaining the existing unit, and is consistent
with the housing production goal.
Housing Element Policy 7.2.1. Character, Size, Density and Quality — Within established
neighborhoods, new residential development must be of a character, size; density, and quality
.that preserves the City's neighborhoods and maintains the quality of life for existing a_nd future
residents.
The proposed General Plan designation of Medium-Density Residential and R-2-S zoning would
provide a transition from the Medium-High Density (R-3-S) site to the north and Low-Density
Residential.Planned Development (R-1-PD) to the south. The design, while unique in the area, is
consistent with the neighborhood pattern in terms of density and massing of units. The units
equal or exceed the quality and character of nearby multi-family structures adding character and
style to the neighborhood.
Housing Element Policy 7.:2.2. Higher density housing should maintain high quality standards
for unit design, privacy, security, on-site amenities, and public and private open space. Such
standards should be flexible enough to allow innovative design solutions in special
5-3 l
- Attachment 5
GP, R, TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 1.1
circumstances, e.g. in developing mixed-use developments or in housing in the Downtown Core.
The project has been designed to provide small, single-family dwellings with both individual
private areas and areas for community interaction. The units demonstrate economy of scale while
providing for the necessary living space and amenities needed for independent living, in a unique
detached ownership unit style of development. Given the orientation of the site, with its narrow
frontage along Brizzolara Street and the creek along the rears the orientation of the proposed units
is an innovative design solution for realizing its full potential.
Housing Element Policy 7.2.7. The physical designs of neighborhoods and dwellings should
promote walking and bicycling, and should preserve open spaces and views.
The proposed project is located near the downtown and shopping, and within bicycling distance
of Cal Poly University. Brizzolara Street is relatively unique in the downtown, as it is a single.
loaded street with no through traffic. Both of these factors make it an ideal location for further
residential density and development.
2.Subdivision Design and Property Development Standards
Since the project includes a common lot development and not an airspace condominium or a
planned development, the project must be evaluated for conformance to development standards
in the R-2 district as well as the State's Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act —
2003. Planned Development rezoning of the property in any residential district requires a
minimum of one acre, while condominium developments (or common interest, planned unit
developments) may be developed on any size parcel and may be subdivided into any size parcel..
Since the project is only 0.77 acre it is not eligible for a planned developntent and must be
designed as a common interest development:
The following is an evaluation of the project with respect to consistency with the City's General
Plan, the State's Davis-Stirling Commtoa Interest Development Act =2003, and development
related codes,including the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations.
Subdivision Design
Lots within all common interest subdivisions, as defined by the Davis-Stirling Common Interest
Development Act, may have any size or shape, except in the R-1 "zone where subdivisions must
meet the lot size and shape standards described in the table above. For this Common Interest
Subdivision to be considered, the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning from Low Density
Residential with Special Considerations (R-1-S) to Medium Density Residential with Special
Considerations (R-2-S) zoning must be supported and approved.
The 8-lot subdivision, within the proposed R-2-S district, is a common interest subdivision
because the rnutual/reciprocal access, drainage & public utility easement, and the private
recreation & drainage easement provide each subdivision lot owner(s) and/or the required
homeowners association an equal interest in the use of portions of the other separate lots for their
5 -3a
Attachment 5
GP, R,TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 12
own benefit and enjoyment. California Civil Code section 1351(b) permits the "common area"
of a "common interest development" to consist of mutual or reciprocal easements over the
separate interests/lots. Similar to Planned Development zoning on sites of one acre or more, the
City also allows common interest subdivisions to deviate from standard subdivision regulations
pertaining to lot dimensions and shape. However, in a Common Interest Subdivision each parcel
must be able to comply with density, lot coverage and setback requirements.
The proposed subdivision is designed with a 20-foot wide central roadway with landscaped
parkways, detached sidewalks, and four on-site guest parking spaces. These features bisect the
site, and are covered by a private access, drainage & public utility easement. The new units are
on individual lots that are oriented to face the private road with single car garages, porches and
living space on the fust floor, and additional living space on the second level. The project
maximises use of the site by proposing small two story, 1-bedroom units. The existing home at
the northwest corner of the site is oriented towards Brizzolara Street. Private open space in this
project is located on ground level private yards at the rear and sides of each lot. A common open
space area with outdoor use amenities and covered by a private recreation and drainage easement
is located along the creek at the east end of the property.
Density
The proposed project meets the density standards provided in the Zoning Regulations. In the R-2
(Medium Density) residential zone, the maximum number of dwelling units per acre is 12. The
applicant is proposing to construct seven 1-bedroom dwellings and maintain the existing 3-
bedroom dwelling in its current location and configuration, resulting in a total density for the site
of 6.12. Within a Common Interest Subdivision each residential lot is required to meet its own
density requirements. Staff has calculated density based on the individual lot, including the
common use areas. The following table summarizes the density unit value of the proposed lots.
Lot Density
Lot Lot Area Allowable Development Proposed Development
Number
1 6,256 sq. ft. 0.14 x 12= 1.68 density units 1 three bedroom= 1.5 units
2 2,469 sq. ft. 0.05 x 12=0.68 density units 1 one bedroom unit=0.66 units
3 2,468 sq. ft. 0.06 x 12=0.68 density units 1 one bedroom unit=0.66 units
4 6,214 sq. ft. 0.14 x 12= 1.71 density units 1 one bedroom unit=0.66 units
5 2,840 sq. ft. 0.07 x 12=0.78 density units 1 one bedroom unit =0.66 units
6 2,480 sq. ft. 0.06 x 12=0.68 density units 1 one bedroom unit=0.66 units
7 2,484 sq. ft. 0.06 x 12=0.68 density units 1 one bedroom unit=0.66 units
8 8,370 sq. ft. 0.19 x 12= 2.31 density units 1 one bedroom unit=0.66 units
Lot Coverage
Since the project proposes individual lots instead of air space units, each property must comply
with the lot coverage standards for the zoning district. In the R-2 district the lot coverage
5-33
A'tachi lent 5
GP, R,TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 13
maximum is 50%. As proposed, all units meet lot coverage standards as shown in the chart
below.
Lot Coverage
jLot SizeaSze ,, .; `, ,+Lot Covera e : : Percenta a of coves e
1 6,256 sq. ft. 1, 937 sq. ft. 31
2 2;469 sq. ft. 564 sq. ft. 23%
3 2;468 sq. ft. 564 sq. ft. 23%-
4 6,214 sq. ft. 564 sq. ft. 9%
5 2,840 sq. ft. 564s q. ft. 20%
6 2;480 sq. ft. 564 sq. ft. 23%
7 2,484 sq.ft. 564 sq. ft. 23%
8 8,370 sq. ft. 564 sq. ft. 7%
Setbacks
In the R-2 zone; the required street yard for corner lots is 20 feet along the shorter frontage and
10 feet along the longer frontage and other yard requirements have a dimension of 5 to 10 feet
depending on building height. Since the proposed subdivision is not an airspace condominium
project or a planned development, each unit must meet required setbacks for the R-2 district
unless exceptions are approved with the subdivision. The applicant is requesting an exception to
allow 5-foot side yard setbacks between the new units where 6-foot and 7.5-foot setback are
normally required depending on building height. The side of the structures closest to the front
door is 17-feet in height; which would require a 6-foot setback, and the side of the structures
closest to the garage door is 23-feet in height, which would require a 7.5-foot setback. The
applicant has requested exceptions to allow both of these side yard setbacks be reduced to 5-feet.
The Zoning Ordinance provides for discretionary exceptions for variable other yards in new
residential subdivisions provided that at least 10-feet of separation is maintained between
buildings on adjacent lots and an acceptable level of solar exposure is guaranteed by alternative
yard requirements or private easements. Because some of the proposed units would have a
reversed floor plan (mirror image) the proposed setback reductions would be applied to the
various lots depending which layout was used. It is staff's opinion that these minor exceptions
contribute to the compact form of the project and are appropriate given the.size of the units and
overall scale of the project.
Private Roadway Design
The proposed 20 foot wide private street with detached sidewalks will allow for two-way vehicle
traffic and pedestrian access. 'At 20 feet in width, the Fire Department has required that all curbs be
5�3�1
Alachilent 5
GP, R,TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 14
painted red to prohibit parallel parking, which would encroach upon fire truck access. In-lieu of
parallel parking, four parking stalls have been incorporated into the site design to accommodate
guests and overflow parking. These spaces will be included in the mutual/reciprocal access,
drainage & public utility easement that is proposed for the roadway. Building and Planning staff
have reviewed the plan and found the location of the garages, parking stalls, and turn around
hammerhead at the end of the private street meet all City's Parking and Driveway Standards.
Parking
Since the units are to be constructed on individual lots, each lot should contain the required parking
for each unit. The project generates a parking requirement of 1.8 parking spaces, (2 spaces for the
existing residence,.2 spaces for each new dwelling, and 2 guest parking spaces. The site has been
designed with 20 parking spaces, including 8 single car garages, 4 on-street guest spaces, one
tandem space within a garage on Lot. 1, six uncovered tandem spaces on Lots 2-7, and one
uncovered parking space in the side yard of Lot 8. The request to provide required parking spaces
in tandem requires special findings be made and approval by the Community Development
Department Director or the Planning Commission. All of the driveways except for that of Lot 8
provide.a minimum of 18-feet.from the face of the garage to the beginning of the sidewalk, which is
adequate for parking a vehicle without overhanging the public.access way. On Lot 8, in-lieu of a
tandem space the applicant.has proposed anuncovered space in the eastern side yard. To reduce the
total amount of impermeable surface on the site the additional space has been designed to utilize
decorative permeable pervious pavers. The proposed plan provides adequate parking as two guest
parking spaces beyond those required have been provided(for a total of 4 guest parking spaces).
Staff feels that tandem parking is appropriate at this site due to its downtown location and the type
of units being proposed. Because of the site's proximity to the downtown the future residents will
have services and transit nearby, which will generally reduce reliance on vehicles. Further, because
the units are designed as small single-bedroom residences it is likely that they will be occupied by
only one to two occupants. To ensure that the garages are utilized, staff has recommended a
condition to ensure that the garages are kept available and used for parking at all times.
Additionally, because Brizzolara Street is a single-loaded dead-end road that typically has ample
street parking available, together with the extra guest parking that is being provided,.it appears that
there will be sufficient parking for the proposed development.
Attachment 5
GP, R, TR,ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 15
Proposed parking calculations
.��
T4Unit size _ _WPar n Re uirement r Parkes su `lied r� <'
Lot 1: 3-bedroom 2 spaces (existing) 2 spaces, with tandem approval
Lot 2c 1-bedroom 2 spaces 2 spaces,with tandem approval
Lot 3: 1-bedroom - 2 spaces 2 spaces,with tandem approval
Lot 4: 1-bedroom 2 spaces 2 spaces, with tandem approval
Lot 5: 1-bedroom 2 spaces 2 spaces, with tandem approval
Lot 6: 1-bedroom 2 spaces 2 spaces, with tandem approval
Lot 7: 1-bedroom 2 spaces 2 spaces, with tandem approval
Lot 8: 1-bedroom 2 spaces -2-spaces
Visitor space 1 space per five units (2) 4 spaces
Common_and Private Open Space
Common open space; private open space and recreation space are required to be provided. To
qualify as private open space, the private yard must be directly accessible from the unit it serves
and must have a minimum dimension in every direction of at least,10 feet inside of a minimum
area of at least 100 square feet. Each of the units contains 750-900 square feet of open space,
however much of this space is within side yards with a minimum dimension of only 5-feet.
Despite this, the large rear and front yard areas meet the intent of the private open space areas.
Access to the yard areas is through sliding doors off the side of the first floor den area into the
side yard. To reduce noise levels in the private outdoor areas a landscape berm has been
incorporated along the.Brizzolara Street frontage of Lot 5, and a 6-foot high sound wall shown
along the rear yard. By utilizing a sound wall in-lieu of standard fencing for this rear yard the
sound levels in all of the back yards 5-8 will be significantly reduced.
Common open space is provided in the form of a common recreation and landscape area at the .
east end of the property adjacent to the creek. Two existing pine trees are proposed to remain in
this location and additional landscape is proposed. In addition, amenities such as.a picnic bench,
barbeque, arbor and sitting bench are proposed. The approximate size of the common open space
area is roughly 3000 square feet in addition to the adjacent creek area which is dominated by
riparian brush and trees. As proposed, the common open space area provides a nice aesthetic
landscape addition to the project, providing outdoor area that is sheltered by the structures from
the highway noise. The common open space has been designed as a usable amenity with
decomposed granite pathways accessing the various amenities.
Building design'and orientation
The units are oriented toward one another with front porches and garages facing the private
roadway. The front doors and entry areas are prominent features of the units addressing the
public sidewalks and inviting a sense of community orientation. The existing unit on lot one will
retain its orientation towards Brizzolara Street. The building elevations have a quality appearance
5-3 to
Attachmi cnt 5
GP, R,TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 16
through the use of appropriate roof forms, windows, and siding,however the only variation of the
7 new units would be the reversal of layout for some of the units. The project will be subject to
architectural review, at which time it can be reviewed for opportunities to increase visual interest
through the introduction of alternative window designs, garage doors, and other details.
With the exception of lot 8, the units are setback from the private road by 18-feet. The unit on
Lot 8 was situated only 8-feet from the roadway to accommodate the required creek setback.
This setback area includes a landscaped parkway and detached sidewalk, in addition to private
yard areas that provide buffering between the roadway and the units. The lot configuration, size,
design and layout of the units appear to be reasonable, and following direction or a
recommendation from the Planning Commission, the project will be forwarded to the
Architectural Review Commission prior to proceeding to City Council.
Typical unit design
-----------
Idu T �� , fJ ON
17 u'
`lQ
}23C-f�
'Q! ROC' W/POSITIVE FLOOR PLAN MIP ROOF W/MIRROR FLOOR PLAN GABLE ROOF W/POMIVE FLOOR PLAN
Front elevations will face the common roadway and include garage access and covered porch entries
3. Zoning Ordinance and Housing
As discussed above, this project proposes a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of this
property changing its designation from low-density residential (R-1) to medium-density residential
(R-2), and a common interest subdivision to allow single family, individual ownership properties.
The Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 17.26, describes the R-2 district: "The R-2 zone is intended to
provide housing opportunities for people who want compact residences close to commercial and
public services. These areas will usually lie between zones of higher and lower residential density
and/or adjacent to office (0) zones or neighborhood-commercial (C-N) zones. The project has
been designed to generally conform to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance descriptions of the
R-2 district, meeting the specified developments standards for the district in terms of density, lot
coverage, setbacks and amenities, except for the minor exceptions for tandem parking and setback
reductions noted earlier.
5 -377
A'tachl went 5
GP, R,TR,ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page_17 _
The proposed small scale, one-bedroom units would provide a unique type of ownership
opportunity and provide an affordable way for individuals and young families to enter the housing
market. This is a good example of"affordable-by-design" development and so meets the City`s
Inclusionary Housing Requirements.The developer is required to pay the in-lieu fee as described in
Table 2 of the Housing Element and as determined by the Building Division fee calculation prior to
issuance of building permits. The in-lieu will be required to be paid prior to occupancy of the first
dwelling in the development, or prior to final map approval if the subdivision is to be built out by
others. The City's Housing Programs Manager has reviewed the applicants proposal and found that
it meets City and State Inclusionary Housing.Requirements.
4. .Gradiny,Drainage and-Utilities
The proposed development requires grading to achieve acceptable minimum building pad
elevations above the 100 year flood plane elevation,but generally follows the existing, natural
grades of the site. Since the site slopes down from the street, drainage exits the property at the
rear of the site: There is an existing storm drain along the northern boundary of the site which
drains both from Highway 101 and Brizzolara Street. The existing easement surrounding the
storm drain will need to be expanded from 10-feet to 154eet or the storm drain relocated to the
proposed main driveway within a 15-Wilde easement prior to issuance of a building permit for the
project. This additional area is required to ensure that there is adequate space available for future
maintenance of the drain.
The project site is bordered by Stenner Creek at the south east boundary. The creek and
associated vegetation will remain, and will be separated from the developed portion of the site
consistent with City Creek Setback requirements. Minor improvements are proposed in the creek
setback area consistent with City regulations including landscaping, walkways and garden
structures. Because the creek is at the rearmost portion of the site, and.is separated from the
proposed development by the required setbacks, no impacts to the riparian habitat are expected.
All utility services such as electricity, phone and cable will provided to the new units
underground:
5. Subdivision Findings
In order to approve the proposed tentative map; the Subdivision Map Act requires the City
Council must make the following findings:
1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan.
2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General
Plan.
3, The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
5 '3�
Attachment 5
GP,R, TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 18
5. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish of wildlife
or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious
public health problems.
7. That the design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision.
Findings tailored for the subdivision based on and supported by the above analysis are included
in a draft Planning Commission Resolution should the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the project to the City Council (Attachment 6).
6. Environmental Review
The Community Development Director has recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the project. The initial study has been included 8 attachment 6 to this staff report. Staff
identified mitigation measures that should be required of the project in the areas of Cultural
Resources, Noise, Public Services, Transportation & Traffic, and Utilities & Service Systems.
Some of the known potential impacts to the site will be automatically mitigated by compliance
with required public works and building code provisions that will be incorporated in the plan
check process.
Cultural Resources
Based on a review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System, and the
sites proximity to a known sensitive archaeological sites and historic resources, a Phase I cultural
resource survey was prepared. Inspection of the site did not identify the presence of any surface
indication of cultural resources, and it was determined to be unlikely that buried resources would
be present. Although there are no known cultural resources on the project site, due to its location .
adjacent to a creek and within a quarter mile of the Mission San Luis Obispo there is an elevated
potential for resources to be uncovered. Two mitigation measures arerecommended to ensure
that if archaeological resources are uncovered construction activities will cease until the
resources have been evaluated and properly handled. Implementation of these measures are
sufficient to mitigate potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Geology and Soils
Puture development will be required to comply with the Uniform Building Codes and City Codes
which require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an
earthquake, and proper documentation of soil characteristics for designing structurally sound
buildings. According to the Soils Engineering Report prepared for the project, the soil is suitable
to support the proposed building foundations and flat-work provided the recommendations in the
report are incorporated into the project design. The Building Division of the Community
5 ,3�
ktachm ent 5
GP, R. TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page_19 ____
Development Department routinely reviews projects for their compliance with the
recommendations of the soils engineering report for the site. No further mitigation is required.
Hydrology and Water Ouali!y
Since the site slopes away from the road, substantial development of the property is unlikely to
change drainage patterns and create additional cross lot drainage. However; provisions must be
made to ensure that the existing drainage easement, which channels water from Highway 101 and
Brizzolara Street towards the creek, continues to function properly and allows for future
maintenance to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Building Official.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure contained in the analysis are sufficient
to mitigate potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Noise
The Initial Study identifies potentially significant impacts from Highway 101 roadway noise. An
acoustical analysis was prepared for the site and it was found that the project can be designed to
meet the standards contained in the City's Noise Element for exposure of residents to
transportation noise sources. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures contained
in the acoustical analysis for interior noise attenuation and staff recommendations for outdoor.use
area noise attenuation are sufficient to mitigate potential impacts to less than significant levels..
Public Services
No resource deficiencies have been identified with respect to public services. However, a
potentially significant impact on.safety has been identified regarding potential impacts to public
safety. A mitigation measure is recommended to ensure that adequate emergency vehicle access
and maneuvering room is maintained on the private street. No further mitigation is necessary.
Trdffic
No impacts related to traffic have been identified. Traffic generated by the project will be
minimal, and existing street systems are capable of handling the additional trips. Potentially
significant impacts have been identified with respect to on-site parking availability and potential
for vehicles to block the public sidewalk The proposed mitigation measures will insure that
adequate parking is retained and potential conflicts between tandem parking and pedestrians are
avoided.
Utilities
No impacts have been identified relative to water service or supply, wastewater service capacity
at the Water Reclamation Facility; or storm drainage. Potentially significant impacts have been
identified relative utilities both on-site and within the public right-of-way along the street
frontage, and to solid waste disposal. The developer will be required to comply with City
requirements for solid waste recycling of construction debris. In addition to the ordinance
requirements, mitigation measures are recommended to insure the provision of necessary utility
improvements and on-site recycling facilities to reduce the waste stream generated by the project..
No further mitigation is required.
5 -�1�
Attachm went 5
GP,R,TR, ER 09-05 (499 Brizzolara)
Page 20 _
REFERRALS
The project proposal was routed to various City departments and comments received have been
incorporated into the project plans or mitigation measures where appropriate.
CONCLUSION
The property is a good site for increased density and infill housing as it is an area developed to a
similar density close to the downtown area and available services. The proposed design will
create safe, well designed small lot single-family housing that is affordable by design. A draft
resolution of approval with appropriate project conditions is included as attachment 6 should the
Planning Commission determine that the project should be forwarded to the City Council for
approval following review by the Architectural Review Commission.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Recommend denial of the project should the Planning Commission find the development
is inconsistent with the General Plan or out of character with the surrounding
development.
2. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on changes to the project or
additional information necessary to support approval of the project.
3. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff to revise the project to be
consistent with the Medium-High Density Residential General Plan Designation and R-3
Zoning District.
�444aelhmeef5"
A 1.:::....rA•
I—Tn:.ta:4.,. T_dr..i uu__
r�ttin�e:rn�i ' ..
nww�a'�fMi� Afldii6W glm �
R�PRI�}�Si4P�ff 61��piBil
�t 1, t Q. �i0dii .i C' - ('.,r.i'1:.,i. .P. r •. — —
9- Redialwj Ski! Pxhar
A9aQhaw*W- If
e6�ws
Atr - t t t' D f� Dl _. - _ - rntfA;rinnc
e'86E1�}l@ib�e�i•'
L �
��pp��IIppIIII�� Attachment 6
IVllII�IVIIIIuIuIllllll
III11111qCity of sAn 1U1 OBISPO
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
August 4,2005
Kelly Gearhart
6205 Alcantara Ave.
Atascadero, Ca 93401
SUBJECT: 9-05: 499 Brizzolara Street
Review of home design for a new common interest subdivision
Dear Mr. Gearhart:
The Architectural Review Commission,. at its meeting of August 1, 2005, continued
consideration of the project to a date uncertain, with the following directions:
1. Redesign the homes' stairwell to allow a door directly from the den to the rear yard.
2. Eliminate the sidewalk and parkway from one or both sides of the drive to allow for
staggering of front yard setbacks; larger rear yards, and deepening the garages to
create storage space.
3. Look into using an S-curb along drive.
4. Determine average street yard setback along Brizzolara to determine appropriate
setback for Lot 5.
5. Reduce fence height between units to 5-feet.
6. Move common recreational amenities out of-the creek setback area.
7. Design an alter=nate drainage basin with porous paving system in the driveway
rather than the creek setback and reduce the creek bank slope to no more than
3:1(explore using a product similar to Readymix.org).
8. Add a clarifier to the storm pipe drain for filtering site runoff.
9. Changes to the landscape palate include replacing the shrubs in the side yard with
climbing vines, reducing the size/number of shrubs in the rear ya"rds, varying the
type of ground cover used in the creek setback, using Magnolias or other
evergreens as street trees, and planting Oaks in the Creek area and using a more
vertical growing tree in rear yards.
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities.
�;, Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. —�Z
Attachment 6
ARC 9.05
Page 2
i
If you have questions, please contact Jaime Hill at 781-7165.
Sincerely,
l
itC
/
Pam Ricci, ICP
Senior Planner
Community Development
cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office
Jaime Kirk
9720 Atascadero Ave.
Atascadero, CA 93422
Vine Street Homes LLG
6205 Alcantara Ave
Atascadero, CA 93422
5=y3
Attachment 7
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER 9-05
1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Tract Map GP/R and TR 9-05
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number;
Jaime Hill, Associate Planner(805) 781-7165
4. Project Location: 499 Brizzol.ara
5. Project:Sponsor's Name and Address:
Kelly Gearhart
6205 Alcantara Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
7. Zoning: R-I=S (Low Density Residential with Special Considerations)
8. Description of the Project:.
General Plan.Amendment and Rezone to change the property's designation from Low Density
Residential with Special Considerations (R-1-S) to Medium Density Residential with Special
Considerations (R-2-S), Eight Lot Common Interest Subdivision and .seven new single-family
homes, including approval of further development of a sensitive site and exceptions for side yard
setback reductions and tandem parking.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings; The project site consists of approximately 0.77 acres
(33,541 square feet) located on the east side of Brizzolara Street, and bordering Stenner Creek
along its southeastern boundary. A single family residence exists on the site and will remain on
one of the eight lots; the site is otherwise vacant. Vegetation is limited to seasonal grasses and
several non-native trees. No rare or endangered species were observed on the site as it has been
disturbed by past human activities.
Attachment 7
The project area is residential in character with some commercial and community=serving uses in
the vicinity. Surrounding uses include single-family residences, apartments, condominiums, an
office/condominium development, the Odd Fellow's Hall, Mission High School, and the
Downtown Commercial District.
10. Project Entitlements Requested:
The applicant is requesting a General Plan (Land Use Map) amendment and rezone, a Vesting
Tentative Tract Map to create an 8-lot Common Interest Subdivision, and architectural review of
seven new single-family residences including exceptions to property development standards for
reduced side yard setbacks and tandem parking.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO• 2 INMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMIST 2005
i
Attachment 7
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impactthat is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Geology/Soils Public Services
Agricultural Resources Hazards&Hazardous Recreation
Materials _
Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality x Transportation&Traffic-
Biological Resources Land Use and Planning x Utilities and Service
Systems
x Cultural Resources x Noise Mandatory Findings of
— - — -- — - — —
Significance
,t..
Energy and Mineral Population and Housing r, �
Resources
FISH AND GAME FEES
There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish
and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a
de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees.
X The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish
and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial stud_y has been
circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
This environmental document must be "submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more
State agencies(e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and
Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines
15673(a)).
IMF
fag CITY OF SAN Luis OBwo 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
5
Attachment 7
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.,
Ifind that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on they environment;
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and X
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL RvIPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" impact(s) or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL RAPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that.remain to be addressed
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE.DECLARATION, including revisions
or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further,is required.
r
igna Date
Ronald Whisenand,Deputy Director of Community Development For:John Mandeville;.-
Printed Name Community Development Director
Cmr OF SMV Luis OBLsPo 4 INM"STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
5-q-7
Attachment 7
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A"`No Impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact"answer should be explained where it is
based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose,sensitive receptors to
pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. The explanation of each
issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold,if any,used to evaluate each question.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact'is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are
one or more"Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made,an EIR is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has
reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to.a "Less than Significant.Impact." The lead agency must
describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures from Section 17,"Earlier Analysis,"may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process,an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D) of the California Code of
Regulations. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts(e.g. general pians, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached,and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion. In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent
to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
CITY OF SAN Luis 0-8rpo 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
5-Y
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#905 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
1.AESTHETICS. Would theproject:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,2 X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited 1, 10 X
to,trees,rock outcroppings,open space,and historic buildings
within a local or state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 1, 10, X
the site and its surroundings? 24
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would 1,25 _T X
adversely effect day or nighttime views in the area?
Evaluation
a), b), c), d) The subject property is currently surrounded by urban uses and is not within a location that is considered a
scenic vista. Additionally, Brizzolara Street is not designated within the General Plan Circulation Element as a road of
scenic value. The site is bordered by Medium-High Density Residential with special considerations (R-3-S) to the north,
Low-Density Residential Planned Development (R-1-PD) to the south, and across the creek to the west additional
Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) and a mixed use officetresidential development zoned O-H-PD. Immediately
across Brizzolara Street to the east is a newly constructed sound wall adjacent to Highway 101. The site is already
developed with an older residential dwelling at the northwest corner of the site that will be maintained. Aesthetic impacts
to the site could occur due to tree removals from within the site and at the site boundaries. However, new construction
combined with new landscape at the property is likely to produce negligible aesthetic impacts, and instead is likely to
enhance the aesthetic appearance of the property. Construction on the property and the requested exceptions to City
property development standards are subject to architectural review by the City's Architectural Review Commission to
ensure aesthetic compatibility of the project to the site and its surroundings.
The GP/R will allow for the development of a medium density residential project with taller buildings and increased
density and lot coverage than the present zoning, which could negatively impact views and create light and glare for the
adjacent residential properties. The proposed common interest subdivision would create small lots with detached
residences fronting a private driveway. Though less dense than allowed by the Medium Density Residential Zone (R-2)
would allow,it will provide a transition between the R-3-S to the north and R-1-PD site to the south.
Conclusion
No impacts have been identified relating to aesthetics. The project is subject to Architectural Review and tree removals will
require a tree removal permit and mitigation to ensure on-site replanting of trees. The City's Architectural Review
Commission routinely reviews new development projects to assure a high level of architectural integrity and aesthetic quality.
No further mitigation is required.
2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project-
a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of 13 X
Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a 9 X
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to 25 X
their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural rue?
Evaluation
a),b),c)The site is designated as Urban Land by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency. It is a small parcel that is surrounded by developed properties and public streets and is not considered prime
farmland. The project will not convert prime farmland to any no-agricultural use and there is no Williamson Act contract
Crnr of SAN LUIS OB9SPO 6 INMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNEcKusT 2005
S-q9
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Potency Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
nless Irnpact
ER#9-05 saes Mitigation
Incorporated
in effect on the project site. The project is an infill development and will not result in impacts to existing on site or off site
agricultural resources as there are no properties within the immediate vicinity zoned or used for commercial agricultural
use.
Conclusion
The project will not have any impact on agricultural resources.
3. AIR QUAIM. Would theproject:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an 14,15 X
existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air 14,15 X
quality plan?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 25 X
concentrations?
d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 25 X
people?
e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria 14,15 X
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative
thresholds for ozoneprecursors)?
Evaluation
a),b),c),e)San Luis Obispo County is a non-attainment area for the State PMIo(fine particulate matter 10 microns or less in
diameter) air quality standard. State law requires that emissions of non-attainment pollutants and their precursors be
reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. The 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo
County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District(APCD)to meet that requirement.The CAP is a
comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as
well as from motor vehicle use. Land Use Element Policy 1.18.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the
Clean Air Plan.
Temporary impacts from the project,including but not limited to excavation and construction activities,vehicle emissions
from heavy duty equipment and naturally occurring asbestos,has the potential to create dust and emissions that exceed air
quality standards for temporary and intermediate periods. However, this project will be subject to the City's Grading
Ordinance which includes dust control measures to reduce any potential impacts.
d) The project is a General Plan (Land Use Map) amendment and rezone, Tract Map to create an 8-lot Common Interest
Subdivision and residential development,which will not create objectionable odors under normal circumstances.
Conclusion
The project does not exceed APCD thresholds and air quality mitigation measures are not required. The City's Grading
Ordinance includes dust control measures that will apply to the project. Energy efficiency is a factor that is routinely
considered by the City's Architectural Review Commission and conditions of approval may be required to insure that City
goals are met with respect to solar orientation,building materials and general methods for conservation.No further mitigation
is required.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proiecL
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or indirectly or 1,25, X
through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a 5
candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional
plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and.Wildlife Service_.
CRY of SAN LUIS OstsPo 7 INmAL STUDY ENvKRDNmENrAL CHECKLIST 2005
5-50
Affachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sonar Potentially Potentially Lgw Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
b) Have a substantial adverse effect,on any riparian habitat or 5 X
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting 5 X
biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance(e.g.Heritage Trees)?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident 9 X
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation 5 X
Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved
local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan?
f) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands 9 X
as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(including,but
not limited to,marshes,vernal pools,etc.)through direct
removal,filling,hydrological interni tion,or other means?
Evaluation
The project site is bordered by Stenner Creek on the east side of the property.The proposed development has been designed
to comply with City Creek Setback Standards,which insure that development will not encroach up the creek or associated
riparian vegetation.Because the creek and any riparian vegetation are at the east extent of the property,farthest from the
Brizzolara Street access point,as mitigated construction activities will not impact any resources.The property contains no
known habitat areas and is partially developed with a residential dwelling and ornamental trees. No significant native trees or
vegetation are presently on the site,however several larger non-native trees are established on the property and are proposed
to be removed with development of the residential project. Subdivision and redevelopment of the property is likely to create
less than significant impacts to biological resources on the subject property and within the project vicinity.
a), b) According the Natural Diversity Database of the California Department of Fish and Game, there are no species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified.
c) Several trees are proposed for removal; however they are non-natives and not considered heritage trees. The proposed
project will include significant landscaping,including on-site replanting of trees.
d) The property is completely surrounded by urban development and the proposed GPA/R will not interfere with the
movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor.
e) The proposed project will not conflict with any local policy protecting biological resources or any adopted habitat
conservation plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan.
f) The development of the site is adequately set back from Stenner Creek and the associated riparian vegetation and will
therefore have no adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to impact biological resources.
S.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the reject:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 9, 19 X
historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 150645) 21,294
b) Cause a substantial adverse chafe_in the significance of an 9,20, X
Curr OF SAN Luis OBISPO 8 INmnL SnmY Dr mONmEwAL CKmKLw 2005
5 -51
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources potentially potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
archaeological resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 150645) 22,29
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource 20,29 X
or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of 22,29 X
formal cemeteries?
Evaluation
a), b) Based on a review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System, and the sites proximity to a
known sensitive archaeological sites and historic resources, a Phase I cultural resource survey was prepared. Inspection of
the site did not identify the presence of any surface indication of cultural resources, and it was determined to be unlikely
that buried resources would be present.
c) There are no known paleontological resources or unique geologic features on the project site.
d)Although there are no known archeological resources on the project site,it is within a quarter mile of the Mission San Luis
Obispo, an area identified on the City's Burial Sensitivity Map as having a heightened potential for undocumented burial
sites.
Mitigation Measures:Cultural Resources
In the event archaeological resources are unearthed or discovered during any grading or construction activities,the following
standards apply:
1) Construction activities shall cease,and the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department shall be notified
so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of
artifacts may be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law.
2) In the event archaeological resources are found to include human remains,or in any other case where human remains are
discovered dulling construction,the County Coroner is to be notified in addition to the Community Development
Department so that proper disposition may be accomplished.
Conclusion
Although there are no known cultural resources on the project site,due to its location adjacent to a creek and within a quarter
mile of the Mission San Luis Obispo there is an elevated potential for resources to be uncovered. Two mitigation measures
are recommended to ensure that if archaeological resources are uncovered construction activities will cease until the resources
have been evaluated and properly handled.No further mitigation is necessary.
6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would theproject;
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 6 X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient 6 X
manner?
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource 6 X
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
State?
Evaluation
a), b)The project is consistent with the City's Energy Conservation Element which encourages concentrations of residences
close to concentrations of employment. Any development on the site must comply with the policies contained in the
General Plan Energy Conservation Element. The City implements these goals through enforcement of the California
Energy Code, which establishes energy conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Future
development of this site must meet those standards.
c) No known mineral resources exist within the project site that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the
State.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBlspo 9 INMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNEcKLIST 2005
5-5z-
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant lmpact
ER#9 05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorpotated
Conclusion
No further mitigation is required beyond compliance with City energy conservation standards and all applicable State
requirements. The Architectural Review Commission regularly reviews development projects for compliance with these
standards.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would theproject:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 4,27 X
effects,including risk of loss,injury or death involving:
I. Rupture of a]mown earthquake fault,as delineated in the 23,27 X
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area,or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 23,27 X
III. Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? 12,27 X
IV. Landslides or mudflows? 27 X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 12,25 X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that 27 X
would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially
result in on or off site landslides,lateral spreading,subsidence,
liquefaction,or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the 27 X
Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life
or property?
Evaluation
a) San Luis Obispo County,including the City of San Luis Obispo,is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province,
which extends along the coastline from central California into Oregon. This region is characterized by extensive folding,
faulting,and fracturing of variable intensity. In general,the folds and faults of this province comprise the pronounced
northwest trending ridge-valley system of the central and northern coast of California.
Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act,the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special
studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently-active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well-defined as to
constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County,the special
Studies Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults.The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit
line,near Los Osos Valley Road.According to a recently conducted geology study(source 16),the closest mapped active
fault is the Los Osos Fault,which runs in a northwest direction and is about one mile from the City's westerly boundary.
Because portions of this fault have displaced sediments within a geologically recent time(the last 10,000 years),portions
of the Los Osos fault are considered"active". Other active faults in the region include: the San Andreas,located about 30
miles to the northeast,the Nacimiento,located approximately 12 miles to the northeast,and the San Simeon-Hosgri fault
zone,located approximately 12 miles to the west.
Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity,the site is located in an area of"High Seismic
Hazards," specifically Seismic Zone 4, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be
subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. New structures must be designed in compliance with
seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone 4. To minimize this potential impact,
the Uniform Building Code and City Codes require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing
in an earthquake.
b),c)The project will not result in the loss of topsoil as most of the site will be covered by impervious surfaces or planted
with vegetation.The soils engineering report includes specific recommendations to insure that foundations are designed to
withstand settlement.
Cmr of SAN LUIS OBISPo 10 INML STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
5-53
Httacnment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sour.« Potentially Potentially toss Than No
Significant Significant Significant hnpact
ER#9-OS Issues Unless trnpact
Mitigation
Inco fated
d) The Soils Engineering Report includes evaluation of 5 soil samples taken from the project site. Evaluation of the
subsurface indicates that the soils are generally silty clayey sands characterized by low in-place densities. Expansion
determination indicates that the bearing soils lie in the medium range in accordance with the U.B.C,and that the relative
density of the in-place soils is over 70%, meaning that the potential for liquefaction at the site is low. The
recommendations in the soils report suggest a series of site grading and development standards to achieve the required
support of building foundations. The soils engineering report concludes that the project site is suitable for the proposed
development provided the recommendations in the report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.
Conclusion
Future development will be required to comply with the Uniform Building Codes and City Codes which require new
structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake, and proper documentation of soil
characteristics for designing structurally sound buildings.According to the Soils Engineering Report prepared for the project,
the soil is suitable to support the proposed building foundations and flat-work provided the recommendations in the report are
incorporated into the project design. The Building Division of the Community Development Department routinely reviews
projects for their compliance with the recommendations of the soils engineering report for the site. No further mitigation is
required.
& HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the r('ect:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 25 X
through the routine use,transport or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 25 X
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely 9,25 X
hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Expose people or structures to existing sources of hazardous 25 X
emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances,or waste?
e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous 9 X
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and,as a result,it would create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
f) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within 9 X
two miles of a public airport,would the project result in a safety
hazard for the people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of,or physically interfere with,the 4 X
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose,injury, 4 X
or death,involving wildland fins,including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed
with wildlands?
Evaluation
a), b), c), d), e) The site does not contain any known hazardous substances and is not located in an area of high risk. The
proposed land use change, common interest subdivision and development of a residential housing project will not cause
any hazardous emissions or require handling of hazardous wastes. The site is not on a list of hazardous material sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
CRY OF SAN Luis OBispo 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
57-5y
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potena Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER#9-05 Mitigation
Inco orated
f) The project site is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area.
g) The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshall and will not conflict with any emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.
b) The Safety Element of the General Plan identifies the site as having low potential for impacts from wildland fires.
Conclusion
The project will not involve any impacts with respect to hazards or hazardous materials.
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALUY. Would the ro'ect:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 7,29 X
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere 19,28 X
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be
a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level(e.g.The production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the 7,28 X
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or
provide additional sources of runoff into surface waters
(including,but not limited to,wetlands,riparian areas,ponds,
springs,creeks,streams,rivers,lakes,estuaries,tidal areas,bays,
ocean,etc.)?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or 7,28 X
area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or
siltation onsite or offsite?
e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or 28 X
area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding
onsite or offsite?
f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on 9 X
a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map?
g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which 9,25 X
would impede or redirect flood flows?
h) Will the project introduce typical storm water pollutants into 25 X
ground or surface waters?
i) Will the project alter ground water or surface water quality, 25,28 X
temperature,dissolved oxygen,or turbidity?
Evaluation
a),b),h), i)The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.All of the residents will
be served by the City's sewer system and run-off is required to be directed to an approved point of disposal, in this case
the majority of the site will be directed into an on-site detention basin, and the remainder of the site sheet-flowing into
Stenner Creek. The project will be served with water by the City's Utilities Department and will not use or otherwise
deplete groundwater resources or negatively effect water quality.
c),d),e)Future development of the site will increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site and affect the absorption
rate,drainage patterns,and amount and rate of surface runoff.To assure that potential drainage impacts are minimized to a
level of insignificance,any future development of the site will be required to be designed to meet all applicable City
codes,including City gradingand drainage standards.Site drainage will be adequately evaluated with the grading plans as
CITY DF SAN LUIS OsisPo 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
�-�55
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant hnpact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
part of the required Architectural Review process.The Preliminary Drainage Analysis includes evaluation of the existing
and post-development runoff for the entire site and found that for the 2, 10 and 25-year storm events there would be no
increase in total runoff.However,the basin has been designed for 25-year storm,becoming submerged in a 50-year flood,
and with the entire site submerged in a 100-year flood.A multi-stage outlet structure will be incorporated into the project
design to ensure that the post-development runoff does not exceed predevelopment runoff in the 2 and 10-year return
storms.A mitigation measure has been recommended to ensure that there is adequate room available for the long term
maintenance of the site's storm drain.
f), g) The Preliminary Drainage Analysis identifies the site as within a 100 year flood elevation. Preliminary in-fill
calculations suggest the 100-year elevation will increase due to the proposed grading approximately 0.075',requiring the
proposed finished floors of all the new residences to be a minimum of 183.00'. Site drainage will be adequately evaluated
with the grading plans as part of the required Architectural Review and Building Permit processes.A mitigation measure
has been recommended to ensure that the proposed development is elevated a minimum of 1 foot above the 100 year storm
elevation.
Mitigation Measures:Hydrology and Water Ouality
3) The drainage easement along the Northerly boundary shall be a minimum of 15-feet wide or the storm drain shall be
relocated to the proposed main driveway within a 15-wide easement.
4) The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter of Map Amendment
(LOMA),or,Letter of Map Revision(LOMR)prior to final acceptance of any development. Any lots or building pads,
identified in the hydrology study to be subject to flooding during a 100 year storm shall be graded to provide minimum
pad elevations of at least 1 foot above the 100 year storm elevation.
Conclusion
No impacts have been identified with respect to water quality or hydrology. Drainage patterns will be evaluated for
consistency with existing City codes as part of the subdivision approval process and through architectural review.Mitigation
measures are recommended to insure that there is adequate room available for the long term maintenance of the site's storm
drain and that the new structures and improvements will be elevated above the 100 year storm elevation.No further mitigation
is necessary.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the ro'ect:
a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 1 X
an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
b) Physically divide an established community? 1,9 X
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural 8 X
community conservationplans?
a) The proposed project includes changing the land use designation of the site to allow additional residential density and
approval of a Common Interest Subdivision with exceptions to property development standards to allow reduced side yard
setbacks and tandem parking. The General Plan land use map currently designates the site Low Density Residential. The
land use designation is described as "primarily dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both
individual identity and neighborhood cohesion for the households occupying them.Such dwellings are generally detached,
one- or two-story buildings, with private outdoor space separating them from neighboring dwellings".The project site is
zoned R-1-S (Low Density Residential with Special Considerations) with a maximum allowable density of 7 units per net
acre. The Special Consideration overlay was applied to this site to assure conformance with the general plan creek
protection policies and to determine if the proposed development solves problems associated with highway noise.
The applicant is proposing to change the land use designation to Medium Density Residential, which is described as
"primarily dwellings having locations and forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood
cohesion for the households occupying them, but with a more compact arrangement than Low-Density Residential. Such
Crry OF SAN LUIS OsisPO 13 lNR1At.STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNECKuST 2005
55,S CQ
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Inco orated
dwellings are generally detached, one- or two-story buildings on small lots, or attached dwellings, with some private
outdoor space for each dwelling". Concurrent with the changed land use designation the site would be rezoned to R-2-S
(Medium Density Residential with Special Considerations), which has a maximum allowable density of 12 units per net
acre. The applicant is proposing a project with a density equivalent of 6.12 density units. This is less than the maximums
density allowed on the site under the R-2-S zoning,which is 9.24 density units(12 units x 0.77 acre).Any development of
this site is subject to approval of the Community Development Director or the Planning Commission. With the
incorporation of recommended mitigation measures the proposed development adequately addresses both the ambient
noise at the site and creek protection measures.
Except as specifically noted, each lot within the proposed development has been designed to meet City property
development standards, including lot coverage, density, parking and setback requirements. The applicant has requested
approval of two exceptions to City standards, including yard reductions to allow 5-foot side yards where 6-foot and 7S-
setbacks are required, and approval of tandem parking spaces for seven of the eight units (excluding Lot 8). Six of the
tandem spaces would include an uncovered space in front of a single car garage, and one would be tandem within a
garage.
b) Adjacent uses consist of Low Density (R-1-PD) housing in a Planned Development to the immediate south and Medium
High Density (R-3-S) housing to the north on a sensitive site. The proposed common interest development, with seven
new one-bedroom homes and the existing 3-bedroom dwelling would be compatible with the adjacent development and
provide a transition from the Low Density development to the north and the Medium High Density development further to
the south. The creation of "affordable by design housing" close to the downtown will help to reduce the City's
Jobs/Housing imbalance.
c)The proposed residential use does not conflict with any known habitat conservation plan or applicable land use plan.
Conclusion
The General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the property from Low Density Residential with Special Considerations(R-1-
S) to Medium Density Residential with Special Considerations (R-2-S) and associated subdivision proposal is an issue of
neighborhood compatibility,property aesthetics,and traffic increase. In the General Plan Land Use Element Medium Density
Residential development is described as "appropriate as a transition from low-density development to higher densities". The
proposed project would provide a tratvsition from the Low Density Residential Planned Development(R-1-PD) units to the
north and the Mediums High Density Residential with Special Considerations(R-3-S)that has been development to the south.
The applicant has proposed small detached homes in a common interest subdivision,which will be single-family in character
with in a compact form. The project is subject to approval of a use permit(review of development of a sensitive site and
exceptions to property development standards to allow reduced setbacks and tandem parking) by the Community
Development Director or Planning Commission, and Architectural Review including neighborhood compatibility. No further
mitigation is required.
11.NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of people to or generation of"unacceptable"noise 3, 11, X
levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise 17,26
Element,or general noise Ievels in excess of standards
established in the Noise Ordinance?
b) A substantial temporary,periodic,or permanent increase in 25 X
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groumdbome 17,25 X
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
d) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within 9 X
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Cn Y of SAN Luis Ostsao 14 UtmaL Srunv ENviRoNMENTAL Cmcutusr 2005
5 -57
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources So tir Potentially 1'otwtially Less Than No
Significant Significant Sigmficam Impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER#9-05 Mitigation
Incorporated
Evaluation
a) The project site is within an area determined by the City's Noise Element to exceed the noise standards for residential
development. The Noise Element requires all outdoor use areas to have an average noise level of 60 dB. Interior noise
areas must have a maximum average noise level of 45 dB. In August 2003 Cal Trans completed a sound barrier along this
portion of Brizzolara. A post-construction survey.found that the effectiveness of the barrier was reduced by the inclusion
of scuppers at the bottom of the barrier to allow for the passage of storm water since the barrier is in the 100-year
floodplain of Stenner Creek.Noise levels on the site were reduced from approximately 75 dBA to 68 dBA at ground level.
In order to address the potentially significant noise impacts on the project, the applicant has submitted an acoustical
analysis, prepared by Davis Engineering.The study concludes that development of the project will satisfy the City's noise
exposure criteria for interior noise levels if specific recommendations are incorporated.These recommendations have been
incorporated into the project design and are included in the plans submitted by the applicant. Staff is recommending a
mitigation measure to insure that these recommendations are carried through to the construction drawings for the project.
The acoustical analysis also concludes that as designed the exterior noise levels will exceed the 60 dBA recommended by
the City's Noise Element, with exterior noise levels ranging from 70 dBA on second level decks on lots closest to
Brizzolara to 62 dBA on areas nearest the creek,however no mitigation measures were recommended in the report.Staff is
recommending.additional mitigation measures to reduce exterior noise levels in the outdoor use areas, including the
incorporation of an earthen berm within the Brizzolara Street street-yard and a six foot high sound wall setback 10 feet
from Brizzolara Street, along the rear yard of Lot 5. If incorporation of these features does not reduce noise levels to
acceptable levels provision of alternative refuge in the form of common outdoor use areas adjacent to the creek will be
required. An additional mitigation measure is recommended to reduce interior noise levels in the bedroom of Lot 5 by
reversing the second-level floor plan so that the bedroom is one the eastern side of the home, farthest from Highway 101
noise.
b) During construction, ambient noise levels in the area of construction will increase. Construction noise is regulated by the
City's Noise Ordinance and the project will have to meet the noise standards contained in the Ordinance, which includes
limitations o the days and hours of construction.No further mitigation is necessary.
c) The project is a residential subdivision and will not expose people to excessive ground borne vibration or noise levels..
d) The project is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area.
Mitigation Measures:Noise
5) The final project design shall comply with all recommendations of the April 18, 2005 acoustical analysis prepared by
Dohn Associates for the attenuation of indoor noise levels at the project site.
6) The final project design shall include an earthen berm with dense plantings along the Brizzolara Street froimtage.Plantings
shall include groundcover,large bushes and hedges,and trees to maximize the effectiveness of the berm in reducing noise
transmission. Additionally, a six-foot high sound wall shall be constructed 10-feet back from Brizzolara Street along the
portion of Brizzolara Street adjacent to the 10-foot rear yard of Lot 5. These improvements shall be included on
architectural plans and determined to be satisfactorily in design by the City's Architectural Review Commission.
7) The final project design shall be revised to show the second-story bedroom on Lot 5 on the eastern side of the home,
farthest from Highway 101 noise.
Conclusion
The applicant has had an acoustical analysis prepared for the site and the project can be designed to meet the standards
contained in the City's Noise Element for exposure of residents to transportation noise sources. Mitigation measures are
recommended to insure that the recommendations of theacoustical analysis for interior noise attenuation and staff
iiCmr OF SAN Luis Ostspo 15 INmAL STUDY EwmoNmENTAL C,HEcta.sT 2005
5 C,
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
recommendations for outdoor use area noise attenuation are carried through to the construction drawings for the project. No
further mitigation is necessary.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly 25 X
(for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people 25 X
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Evaluation
a), b)The proposed project will amend the City's General Plan, to allow higher density housing than is currently allowed on
the site. The proposed common interest subdivision would create small lots with detached residences fronting a private
driveway. Though less dense than allowed by the Medium Density Residential Zone (R-2) would allow, it will provide a
transition between the R-3-S to the north and R-1-PD site to the south.A total of 8 residential lots, one already developed
with a single family home, are proposed on the 0.77 acre site. This amount of new housing, in combination with other
]mown separate residential projects, is not considered substantial population growth, and is consistent with growth rates
contained in the City's General Plan.
The developer proposes to pay the in-lieu fee to meet the inclusionary requirements. Fee shall be paid as described in
Table 2 of the Housing Element and as determined by the Building Division fee calculation prior to issuance of building
permits. The in-lieu fee shall be paid prior to occupancy of the first dwelling in the development,or prior to final map
approval if the subdivision is to be built out by others.
Conclusion
The population growth created by the project is considered less than significant since the development places needed
additional housing in a location near schools, employment and the downtown area. This is consistent with Land Use and
Housing Element policies encouraging a variety of housing s,efficient infill development,and compact urban form.
13.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision,or need,of new or physically altered government facilities,the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? 8,25 X
b) Police protection? 8,25 X
c) Schools? 8125 X
d) Parks? 8,25 X
e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? 16,25 X
Other pubfic facilities? 8,25 X
Evaluation
a) The proposed homes are designed to be served by a 20-foot wide private double loaded residential street constructed
perpendicular to Brizzolara. To provide sufficient area for access to emergency vehicles, the entire width of the street is
required to remain clear of parked vehicles.Although the applicant is not proposing to develop a standard cul-de-sac with
sufficient tum around area for emergency vehicles, the new street itself will act as a hammerhead turn-around as
Brizzolara currently terminates without sufficient turn-around area.
b), f), As an infill site, adequate public services (fire, police, other public facilities) are available to service the property.
Project plans have been routed to all effected City Departments for comments and input on needed plan revisions. Future
development must comply with applicable City codes and State regulations and building permits will be issued to insure
consistency with these requirements.
Crnr OF SAN Luis OBISPO 16 INMA.STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
S-5R
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-OS Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
c) The school districts in the State are separate governing bodies with authority to collect fees to finance school construction
and parcel acquisition. Section 65955 of the Government Code prohibits the City from denying a subdivision or collecting
any fees beyond those required by the school district itself, to mitigate effects of inadequate school facilities. Any effect
that the additional children will have of school facilities will be mitigated in whole or in part by the districts per square
foot fees,charged at the time of building permit issuance for each residence.
d) Park in-lieu fees are required to be paid as part of the subdivision to insure that City residents have adequate access to park
facilities as required by the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan.
e) The project site is served by a local residential street The Institute of Traffic Engineers Manual estimates that single-family
homes generate an average of 10 vehicle trips per day. A total of seven new homes (one exists) might generate 70
additional trips per day on average. Existing street system is capable of handling the additional trips.Furthermore,the site
is within reasonable walking distance from shopping,schools,and services.
Mitigation Measures: Public Services
8) The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs shall be panted red and properly signed and stenciled as a"Fire Lane"
per the Fire Department's"Developer's Guide"in order to prohibit parking in unauthorized areas and preventing access in
case of emergencies.The prohibition from parallel parking along the street shall be enforced by the Homeowner's
Association and the City.
Conclusion
No resource deficiencies have been identified with respect to public services.A mitigation measure is recommended to ensure
that adequate emergency vehicle access and maneuvering room is maintained on the private street. No further mitigation is
necessary.
14.RECREATION. Would the project-
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 8 X
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or 25 X
expansion of recreational facilities,which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Evaluation
a)Residents of the project will likely use Emerson Park and Sinsheimer Park recreation facilities for their park and recreation
needs.The project will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities.However,given the size
of the project and the expected number of residents, no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur with
development of this site. Additionally, park in-lieu fees will be required to be paid to the City to help finance additional
park space, maintenance or equipment in the vicinity. These fees are set at a level to offset the effect of the additional
demand. The subdivision of the property will be subject to Park In-Lieu fees that will offset any increase in facility use.
b)The project does not include the construction of recreational facilities beyond small open space areas and a picnic area with
a barbeque.The construction of these facilities will not have an adverse physical effect on the environment because of their
small scale.
Conclusion
Park and recreation facility demand will increase incrementally with the development of the project.Park-in-lieu fees are set
at a level considered to be sufficient to offset the effects of the additional demand for park facilities.No further mitigation is
required.
15. TRANSPORTATION/IRAFFIC. Would theproject:
Crry of SAN Luis OBISPo 17 INmAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
cs— ��
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 16 X
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system?
b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of service 16 X
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads and highways?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features(e.g.sharp 25 X
curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.
farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 25 X
e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite? 25 X
f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative 2 X
transportation(e.g.bus turnouts,bicycle racks)?
g) Conflict with the with San Luis Obispo County Airport Land 25 X
Use Plan resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards,noise,
or a chane in air trafficpatterns?
Evaluation
a),b)c)The project will result in a total of seven additional single-family residential dwellings to be served by a 20-footwide
private road located perpendicular to Brizzolara Street_Brizzolara Street is a single loaded street,bordered by Highway 101
and a new sound wall to the west, and ending at dead ends at both its northern and southern extremes. The Institute of
Traffic Engineers Manual estimates that single-family homes generate an average of 10 vehicle trips per day. A total of
seven new homes aright generate 70 trips per day on average. Existing street systems are capable of handling the additional
trips.
d) The project plans have been evaluated by the City's Fire Marshall who has determined that there are no emergency access
constraints or impacts.The project can adequately be served by emergency vehicles,including fire trucks.
e)With the approval of tandem parking, the site contains sufficient space to provide for on-site vehicle and bicycle parking
for tenants and guests, and an adequate turn around area at the terminus of the private roadway. The project includes the
required parking for 18 vehicles on the project site,including seven tandem spaces on Lot 1-7. Eight of the vehicle spaces
are provided in garages,one in tandem within a garage, six in tandem on private driveways, one uncovered in a side yard,
and four on the private street. To maximize the number of spaces actually used for parking on the project site staff is
recommending a mitigation measure to insure that garages are used for vehicle parking only and that parking on-site is
maximized.Because the unit on lot 8 is situated only 8-feet from the private roadway due to the creek setback requirements
at the rear of the lot a second parking stall on this lot is proposed along the east side yard to ensure that a vehicle parked
there would not overhang the sidewalk. Staff is recommending a mitigation measure to insure that cars are not parked in
tandem on Lot 8, as they would block the public sidewalk, and a second mitigation measure to require the uncovered
parking stall utilize pavers or a comparable permeable surface for the uncovered parking stall to reduce water run-off and
aesthetic impacts. Additional on-street parking is available along Brizzolara. The approval of the tandem parking space is
subject to approval by the Planning Commission or the City Council.
f) The project does not conflict with policies supporting alternative transportation. In contrast, the site is within reasonable
walling distance from shopping,schools,and services.
g)The project is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area.
Mitigation Measures:Transportation/Traffic
9)The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a requirement,to be enforced by the
Homeowner's Association and the City,that all garages must be available for parking a vehicle at all times.
10)The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions(CC&R's)for the project shall include a requirement,to be enforced by the
Homeowner's Association and the City,that there be no parking in the driveway of Lot 8 at any time.
CITY OF SAN Luis Owsvo 18 INITIAL STUDY Ewmop MENrAL CNEgtLw 2005
5-L I
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Potentially Potentially Less Than If
Significant significant Significant
ER#905 Issues Uniess Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
11) The uncovered parking space along the east side of Lot 8 shall utilize pavers or a comparable permeable paving material.
Conclusion
No impacts related to traffic have been identified.Traffic generated by the project will be minimal,and existing street systems
are capable of handling the additional trips.Potentially significant impacts have been identified with respect to on-site parking
availability and potential for vehicles to block the public sidewalk. Staff believes that the proposed mitigation measures will
insure that adequate parking is retained,and potential conflicts between tandem parking and pedestrians are avoided.
16.UTII.ITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would theproject:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 7,28 X
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water 28 X
treatment,waste water treatment,water quality control,or storm
drainage facilities,the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project 7,28 X
from existing entitlements and resources,or are new and
expanded water resources needed?
d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider 7,28 X
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitment?
e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 8 X
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
f) Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations 8,25 X
related to solid waste?
Evaluation
a),b)The project has been review by the Utilities Department staff.The project is subject to water impact fees which were
adopted to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing the water supply,treatment and
distribution facilities that will be necessary to serve it.
c) The City Water&Wastewater Management Element projects the City water needs at its ultimate build-out of 56,000
people.The GPA/R would increase the anticipated build out of the site from approximately 5 residences(each potentially
with a secondary dwelling unit)under the current Low Density Residential(R-1)designation to 8 residences in a common
interest subdivision as proposed by the applicant Though this exceeds the anticipated build out of the site at the time the
WWME was adopted,the actual water demand increase for the site will be minimal as the proposed small lot homes have
only one bathroom each,with no potential for secondary units.
d) The wastewater treatment plant and existing sewers in the vicinity have adequate capacity to serve this development The
developer will be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public sewer,and be
constructed according to the standards in the Uniform Plumbing Code.A mitigation measure is recommended to ensure
that there the costs of installation and maintenance of the on-site sewer main are bome by the Homeowners Association.
Subdivision improvement plans and building plans will be checked for compliance with UPC standards.Impact fees are
collected at the time building permits are issued to pay for capacity at the City's Water Reclamation Facility.The fees are
set at a level intended to offset the potential impacts of each new residential unit in the project A second Mitigation
Measure has been recommended to ensure that all existing overhead utilities along the public street frontage are
tndergrounded consistent with City Standards.
e),f)Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989(AB939)shows that Californians dispose of
roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per month.Over 90%of this waste goes to landfills,posing a threat to groundwater,air
Crrr of SAN LUIS OsisPo 19 INmAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005)-
,5^ /
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially tees Than xo
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9-05 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Inco rated
quality,and public health.Cold Canyon landfill is expected to reach its capacity in 2018.The Act requires each city and
county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50%(from 1989 levels)by 2000.To help reduce the
waste stream generated by this project,consistent with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element,recycling
facilities must be accommodated on the project site and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded materials is
required to be submitted with the building permit application.The project will also include facilities for both interior and
exterior recycling to reduce the waste stream generated by the project consistent with the Source Reduction and Recycling
Element.
Mitigation Measures:Utilities and Service Systems
12) The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
13) The subdivider shall place underground,all existing overhead utilities along the public street frontage(s),to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Director and utility companies.
14)The final project shall be designed to include locations for the collection of recyclable materials and sufficient space shall
be provided for each unit to store a waste wheeler for recycling service from the local garbage company.
Conclusion
No impacts have been identified relative to water service or supply,wastewater service capacity at the Water Reclamation
Facility,or storm drainage.Potentially significant impacts have been identified relative utilities both on-site and within the
public right-of-way along the street frontage,and to solid waste disposal.The developer will be required to comply with City
requirements for solid waste recycling of construction debris.In addition to the ordinance requirements,mitigation measures
are recommended to insure the provision of necessary utility improvements and on-site recycling facilities to reduce the waste
stream generated by the project No further mitigation is required.
17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the X
environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Without mitigation the project would have the potential to have adverse impacts to all of the issue areas checked in the Table
on Pae 3.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but X
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects,
the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable
futureprojects)
The impacts identified in this initial study are specific to this project and would not be categorized as cumulatively significant.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause X
substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or
indirectly?
With the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures,the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on
humans.
18.EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion
should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
CnY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005
5-43
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
s hapact
ER#9-05 Issues Nfitiiggaattion
Incorporated
N/A
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
N/A
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions of the project.
N/A
19. SOURCE REFERENCES.
1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element,August 1994
2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element,November 1994
3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element,May 1996
4. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element,July 2000
5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation Element,July 1973
6. City of SLO General Plan Energy Conservation ElementApril 1981
7. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element,July 1996
8. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
9. City of San Luis Obispo,Land Use Inventory Database
10. Site Visit
11. Post construction survey prepared by the Department of Transportation,for the HB 311 sound barrier project
along Brizzolara Street,attached
12. USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Service,Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County
13. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency:
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dirp/FMW/
14. Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County,Air Pollution Control District,2001
15, CEQA Air Quality Handbook,Air Pollution Control District,2003
16. Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,6 Edition,on file in the Community Development
Department
17. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook,May 1996
18. 2002 City of San Luis Obispo Water Resources Report
19. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community Development
Department
20. City of San Luis Obispo,Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community
Development Department
21. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Site Map
22. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Ma
23. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map,prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act,effective January 1, 1990
24. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines
25. Pro'ect Plans
26. Acoustical analysis prepared by Dohn Associates,Inc.for the project proposal,attached
27. Geotechnical engineering report prepared by Buena Geotechnical Services for the project proposal,attached
28. Preliminary drainage analysis prepared by Davis Engineering for the project proposal,attached
29. Cultural resource study prepared by C.A.Singer&Associates,Inc.for the project proposal,attached
Attachment:
Proposed tract map and project plans(site plan,building elevations,and landscape plan)
CRY OF SAN Luis Oatspo 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNEcKusT 2005
5—(4q
Attachment 7
Issues, Discus"sion.and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially I 1jessIbaii No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER#9 05 Issues unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorpotated
REQUIRED MMGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM
1. Mitigation Measure: Cultural Resources
In the event archaeological resources are unearthed or discovered during any grading or construction activities all work.shall
cease,:and the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location
of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist; and disposition of artifacts may be accomplished in
accordance with state and federal law.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Community Development Department Staff will ensure compliance with standards through periodic site inspections during
project construction.
2. Mitigation Measure: Cultural Resources
In the event archaeological resources are found to include human remains,or in any other case where human remains are
discovered during construction,the County Coroner is to be notified in addition to the Community Development Department
so that proper disposition may be accomplished.
Monitoring Program:
Community Development Department Staff will ensure compliance with standards through periodic site inspections during
project construction.
3. Mitigation Measure: Hydrology and Water Quality
The drainage easement along the Northerly boundary shall be a minimum of 15-feet wide or the storm drain shall be relocated
to the proposed main driveway within a 15-wide easement.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirem_ent shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
4. Mitigation Measure: Hydrology and Water Quality
The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter of Map Amendment(LOMA),
or,Letter.of Map Revision(LOMR)prior to final acceptance of any development. Any lots or building pads,identified in the
hydrology study to be subject to flooding during a 100 year storm shall be graded to provide minimum pad elevations of at
least 1 foot above the 100 year storm elevation.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
5. Mitigation Measure: Noise
Crry OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INmAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEc n.IST 2005
5—Le
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER #905 Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
The final project design shall comply with all recommendations of the April 18, 200.5 acoustical analysis prepared by Dohn
Associates for the attenuation of indoor noise levels at the project site.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be"monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
6. Mitigation Measure: Noise
The final project design shall include an earthen berm with dense plantings along the Brizzolara Street frontage. Plantings
shall include groundcover, large bushes and hedges, and trees to maximize.the effectiveness of the berm in reducing noise
transmission. Additionally, a six-foot high sound wall shall be constructed 10-feet back from Brizzolara Street along the
portion of Brizzolara Street adjacent to the 10-foot rear yard of Lot 5.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
7. Mitigation Measure: Noise
The final project design shall be revised to show the second-story bedroom on Lot 5 on the eastern side of the home, farthest
from Highway 101 noise.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
8. Mitigation Measure: Public.Services
The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs shall be panted red and properly signed and stenciled as a"Fire Lane"per
the Fire Depariment's'`Developer's Guide"in order to.prohibit parking in unauthorized areas and preventing access in case of
emergencies.The prohibition from parallel parking along the street shall be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and
the City.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this.requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
9. Mitigation Measure: Transportation/Traffic
The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a requirement, to be enforced by the
Homeowner's Association and the City,that all garages must be available for parking a vehicle at all times.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and detailed plans submitted for
architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
10. Mitigation Measure: Transportation/Traffic
CRY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 23 INmAL STUDY ENVIRoNmtkTAL CNEckuST 2005
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sours Potentially po y ' xO
s;goificant Sign;ficant Significant impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER#9-05 Mitigation
Incorporated
The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a requirement, to be enforced by the
Homeowner's Association and the City,that there be no parking in the driveway of Lot 8 at any time.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored throd- the review of the CC&R's and detailed plans submitted for
architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community.Development Department staff.
11. Mitigation Measure: Transportation/Traffic
The uncovered parking space along the east side.of Lot 8 shall utilize pavers or a comparable permeable paving material.
Details of the materials that will be used shall be included on the final project design.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
12. Mitigation Measure. Utilities and Service Systems
The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and detailed plans submitted for
architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
13.Mitigation Measure: Utilities and Service Systems
The subdivider shall place underground,all existing overhead utilities along the public street frontage(s),to the satisfaction of
the Public Works Director and utility companies.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and detailed plans submitted for
architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
14. Mitigation Measure: Utilities and Service Systems
The final project shall be designed to include locations for the collection of recyclable materials and sufficient space shall be
provided for each unit to store a waste wheeler for recycling service from the local garbage company.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review
and building permit primarily by the Cominunity Development Department staff.
CrrT OF SAN Luis OBispo 24 INrMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLI&005
'tTy OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Planning Department Contact:Jaime Hill,Associate Planner
File i:GWRMIJTR 9-05tOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Property:499 Bfizzolara St.
Applicant seeks:General Plan Amendment and Rezone fforn R-1-S t-6R-2-S
Common interest Subdivision with 8 Residential Lots Attachment 8
Here are some notes on the topics we discussed:
The site itself is a well-established riparian corridor adjacent to the creek and
Downtown San Luis Obispo. The adjoining'lots currently sustain a single-family
residence, garage, And backyard orchard. College students have occupied the home itself
for at least the past five years,and the blighted condition of the yards is the result of
lackadaisical I isical property management. The recent decision to mow the yards resulted,in the
destruction of.the protected and native state flower California poppy; as well as the
displacement of several species of bird's nests..We seek to Protect the natural
surroundings of the.area and ask that a setback extension be granted to the distance of 40
feet from any built surface and,the creek in order to better protect the native species.
Some species of flora/fadria documented to have interacted on the property:
Animals: Trees:
White Owls Kiwi (at-least 40 yrs old)
Frogs Avocado
Freshwater turtles Lemon and lime
White egrets Walnut
- � 9
Deer Apple
Possum Fig
Countless birds Magnolia
Aspen
100+yr old conifer
Besides being the only existing orchard in the neighborhood and relative proximity to
Downtown.S1,O, the orchard has great potential to be dedicated-As Open Space for use by
residents of Brizzolara Street as either a pocket park for the 10+children that live on the
street or a community garden for the residents of the area. The soil of the property is
extremely fertile.. It 1 s almost guaranteed that the creek will be affected negatively by the
development of this property. Each stage of the construction process
s will cause.leeching
pollutants and unnecessary erosion of the.natural creek bank. Sediments or pollutants
deposited in the creek during construct-ion Will affect the entire creek ecosystem. We feel
that by addressing the issues facing the health of the environment of the property,we are
acting in the best interests of the residents surrounding the property as well as the plants
and animals that call the area home. We would Also like to request a cause of
investigation to be performed by the San Luis Obispo Historical Society in order to
reveal
if any, facts surrounding the property's cultural and/or historical signifidance.
We should also Address the traffic/circtilation issue. Higher densities for the property,
even with themimmurn requirement:for on-site parking will adversely affect the
Attachment 8
congestion of the street itself. Children playing along the street and pedestrians already
struggle with a few residents who feel the need to speed along our quiet street,and the
influx of even more residents to the area can only result in higher traffic and related
problems.
I hope each issue was addressed in this summary. Feel free to use any part of this and add
on to it, as you feel necessary. The contact information if you have any more questions is
at the top of the first page; the number for the Planning Department for the City of San
Luis Obispo is: (805) 781-7172
Good Luck with the meeting. I would love to keep in contact with you and be available
for help should you need it. My email address that I will use for the next few months:
sloplanner6@yahoo.com. I will do my best to check it as often as possible but its not
always easy in the mountains. Good luck and may God bless you..
Regards,
Q
Hayden Beckman 0)7ZZe`Q.,*� ST
C�L�-r v� �1�� . 6�DS ,81'izzolaru-sf'• '07
Attachment 9
RESOLUTION NO.V= (2005 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP FROM LOW=
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL,FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 499 BRIZZOLARA STREET; GP 09-05
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 13, 2005, and
recommended approval of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on August 16, 2005, and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and
action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff,and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,presented at
said hearing.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative
Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed
project; and reflects the independent.judgment of the.City Council. The Council hereby adopts
said Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures into the project:
Cultural Resources
1. In the event archaeological resources are unearthed .or discovered during any grading or
construction activities all work shall cease, and the. City of San Luis Obispo Community
Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered
materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be
accomplished in accordance with state and federal law.
2. In the event archaeological resources are found to include human remains, or in any other
case where human remains are discovered during construction, the County Coroner is to be
notified in addition to the Community Development Department so that proper disposition
may be accomplished.
Monitoring Program:
Community Development Department Staff will ensure compliance with standards through
periodic site inspections during project construction.
51c)
r
Attachment 9
Resolution No.)OM(2005_Series)
Page 2
Hydrology and Water Quality
3. The drainage easement along the Northerly boundary shall be a minimum of 15-feet wide or
the storm drain shall be relocated to the proposed main driveway within a 15-wide easement.
4. The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter
of Map Amendment (LOMA), or, Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to final acceptance
of any development. Any lots or building pads, identified.in the hydrology study to be
subject to flooding during a 100 year storm shall be graded to provide minimum pad.
elevations of at least 1 foot above the 100 year storm elevation.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Departinent staff.
Noise
5. The final project design shall comply with all recommendations of the. April 18, 2005
acoustical analysis prepared by Dohn Associates for the attenuation of indoor noise levels at
the project site.
6. The final project design shall include an earthen berm with dense plantings along the
Bfizzolara Street frontage. Plantings shall include groundcover, large bushes and hedges, and
trees to maximize the effectiveness of the berm in reducing noise transmission. Additionally,
a six-foot high sound wall shall be constructed 10-feet back from Brizzolara Street along the
portion of Brizzol'ara Street adjacent to the 10-foot rear yard of Lot 5.
7. The final project design shall be revised to show the second-story bedroom on Lot 5 on the
eastern side of the home, farthest from Highway 101 noise.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Department staff.
Public Services
8. The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs shall be panted red and properly signed and
stenciled as a"Fire Lane"per the Fire Department's "Developer's Guide"in order to prohibit
parking in unauthorized areas and preventing access in case of emergencies. The prohibition
from parallel parking along_ the street shall be enforced.by the Homeowner's Association and
the City.
5-7/
Aftachment 9
Resolution No.,XXXX(2005 Series)
Page 3 -
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Department staff:
Transportation/Traffic
9. The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a
requirement, to be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the City, that all garages
must be available for parking a vehicle at all times.
10. The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the, project shall include a
requirement, to be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the City, that there be no
parking in the driveway of Lot 8 at any time.
11. The uncovered parking space along the east side of.Lot 8 shall utilLEe pavers or a comparable
permeable paving material. Details of the,materials that will be used shall be included on the
final project design.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&-R's and
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the
Community Development Department staff.
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Department staff.
Utilities and Service Systems
12. The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned and maintained by the
Homeowner's Association.
13. The subdivider shall place underground, all existing overhead utilities along the public street
frontage(s), to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and utility companies.
14. The final project shall be designed to include locations for the collection of recyclable
materials and sufficient space shall be provided for each unit to store a waste wheeler for
recycling service from the local garbage company.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the
Community Development Department staff.
Attachment 9
Resolution No.XXXX(2005,Series)
Page 4
SECTION 2. That this Council, after consideration of the amendment to the Land. Use
Element Map from Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density Residential, and considering the
Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports
thereof,makes the following findings:
1. Amendment of the General Plan Map from Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density
Residential is consistent with the General Plan text policies that encourage the preservation
and expansion of existing residential neighborhoods and increased residential density in close
proximity to existing services.
2. A Medium-Density residential land use designation is-appropriate for this site since it allows
a transition between the existing Medium-High Density Residential (R-3-S) development to
the north and Low Density Residential (R-1-PD) development to the south
3. A Medium-Density residential land use is appropriate for the site and compatible with the
land use pattern of adjacent properties along Brizzolara Street.
4. The land use amendment and project will implement the City's goal of maintaining a
compact urban form by increasing the maximum density allowed and.more fully utilizing the
potential of this site, which is close to the downtown planning area and is within walking
distance to shops and services.
5. Allowing the land use amendment will implement the City's Housing Element Policies that
encourage sustainable and affordable housing projects.
SECTION 3. The Land Use Element Map is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit A.
SECTION 4. The Community Development Director shall cause the amendment to be
reflected in documents, which are on display in City Hall and are available for public viewing
and use.
5`7.3
Attachment 9
Resolution No.XXXX(2005_Series)
Page 5
On motion of , seconded by , and on the
following roll call vote: .
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this—day of , 2005.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
City Clerk Audrey Hooper
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Cit torney Jonathan Lowell
G:VHili\Subdivision\499 Brizzol=(ER-GPR-TR 9-05)\City Council\Council GPA Resolution 9-05.doc
5-7 Ll
LbL LL 11 A 11
Open Space
Medium-High Density
Residential
\,Office
Low Density
Residential urrently Low Donsity,'Resid Na
roposed' Medium Density Reside at
Medium-High Density
Residential
General Retail
General Plan Map Legend
Stenner Creek
General Plan Boundary
GPR/R/ER 9-05 499 Brizzolara
499 Brizzolara Highway 101
57-75-
i
Attachment 10
RESOLUTION NO.XXXX (2005 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR AN EIGHT LOT
RESIDENTIAL COMMON INTEREST SUBDIVISION WITH EXCEPTIONS FOR
TANDEM PARKING AND REDUCED SIDE YARD SETBACKS,FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 499 BRIZZOLARA STREET; TR/ER 09-05 (TRACT 2691)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 13, 2005, and
recommended approval of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on August 16, 2005, and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and
action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant; interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,presented at
said hearing.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. That this Council, after consideration of the vesting tentative tract map for
an eight lot residential common interest subdivision with exceptions for tandem parking and
reduced side yard setbacks, and considering the Planning Commissions recommendations, staff
recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings:
A.Subdivision Map findings
1. As conditioned, the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan Map for Medium Density Residential because each.dwelling has access to a
satisfactory private and communal open space area sheltered from ambient noise sources, and
the development would occur as part of the neighborhood pattern along Brizzolara.
2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because it is an under-
developed site that is adjacent to an existing street right-of-way and is close to public transit
and associated services.
3. As conditioned, the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development
because the site is adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood and there are existing
roadways and services available to serve the development in accordance with City standards.
4. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, is not likely to cause substantial
5-7 Cao
Attachment 10
Resolurion No.)D=(2005_Series)
Page 2
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat
because the site contains provisions to preserve and protect the creek.
5. .The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public
health problems because the development is of a. similar scale to surrounding development.
Additionally,new construction will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes.
6. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision because no such easements exist.
7. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project adequately identifies and evaluates the
potential impacts associated with this project and where impacts are potentially significant,
mitigation measures are provided to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels.
8. The project will be reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Commission for consistency
with the Community Design Guidelines prior to approval.
9. All affected public facilities, services, and utilities are adequate to serve the proposed project.
10. The location, size, site planning,building design features, and operating characteristics of the
project are suited to the characteristics of the site and surrounding neighborhood, and will be
compatible with the character of the site, and the land uses and development intended for the
surrounding neighborhood by the General Plan.
11. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size, configuration topography, and other
applicable features (as conditioned), and has appropriate access to public streets with
adequate capacity to accommodate the quantity and type of traffic expected to be generated
by the use.
12. As conditioned, the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed project will
not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in
the vicinity of the proposed use, or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in
the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
B. Findings to allow other yard building height exceptions and tandem parking
1. The request for 5-foot side yard setback reductions to allow building heights in excess of 12-
feet. are minor exceptions that contribute to the compact form of the project and are
appropriate given the size of the units and overall scale of the project.
2. The side yard setback reductions are minor in nature, involving only an insignificant portion
of total solar exposure available in the side yards..
3. No significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are likely to
result from the side yard setback reductions as 10 feet will be maintained between structures
on adjacent properties.
4. Tandem parking is a logical parking design solution for some of the units since the tandem
5-� 7
Attachment 10
Resolution No.XXXX(2005_Series)
Page 3
parking spaces will be for the exclusive use of the occupants of each unit supplying the
tandem parking.
5. There will be adequate parking available for the development as ample guest parking will be
provided for those visiting the site.
SECTION 2. Approval of the vesting tentative-tract map for an eight lot residential common
interest subdivision with exceptions for tandem parking and reduced side yard setbacks, s hereby
approved subject to the following conditions and code requirements:
1. An affordable housing agreement consistent with the draft affordable housing proposal shall
be submitted for review .and approval of the Community Development Director prior to
proceeding to the Architectural Review Commission for final approval:.
2. The project shall be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission to review the project
design for consistency with the Cor iinunity Design Guidelines.
5. No parking, paving, or site construction shall be allowed within the creek setback unless
approved as part of the common interest subdivision and, development as shown on the
approved plans.
6. The applicant shall pay Park In-Lieu Fees prior to recordation of the Final Map, consistent
with SLO Municipal Code Section. 16.40.080.
7. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside,
void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto,
including but not limited to environmental review..
8. Prior to the occupancy of the new units a covenant shall be recorded to ensure that new
bedrooms are not added in the future. The covenant for Lot 1 shall state that the unit not
exceed 3-bedrooms; while the homes on Lots 2-8 shall be restricted to 1-bedroom each.
9. The sidewalk adjacent to lot 1 shall be modified so as to allow the Magnolia Tree to be
retained.
Conditions and code requirements from other departments:
The following code requirements are included for information purposes only. They serve to give
the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project. This is not
intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements maybe identified during the plan check
process.
5' 78'
Attachment 10
Re-solution No. X (2005,, Series)
Page 4
Right of Way/Access
1. Additional public right-of�wqy or public pedestrian easements may be necessary to
accommodate driveway approach improvements required for Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA)compliance,to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
2. Complete street improvements along Biizzolara Street are required and shall be constructed in
accordance with the most current City regulations, City of San Luis Obispo Engineering
Standards and Standard Specifications (improvements include but are not.limited to: integral
curbs, gutters &2m sidewalks, full width street pavement, signing, striping,barricades, street
trees,street lights,etc.).
3. The subdivider shall dedicate a.2m wide public utility easement and a 3m wide street tree
easement across the frontage of each lot. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous
With all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
4; The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs-shall be panted red and properly signed and
stenciled as a"Fire Lane"per the Fire Department's"Developer's Guide" in order to prohibit
parking in unauthorized areas and preventing access in case of emergencies.
5. Theject public improvement plans shall identify the locations of the required bicycle
proi
parking areas per the City standards.
Water,Sewer & Utilities
6. The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner s
Association;
7. The subdivider shall place underground, all existing overhead utilities along the public street
frontagd(s), to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and utility companies.
Grading & Drainage
10. The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter
of Map Amendment (LOMA), or, Letter,of Map Revision (LOMR)prior to final acceptance
of any development. Any lots or building pads, identified in the hydrology study to be
subject to flooding during a 100-yr storm shall be graded to provide minimum pad elevations
of at least I foot above the 100-yr storm elevation.
51 -
Attachment 10
Resolution No.XXXX(2005_Series)
Page 5
On motion of , seconded by , and on the
following roll call vote;
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of ,2005,
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST-
City Clerk Audrey Hooper
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ci ttorney Jonathan Lowell
G:\It IPSubdiVisiOn\499 Brizzolara(ER-GPR-TR 9-05)\City Council\Council TR Resolution 9-051doc
Attachment 11
ORDINANCE NO.XXXX(2005 Series) .
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY
AT 499 BRIZZOLARA STREET FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY(R-1-S) TO MEDIUM-DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY (R-2-S);
ER/R 09-05
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 13, 2005 and
recommended approval of amendment to the City's Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on August 16, 2005,.and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and
action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS; the City Council finds that the proposed revisions are consistent with the
General Plan;the purposes of the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared for the property as described_ in a separate resolution approving the General Plan Map
amendment; and
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative
Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed
project, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts
said Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures into the project:
Cultural Resources
1. In the event archaeological resources are unearthed or discovered during any grading or
construction activities all work shall cease, and the City of San Luis Obispo Community
Development Department ,shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered
materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be
accomplished in accordance.with state and federal law.
2. In the event archaeological resources are found to include human remains, or in any other
case where human remains are discovered during construction, the County Coroner is to be
notified in addition to the Community Development Department so that proper disposition
may be accomplished.
Monitoring Program:
Community Development Department Staff will ensure compliance with standards through
periodic site inspections during project construction.
5 �8I
1
Attachment .11
Ordinance No. XXXX (2005 Series)
Page 2
Hydrology and Water Quality
3. The drainage easement along the Northerly boundary shall be a minimum of 1,5-feet wide or
the storm"n.shall be relocated to the proposed main driveway within a_ 15=wide easemeint.
4. The developer shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter
of Map Amendment (LOMA), or, Letter of.Map Revision (LOMR)prior to final acceptance
of any development. Any lots or building pads, identified in the hydrology study to be
subject to flooding during a 100 year storm shall be graded to provide minimum pad
elevations of at least 1 foot-above the 100 year storm elevation.
Monitoring.Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Department.staff.
Noise
5. The final project design shall comply with all recommendations of the April 18, 2005.
acoustical analysis prepared by Dohn Associates for the attenuation of indoor noise levels at
the project site.
6. The final project design shall include an earthen berm with dense plantings along the
Brizzolara Street frontage. Plantings shall include groundcover, large bushes and hedges, and
trees to maximize the effectiveness of the berm in reducing noise transmission. Additionally,
a six-foot high sound wall shall be constructed 10-feet back from Brizzolara Street along the
portion of Brizzolara Street adjacent to the 10-foot rear yard of Lot 5.
7. The final project design shall be revised to show the second-story bedroom on Lot 5 on the
eastern side of the home, farthest from Highway 101 noise.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural.review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Department staff.
Public Services
8. The internal driveway and turnaround area curbs shall be panted red and properly signed and
stenciled as a"Fire Lane" per the Fire Department's "Developer's Guide" in order to prohibit
parking in unauthorized areas and "preventing access in case of emergencies. The prohibition
from parallel parking along the street shall be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and
the City.
Attachment 11
Ordinance No. XXXX (2005 Series)
Page 3
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development.
Department staff.
Transportation/Ttaffic
9. The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a
requirement, to be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the City, that all garages
must be available for parking a vehicle at all times.
10. The Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project shall include a
requirement; to be enforced by the Homeowner's Association and the City, that there be no
parking in the driveway of Lot 8 at any time.
11. The uncovered parking space along the east side of Lot 8 shall utilize pavers or a comparable
permeable paving material. Details of the materials that will be used shall be included on the
final project design.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and,
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and.building permit primarily by the
Community" Development Department staff.
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans
subniitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development
Department staff.
Utilities and Service Systems
12. The proposed on-site sewer main will be privately owned_ and maintained by the
Homeowner's Association.
13. The subdivider shall place underground, all existing overhead utilities along the public street
frontage(s), to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and utility companies.
14. The final project shall be designed to include locations for the collection of recyclable
materials and sufficient space shall be provided for each unit to store a waste wheeler for
recycling service from the local garbage company.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of the CC&R's and
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the.
Community Development Department staff.
_ Y
Attachment 11
Ordinance No. XXXX (2005 Series)
Page 4
SECTION 2. The City Council makes the following findings:
1. The project is consistent with the General Plan text policies, and implements Housing
Element goals by allowing expansion of residential land uses.
2. The project complies with all applicable provisions of these Zoning Regulations other than
those exceptions approved with the vesting tentative map.
3. The approved modifications to the development standards of these Zoning Regulations are
necessary and appropriate to accommodate the superior design of the proposed project
including its compatibility with adjacent land uses, its compact form, and its successful
mitigation of environmental impacts.
4. The project will be reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Commission for consistency
with the Community Design Guidelines prior to approval.
5. All affected public facilities, services, and utilities are adequate to serve the proposed project.
6. The location, size, site planning;building design features, and operating characteristics of the
project are highly suited to the characteristics of the site and surrounding neighborhood, and
will be compatible with the character of the site; and the land uses and development intended
for the surrounding neighborhood by the General Plan.
7. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size; configuration, and other applicable
features (as conditioned), and has appropriate access to public streets with adequate.capacity
to accommodate the quantity and type of traffic expected to be generated by the use.
8. As conditioned, the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed projectwill not
be detrimental to the health,.safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity of the proposed use, or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
9. This project site is subject to several criteria which clearly necessitate an overlay zone in
order to ensure adequate review. The S overlay will allow consistency with adjacent
Properties since adjacent residential properties currently contain an S overlay zone, asdoes
the c designation of this.site. The following conditions warrant the S overlay zone:
a. The property is within a 100-year flood zone.
b. The property is bordered on the southeast by Stenner Creek and discretionary review
should be required for new land uses in order to ensure that City's policies related to
creek setbacks and habitat protection are adhered to.
c. Highway 101 is recognized as a significant transportation noise source as cited within
the General Plan Noise Element.
Attachment 11
Ordinance No: XXXX (2005 Series)
Page 5
SECTION A. The Zoning Regulations Map Amendment (K 09-05) is hereby app
moved
as identified within Exhibit A.
SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the name's of Council
members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage,
in.the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into
effect at the expiration of thirty(30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the day of 2005, AND FINALLY
ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of
2005, on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
City Cleik A-ticirey Hooper
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
d*A-60mey Jonathan Lowell
GA1Hi1Mubd_ivis.ion\499 Brizzolara(ER-GPR-TR 9-05)\City CounciKouncil Ordinance 9-05.dw
C/OS - 20
R-3
0-H
Currently S9
R-1-PD Proposed R-2-
R-3-PD
R-1-S
C-R
Zoning Map Legend
Stenner Creek
Zoning Boundary
GPR/R/ER 9-05 499 Brizzolara
499 Brizzolara Highway 101
Attachment 12
RESOLUTION NO.XXXX (2005 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN.LUIS OBISPO DENYING
AN AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP AND ZONING
REGULATIONS MAP FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY,VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR
AN EIGHT LOT RESIDENTIAL COMMON INTEREST SUBDIVISION WITH
EXCEPTIONS FOR TANDEM PARKING AND REDUCED SIDE YARD SETBACKS,
AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW,FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 499
BRIZZOLARA STREET; TR/ER/GP/R 09.05 (TRACT 2691)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 13, 2005, and
recommended approval of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on August 16, 2005, and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and
action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendation_s by staff;presented at
said hearing.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. That this Council., after consideration the amendments to the Land Use
Element Map and Zoning Regulations map from Low-Density Residential with the Special
.Considerations overlay to Medium-Density Residential with the Special Considerations overlay,
vesting tentative tract map for an eight lot residential common interest subdivision with
exceptions for tandem parking and reduced side yard setbacks, and environmental review, and .
considering the Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations, public
testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings:
[Council specifies findings]
SECTION 2. Denial. The amendments to the Land Use Element Map, Zoning
Regulations Map, and tentative tract map are hereby denied.
Attachment. 12
Resolution No.XXXX(2005_Series)
Page 2
On motion of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , seconded by - _ ' __, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this—day of ,.2005.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST-
City C1erk.Audrey Hooper
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney Jonathan Lowell
QVIERSubdivision\499 Briuolam(ER-GPR-TR 9-05)\City Council\Council Resolution(Denial)9-05.doc
5- �