HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/05/1989, 1 - A) APPEAL OF DIRECTOR'S ACTION GRANTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; A 1111 IY 1111111Iu1I10111$ city
MEETING OATS:
c� of san lugs oB�spo
COUNCIL ENOA REPORT MAA NUMMR:
FROM: R dy Rossi nterim Community Development Director; By:
Jeff Ho
SUBJECT. A) Appeal of Director's action granting a mitigated
negative declaration on environmental impact; and B) Consideration
of a tentative parcel map creating three lots from one lot at 124
Highland Drive, between Patricia and Fel Mar Drives.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution denying the appeal and
upholding the Director's action, and approve the tentative map MS
89-116 subject to the recommended findings and conditions.
BACKGROUND
The subdivider wants to create three lots from one large lot with
an existing house. If approved, the minor subdivision would allow
the eventual development of two additional houses on the 1.15 acre
site. The site is locally known as the Ferrini Ranch, and was once
part of dairy ranch owned and operated by the Ferrini family. In
the 1950's, the Ferrinis subdivided the ranch property to create
the subject lot and surrounding lots in the neighborhood.
In December 1981, the City Council approved a tentative parcel map
for a similar three-lot subdivision at this site (MS 81-211) ;
however the final parcel map was never submitted. The property has
since been sold, and the previous approval has expired.
On April 18, 1989 the Director denied the subdivider's request for
a four-lot subdivision at this site based, in part, on
neighborhood compatibility concerns. The subdivider then submitted
a new application and map showing a three-lot subdivision. On
October 9, 1989, the Director granted a mitigated negative
declaration. A neighbor has appealed that decision. As yet, no
action has been taken on the tentative map, pending resolution of
the environmental appeal.
Under the city's Environmental Procedures, appeals of the
Director's environmental determination are heard by the decision-
making body which takes final action on the project. Subdivision
Regulations allow the Director to approve parcel maps; however the
City Council takes final action on appeal or when subdivision
exceptions are requested. To avoid the obvious role conflict
posed by the Director hearing the appeal, both the environmental
appeal and the subdivision have been referred to the council for
final action.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts are likely. Staff's initial
environmental study focused on three issues: utilities,
archaeological/historical, and aesthetic impacts. After
considering documentation provided by the staff, Cultural Heritage
Committee, and the subdivider, the Director determined that the
project would not have a significant impact, provided that four
1 1111 city of san tuis osispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 2
mitigation measures were incorporated into the project. These are
listed below and in the attached expanded initial study.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TARING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION
If the appeal is upheld, the project will require an environmental
impact report, and review of the tentative map would be postponed
until the additional environmental study is completed. If the
council denies the appeal (ie. concurs with the Director's
mitigated negative declaration) and denies the map, the subdivider
would have to wait one year before reapplying.
DATA SUMMARY
Subdivider/Property Owner: Norman 'and Ina Lerner
Representative: Terry Simons
Appellant: Charron O'Neill
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-density Residential
Environmental Status: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Site Description: The site covers about 50,000 square feet (1.15
acres) , and slopes down and away from the center of the lot toward
all property lines at approximately a 10 percent slope. The main
house and a 1-bedroom cottage are to remain, as are numerous large
trees including live oaks, sycamore, pine, redwoods, Silk Oak, and
Pittosporum. Houses border the site on three sides, and Bishop's
Peak Elementary School is located across Highland Drive
from the site.
ADVISORY BODY COMMENTS
At its May 4,1989 meeting, the Cultural Heritage Committee found
that the site and the structure at 124 Highland Drive are
historically and culturally significant, and on a 7:0 vote (one
abstention) , recommended against subdivision (minutes attached) .
EVALUATION
Basis For Neighbor's Appeal
The appellant believes the subdivision will cause significant
damage to the environment, and alleges that "any subdivision of
said parcel will significantly impact, for example, the historical
significance of the site and structure." Staff has received
letters and petitions from other neighbors objecting to the
subdivision on grounds that it will: detract from the
neighborhood's character, lower property values, and conflict with
the tract's codes, covenants, and restrictions (C.C. & R. Is) which)
city Of san IUIS OBisp0
Sii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 3
prohibit lot divisions.
Project Description
The subdivider wants to create three lots from a 1.15 acre lot in
the Ferrini Heights area. Lot areas would be about 24,500 sq. ft.
for Parcel A (lot with tree grove and cottage) ; 14,111 sq. ft. for
Parcel B (lot with main house) ; and 11,250 sq. ft. for Parcel C
(vacant area between main house and the driveway) . Approval of the
subdivision would allow the following changes:
1. Widening and repaving of the existing driveway to meet
city standards;
2 . Eventual construction of a new house on Parcel C;
3 . Removal of one tree on Parcel C -- a 6" diameter Olive;
and
4 . Construction of a 600 sq. ft. garage to serve Parcel B.
In his initial statement, the subdivider notes that the cottage
". . .could remain and be incorporated into a future residence (on
parcel A) or could be removed and replaced by future development.
The main house and major trees would be preserved, and additional
landscaping done along the common driveway and wherever the site
is disturbed.
Key Issues
Key issues are grading, access, neighborhood compatibility, C.C.
& R. Is,, and historic preservation. Of these, historic preservation
has become the most visible, and possibly, the most controversial
issue. Although not listed in the City's Master List of Historic
Resources, the site and building are of local historic significance
due to their history and setting. To further explore the issue,
the Director required an expanded initial study focused on historic
significance. Mark Hall-Patton of the Cultural Heritage Committee
(CHC) , and subsequently, Dan Krieger, local historian and also a
CHC member prepared separate historical. briefs on the property.
Their findings were incorporated into the expanded initial study
prepared by staff.
Grading and Access
I
Grading and driveway access meet city standards. The existing
driveway serves both the house and cottage, and would be widened,
repaved, and serve as the common driveway for the proposed three
/-S
QW111 II city Of san LUIS OBISpo
INNIGN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 4
lots. There is a 3:1 slope bank along the street frontage, and the
driveway is located near the east property line where the slope
bank is lowest. The subdivision includes a 20 ft. wide driveway
to meet city standards, and a five- to ten-.foot wide landscape
buffer between the driveway and the adjacent lot to the east. The
driveway and subsequent development would be designed to preserve
the brick retaining wall which accents and unifies the front yard
landscape. A building pad covering about 2000 sq. ft. would be cut
at the rear of Parcel C. The main house is at the top of a knoll,
and the new house would sit slightly lower than the main house.
Although detailed grading plans have not been prepared, the amount
of grading necessary appears to be modest. Grading and driveway
design meet city standards; however an emergency vehicle turnaround
may be required unless existing and new dwellings are sprinklered.
Density/Neighborhood Character/Aesthetics
The site is located in a neighborhood of predominantly large lots -
- many with large houses and spacious, well-maintained landscapes.
The neighbors' fundamental concern appears to be the aesthetic
impact the subdivision would have on this! and adjacent properties.
To staff's knowledge, this is the first time a lot in this tract
has been subdivided; however it is also the only lot of this size
in Tract 104.
With the recommended mitigation measures and tract conditions,
staff believes this subdivision could be compatible with
neighboring properties. It will preserve the main visual elements
of the site -- the ranch house, major trees, and large landscaped
front yard -- and insure the future development respects the
architectural integrity of the main house. Condition requires
that the new lots be considered sensitive sites, requiring
architectural review prior to development.
Recommended condition 4 requires that the new lots be considered
sensitive sites, requiring archtiectural review piror to
development. During the review, the ARC would pay special
attention to design compativbility of new development with the
existing house, privacy screening, open space and tree
preservation, and to design measures which preserve the site's
unique visual character and neighborhood compatibility.
The subdivision meets zoning and subdivision standards, and no
design exceptions are requested or necessary. Zoning Regulations
would allow a maximum of eight houses on this site, while a total
of three houses. The project is also consistent with Subdivision
Requirements which require a minimum lot area of 6000 sq. ft. --
the average lot area is 13,600 sq. ft. (not including the common
driveway) . It also appears consistent with the City's General Plan
���;ll cit' of san tuts OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 5
Land Use Element policy which states:
"The City should encourage residential development, promoting
efficient urban densities and diversity of design, consistent
with the prevailing or proposed neighborhood character. . . ��
and
"Low-density residential development, allowing a maximum of
7 dwelling units per acre, will be encouraged within
neighborhoods clearly committed to this type of
development. . . ."
Under city standards, additional dwellings could be built without
subdividing the site, subject to administrative use permit
approval. Instead, the property owners have chosen to create
separate lots to facilitate development and resale of two of the
lots.
While this would be the first three-lot subdivision in the
neighborhood.served by a common driveway, its appearance would not
differ dramatically from other properties in the tract. Due to
dense landscaping and extra-deep building setbacks, any new
structure would not be visually prominent from Highland Drive. As
recommended by staff, the map shows a 40 ft. street yard for all
three parcels. This is twice the required 20-ft. street yard, and
equals or exceeds many street yard setbacks in the neighborhood.
The site and former ranch house occupy a prominent knoll,
overlooking Highland Drive, Bishops Peak School, and Foothill
Drive neighborhoods. Due to its large size, visual prominence, and
mature trees, the site has become a neighborhood landmark and
scenic focal point.
Clearly, the property is unique, and its division will irreversible
alter its appearance by adding a house on Parcel C, and by reducing
area of front yard landscaping by about 13 percent. In size and
character, the new lots would more closely resemble neighboring
properties, while keeping the key visual elements of the site --
main house, mature trees, and large, landscaped street yard.
With an average size of 13,600 sq. ft. , the new lots would be
consistent with the prevailing neighborhood character, since the
average lot size for the neighborhood is about 11,000 sq. ft. ; and
the average size of the six lots bordering the site is about 13,000
- sq• ft.
l�
city of san Luis owspo
Mmom COUNCIL. AGENDA REPORT
Page 6
Tract C.C. & 8. 's
Private deed restrictions recorded July 18, 1956 apply to this lot.
Established by the original subdividers, A.L. and Hilda Ferrini,
these restrictions were intended to shape the physical development
and appearance of all lots in Tract 104. The restrictions prohibit
the resubdivision of lots, limit development to one, single-story
house and garage per lot, and set minimum setbacks and other design
and land use standards. Lot line adjustments are allowed provided
that a minimum lot area of 7500 sq. ft. is maintained.
On the City Attorney's advice, it has been the city's policy not
to enforce private C.C. and R. 's. When considering a subdivision
or other land use entitlement, the City is not legally bound by
such private deed restrictions, though council's action may
consider their intent. Typically, deed restrictions are enforced
through civil actions by private parties. Both the subdivider and
neighbors have retained attorneys, and have indicated that a
lawsuit is likely whether or not the subdivision is approved.
Historic Preservation
Studies by Mark Hall-Patton and Dan Krieger of the Cultural
Heritage Committee indicate that the site, and possibly the house,
are of local historical significance. The Mt. Bishop Dairy was
once operated on the lower slopes of Bishop's Peak by Albert and
Hilda Ferrini who came to San Luis Obispo in 1884. According to
Felton Ferrini, the site and house were used as the family home
from about 1940 to the late 195018. An earlier house used as the
Ferrini ranch house was built in 1903 and still stands at the rear
Of 550/554 Foothill Boulevard. According to Krieger, this is not
the . last surviving dairy ranch house within city limits. The
former ATO fraternity at 679 Monterey Street is cited as another
example of a dairy ranch house from an even earlier period.
Staff does not believe that the site's historical importance hinges
on preserving a single lot and house, or that the subdivision will
cause a significant loss of the city's historic resources. The
original dairy structures are gone, and most of the pastures
subdivided in the 50's and 601s. The site's historic value stems
from the presence of the ranch house, its previous occupants and
uses -- characteristics which would 'not be affected by the
subdivision.
To address concerns with aesthetics and historic preservation, the
project has already been revised to: 1) reduce the number of lots
from four to three lots; 2) delete a common driveway from the
street yard to preserve trees and landscaping; and 3) provide a
40 ft. street yard where 20 ft. is normally required. Thesef
_ �40
��li�ii�illlll�l�� �����i► cety of san Luis oBispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 7
changes, along with additional landscaping and a sensitive
architectural design for the new house which respects the character
of the old ranch house, will maintain the essence of what makes the
site unique.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny the appeal, concur with the Director's environmental
determination, and approve the subdivision with or without
changes, Exhibit "A." This is the appropriate action if the
council feels the project would not have a significant adverse
environmental impact, and supports the project. It may as a
condition of approval, modify the subdivision design or number
of lots as appropriate.
2. Deny the appeal, concur with the Director's environmental
determination, and deny the subdivision with findings, Exhibit
"B. " This action would indicate that the council agrees with
the Director's environmental determination, but does not
support subdivision due to compatibility concerns with the
neighborhood.
3. Uphold the appeal, require additional environmental review and
continue consideration of the tentative map. This is the
appropriate action if the council finds substantial evidence
that the project may have a significant adverse effect on the
environment. In marginal cases, the council may also base its
decision to require additional study on the following:
A. If there is serious public controversy over the
environmental effects of a project; or
B. if there is disagreement among experts regarding the
significance of an effect on the environment.
In this case, council may decide to: 1) require a expanded initial
study to further evaluate potential impacts; or 2) require an EIR.
Staff does not believe additional environmental review would be
useful. Public controversy seems to revolve around the
compatibility of the subdivision with the neighborhood, and not
environmental impacts. If preservation of "the ranch" is the
central issue, the environmental impact occurred years ago when the
overall subdivision took place.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution, Exhibit "A" denying the a i
Y g appeal and upholding
the Director's environmental determination, and approving the
tentative map for Minor subdivision 89-116 subject to the findings
�� 7
QUn"igl j city of san Luis owpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 8
and conditions noted in the resolution.
Attachments:
-vicinity Map
-Council Resolutions: Exhibits "A, B. and C"
-Tentative Map MS 89-116
-Expanded Initial. Environmental Study
-Appeal/neighbors' letters/petitions
-Attorneys' letters
-CHC Minutes
-Director's action, MS 89-016
-Tract 104, C.C.
D:MS89-116.WP
J— O i U
— —t— — -
'r. O
O �1 0 O
t•)_ °(10 R-1
oC �Y v �✓1
o
.y' ti haS of O '
a` ''�� ° ° o ° R-1
0
,Q 0 1—iiO O a t
0 �ekcs
5° 0 Q O .
0' O
0 a :o
R1 °
-- - DALYAVENUE
r
O ° e n
C h ° R-1 <„ .
J C
FEL ` 0
„ 0 -
• -MAR
DRIV
E
O
i h
Iil�rwy �1- 1_
0
,,. �:. DRIVE
HIGHLAND I _
)0' ^, r---l-r7
BISHOP'S PEAK SCHOOL '
0
MS 89-1 1
` • o
JAYCEE DR. "
- U
c
-, o ---
RESOLUTION NO. (1989 Series)
1
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING
AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR MINOR
SUBDIVISION AT 124 HIGHLAND DRIVE (MS 89-116)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. APPEAL. That this council, after consideration of public testimony,
the minor subdivision request MS 89-116, the Community Development Director's action,
staff recommendations and reports thereon, hereby denies the appeal by Charron O'Neill of
the Director's environmental determination (ER 37-89) and approves Minor Subdivision MS
89-116 with following findings:
1. The design of the minor subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and
Subdivision Regulations.
2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the
R-1 zone.
3. The design of the minor subdivision is not likely to cause serious health problems,
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
4. The design of the minor subdivision will not conflict with any easements for access
through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.
5. The Community Development Director's decision on March 8, 1989 granting a
mitigated negative declaration is affirmed, and the required mitigation measures
listed in the attached initial study are incorporated into the project. Required
mitigation measures are:
A. The subdivider shall retain a qualified professional to document the
site and structure's historical significance, including photographs of
past and existing conditions, architectural site and building plans,
family and dairy history, and other relevant historical information.
The documentation shall be submitted to the Community Development
Director prior to final map approval. Once approved by the Director,
three copies of the completed documentation shall be provided for use
by the San Luis Obispo County Historical Museum archives, Cal Poly
San Luis Obispo library, and San Luis Obispo City/County .Library.
B. The subdivider shall install a permanent historical marker on the site,
Of a size not less than 2 feet by 3 feet, and readable by pedestrians
from Highland Drive, documenting the history of the site and house,
and their local significance. The marker's design, location, and
materials shall be to the approval of the Community Development
Director, and the marker shall be installed prior to final acceptance of
C. The new lots shall be consideredsensitive sites, and shall require
EX.1110,04,111T A /-lo
Page 2
architectural review prior to development. At such review, special
attention shall be paid to design compatibility with the existing house,
privacy screening, open space and tree preservation and maintaining
the site's unique visual character and neighborhood compatibility.
D. If the Community Development Director determines that the above
measures are ineffective or physically infeasible, he may add, delete,
or modify mitigation measures to achieve the intent of the original
mitigation measures.
SECTION 2. MINOR SUBDIVISION. Tentative map for Minor Subdivision MS 89-
116 is approved subject to the following conditions:
1. Subdivider shall submit a final parcel map for city review, approval, and recordation.
2. Subdivider shall submit a landscaping/slope stabilization plan for the front slope
bank area, and shall install the landscaping to the approval of Community
Development Department staff prior to final map approval. The plan may include
decorative retaining walls if determined necessary by staff.
3. Subdivider shall provide individual water and sewer service and utilities for each
parcel, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and utility companies.
4. Final map shall mtBihat all of the parcels in the subdivision are considered sensitive
sites, and new construction shall require architectural review and approval. At such
review, the commission shall pay special attention to design compatibility of new
development with the existing house, privacy screening, open space and tree
preservation, and to design measures which preserve the sites unique visual character
and neighborhood compatibility.
5. Final map shall note: that all trees on the site shall be retained except for the 6"
diameter Olive tree, which may be removed with City Arborist's approval. If
removed, it shall be replaced with two 24" box sized specimen trees.
6. Subdivider shall sign an agreement and post a surety to guarantee preservation of
existing trees, to the approval of the City Arborist and Community Development
Department staff.
7. Subdivider shall record a common driveway agreement with the final parcel map,
consistent with City parking and driveway standards.
8. Final map shall note that all parcels shall have a minimum street yard setback of
40 feet, and building height of new development shall not exceed one-story, or a
maximum of 16 feet above average grade below"Ilie building, whichever is less.
9• Subdivider shall install or relocate pressure zone.water valve in Highland Drive to
connect existing fire hydrant to adjacent pressure zone, to the approval of the Public
Works and the Utilities Department staff. Individual water services shall have
pressure regulators, if determined necessary by Public Works Department staff.
10. Subdivider shall provide parking on Parcel B to city standards prior to final map
approval.
r-.
Page 3
On motion of , seconded by
call vote: _ , and on the following roll
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of
1989.
Mayor _ ..
ATTEST:
City Clerk
• • • s • • ses • • •
APPROVED:
*ttrne
ive Officer
community Development Director
ity Engineer
RESOLUTION NO. (1989 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF'SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING
AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION, AND DENYING A TENTATIVE MAP FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION
AT 124 HIGHLAND DRIVE (MS 89-116)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. That this council, after consideration of public testimony,
the minor subdivision request MS 89-116, the.Community Development Director's action,
staff recommendations and reports thereon, hereby upholds the appeal by Charron O'Neill
the Director's environmental determination (ER 37-89), and denies Minor Subdivision MS
89-116 with following findings:
1. The site is not physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in
the R-1 zone.
3. The design of the proposed subdivision is not likely to cause serious health problems;
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
4. The project would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health or safety
unless the project is disapproved, or approved upon the condition that the project be
developed at a lower density.
- 5. The Community Development Director's decision on March 8, 1989 granting a
mitigated negative declaration is hereby reversed, and there is no feasible method
to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid adverse impacts to public health or safety other
than the disapproval of the project or the approval of the project upon the condition
that. it be developed at a lower density.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
EXHIBIT
Page 2
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of
1989.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ssssrrsssss •
APPROVED:
City Ad nistrative Officer
C�
C me
Community Development Director
CifY axji e
RESOLUTION NO. (1989 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPHOLDING
AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ENVIRONMENTAL +
DETERMINATION, AND REQUIRING ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR
A MINOR SUBDIVISION AT 124 HIGHLAND DRIVE (MS 89-116)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. APPEAL. That this council, after consideration of public testimony,
the minor subdivision request MS. 89-116, the Community Development Director's action,
staff recommendations and reports thereon, hereby upholds the appeal by Charron O'Neill
of the Director's environmental determination (ER 37-89) on October 11, 1989 granting a
mitigated negative declaration and requires that the subdivider prepare an environmental
impact report to address the projects potential historic and aesthetic impacts, subject to the
findings listed below.
SECTION 2. MINOR SUBDIVISION. Consideration of tentative map MS 89-116 is
hereby continued to pending completion and council review of additional environmental.
study.
1. The design of the proposed subdivision is likely to cause adverse impacts to the
community's historic or cultural resources by altering the visual character of an
historically significant site.
2. The design of the proposed subdivision is likely to cause adverse impacts to
community aesthetics, since the proposed subdivision would result in development
which is inconsistent with the prevailing neighborhood character, or would detract
from the site's and neighborhood aesthetic valuessubstantial environmental damage
or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
3. Additional environmental study is necessary to determine the significance of
potential impacts.
On motion of _, seconded by
and on the following
roll call vote:
Exrol I
Page 2
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of
1989.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
r • s • sss • • ass
APPROVED:
City Admin stratrve O facer
y for ey
Community
ADevelopment Director
ity Engineer
.. � r�.i..1y waw / yr �M .�•�w�����•i �_—� .
w_.wwwi 'M.Y.M �.�../ '.�. . �. ww._.•M M.r A.l.1• � •. //////�����1 .I I ,
w.r�ww
IIS
still
ii
t q
�� � � � }• � ���i �E gni C
_ •t . ✓
•� �iJ
• �� 1 V 0 •`
. :'4b t 3 h '
is
\ j t4
!•—_ � e
CV14 _
'o� s —
�
I } fill
,b let
Ik
ORZ
; I
w � '
'1- .a
V.
I-
1:'
!'.�f 'fir � '.�I,� "�� 1 ■ ,
n ,v,
i
•
city of san lues ompo
�Iuillllll(IIi�I��jllluHll�li�
' • INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
a ER
SITE LOCATION 124 Highland Drive APPLICATION NO. 37-89
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Tentative parcel map to create three residential lots from one lot
in the R-1 zone (MS 89-116)
APPLICANT Norman and Ina Lerner
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
t
X NEGATIVE DECLARATION X MITIGATION INCLUDED
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REOUI D ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED
PREPARED BY Jeff Hoo Associate Planner DATE 10/9/89
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRE OR'S ACTION: DATE
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
1.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING'
IL POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS....................................................
None
B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH...............:.......................... -,&M.e
C. LAND USE ....................................................................... None
D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .............................................. N mP
E PUBLICSERVICES ............................................................oo-- None .
F. UTILITIES........................................................................ None!
• G. 1401SE LEVELS ................................................................... None -
H. GEOLOGIC h SEISMIC HAZARDS 3 TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS ..................... Nme
1. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... None
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY .............................:................ None
K PLANT LIFE....................................................................... None
L ANIMAL LIFE.................... None
...........................................
M. ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL •• NOIteh.
N. AESTHETIC .......................................................... ':gone*
O. ENERGYIRESOURCEUSENone
.....................................
P. OTHER .......................................................................... None
GIII.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Negative Declaration with }Litigation
'SEE ATTACHED REPORT /-/ Q
Initial Study, ER 10-89
Page 2
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Initial Study Update
On July 12, 1989 the Community Development Director required an expanded initial study to
evaluate historical significance. A local historian and member of the City's Cultural
Heritage Commission, Dan Krieger, has submitted additional information on the history of
the Ferrini house and grounds. The Director has determined that this information, along
with previous investigation and reporting by the CHC, is sufficient to proceed with
environmental review for this minor subdivision. Changes to the previous initial study
are in italics.
The subdivider wants to create three residential lots from one R-I zoned lot. The
existing lot covers about 50,000 sq. ft. (1.15 acres), and slopes down and away from the
center of the lot toward all property lines at approximately a 10 percent slope. The
site has a house and cottage, and numerous large; mature trees including Live Oaks,
Sycamore, Pine, Silk Oak, Coastal Redwoods, and Pittosporum.
Residential uses border the site on three sides, and an elementary school is located on
the opposite side of Highland Drive. A description of the proposed subdivision and
future house development is attached. Two similar applications have previously been
submitted on this property: A 4-lot residential subdivision (MS 89-016) which was denied
on April 18, 1989; and a three-lot subdivision (MS 81-212) which was approved December
15, 1981. The final parcel map was never filed, and the previous tentative map approval
has expired. The property has since been sold, and the previous projects abandoned in
favor of this new proposal. The new three-lot tentative map has been revised to address
staff concerns raised in the previous initial environmental study (ER 10-89), attached.
II. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW
F. Utilities
Under current conditions, the proposed subdivision would increase potential water demand
during a period of severe drought, as determined by the City's Utilities Department.
City water use during 1988 (8,260 acre-feet per year) exceeded safe annual yield (7,357)
by about twelve percent. Safe annual yield is the amount of water which can be withdrawn
from reservoirs year after year, without running out of water during a drought like that
which has been experienced since the reservoirs have been in use. As water use increases
above safe yield, cut-backs from usual water use will be needed more often and they will
have to be more substantial to avoid running out of water. In response to three-years of
below-average rainfall, the city is aiming for at least a 25-percent reduction in water
use during 1989-90. More substantial reductions may be needed in following years.
While the city is pursuing conservation and several supplemental sources of water, new
supplies may not keep pace with added demand due to development. Therefore, the City
Council has adopted a moritorium on most types of new construction, and Water Allocation
Regulations to help correct the current imbalance between water use and supply. These
controls will delay issuance of building permits until adequate water supplies are.
available. ^
A070
Initial Study, ER 37-89
CPage 3
This subdivision. is expected to increase potential water use from its current level of
about 2.4 acre-feet/year, to 3.3 acre-feet/year (3 X 1.1 a.f./yr, based on City of S.L.O.
Water Demand Figures for a single-family house on a large lot). This is a 38 percent
increase over existing water demand, and is not considered a significant environmental
impact since: 1) it is a minor increase over existing water use, and 2) under current
standards, construction would not be allowed unless adequate water supplies become
available.
M. Archaeloeical/Historical
The existing house was built in 1941 for Albert and Hilda Ferrini. The Ferrini family
had operated a dairy on the lower slopes of Bishop's Peak Since World War 1, and this was
to be the new ranch house for the dairy operation. According to Krieger, this is not the
last surviving dairy ranch home within the City limits. In the attached report, he cites
the former ATO Fraternity House at 679 Monterey as another example of a dairy ranch house
from an earlier period. The study,also notes that though the home was reputedly built
with lumber from a Swedish vessel which ran aground near ocearm in 1938, this fact alone
would not make the home unique. He notes that 'tens-of thousands of board feet' of
lumber from the wreck was sold during the period the house was built.
Recent studies by Mark Hall-Patton of the SLO County Historical Musuem suggest that the
site and existing house are historically significant. This is the former location of the
"Mt. Bishop Dairy% an early dairy in the area, and the former home of the Ferrini family
who operated the business. They came to San Luis Obispo from Switzerland in 1884, and
established the dairy at the base of Bishop Peak. According to Felton Ferrini, the house
at 124 Highland Drive was built in 1939, and used by the family from 1940 to the late
1950's. An earlier house used as the Ferrini ranch house was built in 1903 and is still
standing at the rear of 550/554 Foothill Boulevard.
This is one of the few remaining homes in the city where early dairy operations are known .
to have occurred in connection with an existing house. As such, both the site and the
existing ranch house have local historical significance. At its May 4, 1989 meeting, the
Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed the previous 4-lot subdivision and found that both
the site and the building were historically significant, and recommended against further
subdivision.
Staff does not believe, however, that the site's historical significance hinges on
maintaining a single lot and house, or that the proposed subdivision will significantly
impact the site's historical value. The original dairy ranch was subdivided into
residential lots in the 1950's and '60's, leaving a remnant of just over one acre, and a
front yard open space of about one-half acre adjacent to Highland Drive. Nearly one-half
acre of landscaping would remain in the proposed subdivision and development concept
plans. In summary, the site's historical value is the result of its previous occupants
and uses — characteristics which would not be altered by this project.
The revised subdivision design and development concept (see attached previous and revised
plans) reduces the amount of paving and building coverage in comparison with the previous
design by using the existing driveway location, and by maintaining a 40-foot street yard
where 20 feet is normally required. The existing ranch house and all but one of the
major trees (16" diameter Olive) would remain. The expansive and prominent front yard,
perhaps the strongest visual link to the site's historical use, would be reduced in area
by 2400 sq. ft., a reduction in the size of the front yard open space of about I l
percent. /
Initial Study, ER37-89
Page 4
In summary. staff believes that the house and grounds are of local historical value,
but that the proposed subdivision will not cause a significant, irretrievable loss of the
City's historical resources. To address staff and neighbor concerns with historical and
open space preservation. the project has already been revised to. reduce the number of
lots from four to three. delete a driveway in the street yard to preserve trees and open
space, and a 40-ft. building setback is shown. where 20-ft. is normally required.
In addition, staff recommends that a qualified professional be retained to document the
existing conditions of the house and grounds, and that an historical marker be installed
at the project's street frontage. These recommended mitigations are discussed in greater
detail below.
N. Esthetics
The site and old ranch house are located on a prominent rise, overlooking Highland Drive,
new housing above Foothill Boulevard, and Bishop Peak Elementary School. Owing to the
lot's large size, visual prominence, and large trees, it has a unique visual character
which is distinct from the adjoining residential properties. Subdivision of the lot into
three large lots averaging about 13,600 sq. ft. is consistent with the prevailing
neighborhood character — the average lot area for the neighborhood is about 1.1,000
square feet; and the average lot area of the six lots bordering the site'is about 13,000
square feet. Nevertheless, the subdivision and subsequent development will alter the
site's visual character, primarily by adding an additional house on Parcel C and reducing
the site's broad expanse of landscaped yard.
To insure that development of the new lots maintains the site's open space to the maximum
extent possible and is compatible with the historic character of the existing ranch.
house, staff recommends that the site be considered sensitive, and require architectural
review prior to development.
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Grant a Negative Declaration subject to the following mitigation measures being
included in project:
1. The subdivider shall retain a qualified professional to document the site
and structure's historical significance, including photographs of past and
existing conditions, architectural site and building plans: family and dairy
history, and other relevant historical information. The documentation shall
be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to final map
approval. Once approved by the Director. three copies of the completed
documentation shall be provided for use by the SLD County Historical Museum
archives. Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Library, and SLO City/County Library.
2. The subdivider shall install a permanent historical marker on the site. of a
size not less than 2 feet by 3 feet. and readable by pedestrians from
Highland Drive. documenting the history of the site and house, and their
local significance. The marker's design, location, and materials shall be
to the approval of the Community Development Director, and the marker shall
be installed prior to final acceptance of the subdivision.
Initial Study, ER 37-89
U Page S
3. The new lots shall be considered sensitive sites; and shall require
architectural review prior to development. At such review, special .
attention shall be paid to design compatibility with the existing house.
privacy screening, open space and tree preservation, and maintaining_ the
site's unique visual character and neighborhood compatibility.
4. If the Community Development Director determines that the above measures are
ineffective or physically infeasible, he may add, delete, or modify
mitigation measures to achieve the original mitigation measures.
Attachments:
-Vicinity Map
-Historical Resources Inventory, by D. Krieger
-Proposed Tentative Map MS,89-116
-Previous Initial Environmental Study. ER 10-89
-May 4, 1989 Minutes, Cultural Heritage Committee
,
jh7/er37-89
/-�3
0
Dan Krieger to Cultural Heritage Commission: October 5 1989 Page no • 1
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY
IDENTIFICATION: Ferrini Residence, 124 Highland, San Luis Obispo, Cardomia 93401
ARCHITECTURAL STYLE: California Ranch
CONSTRUCTION DATE: 1941 (ActuaQ
BUILDER: Ferrini Construction, Santa Maria, California
CONDITION: Fair
ALTERATIONS: There have been significant interior and exterior alterations during the late 1950's
to the present
SURROUNDINGS: Residential
SITING: Structure is on the original site.
SIGNIFICANCE: The residence was built for Albert and Hilda Ferrini in 1941. Ferrini came to San
Luis Obispo County in 1881, settling first in the Irish Hills adjacent to the Los
Osos Valley. During the early years of the present century, Ferrini began
purchasing land at the base of Bishop's Peak,then outside the San Luis Obispo
City limits. During the First World War he founded the Bishop's Peak Dairy. This
was one of the few Class A dairies in the county. It supplied fresh milk for local
consumption.
Ferrin is dairying activity, service as a San Luis Obispo County Supervisor and
Hilda Ferrinrrs involvement in the Monday Club and other woman's organizations
make the family historically significant on at least a regional basis.
The Ferrini family's role as tract real estate developers from the mid-19S0's on,
ultimately transcend all oth r matters of significance. The Fermi developments
totally transformed the anflnorthwest of Foothill.
Ferrini family folklore surrounds the construction and siting of the home.
Reputedly, Mrs. Ferrini designed the house. It does however have a similar
footpad to homes built by Ferrini Construction (Albert Ferrini s brother) in Santa
Maria as early as 1940.
There are many stories about the choice of location. The simple fact is that it
was just above the Bishop's Peak Dairy. The family wished to live nearby the
family business. The truly historic element was the dairy ranch on the adjoining
property which was demolished and built over more than two decades ago.
Additional folklore surrounds the Ferrini home. It is by no means the last
surviving dairy ranch home structure within the city limits. the ATO Fraternity
House is an impressive example of a wetl4o-do tum of the century ranch home.
' % I
i
Dan Krieger to Cultural Heritage Commission: October 5 1989 Page no 2
The Ferrini Home is reputedly constructed with lumber salvaged from the.
capsized Swedish vessel S.S.EIg which ran aground off Oceano in 1938. This
in and of itseff does not make the structure unique. A South County lumber
company is known to have sold tens of thousands of board feet of lumber from
the wreck. Only the construction boom that began with the Second World War
exhausted this supply.
The structure is arguably the most culturally significant in the FerriniTract and
adjacent area But this must be seen in relative terms of total relevance to the
history of the San Luis Obispo community.
Prepared by:
Daniel EKrieger, Ph.D.—October 5, 1989
C'
RECEIVED
APPEAL OCT 2 31%9
RE: Application #ER 37-89 (2-1-4- Highland Drive, San Luis
Obispo, California)
The undersigned, on behalf of numerous neighbors of the
project, hereby appeals from the environmental determination made
on October 11, 1989, which was a mitigated negative declaration.
This appeal is based on, among other grounds, the fact that the
project will cause significant damage to the environment. Any
subdivision of said parcel will significantly impact, for
example, the historical significance of the site and structure.
DATED: October 23, 1989
MAL-
Charron O'Ne122
1014 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
l
/"OC CO
March 31 ,1989
Community Development Director
City of San Luis Obispo:
I wish to object •to the proposed subdivision no.
89-016 ( 124 Highland Drive) . This plan to make four
lots out of one would downgrade a beautiful old
neighborhood by putting small lots and homes in an area
that has long been of esthetic value to San Luis Obispo.
Smaller homes are not in keeping with the development of
larger homes in the neighborhood. This idea of cutting
up ,lots would be a detriment to the value of all homes
in the area.
Janice Nanninga
118 Highland Drive
r
Saves �^is �b�S��
�► 9 350 6 - 0 959
�'cR :. lvro�j eS�x.oS J�dl•r� e.. � �b'� ��o a.rc o`i u�cj h la.r� ,d,/��-
P14. CO C*J P%Q..r
a..� f�� ht.q���r.e� �ri d2„ � �e�! O^e. �►''e��7¢�a
-- .. 4&4-
;P,C. wj SAE access ..� ,.ecessaxd de.s �' �rb.J•
�./�;•,.4�rr�„ a..dLn s � N;.�.0 fa,.et OOBJ•i tee. . J.. d •,F.
/� �'�+^r:••� �+�. �ov.S.e, 1$ e� �I�.�S�avi c.a.l ��
FVP�4KQ�6'i�� � �¢. n��9 �L orZ.ee Gl a to a..� afS o � "JCwr r••�
d
Community Development Director
City of San Luis Obispo
P. 0. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
Re: Minor Subdivision No. 89-016
Dear Sir:
We are homeowners in Tract 104. We object to the proposal
to subdivide lot seven (7) into four parcels.
We each bought our lots relying: on the character of the
neighborhood. The tract consists of large lots with homes of
similar design and yard space. We do not feel that it is
appropriate to allow these mini-lots into this area both because
they are not compatible with the existing lots and approval would
set a precedent for other lots in the area.
Although the City is not required to concern itself with the
existing restrictions on the lots, in arriving at a decision,
everyone in the neighborhood understood when they purchased their
lots or homes that efforts had been made to, preserve the
character of the neighborhood, by enacting restrictions.
We ask that the applicant's request for a subdivision be
denied.
A -Ale /8S N�1t Gavot/ �2.
�1• �P'S l�-r h�C+� fir..
NYS'
P;JOA-Aa Tv.
�• �J� oZ/�1�f��/� Anon ��!
spy
2:►
Community Development Director
City of San Luis Obispo
P. O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
Re: Minor Subdivision No. 89-016
Dear Sir:
We are homeowners in Tract 104. We object to the proposal
to subdivide lot seven (7) into four parcels.
We each bought our lots relying on the character of the
neighborhood. The tract consists of large lots with homes of
similar design and yard space. We do not feel that it is
appropriate to allow these mini-lots into this area both because
they are not compatible with the existing lots and approval would
set a precedent for other lots in the area.
Although the City is not required to concern itself with the
existing restrictions on the lots in arriving at a decision,
everyone in the neighborhood understood when they purchased their
lots or homes that efforts had been made to preserve the
character of the neighborhood by enacting restrictions.
\,
We ask that the applicant's requ�st for Division be.
denied.
of T5" , C0.U Il�'�. �,�r• 'a.:,..�1 tai
7
/;
/Ir
173
000
March 29, 1989
Community Development Director ,u„a,,aas,„„,,,XUDD
City of San Luis Obispo 0dSQ0Stnl 10A1VJ
P. O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403=8100 M 0£ GVW
Re: Minor Subdivision No. 89-016 03A13338
Dear Sir:
we received notice of the proposed subdivision of lot 7
at 124 Highland Drive, San Luis Obispo, into four lots. As
neighbors we object.
We purchased our homes relying on the fact that the character
of the subdivision (Ferrini Heights) would always be maintained.
we relied on the common scheme of the area being large lots with
single family residences. This intent is shown in the Declara-
tion of Restrictions recorded July 18, 1956, a copy of which is
attached hereto.
The houses are separated by more than the few feet found in
some of the newer subdivisions. They ,have larger yards and
there is more privacy in, the yards and houses than in newer
subdivisions. This has always been and continues to be a major
contribution to the value of the houses in this neighborhood.
The proposal will destroy the character of the neighborhood
and reduce the value of the mes in it.
* George & Char O'Neill F.L. & Evelyn Dirkes
149 Fel Mar Drive 157 Fel Mar Drive
lop
* W. C. & Norma Ogden *Janine Nanninga
143 Fel Mar Drive 118 Highland Drive
* Phyllis Breckan
123 Fel Mar Drive
CONTIGUOUS LANDOWNERS
Robert A. 6 Helen R. Mott
109 Highland Drive
it
J
March 29, 1989
Community Development Center
City of San Luis Obispo
P. 0. Box 8100.)
San Luis Obispo, Calif 93403
Ref: Minor Subdivision 89-016
Dear Sir:
I own a home in Tract. 104 on Patricia Drive.. I have a pink: "Notice
of Proposed Subdivision" for Minor Subdivision 89-016 at 124
Highland Drive.
I strongly object to this proposed subdivision.
I and all other buyers purchased our homes in this area for
specific reasons, as did the buyers in the Rolling Hills area. One
of our reasons was the "Declaration of Restrictions" recorded in
July 1956 which were explained to us before we purchased and which
we accepted. These restrictions collectively define the character
of our neighborhood, which are large lots with homes of similar
design and space.
We purchased expecting the restrictions to be f-ollowed, which are
for the benefit of present and future owners to protect and i.nsure
the character of the neighborhood. The proposed 89-016 subdivision
will change the character of the tract and lower property values.
I strongly object to the this proposed subdivision and ask the
applicants request be denied.
Respectfully,
G y
Darrell F. Bennett
515 Patricia Drive RECEIVED
San Luis Obispo, Calif 933401
day time phone 756 5260 APR 0 61989
home phone 544 477
an a SM LYK 0b.W
Com^urnlr oe.eh*mnmt
/-3�
GEORGE
J.K.George
-GALLO • Ray A. Gallo
i Michael G. Collins
COLLINS• Shauna Sullivan
SULLIVAN J. Christopher roews
8tTOEWS . Timothy L. Wilkerson
a 6w cnrrxmm
Kim Marie Herold
Los Osos Office RECEIVED
Aerie RWy to:
May 2, 1989 MAY 3 M
RE: 124 Highland Drive COY of San Lu40Wsw
nnmunitr Derelpprnen.
To Whom it May Concern:
This firm represents Norman and Ina Lerner, owners of the
real property at 124 Highland Drive. On behalf of our
clients, we oppose designation of this property or any part of it
as an historical site on the ground that it plainly fails to meet
any of the published criteria for such sites.
Preliminarily we note that this item was placed on the
Committee ' s agenda by City staff without notice to or
consultation with the owners, who first received a copy of the
staff report on April 29, 1989. We would also note that the
subdivision controversy involving the property has never involved
historical issues but has been based entirely on compatibility
with the existing neighborhood. This issue incidentally was
resolved adversely to the objectors in 1983 , when the City
approved a 3-way subdivision in substantially the form now
proposed.
,. Turning to the merits of the property as a historical
site , we submit that the property fails to qualify as
significant by virtually every objective test set forth in the
City's Historical Preservation Program Guidelines. Specifically:
1. The property is not in or near any established
historical preservation district.
2. The property is not listed in the City's master list
of historic resources.
3 . The building on the property is architectually
undistinguished, was not designed by an architect in the first
instance and has been modified on numerous occasions since its
construction (see enclosed photos) .
4. The property is not within an area where "buildings
with pre-1941 architectural styles create a recognizable
character." The house at 124 Highland was not built until around
1940 (exact date unclear) and none of the houses around it was
built until at least the mid-1950's.
2238 Bayview Heights Drive 8000uintana Road 694 Santa Rosa Street
P.O.Box 6129 P.O. Box 2040 0.0. Box 12710
Los Osos, CA 93412 Morro Bay. CA,93442 San Luis Obispo. CA 93406
(805)528-3351 (805)772-5687 (805)544-3351
FAX(805)528-5598 FAX(805)772-2006 /�
GEORGE
�GALLO
COiLWS-
SULUVAN
&TOEWSi
Page 2
5. The property is not accessible to the public and has
no noticeable synergistic relationship with adjacent properties.
6. There is no obvious connection between, the property
and any persons or groups of historical significance. The
property was used by the Ferrini family for about 15 years
(versus historical guideline of 40 years) , having been sold to
one James Smith in January 1956. Moreover, the Ferrinis do not
appear to :have been notable or famous in any way except as
subdividers of land in and around the subject property.
7. In any case, the subject property is not the original
Ferrini ranch house. According to the staff report that house
was built in 1903 and is still standing in the rear of 550/554
Foothill Boulevard.
In sum, 124 Highland Drive fails to qualify as an
historical site by any of the objective criteria set forth in the
Guidelines. We would urge the Committee to so conclude, and to
allow the subdivision issues to be resolved between the owners,
the City and other concerned parties in accordance with the
City's normal procedures.
Respectfully submitted,
GEORGE GA Comm
SULLIVANJoh
T EWS
J. Chri e Toews
JCT:jan
cc: Norman & Ina Lerner
Distribution List (attached.)
j ct:lern6
• � GEORGE
�GALO&TOEWS
COL�INS
SULWVAN
.
C' I alawv.j+rnallm i
Page 3
Distribution List
Jerry Michael James T. Rickes
2219 Del Campo 2855 See Canyon Road
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Mark P. Hall-Patton Gloria Heinz
1257 S. 16th Street 1367 Mill Street
Grover City, CA 93433-3217 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
Patricia H. Nicholson Leo Pinard
103 La Entrada 714 Buchon Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Bruce Sievertson Dave Eddy
1170 Buchon Telegram-Tribune
San Luis Obispo, CA 934.01 P. O. Box 112
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
San Luis Obispo City Clerk .
P. 0. Box- 8100 Councilwoman Penny Rappa
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 City-of San Luis Obispo
P. 0. Box 8100
Hon. Ron Dunin, Mayor SLO, CA 93403-.8100
City of San Luis Obispo
P. 0. Box 8100 Priscilla. Graham .
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 600 Santa Lucia
Los Osos, CA 93402
Daniel. E. .Krieger
662 Islay Michael Multari
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Community Development
Director
Wendy Waldron City of SLO
525 Mitchell Street P. 0. Box 81.00
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SLO, CA 93403-8100
/-3S
THE LAW OPFICEs OP
GEORGE B. O'NEILL Q'NEILL & O'NEILL
DANIEL J. O'NEILL 1014 PALK'STREET
SAN Lms OBISPO,CALUDIVIIA 93401
Registered Mail (803) W-7995
March 28, 1989
Mr. and Mrs. Norman Lerner
124 Highland Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lerner:
I represent homeowners who reside in Tract 104, Ferrini
Heights.
They are concerned that you propose to subdivide lot seven (7)
which you recently purchased from the Wards.
The neighborhood plan is protected and governed by the
Declaration of Restrictions covering Tract 104 (which includes
your lot) , which was recorded on July 18, 1956, and referenced in
the original deed to the Smiths. It provides that no structure
shall be erected on any lot in said tract other than one single
family dwelling not to exceed one story, no structure shall be
erected on any lot having an area of less that 7500 square feet,
and no lot shall be subdivided nor any part less than thewhole
thereof granted, conveyed, or transferred.
The conditions, restrictions and reseryations were
established for the benefit of present and future owners of lots
in said tract. They pass with each and every lot in the tract
and bind all present and future owners.
As owners of lots in Tract 104, my clients will have no
alternative except to see that the restrictions are enforced if
youcontinue with your proposal to subdivide lot Seven (7).
very 1 yours,
George B. O'Nei
GBO:ss
cc: Community Development. District
i'
CMINUTES
t;r id y L
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Regular Meeting of May 4, 1989
Present:
Chairperson Jerry Michael, Gloria Heinz, Priscilla Graham, Patricia Nicholson, James
Fickes, Mark Hall-Patton, Leo Pinard, Wendy Waldron.
Absent:
Bruce Sievertson, Dan Krieger
Staff:
Terry Sanville Principal Planner
Item *1: Subdivision of Land .at 124 Highland Drive.
Terry Sanville introduced the project and the reasons why it had been submitted by staff
for CHC review. Sanville referenced a letter submitted by the property owner's
attorney. Chairperson Michael opened the discussion for public comment and asked that
the property owners or their representatives spcak.. Chi stopher Toews, attorney
representing the property owners, indicated that he was not sure of the reasoning why
this item was being considered by the CHC at this time; he was there to listen to the
J public testimony and learn from the CRC's discussion. Terry Simon, design consultant for
the property owner, commented on some of the design elements of the proposed three-lot
subdivision.- Simon indicated that their intent was to try to accomodate the preservation
of historic resources into the eventual development proposal for the property.
Residents of the surrounding neighborhood spoke (Emmons Blake, Carla Sanders, Steve
Hockaday, Neal Kockaday, Les Dirkens) indicating that the property was an important part
of the community's heritage, that it had been used as the center for the.Mt. Bishop dairy
operations, that future lot splits would damage the cultural and historic value of the
site, that the purpose of the dead restrictions on the property was to preserve it as a
important historic site.
Wendy Waldron joins the meeting
Chairperson Michael closed the public testimony portion of the hearing and asked for CHC
comments.
Mark Hall-Patton indicated that he had researched the history of the site on request by
city staff and indicated that the site and structure are historically significant.
Hall-Patton reviewed the history of the Ferrini family and their use of the site
indicating that the Mt. Bishop dairy was a Grade 'A° dairy and well known in the area.
The site was used for dairy operations at the time the house was built. The house was
designed by Hilda Ferrini which makes it unique because she was untrained in
architecture; the knoll was chosen for locating the ranch house because it had a good
view of the dairy operations and was free from flooding that occurred in the lowlands;
the site is one of the few sites in the city that was used as a dairy ranch house; the
O house itself is significant because it includes lumber taken from a Norwegian freighter
(the Elbe) that foundered off the cost in 1938 -- some of the lumber is metric sized.
f
I
Page 2 — CHC Minutes: May 4, 1989
Pat Nicholson said that she remembered the dairy was operating when she moved to San Luis
Obispo in 1956. The access to the house was from Foothill, the tract had not been
developed and there were animals on the property.
Waldron asked Hall-Patton how large was the original diary ranch. Patton indicated that
he was not certain.
Hall-Patton indicated that the structure and the site are significant because they meet
criteria included in Appendix C of the city's Historical Preservation Guidelines. These
criteria include Section I.3 (Building Style); Section VI.1 (History Person) and
Section VIIL1 and VIIIA (History-Context).
On a motion by Hall-Patton. seconded Pinard, the CHC found that the site and the
structure at 124 Highland Drive are historically and cultural significant (because it
meets historic resource criteria contained in the city's Historic Preservation
Guideline) and that the site should not be further subdivided. Motion passed: seven
ayes; one abstention. (Waldron missed most or all of the public testimony part of
the hearing and consequently abstained from voting.)
Item 02' The Addition of Two Apartments to a Site at 1328 Archer Street
Sanville presented the staff report indicating that this item had been referred to the
CHC by the ARC. Tom Braijkovich, architect representing the property owners, talked to
the CHC about the project. The discussion touched on the historical importance of the
existing building, the design details of the proposed changes to the existing house, and
the pros and cons of requiring that the new building at the rear of the property
accurately reflect the historic style and detailing of the existing structure.
After further discussion focusing on the formulation of motions, the CHC considered four
motions and approved three as noted below:
On a motion of Heinz, seconded by Nicholson, the CHC found that the existing
residence is historically significant because of its historic architectural style and
because it was previously used as a weather station. (Motion unanimously passed.)
On a motion by Pinard, seconded by Graham, the CHC found that the proposed changes to
the existing structure alter its historic and architectural character. The project
architect should further research the design details of rehabilitating the existing,
structure using local examples and information in the local record. Details to
further research are the design of the widow's walk and the railings. (Motion
unanimously passed.)
Ona motion of Hall-Patton, seconded by Nicholson, to find that the proposed addition
is in keeping and compatible with the existing structure and that further research
should be done, using local examples of historic buildings and the local record, to
refine the design of the bay windows, railings, and widow's walk. (Motion failed on
a 4-4 vote.).
At this point the CHC talked some more about the desirability of having new structures on
historic sites reflect or not reflect the style of the existing structures. Pinard felt
that the new structure on this site should be separate from the existing structure so i
that it would be more clear that the existing structure is the one a with historical
significance.
Page 3 -- CHC Minutes: May 4, 1989
Some members felt that this concern should be discussed further at another meeting, that
a uniform policy might not be possible and that an site-by-site approach is best.
On a motion of Fickes, seconded by Heinz, the CHC found that the proposed addition is
compatible with the existing structure. (Motion passed 7-I, Pinard voting no.)
Item a3: Interim Archaeological Guidelines.
Sanville introduced the item. Waldron commented on the subcommittee's activities. The
committee identified typos in the draft guidelines in their packet and touched on the
issue of the survey of sites adjacent to seasonal creeks.
On motion of Waldron, seconded by Fickes, the CHC supported the interim procedures
and directed that they be forwarded to the Community Development Director
recommending implementation. (Motion unanimously passed.)
Item 04: CHC Preparation of National Register Aonlication for the Jack House,
Sanville indicated that because of limited staff resources, the recreation department was
not able to, make progress in completing the application for the Jack House and had asked
the CHC to take the lead. Pinard volunteered to prepare the application.
On a motion of Hall-Patton, seconded by Waldron, the CHC unanimously supported Pinard's
offer to prepare the National Register Application for the Jack House. A letter will be
sent to Jim Stockton informing him of Pinard's involvement.
Item 05: The ,,., uart rlyy Conference.
Chairperson Michael talked about the meeting, indicating that there was some interest in
the historic plaque program. That program should be placed on the next CHC agenda for
further discussion.
Item rt6: Preate II Survey Work.
Graham reported progress, indicated that over five hundred forms had been prepared and
that just about all of the properties had been photographed. Graham and Heinz are
continuing to complete the information. Other CHC members are welcome to assist.
Dem *7• Update on Second Round of Rehabilitation Loan Program,
Sanville indicated that the agreement with the Bank of America had been extended for
another year although the interest rates of the collateral loan program had been adjusted
somewhat. Staff envisioned that the program would be advertised in the summer with
applications accepted in the fall.
Item 08• Historic Preservation Conrcrencc Undate
Waldron and Graham reported to the committee on the happenings of the Historical
Preservation Conference in Los Angeles in April. The committee agreed that tapes of some
C, of the conference sessions should be ordered. Sanville indicated that staff would do
this.
Page 4 -- CHC Minutes: May 4. 1989
The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Terry Sanvillc
Secretary to the Committee
Y
/-Alo
ODIRECTOR'S ACTION NO. 89-07
AN ACTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF THE
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR
MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 89-016 LOCATED AT 124 HIGHLAND
DRIVE
BE IT RESOLVED by the Community Development Director of the City
of San Luis Obispo, as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Community Development Director,
after consideration of the tentative map of Minor Subdivision 89-016
and the staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the
following findings:
1. The design of the proposed tentative map is inconsistent with the
following General Plan policies:
a. All residential development proposals should be designed to
achieve full use of special site potentials, such as natural
terrain, views, vegetation, creek environs or other features,
and to mitigate or avoid .special site constraints such as
climatic conditions, noise, flooding, slope instability, or
ecologically sensitive surroundings. They should be
compatible with present and potential adjacent land uses.
b. Residential development should promote efficient urban
densities and diversity of design consistent with prevailing
or proposed neighborhood character, to enable adequate choice
of location, type, tenure, design and cost by families and
individuals working in or enrolled near San Luis Obispo.
2. The site is not physically suited for the type and density of
development proposed.
3. The proposed subdivision is not appropriate at the proposed
location, and will not be consistent with the prevailing
character of the neighborhood.
4. The proposed subdivision would violate the letter and intent of
private deed restrictions intended to guide the physical design
and appearance of lots within this neighborhood (Tract 104) .
The foregoing document was passed and adopted this 14th day of April,
Cl� 1989.
KA^(
Community Development Director
By: Ken Bruce, Hearing Officer
8555 rut270
rr.
::'.�..;. •,; ]fscr.eearlcn i]f Bad'relcrin9s
Boor all syn aT thee% pre•ante Uz% A. L. F&MINI and 11L.Dd L. 1'88=p
husband and wife, owners of tract Pa.;lD1a� in %to city or Dan Lada Otis,»►
[, soaaty of day Luis Cbisyo, stats of California, as per orp hereof recorded
lam 12, 1956, ii bok :y rap, 98 of Ncfa in Ua office of t8, reendrr of
'j •:':;' &aid couaJ, do borltp carWy and belare that said par'.taa have sotatblisbod
"; t7.'`•- and dc. hmtetp establia], for tba bandit of prawst and rature owners wad
eaotalaromers of acid Tract Co. 204► th following eendItioax, restrictions►
wad r400rvatioas suble-t to rbieb paid Into alall be bald h said oawrs
ani shall be sold and la:avalad t7 thns rad vhiab mall Save to tad peas
(:•., -. .' with such and a Tory lot to amid Tract 6•r. 1011, and 041 apply to and bind
the belts, devdsess, veh airtrators, exocot.ore, and OUnr respective saeaassors
\ La iatenrt asc aeai
Qat of text prevent owura, to-alts
1' 2
All Ltts in raid tract, except Lat 1 to Block D► 8h•11 to wind for
wroldlbtiel purpo-D• oulr, f-) structnv &tell he eroet:d, altorwl, plprod
] or pe."U,124 to asralo ca e-j lot in said tract, accept raid Lot 1 iu
Mack D, otbar thcj \tae oir,;]a fr=U$ .':al]i:;. not to ere::d ons-attry is
height &bon Il's norvAl let Iowa], and a `rival■ gararr i'eT out ,.ars them
tine caro and ca.••tcaarf oat-hi2d1r7a4 Paid lot 1 Li Most D mull to aced
for r nvatlAvlal and !eligicus Furperae ca1T and t1w cev<narrte, taonditiaas
sad re&Lie+.ions israia act fcrth 00cb are contrary to cath on of said
Lot l to Sleek D &:all act M,l•f berr.to.
Bo ivl:diad aball be located seater thea 20 feat to Um fro:,t lot 3isa,
air toarar thta 10 feet ta any aide street lits► we nnecor thv S lost to
�';;. Yts adjalaiag lot lion. its baildi;g oxcrat a garcv, par ot;ar rn'�EaJldity=
a_.•.^" located 1C Peet or ran Arm the front is% Pim► shall be located mater
' than 5 lint to nay dale lot Lim.
'
•�t.,;.. ul
lie atrvctan► &ball to erected, placed or permitted to rottaia on any
: . ••„` lot a? Portion of a lot having an one of Imam filen 7500 square leets or _
r a width of Lee tarn 75 feat at the f>rc•!t buildlog "t-back line.
f• Yi
!,11. M. . Construction, mthod of comtruetion, materials mead, &W buildings
stmtum sr rovasoat erected eta said
��'•' ..: ;' � promisee eha11 eonfors to the
standards of the Onifam Building Codd In effect at the date of cosatrectim
of such haildinQa structure, or lvrvvm vt.
M
No main bu11G1aQ or structure abali be eoustraetee.. on yep ry aidentdal
LA fa said tract, until the general dssige thereof has bten mpproved ty
cut or sore >sabore of tis follawits etmritttasr As Le lorrini Edda f,
Parr'1a4, and loltsn L. Fwriai, she are b@reta ds&SJ]natetl 6=4 &WAnted
m a ecmittes sitbr mLwgalrry or collactire77 !her the pmrsl Shp
and itapr'oesaat Of Raid trastp Pro&idad honer that it said plan of
far<"WoJamt or dssip of &age soap ottmtun Ens not been roved Or
se,lpetted Vitt”30 days !!ea an data soap qm !r�t
".. tai& appUed is retprasted, than
�:; •:: .-, Delisa ahsil hs heated V pmts been osatplLd with.
XTy: ta
4,�„'li"l. IA '1!t' lY'.\w..tr.�j.,( 1J��vv lhS. �'J�'n I'. I' .i•Y tI7.•tl.'`A fN,.V, p .. ...n• y.a'
't 111' 1 A, 1 /.11�fT�r�•.T �b '11 '7l ] AI \ n IT':rI f11'1' 1, f � , -
';l:u�
1,A, \. Way
, • !�I•. ibl� lI l �,111A tr �•
K {> I
.•.rE.Y,. .1,• +�ii�:� �'C w;0.,'IL'[I:1,;rt/Jtij;1tps"1.!•1 \t' /. .,��,,1.. .1 '�`"•i '' .. ..1 /'�. ..t
855 171
Mw person of &M rare Otter than the C-sucani" ra(s, to-At ;r
occupy Lry tFulldIsig or any )Fft., airrI,, tjikt this c%jv,Fljujp, AlIll,11 not ;rv,qnt
0CCUPmJ1CY 17Y 'Ist atiC WrWarit.m ,r - Ciffe"-FIL race, .nth any Own,,r
or tenant.
A
Vil
No trailer, tenement, tent, RhAFrIA, ArArmp", harri, or *Iw.r o%ittFA;ijdjng
tu aroctod Sit the tract, nhAT13 al. arty Tim I.- unod an a
A� f,rljortrily,
or PSMAntntly, nor shall ony rtmrt,;rt or a Lemporm-y t- used
T"AI'lence,
VII
NO cAl"AllinE RheJ11 M II"rvllt-t-^ to tw conh.viw'.d, or &Bft:mb]Ad
If. any lot in sald tract FFxsf,j.t ar tw-minaft.-r I,rovjU,l, :,:1r:l LJ,url a
inrle :wily ort?-atti-y )weilink. r,,TjFTA, a rnvnd rlwls &Fair c.f ,,()U eq;F Arm
:vat in L!•- main eLrvL tura e.<iu�:av cf open porri.,,FF, ^,jjjr,, jjj
to all ),,!.a In sari tract JlAFY1nP a mailt.wt f 75 fan L,or 76 feet.,
the rrotAnd floor area of the resin atcurt,im an Mtw,vp dvrjnr..j oh:.Il tic. not
Iota thsai 12UU squar* r"t.
IT
No let Bh&U he subdivided nor any Part Lmsb than t,),e whole thereof
granted, convsjwd, or transferred, except (a) Wial, a fraction f,,r a lot r.rly
be granted and cormynd to tkw owmr In fee ,r LIMA adjGlnlns I*Luro%3 lot
provided meld fraction be or Uniform Width arr.] ronLIF.u,.-jr. L. I .1.rul lotfi '
for the whole depth of lot from whirh takrri, on,: 14,4 ri"�:.r wi, pmedre A
(that is, th3 lands Ow-led Ly U& grantor of vaim frfir-Lioin; ul which acid
tract is a part, *hall not Le reduco,$0 Ule 113mainini- hr,,:, 0,-r,.of will
be loan than 7500 aware feet. (b)
a lot, am a frtLrt.jo!l of an 41.10ning
lot may be granted LoLethor, if said fra,tion Le of unjf,," tFjj!i.jj C3,1 vu
to the acid lot, for the W,ulA depti, Of it& lot of whichL Fit a
apart, and tAs arm of rj.rF,tIun
Ur F-AvAnt!P-ja (the L,!rtr, A,.,. Brei wlcre l'
r
described) of %hich said tract is a part. In nut. rrfh,rold I.o ir. ar.0
containing loss th4-. 71,00 3:u.n. fou L.
No fowla, or damootic artimair, otter Uxan house pets c,r, •Iogg, shill
be kept or harbored on said promises.
Prasioes shall not be used for the purpose of drillinj Uuire.tn fed- or
producing therefrom, oil, gma or any other mineral or for t1lo
removal of &M of the earth thbrafroal,
X.11
No bill boards or se"Irtimemanto shall be erected or placed an raid or.
pre:Azes except "Property For Sala" " "For Rentz advertlawIml-slLa rFFlAtjzv
only to the property an which they are placed*
The said land, or &M Lntdrast or satato therein, shall not an 801.1#
laAmeds conveyed, or otherwise transferred except by an Instrument In jrtiJr.e A.
which shall -1-taln all restrictions, liftlLatione and coalitions which 1psA.
herein act forth or by proper record referanco staking the name a part of
the said InaLr-Amante
A
t%r1;11rVt7z*.W11I1 rl-11fI1(-rV7111*q
rp
iiL ;f. :4 A.'Ad
!�k'U,
r1�n1s „-'�x .c ' �if ij i `e:.. `.k.�lE�i�•I�r JM• t{1 i\14�iG �t�
ia$daJC.a4ti... luiv►:<„ji,�lY
M 2
1
IF
i
Siv
\
If the parties or.rrtor or auy of thnar Or 41%,IF HeLa w:• saaignn,
ab&n triolate or attsay; to r101ste ay Id tl:o rr.\r.ua.a Ir.roin, It shav
be lawful far any o4mr parson or poroo0.: owning uy rucl fir-party situatt,
In said tract or sul,din:sion to proe.9,ut" .-ry pro.se,tlr{e .t la" ar I
in equity aguiast t.hw Parson or penorm vinlst I wp nr actio; ting W violets
any teen soenosnt and either to prownt hLa or ,.to,u fret so doing ur to
recover chaps or etbr Cuss for seeh ro:atiom.
ry ([r;
Iatalldation of wry was of those eovor.e.nta b7 jud,mwW: or Crnurt order jw
ahall is no ries affect &47 of the othor proviaionu % ma
high hhall rein in 1
full force and effort.
vi
t
Sb Oovst.aaW, voclltion.7 and metre.acme tmmin set I,rth af,%U inu.^e
to and We with Its Iwtrd omvidod tunnrar the!. a violottlia thereof styli
not defeat or rvntsr irrvaiLd {.he lion of a.q rwrugrwfs or dnucl of trust
ands le BOOS frith std fca valmw•
Xarsnto for public rdilues rod inci.d.ntal r oroa
tw P ery borob
reserved tido$, onr, 'Vtl' along and thiuurE o].1 thorn tortrlt{ otriyr
share and dssiQnataA "Ut111t7 iasnaea epnu tha cop of salt trxt. �\
i
ZA ttIT1PSt HflE}iICF, thr: parties hereto have hereunto not their �.
hands this 23rd day of Jaw, 1956.
r / r{ ' ""•'SEG—+_�
l•Zi�O i'Ml�
fiTl3• err
i
I
1
STATE CF CAL370SYlA �n
CCWT Q' SAY ZZX CMLSM,
On Jurr 23, I^56, before s, the wnderaigwsd, a Notary public in and for
said oonnty and staW, porsonalIj appeared A. 1., MUM and HILDA S.
1YRNIYI taown to &be to be the persons whose Maass ars subscribed to the
within laetr acnt sad acknowLdged that they /Niscuted the also
hand tnd official Malo /
%./ i 4 •. t O arJc • Or •
';(• �y✓+ @ Counts and states
V. 1
C)OoamaM NIL...:e1
—'.tfiCORO DX R EST OF
10� IY.►% J
WS41144l{honoree R1?0
w�caaro
JUL 181956
� -alga � ,• a'
7"^w�rllewyq.l\rYraw•tiRw
, .�..' y
AGHLE,
Dated October 18, 1956 and recorded octoher 2L, 1956 in Book 866,
• at Page 579 of official !Wcordo .
A. L. FE'1111INI and HILDA E. FiFIVITNI . first partles; LOYD GLTN WATT"'
and BETTY F. WATT3, second parl.1r,.,; A:MOLD A . V,,)L!-!Y and DIMHA M.
VOLNY, third parties; (NZ-; -.,I . and MiUllfl!! "'. '.')ATJ_), fourth
j;arties; 11AHOLD F.TLIPW ;.:,d 1,. p1j,U);V1: t I*if'th rjart,Jes:
JAMES BARRY '.'M'rTli and MiA71;:Ll r-11. sixth part.1co: and ti.
i:UMENE SNEE and PETTY J .
li partie. .
the first a certain tract of
land hereinafter d(:!:;L,_11 t:(,d:
the L;al (i r,atjc�;
I '.I(' -)r- the -J' .'Tu71(-- , 1956
Tract of
Land, 1.1h-i L c I I -U(- )n thr� , 1. 'Itt; (Iijv of., July ,
1956 _ie-, 0 7t,
Ct),,i!ty Recor-
de r I o 0 A"f'i c e J'Li,!
Iti., said beciarjl ! -)'I �X therein one
Farur:aph a..;
JI i4io per.on of iLny race :)t;::.-Ir race shall use
or occupy any building or
1_,0t,, :xcePt that• this covenant shall
not prevent occupancy by dor.,ic"t.1c oervants ol' a different race
domiciled with any owner or tenant"; and
WHERLAS, after the execution and recordation of said Declaration
of Restrictions, said first parties sold Lots in said hereinafter
described tract of land to the other partieo, above named, and are
about to sell properties to other persons; and
WHE.;-EAS2 it has come to the attention of the parties hereto that
no F.H.A. financing can be obtaii.-ed for property in said Tract as
long as the provisions of the restrictive covenants above set
forth continue to be effective; zAnu
6VILL'REA150 the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled Such
covenants unenfurceable ao being ulicon-titutiunal; and
WHEREAS, the presence of such restriction will affect the ability
of owner and purchasers to receive adequate financing and will
thus affect property values, and the saleability of said property;
and
WHLREAS., it appears desirable to have said restrictive covenant
eliminated.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of $1.00 and other good
and valuable consideration paid by the first partles to the other
parties hereof, record of which Is hereby acknowledged, it is
agreed by and between all of the parties hereto that said Restric-
tive Covenant above set forth and being Paragraph VI of the Dec-
laration of Restrictions, recorded in Book 955, at Page 270 of
official Records, San Luis Obispo County Recorder's Office, shall
be and the same Is herewith completely eliminated from the Reutric-
D
-2-
tions applical)le to the hcreinal'tor descrIbc!d t,r',tct. :)f real pro-
perty, and to all Lot.:. contained therein , lnclud.i:ltr r;1.1� rlut limiter
to the Lets of all the parties hereto, and all of :;aid properties;
are herewith declarod free and clear of an;,• "Lich re:;trIctive pro-
Vl ;iOn ;, a ; art: CO t:,.used :111 :;aid Paragraph ,,.I Set_ for-th;
and all Ui silo t:artle:; !lel' lt. 7 , f-11(27 r r•e:jrec11 i ve !u-arltet?j , 1-7e.IIs
and assig!l;; :shall have thr vi -ht: , ullii t,he, : ilerC,li.ih granted
the right to :.l ;c ;a;ld pro;,(.rt:i :s :nli all Of' tilcc: az i;ih ;-ara-
graph V1 Of said hecl:tration .�1'. ieuir cY, uns alio•✓,, rel-'erred to
had never been made .
The tract Of land her'CL:i:1 rJVt: l:'(:1't)1'!'eCi to i;.; 'iC:,:C I'it)ed t1'; i011ol."
t:0-wi t:
TII::� .''.':il i ••!':ir,n `.V 1•.?C�tf'.C'(1 .1.r? . i ,
o!' Sal: 1 ). ill"1_.�'
>
t t', l�•.,:, !,i 7! e p;7 r1, i.rl,larly
a:, _C71.1uus:
Tract 104, i !1 tljh !
CJI'ded JUI'1@ 1.-' 1 , i 0.- ;ie r' ;1:1r� t;;l^rout' r'e-
, .� . •..'1 i . .t i. I ';f":3 � .1 Jt HIL!i :i., I. thQ f.)!t' I C:e
Of the _iccurdur oi' " t! !„ J :�;, ;. :. .1 *, ��(.1 i UL)rrr.ia .
The ;jel'eto int tiir r'" ;'..it.icj loc.' ted with i.r;
said Tract r)f Land an(I I1crCYditi) ;:lade sub.l.t2ct t.0 !S!;:1 ;;. r+jrreement are
as follows:
2. Loyd Glyn 'Watts and Betty P'. ',jatts , second parties,
Lot 2 in Block A, Tract 104;
3. Arnold it. Volny and Diana M. Volny, third parties,
Lot j in Block A. Tract 104;
4. Glen 4 . Salo and Marian L. Salo, fourth parties,
Lot u" in Block A, Truct 101 ;
5. Harold L. Pillow and Jo;,ce L. Pillow, fifth parties,
Lot ii in Block D, Tract 1011;
6. James Barry Smith and Mabel M. Smith, s:ixtn parties,
Lot 7 in Block i;, Tract 101E; and
7. H. Eugene. Smee and Betty: .7, ; mee, seventh parties,'
Lot 2 in Block F, Tract 104.
kar /���
MEETING
AGINGA
UATE �• �ITE�► #
C
Nativity, ®— of
�. Our .Lad
December 5, 1.989
City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo , CA 93401
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
I have recently been approached by parishioners in regard to the
proposed land split of the old Ferr•ini property near Bishops Peak
School . It is of concern since the chartering of land in the
.Highland area included our Church land which was donated by the
Ferrini family. The changing of the charter restrictions in the
proposed situation would set the precedent for a change in the
chartering restrictions on our land . The effect of such a change
could allow us to split and sell parts or our land originally
designated for Church use only.
This would be a violation of the original intent of the donors of
our land and those who made this land available to the city for
housing . It would be morally and ethically reprehensible.
I would like to emphasize that Nativity of Our Lady Church has no
such intention of splitting or. selling this land . Even hearing
of the possibil-ity of such a thing being allowed has angered and
frightened parishioners. We believe the intentions of the
original owners ( the Ferrini 's) should be honored , not only in
our case, but in the proposed case near Bishops Peak .
Si cerely,
Rev. Michael Cicinato
Pastor
CC . Diocese of Monterey
i::f Denotes action by Lead r o.cin
;)es and by: RECEIVED
i IVAO
Acv. 1 DEC 5 9
b
Y+
AN��4E17K a
S
221 Daft' Avenue, San Luis Obispo, California. 93401 (805) 544-2357
MEETING AGENDA
U. DAMN TORRANCE i�-�g°�
WGHLnrm DmvB DATE - ITEM #
snrr Luis osrsro, cA euoi
Dear Mayor Ron Dunin and Council Members .
First , congratulations to you ,Mr . Mayor , and to council members
Penny Rappa and Bill Roalman , for your election and installation
I know you will all do the very best for the property owners
of San Luis Obispo .
I call attention town appeal filed for 124 Highland Drive, for
the division of the property from one to three lots . I hopes that
you will all turn down that appeal . The kind of crowding and
density change this would bring about should not be allowed in
this city . Also , it appears to be an effort to circumvent the
zoning intent . WE should not tend to increase water usage by
allowing undesireable changes of this type.
U In another vein , I believe we should discontinue contributing
city money toward advertising for tourists while we still have
a water shortage . I read tourism is up this year by 13% over las
year . Also those who cater to tourists shoulld have the same
percentage of water use reduction as regular residents .
Thank you , and lets pray for RAIN. . . .
U. Dann Torrance
i0Ceun t
Vj_sil Aq.
1f�/Clerkprig. 1 RECEIVED
If�J 1�',X�CtSS!
&F< DEC 4 W64
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA