The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/01/2007, C4 - APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR PHASE 1 OF TRACT 2560, 215 BRIDGE STREET - (TR 64-03) council Mfim D� 05/01/07 j aclEnaa izEpoiA CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Jay D. Walter, PE-Director of Public WortVing Prepared by: Robert Livick, PE/PLS - Supe Civil Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR PHASE 1 OF TRACT 2560, 215 BRIDGE STREET—(TR 64-03) CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving Phase 1 of the Final Map for Tract 2560, located at 215 Bridge Street. DISCUSSION As the Council may recall, the tentative map for Tract 2560 (TR 64-03) was approved on December 7, 2004 by Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series), and which authorized the creation of a 22-lot subdivision with conditions, referred to as the Bridge Street Project. For a variety of reasons, that development proposal did not make it to the final approval stage. On November 20, 2006 the subdivider received the Community Development Director's approval, in accordance with §16.10.155 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code (S.L.O.M.C.), for a one year time extension of the tentative map.. In December 2006 the subdivider requested of the Community Development Department that the proposed subdivision be a phased subdivision in order to complete the financing needed to pursue the future phase and build out of the required improvements. Tract 2560 was submitted as a vesting tentative tract map and is to be processed under the regulations that were in effect at the time the application was deemed complete. The City's subdivision regulations, Chapter 16 of the S.L.O.M.C., in effect at the time of application submittal, were silent as to the procedure for filing of multiple final maps subsequent to an approved tentative map. Therefore, we looked to State Law for the authority to act on this proposal. Pursuant to the authority under §66456.1 (Multiple Final Maps) and §66498.1 (Vesting Tentative Map) of the Government Code, the Community Development Department agreed to the submittal of a phased subdivision map. The first phase of the proposed subdivision is one lot (Lot A) with a 5.06 acre remainder lot. A 22-4ot subdivision of lot A is being contemplated as a future phase of this subdivision. Since no development is being proposed with the first phase of Tract 2560, the Public Works and Community Development Department staff recommend that the conditions of the subdivision specified in Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series, Attachment 2) not apply to this phase of the map, but will have to be satisfied prior to the approval of the development phase of the map. The resolution necessary to facilitate the final map approval for Tract 2560 is Attachment 3. Section 66474.1 of the Subdivision Map Act states that "a Legislative body shall not deny approval of a final or parcel map if it has previously approved a tentative map for the proposed Cy-i Council Agenda Report-Fieat Map Approval-Tract 2560 Page 2 subdivision and if it finds that the final or parcel map is in substantial compliance with the previously approved tentative map." With respect to Phase 1, this tract has met all City regulations and no further discretionary approvals are required. CONCURRENCES The Community Development Director concurs with the recommended action. FISCAL IMPACT There is no financial impact to the City with this phase of the proposed subdivision. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series) 3. Draft Resolution g:\staff-reports-agendas-minutes\_car\2007\devrev\tract 2560\car-final map approval for tract 2560.doc �y-z I i VICINITY MAP File • • 4 1 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO.9638(2004 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2560 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 215 BRIDGE STREET TR 64-03(TRACT 2560) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo recommended approval of Application TR/ER 64-03,.a Planned Development subdivision with 22 lots, and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall,990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,.California, on October 27`h,2004 and WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project;and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo reviewed the project and considered public testimony at a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hail, 990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,California,on December 7,2004; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the mitigation monitoring program prepared for the project;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. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: A. Subdivision 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 open space area and the development would occur as part of the neighborhood pattern anticipated for the Medium Density Residential zone. 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 the public transit and associated services. R 9638 �y-y � 1 Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series) Page 2 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 environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site contains provisions to preserve and protect the creek,and sensitive hillside areas to maintain significant or other potentially significant habitat areas for fish and wildlife. 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 (GPR 64-03) 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. B.Creek Setback Exception Findings for replacement clear span bridge 1. The location and design of the new clear span bridge will minimize impacts to scenic resources, water quality, and riparian habitat, including opportunities for wildlife habitation,rest,and movement. 2. The exception will not limit the city's design options for providing flood control measures that are needed to achieve adopted city flood policies. 3. The exception to allow the new bridge will enhance safe vehicular access for the property and allow a circulation plan that complies with the City's flood regulations. 4. The exception will not prevent the implementation of city-adopted plans, nor increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans. 5. There are circumstances applying to the site, such as size,shape or topography, which do not apply generally to land in the vicinity with the same zoning, that would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity with the same zoning if the bridge were not constructed 6. The exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege—an entitlement inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. 7. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area of the project or downstream. 8. Site development cannot be accomplished with a redesign of the project; and 9. Redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the property. cy-S Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series) Page 3 C. Findings to allow a 10%parking reduction 1. Since the commercial project will be developed as a condominium plan, with attached ownership units sharing a.common parking area, a shared parking plan and 10% parking reduction is a logical solution to improve vehicular access and increase site design options. 2. A 10% parking reduction will allow additional space for a vehicle turn-around area and allow development to be shifter further from the existing creek. 3. A 10%parking reduction will reduce the parking requirement by only three spaces and is therefore not likely to.result in off-site parking impacts. Section 2.Approval. The City Council does hereby approve of application TR 64-03,including a creek setback exception and a 10% parking reduction for the commercial condominium, subject to the following conditions and code requirements. 1. Within 6 months of City Council approval (following approval by the Architectural Review Commission) the applicant shall prepare and submit a final development plan to the Community Development Director consistent with .Zoning Ordinance Section 17.62.060. 2. 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. 3. 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 Planned Development by the City Council, 4. The project shall be developed with sustainable construction features as identified (or comparable to) exhibits and testimony provided by the applicant. These features include, energy and water conservation methods, attention to preservation of native site conditions,and recyclable construction materials. 5. At least 50% of the common driveway and private outdoor driveway areas shall be designed with pervious surfaces such as turf block or a similar pervious surface to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and the City Public Works division. 6. A common address sign shall be placed at the driveway intersection with Bridge Street. Address sign shall list all unit addresses and shall be reviewed with architectural plans for consistency with the proposed subdivision and the existing neighborhood. Resolution No.9638 (2004 Series) Page 4 7. No parking or vehicular.access for commercial tenants or customers shall be allowed within the residential area. A sign shall be posted at the south end of the commercial condominium to discourage commercial traffic from entering the residential area. 8. No parking,paving, or site construction shall be allowed within the creek setback unless approved as part of the planned development as shown on the development plan. 9. A turn-around space, consistent with the required dimensions as shown within the City's Parking and Driveway standards shall be provided at the south end of the commercial property to allow vehicles to tum around and leave the site in a forward manner without entering the residential area. Appropriate signs and design features shall be installed in order to prevent vehicles from parking in the tum-around area. 10.The installation of a clear span bridge as shown on the Tentative Tract Map shall be completed in conjunction with the project driveway improvements. All components of the existing bridge, including concrete abutments, shall be removed in conjunction with the new bridge installation. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits that may be necessary in conjunction with performing work within the creek channel. 11.All parking areas are to be kept clear for parking purposes only and the carports within the commercial area are to be kept free of storage so that water can flow through at all rimes without impediment. This requirement will be included in the CC&Rs. 12.The subdivider shall dedicate a public easement to allow pedestrian access through the site to a pathway that links to City Open Space property. The pathway shall be constructed per specifications approved by the City's Natural Resources Manager to the boundary of the property. The Natural Resources Manager shall define the trail route from the property boundary to the existing City Open Space trail. 13.The subdivider shall dedicate an easement for all property outside the development limit line, to perpetually preserve the property as private open space. The double dashed line identified on the Tentative Tract Map as the "Development Limit Line" shall act as the boundary of the easement.The easement shall be written to prohibit grading,construction and land disturbance other than pedestrian pathways or native landscape. Erosion control devices and wildland fire vegetation control may be allowed within the open space easement. 14.The subdivider shall dedicate an easement to preserve the blackberry brambles and associated drainage swale north of lots 2 through 12. The easement shall prevent vegetation removal,grading,landscaping, and other site disturbance. Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series) Page 5 15. All site construction shall be limited to the footprints of the homesites shown on the approved final development plan. Additional site construction or changes to the site configuration shall be subject to review and approval of an amendment to the Planned Development. 16.The applicant shall pay Park In-Lieu Fees prior to recordation of the Final Map, consistent with SLO Municipal Code Section 16.40.080. 17.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. 18.The demolition of the existing residence shall be subject to the City's demolition and building relocation code and may be subject to a 90-day newspaper advertisement prior to demolition or removal. 19.The project shall be subject to Mitigation Measures approved with GPR 64-03 adopted by separate resolution. 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. Public Right-of-way 1. Complete street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the most current City regulations, City of San Luis Obispo Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications (curbs, gutters & 2m sidewalks, full width street pavement, signing, striping,barricades,street lights,etc.). 2. A public improvement plan,prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Director for review and approval. All grades, layout, staking and cut- sheets necessary for the construction of street paving and frontage improvements shall be the responsibility of the developer. 3. The subdivider shall dedicate a 2m wide public utility easement across the Bridge Street frontage. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. ey 6 Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series) Page 6 4. The subdivider shall dedicate a 3m wide street tree easement across the Bridge Street frontage. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. 5. All proposed private streets shall comply with the City of San Luis Obispo Engineering Standards and pavement design shall be based on a Traffic Index of 6.5. Water,Sewer&Utilities 6. The proposed on-site sewer main and water services will be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. 7. Final grades and alignments of all water, sewer and storm drains (including service laterals and meters) shall be subject to change to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Utilities Engineer. S. If a public water main.is approved by the Utilities Department, the subdivider shall dedicate an easement for a public water system over all private streets or driveways, parking areas (including planters and raised medians) and common areas to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Utilities Engineer. If alternative paving materials (eg pavers; grass-crete ,etc) are used for the private street surfacing, the City will restore any water line repair with temporary asphalt pavement. It shall be the responsibility of the homeowners association to restore the private street to the desired condition. 9. 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. 10.Separate utilities, including water, sewer; gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each parcel to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and serving utility companies. Utilities to the all lots shall be underground. 11.The subdivider shall provide individual electrical, phone, television, natural gas, water service, and sewer connections to the approval of the affected utility companies and the Public Works Director. Grading&Drainage 12.Final analysis and design of stormwater facilities shall be consistent with the Drainage Design Manual section of the City's Waterways Management Plan including but not limited to the following provisions: �y- Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series) Page 7 a. Post construction stormwater runoff rates shall not exceed the predevelopment runoff rates for the 2, 10 and 100 year 24-hour storm events. b. All proposed detention.basin and drainage improvements, except those within a public street, shall be privately owned and maintained by the property owner and homeowners'association. c. All construction within the 100- year FEMA floodplain shall meet the following requirements per the Waterways Management Plan: i. There shall be no significant net increase in up-stream or downstream floodwater surface elevations for the 100-year flood at General Plan build- out as a result of changes in floodplain configuration and building construction. A significant threshold of a 64 mm (2.5 in) increase in floodwater surface elevations or 0.1 m/s (0:3 Us) increase in stream velocities shall be used. This shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and based on a final hydraulic analysis pursuant to the Drainage Design Manual. ii. There shall be no significant net decrease in floodplain storage volume as a result of a new development or redevelopment projects. This can be achieved by a zero-net fill grading plan, balancing all fill placed on the 100-year floodplain with.cut taken from other portions of the floodplain within the project area of the application, or with cut exported off site. Specifically, all fill placed in a floodplain shall be balanced with an equal amount of soil material removal (cut) and shall not decrease floodplain storage capacity at any stage of a flood(2, 10, 50, or 100-year event). iii. All bridging, culverting and modifications to the existing creek channels must be in compliance with the City's Waterways Management—Drainage Design Manual (specifically regarding clear spanning of creeks, etc.) and be approved by the Public Works Director, Army Corp of Engineers, and Fish&Game. iv. Any necessary clearing of existing creek and drainage channels, including tree pruning or removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, the City's Natural Resources Manager and the Dept. of Fish&Game. V.. All lots shall be graded to preclude cross-lot drainage, or, appropriate easements and drainage facilities shall be provided, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 13.General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading and excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acre. Permits are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General Construction Activity Permit, the owner(s) of land where construction activity occurs must submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOl) form, with the appropriate fee, to the State Water Resources Control Board (S WRCB). �y/D (7` Resolution No. 9638(2004 Series) Page 8 14.A copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the SWRCB shall be included in the PIP set. The WDID Number issued by the SWRCB shall be noted on all plans that involve land disturbing activities. 15.The detailed hydraulic analysis indicates that the limits of the 100-year floodplain differ from the current Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)floodplain.Therefore, the subdivider shall process and complete a Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA), or, Letter of Map Revision (LOUR) prior to final acceptance of any development. Any building pads, identified in the hydrology study to be subject to flooding during a 100-yr storm shall be modified to provide minimum finish floor elevations of at least 1 foot above the 100-yr storm elevation. Any lots subject to flooding during the 100-year flooding shall be shown on the "additional information sheet" with the final map. Mapping Requirements 16.The subdivider shall submit a final map to the city for review, approval, and recordation. The map shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor in accordance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act, the Subdivision Map Act and the Subdivision City's Regulations. 17.The map shall be tied to at least two points of the City's horizontal control network, California State Plane Coordinate System, Zone 5 (1991.35 epoch adjustment of the North American Datum of 1983 also referred to as "NAD 83" - meters) for direct import into the Geographic Information System (GIS) database. Submit this data either via email, CD or a 3-1/2" floppy disc containing the appropriate data for use with AutoCAD, version 2000 or earlier (model space in real world coordinates,.NAD 83 m). If you have any questions regarding format,please call prior to submitting electronic data 18.The final map shall use the International System of Units (metric system_). The English System of Units may be used on the final map where necessary (e.g. - all record data shall be entered on the map in the record units, metric translations should be in parenthesis),to the approval of the City Engineer. 19.Electronic files and stamped and signed drawings shall be submitted for all public improvement plans prior to map recordation or commencing with improvements, whichever occurs first. Submittal documents shall include the AutoCAD compatible drawing files and any associated plot files along with one original, stamped and signed, ink on mylar set of plans. -J J Resolution No. 9638(2004 Series) Page 9 20.Prior to acceptance by the City of public improvements, the developer's engineer shall submit a digital version of all public improvement plans and record drawings,compatible with AutoCAD for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, in accordance with the City's Engineering Standards,to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 21.The map shall be recorded prior to occupancy of any of the units. Otherwise, the map shall be processed as a condo conversion per Municipal Code Chapter 17.82. Utilities 22.It is necessary to be certain that all City facilities fall within proposed easements or property deeded to the City. The on-site water and sewer systems shall be privately' owned and maintained. The on-site water and sewer mains shall be labeled on the plans as "Private". The existing single family residence located on the remainder parcel shall be included in the joint ownership and maintenance of the private on-site water and sewer lines. The joint ownership and maintenance responsibilities of all the owners shall be clearly described and explained in the homeowners' association agreement, bylaws, and/or CC&R's. 23.The tentative map shows a 6"water main serving the private on-site fire hydrants,but the location of the backflow preventer is not indicated. The backflow device shall be located adjacent to the private driveway, just outside the public right-of-way. The backflow device shall include a detector meter on the bypass, in accordance with City Standard 6420. The backflow configuration may include one or more fire department connections, as directed by the fire department 24. A water allocation is required,due to the additional demand on the City's water supplies. The City currently has water to allocate, and does so on a"first-come,fust-served"basis. Water is allocated at the time building permits are issued and the Water Impact Fee is paid. Both the Water and the Wastewater Impact Fees are charged on a per residential unit basis. 25. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any connection to the City water system if the property includes an active well or other water source not under City control. Such water systems will be allowed to be used only on the property containing the system, and no part of such a system will be allowed to cross over any property line. All backflow preventers shall be approved by the University of Southern California Foundation for Cross-Connection Control and Hydraulic Research. The project shall be coordinated with the County Cross-Connection Inspector, Henry Ruiz, who can be reached at 781-5567. Resolution No.9638 (2004 Series) Page 10 i 26.By ordinance, the applicant is required to prepare a recycling plan for approval by the City to address the recycling of construction waste for projects valued at over$50,000 or demolition of structures over 1000 square feet. The recycling plan shall be submitted to the Building Department with the building plans. The City's Solid Waste Coordinator can provide some guidance in the preparation of an appropriate recycling plan. V.The project presents an opportunity to evaluate and upgrade the sewer lateral serving the existing residence on the remainder parcel, if needed Most plumbers have the ability to produce a videotape of the inside of the sewer lateral. The Utilities Department can assist in reviewing the video and making recommendations for repair or replacement, as appropriate. As stated previously, the owner of the existing residence on the remainder parcel shall be included in the joint ownership and maintenance agreement,in order to tie into the proposed private sewer main running through the project. Street Trees 28.Removal of(1)one pine tree approved with the replanting of several unique and common landscape trees per. proposed landscape plan. All other existing trees to remain with a tree protection plan developed for creek and native trees to the satisfaction of the city arborist. One street tree required per 35 lineal feet of street frontage or any part thereof. 29. Street tree selection may need to be revised considering available space and planted to city standards. Natural Resources Manager 30. Slopes consist of serpentine rocks, likely to contain rare or threatened plant species. Rock outcrop on south side of project should be protected, and encroachments onto hillside should be kept to a minimum. 31.Drainage on north side of access to the existing house on the hillside is not a creek but is good quality wildlife habitat. Plan apparently calls for protecting this feature. Natural Resources staff supports such protection. Transportation 32.The final development plan shall provide a plan showing locations and dimensions of on site parking also noting covered vs. uncovered. 33.The final development plan shall describe and detail the bike bench concept. Resolution No.9638 (2004 Series) J Page 11 On motion of Vice Mayor Ewan, seconded by Council Member Settle, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Brown and Settle, Vice Mayor Ewan and Mayor Romero NOES: Council.Member Mulholland ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 7'b day of December 2004. Mayor David F.Romero ATTEST: Audrey Ho City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jo an P.Lowell City Attorney Attachment 3 RESOLUTION NO. (2007 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR PHASE 1 OF TRACT NO.2560 WHEREAS, the City Council made certain findings concerning the tentative map for Tract 2560, as prescribed in Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series), and WHEREAS, all conditions required per said Resolution No. 9638 (2004 Series)will be met prior to or concurrent with final recordation of the next phase of the subdivision. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the final map for Phase 1 of Tract No. 2560, as shown on the Tract 2560 — Phase 1 perimeter tract boundary prepared by MBS Land Surveys, dated February 2007, attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A", is found to be in substantial compliance with the vesting tentative map,and final map approval is hereby granted. Upon motion of ,seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 2007. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: - UmWArlh'P. Lowell City Attorney /J g:\staff-reports-agendas-minutes\_cat\2007\devrev\tract 2560\final map approval resolution tor tract 2560.doc /' ��,57 � i 1 ,'uuuuuuLO d < mc L1LJ L40Q °< 000000 N\ Q xpat yA/w c= {aa a d a apb§y�yqp gg'� m C//�� C btl2 b i�� I�•e COON d L e p 1r 0 Nub: k°i e I 10 m" < Z°5oI�f d9 s o$ �m� $ wtv I b Ile �g r N W$40 oN SN m m W/' N R. 3 \� o wv LOT 3 LOT h a to \ TRACT 634 30 PM 55 �^ ID Me _14 BRIDGE ST. ,1,=_� _—L i_ _ _ R _ �_ sew •arc�m.aa�mi � J —� xewarss•.eie.arwem S 1 ¢ a Fee I uo aO�a tt1 Ip$ N L U Q 1 Q i.- 0Ln 2 J F Q I � L I ��oim.a n 'emtozyi r N zea I / w n� 1 Jj L a it QE m¢ I m�d'R Nkba 1 ?a$ LUT 1 AD 1 l � �, gig= I I� aye sl Z ¢ 1 F g 33`dpp I 0 " 3 03 Zl \ i lu \ 1 ¢g �\ W �R 0 an Z . /g ------- ----- I-�` W uwe,uus S.cuceix w d Romero, Dave From: Helene Finger[hfinger@calpoly.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:02 PM =RECEEIVED To: Romero, DaveCc: D. & E. Dollar; Dodie WilliamsSubject: May 1 st, Consent Agenda Item C4 (215 Bridge Street) Dear Mayor Romero, I am writing today in regards to Consent Agenda Item C4 for the May 1, 2007 City Council meeting, "APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR PHASE 1 OF TRACT 2560, 21 5 BRIDGE STREET — (TR 64-03) . " As you may recall, this 7 acre parcel was all zoned Conservation/Open Space in 2003, when the owner requested to develop it as an affordable housing project. Since the owner has now decided to not pursue that project, for which the City Council approved a loss of Open Space zoning in exchange for affordable housing, the city should return the entire parcel to its Open Space zoning. Consent Agenda Item C4 requests to subdivide the lot with no benefit to the city of affordable housing and no compensation to the citizens of the city for the loss of Open Space. Once this subdivision occurs the owner will be under no obligation to provide affordable housing. To be consistent with city requirements and precedents, at a minimum, the owner should be required to give a portion of the parcel to the city to add to the adjacent city owned Open Space. As stated in the Land Use Element, "Before development occurs on any parcel which crosses the development limit line, the part outside the line shall be protected as permanent open space. " Furthermore, the zoning prior to the Bridge Street Project approval was C/OS 5, which requires a 5 acre minimum parcel size. Since the total parcel is 7 acres, subdividing it is not allowed by the zoning regulations. Would you be available to meet to discuss this for about 15 minutes? Thank you for your time, Helene Finger 549-9695 Vr COUNCIL CDD DIR .$CAO �'I FIN DIR RED FILE ACAO FIRE CHIEF ATTORNEY PW DIR MEETING AGENDA ,U CLERKIORIG POLICE CHF DATES//o7 ITEM # C% DED HEADS F DIR RTC DIR �J HR DIR f o 0 p G�� > From:Rick Hamlin To:COUNCILMAN CARTER Date:4/2712007 Time: 11:21:58 AM Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED APR 3 0 2007 April 27, 2007 SLO CITY CLERK RE. AGENDA ITEM (MAY 1) - APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR PHASE. 1 OF TRACT 2560, 215 BRIDGE STREET Dear Mr. Carter, If approval of "Final Map for Phase 1" will in any way limit the City's ability to revoke the PD zoning under Zoning Regulation 17.62.090, then it circumvents our law and should not be approved. 17.62.090 reads: "If a final development plan is not carried out in the time specified in the development plan or within an approved extension period, the Planning Commission and Council may remove the PD designation according to the usual procedure for city-initiated rezoning". It is important for the City and community to maintain the applicability of 17.62.090 to all PDs including the Bridge Street Project as it is the clear intent of the law to allow the City to undo the rezoning if the PD is not completed as approved. It appears from the letter by Public Works that this may be the first time such a request has been made in San Luis Obispo, if so approval of the item might take the City into uncharted waters. Instead, the City might consider granting another extension to allow the developer more time to work out his problems. If approval of "Final Map for Phase 1" will have no effect on the City's ability to act under 17.62.090, then please disregard this letter. Sincerely, Rick Hamlin L 541-1203 If COUNCIL TCDD DIR 10 CAO qfl FIN DIR RED FILE F]ACAO ii FIRE CHIEF MEETING AGENDA M ATTORNEY In PW DIR J2 CLERK(ORIG ;R POLICE CHF DATE Al/o'7ITEM # Cf" ❑ DEU HEADS 't REC DIR [R UTIL DIR ® Z&fta..c L HR DIR r CO&wca e- Ila doo C�� Page 1 of 1 Settle,Allen From: Jan Marx Danmarx@fa.net] Sent: Mon 4/30/2007 7:47 PM To: D. &E. Dollar Cc: Settle,Allen; Carter,Andrew; Mulholland,Christine; Romero, Dave; Brown, Paul; Mandeville,John Subject Re: 215 Bridge Street C 4 Attachments: I agree with Don Dollar. I support the project, and believe it needs to RECEIVED be carefully monitored. Jan Marx 265 Albert Dr, San Luis Obispo CA 93405 MAY U 1 2007 D. & E. Dollar wrote: SLO CITY CLERK > City Council, > I have some concerns on the 215 Bridge Street proposal that is coming > before you tomorrow evening as part of the Consent Agenda - C 4. > 'rCOUNCIL � > 1. I understand that there is no proposed change to what has been 51 CAC �c�D DI,R > voted on before, other than to "phase" this project. I am 51ACAO � FIN DIR > concerned that the length of time this proposal is taking, means ['ATTORNEY i?FIRE CHIEF �PW DIR > that there will be Changes. I am worried that it is becoming a ER'CLERPWRIG ijO POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT HEADS > moving target. Please make sure that there are no. unintended {d REC DIR > consequences with this proposal. -'�-8— �UTIL DIR > 2. Open Space aspects of this proposal. As.I understand it, the �7 �HR DIR > city is getting an Open Space benefit from this proposal. I Y e awWe > understand that this is to be a private open space easement, f Gqo > that is not open to the public access. I also understand that +' CL&ec > the city has about 15 to 20 of these private open space > easements, mostly for creeks, but some rather large parcels. We > need an effective monitoring/compliance program for these > private open space easements. These are valuable properties that RED FILE > the city has in these easements. I suggest that the city start a MEETING AGENDA > monitoring and compliance program for these private open space DA i 7 ITEM > easements, similar to the fee title open space program; i.e.; #may > baseline resource inventory and photo documenting, with at least > annually monitoring and photo documenting by the city's Natural > Resource staff. Amending the Conservation Guidelines for City > Open Spaces may be a method to address this. Also, there needs > to be an effective and meaningful method for the public to > understand and know what is and isn't happening with these > easements.They are part of the public trust, managed by the city. > Sincerely, > Don Dollar > 781.0118 https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/asettle/Inbox/Re:%20215%20Bridge%20Street%20%20%20%20%20C%... 5/1/2007 Page 1 of 1 C �J Settle Allen From: D.&E. Dollar[ddollar@pacbell.net] Sent: Mon 4/30/2007 1:31 PM To: Settle,Allen; Carter,Andrew; Mulholland,Christine; Romero,Dave; Brown, Paul Cc: Mandeville,John RECEIVED Subject: 215 Bridge.Street C 4 MAY 01 2007 Attachments: City Council, SLO CITY CLERK I have some concerns on the 215 Bridge Street proposal that is coming before you tomorrow evening as part of the Consent Agenda-C 4. 1. I understand that there is no proposed change to what has been voted on before,other than to"phase"this project. I am concerned that the length of time this proposal is taking,means that there will be changes. I am worried that it is becoming a moving target. Please make sure that there are no unintended consequences with this proposal. 2. Open Space aspects of this proposal.As I understand it,the city is getting an Open Space benefit from this proposal. I understand that this is to be.a private open space easement,that is not open to the public access. I also understand that the city has about 15 to 20 of these private open space easements, mostly for creeks, but some rather large parcels.We need an effective monitoring/compliance program for these. private open space easements.These are valuable properties that the city has in these easements. I suggest that the city start a monitoring and compliance program for these private open space easements,similar to the fee title open space program; i.e.; baseline resource inventory and photo documenting,with at least annually monitoring and photo documenting by the city's Natural Resource.staff. Amending the Conservation Guidelines for City Open Spaces may be a method to address this.Also,there needs to be an effective and meaningful method for the public to understand and know what is and isn't happening with these easements.They are part of the public trust,managed by the city. Sincerely, Don Dollar 781.0118 J9 COUNCIL ''CDD DIR $J CAO 9,0 FIN DIR j�ACAO T FIRE CHIEF RED FILE 15 ATTORNEY If PW DIR MEETING CLERK/ORIG i& POLICE CHF AGEND,4 DEPHEADS -i_p REC DIR DATE,S�'; fe UTIL DIR aITEM #_Cy 4e HR DIR o https:Hmai l.slocity.org/exchange/asettle/Inbox/215%2OBridge%2OStreet%20%20%20%20%20C%20%204... 5/1/2007 COUNCIL CDD DIR RECEIVED CAO FIN DIR ACAO FIRE CHIEF MAY O 1 200 Red File Item RrATTORNEY IPPW DIR JR CLERK/ORIG POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT HEADS REC DIR SLO CITY CLERK f $7 UTIL DIR May 1, 2007 "e-- i�a HA DIR P ocweu � G.ezo To: Mayor and City Council CL�� RED FILE Via: Ken Hampian MEETING AGENDA From: Jonathan Lowell, City Attorney DAT S� 4 ITEM # (f Jay D. Walter, Public Works Director Subject: Additional Information Pertaining to Agenda Item C-4 (Approval of Final May for Phase I of Tract 2560, 215 Bridge Street (TR 64-03)) In light of inquiries and concerns expressed by some interested neighbors, this additional information is being provided to aid the Council in more fully understanding the action being requested. In December 2004 the City Council took actions to: 1) amend the General Plan Land Use Element Map to change the land use designation from Services & Manufacturing and Conservation Open Space to Medium-Density Residential and Conservation Open Space, and change the development limit line from the 175 foot to the 190 foot contour; 2) introduce an ordinance changing the zoning below the 190 foot contour from Manufacturing and Conservation Open Space to Medium-Density Residential Planned Development and Manufacturing Planned Development; and 3) approve vesting tentative map for a sixteen residential lot subdivision and a commercial condominium with eight commercial airspace units. Two affordable residential units were proposed. As part of the tentative map approval, conditions were imposed. The vesting tentative map conditions are attached to the May 1, 2007 staff report on this item as Attachment 2. The applicant later requested, at the staff level in accordance with our local subdivision regulations that he be allowed to file a final map in phases. Phased filing of multiple final maps after a single tentative map is allowed under the Subdivision Map Act (see attached Government Code section 66456.1). The proposed phase 1 final map does not relieve the applicant from meeting the requirements imposed as conditions of the vesting tentative tract map. While staff has determined those conditions are not applicable to this phase, they shall apply to a development plan submitted for lot A shown on the phase 1 final map. The vesting tentative map is set to expire in November of this year; hence a development plan will likely be submitted soon. Again, as a development plan has not yet been submitted, we cannot yet determine whether or not the conditions imposed on the vesting tentative map r rr have been met. Similarly, it is too soon to consider removal of the Planned Development zoning designation. That is an issue for discussion if a development plan is not timely submitted and the vesting tentative map expires at the end of this year. It should be noted that several sheets were filed as part of phase 1 of the final map, but only one sheet was attached to the draft resolution. All four sheets of the final map are attached to this memorandum, and all four should be considered as part of Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. Please note that sheet four provides for an easement, including for vehicular access, leading to the remainder parcel, and an easement restricting further development of the remainder parcel, excepting that portion of the remainder lot that is already developed. The remainder parcel is not a parcel under the Subdivision Map Act (see Government Code section 66424.6 attached). It was not subject to the conditions imposed as part of the vesting tentative map. However, the remainder parcel lies within the COS-5 zone, with little likelihood of further development. Also, in order to split the remainder parcel into more than one lot, a certificate of compliance (or conditional one) is required. A certificate of compliance is issued by a local agency certifying that a parcel comports with the Subdivision Map Act and the local subdivision regulations. In this instance, the property owner is including as part of the subject final map a private open space easement restricting future development on the remainder lot The private open space easement shown on the Final Map includes all of the remainder lot except the existing house and access road and is shown on sheet 4 of the proposed final map. Hence, were the applicant to seek to sell the remainder lot in the future, he could request a certificate of compliance, and if issued the certificate would indicate that the easement burdening it restricts future development. We hope this memo clears up some of the questions that arose from the staff report. Please contact us if any further questions. And, we will be at the meeting to answer any questions that might be raised then. Attachments: 1. Government Code section 66456.1 2. Four of four sheets in conjunction with Tract 2560—Phase 1 3. Government Code section 66424.6 Attachment 1 Government Code Section 66456.1 Multiple final maps relating to an approved or conditionally approved tentative map may be filed prior to the expiration of the tentative map if: (a) the subdivider, at the time the tentative map is filed, informs the advisory agency of the local agency of the subdivider's intention to file multiple final maps on such tentative map, or (b) after filing of the tentative map, the local agency and the subdivider concur in the filing of multiple final maps. In providing such notice, the subdivider shall not be required to define the number or configuration of the proposed multiple final maps. The filing of a final map on a portion of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map shall not invalidate any part of such tentative map. The right of the subdivider to file multiple final maps shall not limit the authority of the local agency to impose reasonable conditions relating to the filing of multiple final maps. F z w yy � ;yy „ Y qE9 3E � r z<z°d m nw- Q O N W n j aHa. Fp 0 uiiasW N ops c p pp ggg t< < WNO qp a EQ€y < 3 W eQ4ggg t z d =m ryN�2 �p Grcme g h� hN IL °�wE�E� �.: <I� gd8 gg g O$ N<o 0 Z ni?6 QU aja" W � 3 0 Eg at O 5 8MC� u�o W izn e4 r" U I m V E I- °i-< F F hB W Y g�g h �3 @� h W F p gig N w °dpw � 4WSn Q b� h� p Z I jyij w € : w (/) €�E, to W�Fm m E W 8 p • WV E ° ® F— W' W se WA Q0 nO �a ppp d Mil g $ y N Ix ; h Q O 9 EE8 N2 z 0 U1 CSI 8Ll H <„n hx 0 3 Y04 •b g�g yps •y° /�O y Li O j 9 33 G y ��3�� g �.f0'� •41 9 NKFF4' '� •- C o C L bggg is � Ey� d N $ e at bg LQ ■F �g 55 eR PEh%i n 9ypg01u 9 E N } 4h fia� � gg'l'lx 88 yq' h L E i 8< ; hag E 3`• g 0 e h LL Q „eLh€ • 4 WjN � N �� F w a 0 W R Mo& m a Z it o Q $ $ i I — W Ie ml -MIX w w11616 4 € a€ � o € a$=gig Q I 2 q I ` g Q lilt VIP, o yy Qa W yy = E NeE l } � . e e "�C� � �� Y Q �3.. ^,e �� E$8.§p� 00 bb Eb ' O by 2 W 3� @ ht � * a' 2 z 5 g Cd • ez °x 0 e e i ° e � 0 n h Y }�$ Z �, E$ x 3s . 9 k Z al Ea as . I m a I Z :a a4Iasi,' \ p � uuuuuuL 9. p p ON $ ®o LS c IQ= 3�� $ a5. b xpnlxpA,xM ow=_, . L rc pG� b' Gp0 p ��l L L , \ Z I i --p b. <oad w,�R \\ C z Wed 0 W W9` \ Y� Jge_ � �0 Z m to U v ir.�9 H <a W alv°N b 3Y Jn uWI`ll sag o= �N M ebbiep`� 9< S S.L f ��Ffi N n b \ LOT 3 LOT 4 a m S`� ° TRACT 634 30 PM 56 k F 10 MB 14 N � BRIDGE 8T. $ �g _ R \ . xYet,x wvun I OJ I$ a O a [0 I IL r r co N r- `" Q I r a CDcc Xc Z i t� eiso, ��ots �w='ot°(•.w.u¢, o eo �— Z;I; —.I- 01 _ -Oq „n I b gy y LL Gb ygp ul 8 bh yM I mYg g � € $ / LOT ' 10 F � g I L It g 1 $k Z g p Wzi g d 3 & Z Is E C W6 I tl \ N Z a _ ------- - LL a W R F . .. �.LP.9`FW0%(IJ4II.M1a m1 a N4I f[a401./�l4 N' oa WI] "WO 05 ffW a f769 1?�1 9�x Wd GE t=b� f o 1 fI' I gy�� f aj md"i�g 610.93YM1 4' WUZ, ig J6"p BRIDGE ST. e. 3 W 30 n V - -- - - - -; NWS °s ;t '�� W ¢y LLM1 �N O m 6 G Nle c gp i lx,b FN 6m 3 S It �m' m C. a a I' E I� N % O E a. II = C\i I O � sp a I �R 7 L L CD W I W" CI ZNW // •s} I LJ I- FL^ o, e r I Z �$ Wy l ' I - / •.�6^Y-/FOTt I]M1^�1Y�t6�6[[Ob1 w]V 49 Wd OF, r n Vf- 9W a 4£9 LOV141 „W- '•. CIO, I I ; •�, mob a"a xeo�rss•w me.wryaxi �� IL m Ai! 3 a 6 e I BRIDGE ST. `. „. " NO • a 0� «a b xo_ ! ♦ w «3b- yry !!' m : d10 OyQ„ UO F Z�J„ �R !!� u ♦♦ WN W gab Bo° ia-. '•�• R Ur W am< w tt 2 U C a a S a - N Y � 8 � L 9 0 ♦ � $ � �' v by ! s , tlp.ry Q •2c[s n'� Xp" i•^ i°rcfQl '. �b 4• � i L e r 4-z-ft., X R M1 a.0 yR R � w P � �r•�^x ee.�e £ ioryq b b � � P r i1 X � � p k $ ac � y ��b •Z; sie+Ti°w Boz � S R R Esq .q R - ■ g � n^ i 4 3 b•� rt x ¢ gad & s Z� SR9 °� r Attachment 3 Government Code Section 66424.6. (a) When a subdivision, as defined in Section 66424, is of a portion of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land, the subdivider may designate as a remainder that portion which is not divided for the purpose of sale, lease, or financing. Alternatively, the subdivider may omit entirely that portion of any unit of improved or unimproved land which is not divided for the purpose of sale, lease, or financing. If the subdivider elects to designate a remainder, the following requirements shall apply: (1) The designated remainder shall not be counted as a parcel for the purpose of determining whether a parcel or final map is required. (2) For a designated remainder parcel described in this subdivision, the fulfillment of construction requirements for improvements, including the payment of fees associated with any deferred improvements, shall not be required until a permit or other grant of approval for development of the remainder parcel is issued by the local agency or, where provided by local ordinance, until the construction of the improvements, including the payment of fees associated with any deferred improvements, is required pursuant to an agreement between the subdivider and the local agency. In the absence of that agreement, a local agency may require fulfillment of the construction requirements, including the payment of fees associated with any deferred improvements, within a reasonable time following approval of the final map and prior to the issuance of a permit or other grant of approval for the development of a remainder parcel upon a finding by the local agency that fulfillment of the construction requirements is necessary for reasons of: (A)The public health and safety; or (B) The required construction is a necessary prerequisite to the orderly development of the surrounding area. (b) If the subdivider elects to omit all or a portion of any unit of improved or unimproved land which is not divided for the purpose of sale, lease, or financing, the omitted portion shall not be counted as a parcel for purposes of determining whether a parcel or final map is required, and the fulfillment of construction requirements for offsite improvements, including the payment of fees associated with any deferred improvements, shall not be required until a permit or other grant of approval for development is issued on the omitted parcel, except where allowed pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a). (c) The provisions of subdivisions (a) and (b) providing for deferral of the payment of fees associated with any deferred improvements shall not apply if the designated remainder or omitted parcel is included within the boundaries of a benefit assessment district or community facilities district. (d) A designated remainder or any omitted parcel may subsequently be sold without any further requirement of the filing of a parcel map or final map, but the local agency may require a certificate of compliance or conditional certificate of compliance.