HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/07/2010, PH 2 - REVIEW OF MINOR SUBDIVISION WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES Council
j acEnaa REpoRt 1w.N
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Brian Leveille, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF MINOR SUBDIVISION WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING
INCENTIVES
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Community Development Director, approve the minor subdivision and
affordable housing incentives.
DISCUSSION
Situation/Previous Review
The applicant, Habitat for Humanity, has applied for a four-lot subdivision with affordable
housing incentives. In most cases, the Community Development Director can take action and
approve a conforming four-lot subdivision in a minor subdivision hearing. The applicant is
proposing a 100% affordable housing project and is requesting exceptions from standard zoning
development regulations through the City's Affordable Housing Incentives (SLOMC Chapter
17.90), which require approval by the City Council. On September 17, 2010, the Director
reviewed the applicant's minor subdivision proposal and recommended the City Council grant
final approval of the subdivision and requested affordable housing incentives.
Data Summary
Address: 3212 Rockview Place
Applicant: Habitat For Humanity for San Luis Obispo County
Representative: Micah Smith
Zoning: R-2 (Medium-High Density Residential)
General Plan; Medium-High Density Residential
Environmental Status: Categorically exempt (CEQA Guidelines Class 15, Minor Land Divisions;
Section 15315)
Site Description
The project site is an 11,877 square foot (.27 acre) lot which slopes gently from front to back. A
tributary of Acacia Creek bisects the property. The creek is classified as a"Perrenial creek with a
degraded riparian corridor, but able to be restored or upgraded." The creek is lightly vegetated
With mostly invasive species and is in a degraded condition. The surrounding area is zoned for
multi-family development (R-2) to the north, west and east. Service Commercial (C-S) zoning is
east of the property with a developed commercial center directly adjacent to the site and a variety
of commercial and residential uses to the north and south of that center(Figure 1, below).
PH2-1
Council Agenda Report—MS 80-10
December 7,2010
Page 2
Figure 1. Project Site and vicinity
Project Description
The proposed project would demolish the existing residence on the lot to construct three
residential units on common interest lots. The three residential lots are proposed to range in size
from 1,963 sq. ft to 2,598 sq. ft. The open space lot at the rear of the property is 4,027 square feet in
size.
Each residential unit is three bedrooms, 1-1/2 baths, and 1,152 square feet in size. All three units
are to be affordable at the very-low income level and will be deed restricted. Each residential
unit is two stories and parking would be accessed along the south property line from Rockview
Place. Each unit provides garage parking for residents and surface guest parking (reduced scale
plans, Attachment 2). The project also includes an open space lot at the rear of the parcel across
Acacia Creek.
Requested Incentives
The project provides 100% affordable units at the very low income level and is eligible for
affordable housing incentives. The following incentives are requested (Attachment 2):
1. Density Bonus: The site could be developed under existing zoning with three units,
including two 2-bedroom units, and one 1-bedroom unit. The proposed density bonus
would allow all three units to include three bedrooms.
2. Front Yard Setback Exception: The front yard setback would be reduced from 20 feet to
10 feet.
3. Internal Building Setback Exception: The building setback between Lot 2 and Lot 3
within the project would be 3'-7" from the internal property line instead of 10 feet (this
standard only affects buildings within the project).
4. Northern Property Line Setback Exception: Buildings on Lot 1 and Lot 2 would have a 5-
foot setback from the northern property line, instead of a 10-foot setback as normally
required.
PH2-2
Council Agenda Report—MS 80-10
December 7,2010
Page 3
Evaluation
There area number of General Plan Policies which support the project:
1. General Plan
LUE Goal 18: Actively seek ways to provide housing which is affordable to
residents with very low, low, and moderate incomes, within existing neighborhoods
and within expansion areas.
HE Policy 2.4: Encourage housing production for. all financial strata of the City's
population, in the proportions shown in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation,for
the 1007-1014 planning period.
The applicant is proposing that all three units in the project be dedicated at the "extremely low"
or `'very low" income levels. This is a significant contribution to the City towards meeting this
underserved income category; especially considering most dedications at this income level
consist of studios or SRO (single residence occupancy) units. The applicant is requesting a
density bonus and incentives to make the project viable for Habitat for Humanity's program
goals to provide affordable housing for low-income homebuyers.
LU 2.4.2 Density Bonuses: The City may approve a density bonus for a project
which will be:
A. Be a receiving site, within expansion areas or the downtown commercial core
only,for development credit transferred to protect open space:
B. Provide for the minimum percentage of dwellings for elderly or affordable to
the income groups specified in State Law.
The project provides affordable units at 100% which far exceeds the standard percentage
required to allow a density bonus. The minimum percentage required by State law is 10%
of market rate units for"very low" income households.
LU 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.
LU 2.2.10 Compatible Development: Housing built within an existing
neighborhood should be in scale and in character with that neighborhood. All
multi family development and large group living facilities should be compatible
with any nearby, lower density development.
The proposed project complies with height standards and lot coverage requirements and
the requested development incentives will not result in housing which is out of scale or
character with surrounding residential development.
PH2-3
Council Agenda Report—MS 80-10
December 7,2010
Page 4
LU 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 plans.
LU 2.2.11 Site Constraints: Residential developments shall respect site
constraints such as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and
wetlands, wildlife habitats, native vegetation, and significant trees.
The proposed project preserves the creek corridor and meets creek setback requirements.
The requested flexibility from standard R-2 development incentives is responsive of the
creek corridor and the project also proposes to enhance the creek corridor and incorporate
the creek area and open space lot at the rear of the property as an amenity in the project.
2. Affordable Housing Incentives
The applicant is requesting the following incentives to allow deviation from standard Zoning
Regulations:
Front yard (street yard) setback reduction: The applicant is requesting a 10-foot street yard
setback for the building on the front parcel along Rockview Place. The standard setback
requirement in the R-2 zone is 20 feet.
Acacia Creek crosses through approximately the rear third of property which is the principle
reason to move development forward on the lot as discussed in the policy evaluation of LU 2.2.8
and LU 2.2.11 above . The surrounding neighborhood is developed with a variety of lot patterns
and building configurations. The project site is not within a uniformly developed neighborhood
where the variation from standard street yard setback requirements would be detrimental to
neighborhood character, and the project has been designed with an attractive street presence. The
project is in scale and character with surrounding development consistent with General Plan
Land Use Policy 2.2.10.
Interior yard (side yard) setback reduction: The applicant is requesting a 3-7" setback for
buildings on proposed lots 2 & 3 within the project. The standard minimum setback for the
proposed project is 10 feet for buildings between 22-23 feet in height.
As discussed above, the applicant's property is constrained with the creek and creek setback area
at the rear portion of the lot. The applicant's project is intended to provide affordable single-
family residences. The proposed residences are 1,152 square feet in size and designed in a
compact form. The requested reduction in minimum setbacks would only affect proposed parcels
within the existing property and the project has been designed to accommodate needed privacy
between units and to provide adequate common and private open space consistent with General
Plan residential project objectives (LU 2.2.12) to provide privacy for occupants and neighbors of
the project. The Zoning Regulations permit the proposed exceptions with the Council's approval,
and the reduced setbacks are consistent with all applicable fire and building codes.
PH2-4
Council Agenda Report—MS 80-10
December 7,2010
Page 5
Side yard, height-setback reduction: The applicant is proposing a 5-foot setback adjacent to the
property north of the project.The standard minimum required setback along this property line is
10 feet for buildings between 22-23 feet in height.
The buildings are designed in a compact form and only the structures on the front two parcels
require this setback reduction. The design of the buildings does not include upper level patios or
decks which overlook onto the adjacent property. There would be ample separation between
buildings on the adjacent property, since there is a driveway that would separate development on
that parcel from the proposed project. The project is consistent with residential project objectives
of General Plan Land Use Element Policy 2.2.12, to provide privacy for occupants and neighbors
of the project.
Density: The applicant is requesting an increase in density over standard R-2 zoning for each of
the proposed common interest lots. The proposed lot sizes range from 1,963 square feet to 2,598
square feet. Under standard R-2 density calculations this would allow between .54 and .72
density units, which would allow a studio unit or one-bedroom unit on each lot, as proposed. If
the site were developed without subdividing, two 2-bedroom units could be built along with one
1-bedroom unit. The applicant is proposing 1.5 density units per lot, which equates to three 3-
bedroom units..
Affordable housing provisions of the Zoning Code allow the Council to approve increased
density as part of an affordable housing proposal. The applicant is proposing a 100% affordable
housing project and increased density is inclusive of the affordable units. As discussed above in
Housing Element Policy, HE 2.4 and LU 2.4.2, this is a significant contribution toward City
affordable housing goals. The applicant's proposed increase in density results in an incremental
increase in bedroom count for each of the three common interest lots and does not result in
development that is out of character or scale with surrounding development and is consistent
with land use policy for compatible development(LU 2.2.10).
3. Subdivision Regulations
The project is proposed to be developed with four separate common interest lots. Common
interest lots may be developed in any size or shape, provided development standards are met.
With the exception of the above requested deviations from development standards, the proposed
project complies with applicable development and subdivision regulations including private open
space, storage requirements, and laundry facilities.
Environmental Review
The proposed project is exempt from environmental review (Class 15, Minor Land Divisions,
Section 15315 of CEQA Guidelines).
PH2-5
Council Agenda Report—MS 80-10
December 7,2010
Page 6
CONCURRENCES
The proposed project has been reviewed by City Departments involved in the development
review process, including Fire, Utilities, Public Works and Administration, and recommended
conditions of approval have been incorporated into the draft resolution of approval.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which
found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue review of the proposed subdivision with specific direction to the applicant and
staff.
2. Approve a resolution recommending that the City Council deny the proposed subdivision,
based on findings of inconsistency with the Subdivision Regulations and/or General Plan
Policies as specified by the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Applicant statement
3. Reduced scale project plans
4. Resolution
T:\Council.Agenda Reports\Community Development CAR\2010\MS 80-10,3212 Rockview,Council Agenda Repon.doc
PGI2-6
VICINITY MAP File No. 80=10
Attachment 2
LEONARD GRANT , ARCHITECT
LICENSE NUMBER C25073I
July 27, 2010
City of San Luis Obispo, California
Planning Department
919 Palm St.
San Luis.Obispo,CA 93401
Dear Brian Leveille,
Thank you for accepting Habitat for Humanity for San Luis Obispo County's application fora
proposed common interest subdivision with incentives and density bonuses of(3)residential lofts
and(1)open space lot on an existing(1) parcel with and existing(1)single family residence to be
demolished.This project is to be located at 3212 Rockview Place,APN 004583-017.
Our proposed project would include(3) 1,152.square foot single family residences. Each
residence has 3-bedrooms, 1-1/2 baths,and a 1-car garage that would include bicycle parking. All
3 homes are to be affordable at the extremely low and very low income levels and will be deed
restricted as such.Zoning is R-2-S.
We are requesting affordable housing incentives including a 50%density bonus that would
facilitate a project viable for Habitat for Humanity for San Luis Obispo County(HFHSLOCO). In
addition to the density bonus, we are applying for the following incentives:
• Off-site parking for(1) guest parking space,based on a lot-by-lot parking calc(note that
on an overall project basis,we are over-parked by (1) guest parking space)
• Front yard setback for lot 1 of 10'-0" and lots 2&3 proposed to be 3'-7" (20'-0" required
for each)
• Relief from 2nd floor(yard building height) setback requirements
Additionally, HFHSLOCO is requesting City funding in the amount of$250,000 for the purpose
of land acquisition. Such funding may be provided by Affordable Housing Funds and CDBG
funds.
Once again,thank you for accepting our application and for your generous assistance with the
preparation of our application. We are excited about the opportunity to provide more affordable
housing in the City of San Luis Obispo, where the need is as strong as it is in any community in
our County!
Sincerely,
Micah Smith,designer
LGA Architecture Inc.
330 JAMES WAY, SUITE 260, PISMO BEACH. CA 03445
PHONE 803.773.7113 FAX 808.773.7118Q
PH2-8
ATTACHMENT 2
Habitat
a for Humanity'
for San Luis Obispo County.
Post Office Box 613
San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
187 Tank Farm Rd. #130B
(805) 782-0687 kffa@hfhsloco.org •www.hfhslow.grg
Habitat for Humanity for San Luis Obispo County-2006-2010
Habitat for Humanity for San Luis Obispo County,a registered 501(c)3 nonprofit organization(EIN#77-
0434147),was established as an affiliate of Habitat for Humanity International in 1997. San Luis Obispo
County has a serious need for housing that is affordable to low-income homebuyers. The county has been the
third least affordable small metropolitan area in the nation for the past seven years according to the National
Association of Home Builders. It also ranks fourth in California in terms of severe housing cost burden with an
incidence of severe burden of 36.4%. DataQuick reported a median sales price of$379,000 for a single family
home in the county in 2009. The median sales price in the,city of San Luis Obispo was$470,000. To address
this housing need,Habitat uses volunteer labor and tax-deductible donations of money,materials,and services
to build and rehabilitate homes that are affordable to very low-income families. Homebuyers contribute 500
hours of self-help sweat equity to build their homes. Houses are sold for no profit and financed through
affordable,no-interest first mortgages held by Habitat. Mortgages are issued over a fixed period,usually 25 -30
years and are structured to ensure that homeowners pay no more than 30%of their gross income for housing.
Monthly mortgage payments are used to support the construction of more houses through the revolving Fund for
Humanity.
From 2006 through 2009,Habitat for Humanity for San Luis Obispo County built nine homes. One home is in
Cambria,four are in Atascadero,and four in Grover Beach. The nine families include 17 adults and 28
children. The Habitat homeowners in these three cities are very low-income families with incomes between
25%and 50%of the area median income. They qualified on the basis of a need for better housing,the ability to
pay a Habitat mortgage,and a willingness to complete the required hours of labor toward building their homes.
Habitat provides the first,no-interest mortgage to the nine homeowners and services the additional mortgages.
The home price and financing terms are structured to be affordable to very low-income homebuyers. The homes
are deed-restricted allowing resale to very low-income homebuyers only. The other"silent"mortgages with
local jurisdictions come due only if the terms of the deed restrictions are violated. Habitat first mortgages
ensure that our homeowners pay no more than 30%of their gross income for mortgage principal,property taxes,
and homeowners insurance.
All of the nine homes were built with self-help and volunteer labor. Habitat homeowners are required to
contribute 500 hours of self-help sweat equity to the construction of their homes. Habitat supervises the self-
help work by the homeowners and volunteers and provides training for the homeowners in construction safety
and home maintenance and repair. Habitat also offers homeowner workshops to provide counseling in
budgeting and financial management,community services,and how to be a good neighbor.
The Habitat homes in Atascadero and Grover Beach were built with green/energy efficient features, including
photovoltaic systems. These features help to keep utility costs down for the low-income homeowners. These
homes are LEED certified. We plan to incorporate green building features into the construction of the five
homes in San Luis Obispo. Habitat incorporates universal design features into the homes it builds.
Habitat for Humanity for San Luis Obispo County also operates two Restore Building Materials Thrift Stores in
San Luis Obispo County. Revenue from Restore sales is a major source of funding for Habitat's homebuilding
projects. Restore diverts usable materials from landfills,sells good quality materials at low cost to local
customers,and provides training in construction safety and home maintenance for Habitat homeowners,
volunteers,and others.
PH2-9
Ath-OMP,
3
+
40
g 66Q
ria jai 4i-Sir
an �`�1�o
II
MOD)
r + r Ba 45
gill g 8�
5
a_
s
11 ,49
,- ' r
,n6 a � � b iEEEaq E
p gg aa tpc�py
• $aa d d a d �Q � � � �� $�$� G --
_
` h A h
a i
gg ggyy9ggggggg �+�rg !�
WO
a sag a a
aa8 j'' $
as
AN
i H ' §. tg `•
as t
r 3 s s 6 5 s F4
tom' p �
fill,
PR
4
EWA i 6r.4c:
R k 6 b o++ea+ + deed++ o
R F e + dr ja e i E
win m���y{ pee° _
n,aa nia i e ee r _-.
d dada, a a s a a
lltl §. 8
(emay % Habitat for Humanity' E sheen&.rau�ai sr4 e,
r•O am{IMbm OWIN& ..nx..,..,,-.um....nn
2-10
ATTACHMENT 3
um�
v v
tl� �
Al ROCXVIEN PLACE
Be
19 g g �r
9 ar
i•i q 14 tl
• 7
7 ]5
ii ii , G Y
D r
9v .p O0O ' ' I N
y Z T tom 9 n r- OZlp •1 •' a ` !I'y Amo
4 0 3g 7 x S r lj •tl �.Li�ii—.ur' 9 O to
® � A F m � h� • olio_ 3' i m A o
a� m D
°
34� y
ar 0 —
`a9° � m lI SI I I I 0
1 tie'
Ptp� P
13 L afla r —
. jF 13 X39
z
pp L a
RA+ I 1
aux°�4iaa•a aaraptl^.ai 33G I I I I
0
"tea
9�J gaa lm
D 0
a pill a6i __iaaviu-=� oG
.. 3
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
° I I I PRELIMINARY SLO 10-0071
o 'n GRADING
FOR D�SgIGNS
K AND UTILITY PLAN HABITAT
BIT T FOR HUMANITY PLACE
�- SAN LUIS OSISPO.CALIFORNIA `N
2-11
ATTACHMENT 3
�m Sm cmi>��p5� A�$�
Z Q a 2® OgQ� mm < OIC AC
No c v n cvzi ^�� p� F`$QQ4 ?S zo�LuN
z
ROCKVIEW PLACE
0
C'o � QU
>
8 � i_ � - - � V - v� y •lf
+ `
,'
t p�
m I —�N zSO I N ¢��gn � 11
m m
A� m
A� 'm I $I! • 1 �� $ a� I o mm �m
rmgr og4 �8 � q go Oot
'
log Aa
at.a I �rlO n m2 �C r=4'n NjN jyA
5 3370'03'E 40A0'H '2 m
$wv
u$
� � aM
Z
n m20 a
En3, O>
D
GOOOZ K7 ;�
0 , owaoDoDA
vO \ �aNJ
-
?Q � mC2NO -0opo
n b
f
a
��S z�m��ED D m� s
m o mz"<p5 pfd F ,8•,4'
c �ti y
Q� �� Z�0
e v o D V) r §tlC
o 0 0 _
m
y U
r
PH2-12
ATTACHMENT 3
0
a
ROCKVIEW PIACE
n
_g
� M
� � O
m
O
3fig
E a a 5 \
x
G ? a @
w m
9
s
I
t�
S € firma
PH2-13
IWMI
1111111 1
mull
e�
cl D IlMl lllllll
' ►���
lll!Ill +k .
Il!i'1 _.veo -•L4i�;';/r`�'�
may'
_ c � • p ,0 ��r �
IideaondeOm ` ,
r
sia
- ATTACHMENT 3
r�sso ra sso
- I
_ _ I
� I
a j m
@H g H ? = a y s @
a
D
a
I
i
ITS'
fR Habitat for Humanity. °`�'`"°°�'
P11
2-15
ATTACHMENT 3
i^ P xw�>-CTv- mim 9 K �gsn23
• z >�o o$® Q � o�n
o��.
o Q gg �8o E
lug
ROCXVIEW PLACE
— --
a
N
o� Sid�Q 90 0 _gob
_ - - -N- - "
mNm o nn 9
7
_; m�1�.19
OSz IG•1 ; m Why>�1
I
x: Hj3 ec
9 p
a Fat
If I
Q1 I \ F a in vg��rf1"� vm
IA >y
F•1 A~m Oz
C n
�Q 4
^v97
m m
Ri t o 8j '2g4 � $g A'y� 4 0 on>O
'�� �S8
�`8 I 8yg omz o 9y
i.
69-"§
=�� a P k/• I �o�i�" _ ; jzi, g4gyy--§ V Q� w�Qpp(•'',
RV
4tt Z.
s=-Mane 49.W:.4
N$
r
y
2 �
Z>
Nm 3°, D D D
a' ZO rcI
c. , m
c y OD(j 00 �`• � .L�
N y
N
03 coca zcn
0;0 Coc O WJEy l
�cw Spm��O I m
0 0 o mz <p5 O �j ggpb
000Fo iso
a,FF' � O n 3N C
� _ � On 1102
C O m (n V r b C
(� PH2-16
Attachment 4
RESOLUTION NO. (2010 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING A FOUR-LOT PARCEL MAP WITH THREE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND
AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3212
ROCKVIEW PLACE, MS 80-10
WHEREAS, the Council 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 December 7,
2010, pursuant to an application filed by Habitat for Humanity of San Luis Obispo County,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has considered testimony,of the
applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director conducted a public hearing in the
Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September
17, 2010, and recommended the Council grant final approval subdivision and affordable housing
incentives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Council makes the following findings of consistency with
City policies and regulations.
1. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan because the project is
responsive to existing site conditions, will add to the City's affordable housing inventory,
and be consistent with development objectives for the Medium-Density Residential Zone of
the General Plan.
2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development allowed in the R-2 zone.
With the exception of affordable housing incentives granted to the project, the common
interest subdivision meets property development standards.
3. The site is physically suited for the subdivision and subsequent development on the site will
have a minimal impact to surrounding properties because the project has been designed in
scale and character with surrounding development.
4. The design of the tentative map is not likely to cause serious health problems, substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat, since the parcel split will occur within an already developed urban area and the
approval of this subdivision does not grant any exceptions or variances from applicable
zoning regulations or code requirements which would have any effect on wildlife or habitat.
5. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through(or use of
property within) the proposed subdivision since required easements will remain in place
following the subdivision and will be applicable to the newly created parcels and code
requirements require the recordation of new easements and the relocation of utilities
PH2-17
1
Resolution No. [ ] - ATTACHMENT.4
Page 2
wherever necessary to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public
Works Department Director.
6. The applicant's proposed project is 100% affordable and qualifies for the requested
affordable housing incentives at the discretion of the Council per section 17.90 of the
Municipal Code.
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that
the project is categorically exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines Class 15,
Minor Land Divisions; Section 15315.
SECTION 3. Action. The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby approve
the minor subdivision at 3212 Rockview Place subject to the following conditions:
1. The subdivider shall dedicate a 6' wide public utility easement and a 10' wide
street tree easement across the Rockview frontage. Said easements shall be
adjacent to and contiguous with the public right-of-way line Parcel 1.
2. A public pedestrian easement shall be dedicated on the map for the ADA sidewalk
extension at the driveway approach that will be located on Parcel 1.
3. A utility plan, street improvement and curb grade plan 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:
4. 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. A private sewer main may be proposed to the
satisfaction of the Building Official, Utilities Engineer, and Public Works
Director. Wire utilities to new residences shall be underground.
5. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private
utilities, access, drainage, common driveways, and maintenance of the same shall
be shown on the final map. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total
as blanket easements.
6. Development on the proposed parcels shall comply with the Waterway
Management Plan Drainage Design Manual and the Floodplain Management
Regulations.
7. The building plan submittal shall demonstrate that structures constructed on
Parcel 3 or Parcel 4 will be located at least 1' above the 100-year flood elevation.
8. Vegetation Management: A vegetation management plan, necessary to reduce the
threat of fire, shall be prepared by a registered professional forester or qualified
landscape architect for Parcel 4. The plan shall include a maintenance element and
the contact information for the responsible party for the maintenance. The City's
PH2-18
Resolution No. [ ] ATTACHMENT 4
Page 3
Natural Resource Manager should be contacted regarding any species that may
need to be protected.
9. Fire Protection Systems and Equipment: Fire protection systems shall be installed
in accordance with the CFC and the California Building Code. An approved
NFPA 13D system will be required for this project. Shop Drawings and
Specifications shall be submitted for review and approval prior to installation.
10. Address Numbers: Approved address numbers shall be placed on all new
buildings in such a position to be plainly visible and legible from the street
fronting the property. Numbers shall be a minimum of 5" high x 1/2" stroke and
be on a contrasting background. A monument sign showing the address of each
building shall be prominently located as to be clearly visible from Rockview
Place.
11. At the time of building permit submittal, plans shall identify storage areas for
individual waste wheelers for trash, recycling and green waste for each unit_. If
shared service is proposed, plans shall identify a common solid waste storage area
for trash, recycling and green waste.
12. Plans shall include notation to abandon the lateral serving the existing residence
per City standards.
Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing Resolution was adopted this day of 12010.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Elaina Cano, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
hristine Dietrick, City Attorney
L""-<:'\Council Agenda Reports\Community Development CAR\2010WS 80-10(3212 Rockview)—Council Reso.doc
PH2-19
KIMIMIRU ( AICs sRo n. W"1C-Ari-aa
� ��
HISTORY
ON THE STREET WHERE
YOU LIVE...
FIRST STREETS IN SAN LUIS
By Joseph A.Carotenuti
TODAY IS SURROUNDED BY YESTERDAY.THERE IS A
hint of history in plain view—literally—on most every
street corner.
For instance,Cal Poly—formally known as California Polytechnic
University,San Luis Obispo—has had a fair share of historical prob-
ing but not so with the neighborhood around the academic oasis.
While the school is now over a century old,surrounding street names
recall several prominent early pioneers.Each deserves—and will
receive—a more complete biography,but here's some very brief notes
on a few of the more famous.
Put on a pair of comfortable shoes and start walking through time!
The Graves family began locally when William J.married into the
family of Jose de Jesus Pico,a cousin of California's last Mexican
Governor.One of the earliest petitions to the then-Town of San
Luis Obispo is his for property at the site of William Dana's Casa
Grande...today's Court Street. A veteran of the Mexican-American
War,he was one of only two lawyers in the newly designated County
and later served as a judge and County Treasurer.A member-of
both the State Assembly(1854)and Senate(1874),when Graves
died in 1884,flags were flown at half-mast for 3 days—a sign of the
community's esteem.
A short block nearby remembers one of the earliest pioneers the
County seat.Dr.William Williams Hays was born in Maryland,
graduated from Georgetown University in 1861,studied at the Smith-
sonian Institute and was chairman of the Town of San Luis Obispo's
Board of Trustees(1870-72)as well as an avid meteorologist.His
adobe home close to the Mission remains beneath years of careful
restoration.Hays eventually moved to the area now bearing his name.
An early proponent of care for the indigent,he was a founder
and first director of the community's General Hospital.A man
of many talents,for years he submitted weather data to the
community's newspaper.
Most histories of the County and City remember to note Walter
Murray as a co-founder of the Tribune newspaper in 1859.Arriving
here six year earlier,his service to the settlement included early
efforts as a town trustee,lawyer,Assemblyman(1858)and County
judge among numerous accomplishments.Born in England,a vet-
eran of the Mexican-American War(Stevenson's Regiment),he has
left a considerable amount of correspondence detailing life in the
�K�1PIIl'Jl�1►111'�
1850s and 60s. Of particular historicar.m- One possible reason for the omission is likely began referring to fruit trees while
portance are his newspaper articles of the the lack of interest in street names in the the expanse south went across land owned
life and conditions of the early settlement earliest years of the community except an by Tomas Higuera and Johnson Avenue
and county—a most interesting glimpse ordinance changing Mission to Monterey traverses some land originally owned by
into the past.The terror of lawlessness led Street.Names were often more directional Charles H. Johnson.
him to be one of the founders of the Vigi- than specific while others were named by
lance Committee(1858). land developers...as happens today. Begin- Unfortunately,there is no current or-
ning at the oldest municipal crossroads dinance even suggesting use of pioneer
Probably the most recognizable local sur- —the corners of Monterey and Chorro names for streets and other public places.
name on a statewide basis is Pacheco.Com- —few streets commemorate individuals or Remembering our civic ancestors would be
ing to California with Mexican Governor families.There seems neither civic vanity an appropriate addition to the history of
Echeandia in 1825,Romualdo married into , nor pride in personalizing street names. the community.
the Carrillo family of Santa Barbara and Streets carrying family names simply desig-
was one of two casualties in the Battle of nated the early-owners of the surrounding Learn More About It?Do you know the ori-
Cahuenga Pass.His young widow,Dona Ra- property.Higuera(Spanish for"fig")in gin of your street name?
mona,and her two sons entered local history the downtown area,for instance,most
after her second marriage to Scotsman John
Wilson who among his extensive land hold-
ings included the Mission of St.Louis.
Jose Antonio Romualdo,Jr.and his brother
Mariano were educated in Hawaii and both
played prominent roles in the civic and eco-
nomic life of the area.Romualdo continued
his political career and was elected Lieuten-
ant Governor.He became California's only
Hispanic governor(1875)to complete the
term of Governor Newton Booth who went
to Washington,D.C. From Sacramento to
the Federal capital,he served three terms in
the House of Representatives.
Certainly,the premier land speculator and
developer in the county was Chauncey
Hatch Phillips.Arriving here in 1864,he
first partnered with H.W.Warden(another
street near Hawthorne School)to open the
first bank in the county.Among a variety of
land developments,he is most remembered
for Templeton although there exists on older
maps of San Luis Obispo a notation as to the
"Phillips Addition."Phillips was responsible
for dividing the Morro y Cayucos Rancho
into town lots as well as a less successful
attempt to do the same in Los Olivos.Loren
Nicholson's Rails Across the Ranchos
provides the best overview of the energetic
entrepreneur's work to bring the railroad to
and through the county.
Other prominent names surrounded the
University:Loomis,Henderson,Carpenter,
Hathway,and Stenner.These(and many
others)pay tribute to some of the earliest
members of what was simply a little noticed
settlement in the middle of the new state.
There is one glaring omission for some sort
of recognition near the university...Myron
Angel.If there.is.one figure regarded as
the"father"of the college,Angel's efforts
to have some sort of institution of higher
learning located on the central coast de-
serves some remembrance.