Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/21/1989, C-2 - GRANT OF AN OPEN-SPACE EASEMENT FOR BUILDING SETBACK PURPOSES, ADJACENT TO 1680 SAN LUIS DRIVE (ROB �Illlln�A,,,„II V J' MEETING DATE Ciof San1UI5 OBISpO Nov. 21, 1989. WMIGO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FROM: David F. Romero W erson Prepared by: Gerald W. Kenny Public Works Director City Engin Supervising Civil Engineer ` SUBJECT: Grant of an Open-Space Easement for Building Setback Purposes, Adjacent to 1680 San Luis Drive (Robert & Lillian Martin, Applicants) RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution Authorising the Grant of an Open-Space Easement for Building Setback Purposes, Adjacent to 1680 San Luis Drive on City Property Known as "Elsford Park", Subject to a Creek Maintenance Easement. DISCUSSION: Robert and Lillian Martin have applied for an Administrative.Use Permit (A 70-88) requesting a reduced sideyard setback to 0-feet to remodel their residence at 1680 San Luis Drive. The existing residence only has a single car garage. Their proposed remodel includes two enclosed parking spaces, storage, laundry and incidental facilities between the kitchen and the garage. The placement of the existing residence and garage on the lot does not allow the expansion of the garage and related facilities, like the owners desire, without encroaching into the required i sideyard setback of 7 feet. The adjacent City property was conveyed to the City by the school district as a part of San Luis Drive. It is a narrow strip of land between San Luis Drive and the creek, between the Martin property and California Boulevard. The property (immediately adjacent to the Martin property) is encumbered by a concrete block wall built by the Martins for security purposes under a building permit in 1985 on the City property, subject to a standard recorded encroachment agreement (see attached). It is also encumbered by a public storm drain near the common property line which precludes construction of any building on the City property within approximately 16 feet of the property line. In effect, the property is so impacted by existing improvements, that no additional restriction would occur by the granting of this easement. The Martins originally offered to purchase a similar portion of City property. Their request to the Planning Commission to purchase a 7 ft wide by 95 ft long strip of land was denied on May 24, 1989. The reason for denial was that the Planning Commission felt the City should not dispose of public open-space land. The Commission discussed the alternatives, one of which was to grant a 10 ft wide easement (Alternate C per attached staff report and minutes). Subsequently, the use permit was granted, subject to the Martins obtaining a 10 ft wide open-space easement from the City. Procedure The Property Management Manual does not specifically deal with granting easements, only sales and leases. The Acting City Attorney indicated a public hearing process would not be necessary to consider the request for an easement. e ./ 111111%lopoll; city of san lues owpo NiZ COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting of November 21, 1989 Request for Open-Space Easement Page Two. Environmental Review The grant of an easement is "categorically exempt" from environmental review. ALTERNATIVES: tin • Adopt resolution authorizing the grant of a 10 ft wide by 95 ft long open-space easement for building setback purposes at 1680 San Luis Drive, in exchange for a creek maintenance easement. (STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION) The primary advantage would be the applicants could build their desired addition to the residence meeting Building and Zoning codes and the City would obtain an easement for maintaining San Luis Obispo Creek within the applicant's property. A disadvantage might be the possible future loss in flexibility in the use of a rather small strip of passive park land. (Under current uses there is no impact) Option 2• Deny approval of an open-space easement. The primary advantage would be to keep all the City's options open for possible development of a park. A disadvantage would be the City would not receive a creek maintenance easement. The Martins would not be able to encroach into the setback area. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION: The applicants would need to revise their plans to remodel their home. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION: The Parks and Recreation Commission approved of the sale of the narrow strip of land as long as no creek areas were lost. The grant of an open-space easement as requested is likewise acceptable, per Jim Stockton. The Planning Commission and Administrative Hearings on the sale of City property and the Administrative Use Permit, respectively, were held without any public comments other than by the applicant. Both recommended this course of action. FISCAL IMPACT: None CONCURRENCES: The Community Development Director, Recreation Director, and City Attorney concur with the recommended action. No department has indicated any opposition. 1I►01111li�011111 city of san Luis o8ispo COUNCIL AGENOA REPORT Meeting of November 21, 1989 Request For Open-Space Easement Page three RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution authorizing the grant of an open-space easement for building setback purposes adjacent to 1680 San Luis Drive on City property known as "Elsford Park", in exchange for a grant of a creek maintenance easement from the Martins. The Mayor is authorized to execute the easement document and to accept the creek maintenance easement. Attachments: I - Draft resolution 2 - Assessor Map (modified) 3 - Proposed plan 4 - Planning Commission Staff Report & Minutes 5 - Administrative Use Permit correspondence 6 - Encroachment Permit 7 - Open-Space Easement 8 - Creek Easement and Notice j k l.wp/jksidr jk I RESOLUTION NO. (1989 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE• COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUTHORIZING AN OPEN-SPACE EASEMENT ADJACENT TO 1680 SAN LUIS DRIVE, ON CITY PROPERTY KNOWN AS "ELSFORD PARK". WHEREAS, Robert E. and Lillian E. Martin have requested a 10 feet-wide by 95 feet-wide open-space easement for building setback purposes for their property at 1680 San Luis Drive on City-owned property known as "Elsford Park", to accommodate a proposedremodel of their residence in accordance with a requirement of an Administrative Use Permit (A 70-88) approved on September 29, 1989, and WHEREAS, a creek maintenance easement has been submitted by Robert E. and Lillian E. Martin to the City for San Luis Obispo Creek as conditioned by said Administrative Use Permit (A 70-88), and WHEREAS, the requested open-space easement does not significantly affect the use 'and value of said City property. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that an open-space easement is hereby granted, and the Mayor is authorized to execute the easement document and to accept the creek easement on behalf of the City.. The City Clerk is directed to cause the creek easement to be recorded and to transmit the open-space easement to the Martins. . On motion of seconded by _ and on the following roll call vote: AYES: - NOES: ABSENT: Resolution No. (1989 Series) Page Two i the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1989. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK M M M i1 M M M M APPROVED: jACitystrative Officer tyEngineer Community Development Director N/,jksldr ,j k -.z-s' _ ..,y-,•'. .. ...r'.. - ...,.A.... . '.._fir ^ .'y ....'�: i.�._+!f( - .: �- Ste' � '�• � Y, '( •f ^ - , ep.•. t 3'a;'� - ,Zltxt' , ' :2'`L:✓'�'+ F � •, '-::,Vs'r'k`>ti 'Artri- c �(�:aj�}",;F,.L.' t L7yL • ����t•� f :fit J�L.'fJ j 4V `_ 1�'�•'.Ji"�wGS••.• ,rt Gall.-� t °r G "o J'� x t�•T 1.,�� • .00' 9'9 to[.�.tw•'�F`:-�.+4�" O Y '�.�'?���y`o.-..�• ,►1 `' .. _7c `+ V.�sf.��i S.+.Y�.t ".[�i2Y.. • ' OT...A; � , , .. �s .. ......v�•Y}r4'µv��"'.N �� `%:� 1> � 'j•/ ' .J � a.,, i'��`. �'rb��it Or�. : Y •�•�.''�: "r O� s . ` '?\ q, 0 ���n�'��p may^ ' 3 ,c i ,J�R..� � .t a T . < ..ti •!JC ,-Laa, .f 'y�f!t 0,�. 0 � Js��� 3 O �W .. 4 'r ti ,•:'Q' a7.f""''.y.r. y � O V' [cam' •� !I'F�Nr.•�� � �` �i r.i �r'�Cf-rr �..o+�.+Y�T•. y �- �..i�y�, .Y �S ,•! ;... N ��by�q�,yve:.; f . e , ��� A� �.,.,qK 1 N V a.• W Yr4,+f Q a~r Oy .q IV, f�a ����` � :�4 %� �f`9.1`.'.'.M4L �-.r-r � i �. � Y r•..1 i•�•a{.. 'ti�'',.. 45 n pQJ y y �' � �� °V S.'i,� 1 ��i r�p'Qa�� � T �� .. j� � ip h h v� r �R�, wac•Y7.i'1� ``c Oa «�•, O a �, •S Y.,J� m .rt2(' r � � >.x��""t� ,.a i f>t Qd- 11 i r-t' ...{� W "'K �t+..ti yt'- ���-•.�t � , - f. ., \ • t'--�v.� 't `. �S+ a . w•aO +�1^,.o i'�.,'4r,�j,•�•t�d�✓ �""r<.O `fit '��_ty"+F "a.ice, 2yT � �`�..r� '.n/s11 �'c� :.F• .�eh.«�rw�.•F- a y� / � 7 J ,h 7 , "'< f j�zz,, 'r^' r 'h vy y4•�t � '� ✓ f '�:v>� p L .� ^I O Y.4 Wy /AS •V[•44'. V : .. - .+ 4. 4 � l ta wk CY s¢'..til + 'a '>+•'�'+ii ,m d^ " t . n: •.v1 � M. . .v fie, N 4Pr 3 of K �`- n p C ' ;\•"� 'g', ' Dra ' � '2211• « . .p. y G r •\ \ -` �f k °be�z •- oe z FSamwEM as ►t~ „ " r� � ' 4v` m. r'. �► t. a 9y .cn 0 Cr T. ?' r. l�+: ,At q'• '`.• . sK ti , N r �O pj 441 a F -.W,•L` `1.�•ti„4 p .' Q - y n• ` ?' 71% , V V r \.`� Q.\••�,.� 1Yr� � . gin: b -: •. 4 .� �- � `1. --!+FS"� Wim:". t9 4u °•O l- Ny�:- •y.....,••T.•y,y1�::.....y.....yw'w yyw...w w :+::y:::.•:::.•.::•y."'ww y':.y`„�':'titCwyyY.���.� n.yw� `•::':�::a�::.. :`'y'w.,�..•"..`y.`y7"^•.'�`^y'�y.,.'.^',•$:.�.y;7.w"�••_..•.w.:~.w'wy ___. y-�•'..'.y".w e.'.'.7.'.'".y��`�'w..yw.'...••:..•.. •`w'.wy"y..-"'yy'.^. .} Q tiG:.:} •wy'w•yw.�,a`.,..: �..�'.w-.,.••A 'w. .'.•may.'.•..".••... ��/�� /O.Q. •�. ...•..::..L•: +."�•w'.....,,••.��«..yyy...",".... .w..•wwwy^;.'yyyw. yw y "• ,.w y'.w..yy •� rT.•••..wy w:;y TPab -- (JV ZAAW rViS'.as'E: C 17 Twer 30 ��TW Y:+iii e�IRCT/AI ::: ROO . 1 •''... 1 .ate ( /bgo �stiv� aen/E R la W s'✓�w.t�..r 9AAl Gv/5 MEETING DATE: IIiIIIIIIAIIU�, city of San LUIS OBISPO ITEM NUMBER "���'•�`Il�lillll� II�IIIIII�� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT NU6 _ BY. Greg Smith, Associate PlannerFILE#r S U BJ ECT: General Plan Conformity Report - Determination if sale of property at 1660 San Luis Drive conforms to General Plan. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The commission should find that the sale is consistent with the General Plan, or suggest that the prospective buyer follow one of the development alternatives identified below. BACKGROUND Situation The applicant wants to buy a sliver of land.from the city to accommodate aresidential addition. State law requires that sale or acquisition of property by a city must be consistent with the city's general plan. The Planning 'Commission must make a determination on this proposal before the council may approve the sale. ` The commission continued this item at their April 26 meeting, with direction to provide additional background on General Plan policies and the developer's options. Revisions to the previous staff report are indicated in italics. t" Data Summary Address: 1660 San Luis Drive Applicant: Robert and Lillian Martin t � � Zoning: C/OS-5 t Gen-.sl Plan: Conservation/Open Space Environmental Status: Categorically exempt Evaluation The property in question is owned by the city as a result of,-dedication by the school. district at the time San Luis Drive was improved. ,The Matins want to build an addition to their house at 1680 San Luis Drive and need the a ed property to accommodate setbacks required by building and zoning regulations. The Martins have previously obtainedn easement fiver the property in question, whits allowed them to construct a wall and fd the new property line would be. The property is not used by the city at present; the old concrete drainage culvert located on the existing lot line has been abandoned. The culvert currently in use would not be affected by the sale. Staff would emphasize that the area to be sold is only slightly larger than the fenced area, and constitutes a very small portion.of the city property. The fenced area does not currently function as public open space, and neither its function nor appearance would be affected by the sale. 1. General Plan Policies The. Parks and Recreation Element includes this stretch of San Luis.Creek in the urban trails plan. However, the plan shows the trail on the opposite side of the creek, and Page 3 E. One-car garage with tandem barking. Similar to "D" above, but could provide more flexibility with floor plan revisions. ALTERNATIVES The commission must find that the sale of the strip of property is or is not consistent with the General Plan. The commission's determination will be considered by the City Council, which will make the final determination whether or not to sell the property. The council is not bound by the commission determination. OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW The Public Works Department supports the sale. Refer to the attached memo. RECOMMENDATION The commission should determine whether the proposed sale of the small strip of land consistent with the General Plan. If the commission determines the sale is not consistent, the commission may wish to give direction regarding which development alternatives it supports. As noted in the previous staff report, staff believes the proposed sale is consistent with the General Plan. However, staff would also support Development Alternatives C and D, as outlined above. ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity Map Map of Proposed Sale Request to Purchase Public Works Memo General Plan Excerpts gs4/gpcon Ile Vp MobF4 ri7fri. OAF lZ* 1046 jr 07T, s 174 4.7 COCO N Ilk RO 0 o 4 1411�z ev \'No i. � � �ti`° � O \ fir. I• ___�, C ^� ,i s \ �\ / P Trap lrl� ero PF ARIZ i r 0 0 L 1 A a e3-' F u r J OtY JOWu U< \ \ 7n .J4 C�n1 x.43 V) \ Ao'cB 3,.00.9►.SE rT" —_. I I - � h- au r tJ2•J V I V ZI <V� JJ v & / j N / J — u Ul s• m -1t 5�^ 3s i April 7, 1989 City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo, California. To `gYhom It May Concern: Dear Sirs: ;e are. Robert L. and Lillian E. Martin, owners of 1080 San Luis Drive, San Luis Obispo, Calif. Lot 1, Tract 30 (Lsduela Alta). A.P. No. 001-151-02. We are requesting acquisition of 7 Feet ^ridth and 95 Feet Length of property on the Southwest side of our -10t,�.cauisitior_ of portion existing city 7roperty. (c/os-5 zone) earing officer Ken Sruce and Staff member ("sreg smith, _ssociate •lanner recommended our .reeuest. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfuily submitted. Robert .' • 'i�I ti r :.i11j.ar_ 7. i°:artir 355 Pomeroy _lveo ismo leach, ;'a. a (805) 77;-4495 e r 0 .5 1.0 URBAN TRAIL SYSTEM ONE MILE EXISTING PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY �{E PROPOSED PARK OR RECREATION SITE TRAIL ACCESS POINT cca ON-STREET TRAIL OFF-STREET TRAIL CAL.POL-f P 7A)L t < SAN W 15 r C MT11. C Zoo �• HILL. O' IZ is HEt:LS 1�Y �4s�G: Q NORTH 44,111P.11 city of PARKS & RECREATION ELEMENT ®.i San WIS OBISPO 10 PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT SECTION E.. DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE AND GUIDELINES (CONT) . 7. Develop Parks WithiniNew,Subdivisions When a site designated for a park is part of a subdivision map submitted to the city, the city may require the subdivider to dedicate the park area and prepare plans for its phased development. The park proposal must be judged consistent with the intent of this element. Park plans will be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission and must receive approval by the City Council. 8. Develop parks Within M- aior Growth Areas Specific plans for the major growth areas of the city must include designs for neighborhood or district parks. The specific pians may propose park locations and designs other than illustrated in this element, provided that they satisfy the planning and design-standards of this element and are shown to perform as well or better than those proposed in this element. 9. jL q[Schematic.Designs gL Parks The park plans shown in Technical Report z2 will be used as guides for preparing final park designs. The general allocation of land for passive and active areas should be as portrayed by these schematic plans. Final plans should ensure that neva parks are compatible with surrounding residential areas. 10. planning Snecial Park gg¢, Recreation Facilities The following policies will direct the planning and development of other recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo: Laguna Lake.Park: The city will adopt a master plan for Laguna Lake Park. The park will be designed to function as a community park serving residents of San Luis Obispo. The park will also contain facilities which meet the neighborhood park needs of people living in PSA's 014 and a15. Recreation Center•. The city will continue to provide a centralized recreation building in downtown San Luis Obispo. For now, the city will update and remodel the existing building at the corner of Mill and Santa Rosa Streets. If a new structure is needed at some point in the future, the following alternatives (listed in order of priority) will be considered • Build a new recreation center at the existing site; Expand the existing site and build a new facility; Select a new site in the downtown that functions as well and build a new facility there. �l1 bourse The city will continue to own and operate the 9-hole Laguna Lake Golf Course. Mission Plaza/Cultural Facilities: The city will proceed with the extension of Mission Plaza along San Luis Obispo Creek between Broad and Mipomo Streets. This project may be done separately or combined with city or county construction of other public facilities on property fronting the creek. ' Urban Trail System: A map of the urban trail system is included - shown on page 11. As part of the development review process or in separate city actions, the city shall in all cases attempt to secure access rights needed to carry out the trail plan. 9 PARKS AND RECRECREATION ELEMENT SECTION E: DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE AND GUIDELINES (CONT) The city will continue to refine the urban trail plan and develop precise design standards that control the type of access to and use of specific sections of the trail system. ' Public Utilitv Easements. Rights-of-Way. and Other Public Lands: should be maintained in a safe and orderly state and, where appropriate, used as part of the city's open space and recreation system. ' Reservoir Canyonnod, Looez Canyon: Public access to these sensitive areas will be allowed when consistent with sound resource management. Minimal facilities might be provided. These areas should be preserved in their natural states. Loral nature groups and other organizations that use the canyons should be asked to help provide periodic clean up. ' Access Imorovements The city will work on improving access to existing city recreation.facilities. Examples of these types of projects include: Building sidewalks and bike paths to join housing areas with schools and parks. Creating creek-side trails to connect housing areas with parks while avoiding major arterial streets and the railroad tracks. ' Ooen Space Planning: As part of its Hillside Planning Program, the city will develop specific programs to preserve scenic hillside areas. Similar programs will be developed for major creeks in San Luis Obispo. w - r The city's creekways provide routes to parks and schools for many people. The City should seek to develop safe, maintainablecreek access points and paths wherever possible. PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT SECTION J: TYPES OF PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES (CONT\ C. Sports Complexes: A sports complex should concentrate intensive, active recreation facilities in one place to serve the entire community. A sports complex is aot a park since it does not provide the range of recreation options present in parks. A large park could contain a sports complex. d. Golf Courses: Golf courses are special facilities which help meet overall community recreation needs. A very large community park might contain a golf course. On easily developable land. the minimum effective size for a 9-hole course is 50 acres and for an 18-hole course is 125 acres. C. Trails and Bikeways: Foothpaths and bikeways should be: 1) Developed as separate paths as a recreation experience in themselves. 2) Developed as key links from isolated neighborhoods to parks. f. Passive Park Space: These are areas that can be used for things like walking, picnic, reading, jogging, sunbathing and free play. g. Active Park Space: This includes areas that can be used for things like organized sports, playgrounds, swimming, spectator areas, tennis and parking. h. Sensitive Arens: 1) As it relates to this element, the term "sensitive area" includes: (a) Open space which has particular scenic, aesthetic or historic values; or includes significant natural, historic or archeological resources which should be conserved; 20 ev 7 ( i PARKS AND RECREATION ELE14ENT SECTION J: TYPES OF PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES (CONT) (b) Historic sites which may include areas or facilities with limited park or recreation potential; and (c) Major creeks(which include San Luis Obispo, Stenner, Old Garden and Prefumo creeks), lakes and wetlands. 2) Open space easements should be used to secure appropriate public use of sensitive areas with scenic or recreation value. Scenic open space and buffers, as well as rights-of-way for paths and trails, may also be obtained through open space easements or more permanent land transfers. 3) Sensitive areas may have limited potential for active or passive park uses when consistent with sound resource management. Buffers created between adjacent land uses may also have active or passive park/recreation potential. i. Private Open Space: Private open space is not considered park space. Requirements for open space in developments is a zoning issue. Developers should be encouraged to include usable recreation space in high-density housing projects to offset the lack of private yard space normally used for family recreation. This would vary according to the number of children expected to live in the development. All of the above park types and areas add up to create a complex pattern of neighborhood, district and community facilities in San Luis Obispo. Understanding how they can all be. made to work together to satisfy community needs is an important key to implementing a - successful park and recreation program. 21 +r OPEN SPACE ELEMENT SECTION 7: OBJECTIVES OF OPEN SPACE (CONT) p� B. RECREATION LANDS 1 The San Luis Obispo definition of open space includes: "Any land. . . . . which has value for park and recreational purposes. . . ." As a further development of this general definition, recreational lands are here defined as those lands needed for outdoor recreation, including but not limited to, areas of outstanding scenic, historic and cultural value; areas particularly suited for park and recreation purposes, including access to lake- shores and streams; and areas which serve as links between major recreation and open space reservations, including utility easements, banks of streams in certain areas, trails and scenic highway corridors. In addition to San Luis Obispo's neighborhood and community parks, one may view this definition as including Mission Plaza, present and planned paths along certain creek banks, the broken line. along City streets which guides people along the City's Path of History and City bicycle routes. The City's creeks presently serve as a positive esthetic element in the community. Maintaining them in their natural setting consistent with safety, and viewing them as passive recreational space should guide future plans. However, it is not the intention of the City that creek areas in estab- lished neighborhoods and on private property be used for recreational purposes. A graphic identification and inventory of open lands in and around San Luis Obispo is included in this section as further clarification of community recreation lands. The map identifies existing parks and recreational facilities. Studies are underway to identify and inventory all existing, planned and potential recreational sites including scenic drives, parks, school playgrounds, waterways, trail systems and public land (including the extensive grounds occupied by California Polytechnic State University, Cuesta College and`the San Luis Obispo Coastal School District). From such an inventory, it will be possible to -16- ��-rg --- y l LAND USE ELEMENT CTI^vir C: GOALS AND POLICIES (b) Foster convenient public access to those uses serving the public directly. l (c) Group related public offices together. (d) Locate facilities with significant numbers of employees or clients near complementary non-governmental services (restaurants, convenience shopping). (e) Make economical use of land and buildings already owned by public agencies and minimize the displacement of existing private businesses or residents. 5. Open Space Policies Areas not designated for urban uses will be designated within an open space category. As described in the Growth Management Objectives (C.l.a above), the city will not designate more land for urban uses than its resources can be expected to support Open space lands will define the edges of the city so that it will remain a comprehensible, identifiable place. a. Conservation/open space Areas intended for permanent open space will be designated 'conservation/open space." This designation will be applied to land which is unsuited to urban use because of: infeasibility of providing access or utilities consistent with policies under C.l.d above; excessive slope or slope instability; wildland fire hazard; noise exposure; flood hazard; scenic value; ecological sensitivity; and agricultural value. { Uses within this designation will generally be those not requiring urban services, major structures, or extensive landform j modifications. Parcels will be kept large, generally five to 40 acres. Minimum parcel size will be determined when the area is zoned, considering consistency with general plan policies and the development potential of the land. i i b. Interim conservation/open space Areas to be kept open until urbanization is appropriate will be designated "interim conservation/open space." Such areas, and the prerequisites for their conversion to an urban use, are identified below. Allowed uses and parcel sizes within interim conservation/open space areas will be the same as in conservation/open space areas. However, there will be an emphasis on maintaining productive agricultural uses until urbanization is actually needed. Before any interim conservation/open space area is urbanized, a development plan (under specific plan, planned development, or use permit) must be approved. l 72 ✓ '�` PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT - PARKS MASTER PLAN District Park 0-6, San Luis Creek Trail o'n\ : � :�• CD4 J ' \ \ 1 301 Ir PAI �Wft ST LEGEN J0 � Requested Sale C1 i D1 1 `, URL '4 . . , i �♦ /� I a'•.V'� Dry\• V 4.7 � ,,� ..,J.'� ' \ / -�• w, 1 / \ Irl OPEN SPACE ELEMEN,---SECTION 7.D: OBJECTIVES - HAZARu LANDS (CONT) erosion pattern should be identifiable. Usually these areas lack sufficient ground covering and are unprotected from turbulent storm waters. The classification "bank encroachment" is applied where any structure or structures protrude over the top of a bank, where a structure is placed directly in the creek, or where grading operations have pushed masses of land into the channel. Examples of this are home-made dams, certain private recreation structures, buildings at the water line, and bank encroachments made to increase the developable portion of a pieceof land. Creek sections classified as having a "debris" problem are areas which are usually littered. Often these areas act as catch basins for litter travelling down stream. At other spots there may be old tires, car parts, concrete rubble and so on. i MDLTI-USE CONCEPT FOR THE CREEK SYSTEM Pedestrian circulation should be allowed between the various public parks, public easements and state and county owned land along the creek. These lands would be linked by land obtained for public pedestrian circulation. In the future these creekside pedestrian linkages could be included in an overall linking and trail. system connecting the creeks (and therefore the town) with the peaks around the City and ultimately with the proposed State trail system. GOALS I: I' 1. Formulation of a flood abatement program with assistance of County, State and Federal agencies. 2. Designation of a flood plain zone, for agriculture, recreation, specified transportation and other appropriate open space uses. 3. Establishment and enforcement of strict erosion controls. 4. Development of a multi-use concept for the City's waterways. 5. Completion of a creek cross sectional analysis, showing water ~} carrying capacity. -15- ��� P . C . Minutest April 26 , 1989 Pa Commr . Crotser seconded the motion . VOTING : AYES - Commrs. Duerk , Crotser , Hoffman , Karleskint , Roalman , Schmidt and Kourakis . NOES - None. ABSENT - None. The motion passes . NEW BUSINESS ITEMS -------------------------------------------� _Y Item 5 . __C�it Council Referral : San Luis Obis o Count Water Ethic . A i-raft oocument wt�i..cF would-impose water use stan ar s county-wide . Bill Hetland , Utilities, Director , discussed the policy document purpose and process , emphasizing the need to focus on draft format. He was concerned with the imposition of additional agencie_ participating in the state wate project. He felt tt(e document did not support the irrigation schedule or ..__ general education ./ He stated he did not favor specific water rates included and discussed pressurized hot water systems . Commr . Roalman . stated he supported the draft direction and standards . Commrs . Crotser and Kourakis felt it was important to strengthen community education . Chairperson Kourakis felt it needed to address all water users . Mr . He,tland agreed to take commission comments to council . Item 6 . General Plan Conformity Report. Commission to determine if sale small portion at 1.660 San Luis Drive by the City of San Luis Obispo ( C/OS-5 ) is in conformance with general plan . ( Continued from October 26 , 1988) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pam Ricci presented the staff report and asked that the commission determine if the sale is consistent with the General Plan . Chairperson Kourakis opened the public hearing . Robert Martin , 1660 San Luis Drive , discussed the request for an easement : ` -f—� _ P . C . Minutes April 26 , 1989 Page 6 . Commrs—!Courakis and Roalman felt public trusted land should stay public . Chairperson Kourakis closed the public hearing . Chairperson Kourakis moved to continue the item to allow time to check the easements and code requirements regarding the fire wall and to clarify property lines . Commr. Roalman seconded the motion . VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Kourakis , Roalman , Crotser , Duerk , Hoffman , Karleskint, and Schmidt. NOES - None. ABSENT - None. The motion passes ., --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Item 7 . General Plan Conformity Re ort . Commission eo determine if purcTaseorproperty at 34= 3511 South 14guera Street by the County of San Luis Obispo ( C-S-SP ) is in conformance with the general plan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pam Ricci presented the staff report and asked the commission to review applicable General Plan policies and forward a report to the County Board of Supervisors finding the acquisition consistent with Public Facilities policies but not with the Land Use Element map designation . Commr. Crotser was concerned with the traffic impacts of the possible future overpass . Chairperson Kourakis opened the public hearing. George Rosenberger , County Services , discussed the request and stated that the 145 Prado Road segment had not been negotiated . Chairperson Kourakis closed the public hearing . Commr . Crotser moved for Alternative 2 as suggested in the staff report, subject to the findings . Commr . Roalman seconded the motion . VOTING : AYES - Commrs . Crotser and Roalman . NOES - Commrs . Duerk , Hoffman , Karleskint , Schmidt and Kourakis . ABSENT - None. The- motion fails . I .C . Minutes May 24 , 1989 Page 4 . -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Item 6 . Public Hearing . General Plan Conformit Report . Commission to eterminele oma smaTT—portion o property at 1660 San Luis Drive by the City of San Luis Obispo ( C/OS-5 ) is in conformance with the General Plan . (Continued from October 26 , 1988. and April 26 , 1989) Judith Lautner presented the staff report and recommended the commission find the sale to be consistent with the General Plan or suggest the prospective buyer follow development alternatives . Chairperson Duerk opened the public hearing . Robert Martin , 1660 San Luis Drive , applicant , requested to purchase the property or be granted a variance to build to the property line. He stated that the survey to determine actual property lines had not been completed . He discussed the construction of the proposed wall . Chairperson Duerk closed the public hearing . ' ommr . Crotser felt the construction was reasonable with fire protection ..onditions . Commr . Crotser moved to recommend that the sale is not inconsistent with the General Plan . Commr . Karleskint seconded the motion . Commr . Schmidt felt no piece of city park should be sold. Commrs . Roalman and Kourakis agreed with Commr. Schmidt and felt the applicant had other options . Commr . Karleskint stated that the parcel in question was not an official city park . Commr . Duerk did not feel this was precedent-setting for selling park land . VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Crotser , Karle.skint , and Duerk . NOES - Commrs . Hoffman , Kourakis , Roalman , and Schmidt. ABSENT - None. The motion fails . Commr . Roalman moved that the sale isj_n_consistent with the General Plan and that alternative C is preferred . - Commr. Hoffman seconded the motion . Commr . Schmidt pointed out that choosing an alternative strategy is not 4iK I �l . C . Minutes May 24 , 1989 Page 5 . the function of the commission . VOTING : AYES - Commrs. Roalman, Hoffman , Crotser , Karleskint , and Duerk. NOES- Commrs. Kourakis and Schmidt. ABSENT - None. The motion passes . Item 7. Public Hearing : Draft Capital Improvement Plan . Review and etermination of consistency with the General Plan of the city ' s Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 1989-1991 . ----------------------------------- Michael \'Multari introduced the item and asked that the commission comment on the cohsistency . Judith Lautner elaborated on the staff report . Commission concerns included the following : ommr . Roalman`was concerned that there was not enough money allocated to alternative modes, of transportation , e . g . transit improvements and bikeways. He felt recycling efforts should be city-supported . He felt the Laguna Lake sediment removal presented difficulties for steelhead fish passage and the project needed to address habitat concerns . He felt the open space acqui - sition efforts needed firm city commitment beyond the use of park-in-lieu fees . He was concerned with the sensitivity of building storage structures on the Mission Plaza and in the two parks . Commr . Kourakis agreed with to Roalman about the open-space funding. She felt the disposition of the," Firestation #1 site needed to be known before she could decide if it were consistent with the General Plan . She felt a Civic Center commitment was premature and should have public hearings for input . She felt the Sinsheimer tennis courts needed more attention than resurfacing . Commr . Crotser was also concerned with the lack of funds for alternative transportation modes and supported greater funding for open-space acquisi - tions . He felt the Old Garden Creek improvements were not consistent with standards . Commr. Karleskint agreed with the need for more open-space acquisition funds , but did not want them taken from park-in-lieu budgets . He felt Parks and Recreation should have their own building , not a part of the Fire Dept . building . He felt it needed to be determined who was responsible for :he railroad tower before rehabilitation efforts began. He felt there - should be new neighborhood parks land acquired . He 'felt bus stops at convalescent care facilities needed benches . aty Of S eVel WIS 0BRc;*V-%0........ na•Wy 1"-..a.ario =a•� � '�k ?y 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 October 4 , 1989 Robert and Lillian Martin 355 Pomeroy Avenue Pismo Beach, CA 93449 SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 70-88 1680 San Luis Drive Dear Mr. and Ms. Martin: On Friday, September 29, 1989, I conducted a public hearing on your request to allow reduced side yard setback to 0 feet for addition adjacent to city open space, at the subject location. After reviewing the information presented, I approved your request, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 1. The proposed setback reduction will not adversely affect solai/ access of the adjoining parcel, since an easement will ensure adequate separarion of structures. 2. The proposed setback reduction will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of persons living or working at the site on the in the vicinity. Conditions: I. Prior to building permit issuance for the addition, the applicant shall secure, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, an open space easement from adjacent property owner to the south (City of San Luis Obispo) , guaranteeing a 10-foot separation between structures on adjacent properties. 2 . Applicant shall dedicate to the city an easement for storm drainage and creek maintenance purposes. Easment shall cover the area within the creek channel and westerly of the existing wood retaining wall along the creek bank, to the approval of the City Engineer. My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision. Page 2 A 70-88 If the use or structure authorized by this use permit is not established within one year of the date of approval or such longer time as may be stipulated as a condition of approval, the use permit shall expire. See Municipal Code Section 17.58.070.D. for possible renewal. If you have any questions, please call Greg Smith at 549-7174 . Sincerely, Ken Bruce Hearing Officer drs cc: Visser Drafting & Design 407-B Traffic Way Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 c,- 6 Recording Requested by - C"I n-� San I'Uks Obi1OPC and when recorded mail to: DOC.No 2417 City Engineer OFRCLAL RECC)ADS P.O. Box -52-k '2100 SAN LUIS COSGPO CO., CAL 990 Palm Street JAN 1 6 185 San Luis Obispo, CA 9341 q3�0-a_eja0 FF,! 4C;L'C M. COONEY County Clerk-Recorder TIME j 5 AM AGREEMENT AFFECTING REAL PROPERTY PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY ERECTION OF .IMPROVEMENTS- WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the issuance of this revocable permit to erect improvements temporarily within the. public right-of-way, said improvements consisting of: Security fence approximately 5 feet onto city park property adjacent to westerly side of 1680 San Luis Drive the undersigned owners of the real property hereinafter described, hereby covenant with the City of San Luis Obispo to remove said improvements without cost to said -City upon thirty (30) days written notice, which may be given by the City at any time at its sole option and discretion. If the owner does not remove the encroachment authorized herein when requested by the City, City may proceed to require removal under its nuisance abatement ordi- nance and to assess the cost of said removal against the real property described herein. Said property is located in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and is described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1 , Tract 30 A.P.N. 1-151-02 Commonly known as: 1680 San Luis Dr. This covenant shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the undersigned owners, their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns. DATED this 10th day of January, 1985 Owner Robert E. Martin Owner Lillian E. Martin STATE OF CALIFORNIA } TFTItL5 L COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBI SPO) I�:%'• :; F:':C�i•! «•� SAP!LUIS OSISPO CIOL; TY MY Gomnission_ Expires.Aar 23.1985 On January 10. 1985 before me, the un ersig , ... rr in and for said County and State, personally appeared Robert E. Martin & Lillian E. Martin; known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose ncac.s are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged .to :de that t heL executed same. WITNESS my hand and official Seal. VO' ?v��pn�'E is OF DOCUMENT 3 72 l Diane R. Stuart, Notary Public c - a - ag Recording Requested by and when recorded, return to: City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo P. O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 DEED OF EASEMENT (Open Space) FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City of San Luis Obispo, a chartered municipal corporation, hereby GRANTS to Robert E. Martin and Lillian E. Martin, an open-space easement for building set-back purposes required as a condition of a conditional Use Permit (A70-88) granted on September 29, 1989, over a portion of City property recorded on December 24, 1970 in Volume 1599 of Official Records at page 523 in the Office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California. This easement is appurtenant to Lot 1, Tract 30, recorded in Book 5 of Maps at Page 49 in the Office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder in said City, County and State and shall run with said lot 1, and described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly property corner of said City property, said point also being the southerly corner of the aforesaid Lot 1, Tract 30; thence, northwesterly along the northeasterly property line of said City property a distance of 95 feet to a point; thence, southwesterly along a line perpendicular to said northeasterly line a distance of 10 feet to a point; thence, southeasterly along a line parallel to said northeasterly line to a point on the northwesterly right-of-way line of San Luis Drive; thence, northeasterly along said northwesterly line of San Luis Drive to the point of beginning. City of San Luis Obispo By: Mayor Ron Dunin Attest: Pam Voges, City Clerk Recording Requested by and when recorded, return to: City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo P. O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 DEED OF EASEMENT APN 01-15-002 FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Robert E. Martin and Lillian E. Martin hereby GRANT to the City of San Luis Obispo, a chartered municipal corporation, a drainage easement for the maintenance of San Luis Obispo Creek with the right to make improvements within Lot 1, Block 1, Tract 30 recorded November 8, 1939 in Book 5 of Maps at Page 49 in the Office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California lying northwesterly of the following described line: Beginning at the most southerly property corner of said property; thence, N 64025' W along the southwesterly property line of said lot a distance of 100 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, N 15035' E a distance of 17 feet to a point; thence, N 4025' W a distance of 65 feet to a point; thence, N 35935' E a distance of 35 feet more or less, to a point on the northeasterly property line of said lot. The City shall not be responsible for maintaining any portion of an existing wood retaining wall and/or fence along the approximate top of the southeasterly bank of said creek where same may be located within the aforesaid easement. "n"PJPSS WHEREOF, GRANTOR hereunto caused their name to be subscribed STATE OF 1989. COUNTY OF�IFORNIA A On_0 �dn r„—�-�+�1Snn S5. Signed Notary Public, before me,the under- (SEEN, Martin and Personally"I lanaF ared Robert— ° 1`fartin z I W (Personally known tome)or W to be the person sEAI subscribed to the within instrument kOse Inames-_ a=" NANSW 'rev executed the same. edBedthat � z � _ wm�.r•E.,w SIGNATURE e } TO 'VdHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Ai'N 01-15-002 This Deed of Easement is not to become valid or recorded until the easement is granted from the City for the zero line set back (on the south property line) , guaranteeing a 10 foot separation between structures on. adjacent properties; without this City 'Easement this document would become void. Date October 27, 1989 State of California, County of L %�f San Luis Obispo, On October 27, 1989 7 before me, the undersigned Notary Robert E. Marti Public, personally appeared Robert E. Martin and Lillian E. Martin, personally known to me to be the person's whose names subscribed to the within instru- �f`""' meat and acknowledged that they executed Lillian i. Martin the same. S IGNAT[TRE 1.�.(M, -` /!1 sm L Wim tu11u ar�u ]EETING AGENDA D DATE REM # D D 'YOV 2 01989 805/543-7993 "L',s Ob Bishop Medical Center "'ZI,iszp 1551 Bishop St., Suite 430, San Luis Obispo, CA 934p1-,.,..:_ E:7_ 05 9rLoUncii / Nov. 16, 1989 IL CAO i. 'Y Atty. CrIC City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 Dear Sirs: As a health practitioner in the Bishop Medical Center, I recognize the need for extended care facilities and I welcome them. The one proposed at 1575 Bishop next to my office should be ideal. I have one serious reservation which I beg you to consider. We have a parking problem and it is being relieved now, by the empty lot where the proposed building is to be built. There is an average of thirty cars parked there daily. If there isn't sufficient parking and even extra parking/ we will all suffer. What I mean by we is: the pract- itioners, staff and patients of Bishop Medical Center and General Hospitial. When our complex was built, we were required to supple- ment parking for General Hospitial as part of our construction. If the same is done with General Plan Amendment-GP/R 1422-1575 Bishop, hopefully that will take care of the problem. We also need a left-hand turn light at the stop light on Johnson. With on coming cars, it is dangerous now and with this proposed new addition to our area and increased traffic, we are inviting a serious accident. Sincerely, Dr. LaurenceAckermanD.D.S. RECEIVED NOV 2 0 1989 //-.,e.5 P. Crry CLERK UN LUIS 08;Spo,CA Mr�Ti> G AGENDA DATEi%oL f MN # R 1 Paul A. Gallaghe M.D., Inc. .. FAMILY PRACTICE :.xiv..•y DIPLOMATE.AMERICAN BOARD OF FAMILY PRACTICE _ V�}Y !;� aar.•.e 1551 BISHOP STREET RECEPTIONIST 805/541-6500 SUITE 220 NURSE 805/541-6502 SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA 93401 BOOKKEEPER 805/541-6590 November 15 , 1989 RECEIVED City of San Luis Obispo 2 019018391111111 City Council Members Attn: Pam Voges , City Clerk P.O. Bos 8100 SAN LUIS CA San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-810 Re: Agenda Item - General Plan Amendment GP/R1422-1575 Bishop Street I am writing to make sure my comments will be included in any 'discussion on the above land use and zoning for the Recovery Care Center planned at the above-named address. As can be seen from the enclosed photographs, that site where the Recovery Care has by default, become part of the parking for the General Hospital staff and users of General Hospital . On any given day there are some 25-30 cars and sometimes as many as 40 cars parked on that spot . I would make the point that not only will these cars all be displaced , but that the Recovery Care Center will require par-king in its oven right, not only for employees but for patients and for visitors , probably requiring at least another 50-100 parking spaces if you include the 30 that are already using that space because there are no spots left on the Genera]. Hospital parking or ' on the Bishop complex parking. This is a eery high volume medical office complex, particularly with the County Family Practice Clinic in Building A of the Bishop complex . There 'is a very high volume of patients that come through this area. Most of those use the Bishop parking but a large number of General Hospital employees are parking in the area that will be occupied by the Recovery Care Center. Any zoning that allows that facility needs to ensure that there will be adequate parking for that facility and for those cars displaced out of that area . iyL:ot:ntil ` y✓�CAO lark �` .its� �r.r l City of San Luis Obispo City Council Members Attn: Pam Voges, City Clerk November 15, 1989 Page Two A second item that should be addressed is the very dangerous traffic situation .created at the corner of Johnson Avenue and Bishop Street . The current turn lanes are helpful but are not adequate for the high speed traffic coming down Johnson Avenue and traffic lights with turn lane signal indicators are necessary to avoid major accidents occurring at that corner. Item 3 - because of the parking that is taking place at the corner where the Recovery Care Center will be located, it is difficult to see up towards the Probation Department offices and cars come down that street at a high rate of speed and there should be speed bumps and stop signs placed at the corner of Bishop where it intercepts the turn-in to the General Hospital parking and the Bishop Medical complex corner. Sincerely, eau�l A. Gall her, M.D. President Bishop Medical Complex Owners Association cc: Mayor Ron Dunnin