Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/25/1978City Council Minutes April 25, 1978 Page 2 A. The City Council continued their preliminary review of the County Land Use Element for the San Luis Obispo Planning Area (continued from April 17, 1978). The City Council used a guide prepared by the planning staff for discussion purposes. 1. URBAN RESERVE LINE On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Mayor Schwartz, that the 1 council adopt the recommendation of the planning staff on the Urban Reserve Line, Item A through D inclusive. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff Recommendation - Item 1 Urban Reserve Line. a. The precise location (contour elevation) of the Urban Reserve Line along the Irish Hills and the Santa Lucia Foothills should be labeled. The text should be expanded to present the rationale for the reserve line location (especially in these two areas). b. The Urban Reserve Line east of the Johnson Avenue residential area was different from the line shown on the city's general plan. The city's plan showed three small areas outside corporate limits but within the urban reserve. As "minor expansion areas" these three sites might accommodate some limited resi- dential development if annexed to the city and provided with urban services. Areas beyond the urban reserve (e.g. the Goldtree Tract) should be designated as rural lands. Any development rights in this area should, at a minimum, be transferred downslope to land inside the urban reserve. C. The Urban Reserve Line should not include the upper "unbuildable" portions of the county's Marsh Street site. Since this area was clearly beyond the urban services limit and had very steep slopes it should not be developed with buildings. An agriculture or rural lands designation would seem more appropriate. The Urban.Reserve Line „should . be the same as the city limits in this area. 2. RURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USE On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City Council adopt the recommendation of the planning staff on Rural Residential Land Use. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff Recommendation - Item 2 Rural Residential Areas. a. Designating South Street Hill as rural residential probably would not be a problem if the development code were accurately and uniformly applied. It would result in about one house per twenty acres. However, only if the density transfer concept (described in the text) were a workable solution would the rural resi- dential designation be acceptable for this area. Individual 20 -acre lots on the hillside would not be acceptable. b. The method of applying the density transfer concept should be carefully evaluated prior to designating the South Street Hill as rural residential. If it became too cumbersome or workable, the area should be designated rural lands. C. Will the density transfer concept allow the construction of housing which exceeds six units per acre in the Margarita expansion area? If so, how many units will be transferred from the South Street Hill area? d. To be consistent with the city's general plan, the rural residential designation should be restricted to areas north of the Prado Road alignment. City Council Minutes April 25, 1978 Page 3 Areas south of Prado Road were relatively flat and would probably allow one house per five acres. This area may be partially affected by future airport noise levels exceeding 60 db. Rural residential development within the urban reserve was inconsistent with the policies of the city's general plan. Five -acre break- downs of property south of Prado Road would preclude efficient urban use in the future. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City Council recommend to the County of San LUis Obispo that areas shown on the Land Use Map as Rural Residential remain as Rural Uses until the county develops a density transfer system. Motion carried, all ayes. 3. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City Council adopt the recommendation of the planning staff. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff Recommendation - Item 3 Residential Single Family. a. The city's general plan considers portions of the Ferrini property as a "minor expansion area ". The annexation of this property and other small areas adjacent to the city is controlled by policies within the general plan. Their annexation was not necessarily tied to the expansion of the city's existing water supply. The county's land use element should contain a separate discussion of the planning of these minor expansion areas. b. The county land use element text should emphasize the interim use of expansion areas.for agriculture. Paragraph #1 under "programs and standards" should specify a minimum parcel size. The city staff recommends the following: - If the minimum parcel size for single family areas is 20 -acres or greater (with smaller parcels allowed only upoii'dnnexation ' to the city) then there is no reason to require the preparation of a specific plan. - If the minimum parcel size for single family areas is less than 20 -acres specific plans should be prepared for each of the expansion areas prior to further subdivision. Preparation of the specific plans should be a joint responsibility of the city, county, and affected property owners. - At no time should the minimum parcel size be less than 10 -acres within potential single family expansion areas (subdivision to parcels smaller than ten acres will preclude efficient future urban development). It should be recognized that the pattern of development within the San Luis Obispo Planning Area is different than other parts of the county. City planning policies discourage suburban sprawl outside the city limits. C. Irish Hills Area. If the development transfer concept is applied to flood prone areas (shown as agriculture on the map) will densities within the single - family area substantially exceed those allowed in the city's R -1 zone? How many housing units are we talk- ing about? - No additional neighborhood commercial development will be needed in this area to serve existing or future residences. The Laguna Village Shopping Center at the corner of Madonna and Los Osos Valley Road is in the process of being expanded. A total of 13+ acres are available for commercial use. Up to 130,000 square feet of additional neighborhood commercial floor area is being planned. d. Dalidio Area. - Why does the land use element say that this area should be developed as an urban plan development (UPD)? There appears to be little difference between this property and other expansion areas shown on the city's general plan. City Council Minutes April 25, 1978 Page 4 - The land use element should indicate the need to establish open areas adjacent to Highway 101 to buffer future development from freeway noises. This setback area will also improve this section of freeway as a "scenic entryway" to the City of San Luis Obispo. Other sensitive ecological areas which are candidates for open space use include the grove of eucalyptus trees and creek near Madonna Road. e. Orcutt /Islay Hill Area. -. The discussion of specific plans should be eliminated from this paragraph and become a part of the "programs and standards section ". The preparation of a specific plan should be required for all major expansion areas. The land use element text should reference pertinent: sections of the Government Code which permit cities and counties to prepare specific plans. The role of the specific plan, as a way of implementing general plans and controlling the extent and timing of development, should also be emphasized. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the 10 -acres residential minimum policy not apply to mobile homes; mobile homes should be confined in approved mobile home parks only. Motion carried, all ayes. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City Council encourage the County Board of Supervisors to require joint approval of City and County on all specific plans. Motion carried, all ayes. 4. COMMERCIAL LAND USES On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City Council adopt the recommendation of the planning staff. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff.Recommendation - Item 4 Commercial Land Uses. a. Young's Giant Food may not be in the right location to effectively provide commercial services to nearby residential areas. Th existing building could eventually be converted to industrial use similar to those along Sacramento Drive. The Laurel Lane Shopping Center provides commercial services to the Johnson Avenue neighborhood. Future residential areas near Islay Hill will be served by convenience commercial stores on the west side of Broad Street at the Tank Farm Road intersection. Commercial uses at this location will help intercept shoppers coming into the city from Rolling Hills and Country Club Estates. Therefore, Young's Giant Food will have a very limited market area; the site should not be further developed as a shopping center. 5. INDUSTRIAL (RURAL) On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the City Council adopt the recommendation of the planning staff, 'including revision of the city general plan. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff Recommendation - Item 5 Industrial (Rural). a. The text of the land use element should simply state that urban services will not be provided to rural industrial areas adjacent to the city. This would include £ire, police, water, and municipal sewer services. b. It is questionable whether uses which attract a large number of customers should be allowed within rural industrial areas. Customer - intensive uses typically require urban services. For this reason it is questionable whether non - industrial uses should be accommodated. City Council Minutes April 25, 1978 Page 5 In addition, it is questionable whether customer - intensive uses would be desirable within established flight paths and noise influence areas of the San Luis Obispo County Airport. If the county feels that these uses may be desirable in some instances the land use element or the development code should clearly describe performance criteria which would make their construction acceptable. These criteria should address the following issues: ' - Noise exposure - Police and fire protection - Airport safety concerns - Privisions of adequate sewer and water service (to include adequate fire flow as prescribed by ISO standards). C. Both the city and county staffs should collectively refine the entire rural industrial portion of the San Luis Obispo area land use element. It continues to be questionable to city staff whether the 5 -acre minimum is appropriate for all areas designated rural industrial. For example: 1. The Tank Farm (both existing and abandoned areas) could be planned for larger parcel sizes (say 20 -acre minimums) with further breakdown allowed only after an industrial park plan is developed. 2. Other areas may be shown as agriculture until they are needed for future industrial expansion. 3. Rural industrial properties along Edna Road in the vicinity of the airport might be allowed to use the 5 -acre minimum as the appropriate land use standard. On motion of Councilman Jorgensen, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the City Council request that the County of San Luis Obispo not support user - intensive ' or polluting industries. Motion carried, all ayes. 6. CIRCULATION On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, that the City Council adopt the planning staff recommendation on circulation, including the addition of Orcutt Road and also ask the County of San Luis Obispo to show only Major Regional Transportation routes. Local and collector streets should be deleted from the land use map. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff Recommendation - Item 6 Circulation. a. South Street This extension may provide a logical east -west connection. The city has prepared an EIR which evaluates six alternative alignments for this street connection. The city has tentatively designated one of the alignments as the preferred street location (see attached). This project will probably be given a low priority for construction by the city. (The PUC has given it a very low priority for funding.) In addition, it is questionable whether the number of cars using the South Street overpass would warrant the spending of several million dollars to construct it. b. Santa Rosa Street The land use map should show Santa Rosa Street as a "proposed" arterial between Foothill Boulevard and Highway 101. Depending on what street standard is used, this section of Santa Rosa will have to be widened to allow six lanes of traffic. The existing right -of -way north of Murray Street may be able to accommodate six lanes by reducing the size of the median strip, eliminating curbside parking on both sides of the street, and restriping. South of Murray Street some additional right - of -way will have to be secured to accommodate six lanes. City Council Minutes April 25, 1978 Page 6 C. Highway 1 B)Tass Only if the widening of Santa Rosa Street proves incapable of handling regional traffic could this.alternative be considered by.the city. The city will probably continue.to object to the-construction of the Highway 1 Bypass. Recent:studies prepared for the city by Wilbur Smith, .Inc., indicate that its construction is not essential to serving regional traffic needs.. Hopefully, the city will be able to work with the RTPA to amend the regional transportation plan and delete the Highway l Bypass proposal or more .clearly identify it as a future study item. d. Buckley Road Why is'Buckley Road shown as an urban collector when most of it lies outside the urban reserve limit and serves agricultural uses? This road probably will continue.to function as a rural collector street with little improvements required in the future (especially if the county is serious about retaining agricultural use in this area). e. Prado Road The extension of Prado Road east of Higuera Street probably will happen as .properties further-develop-in the future. The exact alignment of Prado Road in this area should be adjusted on the land use map to reflect the location of exist- ing rural roads. It is unclear from the text whether .there would be a full freeway interchange or whether access to Highway 101 would be limited. It is doubtful whether access to and from the southbound land of Highway 101 is possible since it would probably conflict with the Madonna Road on -ramp system. f.. The city staff would, be happy to work with the county;. staff to more precisely show the alignment of all arterial and collector streets. 7. RURAL LANDS On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Jorgensen, that the City Council adopt the recommendation of the planning staff on rural lands. Motion carried, all ayes. Staff Recommendation - Item 7 Rural Lands. a. Portions of the Davenport, Santa Lucia, and Irish Hills which are not protected by agricultural preserves and have slopes greater than 30% should be designated as rural lands. b. The southern portion of Islay Hill above the 320- foot-elevation should also be shown as rural lands. The text of the rural land use element should clearly define the boundary between agricultural lands and the portion of the morros which are designated rural lands. This boundary line should be based on the clearly identifiable change-in vegetation from grassland (used for agricultural grazing) to chaparrel /oak woodland. C. Major modifications of the topography or removal of significant amounts of vegetation should be avoided within rural land areas. Agricultural grading should be carefully controlled within rural land areas and require a grading permit. It might be desirable to identify the morros as a special area of concern; minimum parcel sizes should be at least 120 - acres. 8. PROJECT REVIEW PROCEDURE. On motion of Mayor Schwartz, seconded by Councilman Settle, that the City Council directs the city staff to work with the county staff to refine procedures for review of land development within the urban reserve line and that project review be made by the City Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council for action by the County Board of Supervisors. Motion carried, all ayes. 1 1 P City Council Minutes April 25, 1978 Page 7 9. OTHER COMMENTS Councilman Jorgensen urged the City Council.to encourage the county to approve less intensified use of the County Airport,- smaller.planes, less noise, no jets. Councilman Jorgensen also urged the City Council to re- emphasize adopted ' city policy not to extend water and sewer utilities outside the city limits. Common consent of the City Council that the City Council accept the concept of "villages" in the plan as their boundaries now exist, but would not support expansion of these boundaries. Common consent of the City Council that the City Planning Staff re- emphasize the prior council action on uses at the County Airport (see sewer /water extension agreement). Jan Hubbel, County Planning Department t, stated that it was the staff's plan prior to adoption of..the plan by the County, that the City would be given an opportunity to review the plan one more time as amended by the County. B. R.D. Miller, Administrative Officer, brought to the Council's attention two letters received from the firm of Priest, Richmond, Wolf and Rossi, con- sultants for 1) Ferrini Annexation; and 2) Foothill Annexation, requesting that the Council establish a procedure and schedule for processing the pro- jects through the City Council. R.D. Miller continued that due to the absence of two Planning Commissioners during the hearing of the Ferrini Project there was a technical question if the action was proper in accordance with policy adopted by the Planning Commission. He continued that he and staff had met and felt that both pro- jects should proceed through the city in accordance with adopted city policy and LAFCO recommendation. He said.that the Council would be asked to approve the following schedule for each project at the May 2 meeting: 1. FERRINI ANNEXATION - May 2, 1978 - Council receives Planning Commission report and sets hearing for prezoning and EIR_consideration. - June 20, 1978.- Public hearing -to consider Ferrini Annexation and prezoning requests. - July 5, 1978 - Final passage of prezoning ordinance and annexation hearing. 2. FOOTHILL ANNEXATION - May 2, 1978 - Council receives report from Planning Commission and sets hearing on prezoning. - June 20, 1978 - Public hearing on prezoning request. - July 5, 1978 - Final passage of prezoning of area. - No date set - LAFCO considers annexation. ' - No date set - City Council considers annexation. The City Council:received the recommendation without comments. C. There being no further business to come before-the City Council, Mayor Schwartz adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. to 12.:10 p.m. Thursday, April 27, 1978. APPROVED: June 7, 1978 Fitzpatrick, City Clerk