The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/06/1988, 4 - TRACT 1439 SING AGENDA DATE ITEM # ��IIIIIIIIII� C�� o S� ��S 0'"Bel'ISPOy 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 �C••tl� nQfU�� 1 June 1988 TO: City Council FROM Judith Lautner, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Tract 1439 The applicant has run into unexpected difficulties in completing negotiations for a portion of land included in this subdivision. Therefore, he has to revise the tract boundaries and adjust the layout. The Planning Commission must review these significant changes prior to council review. Staff recommends the council continue consideration of Tract 1439 to a date uncertain. MEETING AGENDA 4. ��i�II�111111111I��°QIIUIU City Of San tins OBISPO DAe STEM # iINIGn COUNCIL GENOA REPORT FROM: Michael Multari, Community Development Director Prepared by: Judith Lautner SUBJECT: Tract 1439: Subdivision to divide one large lot into 22 residential lots, at the intersection of Royal Way and Rubio Lane. CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the tentative map, as recommended by the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND: DISCUSSION The applicant wants to divide a 6.95-acre parcel into 22 residential lots. Up to 36 lots are allowed on the nearly-level site, but the property includes a portion of Prefumo Creek and some steep slopes on the southerly boundary of the tract. The subdivider also prefers to create large lots. The Planning Commission discussed the subdivision on April 13 and May 11, 1988, and recommended approval of the map at the May 11 hearing. That commission's largest concern was the disposition of the creek. The applicant offered to dedicate an area extending from the centerline of the creek (tract boundary) to ten feet beyond the top of bank, to the city for park purposes. The offer was referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission, which recommends the city accept the offer. The Planning Commission is recommending the council require the dedication to extend to twenty feet beyond the top of bank, to allow the property to be developed as part of a trail system eventually. That commission also wants some adjustments to the street design, to accomodate the creek dedication while maintaining acceptable lot sizes. Alternatives considered by the commissions were dedication of easements instead of property in fee, and inclusion of a portion of lot 1 (adjacent to the city golf course) in the offer. Both commissions wanted access to the creek from the Rubio Lane cul-de-sac. Minor concerns were the proposed grading for lots 11 through 14, fire department requirements, and the amount of paving indicated for the Royal Way bulb-out. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION: If the council continues the request, the applicant must agree to a continuance or the tract will be considered "automatically approved", as the deadline for action expires on June 11, 1988. If the council denies the request, the land will remain vacant until some development plan is approved. The access easement (proposed to become an extension of Royal Way) will be paved as a condition of the approved subidivision adjacent and to the south of the site (Tract 1438). 4-I ��h��►►I�IIIII��P° �' city of San lues OBIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1439 Page 2 Data summary Address: 1901 Royal Way Applicant: Bob Noyes Representative: Central Coast Engineering (Steve Kahn) Zoning: R-1-S General plan: Low-density residential Environmental status: Negative declaration of environmental impact, with mitigation, granted by the director April 6, 1988 Project action deadline: June 11, 1988 Site description The site, at the northwesterly end of Royal Way, is flat except where it takes in a portion of the hillside, on the southerly boundary of the tract, and within the creek boundaries. Several trees and bushes exist on the site, most of them near the existing house on proposed lot 21 and along the southerly boundary. A barn and corral sit on the northwesterly portion of the site. The tract boundaries extend to the centerline of Pref umo Creek. Proiect description The subdivider wants to divide one 6.95-acre lot into 22 residential lots. The lots range in area from 7,125 square feet (lot 2) to 17,000 square feet (lot 20). As the average cross-slope of the land is less than 15%, the maximum density allowed on this site is 5.16 (area not including streets) X 7 - 3A single-family dwellings. EVALUATION In evaluating this request, staff asks the council to consider: 1. Creek. Prefumo Creek runs along the northerly perimeter of the tract. The creek is deep and attractive, but the some of the banks are in danger of further erosion. In addition, the wildlife that now exists in the creek area may be threatened by further development next to the creek. Staff therefore recommends installation of additional riparian vegetation at the top of the bank, to protect and enhance the wildlife habitat, and measures to prevent siltation and additional erosion. To assure that the riparian environment is protected but at the same time limited access to the creek is allowed, staff recommends the subdivider develop a creek plan that shows erosion and flooding protection measures, siltation control, planting, fencing, and access. Condition # 1 requires such a plan. "'��►►►�IIIII��p�IiIUI� city of San LUIS OBISpo ' Mii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1439 Page 3 2. Park dedication. The subdivider is offering land, adjacent to the creek and extending to the centerline of the creek, to the city as "open space" for park purposes. Two primary questions need to be answered to evaluate this offer: 1) Does the city want the land? and 2) If so, what is the appropriate method (dedication in fee, or easement) for obtaining it? Both questions are primarily policy questions, for which there is some policy direction provided in the city's Parks and Recreation Element and supporting documents. Does the city want the land? Staff, the Planning Commission and the Parks and Recreation Commission say, "Yes." The subdivider's initial offer was an area extending to ten feet beyond the top of bank. This area could be used as. part of the city's trails system ultimately. Where will it go? A logical connection on the easterly end is with the city golf course. Non-golfers do walk along the creek through the golf course even now (although they are not encouraged to do so). If that informal pathway is to become a part of an official trail system, of course, some signing and other safeguards will be required to warn walkers of the risks of being hit by a ball, and to limit interference with those playing the game. The city also owns property across the street from the golf course, extending to Laguna Lake. Currently a wildlife preservation area, the property was dedicated to the city as part of Tract 718, to satisfy park dedication requirements. A map is attached ("City-owned parkland") that shows the city's ownership of creekside parkland in the vicinity. A connection at the westerly end would require crossing the creek in some location. It may be possible in the future for the city to acquire land along the creek that extends behind the mobile home park, out to the county area near Prefumo Canyon Road. Existing city policy documents tend to support acquiring access rights: The Parks and Recreation Element includes a schematic map of areas where trails may be developed. This specific area is not included in that schematic map. However, the land being offered is attractive and includes part of a major creek. A trail in this location can be considered consistent with the schematic trail plan, if the trail can eventually become a part of a larger trail. Technical Report I. a supporting document for the city's Parks and Recreation Element, points to a need for additional parkland in this area. This report also points out (page 156) that "the community has expressed a desire for more trails and paths, especially as they might relate to the creek and other natural features. There is also a need for linking parks and recreation facilities to isolated neighborhoods." '�►�� i�IIIII�1Ip�°°111��UJ`� city of San WIS OBISpo All COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1439 Page 4 The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposal at the request of the Planning Commission, and recommends the city acquire the property offered, including access to the creek from Rubio Lane. The Planning Commission also supported obtaining the property, but is recommending a wider dedication than what was initially. offered. The Planning Commission's recommendation is that the area above the top of bank be an "average" of twenty feet wide. The intent of the "average" requirement is to allow the path to widen out where trees or other obstructions limit access, and to compensate for this widening by narrowing the path where there are no obstructions. That commission also supported access from Rubio Lane, with an easement for maintenance only from Fairway Drive to the golf course. Staff would support the Fairway Drive easement extending to the 20' creek dedication, with public access allowed also. The applicant and his representatives will have staked three different widths in the field (with different color ribbons) by the time the council reads this report. One will indicate the ten-foot width originally proposed, one will show a twenty-foot width, and the third will show a variable width that is acceptable to the subdivider. Staff will be prepared to comment on the subdivider's second (variable) offer at the meeting. Possibly the more difficult question is the second: If the land is valuable to the city. what is the aoprooriate method (dedication in fee. or easement) for obtainine it? The Parks and Recreation Element concludes that the city needs more parks and trails. The element, being a policy document, does not spell out exactly how the land is to be acquired. The city has the following options: A) Accept the offer as parkland satisfying all or Dart of the subdivision's nark reauirement. According the the Subdivision Regulations (Section 16.040.050), to qualify as parkland, the land must be "of sufficient size and suitable topography to meet the local park needs of the immediate and future residents of the subdivision". The Parks and Recreation Element adds that the land should be half active and half passive (page 4). The city has limited experience in acquiring land for trails. The Edna-Islay area, intended to be a model for future subdivisions, requires trails along the "lower" creek. Ownership of the land varies with where the trail is located: where adjacent to the future park, the land is to be dedicated to the city in fee (presumably as part of the park). In other locations, the creek and pathways are owned by adjacent property owners, and are within maintenance and access easements. In neither case is the land included in calculations of parkland required by the city. However, the development of the Edna-Islay area is under the guidance of a specific plan adopted by the city. Also, the creeks in that area are not classified as "major", and therefore may not be of as great value as the creek in this subdivision. In some small developments (for example, the condominium development the corner of Nipomo and Brizzolara), public access has been acquired as part of the maintenance easement over the creek. ��i�►uVIIIIIII�U� q�UIU MY Of San suis OBISp0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPOPM Tract 1439 Page 5 "Passive" parks of various types have been approved and accepted by the city as meeting at least a part of the parkland requirement. Terrace Hill and Ferrini Heights are two examples. Tract 718, noted above, involved a creek offer similar to this, except that it included a small "mini park", and the creek was offered as a wildlife protection area rather than a public access area. Therefore, there have been precedents set for accepting similar types of property as parkland. Is the proposed dedication useful as a "park"? Does it meet the criteria in the Subdivision Regulations and the Parks and Recreation Element set out to define parks? The element includes the following table, which defines how credit is to be given to different types of land for meeting the requirement for "passive" space: Landscaoe Character Credit Steep hillsides - over 20% slope 50% Drainageways 25% Flat rolling land 100" Flood plain land 150% Major creeks 200% Hill top 200% The majority of the land being offered in this case qualifies as a "major creek". Therefore, the area dedicated can be credited as 200% of the actual area, or 2 X 28,000 square feet (the area included in the ten-foot dedication offer) = 56.000 square L&d. The creekside land thus meets the objective criteria for "passive" parkland. Staff suggests a calculation to determine the value of the initial (ten-foot + creek) offer as parkland: Total parkland reguired 5 acres per 1000 residents 22 lots @ 2.69 persons (average from city census for single-family homes) = 59 persons (59/1000) X 5 acres = 0.295 acres = 12.850 square feet (half passive and half active). Passive portion Description: All of the land along the creek bank (28,000 square feet) Requirement: 1/2 of 12,850 S.F. - 6,425 S.F. Dedicated area: 28,000 X 2 (200% credit) = 56,000 S.F. ��,��►�►►�111�Ipn�IIUIU city of San lues OBISpo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1439 Page 6 PASSIVE REQUIREMENT EXCEEDED Active portion Description: None. Requirement: 1/2 of 12,850 S.F. = 6,425 S.F. Dedicated area: 0 S.F.+ ACTIVE REQUIREMENT NOT MET Park-in-lieu renuirement Active portion = 1/2 of park dedication requirement, or 1/2 of park-in-lieu fee: 1/2 X ($44,000) (estimated park-in-lieu fee) = $22,000, PARK-IN-LIEU FEE REQUIRED IN ADDITION TO DEDICATION: $22,000. The Planning Commission, in addition to recommending a wider dedication, recommends that this wider offer be determined to meet the subdivision's requirement for parkland in full, thereby exempting the property owner of any park-in-lieu fees. In recognition of the large area involved (exceeding the passive park requirement by at least ten times), staff supports this recommendation. B) Require dedication of the offered vrooerty as easement only. This option would satisfy the city's needs for pathways along the creek and for access for city maintenance. From a practical standpoint, there is little difference in the city's owning the land outright and having rights to a permanent easement instead. The city has usually opted for easements rather than dedication in fee and requiring park-in-lieu fees in addition. The Edna-Islay subdivisions, for example, have had to provide land for neighborhood parks as well as easements and dedications for creeks. In the present case, the developer prefers to dedicate in fee and avoid all or a portion of the park fees. If an easement were required, the map would be revised so that individual property owners would own land to the centerline of the creek, and the city would have an easement over a part of their land. Normally, when an easement is required, the land under the easement is counted as part of the individual lots, meeting subdivision regulations requirements for lot size, width, or depth. If the council prefers this option, the map will have to be revised to show the new lot lines. The subdivider may choose to increase the number of lots, given the extra area. These additional lots would tend to "reimbuse" the subdivider for the park-in-lieu fee requirement. 44 C��pI��INlllllll�l ry II I, f n IU�S OB�Sp� MEETING DATE: I`II=III �� ITEM NUMBER: NO; COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1439 Page 7 CONCLUSION: On balance, staff supports the dedication in fee proposed by the subdivider, as modified by the Planning Commission, with the land counting as fulfilling the parkland dedication requirement, based on the following: • Prefumo Creek is a major creek. City policy and commissions support acquisition in fee of major creeks, for park purposes. • There is less chance for conflict with a landowner, and overall development near the creek is likely to be less dense than with an easement. However, the above discussion is intended to provide adequate information for the council to make a policy determination in this case. Staff expects that upcoming revisions to the Parks and Recreation Element, and, preferably, development of an implementation ordinance for that element, will spell out policy and standards for future similar subdivisions. 3. The %trading strateQv fir lots LLht rough 14• The Planning Commission asked if a proposed fill bank behind lots 11 through 14 could be eliminated by the creation of a swale along the rear property -lines of these lots. It is possible to create a swale to drain all four lots to Rubio Lane. Such a swale would eliminate the fill on lots 11 through 14. Easements would be required and the swale would have to be constructed to require little maintenance, or it would likely be ineffective. The subdivider, after considering several options, including a swale, proposed area drains at the rear of lots 11 through 14. This solution involves creation of easements and placement of a lesser quantity of fill (fill banks would not exceed five feet in height). Planning and Public Works staff can support any of the three alternatives suggested. The commission discussed the alternatives and recommends the Public Works staff determine which of two (swale or rear lot drains) is preferable. The applicant is showing the rear lot drains on the map, with the understanding that the Public Works Department may require a Swale instead. No action on this item is required of the council, unless the Planning Commission recommendation is unacceptable. 4. Tree protection. The applicant and planning staff have met at the site two times, with the city arborist. The arborist's recommendations led to the retention of the large pepper tree on the site. The Planning Commission discussed the large oak on Lot 2 at some length. The applicant proposes to retain the tree, pruning it under the supervision of the city arborist. The commission's concern was that building a house on this lot may damage this large, attractive tree: That commission therefore recommends that Lot 2 be lengthened at the rear by ten feet, removing that much from Lot 3. To avoid awkward angles, the commission suggested the applicant work with staff to develop the exact configuation of these lots. 4-7 MEETING DATE: o�na��e►�IIIIIh�J��Jl� city of San tins osispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: ract 1439 Page 8 Staff met with the applicant and his representatives at the site and determined that the additional area would likely benefit the lot. However, the actual configuration is less important than the maintenance of a healthy tree. Staff can support any technique that assures its continued life. The applicant will be presenting a revised layout of these lots at the meeting. Staff will be prepared to respond to the proposal. The city arborist has reviewed all trees proposed to be removed, and concurs with their removal. To be sure that no mistakes are made or that no significant tree has been missed, the arborist is requiring that the subdivider stake all trees in the field with numbers, and list all types, sizes, and status (to be retained or to be removed) on a corresponding list. The arborist will then review each tree in the field prior to construction of the tract. A tree preservation bond will be required to protect the trees during construction. 5. A well exists 9A the gni L The subdivider wants to remove this well and drill another on one of the four lots he intends to retain for his own use (lots 19-22). The well would then be used only for agricultural irrigation. No city departments had any concerns with this proposal, as long as the work is done to city standards, with appropriate permits. 6. The alignment of Rubio Lane can Dg adjusted. gni the bulb-out gn Royal }may could hg modified. The Planning Commission suggested the applicant work out a way to lessen the proposed paving by making the bulb-out smaller. Also, to make up for the wider dedication near the creek, that commission suggested that Rubio Lane be moved down slightly, thereby increasing the area of the lots by the creek. The applicant's representatives have been developing proposals along these lines. Among the modifications under consideration is a change to an 84' diameter no-parking cul-de-sac at the end of Rubio Lane. The applicant is looking at providing three parking spaces in the center of this cul-de-sac. Such a design would meet Fire Department access concerns for overly-long cols-de-sac, and eliminate the need for fire sprinklers. Staff and the applicant's representatives will be prepared to discuss these modifications at the meeting. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Other agencies and departments had no concerns with the request other than those noted in the evaluation above. FISCAL IMPACT Acceptance of the park offer may not increase maintenance costs beyond that normally required simply to keep creeks clear. However, a creekside trail is a relatively low cost type of park. Acceptance of the land in fee means a loss of the $44,000 park-in-lieu fees. No other significant fiscal impact is expected to result from this subdivision. �►��i�i►I�IIIII��p=111cIty Of San LUIS OBIspo a MM is COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1439 Page 9 RECOMMENDATION Approve the tentative map as recommended by the Planning Commission, with the findings and conditions listed in the attached resolution. Attached: Vicinity map Environmental initial study Map of city-owned parkland between Tract 1439 and Laguna Lake Planning Commission minutes: April 13, 1988 May 11, 1988 Parks and Recreation Commission minutes: May 4, 1988 Documents used in the preparation of this report: Zoning Regulations Subdivision Regulations Flood Prevention Regulations Flood Management Policy General Plan Land Use Element General Plan Parks and Recreation Element and supporting Technical Report I California Department of Water Resources Urban Stream Restoration Program �� 1 RESOLUTION NO. (1988 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO GRANTING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1439 LOCATED AT 1901 ROYAL WAY BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of the tentative map of Tract 1439 and the Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed use will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of persons living or working on the site or in the vicinity. 2. The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The design of the subdivision, as conditioned, and proposed improvements are consistent with the general plan. 4. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in an R-1-S zone. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious health problems, substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will not conflict with easement for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision. 7. The Community Development Director has determined that the proposed subdivision will not have a significant effect on the environment and has granted a negative declaration. SECTION 2. Conditions. That the approval of the tentative map for Tract 1439 be subject to the following conditions: 1. Creek improvements shall be limited to those shown on a creek plan submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department and the Community Development Director, and in accordance with permits obtained from the Department of Fish and Game. Such creek plan shall show the extent of grading, proposed erosion and siltation control and revegetation techniques, and fencing, plus any other related work required by the Community Development Director and City Engineer. �-10 Resolution No. (1988 Series) Tract 1439 Page 2 2. The subdivider shall offer for dedication to the city an area extending from the centerline of Prefumo Creek to a line averaging 20' beyond the top of bank, for park purposes. Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall stake the area to be dedicated. The staked area shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director to assure adequate area for passage and to protect trees and other riparian vegetation. The precise boundary of the area to be dedicated shall be approved by the City Council with the recommendation of the Community Development Director, at the time of approval of the final map. If necessary to accommodate the creek dedication, some lots are hereby granted exceptions in area, width, or length. The Community Development Department staff shall determine the exact exceptions required, if any. This area shall be counted as meeting the subdivision's park dedication requirements. The subdivider shall also provide a public access easement from Rubio Lane to the creek, to the approval of the Community Development Director, and shall provide an easement for maintenance purposes only, extending from Fairway Drive to the golf course, to the approval of the Public Works Departmcnt. 3. Subdivider must provide a hydraulic analysis illustrating the effects of this project during a 100-year storm on projects downstream. If the analysis indicates additional work to prevent further erosion of the Prefumo Creek banks must be done, such work must be included as part of the creek plan, and is subject to approval by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Game; said work shall be installed by the subdivider. 4. No trees may be removed, except with the approval of the city arborist and the Community Development Director. The subdivider shall develop a tree protection plan and post a bond to assure the safety of the existing trees during construction of tract improvements, to the satisfaction of the city arborist and Community Development Director. 5. One-inch minimum water services must be installed to accommodate possible future fire sprinklers. Rubio Lane shall meet Fire Department requirements or fire sprinklers will be required for homes built on lots 4 through 9. 6. The subdivider must install a 4-foot integral sidewalk, street pavement, street lighting, fire hydrants, drainage facilities, and utilities along both public streets to city standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Utilities Engineer. Six-foot public utility easements and ten-foot street tree easements are required along all street frontages. 7. An updated soils report shall be prepared after grading of the site is completed. Such soils report shall make specific foundation recommendations for each lot. The final map or other recorded documentation of the tract shall refer to the updated soils report. 8. Lot #2 shall be increased in length by 10, to accommodate building of a home on this lot without harming the existing 48'-diameter oak tree. 9. All homes built on lots I and 3 through 7 shall be set back a minimum of ten feet from the rear property line. I►� Resolution No. (1988 Series) Tract 1439 Page 3 On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1988. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: ;City A ministrative Officer City At rney Community Development Director ., LAGUM CEOs-4a /c/o s --40 o LAKE♦ L. 0 �� r4lCi,O Ct � _ PF Ok r d � .d, 4 .. R-3 ✓� — a � •• .b �' F 9.. • �'� PF C va .6 R-2 'Q R-2 Q` • a i .Q� C-f� 1 C* ♦ 0 �C/OSR •. . . F -40 ,c R \ R-3-PD 3°l • x.13 ADDENDUM '!O City of san luis owp0 I�►+��iilll iiilll " I�il' INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SITE LOCATION 19Q1 Royal Way APPLICATION NO. ER 65-87 PROJECTOESCRIPTION See attached - residential subdivision to create 23 lots frrn one large lot. DIME: ihis addendum and the orictinal initial study are to be taken together as a cantslgte APPLICANT RC)bert Noyes report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: X NEGATIVE DECLARATION X MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REOUIRED Addendum PREPARED BY Judith Lautner, Associate Planner DATEA=:il,5, 1988 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE 4/6/88 Negative Declaration with Mitigation Included -SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS I.DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING IL POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS .....................................................NONE* B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH..........................................NCNE C. LAND USE .........................................................................NONE* D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ................... * ............................NODI.. E. PUBLIC SERVICES ..................................................................NONE* F. UTILITIES........................................................................ G. NOISE LEVELS ......................................................................NONE H. GEOLOGIC 6 SEISMIC HAZARDS 8 TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .....................NONE* I. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS...............................................hrvjp. J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ...............................................TJDNE* K PLANT LIFE......................................................................NT]NR* LANIMAL LIFE......................................................................NCWR* M. ARCHAEOLOGtCAUMISTORICAL ...................................................nnrb N. AESTHETIC .......................................................................NrYJF* 0. ENERGYIRESOURCE USE ..........................................................hyljr* P. OTHER ..........................................................................nvobw III.STAFF RECOMMENDATION Negative declaration of environmental impact, with mitigation. 14 -4 , 'SEE ATTACHED REPORT 1 J ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY ER 65-87 Page 2 On March 31, 1987, the applicant's representative submitted revised plans for Tract 1439. Addendum jQ Dro*cct description The tract now includes land extending to the centerline of Prefumo Creek, from the intersection of Prefumo Creek with its southwesterly tributary to the boundary of the golf course. The additional land also extends to the current end of Fairway Drive, the boundaries of Tract 322. Total acreage of the tract is now 6.95 acres. The total number of lots proposed has been increased from eighteen to twenty-three. Two of the additional lots.have access from Fairway Drive, while the remaining three have frontage on Rubio Lane, which is shown longer than originally proposed. The lot lines of the lots next to the creek are shown ten feet in from the top of bank. The area extending from these rear lot lines to the centerlinc of the creek is offered to the city to satisfy parkland dedication requirements. Addendum IQ potential impact review A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS Land =clement A closer review of the Land Use Element map indicates that the property is designated as Low-density Residential, rather than Interim Conservation/Open Space. The tract is consistent with this designation. Mitieation measures: None required. Parks and Recreation Element At the suggestion of staff, the subdivider is offering a ten-Coot-wide path along the creek bank to the city, along with a dedication of the creek to its centerline. The land is offered to the city as part of required park dedication for the subdivision, instead of park-in-lieu fees: The Subdivision Regulations say that "land to be dedicated shall be of sufficient size and suitable topography to meet the local park needs of the immediate and future residents of the subdivision..' This means the land along the creek bank must be available for the use of the residents of the subdivision, and must be a public park. To be available, the path must be accessible. As shown, the path is accessible to those lots adjacent to it and to the city golf course. Additional access must be made available for the remaining lot owners. ER 65-87 addendum Page 3 The Parks and Recreation Element includes a schematic "urban trail system'. The map showing the route of the trail does not include a trail along Prefumo Creek specifically. However, a trail along the southerly (south of Los Osos Valley Road) portion of Madonna Road is included, looping down to Los Osos Valley Road through a portion of the Irish Hills (see map attached to this report). If the council finds the path along Prefumo Creek desirable, it may interpret this schematic map as including such a trail. The Parks and Recreation Element says (page 10), 'The city will continue to refine the urban trail plan and develop precise design standards that control the type of access to and use of specific sections of the trail system.". The city is currently considering significant changes to the Parks and Recreation Element, and possibly an implementing ordinance. If the council supports the concept of a trail extending from Los Osos Valley Road through the golf course and along the creek, the upcoming review process should consider such a trail. Mitigation measures: • If the council supports a trail along the creek, it must find the trail consistent with the city's Subdivision Regulations and Parks and Recreation Element. Access must be provided to the trail for all residents of the neighborhood. Subdivision Regulations LOT SIZES: The 'remainder' included in the original submittal has now been combined with additional property to create a conforming lot. All of the proposed lots meet Subdivision Regulations standards for minimum lot width, length, and area. Mitigation measures None required. FLAG LOTS: An additional flag lot (lot 8) is now shown, on the Rubio Lane cul-de-sac. Again, the regulations say that such lots may be approved where "development would not be feasible with the installation of a standard street..., or where justified by topographical conditions" The layout of the tract will be reviewed by staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. If lot 8 is approved as currently designed, findings must be made that support the approval. Mitigation measure: Approval of flag lots must be justified by appropriate findings. C. LAND USE See comments under "Community Plans and Goals - Land use Element", above. ER 65-87 addendum Page 4 D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Average trips per day expected from this subdivision is 23 X 10 = Q. Total trips on Royal Way is expected to increase to 230 + 1400 = 1630 after buildout of this and the adjacent subdivision (Tract 1438). The estimated traffic load is acceptable. Mitigation measures: None required. J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY The revised boundaries of the tract now include a portion of Prefumo Creek. Development of lots adjacent to the creek needs to address two primary issues: Riparian habitat: Provisions should be made to protect and enhance the existing riparian habitat. Usually planting and irrigation to establish native shrubs that discourage access is adequate. If a trail along the creek bank is determined desirable by the council, design of this planting should be reviewed carefully to allow protection of wildlife while encouraging limited public access. Flooding and erosion: The banks must be protected against further erosion where necessary. Approval of this tract will include either an easement or a dedication in fee of the access to the creek. City crews will be able to clear out flow-restricting brush as needed. This portion of the creek is deep and currently considered adequate to contain a 100-year flood. However, a hydraulic study will be required to support this conclusion. If the study indicates the need for improvements to limit flooding, these improvements must be made as part of tract development. Mitigation measures: • A creek development plan shall be provided in addition to standard improvement drawings, to be approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. This plan shall include provisions for improving the flow of the creek, planting of the banks to protect wildlife, and erosion and siltation protection, where determined necessary by the City Engineer and the Community Development Director. • Homes shall be set back a minimum of twenty feet from the rear property lines. RECOMMENDATION Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact for the project, with the following mitigation measures: 1. If the council supports a trail along the creek, it must find the trail consistent with the city's Subdivision Regulations and Parks and Recreation Element. Access must be provided to the trail for all residents of the neighborhood. 2. The subdivider shall inform future lot buyers of the possibility of building permit delay based on water supply and usage in the city. 3. An additional hydrant shall be required beyond that shown on the tentative map. Location shall be to the approval of the Fire Department. 447 L. ER 65-87 addendum Page 5 4. Individual soils investigations shall be made on the lots following completion of earthwork. Reports of these investigations shall become part of the recorded documentation of the tract. 5. All trees shall be labelled in the field, and listed by type and diameter on a corresponding list. The list shall be reviewed in the field by the city's arborist and Community Development Director. No trees shall be removed without approval from the arborist and director. 6. Approval of flag lots must be justified by appropriate findings. 7. A creek development plan shall be provided in addition to standard improvement drawings, to be approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. This plan shall include provisions for improving the flow of the creek, planting of the banks to protect wildlife, and erosion and siltation protection, where determined necessary by the City Engineer and the Community Development Director. 8. Homes shall be set back a minimum of twenty feet from the rear property lines. 000 JL:er65-87add .s LO ONE MILE URBAN TRAIL SYSTEM EXISTING PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY s�E PROPOSED PARK OR RECREATION SITE t TRAIL ACCESS POINT .aaa ON-STREET TRAIL a OFF-STREET TRAIL CAL POLK a4 519HOP 3 _ i MTI4. 0 HILL. coo SL m, / Q JL moo. LiM ISLA tf • IiIL.L. NORTH city of PARKS & RECREATION ELEMENT M.; San lues oslspo 4 .wlq City of san IUIS omp0 ��NIIIIIIIII��!II��►I;Iljlll ' • INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SITE LOCATION 1901 Royal Way APPLICATION NO. 65-87 PROJECT DESCRIPTION See attached - Subdivision to create 18 residential lots fran one large lot. APPLICANT Robert Noyes STAFF RECOMMENDATION: _NEGATIVE DECLARATION Y MITIGATION INCLUDED EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED PREPARED BY Judith Lautner, Associate Planner DATFJanuary 12, 1988 1-13-88 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE Negative Declaration with Mitigation SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS L DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING IL POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ................................................... NONE* B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH.......................................... NONE NONE* C. LAND USE D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .............................................. ►QWF* E PUBLIC SERVICES NnW* F. UTILITIES..............:.......................................................... NC>m* • G. NOISE LEVELS ............. H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMICWAZAROS A TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... mn * I. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS............................................... NONE J. SURFACE WATER FLOW-AND QUALITY .............................................. mnNg* K PLANT LIFE......................................................................... mrf4:* L ANIMALLIFE........................................................................ NONE* M. ARCHAEOLAGICALJHISTORICAL................................................... mm N. AESTHETIC ..... O. ENERGYIRESOURCEUSE ...........................................................bry(m P. OTHER .._-- RL STAFF RECOMMENDATION. NEGATIVEEEa.Ap 'j'l�j, i�TI7H MITIGATIQN "OSEE ATTACHED REPORT �' °� ER 65-87 Page 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Tract 1439 is a residential subdivision creating eighteen lots from one large lot. The site is relatively flat, although the southerly boundary slopes steeply. Prefumo Creek runs along the northwesterly boundary, adjacent to the site. A soils engineering investigation was conducted for the area. The report of that investigation, conducted by Pacific Geoscience, Inc, and dated June 16, 1987, is incorporated in this report by reference. The subdivision includes a half-street and cul-de-sac, completing Rubio Lane, and extends Royal Way in the westerly direction. Eighteen large lots, ranging from 7075 square feet (lot 8) to 17,862 square feet (lot 16) are accessible from these two streets. The subdivision is adjacent to and to the west of a fully-developed low-density residential area. A portion of the Irish Hills lies southwest of the site,creating a scenic backdrop. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS Land use element The Land Use Element map shows the property as.'Interim Conservation/Open Space". The proposed tract is not consistent with such a designation. However, the City Council, in approving a zoning change to R-I-S for the area, indicated a desire to see a specific proposal prior to changing the Land Use Element map. This tract map will serve as a specific proposal. If the City Council approves the tentative tract map, it must be with a condition that a land use map change from Interim Conservation/Open Space to Low-Density Residential be approved prior to or concurrent with the approval of the final map. Mitigation measure: Approval of the tentative tract map must include a condition requiring approval of a general plan map change from Interim Conservation/Open Space to Low-Density Residential prior to or concurrent with approval of the final map. Water and wastewater manasement element WATER: Policies in the Water and Wastewater Management Element as amended October 26, 1987, say that the city will provide adequate water for all uses within the urban reserve line, inside the incorporated city. However, water use and conservation policies in the element stress that the city will not allow development that causes total city water use to exceed the safe annual yield 'by a factor which would lead to an unacceptable level of risk'. In other words, if present supplies are not adequate, development of individual lots in this tract may be delayed. The city's policies will favor residential development when supplies are again available in these instances. ER 65-87 Page 3 The subdivider should acknowledge that water supplies are not guaranteed until building permits are issued. The city is currently in the process of developing an ordinance to implement the water use policies in the element. The ordinance is expected to spell out the process for determining when and how development will be slowed in times of excessive water use. Mitigation measure, The subdivider shall inform future lot buyers of the possibility of building permit delay based on water supply and usage in the city. WASTEWATER: The city's existing wastewater treatment plant is adequate to treat projected wastewater from this development, if developed within the next 5 - 10 Years. Modifications to the treatment plant will be necessary as the population increases, and with these modifications should meet regional standards for treatment quality. No change to the subdivision will be required. Water service poli ics 'Water service limits' vary throughout the city. These limits are the maximum elevations at which development can be served, based on existing conditions. In this area, the water service limit is approximately 246'. None of the proposed buildwing sites exceeds the 175' elevation. Therefore, adequate service can be provided for residential water needs. Supplies for adequate fire protection are discussed further below. Mitigation measures.• None required. Flood management policies Portions of the site lie in the 'B' and 'A' flood zones. The city's Flood Management Policy (adopted June 1983) says that floor levels of all structures must be built at least one foot above the 100-year flood level. The 100-year level in this area, according to the Flood Insurance Rate Map, is between the 155 and 160' elevation. The minimum lot elevation proposed is 1669. Mititation measures- None required; standard code requirements will suffice. Subdivision Regulations SOLAR ORIENTATION: The Subdivision regulations say that the longest dimension of each lot shall be oriented within thirty degrees of south, unless the subdivider demonstrates certain conditions that make this orientation difficult or impossible. None of the lots is oriented in this way. However, the site lies at the intersection of Rubio Lane and Royal Way, and is constrained by the need to have access off these two streets. As the city's Urban Reserve Line (URL) extends beyond this property, to the southwest, development beyond this site is possible (a subdivision to divide the adjacent site into thirteen lots is being reviewed by the city at this time). The alignment of the extension of Royal Way is therefore logical and practical. �-22 ER 65-87 Page 4 The lot sizes allow homes to be developed that will not create significant shading on nearby lots. The orientation of the lots should not prevent homes built on them from having maximum access to solar opportunities. Mitigation measures: None required. Normal zoning regulation standards should assure adequate solar access. LOT SIZES: All of the proposed lots meet Subdivision Regulations standards for minimum lot width, length, and area. However, the subdivision includes a "remainder" containing only 2475 square feet. The Subdivision Map Act says that a designated remainder may subsequently be sold without any further requirement of the filing of a parcel map or final map, but the city may require a certificate of compliance or conditional certificate of compliance to allow development. In other words, the remainder parcel will become a nonconforming parcel. The intent of the city's zoning regulations' nonconforming lot section (Chapter 17.12) is to provide for "reasonable use" of such lots. The regulations (Section 17.12.020) say that any such lot held in common ownership with any contiguous property at any time since November 18, 1977, may not be individually developed. Therefore, this remainder parcel, if created by the tentative and final maps, may not be individually developed. It must, according to the Zoning Regulations, be combined with contiguous property or otherwise resubdivided in conjunction with contiguous property to create lots that more nearly conform to the Subdivision Regulations size requirements. Creating such a remainder parcel is not consistent with the intent of the subdivision and zoning regulations. Mitigation measure: The designated remainder parcel must be combined with adjacent lot(s) so that no nonconforming lots or remainder parcels result. This may be accomplished by combining it with existing residential lots in Tract 322, or by adding it to proposed lot 1 in Tract 1439. FLAG LOT: Lot no. 17 is a "flag lot', which is a lot predominantly situated behind another lot and having access to a street by means of a narrow portion of the lot extending to the street. The subdivision regulations say that such lots may be approved where "development would not be feasible with the installation of a standard street-, or where justified by topographical conditions." (Section 16.36230) The existence of a house on lot 16, which is intended to remain, places constraints on this portion of the property. To allow the house to remain, the subdivider has created a lot around it with adequate yards to meet zoning regulations requirements. The remaining land east of this house is of sufficient size to create at least two lots, but is an awkward shape. The flag lot may be justified based on the configuration of the property. ER 65-87 Page 5 Mitigation measure. None required. The City Council will determine if the lot is justified, in its review of the tentative map. C. LAND t cF The project conforms with the planned land use of the area, as indicated on the zoning map. As the general plan map designation does not currently allow the use, however, a general plan change will be necessary prior to or concurrent with approval of the final map. (See discussion under "Community Plans and Goals - Land use element", above.) D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trig Generation report, an average of ten trips per day begin or end at single-family residences. This means that this subdivision can expect to generate 18 X 10 . IN vehicle trips per day. Average daily trips on Royal Way near the subdivision are 1270, according to counts taken in August 1986. A proposed subdivision southeast of Tract 1439 (Tract 1438, currently being reviewed by the city) would generate approximately 130 trips per day. This subdivision is therefore expected to increase current plus expected levels by 180/1400, or about 13%. Average daily trips would increase to about 180 + 1400 M trips per day, after buildout of the subdivision. According to a study by JHK and Associates (San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Study; Phase II, Technical Report), traffic engineers, there are levels of "acceptability" in traffic volumes. In single-family residential neighborhoods, daily trips up to the level of about 2800 trips per day lead to a perception of "acceptability". Levels higher than 3400 trips per day are considered "unacceptable" (see attached Table 3-3). The estimated traffic load of 1580 trips per day is well below the threshold of acceptability. Staff therefore finds that there will be no significant adverse effects on transportation and circulation in the area. E. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire protection: 1) Response: The project would be served by fire station no. 4 on Madonna Road at Los Osos Valley Road. Trucks can respond within four minutes, meeting Fire Department criteria. 2) Access: The design of the subdivision meets fire access standards, except for lot 17. Because of the long narrow driveway, sprinklers or other mitigation measures may be required. Specific requirements will depend on the actual design, size, and location of the dwelling. Mitigation measures None required. Normal review of building permit applications by the Fire Department will assure resolution of access concerns. ER 65-g7 Page 6 3) Fire-flow: Available water supplies can provide adequate flow. An additional hydrant will be required on the northeast corner of lot 16. Mitigation measure: An additional hydrant shall be required beyond that shown on the tentative map. Location shall be to the approval of the Fire Department. F. UTILITIES Water supply: Water supplies in the city are being used faster than they are being replaced on a regular basis. While it is possible the city may secure additional water sources to serve new development, no guarantees can be made at this time that water will be available to serve these new lots, except for temporary irrigation for erosion protection and trees. Only when building permits are issued can the individual lot owners be assured of water. (See discussion above, under 'water and wastewater management element'.) Gas. electricity, telephone: No gas, electric, or telephone lines exist within the tract boundaries, except that lots 6, 7, and 19 are already served by existing sewer, water, and gas. Lines can be extended from those in Royal Way. Lines not placed within a public right-of-way will require easements. A six-foot public utility easement will be required along the perimeter of all rights-of-way as well, for service boxes. All new development that requires the extension of services is required to place those services underground (Subdivision Regulations Section 16.36.250K). The gas company cautions that availability of natural gas depends on 'conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies' in place at the time contracts are developed. In other words, gas supply is not guaranteed until contracts are signed. This is a normal condition of gas service, and is not expected to affect this subdivision, but is noted here to alert the subdivider of the possibility. Storm water drainage: The subdivision lies partially in a 'B' flood zone, and a portion along Prefumo Creek may be in an 'A' zone. This means the property has been subject to flooding in the past. Improvement of the site will bring with it increased runoff from hard surfaces. The lots must be designed to provide adequate drainage and to protect future homes and existing homes from flooding. Refer to discussion under 'Flood control policy' above. H. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS AND TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS Limited grading is proposed for this subdivision. The topography is flat, sloping at less than 59L Grading proposals meet all standards of the grading ordinance. ER 65-87 Page 7 A soils engineering investigation was conducted for the area (noted in the project description). Conclusions of that report are that the site can support the proposed subdivision, with minor modifications to existing fill and development of foundations that mitigate possibilities of expansive soil damage. Deeper perimeter foundations are usually required to allow structures to bear below the zone of significant moisture fluctuation. Evidence of the old creek channel (rerouted several years ago) was not found in the preliminary investigation. Any construction on the old channel and the fill used in it will require additional investigation because of possible soft conditions, subsurface water, or differences in consolidation characteristics from the native soils. Mitigation measure: Individual soils investigations shall be made on the lots following completion of carthwork. Reports of these investigations shall become part of the recorded documentation of the tract. J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY A creek flows near the northerly edge of the property. While the creek is offsite, lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10 back up to it. Provisions should be made to protect the riparian habitat from intrusion. Drainage from these lots should be controlled so that erosion and siltation does not result. All of the lots adjacent to the creek are large. A landscape buffer area could be incorporated into the requirements for the tract. Siltation can be controlled through various methods. All work that affects the creek is subject to approval by the Department of Fish and Game. (Also see discussion under 'Flood control policy" above.) Mitigation measures: • A landscape buffer area shall be provided along the rear lot lines of lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and along the westerly lot line of lot 10. Plans for this buffer area shall be submitted to the approval of the Community Development Department. • Siltation and erosion from runoff into the creek shall be controlled, to the approval of the Department of Fish and Game and the Planning and Public Works Departments. • Homes shall be set back a minimum of twenty feet from the top of bank of the adjacent creek K. PLANT LIFE L. ANIMAL LIFE Several trees exist on the site, including fruit trees, pepper, acacia, and. other varieties. Some are proposed to be removed. Some of those intended for removal may be considered significant trees. All such removals should be reviewed by the city arborist and Community Development Director. ER 65-87 Page 8 There is no evidence of the existence of any rare or endangered species on the site, although it is home for many small species of birds and animals. The intrusion of housing into this essentially natural situation will discourage the future nesting and hunting of these animals. The richer habitat near the creek should be preserved as much as possible. Mitigation measure: All trees shall be labelled in the field, and listed by type and diameter on a corresponding list. The list shall be reviewed in the field by the city's arborist and Community Development Director. No trees shall be removed without approval from the arborist and director. N. ESTHETIC These home sites will not be visible from other parts of the city, as the highest lots are at the 175' elevation. As this is a lot-sales subdivision, and the topography is relatively flat, most of the home designs will not be subject to architectural review. In its review of this tract, the council may determine that those lots adjacent to the creek (1, 2, 3, 4, and 10) are sensitive sites, subject to architectural review. Alternatively, specific standards for siting, fencing, or landscaping may be imposed as tract conditions. Mitigation measures: None required. Normal city review of the tract should be adequate to address esthetic concerns. OTHER IMPACTS Other impacts on the environment as a result of tract development are not expected to be significant. See project description and map. RECOMMENDATION Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact, with the following mitigation measures: 1. Approval of the tentative tract map must include a condition requiring approval of a general plan map change from Interim Conservation/Open space to Low-Density Residential prior to or concurrent with approval of the final map. 2. The subdivider shall inform future lot buyers of the possibility of building permit delay based on water supply and usage in the city. 3. The designated remainder parcel must be combined with adjacent lot(s) so that no nonconforming lots or remainder parcels result. This may be accomplished by combining it with existing residential lots in Tract 322, or.by adding it to proposed lot 1 in Tract 1439. 4. An additional hydrant shall be required beyond that shown on the tentative map. Location shall be to the approval of the Fire Department ER 65-87 Page 9 5. Individual soils investigations shall be made on the lots following completion of earthwork. Reports of these investigations shall become part of the recorded documentation of the tract. 6. All trees shall be labelled in the field, and listed by type and diameter on a corresponding list. The list shall be reviewed in the field by the city's arborist and Community Development Director. No trees shall be removed without approval from the arborist and director. 7. Homes shall be set back a minimum of twenty feet from the top of bank of the adjacent creek. 8. A landscape buffer area shall be provided along the rear lot lines of lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and along the westerly lot line of lot 10. Plans for this buffer area shall be submitted to the approval of the Community Development Department. 9. Siltation and erosion from runoff into the creek shall be controlled, to the approval of the Department of Fish and Game and the Planning and Public Works Departments. 000 Attached: Traffic acceptability chart judo2:er65-87 ANIL Alb, O O O p O 49 1 49 1 1 49 1 1 1 06 49 1 uoT3ea3oaa �O I M r I M N I M O I N M I N M I N N I N in M v I N e v w W O O O O 1 O I 1 1 1 O I O aTeuoiiniTisuj H I M O 1 H N I M N I N 1 ).-1I M N I M H I N aan I ►+ �1 > a '^ t C N .U-I !• O O O O O O O W "' > >u aw�Co dwg o 1 0 l o f 1 o r o 1 1 0 1 0 1 M4 W T r I N o 1 N V1 I H M I H O I N ,y 1 M N I "ICE I M Ln I M C 'o D v E- 14 N w Tetz3awwo, 1 0 l o 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 l cr. �CeMy6iit N I M ! 1 0 0 1 Ln N I M H I M �D I N an 1 f+ Co 1 0 % I M el 1 m .-1 aD Vw r %D r aft �D .a O '4 1.1 ZO O 0 0 0 u H TeTaJawwo, 0 0 0 1 49 1 0 1 O I O I 0 1 00 1 pooy3ogy6taN N 1 M O I M r 1 N Ln IN O I M O I O NI M M I M Lnn I N O '+ v in v r r o� In .. 'O •4 to O O p O aJ O T"a3awwoo 1 49 1 0 H W O O O O O O m m cr 1 p l 49 1 0 1 49 1 •Q •$• an I N I M 1'1 I H O I O N I M M 1 1-4 M 1 H % I p` y+ U 10 a �o m r to o *1 H > 00 4 �aTSU3Q no'T o 00 00 op o 00 0 00 0 0 0 iz It 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 p o 1 0 l o o l o 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 qw 0 w r- N r•1 0� p ATTwej aT6uTs r 1 r1r I vN 1 om I Nr 1 nn 1 ►+ 0 1 ovcm�7 1 r °° cn a N thN Mr+1 QN N �0 cn F! 't p o E � 0a o E~ ,tztsuaQ -POW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010 M O Z 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 co 1 0 1 0 1 O I = 4 w dTtwe3 aT6uTs r 1 cel ! I HH I M 1 I N I N I N ^ I N I v 1 cn (a] 1-1 �] a cn o p p o O o 0 b x a A-4TSuaQ 46tH o f 0 1 0 l 1 0 l 0 1 I o 1 0 1 E! E"' 49 1 N M I M Q I H N I M N I M I N 1 M > dTTwe3-tjTnj4 rf N y r r r'1 � • Yrr D Y C r1L • •. C Y7. ,. •� Yr• u 4 ` • .✓r .r• CY. cY SLC •�` O wc a Y• c Y 1 !Y r %= •-; r 0 Y r✓ (y ✓Y Y Y✓V C .r .0 O. 7 r CY L. H P O• Yrr Or r. . .O C• � Y f.YY O E O j Y L ) C .r r = 7 a .1 . .> Yew N _ r V Z O ✓ra Di. AC YrC II Y l' ate. .r .GY O,OV c Y> • 0 0 w .r . Yrr V 2. O w r &, a rMUD •YC UV a .r. IA •V Y r r •• •. O I w C 7 r i i r✓O u) N '_I a.rw Y.O re0.✓O 0 Y O.O ••AV E • C .• .C. rA O]. qo.;! 10•r LLw O•• �• L.. Y C i Oro 2•V re •✓e oYrw w 'L rOC 7t • C Y • O Y. Y• . '•• ■ •C IA Z Y +� rr •3L2 a0 CY • ��oe 7.cr •CU /H/11 . 4 I •O• `�Y O V O e Y a -oSL r Y.r• w ✓ O✓ �! r ✓r r a u! . ✓c ►� r Y.r�J!J• irY. •YrY� Y. saW Lr.9 4249 iO1✓) •r i�Y�f V aw t)•J C•iOab :• N 31 C) )o 0. 02 rw0 >` V. bI 31 0 irr�Jiit Z wIy a w C. :a] e .. e. N • • .r •mu pY 7iz 49 v .a asEY eOwr Y 0rOY `O • OYYw 0 •L�Y O. rY• O SCC r• .• �iw •Yrr Y✓ OC ✓e.Y a 7r• Y• rY rw■ •.• Y e YYw iC `may C.' . rY . • >r r.. CAA �. w 1 '!OC Y..ft YC ri7 •� As 1y�=\I N rYL .CO Cc CY •✓• r.w CYL ]0✓ 0 .r r Y Y .aa■ •••C L•• Ywr r0C CC V Y.49 !4920 ✓.Y 4949 Y •C :05 -0.0 .00 riiiw •r .,� O .0 • D Orr .0• COY . Ste` 49.49 E.. rYrt rr E! M Y•� r0 • OY•r• 49V0 r�Z 497.0 0+0 rD. - sC.w W y 0 0•Y •W O i t V�C L 7.• >7.0 y.• Y 49 r �8Y w nL ..• O . .0 0.• e • 19 •wMae C �`.L� )49 • • ) •"• E_. .YC Ems- E"._ E. . a p Cc✓C p`r E Y r i w . Y. ice! i .>rY Z ',I _tr icy • I 1 c -�S �R ��yyt��r ,i� • - h�Iry ITT is Hg `go -n-tl� - . � '•a \\\>„ lk 1 �T �'. 1 1,.� w.e.!' ,.� F+•..F., ♦..! .^S' f,: .mow la'r.rU i , t .;.. • '. .�. a:;P...�r. ....`'•'.. �•'. 'f!.� .._ .: �'+��1�-ei.t' •.:lM„�• _ z'.�J��:+��_i?_fir. fqtr ,��` '".i. .4. ��t� .. �."Lri�-:• .r_ '.li'� r7�.�.6";�`: .: P Minutes'`} - Ap.. 11 A 3, 4988: �3:Pa`ge John Phi 11.1 psi;.3355 -See Canyon Roads- University Squ a Merchants i Association;:representative, stated that McMahon' s ad complied with all irequirements;`.and that he favored the sale. Commr. Duerk: •asked Mr. Phillips whether the ssoclation was aware that btt"'i t _iroul dwere acceptabl e i fMr. i itPhil required. rednot been aware of that, utfei • Chairperson Kourakls closed the pub c hearing. The commission discussed the sp ifics of conditions 3 through 7. Staff also noted that conditions 5 d 6 were code requirements. ' Commr. Gerety felt the or inal 11 day sale time was acceptable. He moved to uphold the appeal an grant the use permit, subject to findings and conditions , modifying ondition 29 and deleting conditions 5 through 7. He wanted code require nts listed separately. Commr. Roalman conded the motion) A^��126 VOTING: AY - Commrs. Gerety, Roalman , Duerk, Hainline. Schmidt and Kourakis. NOES - None. ABSENT - Commr. Crotser. 1 Th motion passes. ---------------=9------------------------------------------------------- Item 3. Public Hearing: Tract 1439. Consideration of a tentative map creatines Tot residenTial subdivision; 1901 Royal Way; R-1-S zone; Robert Noyes, subdivider. (Continued from February 10 and February 249 1988) _ -----------------------------—-------------------------------- Jeff Hook presented the staff report and recommended cto allow subdivider to respond to commission concerns 4owete4sed-• He distributed applicant revisions to the lot map. Chairperson ou aki s opened the public hearing. Piti�C / Steve K hn , 817 Alicia Court, applicant' s representative, discussed the creek otection -issue. He stated the dedicated area at 10 feet From top. of bank He stated conrtion 6- wa�s acceptable. He discussed tree,: maps and the EIR. He requested the commission approve the ,ay tentative. map. . "Ir >� ��,/` "`� ' Robert. No es. 1901 Royal May; applicant,. discussed the project and was concerned'..with the city's definition` of.'. a park. He did not favor. picnic tables.'.;- . He. -agreed to an.easement, but,4id not agree to an active ..park•.. He ' reques. ed th.at:'the 10-toot area could.-be,--,.dedicated as- open space.* 4em . . J✓its �Y. •' �k�• ... _ ...' :� .f:. � •'F.r-':o-".'... .A .'L '.i• +• .. �•. �t�� 's.r�`�wvii•{�. �•"' ♦+lv'.y� . . .. AN 1 .y �y ��c,r • Vr� '•s 'S.'.'n�'.Y Y:r� `.W�,.!�'�l{�i6A'�T;1..ir;�?w`i�S.. .-r: ."L::. ._ P IN i nutes Apri 1 13;.:.1.988 Page 4. j; Hecdidonotrfeel2the-Lotf1 areaeritage should benahpark. Heeagreedcreek ess, with the grading .plan. Chairperson Kourakis closed the public hearing. Commr. Schmidt suggested the end of Lot 8 be incorporated into the dedication. Commrs. Kourakis ,and Gerety agreed. Commrs. Gerety, Schmidt, and Roalman felt the park land dedication issue 44. should be referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission for review and ka- thek recommendationsito the Planning Commission. /1� .S�'L+�/!� .tet-rt�Ri✓ Commr. Schmidt also wanted staff to investigate the need for lot 16' s 10- foot variance requirement and grading on lots 17 through 19 . Commr. Gerety moved ,to continue to . item to a date uncertain. L� Commr. Duerk seconded the /T Chairperson rakis wanted to see a map that showed all -s� open space easements and wanted the Parks and Recreation Commission' s input ori the park land and park-in-lieu fees. Commr . Schmidt wanted the mitigations included in the findings. VOTING: AYES - Commrs. Gerety, Duerk, Roalman, Hainline, Schmidt and Kourakis. NOES - None. ABSENT - Commr. Crotser. The motion passes. BUSINESS Commission irperson/Vice Chairperson Elections Commr. Gerety nomin Commr. Kourakis . A vote was taken and Commr. Kourakis was re-elected hairperson. Commr. Hainline •nominated Commr. rk as Vice Chairperson. Commr. Gerety nominated himself as Vice irperson. The voting resulted inn a ,tie. The commission a ed to vote again when Commr. Crotser was present. 1. A !.• V/rte ;.'`� .i ..��,Y��Y,w.J,.`J�.. .. , . .. �.. e...''r.�• .:"y ivy 4. , ,••moi' • .D�A�FT MINUTES - CITY PLANNING COMMISSION City of San Luis Obispo, California May 11 , 1988 Regular Meeting PRESENT: Commrs . Charles Crotser , Patrick Gerety , Linda Hainline, William Roalman , Richard Schmidt , and Chairperson Janet Kourakis . ABSENT: Commr . Donna Duerk . OTHERS PRESENT: Judy Lautner , Assistant Planner; Michael Multari , Community Development Director ; Erwin Willis, Fire Department ; and Lisa Woske , Recording Secretary. The minutes of the March 16 , 1988 meeting were approved as amended and the March 23 , 1988 meeting minutes were approved as submitted. There were no changes to the agenda or public comments . -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ Item 1 . Public Hearin_q: Tract 1439 . Consideration of a tentative map creating a 2-T t� Tntial subdivision ; 1901 Royal Way ; R-1 -S zone; Robert Noyes , subdivider. ( Continued from February 10 , February 24 , and April 13 , 1988 ) ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- - Judy Lautner presented the staff report and recommended approval of the subdivision to .Zounci(, subject to conditions . YU Michael Mulyri r ,gapped Commr . Roalman ' s concerns about the width of the iro h�. top of bankser�s ,, the tree on lot 2 , and the portion of Lot 1 originally dedicated-!oil ccnsaerrd fcr Commr. Roalman explained he was concerned with the trees in the setback area and the vertical banks and erosion . He passed out photos illustrating his points . He felt there should be a 20-foot vegetation buffer and 5 feet for the path . He also discussed the oak tree on Lot 2 and the consolidation of Lots 1 and 2 to protect the tree . Chairperson Kourakis stated she had attended the Parks and Recreation meeting and discussed the highlights of that meeting and their recommendations . She was concerned with the 6-foot fence height. Chairperson Kourakis opened the public hearing. Steve Kahn , 817 Alicia Court , discussed engineering aspects of the project . He discussed creek improvement plans , easement and public access , and dedicated areas . He felt a house could fit on Lot 2 if the oak tree .XasHZh safety pruned. He discussed re-grading on Lots 11 through 14 and project drainage . 1 �r/✓ P.C . Minutes May 11 , 1988 Page 2 . Robert Noyes , applicant, discussed the project5open space and creek He felt Lot 2 was adequate as is . He did not agree with an expanded dedicated area or the portioning of Lot 1 and offered a. ;P* Fee 4 ncity dediGatien . goiF roursc Ar rnainhnahce - I h'earemmt' s Pete Badragio, 1346 Rubio , was concerned with water drainage. Judy Neuhauser , Urban Creeks Council representative , was concerned that the project proposal did not provide a community amenity or protect the creek . She did not agree with =ectio tvr-i�g.. She encouraged a 20-foot easement for creek protnted the oak tree preserved. fr,a r re John Chestnut , 314 Higuera , was concerned with creek erosion and felt provisions needed to be made to protect vegetation and trees . Chairperson Kourakis closed the public hearing . Commr . 6erety stated he supported the subdivision as presented and the cul de sac modification . He felt the 10- inch oak tree should be removed . He did not support public access off of Rubio Lane , due to maintenance requirements . Commr . Hainline did not favor the 6-foot _b]-ee-k fence and suggested the fence be an open-rail type . Commr . Schmidt wanted the easement line moved to 20 feet to protect the top of bank . He favored open fencing and felt grading for Lots 11 through 14 was acceptable . He was concerned with the preservation of the large oak . He favored modification of the cul de sac at Lots 16 through 18 . He felt public access at Rubio Lane was acceptable , with additional access at Fairway Drive. He favored the cul de sac at Rubio Lane . Commr. Roalman felt a 20-foot setback was necessary to protect the creek , but preferred 25-feet and favored the Rubio Lane public access . , Chairperson Kourakis felt a condition was necessary concerningvsprinklVA-g- systems . She was concerned that the creek would prove an isolated area -85— with a 6-foot fence and favored open fencing . She felt the need for creek protection was significant . She favored modifying the Rubio Lane cul de sac and favored a public access easement. Commr . Roalman moved to approve the subdivision , subject to conditions 1 through 7 , with an average 20-foot setback with staff review and maintaining Rubio Lane access . He favored expanding Lot 2 by 10 feet to accommodate the oak tree and moving the cul de sac south. Commr . Schmidt seconded the motion . • 4,34, . P.C . Minutes May 11 , 1988 Page 3 . Commr . Crotser felt the flexibility of the creek easement area was necessary . He felt the piping for drainage of Lots 11 through 14 and 8 tffSgh 10 should be reviewed by Public Works . He felt open fencing should be addressed for Lots 1 and 4 through 7 and offered an amendment to condition 8 . Chairperson Kourakis suggested a condition 9 regarding fire protection . The motion-maker and second agreed to conditions 8 and 9 . Commr . Gerety did not agree with the conditions and could not support the motion . VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Roalman , Schmidt , Crotser , Hainline and Kourakis . NOES - Commr . Gerety . ABSENT - Commr . Duerk . The motion passes. Commr . Schmidt moved to eliminate all park in lieu fees , due to the additional land requested . Commr . Hainline seconded the motion . VOTING : AYES - Commrs . Schmidt , Hainline , and Roalman . NOES - Commrs . Crotser and Kourakis . ABSENT - Commr. Duerk . The motion passes. ----------------------------- --------------------- Ite Public Hearing : Use Permit U1376 . Request to allow a temporary c eaning pick-up aci qty ani a acretaker residence ; 2959 Br Street; C-S-S zone; Kevin Snyder , applicant. ---------------- ---------------------------------------------------------- Commr . Gerety had to lea the meeting . Michael Multari recommended con uanncce to the May 25 , 1988 meeting . Chairperson Kourakis determined that tReve was no one to speak to this item . Commr . Schmidt moved to continue the item to the nmeeting . Commr . Crotser seconded the motion .