Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/07/1989, 8 - DETERMINATION REGARDING A SAN LUIS CREEK SETBACK AND EASEMENT FOR A NEW OFFICE BUILDING AT 444 HIGU MEETING SATE: City of San WI S OBI SPO 3/7/89 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 01 FROM: David F. Romero Wayne A. Peters Prepared by: Gerald W. Kenny Public Works Director City Engineer ( Supervising Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Determination Regarding a San Luis Creek Setback and Easement for a New Office Building at 444 Higuera Street (Smith-Lorance, Applicant). RECOMMENDATION: By Motion, Uphold Staff's Determination Regarding Location of the Required Creek Setback and Easement. BACKGROUND: Plans have been submitted for a new office building adjacent to San Luis Creek at 444 Higuera Street. These conflict with the "unofficial" creek setback line recently prepared by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. The setback line was determined in accordance with criteria established in the City's Flood Management Policy (Pink Book) which provides for a 50-year storm downstream from the confluence with Stenner Creek and a 40-year storm, upstream from the confluence. This site is at the confluence, and is immediately upstream of 424 Higuera where the Council considered a similar request on November 11 , 1988. The current proposed creek setback line accommodates alternate cross-sections (a vertical wall, to a 2 to 1 slope with landscoping within the slope bank, as well as a pedestrian pathway). See exhibits 1 , 2 and 3. The Community Development Department is asking for an "additional" 8-foot building setback and easement beyond that required to convey only the 50-year storm. This is for environmental and visual impacts, including public pedestrian trail purposes included in the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan. This provides a distance of 20 feet from the vertical wall alternative to 9 feet from the top of a sloped bank alternative (Exhibits 5 and 6). Staff had recommended that the applicant revise the plans to accommodate the required setback prior to pursuing ARC approval The applicant asked that the matter be referred to the Council for a determiration of the setback and easement requirements prior to modifying the plcns and pursuing ARC approval. DISCUSSION: The project site is relatively flat except for the the creek bank which slopes steeply to the creek channel area. Currently the site is improved with an existing structure near the Higuera Street frontage (to be removed), a parking lot along the side of the building and an undeveloped area at the rear. �������mIIIIIIip:141 ��U city of san Luis osispo =1111110COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 444 Higuera St. - Creek Setback Meeting of February 21 , 1989 Page Two. Relevant City Policies 1 . Flood Management Policy pursuant to Resolution No. 5138 (1983 Series), (Pink Book). 2. Flood Damage Prevention Regulations (M.C. Section 17.84). 3. Municipal Code Section 15.04.060 requires specific approval of plans for buildings or grading within 20 feet from the top of bank of major creeks. The Flood Management Policy is intended to prevent the loss of life and property from flooding and provide for the orderly environmentally sensitive maintenance of, and improvements to, major creeks. Relevant policies (Exhibit 4) include: 1 . All new building construction and parking lots shall be constructed outside of adopted creek setbacks. 2. As a condition of approval of projects requiring entitlements other than a building permit or lot line adjustment (i.e. use permit, subdivision, parcel map, architectural review, etc. ) the owner shall: a. Dedicate the natural creek area lying within his/her property, and b. Dedicate right-of-way needed for widening the creek if shown on an adopted creek setback map. 3. The developer shall not be required to dedicate, without compensation, more than 25 percent of his property lying outside of the natural creek. 4. Developers of property on all creeks shall be responsible for improving creeks to City standards. EVALUATION Staff feels the recommendations to require the setback and easements as proposed is consistent with the aforementioned Flood Management Policy (commencing on page C-1 ) as follows: Policy #1 . This policy clearly states all new buildings and parking lots shall be constructed outside of adopted creek setbacks. Policy #3. This project requires an entitlement other than a building permit. Although the setback line has not been "formally adopted", it meets the "criteria" which was formally adopted and based on engineering calculations and field measurements, as well as environmental �s� ���n��►�uil�iIIIIIIIIP°1 ►q�llll city of san tuffs ompo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 444 Higuera Street - Creek Setback Meeting of February 21 , 1989 Page Three. considerations felt to be a mandate for such a project. It also complements existing creek setbacks on nearby properties and on the opposite side of the creek to obtain the adopted creek ccWacity. Policy A. The Developer is not required to dedicate more than 50 percent of the ultimate creek widening outside the natural creek. In fact, evidence is available indicating that the creek has been filled in over a period of many years along this reach of San Luis Creek. Policy #5. The Developer would be required to dedicate an estimated 24.9 percent of the land outside of the natural creek. Policy #7.& #8. Since the improvement of the channel at this location would be more of a hindrance than a benefit without necessary widening downstream, these conditions are not feasible at this time. A "creek development fee" has never been adopted by ordinance. SUMMARY: The City's Flood Management Policy requires dedication of necessary easements and setbacks for developments along major creeks. Public health, safety and welfare considerations dictate that flood protection measures be addressed in the approval of such projects. Staff sees no reason to grant an exception to these policies. ALTERNATIVES: Option 1 . Uphold staff's determination of the required development setback and easement to provide for future creek widening, including public pedestrian pathway purposes and find that the creek dedication (24.9 percent) is justified. The primary advantage would be to provide for orderly creek development when deemed appropriate and to allow development of the property in the interim. A disadvantage would be less developable property on behalf of the applicant. (RECOMMENDED ACTION). This action is consistent with City Council action taken November 11 , 1988 on adjacent property at 424 Higuera Street.. Option 2. Uphold staff's determination of the required setback and easement to provide for future creek widening, without additional setback for environmental and visual purposes, but including public pedestrian pathway purposes. Provide for an alternate site plan to provide for lost riparian habitat when creek widening occurs. 0 II�n�►�►t�IVIINIII�P � U city of San Luis OBlspo 00% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 444 Higuera Street - Creek Setback Meeting of February 21 , 1989 Page Four. The primary advantage would be environmental considerations would be included in the development plan without the additional setback or easement dedication. A disadvantage would be loss of a wider visual corridor and added options in landscaping and pathway designs. Option 3. Uphold staff's determination of the required setback as in Option 1 , but allowing a portion of the second story of a proposed building to cantilever over the future channel, subject to ARC and Council approval of the plans. An advantage would be that the City would have the necessary easement for creek widening and the Developer could construct more building area without affecting the creek easement. A disadvantage would be possible loss of visual corridor. CONCURRENCES: The Community Development Director concurs with the recommended action. No other department has significant comments regarding the project. RECOMMENDATION: Uphold staff's determination of the required development setback and easement to provide for future creek widening, including public pedestrian pathway purposes. Attachments: 1 - Vicinity Map 2 - Site plan 3 - Creek Setback Map 4 - Flood Management Policy (pgs. C-1 to C-4 5 - Easement Map 6 - Creek Sections Project Plans are available in the Council Office for review I n/jkcreek a r VICINITY MAP ARC 88 -200 T d� O % d- Y ►_ �r•� �0 l CR ... N u �R OP �` 10 e... � 4 3.. O���r yN P 1, A�a:v 6isa n �t -P P��My le b �.:�m timet��":`©��•��� .dam / /� -_-_..... fir•=� .. — --: .yZ>"it Wit. cs A� - I� !�:G1.1• 11✓i'ytlti diw.o.—:1�.I J'n('L..el t.,i�..i111u,.�i WLiq':—.��_`11.'��3�]slri: � ;� �'{.I7I1, 11�Ii";'�iisj.� .'!i�.IIZI�^l:i��'2ieiNl;;It;;;l.ni5!l''nlLLnll'I�ii'•Ilifl JJE...a�Piul.nlii:Jf.••,.;•i:1,,.;:JI;L..:.u:•L.6'.I.�IFe:WL':r n1 d 11� / I - ^• . ._•o••••.. -�—, nnnw..m iL"U�ItU:.�YIIIOb•..1: �I t-•lsi:.j:��;.:.�•rl!uq!;capu;r� l�!•I;n-i 171 I r (! I ,Ild, i , 1 II1 �1�II1 rilil' III11rl1 Fri { , 'r f1ae.: `s AO Ilf . I -L • t ' 1 � r ���::`I.iS�. w.y�„�Y. � f"�ia-�.' -I-�f'�- !•:r F�a�rry��LbV 2 f • uh ��. 'Aye`,.�, •.:+.{"�' •` �� / 'f• r ge Y �' f.tv��� y+� , 1<• -S. h.vya7Cfv4. ^F,'� ��:5 •-: +j11»-."4�f�~-t4+e •�,- -�-L.f `3X5//'�{�`�'�'1•�Y^., < 4.�- 'ilc�- �, - ��r�,,,�.�,r�t_�� �..�.[. .ta �'yt'�`"j�� f 'a• �i'jr '•: ��"�d��.•w ' W�P�,.�.1-.a�` �r f>_r. ..-�:.. +w�-.+cam "�j¢•� �'^ �. `+.�,., •c - :: � 3••'a" •.r � �i • • -L'c���+ y � - e .._~`• `C 74�ti� .,-..�.. y�'�.R�"`�y.�'r �"� - •e� •.�IP, �' i ^` .J zrSl Imo• tNI ®riffilm- el �'4-S•��� .r !•.?=Gft•J •�; �•L "`3^T� ��v - s r•-.rff„- fyY?� r�tiyM�'`s•'� •„c.� �..-• '•� a wI'i''. .� �. .ti,..� .,�•y •y, .�:-� .� t`.t��`_rT��� _n: �'�'�•�fi^S x�p�� s�;` _•-��!� �� ,..r.+3'[s��``2=}'F.� -- . IN o a� .. ,� :. r,•,t � ��'�`�'�5.�.?fr ..- ~ � tGS-1S .a•'�.��ii���,.S.cy;rte s•4•s13yti •Ya . '•":.�}�°� .s:' r' `.�, ^�r _j,'f''l�' .}�•iyn+•+...su-•.°�'y�''-.7f-t�.�,�j, . eek'- �: � .• aF,.ilia •.s y..T/Y� f� �'V��y^�" �.r.. !y'-T�4.- ��-_ r jR'^t Tom' �^^�•� .G "'Sr3 � •[:1.."'. .fa Sf�.. �•�r��, ~�� -�'S:6 •� ••- y ct �-•.,r it V �• ; ate_ _+„ ,'.�'�J�r- s._ • �s� k���T 7 i - s N � CREEK DEDICATION POLICY - JUNE 1983 (For Dedication of Easements and Improvement of Natural Waterways) 1. All new building construction and parking lots shall be constructed outside of adopted creek setbacks. Cantilevering of structures over the setback area and creek area may be allowed by the City Engineer, providing that the structures will not prohibit or prevent the City from maintaining the creek- waterway and constructing the improvements required to contain the design storm. Exhibit 1 STREET �- LOT -ADOPTED CREEK SETBACK LINE NATURAL CREEK , BANK 2. As a condition of a building permit or lot line adjustment, except for minor building permits which are not substantial improvements of the structure as defined in Section 9802(t) of the Municipal Code, the owner shall dedicate the natural creek area lying within his property. 3. As a condition of approval of projects requiring entitlements other than a building permit or lot line adjustment (i.e. , use permit, sub- division, parcel map, etc.) the owner shall: a) dedicate the natural creek area lying within his property and, b) dedicate right-of-way necessary for widening the creek if shown on an adopted creek setback map. Page Two 4. If dedication required in #3b involves more than one-half of the total widening of the creek the developer shall receive a credit for the value (based on the assessed valuation of the parcel as shown on the last equalized tax roll) of land dedicated in excess of 50% as calculated by the City Engineer. See Exhibit 2 for further explanation. Exhibit 2 STREET AREA DEDICATED FOR CREEK . .,, • . WIDENING. SINCE ALL WIDEN— LOT ING IS ON DEVELOPER'S LOT HE RECEIVES CREDIT FOR ` i' VALUE OF 1/2 OF THIS AREA. I , y I , SETBACK LINES 11FtEA DEDICATED FOr\ ,, CREEK PURPOSES feet,, (NO CREDIT) '••,t, NATURAL CREEK BANK 'e•• STREET e NATURAL CREEK AREA LOT / DEDICATED (NO CREDIT) SETBACK LINES \� 1 ��•,,, �,'�WIDENING DEDICATED WITH let CREDIT CREDIT CALCULATED BY CITY ENGINEER IF MORE Or THE WIDENING OCCURS ON NATURAL DEVELOPE'R'S SIDE OF CREEK. CREEKDANK �"'''•.,,� f p U:,, c-2 Page Three 5. Developer shall not be required to dedicate without compensation over 25% of the area of his property lying outside of the natural creek. 6. The areas used to allow credits calculated in 414 shall be dedicated prior to calculating whether or not 415 is applied (Example: 100% of widening is on developers side of creek and represents 507 of lot area outside of the creek. Developer receives credit under 414 for 50% of widening but no credit under 415 since he has already received compensation under A.) . 7. Developers of property on all creeks and waterways shall be responsible for improving the creeks to city standards. 8. Developers of property along San Luis, Stenner and Old Garden creeks shall be given the choice at time of development to: a) Improve creek in accordance with city adopted plans to protect his property from flooding, with city participation to the extent of any credit allowed in 414, or b) Build above present flood level at his cost, or c) Flood proof (if allowed) at his cost, or d) Improve creek to a different plan (with City Council approval) that conserves additional right-of-way, with participation by city based on credits allowed in A. 9. A creek development fee shall be paid by developers of all- property lying along San Luis, Stenner and Old Garden creeks requiring city entitlements beyond a building permit (i.e. , use permit, variance, subdivision, parcel map) except when: a) the developer chooses to make improvements allowed under 8a or 8d or, b) the property is not subject to flooding. The amount of the fee shall be based upon city's current estimate to build creek improvements (based on costs at time of final approval of entitlement; i.e. , final subdivision map) within the developers property and shall be adjusted as follows: Estimated Cost of Creek Improvement Construction X Use X Entitlement X Flood Protection - Credit for Excess Dedication = Development Fee. Use - Non-residential 1.0 Multi-family residential 0.8 Single-family residential 0.6 Entitlement - Major Planned Development 1.0 Subdivison (over 4 units) Commercial Development Minor Subdivision or 0.8 Planned Development (4 or less units) Lot Line Adjustment, Variance 0.6 Use Permit .6 - 1.0 (Dependent on scale of project) �� C-3 Page Four 9. (Continued) Flood Protection - Creek Improvement plans will: Provide Ultimate Protection of: a) 100 Years 1.0 b) 50 Years 0.8 c) Less than 50 Years 0.6 10. Improvements of the various creeks within the city shall be at the city's option, expense and timing, utilizing funds deposited by developers or owners of property. 11. Properties which either do not now flood or are not included within the "A" zone on. the FIA - FIRM Maps will not be assessed for creek improvements under this proposal .but will be required to dedicate land as identified above. They may also become liable for. assessment at some time in the future should an area-wide assessment district be established. 12. Properties that are developed adjacent to creeks after the city makes creek improvements without property owner participation, shall be assessed a fee as if the improvements had not already been made. 13. Easements dedicated shall state that they are for purposes of constructing, maintaining and operating a drainage way. Y-// C-4 �REEK,CET TfRLINE 40 NO SCALE = CREEK WIDENING . .': '::.' ::::• •^: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a = CREEK EASEMENT V UI N N t0 � o r r r O O V m N � 0 E 0 444 HIGUERA ST. N 30'43'E 87.00' 12' SIDEWALK HIGUERA ST, CREEK EASEMENT DEDICATION FOR 444 HIGUERA ST, �Q V i i i VF_Rr ICAL. W4L.L �5urc�rNG c� CES OR, GA[3/ca�/5 � r r i c Ivor 70 SCALE,