HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-05-2017 Item 07 - Public Hearing - Downtown Concept Plan Meeting Date: 9/5/2017
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt by Resolution the Downtown Concept
Plan supplement and illustrative poster as a long range vision and guide for public and private
investment Downtown.
REPORT IN BRIEF
The recent update to the General Plan Land Use Element in 2014 included an implementation
objective to update the Downtown Concept Plan to address the significant changes in or affecting
the downtown since the original plan, and to include opportunities for meaningful public input
(LUE Program 4.24).
Work has been underway on the Downtown Concept Plan since December 2015. The public has
been actively engaged in a variety of ways, including three public workshops. The Council-
appointed Creative Vision Team (CVT) has met 13 times, providing important input and design
assistance. On July 12, 2017, the CVT unanimously endorsed the Final Public Draft of the
Downtown Concept Plan supplement and poster.
The City Council last provided input on the Downtown Concept Plan at a joint study session
with the Planning Commission on October 4, 2016. The Planning Commission’s responsibility
includes review and recommendation of the City’s long-range plans to the City Council; as such,
it reviewed the Downtown Concept Plan on April 26, 2017 and on July 26, 2017, and
recommend adoption (with two minor text changes) to the City Council for consideration. A
Draft Council Resolution is included as Attachment A; the Final Public Draft of the Downtown
Concept Plan supplement and poster are included as Attachment B and C.
DISCUSSION
The Downtown Concept Plan is the community’s long-range vision for San Luis Obispo’s
Downtown, providing a road map for future public projects and guidance for private
development. The project was split into four phases, as shown in Figure 1, Planning Process
Graphic. We are now at the end of the public hearing stage of Phase 4, nearing com pletion of the
project.
Packet Pg. 193
7
Figure 1: Planning Process Graphic, August 2017
The attached Final Public Draft of the Downtown Concept Plan, which includes a plan
supplement and an illustrative plan poster, represents the work of residents, the general public,
stakeholders, the Creative Vision Team, staff, consultants and city advisory bodies.
Background
In late 1990, the City Council authorized the preparation of a Downtown Concept Plan and
authorized the City Manager to establish a committee of community design professionals who
would be willing to do the work on a voluntary basis. Chuck Crotser, Rodney Levin, Andrew
Merriam, Pierre Rademaker, and Kenneth Schwartz volunteered to be the design team for the
effort to develop a Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center (Downtown Concept Plan or
Plan).
The City Council adopted the Downtown Concept Plan by resolution on May 4, 1993, and it has
served as a vision for the downtown ever since. The recent update to the General Plan Land Use
Element in 2014 included an implementation objective to update the Downtown Concept Plan to
address the significant changes in or affecting the downtown since that time, and also to include
opportunities for meaningful public input (LUE Program 4.24). As part of the 2015-2017
Financial Plan, the City Council allocated funding for both the Downtown Concept Plan and
Mission Plaza Concept Plan projects. The Community Development Department took the lead
on the update of the Downtown Concept Plan, while the Public Works Department took the lead
on the Mission Plaza Concept Plan effort.
On August 18, 2015, the City Council approved the scope of work and request for proposal for
consultant services associated with updating the Downtown Concept Plan. In addition, the City
Council adopted a resolution creating the project’s advisory body, the Creative Vision Team
Packet Pg. 194
7
(CVT) and defined its term and charge. The City Council appointed ten community members to
serve on the CVT. The current roster includes: Chairperson Pierre Rademaker, Vice Chair Chuck
Stevenson, Chuck Crotser, Keith Gurnee, Jaime Hill, Eric Meyer, Melanie Mills, Matt Quaglino,
Annie Rendler, and Vicente del Rio. Ken Schwartz and Andrew Merriam also served for
approximately 10 months.
The Role of the CVT
The CVT has met 13 times. All meetings were open to the public and meeting information was
posted on the project webpage. As a group and as individuals, the CVT has been actively
engaged in the development of the Downtown Concept Plan. While most have backgrounds in
planning, design, or development, they are also downtown neighbors and business owners and
brought with them a wide a variety of interests and specialties. As outlined in the Council-
adopted guidelines, the CVT has an advisory role, and made recommendations to staff which
were considered in the development of the plan. In addition, CVT members provided pro bono
design work to help illustrate the plan; provided images, examples, and articles to inform the
plan development; reviewed and provided individual input on all plan drafts; and assisted with
all public engagement activities. They were critical in plan development.
Implementation
The original Downtown Concept Plan served as a vision for the downtown for almost 25 years,
and although not a regulatory document, it has been referred to over the years as guidance for
development projects and for public improvements downtown. The updated Downtown Concept
Plan will continue to serve this function.
The Downtown Concept Plan is one of many tools available to staff and stakeholders to
implement the General Plan. Staff will continue to review specific development applications in
the downtown for consistency with adopted regulatory documents, while using the Downtown
Concept Plan as guidance for the holistic vision for the downtown. As a visionary document, the
City will encourage general consistency with the Downtown Concept Plan and it will provide
decision makers with information on how each project can generally implement its concepts. In
addition, a prioritized list of public programs, projects, and actions needed for plan
implementation is included in Chapter 5. It will be referred to when updating other relevant City
planning documents, or developing Capital Improvement Program lists.
Public Engagement
In order to develop a true community vision for the downtown, public input was gathered early
in the project through a robust public engagement process, including stakeholder interviews, an
outdoor public open house with the Mission Plaza Master Plan team, an indoor public workshop,
an Open City Hall survey, and two neighborhood meetings with downtown residents. This input
was used to help develop the draft plan.
A wide-variety of input was also received at the joint meeting with the Planning Commission
and City Council on October 4, 2016. There was an interest in providing more detail on housing
options downtown and questions about whether pedestrian only or shared streets were more
Packet Pg. 195
7
Participants at the third Downtown Concept Plan
workshop on February 4, 2017.
appropriate in some areas of downtown. Based on that input, additional examples of housing
types were included in the plan, and proposed street types were further analyzed and illustated.
After the joint meeting, staff and consultants drafted an internal Administrative Draft of the
Downtown Concept Plan and made it available for staff and the CVT to review. Updates to the
administrative draft were completed by the end of January, 2017 and a Public Draft Plan was
released before the February 4, 2017 public workshop.
Approximately 150 people attended the project’s
third workshop and provided input on all aspects
of the Draft Plan, which was displayed around
the room on project summary boards by topic
area, as well as through two presentations.
Workshop participants were asked to provide
input in a variety of ways: Sixty-two
questionnaires were completed; comments were
provided on post-it notes and flip charts; and
participnts helped prioritize the Draft
Implementation Action List for public projects in
Chapter 5, by using dots to “vote” for their top 5
priorities.
A summary of all project outreach activities and
results are included in the Downtown Concept
Plan supplement as Appendix 1.
Plan Format
The original Downtown Concept Plan included a plan poster with illustrations on the front and
text on the back. The updated Downtown Concept Plan includes a plan poster and a plan
supplement. While the plan poster can be used by itself, for the complete Downtown Concept
Plan, one must also refer to the supplement, which contains significant additional background
information (including vision statement, planning principles and goals), mobility
recommendations, and implementation strategies.
Draft Plan Review and Revisions
Following the third public workshop in February, 2017, staff presented the Draft Plan and
collected input from the following City Advisory Bodies:
✓ Mass Transportation Committee (March 8)
✓ Bicycle Advisory Committee (March 16)
✓ Cultural Heritage Committee (March 27)
✓ Parks and Recreation Commission (April 5)
✓ Architectural Review Commission (April 17)
✓ Planning Commission (April 26 and July 26)
Packet Pg. 196
7
Overall, input was very positive. The most consistent type of feedback were questions about how
the plan describes height, which were often contradictory. On May 9th, the CVT reviewed the
public and advisory body input and provided staff direction. Following, in May and June, staff
and consultants refined the Draft Plan supplement and poster, incorporating input from citizens,
Advisory Body members, and the CVT. Below describes some of the key changes or additions:
1. Plan Supplement:
Chapter 1: Planning Context
• addition of a section discussing the plan’s compatabilty with the
Community Design Guidelines (page 1.4)
• addition of “The Changing Downtown” section (page 1.9) to discuss the
broader trends that were taken into consideration during plan development
Chapter 2: Vision, Principles and Goals
• updates to the Vision Statement, incorporating public and CVT input
• revisions to the plan goals to be consistent with General Plan height
language and to be more sensitive to height in the Downtown Historic
District (planning principle #7, goals 7.1 and 7.2 on page 2.4)
Chapter 3: Illustrative Downtown Concept Plan
• revisions to Table 3.1 Block Descriptions, particularly regarding height
and to describe changes to the illustrative plan noted below (pgs 3.6-3.10)
Chapter 4: Mobility and Streetscape
• updates to Figure 4.1 Street Types Diagram (p. 4.2), such as extending
Street Type B to the Marsh/Higuera Street intersection, and adjusting
locations of Street Type C to reflect input received
• updates to Figure 4.2 Bicycle Facilities Diagram (p. 4.14) to differentiate
proposed locations for a cycle track and buffered bike lane, and reflect
other input received
• development of additional cross sections to illustrate different street type
examples and refinements to better reflect architectural scale
Chapter 5: Implementation
• updates to the implementation list to reflect input received
2. Illustrative Plan (Figure 3.1): Many minor changes were made to clean up the
illustrative plan. The most significant changes include:
a. adding the Railroad Safety Trail adjacent to Pepper Street, and a bike bridge
across Monterey Street;
b. changing a portion of Morro St (from Higuera to Monterey Street) into a shared
street (Street Type D);
c. adding additional housing opportunities along Palm Alley (block 5);
Packet Pg. 197
7
d. removing a previously proposed park on Higuera Street (block 24);
e. updating the design of the shopping center at Marsh Street and Johnson Avenue,
with an enhanced creek walk, plaza and additional commercial mixed use (block
49);
f. extending a paseo from Nipomo to Carmel Streets, through blocks 27 and 28;
g. adding a pedestrian bridge between blocks 26 and 39, to connect a proposed
parking structure with hotel and conference center facilities across Marsh Street;
and
h. incorporating the Draft Mission Plaza Concept Plan design (block 11).
3. Sketches and Plan Poster: CVT volunteers Chuck Crotser, Pierre Rademaker and Keith
Gurnee used their extensive design skills to illustrate a few of the plan highlights, which
are included in Chapter 3 of the plan supplement. Pierrre and Chuck’s sketches also help
illustrate the Downtown Concept Plan poster showing the vision for two of the plan’s
gateway areas, a shared street concept, and infill concepts for two key downtown blocks
(33 and 42). Subconsultant 10 Over Studio developed the illustrative plan, and formatted
the plan poster so that it can be referenced by itself or in concert with the plan
supplement.
On July 12, 2017, at their 13th meeting, the CVT unanimously endorsed the Final Public Draft of
the Downtown Concept Plan supplement and poster.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On July 26, 2017, the Final Public Draft of the Downtown Concept Plan supplement and poster
was brought to the Planning Commission, which unanimously recommended adoption to the
City Council with two amendments:
1. Reword Action 19 so that it reads, "Explore ways to bring history alive in the Cultural
District area, including physical and virtual interpretive information on the area’s
natural, built, and social history. Topics could include the Northern Chumash tribes,
Anza National Historic Trail, and El Camino Real/Indian trade route, among others
(page 5.4).” [Wording in italics is the proposed addition; exact wording was adjusted
after the meeting.]
2. Emphasize safe connectivity across Hwy 101 for bicyclists. After reviewing the plan
language, staff believes that proposed Action 48, as worded, serves that function:
“Seek to improve the safety of the bicycle and pedestrian connection from the Marsh
and Higuera intersection to the Madonna Inn Bike Path and the Cerro San Luis
trailhead across Highway 101 (page 5.6).”
Plan Highlights
Following are some of the highlights of the Downtown Concept Plan. It is meant to give a feel
for some of the themes in the plan; please see Attachment B to review the full plan supplement:
Packet Pg. 198
7
• Downtown gains more legibility beyond its core: As downtown expands, its gateways
and entrances are better defined through design. Design elements unique to downtown
announce one’s arrival. There is an emphasis on signature buildings and public realm
improvements at downtown’s key entry points: A new roundabout at block 26 (the
Marsh/Higuera intersection); improvements to Santa Rosa Street, where Monterey,
Higuera and Marsh intersect; and an enlivened street front and new bike bridge adjacent
to the railroad trestle at Monterey and Pepper Streets.
• Downtown parking is located and designed strategically: While driving patterns are
changing, we still need to accommodate vehicle parking downtown-for now. Carried over
from the original plan, vehicles will primarily park in new structures outside of the
downtown core (accessed from Palm, Nipomo, Marsh and Toro Streets). In order for
building footprints and density to increase in downtown, and more street right-of-way
dedicated to bicycle and pedestrian uses, the plan assumes new parking districts in Upper
and Lower downtown. There are drop off/pick up locations on every block, and an
enhanced shuttle or trolley system. If new parking structures are built, they will be
flexible in design, acknowledging that in the future they may be repurposed for other
uses, and they will primarily be located behind or under other uses that are compatible
with a vibrant downtown street, such as ground floor retail or multi-story mixed use.
• Downtown embraces areas with different personalities and development patterns:
Central Downtown includes the Downtown Historic District with its traditional
development patterns and expanded, vibrant, and art-filled Cultural District; the Flex
Zone around Pacific and Archer Streets in Lower Downtown has a more industrial feel
and encourages adaptive reuse to accommodate a variety of different business types,
including incubator businesses, live/work opportunities, artist collectives or shared
marketplaces; and Upper Downtown along Monterey from Santa Rosa to Pepper St, is
envisioned as continuing to redevelop with multi-story commercial mixed use built to the
widened sidewalk.
• Downtown becomes an urban neighborhood, infused with housing and a diversity of
uses for residents first: Surface parking lots are in-filled with new development
becoming either vibrant mixed use opportunities, parks or plazas. Development patterns
are illustrated in the Plan with some specific uses in mind: opportunities for small local
businesses to cluster together on Block 42; a small house development at the end of Dana
Street on Block 9; larger-footprint mixed-use opportunities in the Flex Zone around
Block 51, and most importantly, the infusion of housing throughout all of downtown, not
just in residential zones, but included on upper levels wherever commercial and office
uses are shown.
• Downtown’s connections to nature are enhanced, and to San Luis Creek
specifically: Residents love San Luis Creek, but it needs to be nurtured. The Creek Walk
and its adjacent parks and plazas will be expanded and activated with positive uses.
These important downtown public spaces will be designed to respect the creek’s natural
habitat and adjacent neighbors alike; they will be clean, well-maintained and well-used,
and as a result, negative uses will decrease. Downtown will include a new creek-front
Packet Pg. 199
7
park in the Cultural District and plaza in the heart of downtown (Block 19), and as
businesses redevelop they will face the creek with patios and outdoor dining
opportunities. The Creek Walk will also connect people to downtown’s historic adobes,
as it is expanded from the Hwy 101 interchange to Johnson Avenue
• Downtown is full of vibrant, safe public spaces and paseos: In addition to the Creek
Walk, new paseos (mid-block walkways) are added downtown, but not at the expense of
the vitality of the public streetscape. Paseos are mostly shown connecting public spaces
with the street, such as the paseos between blocks 27 and 28 that connect to the Jack
House and gardens; and a new diagonal paseo through Block 42 that creates new outdoor
plaza areas and improves connections to Emerson Park. Some of the other new public
spaces include converting the lawn of the County building to a garden area with seating
and public art (Block 14); incorporating the Old Gasworks Building into a mid-block
pocket park (Block 51); including green roofs/public spaces on portions of parking
structures or other tall buildings; and improving Emerson Park so it better serves
downtown residents (Block 54). Public spaces are activated with furnishings, activities
and interactive public art to create engaging places that enhance the downtown
experience.
• Downtown streets are for pedestrians first, and treated like urban parks. Streets are
an extension of the public realm; they are for gathering, socializing, and enjoying
downtown in addition to transporting people. Vehicles will be allowed on downtown
streets, but they are a lower priority than pedestrians, bicyclists and transit. Sidewalks are
widened (up to 24’ in some areas), passenger loading zones are plentiful, and Monterey
Street in Central Downtown becomes a shared street (Street Type D), where unique
paving patterns and green infrastructure improvements can differentiate it from other
streets, slow traffic, and encourage increased pedestrian activity (see p. 4.8).
• Downtown is more safe and welcoming for bicyclists: A combination of enhanced bike
boulevards on north/south streets and buffered bike lanes and cycle tracks on east/west
streets will allow families, seniors, and novice riders feel comfortable bicycling
downtown. Proposals include 1-way dedicated buffered bike lanes on Marsh and Higuera
Streets in the Upper and Lower Downtown planning areas, transitioning to a protected
cycle track between Nipomo and Santa Rosa Streets. Adding safe bicycle connections to
and from Marsh and Higuera Streets as well as ample and safe opportunities for bicycle
parking will also encourage more bicycle ridership downtown.
Next Steps
On September 5, 2017, the Final Public Draft of the Downtown Concept Plan will be presented
to the City Council with a summary of the Planning Commission’s input and recommendation,
for final review and adoption as is or with changes.
Following adoption, staff will incorporate requested changes into the plan and make final
formatting and consitency edits, then make the final plan available on the City’s project
webpage: www.slocity.org/downtown. The Plan supplement and poster will also be availble to
Packet Pg. 200
7
purchase in print format. The illustrative plan was developed as a 3-D model in SketchUp, so it
may be updated as new development downtown occurrs.
CONCURRENCES
A staff team of representatives from throughout the City has been kept updated on the planning
process, and have met as needed, as a group or individually. Staff team members have had the
opportunity to review and provide input on all versions of the draft plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Downtown Concept Plan is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15262,
Feasibility and Planning Studies, as an advisory planning document which has no binding effect
on future activities. As a visionary planning document that is conceptual in nature, without
regulatory authority or entitlement of projects which can be implemented directly which would
have a physical effect on the environment, the project is also exempt under the General Rule,
Section 15061 (b)(3) since it can be seen with certainty that the Downtown Concept Plan will not
have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
As part of the 2015-2017 Financial Plan, the City Council allocated $100,000 for the update of
the Downtown Concept Plan. Due to expanded public outreach activities, CVT meetings, project
coordination and associated work effort, the cost of updating the Downtown Concept Plan
increased to $135,000. However, additional project costs were offset by cost savings in the
Community Development Department’s LUCE Implementation and Fee Update SOPC. The
additional cost and amended contract were approved via City Manager report following the City
purchasing policy upon receipt of amended scope of work from the consultant in March 2017.
The Downtown Concept Plan is not a regulatory document and therefore has no direct fiscal
impact, but supports ongoing economic diversity and vitality in the Downtown, which
contributes to the City’s fiscal sustainability. Funding for capital improvements will be
considered as part of future financial plans.
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council could request additional information from staff and consultants and request
time on the agenda at an upcoming meeting for further discussion prior to adoption. The City
Council could also request changes or clarification to the Final Public Draft of the Downtown
Concept Plan; this could include the plan supplement or plan poster.
Packet Pg. 201
7
Attachments:
a - Draft Adoption Resolution
b - Council Reading File - July 2017 Downtown Concept Plan Supplement
c - Council Reading File - July 2017 Downtown Concept Plan Illustrative Poster
d - 03-08-2017 MTC Minutes
e - 03-16-2017 BAC Minutes
f - 03-27-2017 CHC Minutes
g - 04-05-17 PRC minutes
h - 04-17-2017 ARC Minutes
i - 04-26-2017 PC Minutes
j - 07-26-2017 PC Minutes Draft
Packet Pg. 202
7
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE DOWNTOWN CONCEPT
PLAN SUPPLEMENT AND POSTER AS A LONG RANGE VISION AND A
GUIDE FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THE
DOWNTOWN
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September
5, 2017, for the purpose of considering Planning File No. GENP-1622-2015, the Final Public Draft
of the Downtown Concept Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
July 26, 2017, for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council
of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the Downtown Concept Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Concept Plan is an update of the Conceptual Physical Plan
for the City’s Center, adopted by Resolution No8165 on May 4, 1993; and
WHEREAS, the updated Downtown Concept Plan includes a supplement and poster; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Concept Plan has been prepared and presented by City staff,
consultants, and the Council-appointed Creative Vision Team (CVT); and
WHEREAS, the decisions incorporated within the Downtown Concept Plan reflect
substantial public engagement and input. Since project initiation in December 2015, there were
focus groups with 48 stakeholders, one open house (75 participants signed in), two project
workshops (110 and 100 participants signed in), two neighborhood meetings (35 participants), an
on-line survey (393 responses), and 13 CVT meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Plan has also incorporated the input of City elected and appointed
officials, including the City Council; Planning Commission; Mass Transportation Committee,
Bicycle Advisory Committee, Cultural Heritage Committee, Parks and Recreation Commission,
and Architectural Review Commission in the development of the Downtown Concept plan; and
WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan Land Use Element contains a program directing the
City to update the Downtown Concept Plan to address significant changes in or affecting the
Downtown area and include meaningful public input (LUE Program 4.24); and
WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan Land Use Element also contains a program directing
the City to consider features of the Downtown Concept Plan in the approval of projects in the
downtown, recognizing that the plan is a concept and is intended to be flexible (LUE Program
4.25); and
Packet Pg. 203
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
R ______
WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan Land Use Element contains policies on encouraging
downtown residential, public gatherings, walking environment, street-level diversity, green space,
parking, sense of place, design principles, building height, sidewalk appeal and other related
concepts included in the proposed Downtown Concept Plan (LUE Section 4, Downtown); and
WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan Circulation Element also contains goals and policies
on encouraging better transportation habits, walking and pedestrian facilities, complete streets, and
modal priorities in the downtown, as included in the proposed Downtown Concept Plan (CE Goal
1.7.1, Section 5, Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.3); and
WHEREAS, on July 12, 2017 the CVT unanimously endorsed the Final Public Draft of
the Downtown Concept Plan supplement and poster; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including information
presented by the CVT, public testimony, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the
following findings:
a.) The proposed Downtown Concept Plan implements General Plan Land Use Element
Program 4.24 because it updates the Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center,
addresses changes in the downtown, and included the opportunity for meaningful
public input.
b.) The proposed Downtown Concept Plan sets the stage for implementation of General
Plan Land Use Element Program 4.25 because it directs staff to consider features of the
Downtown Concept Plan in the approval of projects in the Downtown, recognizing that
the plan is a concept and is intended to be flexible.
c.) The proposed Downtown Concept Plan supports the policies in the General Plan Land
Use Element Section 4, Downtown, because it defines the community’s long-range
vision for the downtown and includes planning principles, goals, concepts and
implementation actions that together provide guidance for future development projects
and public improvements to improve the downtown.
d.) The proposed Downtown Concept Plan supports policies in the General Plan
Circulation Element Sections 1, 5 and 6, because it encourages better transportation
habits, promotes walking, supports the development of complete streets, and prioritizes
pedestrians and bicycle improvements in the downtown.
e.) The proposed Downtown Concept Plan is one of many tools available to staff and
stakeholders to implement the General Plan. Staff will continue to review specific
Packet Pg. 204
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
R ______
development applications in the downtown for consistency with adopted regulatory
documents, while using the Downtown Concept Plan as guidance for the holistic vision
for downtown.
f.) The implementation plan in Chapter 5 includes a prioritized list of the public programs,
projects, and actions needed for implementation of the Downtown Concept Plan. It will
be referred to when updating other relevant planning documents, or developing Capital
Improvement Program lists.
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. Based upon all the evidence, the City
Council makes the following findings, in concurrence with the CEQA Analysis for the Downtown
Concept Plan (Appendix 2):
a) The Downtown Concept Plan is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section
15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies, as an advisory planning document which has
no binding effect on future activities.
b) As a visionary planning document that is conceptual in nature, which does not provide
regulatory authority or grant any entitlement for projects which could have a physical
effect on the environment to be implemented directly, the proposed Downtown
Concept Plan is also exempt under the General Rule, Section 15061 (b)(3) since it can
be seen with certainty that the Downtown Concept Plan will not have a signific ant
effect on the environment.
c) As an implementation action of the City of San Luis Obispo’s General Plan, the
proposed Downtown Concept Plan is covered by the Council-certified EIR for the Land
Use and Circulation Elements (State Clearinghouse No. 2013121019) and none of the
conditions that require further environmental review have occurred.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby adopts the San Luis Obispo Downtown
Concept Plan supplement and illustrative poster, included as Exhibit A and B.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2017.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
Packet Pg. 205
7
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4
R ______
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 206
7
Minutes - FINAL
MASS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Wednesday, March 8, 2017
Meeting of the Mass Transportation Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Mass Transportation Committee was called to order on Wednesday,
March 8, 2017 at 2:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Thyne.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Elizabeth Thyne (Chair - Senior), John Osumi (Vice Chair –
Business), Cheryl Andrus (Cal Poly), Denise Martinez (Disabled), Louise Justice
Member at Large), James Thompson (Technical), Justin Frentzel (Student), David
Figueroa (Alternate), Diego-Christopher Lopez (Alternate)
Absent: None
Staff: Transit Manager Gamaliel Anguiano, Transit Assistant Megan Cutler, Recording
Secretary Lareina Gamboa
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Andy Pease, Council Member, gives a personal introduction to staff and committee. She
expresses appreciation for the work of everyone on the committee, and is happy to be available
to help and support the committee.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
MINUTES
Amendment to Minutes of the Mass Transportation Committee meeting on January 11, 2017 for
the following:
Agenda Item #2, page 3, last paragraph, correction of “amongst” to among
Discussion Item #4, page 4, second paragraph correction to Transit Assistant Cutler’s
name.
Packet Pg. 207
7
FINAL Minutes – Mass Transportation Committee Meeting of March 8, 2017 Page 2
Discussion Item #4, page 4, last paragraph, correction of “following thorough inspection,
likely within the next couple weeks,” to following a thorough inspection, likely within the
next couple of weeks.
Discussion Item #4, page 4, correction to a few word tenses from present to past throughout
the five paragraphs.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER OSUMI, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER ANDRUS, CARRIED 7-0, to approve the Minutes of the Mass Transportation
Committee Meeting on January 11, 2017.
ACTION ITEMS
1.MTC Bylaw Changes
The Clerk’s office requests all committees to present any possible changes,
recommendations, substitutions, or improvements to Committee Bylaws 30 days prior to
their May 1 finalization date.
Committee Member Thyne suggests the following changes:
Article IV, Readings-A: “The committee will hold a regular meeting at least
quarterly”, change to “the committee will hold a meeting every other month, six
times a year.”
Article IV, Readings-C: “meetings will be open to the public and will be held at the
Community Development conference room, downstairs of City Hall or other
previously announced locations”, change to specify “the Council Hearing room”,
where the meetings are regularly held.
Article VI, Officers: “The officers will consist of a procured Chairperson and Vice
Chairperson who will be elected at the committee meeting in June”, clarification
on June to May as that is when the meeting is held.
Committee Member Lopez inquires about the Alternates’ title and place among the
committee. Can they be considered At Large members, and why are other committees
without Alternates? He is concerned for future Alternates and future committees informally
acknowledging the Alternates’ role and input. This leads to discussion and questions in
regards to representation across the community (finding representation for the pre-college
aged students, as well as the homeless). Further questioning includes: who will represent
them? Will students need to miss school for meetings? Will they need parent consent if
under 18 years old? If Alternates are transitioned will it throw off the quorum balance?
Should there be an alternate per represented group as to have someone knowledgeable
enough to step in when necessary? Will this result in an unmanageable committee?
Committee Member Thyne (as well as other committee members) voices the importance
of the Alternates’ input, and considers a terminology change.
Council Member Pease will research the history of the Alternate member, as well as the At
Large member specifics and will report back to the committee.
Packet Pg. 208
7
FINAL Minutes – Mass Transportation Committee Meeting of March 8, 2017 Page 3
Transit Manager Anguiano suggests that upon initiating new committee members, that the
new member receive a 31-day pass. This will allow any future committee members, who
may not be familiar with the San Luis Obispo Transit system, a first-hand experience.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER OSUMI, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER THOMPSON, CARRIED 6-1 WITH OPPOSITION FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBER FRENTZEL, to table the discussion about the committee make-
up until further information is presented, but to go forward with the other decisions that
can be made within their ability to do so presently and make formal recommendations (in
regards to Committee Member Thyne and Transit Manager Anguiano’s suggestions), as
well as schedule a special meeting, if necessary, for the committee make-up.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
1.Downtown Concept Plan (Presentation)
Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner for the Community Development Department,
presents the Draft for the Downtown Concept Plan development. The overall Concept Plan
is to improve access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders, with emphasis on
pedestrians and bicyclists, while providing adequate parking structures. The core of the
changes are embodied by Mill (North side), Pismo (South side), Pepper, and Johnson (East
side), and Marsh, Higuera, and the 101 on ramp (West side).
The plans in correlation with transit involve the following:
The planning principles of enhanced mobility, which involves enhancing Downtown
walkability, and universal accessibility (this includes pedestrians who are rather immobile,
as well as bicyclists, and transit riders). Also, to promote a Downtown that is safe and
inclusive, and easy to navigate through for those using all modes of transportation.
The enhanced mobility principle, which involves collaboration on a new transit center
proposed location is the block surrounded by Higuera, Monterey, Santa Rosa, and Toro),
to meet the needs of Downtown employees, residents, and visitors.
There is discussion of keeping parking structures on the outskirts of Downtown to keep the
focus on pedestrians. This will help prevent Downtown through traffic, and allow closures
for events without too much displacement. With this, Committee Member Thyne brought
to attention that the delivery times for Downtown businesses occur all throughout the day
causing traffic to back up. Committee Member Thyne inquires about possible cut off times,
or specific days for deliveries.
Future parking structures are being planned with all modes of transportation in mind, such
as secure bike parking, as well as additional trolley stops. There will also be adequate
signage of information for new travelers to direct themon their downtown adventure. There
is also discussion about the feasibility of extending and expanding the trolley service along
Higuera and Monterey in addition to its existing Monterey circulation.
Packet Pg. 209
7
FINAL Minutes – Mass Transportation Committee Meeting of March 8, 2017 Page 4
Transit Manager Anguiano informs everyone that trolley stops will have an enhanced
waiting environment.
Committee Member Thompson voiced his concern in regards to finding a balance of
preserving older structures and the historical aspect of downtown, while also enhancing it
to appeal to new visitors and local businesses. He is also concerned about preservation
ordinances (preservation ordinances are in order, as well as advisory body input from the
Cultural Heritage Commission).
2.Transit Manager Updates
The stats report for ridership per route, and ridership by pass type will be available next
meeting, but ridership is consistently holding steady. The unveiling event for the new
busses will take place Thursday, March 9, 4:30 p.m. at Mission Plaza. Bus pass sales at
Laguna Middle School have increased. The Public Hearing for Transit Fares and
Advertising Rates is scheduled for April 4, at 4 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LOPEZ, SECOND BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER ANDRUS, CARRIED 7-0, to adjourn the meeting at 4:20 p.m. until the Regular
Meeting of the Mass Transportation Committee, May 10, 2017 at 2:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lareina Gamboa
Recording Secretary
Megan Cutler
Transit Assistant
APPROVED BY THE MASS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: 05/10/2017
Packet Pg. 210
7
Minutes
Bicycle Advisory Committee
Council Hearing Room, City Hall, 990 Palm St, San Luis Obispo
Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 6:00 p.m.
MISSION:
The purpose of the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) is to provide oversight and policy
direction on matters related to bicycle transportation in San Luis Obispo and its relationship to
bicycling outside the City.
Catherine Riedstra (Vice Chair) called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Paula Huddleston (Chair)(arrived at 6:07), Catherine Riedstra (Vice Chair), Lea
Brooks, Ken Kienow, Jonathan Roberts, Howard Wiesenthal, and Jim Woolf
Absent: None
Staff: Active Transportation Manager Adam Fukushima, Recording Secretary Lareina Gamboa
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
No comments were made.
MINUTES: January 19, 2017
Action:
A correction to Shannon Otto’s name was made, the correct spelling is Chenin Otto.
CM Wiesenthal wanted to make sure that the balance of the minor bikeway improvements
budget of $100,000 was used for Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) was
reflected and noted in the Minutes. In addition, he wanted to note CM Brooks request for more
green bike lanes once the new budget cycle begins. CM Wolf motioned to approve the Minutes
with amendments. CM Roberts seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
ACTION ITEMS
Agenda Item #1: Downtown Concept Plan Update
Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner for the Community Development Department, presented
the Draft Downtown Concept Plan. The Concept Plan is to improve overall accessibility for
pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders, with emphasis on pedestrians, and bicyclists, while
providing adequate parking structures to accommodate motorists.
Packet Pg. 211
7
CM Kienow wanted clarification on the buffered bike lanes that were discussed for the
downtown portion of the plan. (ienow stressed the importance of a physical barrier for new and
young riders. He preferred a barrier is to deter an automobile from hitting a cyclist.
CM Wiesenthal preferred no physical bike barrier along Higuera. He sees potential hazards
with this, such as a new rider hitting the barrier and overreacting to the correction in turn
causing an accident. Also, the possibility of getting stuck when wanting to make a left hand turn.
He is very happy about all the improvements planned and volunteered the BAC to help with
placing any new bike racks and locked parking for bikes downtown.
Wiesenthal is concerned about the Higuera and Chorro intersection, as there are a lot of busses
and traffic, and suggests that once the Transit Center is moved, perhaps the bus routes can be
moved off Chorro as well. He also, suggested this intersection become an “enhanced”
intersection to be a little friendlier for cyclists and pedestrians.
Time frames or limits for deliveries downtown was also suggested. Maybe designate deliveries
to the morning, or to one side of the road, or corrals for them to stop at and unload.
He has concern for Monterey Street turning into a Type B street, from Pepper to Santa Rosa,
because there is too much traffic.
A request that when additional benches are placed downtown, that they be placed
perpendicular to the street.
Wiesenthal would also like to see Toro Street and Broad as bike boulevards, and have them
connect to downtown rather than seeing them dead end in the plan.
He questioned if the new parking structures would have a time frame
And, Weisenthal preferred if Higuera and Marsh streets were turned into Type D streets to
increase pedestrian traffic (this would push all auto traffic through residential neighborhoods
though).
CM Woolf was favorable of the shared streets. He is concerned about the possibility of Morro
becoming a bike boulevard because it is too steep past Palm. He suggested to perhaps veer the
boulevard left on Monterey, then up Chorro.
Woolf also suggested that if for any reason Pepper Street doesn't work out for a bike boulevard,
Toro street can be a secondary option.
CM Brooks suggested openings to possible buffered bike lanes on Higuera, as well as
requesting creation of a design to be brought back to the BAC for review.
She wants to push for a connection of Marsh and Higuera to Madonna with the HWY 101
overcrossing that will connect to that intersection. Brooks stressed the importance of the
crossing being as close to Marsh Street as possible considering there is a creek walk planned,
as well as the importance of connecting Laguna Lake and Madonna to downtown.
Brooks is also for anything that will help calm traffic on Chorro street. She is concerned for door-
ing that occurs from drivers exiting their cars without looking for cyclists.
Packet Pg. 212
7
She also likes that Torro and Pepper streets are being identified as bike boulevards in the plan,
especially since the Railroad Safety Trail will extend to Pepper Street. And, Brooks is also very
happy about bike shares as she had the privilege to enjoy them recently in another city.
She would like to see some clearly identified drop off spots for folks with mobility issues.
She requested the feasibility study through BAC for the development of an eventual bridge to
help connect an over crossing of Monterey street at Pepper street.
CM Roberts is on board with having a separated or buffered bike lane on Higuera Street to help
get new cyclists riding. He also inquired about eliminating vehicular parking spaces downtown.
Public Comment
Myron Amerine says the East/West Higuera and Marsh corridor meet standards, but bike lanes
are in door-ing zones. A North/South corridor is needed for Morro and Chorro. He also said that
directional signage for East/West traveling needs to be established for both locals and tourists
to find their way. He’s glad Broad street is being acknowledged as a bike boulevard. And,
Amerine also stressed the importance of having a continuous, no gap, set of bike facilities in the
plan.
Tim Jouet, resident, says a bike boulevard from Beach to Nipomo is a great idea as he bikes it
every day.
CM Riedstra motioned to take 10 minutes from the next agenda items to keep discussion
going. CM Huddleston seconded. The motion passed.
CM Kienow motioned to have some form of physical barrier to protect cyclists from cars. CM
Roberts seconded the motion. Motioned passed with one abstention from CM Huddleston.
Agenda Item #2: Consideration of Committee Expansion to Include Pedestrians
Active Transportation Manager Adam Fukushima gave a presentation on the development of
pedestrian planning in recent City policy and that the city will soon embark on the planning
process for establishing the City’s first Pedestrian Plan as part of a larger Active Transportation
Plan. Fukushima presented the benefits of expanding the mission of the BAC to include
pedestrians as an active transportation committee.
CM Brooks would like to see some models of the plans. She is concerned about adding more
work for the committee. She suggested adding an ADA member of such a group and a joint
subcommittee of the BAC and the MTC.
CM Kienow had concerns for the mechanics of expanding the mission. There are only a couple
of places where pedestrians and bicyclists coexists. He said since most of the infrastructure is
Packet Pg. 213
7
not shared, pedestrians should have their own committee, and perhaps a subcommittee for both
to come together.
He stated there are no Class IV (shared lanes) established in the bicycle plans, even though
they cost less. He is also concerned about doubling or even tripling their load.
CM Riedstra was favorable of the idea. She said there are so many shared ideas and
opportunities. There are walkers, and joggers like herself, and this would enable the discussion
and opportunities for her to jog along her daughter bicycling.
She thinks it should be a wider perspective of active people and not limit a person as a cyclists
or a runner.
Riedstra also thinks that though in the past the committee has secluded itself while
simultaneously requesting to have shared facilities, this doesn't mean they shouldn’t move
forward with this new mindset. Also, sharing dialogue would be beneficial and productive since
the group is lacking the input and is left making assumptions and guesses on the other’s behalf.
CM Woolf, though in the past has felt differently, he likes this idea if challenges can be
overcome. He acknowledged the Railroad Safety Trail often has more walkers and runners than
cyclists. He sees that elders and fitness individuals are not being included in these trails. He
says that if everyone is included, trails can be improved, and well-rounded with better
environments, and the committee can be more successful.
CM Wiesenthal feels a plan is needed to help get people out of their cars more. He finds this
can be just as complicated and intricate, with just as many issues as biking. Wiesenthal likes the
system in Morro Bay by the Rock, where pedestrians are on one side and bikes on the other. In
comparison to the Railroad Safety Trail, where it is cluttered and compact, everyone on the
Morro Bay path coexists.
CM Roberts is concerned about the mechanics of how we design and implement bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructures of this city. He pointed out that the Railroad Safety Trail and the Class
I lane by Laguna Middle School are the only two paths that overlap pedestrians and bicyclist.
Because of this, he suggests separate committees and a joint subcommittee for certain projects
if need be.
CM Riedstra motioned to expand the current BAC to include pedestrians. CM Woolf seconded
the motion as well as CM Huddleston. The motion did not pass due to a 3 to 4 outcome.
Weisenthal, Brooks, Kienow, and Roberts voted against the motion.)
CM Wiesenthal motioned to investigate this in the future to see how it can be accomplished.
CM Roberts seconded the motion. The motion passed.
Public Comment
Eric Meyer, resident, likes the idea of an Active Transportation committee. He feels if the
committee limits itself to people who only share their same opinion then they will only get the
Packet Pg. 214
7
one point of view. He also feels the arguing and disagreements among others will help create a
stronger and powerful policy while helping create a balanced path.
Myron Amerine, resident and bike advocate, suggested creating a separate pedestrian
committee.
David Figueroa, resident and BAC member, heavily supports that something is done to create a
pedestrian plan to integrate with biking and transit. Whether it is expanding the BAC or creating
a new group, or maybe even have every group meet quarterly.
INFORMATION ITEMS
Agenda Item #3: Update on Fiscal Year 2017-19 Budget Plan Process
Adam Fukushima gave an update on the Fiscal Year 2017-19 budget planning process
especially the results of the Budget Forum in January. He explained that the draft budget would
be available to view after April 18.
CM Brooks asked if the draft budget would be available before the city council budget meeting.
Public Comment
None.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Agenda Item #4: Bicycle Riding on Sidewalk
Adam Fukushima gave information on current city policy on bicycle riding on sidewalks and
cited Municipal Code (Section) 10.72.100.
CM Kienow has tried to bring this discussion up in the past in regards to the code being refined,
removed, or limited to certain sections of town. He is concerned for minors getting to school, or
anywhere, safely and allowing them to ride on the sidewalk if needed. There are many
instances where he is riding with his kids and no pedestrians are found along certain stretches
of the sidewalk, but he still risks a violation. He is also fine with a responsible adult riding on the
sidewalk outside of downtown, but is also concerned for cyclists not slowing down at
intersections, driveways, or for pedestrians.
CM Brooks would like an officer to attend a meeting to inform the committee on when they
actually cite tickets. At what point will there be a citation? And, does the traffic safety study
include bicyclists hitting pedestrians on sidewalks?
CM Roberts thinks the code should be removed.
Packet Pg. 215
7
CM Riedstra likes the idea of allowing minors, outside the business district, to ride on sidewalks
and thinks this is a great opportunity for a pedestrian joint committee.
CM Huddleston is torn on the matter as she partly rides to work on the sidewalk because she
does not like to cross in the middle of South Higuera street when automobile traffic is heaviest,
but also does not like when pedestrians step off the sidewalk into the street to allow a cyclist to
pass when the pedestrian has the right-of-way.
CM Woolf is not in favor of revising the code.
Public Comment
Myron Amerine, resident and bike advocate, is in favor of the current ordinance, as it is uniform
throughout the country. He begs the issue that we do not have sufficient and quality bike
facilities so we do not have to ride on the sidewalk. Also, as a pedestrian he's dodging bikes all
the time so he really wants to keep the ordinance.
There was not a majority consensus to pursue a revision of the current ordinance.
Agenda Item #5: Committee Items
Adopt-a-Trails Subcommittee
California Conservation Core Watershed Sewage program sponsored a Bob Jones bike trail
workday, between Prado and LOVR, on March 25. It was a wonderful partnership for the city
trails staff, Bike SLO county, and the friends of the Bob Jone’s Trail.
A section of Bob Jone’s Trail was requested for adoption by a member of the SLO Bicycle Club
but the group has not formally endorsed the idea
Agenda Item #6: Project Updates
Fukushima gave an update on several projects including:
Bishop’s Peak and Pacheco schools Safe Routes to school project including the latest
public meeting where staff recommendations were presented.
Green bike lanes on Monterey and California are half done. The city is waiting on traffic
control to do the inside of the intersection, which will happen at night and will be
combined with the Santa Rosa and Olive Street bike lanes.
The Broad Street bike boulevard meeting was March 23.
Next ATP cycle is next year and Fukushima is participating with the State ATP
Technical Advisory Committee
The Railroad Safety Trail extension is completed along Laurel Lane.
The bike bridge over Pepper Street is still in design.
CM Brooks pointed out the confusion that occurs at the Railroad Safety Trail.
Packet Pg. 216
7
She also informed everyone about a traffic safety awareness campaign she learned about at the
League Bike Summit
CM Wiesenthal requested to add a presentation of the condition of bike lanes curbs and
gutters, to the next meeting’s agenda.
ADJOURN
CM Weisenthal motioned to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. to the next regular meeting of
May 18, 2017. CM Riedstra seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Lareina Gamboa
Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY THE BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: 5/18/2017
Packet Pg. 217
7
Minutes
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Monday, March 27, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee was called to order on Monday,
March 27, 2017 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Hill.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, James Papp, Vice Chair Thom
Brajkovich, and Chair Jaime Hill.
Absent: Committee Members Shannon Larrabee and Leah Walthert
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow, and Recording
Secretary Monique Lomeli.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER KINCAID, SECOND BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER BAER, CARRIED BY CONSENSUS 5-0 to approve the minutes of the Cultural
Heritage Committee meeting of February 27, 2017 as amended:
Page 2, “Committee Member Papp on the reconfiguration of the stage area and provided
historical information on the area, stated he admires the outreach efforts extended to the
community; commented on the historical importance of the area and asked that its rich history be
incorporated into the plans for signage, sculpture, and other placemaking efforts.”
Page 3, Last paragraph of Item 2: “Committee Member Papp requested staff consider reducing
the Mills Act application fees. Senior Planner Leveille stated that such consideration is
underway.”
Page 4: “Chair Hill requested staff provide information on the height of building height
particularly from Church Street.”
Committee Member Papp commented on the design and stated…and the design guidelines for
the district cannot be elegantly applied to this building.”
Packet Pg. 218
7
Minutes – Cultural Heritage Committee Meeting of March 27, 2017 Page 2
Page 5: “Chair Hill provided information regarding the potential uses of the space and invited
Buzz Kalkowski to provide input on behalf of Friends of La Loma.”
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
End of Public Comment--
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Downtown Concept Plan. GENP-1622-2015: Conceptual review and discussion of
the Downtown Concept Plan; discussion of this item is not subject to CEQA; multiple
zones; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Senior Planner Brian Leveille acknowledged the receipt and distribution of
correspondence from Kenneth Schwartz.
Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow presented an in-depth staff report with use of a
PowerPoint presentation and responded to Committee inquiries.
Public Comments:
None.
End of Public Comment--
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
Senior Planner Leveille provided an agenda forecast and information regarding eligibility for
Historic Preservation grants. Committee Member Papp provided an update on the status of the
Certified Local Government grant application which will be submitted to the State Historic
Preservation Office.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Cultural Heritage
Committee is scheduled for Monday, April 24, 2017 at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room,
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE: 05/22/2017
Packet Pg. 219
7
Minutes - DRAFT
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
5 April 2017
Regular Meeting of the Advisory Body Committee Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order on the 5th day of April
2017 at 5:31 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California,
by Chair Whitener.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Greg Avakian, Suzan Ehdaie, Susan Olson, Keri Schwab, Douglas Single,
Rodney Thurman and Chair Jeff Whitener
Absent: None
Staff: Parks and Recreation Director Shelly Stanwyck, Recreation Supervisor Facilities Devin Hyfield,
Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow, Contract Planner David Watson
PRESENTATIONS INTRODUCTIONS APPOINTMENTS
1. Swear in of new Commissioner Suzan Ehdaie
City Clerk conducted the Oath of Office for Suzan Ehdaie, Parks and Recreation
Commissioner.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: APPROVE THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 1, 2017 AS
AMENDED, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SINGLE, SECOND BY
COMMISSIONER SCHWAB.
2. Consideration of Minutes
CARRIED 7:0:0:0 to approve the amended minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body
for the meeting of 3/1/2017.
AYES: AVAKIAN, EHDAIE, OLSON, SCHWAB, SINGLE, THURMAN, WHITENER
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Packet Pg. 220
7
Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of April 5, 2017 Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
3. Final Tract Map Review of the Linear and Creek Trail Park Proposals for the West
Creek Project (VTM#3038) in the Orcutt Area Special Plan.
David Watson, Contract Planner, presented to the Commission the Final Tract Map Review for
the West Creek Project, a subdivision of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). This project,
approved in May 2016, includes 172 units and several park amenities. Staff Watson said that
pursuant to Condition #109 of the West Creek approval, the applicant is permitted, but not
obligated, to offer parklands that would be improved and maint ained by the project developer,
but that also would be open to public use. Under the conditions of approval, the application
could secure an OASP Parklands Improvement Fee credit of up to one half of the final cost of
construction of the publicly accessible park improvements. He added that West Creek has
proposed to construct a Creek Trail along the east fork of Orcutt Creek (.45 acres), a Park at the
Terminus of the Creek Trail at “A” Street (.14 acres) and two linear parks (1.01 acres) with this
project.
Public Comment
Eric Myer, SLO Resident, spoke about importance of the Orcutt Area creating connectivity
between neighborhoods and parks.
Commission Comments.
Commissioner Thurman said he liked the integration of the linear parks within the homes and
asked about parking.
Commissioner Single commented on the pricing of the homes and the access to public services
like schools and bike safety routes for children to school.
Commissioner Schwab commented on public parking for community members. Street parking
is available but no public lots are proposed. She added that there was a lack of lighting in the
parks and that pathway lighting is required.
Commissioner Ehdaie commented that she would like to see the linear parks connecting to the
creek park and access to the parks from adjacent housing developments. Currently there are no
plans for connecting second linear parks.
Commissioner Olson commented on the availability of sidewalks through the neighborhoods
and the proposed having an ADA accessible trail. She asked about bike friendly trails. The
applicant responded that the linear parks and creek trail will have some ADA accessibility and
will consist of decomposed granite.
Commissioner Avakian commented on lower area parking and the accessibility of the parks to
other members of the community, aside from the residents living next to the parks. He also
spoke about the use of artificial turf and the longevity of the use.
Chair Whitener commented on the cost estimates of the proposed parks, the connectivity of the
parks, and the parks being used as a public park amenity as opposed to a pocket residential
park. He added that the proposed grade change of the linear park is a concern for recreational
use. He was in support of fee credits for two out of the three parks proposed.
Packet Pg. 221
7
Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of April 5, 2017 Page 3
ACTION: BY CONSENSUS PROVIDED INPUT ON THE PROPOSED PARK IMPROVEMENT
FEATURES AND DIRECTION TO THE APPLICANT FOR THE PREPARATION OF
FINAL DESIGN REVIEW MATERIALS TO BE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION
AT A FUTURE DATE.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL APPROVE A CREDIT FOR COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH ONE OF THE TWO LINEAR PARKS (THE ONE WHICH HAS
CREEK TRAIL CONNECTIVITY) AND FOR THE CREEK TRAIL PARK OF UP TO
50% CREDIT.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SINGLE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AVAKIAN
CARRIED 7:0:0:0 to recommend to Council a partial credit for the Creek Park and the one
connected Linear Park up to 50% credit.
AYES: AVAKIAN, EHDAIE, OLSON, SCHWAB, SINGLE, THURMAN, WHITENER
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
4. Presentation of Downtown Concept Plan
Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner for Long Range Planning, presented the Commission
with an update of the draft Downtown Concept Plan. She provided the Commission with the
project background. Staff Gershow added that the project is being led by staff, consultants, and
the ten-member Creative Vision Team (CVT) appointed by the City Council. The Draft Plan
was released in January 2017, and a public workshop with approximately 150 attendees was
held on February 4. Staff is now collecting input from City Advisory Bodies. Staff Gershow
presented project Planning Principles and Goals that were most directly relate to the purview of
the Parks and Recreation Commission and asked for the Commission’ feedback. The Parks and
Recreation Commission was asked to provide input on the draft Downtown Concept Plan’s
goals, recommendations and implementation actions related to parks and park faciliti es in the
downtown. The Commission was asked to provide feedback on the following topics;
1. Is the Commission in support of how the draft Downtown Concept Plan envisions the
future use of the City’s current parks and recreation facilities?
2. Is the Commission in support of how the draft Downtown Concept Plan envisions the
location, amount, and use of future parks and recreation facilities?
3. Do Commissioners have any questions or concerns about the Draft Plan’s vision for
downtown?
Public Comment
Chuck Crotser, SLO Resident, spoke about new and existing parks that can be implemented
across from Art Museum) or updated (Jack House) through the Downtown Concept plan.
Eric Meyer, SLO Resident, spoke about the benefit of pocket parks and parklet proposals.
Commission Comments followed.
Commissioner Avakian commented on the accessible pathways and bike paths. He did not see
the need for outdoor fitness area in the downtown area as there are other locations in the City.
He inquired about the challenges of outdoor rooftop public gathering areas.
Packet Pg. 222
7
Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of April 5, 2017 Page 4
Commissioner Olson commented on the potential of trees in the middle of the streets as trees
could assist in slowing down traffic.
Commissioner Ehdaie commented on the promotion of social activities within the
neighborhoods and asked about concession stands in parks.
Commissioner Schwab commented on activating additional activities at Emerson Park and
Cheng Park.
Commissioner Single commented on eliminating additional street parking areas in downtown to
maximize parking in the existing parking structures.
Commissioner Thurman commented on connectivity of the concept plan and concurred with
Commissioner Single’s comments on street parking. He offered suggestions regarding the
handling of stormwater. Commissioner Thurman added that streets with multiple purposes
could cause issues between pedestrians and cyclists. He was in support designated spaces for
food trucks.
Chair Whitener was in support of public parks, pocket parks, rooftop parks and the proposed
recommendations to activate the Ludwick Community Center as a way to stimulate the
downtown areas. He asked out the potential conflict between public and privately-owned plots
proposed for proposed updates in the concept plan.
The Parks and Recreation Commission was unanimous in its consensus support of the Draft
Downtown Concept Plan with respect to the parks and recreation elements proposed.
Review and Recommendation to Council to Adopt Recreation Fees as Proposed.
Director Stanwyck and Staff Hyfield provided the Commission with a brief update on the City-
wide Fee Study and proposed Parks and Recreation Fees. Staff Hyfield reiterated the
Commission’s input and support of the proposed fees at its public Study Session on February 1,
2017, the Jack House Committee meeting on February 8, 2017 and the City Council Study
Session on February 21, 2017.
Public Comment
None.
Commission Comments followed.
None.
ACTION: RECOMMEND COUNCIL ADOPT THE RECREATION FEES AS PROPOSED
INCLUSIVE OF THE CITY-WIDE COST OF SERVICES FEE STUDY.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SINGLE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLSON.
CARRIED 7:0:0:0 to recommend to Council that is adopt the recreation fees as proposed in the
city-wide cost of services fee study.
AYES: AVAKIAN, EHDAIE, OLSON, SCHWAB, SINGLE, THURMAN, WHITENER
NOES: NONE
Packet Pg. 223
7
Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of April 5, 2017 Page 5
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS
5. Director’s Report
Director Stanwyck provided a brief update of current Parks and Recreation programming and
City updates.
Night Golf April 6th
Ranger Workday – April 8th at Reservoir Canyon
Egg Hunt at Golf Course – April 15th
Youth Services Spring Break Camp (Tiny Wonders) April 17-21st
SLO Triathlon Registration Opens April 22nd
MLBB Camp at Sinsheimer Stadium – April 22nd. Over 160+ registered
Work continues on Sinsheimer Park Playground and French Park Tennis/Pickleball
Court Striping
LIAISON REPORTS
6. Subcommittee Liaison Reports
Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Single had no report.
Bicycle Advisory Committee: Commissioner Olson had no report.
City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner
Avakian reported on Damon-Garcia closing May 1 and the implementation of Kikuya
grass on Field B. Golf is seeing high numbers and lots of activities at the golf course. Jr
Giants registration opens April 29.
Tree Committee: Commissioner Thurman said that the City had a wood-chip giveaway
and he recommended that woodchips could be used for the Laguna Lake dog off-leash
area to fill in holes.
Jack House Committee: This assignment is currently vacant. No report.
Youth Sports: Commissioner Schwab had no report.
Commission Communications
None. Staff provided a brief agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. to the regular Parks and Recreation Commission scheduled for
03, May 2017 at 5:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION: 05/03/2017
Packet Pg. 224
7
Minutes
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, April 17, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
April 17,2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Wynn.
ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR
By a unanimous consensus, Chair Wynn was elected to serve as Chairperson and Commissioner
Soll was elected to serve as Vice-Chairperson.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Richard Beller, Greg Starzyk, Brian Rolph, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root,
Vice-Chair Angela Soll, and Chair Greg Wynn
Staff: Community Development Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rebecca
Gershow. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated
in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NEMCIK, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
ROOT, CARRIED 7-0, to approve the minutes of the Architectural Review Commission meeting
of March 6, 2017.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Downtown Concept Plan. GENP-1622-2015: Conceptual review and discussion of the
Downtown Concept Plan; discussion of this item is not subject to CEQA; multiple zones;
City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Packet Pg. 225
7
Minutes – Architectural Review Commission Meeting of April 17, 2017 Page 2
Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow presented an in-depth staff report with use of a
PowerPoint presentation and responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Public Comments:
David Brodie, Save Our Downtown, urged the Commission to preserve the retail aspect
of the downtown area.
Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding downtown building
heights and pedestrian access improvements.
James Lopes, San Luis Obispo, offered feedback regarding appropriate downtown
building height and street widths.
End of Public Comment--
Commissioner Beller recommended clarification of the language used to define
downtown and strengthen the presentation of human scale and design within the
Downtown Concept Plan.
Commissioner Rolph encouraged staff to be more specific on contentious items.
Vice-Chair Soll commented on the blocks in north downtown, suggesting more
specificity on design and better demonstration of height compatibility with the
Monterey Street view shed.
Commissioner Root suggested expressing the massing and compatibility in number of
feet versus floors; suggested plans include pick-up and drop-off areas; spoke in favor of
open space on top of parking structures.
Chair Wynn spoke in favor of the cultural district, closure of Monterey between Santa
Rosa Street and Nipomo Street; suggested staff implement a cul-de-sac on Nipomo at
Chorro Street, and flat decks in parking structures to encourage future repurpose.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
Deputy Director Davidson provided a brief agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Architectural Review
Commission is scheduled for Monday, May 1, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room,
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: 07/17/2017
Packet Pg. 226
7
Minutes
PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday,
April 26, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Stevenson.
ELECTIONS
By consensus the Commission elected Commissioner Charles Stevenson to serve as Chairperson
and Commissioner John Fowler to serve as Vice-Chairperson.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kim Bisheff, Hemalata Dandekar, Scott Mann, Ronald Malak,
Nicholas Osterbur, Vice-Chair John Fowler, and Chair Charles Stevenson.
Absent: None
Staff: Deputy Director of Community Development Xzandrea Fowler. Other staff members
presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECONDED BY VICE-CHAIR
FOWLER, CARRIED 7-0 to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission for the
meeting of February 22, 2017 as presented.
MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR FOWLER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
BISHEFF, CARRIED 7-0 to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission for the
meeting of March 8, 2017 as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding climate change.
Packet Pg. 227
7
Minutes – Planning Commission Meeting of April 26, 2017 Page 2
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. 1545 and 1675 Calle Joaquin. GENP-0156-2017: General Plan Conformity
determination for property dedication from the City of San Luis Obispo to Caltrans as
part of the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange improvement project; discussion of this
item is not subject to CEQA; C-T and C/OS zones; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Engineer Kyle Rowland presented a staff report.
Public Comment:
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing.
None.
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR FOWLER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
MALAK, CARRIED 7-0 to adopt the resolution which determines and reports to the
City Council, that the proposed relinquishment conforms to the General Plan.
2. Downtown Concept Plan. GENP-1622-2015: Update on the Downtown Concept Plan
project; discussion of this item is not subject to CEQA; multiple zones; City of San
Luis Obispo, applicant.
Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow presented a brief history and update on the
Downtown Concept Plan project; responded to Commission inquiries.
Public Comments:
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing.
Alan Cooper, Save Our Downtown, expressed concerns regarding plan design
conformity.
David Brodie voiced concerns regarding height regulations, preservation of retail space,
and bicycle safety.
James Lopes, San Luis Obispo, spoke regarding inconsistencies in building height
regulations; read written correspondence aloud.
Leah Brooks, Bike SLO County, spoke in favor of the plan and suggested the City take
greater measures toward providing safe crossing of bicyclists at intersections.
Bob Jorgensen, San Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of the Downtown Concept plan and
offered suggestions for expansion.
Packet Pg. 228
7
Minutes – Planning Commission Meeting of April 26, 2017 Page 3
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing.
Chair Stevenson acknowledged concerns regarding inconsistencies regarding height
within the Downtown Concept Plan (DTCP), LUCE, and City zoning regulation
policies; reminded the public that the DTCP is conceptual and not intended to be a
regulatory document.
Commissioner Malak would like to see an analysis of sun, shade, and wind relative to
buildings; suggested consideration for surrounding businesses to avoid creating
unnecessary competition for local businesses; stated he would like to see components
of the plan codified for the sake of consistency.
Commissioner Mann would like to see more cross-town multi-modal connectivity;
suggested slowing traffic down at intersections approaching the downtown area to
increase pedestrian safety; suggested modifying language that states “focus attention on
the downtown’s gateways” to “focus attention on the downtown’s multi-modal
gateways”; suggested referring to green infrastructure as “storm water management”
for clarity; stated he will submit additional written comments to staff.
Commissioner Osterbur spoke in favor of the plan and suggested shutting down
Monterey Street and limit access to pedestrian and bicyclists.
Commissioner Dandekar spoke in favor of the plan and suggested closely monitoring
the upcoming zoning regulation updates to ensure consistency; encouraged mixed-use.
Chair Stevenson expressed concerns regarding availability of affordable housing in the
downtown core and encouraged creative solutions to increase density.
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere provided an update on City emails relative to the
Public Records Act; stated the City Attorney’s Office will be releasing a comprehensive memo
addressing the issue.
Chair Stevenson introduced newly appointed Commissioners Osterbur and Mann.
Deputy Director Fowler provided an agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 08:02 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Planning Commission
is scheduled for Monday, May 10, 2017 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: 07/26/2017
Packet Pg. 229
7
Minutes - DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday,
July 26, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Chair Stevenson.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kim Bisheff, Scott Mann, Ronald Malak, Nicholas Osterbur, Hemalata
Dandekar, Vice-Chair John Fowler, and Chair Charles Stevenson
Absent: None
Staff: Deputy Director of Community Development Doug Davidson, Assistant City Attorney
Jon Ansolabehere, Associate Planner Shawna Scott. Other staff members presented
reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Stevenson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR FOWLER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
BISHEFF, CARRIED 7-0 to reorder the agenda to hear Business Item 1 before Public Hearing
Item 1.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIR
FOWLER, CARRIED 7-0 to approve the April 26, 2017 Planning Commission meeting minutes
with one administrative correction to Vice-Chair Fowler’s title.
Packet Pg. 230
7
DRAFT Minutes –Planning Commission Meeting of July 26, 2017 Page 2
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
BISHEFF, CARRIED 7-0 to approve the May 24, 2017 Planning Commission meeting minutes
as presented.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIR
FOWLER, CARRIED 7-0 to approve the May 25, 2017 Planning Commission meeting minutes
with one administrative correction to the Roll Call.
BUSINESS ITEM
1. Zoning Regulations Update. The Zoning Regulations Update is focused on implementing
the policies and programs of the Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE). This will be a
standing item on the Planning Commission agenda from June 14, 2017 through completion
of the Update of the Zoning Regulations, tentatively scheduled for completion in March,
2018. This will be an opportunity for staff to update the Commission on the status of the
Zoning Regulations Update and for the Commission to listen to ongoing public testimony
and discuss any such updates as they come forward. As a standing item, sometimes there will
be nothing to report; other times staff will give a brief update with limited discussion; and at
certain points, such as review of White Papers associated with the Zoning Regulations
Update, there will be more substantive discussion on the item. When materials are associated
with the Update, as with the White Papers, such information will be made available to the
public and Commission prior to the meeting.
Deputy Director Doug Davidson reported no updates and responded to Commission
inquiries.
Chair Stevenson encouraged members of the public to visit the City’s website and
become familiar with the scope of work.
Public Comments:
None.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. 12165 and 12393 Los Osos Valley Road. SPEC-0143-2017: Review of the Froom
Ranch Specific Plan (Specific Plan Area 3 - Madonna on LOVR); public scoping meeting
to discuss the scope of the Environmental Impact Report being prepared for the Froom
Ranch Specific Plan; Specific Plan Area 3 – Madonna on LOVR; John Madonna,
applicant. (Shawna Scott)
Contract Planner Emily Creel presented an in-depth review of the project and
responded to Commission inquiries.
Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere provided clarification on the proposed
affordable and assisted living units, and future consideration of residential density.
Packet Pg. 231
7
DRAFT Minutes –Planning Commission Meeting of July 26, 2017 Page 3
Applicant Representative Victor Montgomery responded to Commissioner inquiries.
Public Comments:
Vicente Del Rio, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project and suggested the
City consider implementing the Buckley Road bypass to ease the traffic impacts.
Neil Havlick, California Native Plant Society, expressed concerns regarding the
development above 150-foot elevation and urged the Commission to consider the utility
demands the project will create; expressed concerns regarding the Froom Creek
alignment and the inappropriate allocation of acreage; noted the EIR should address
how the project would interrupt the groundwater flow regime and wetlands.
--End of Public Comment--
Commissioner Malak referenced written correspondence addressing flooding along
Calle Joaquin, stating he would like to see the issues addressed in the EIR; voiced
concerns regarding the single entrance and exit point.
Commissioner Mann disclosed ex-parte communications with the applicants; expressed
concerns with the utility connections being identified before the EIR scoping is
complete; requested information regarding the mix of housing; voiced concerns
regarding connectivity issues and expressed interest in seeing unique solutions; stated
he would like to increase the natural habitat and environments.
Vice-Chair Fowler stated the EIR list is comprehensive and includes all areas he would
be interested in reviewing; encouraged the applicant to address ground water flow and
to provide more than the traditional four alternatives.
Commissioner Dandekar commented on the aesthetics and view angle section and
encouraged staff to consider view angles from private commercial developments in
addition to the view and scenic corridors from public rights of way.
Commissioner Bisheff commented on the off-site drainage basin, and evaluation of its
proposed location and potential other locations in the EIR.
Chair Stevenson closed the Commission comment by recommending the secondary
emergency access remain open all the time, and that the EIR address cumulative
transportation/circulation impacts including expansion of Mountainbrook Church
operations.
The Commission recessed at 7:33 pm and reconvened at 7:41 p.m. with all
Commissioners present.
Packet Pg. 232
7
DRAFT Minutes –Planning Commission Meeting of July 26, 2017 Page 4
2. Downtown Concept Plan. GENP-1622-2015: Final review of the July 2017 Draft of
the Downtown Concept Plan; receive a project update and recommend adoption of the
plan by the City Council on September 5, 2017; discussion of this item is not subject to
CEQA; multiple zones; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Rebecca Gershow)
Deputy Director of Community Development Xzandrea Fowler introduced the
Downtown Concept Plan project, Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow and the Creative
Vision Team (CVT).
Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow began the PowerPoint presentation; she provided a
brief plan overview and identified the updates and revisions to the plan since the April
26 Planning Commission meeting.
Pierre Rademaker, CVT Chairperson, presented the Downtown Concept Plan Planning
Principles 1-3, Strong Identity, Plentiful and Safe Public Spaces, and Variety in Form
and Function including associated goals and plan highlights.
Eric Meyer, CVT Member, presented Planning Principles 4-5, Enhanced Mobility,
Street Types Diagram, and Universal Accessibility including associated goals and plan
highlights.
T. Keith Gurnee, CVT Member, presented Planning Principle 6, Art Culture and
History, including associated goals and plan highlights
Melanie Mills, CVT Member, presented the Planning Principles 7 and 8, Compatible
Design and Ecological Connections, including associated goals and plan highlights.
Lorelei Cappel, consultant from Michael Baker International, presented information
regarding project implementation and outlined the next steps in the process, inviting the
Commission and members of the public to provide input.
Public Comments:
James Papp, San Luis Obispo, spoke on behalf of Eva Fina and expressed appreciation
to the Creative Vision Team for the inclusion of cultural heritage; suggested verbiage to
include indigenous and non-indigenous people, specifically the “Tilhini.”
Kyle Weins, San Luis Obispo, expressed appreciation for the Creative Vision Team and
spoke in favor of the plan, especially its vision for Monterey Street and the Railroad
Safety Trail connection.
--End of Public Comment--
Following the discussion, Commissioner Mann stated he would like to see maintenance
measures and a security review with Police Department included in the plan; expressed
interest in the proposed bike connections; stated interest in receiving more information
Packet Pg. 233
7
DRAFT Minutes –Planning Commission Meeting of July 26, 2017 Page 5
on state-mandated building height regulations; suggested a greater degree of clarity on
sustainability and feasibility; recommended greater efficiency of language.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MALAK to recommend adoption to the City Council.
ACTION: MOTION AMENDED BY COMMISSIONER OSTERBUR, SECONDED
BY COMMISSIONER MALAK to include the following modification:
Table 5.1 Implementation Action 19: “…Topics could include the Anza National
Historic Trail, and El Camino Real historic bells, and Tilhini.”
ACTION: MOTION AMENDED BY COMMISSIONER MANN, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER BISHEFF to recommend emphasis on safe connectivity for
bicyclists across Highway 101.
MOTION CARRIED 7-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Dandekar, Malak, Bisheff, Mann, Osterbur, Fowler, and Stevenson
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS
Deputy Director Davidson provided an agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Planning Commission
is scheduled for Wednesday, August 9, 2017 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/2017
Packet Pg. 234
7
THENewspaper of the Central Coast
MBUNE
AUG
5.l.�ry a
3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, California 93406-0112 • (805) 781-7800
In The Superior Court of The State of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
AD #3244982
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ss.
County of San Luis Obispo
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not
interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at
all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned
was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of
THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation,
printed and published daily at the City of San Luis
Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice
at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was
published in the above-named newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit;
AUGUST 26, 2017 that said newspaper was duly and
regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of
general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior
Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on
June 9, 1952, Case # 19 i 39 under the Government Code
of the State of California.
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
(Sign re of Principal Clerk)
DATE: AUGUST 26, 2017
AD COST: $176.32
Clrff OF
&MLI S OBISPO
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The San Luis Obispo City Council invites
all interested persons to attend a public
hearing on Tuesday, September 5, 2017,
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council
Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obi-
spo, California, relative to the following:
1. UowNTOwH CONCEPr PE.AN
A public hearing to consider the following:
As recommended by the Planning Commis-
sion, the City Council will consider adop•
tion by resolution of the Downtown Con-
capl Plan as a long range vision and a
guide forpubiic and private investment In
the downtown. The Downtown Concept
Plan i5 categorically exempt from Califor-
nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
For more information on this item, you are
Invited to contact Rebecca Gershow of the
City's Community Development Depart-
ment at (805) 781-7011 or by email at
%p rrshow.0 sloclty.oro
2. MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN
A public hearing to consider conceptual re-
view and discussion of the Mission Plaza
Concept Plan within the Downtown Historic
District: discussion of this item is not sub-
ject to Calffomla Environmental Quality Act
(CMA).
For more information on this item, you are
Invited to contact Manny Guzman of the
City's Public Works Department at (805)
781.7423 or by email atnlguzmsn@sloci ,:
M
Reports for this meeting will be available
for review in the City Clerk's Office and on-
line at www.slpcitv.ora on Wednesday,
August 30, 2017, Please call the City Cler-
k's Office at (805) 781-7100 for°more infor-
mation. The City Council meeting will be
televised live on Charter Cable Channel
20 and live streaming on www.slocity.org.
Carrie Gallagher
Oily Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
August 26, 2017 3244992
Downtown Concept PlanCity Council—September 5, 2017Presentation Purpose:Background on the Final Public Draft of the Downtown Concept Plan—Plan Supplement and Illustrative PosterUpdate on planning processPlan highlights (CVT)Plan implementation and next stepsQuestions & inputRecommendation: As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt by Resolution the Downtown Concept Plan supplement and illustrative poster as a long range vision and guide for public and private investment Downtown.09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
What is the Downtown Concept Plan?Update of the Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center (1993)Guided by the General PlanVision for the downtown –how it should look/function 25 + years in the future … 30,000 ftviewAspirational, not regulatory09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Advisory BodyCreative Vision Team (CVT)10 member project advisory body appointed by the City CouncilProvide expertise, design assistance and recommendations to staff Creative Vision Team:Pierre RademakerCharles StevensonChuck CrotserKeith GurneeJaime Hill Eric Meyer Melanie MillsMatt QuaglinoAnnie RendlerVicente del RioKenneth Schwartz (former) 09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
•Plan Illustrative Poster•Plan Supplement1. Planning Context2. Vision, Principles and Goals3. Illustrative Downtown Concept PlanIncludes Block Descriptions, Use and Sub‐Area descriptions4. Mobility and StreetscapeStreet Types and Bicycle Facilities Diagrams5. ImplementationHow the Plan is Organized09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Public Engagement Appendix 109-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
709-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Figure 3.1Illustrative Downtown Concept PlanILOWER ICENTRALIUPPER I09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Planning Principle 1:Strong IdentityPreserve and enhance the downtown’s distinct sense of place and memorable character.Upper downtown gateway at Monterey and Pepper Streets09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Left, art on a railroad trestle.Below, Monterey between Osos and Santa Rosa Streets reimagined 09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
2. Plentiful and Safe Public SpacesProvide opportunities for positive social interaction, quiet moments, and access to the natural environment, where everyone feels safe and welcome.09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Block 42, looking from the intersection of Broad and Marsh Streets towards Emerson Park09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
3. Variety in Form and FunctionEncourage a variety of compatible uses, activities, and housing types for an inclusive and vital downtown.09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
4. Enhanced MobilityEnhance the downtown’s walkability; make it easier to get to and travel throughout for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders.The Marsh/HigueraStreet intersection and downtown gateway09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Above, new Paseo on Monterey StreetLeft, Railroad Safety Trail bridge at Pepper and Monterey Streets Below, Street Type D (shared street) open and closed to vehicular trafficAbove, Street Type B cross‐section with cycle track 09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Add street types diagram09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
5. Universal AccessibilityPromote a downtown that is safe, inclusive, and easy to navigate for those using all modes of transportation.09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
6. Art, Culture and HistoryEncourage artistic and cultural opportunities and celebrate downtown’s unique history. 09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Clockwise from above: Extension of Mission Plaza across Broad Street to a proposed new park; narrowed Broad St bridge with path connection; proposed new plaza at Higuera and Nipomo Streets; Cultural District area (approximate)09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
7. Compatible DesignEmbrace context‐sensitive, original and human‐scale design that supports placemakingLooking from Court Street across Higuera Street to commercial mixed use infill on Block 33 09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
8. Ecological ConnectionsProtect, enhance, and reveal the natural areas and ecological functions that are an integral component of the downtown area.09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
How will the Downtown Concept Plan be used?Provides guidance for the holistic vision of the downtown:Referenced when planning future private development and public improvementsImplementation actions considered when updating planning documents and CIPs09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Chapter 5: ImplementationLand Use and Economic DevelopmentArts, Culture and HistoryRecreation, Open Space and Public RestroomsPublic SafetyMobility and CirculationStreetscapePrioritized public programs and projects:09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Planning Commission RecommendationOn July 26, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the Downtown Concept Plan to the City Council with two amendments:1.Reword Action 19 so that it reads, Explore ways to bring history alive in the Cultural District area, including physical and virtual interpretive information on the area’s natural, built, and social history. Topics could include the Northern Chumash tribes, Anza National Historic Trail, and El Camino Real/Indian trade route, among others (page 5.4). [Wording in boldis the proposed addition; exact wording was adjusted after the meeting.]2.Emphasize safe connectivity across Hwy 101 for bicyclists. After reviewing the plan language, staff believes that proposed Action 48, as worded, serves that function: Seek to improve the safety of the bicycle and pedestrian connection from the Marsh and Higuera intersection to the Madonna Inn Bike Path and the Cerro San Luis trailhead across Highway 101(page 5.6).09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
How to Participate TonightQuestions/ClarificationPublic InputDeliberationRecommendation: As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt by Resolution the Downtown Concept Plan supplement and illustrative poster as a long range vision and guide for public and private investment Downtown09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Next Steps (post adoption)Final revisions – recommendation items and other minor clean upPost plan online with links to documents Update digital model as projects are developed Implementation strategies09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation
Vision StatementAs the heart of our community, downtown San Luis Obispo serves as the center for culture, commerce and government. A well‐balanced mix of uses in a walkable environment will make the downtown socially and economically vibrant. Preserving its historic authenticity while accommodating change will create a livable future.09-05-2017 Item 8, Staff Presentation