HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/1997, 1 - A 143-96: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION APPROVING AN ADDITION TO A NON-CONFORMING RESIDENCE, WITH CONDITIONS council
j acEnaa Repout "..A�
CITY OF SAN L U I S O B I S P O
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community.Developtent Director A
Prepared By: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner
i
SUBJECT: A 143-96: Appeal of Planning Commission's action approving an addition to a
non-conforming residence, with conditions.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving or denying the appeal.
DISCUSSION
Background
The applicant wants to add a carport to a non-conforming residence and convert a garage to
bedrooms. Additions to non-conforming buildings require approval of an administrative use
permit. The Administrative Hearing Officer approved the request, with conditions. A neighbor
appealed that action. The Planning Commission denied the appeal and approved the use permit
with changed conditions. The applicant has now appealed one of those conditions. Appeals of
Planning Commission actions are heard by the City Council.
Data summary
Address: 1990 Loomis Street
Applicant/property owner/appellant: Glen Johnston
Zoning: Low-Density Residential (R-1)
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Environmental status: Categorically exempt: CEQA section 15305, Class 5 (minor alteration in
land use limitations, not resulting in the creation of a new parcel.)
Project action deadline: Action has already been taken; no deadline for action on appeals.
Site description
The site is a flat rectangular lot containing a one-story house and attached garage. A 10'-10" X
10'-4" storage shed is located near the garage at this time. The house is in a neighborhood of
similar smaller homes. It is across the street from U.S. 101 and close to Cal Poly.
Project Description
The project is the addition of a carport to the site and the conversion of the existing garage into
bedrooms.
A 143-96
1990 Loomis
Page 2
EVALUATION
1. The addition will meet standards. The existing house is non-conforming because it is
set back only three feet from the northerly property line, whereas current regulations
would require it to be set back at least five feet, and because it contains a one-car garage
while two parking spaces are now required. The Zoning Regulations say that an
administrative use permit must be approved to make an addition to a non-conforming
building. The intent of the regulations is to assure that non-conforming buildings are
eliminated over time. The addition of a small carport to this building does not tend to
prolong the useful life of this building or make it less conforming than it is, and therefore
the Administrative Hearing Officer approved this request.
The building meets all other property development standards. The addition will meet
standards as well.
2. Sidewalk installation is the sticking point. Other concerns have been resolved to the
satisfaction of staff, the applicant, and neighbors who have indicated an interest. The
timing of sidewalk installation is the reason for the appeal to the Council.
The Municipal Code requires the installation of sidewalks, curbs and gutters with all new
development, including additions. The Public Works Director may agree to defer the
installation of sidewalks in some cases, in which case the sidewalk must be installed upon a
30-day notice to the property owner.
In this case, there are no sidewalks in the surrounding area. In such cases, sidewalk
deferrals are often approved. However, the Planning Commission determined that
sidewalks are important for this neighborhood and that requiring their installation in this
case would serve as an impetus for their sooner installation throughout the area. The
Commission's imposed condition reads:
1. The applicant shall install sidewalks along both street frontages with design to the
approval of the Public Works Department. Sidewalks shall be installed prior to
occupancy of the garage conversion.
The applicant has appealed this modification. He is willing to install the sidewalk along the
Loomis Street frontage because he feels it will enhance the property. However, there are
large shrubs on the Henderson side which will make sidewalk installation on that side
difficult.
The Public Works Department says that it is likely that they would have deferred the
Henderson Avenue frontage improvements if the decision had remained with them. The
Loomis sidewalk will be longer and of greater value to the neighborhood.
�, 2
A 143-96
1990 Loomis
Page 3
Neighbors who have reviewed the appeal application have also voiced no objection to the
Henderson sidewalk deferral, saying that the Loomis sidewalk is of more importance.
3. Parking was an issue. In the R-1 zone, a house may have any number of bedrooms. The
current requirement for parking is two spaces, regardless of the number of bedrooms. At
the time this house was built (in 1949), there was no requirement for parking. Although
the width of the garage appears wide enough for two cars, an investigation revealed that it
was designed for only one car. Because it conformed with the regulations at the time it
was built, it is now considered`legally non-conforming".
The City's non-conforming use and structure regulations require that changes to the use
or building not increase the degree of non-conformity. In this case, the conversion of the
one-car garage into bedrooms removed the one existing parking space, and therefore
increased the degree of non-conformity. Therefore, the minimum requirement to obtain a
permit for this garage conversion is to replace the one-car covered parking space.
Approval of the carport addition will meet this minimum requirement.
4. The Hearing Officer and Planning Commission required additional parking. The
zoning regulations say that parking in addition to the standard requirements can be
required as a condition of use permit approval. Because the garage conversion adds two
bedrooms to a three-bedroom house, the Hearing Officer felt it was appropriate to require
a second parking space. The Planning Commission concurred.
5. Architectural review can also be required. The applicant proposes to modify the front
of the existing garage to make it consistent with the rest of the building. This includes
removing the garage door and adding a stucco finish and window, plus brick base, to
match the existing finishes. The proposed carport is modest in size and design and is
expected to fit in reasonably well.
However, with an additional car space it may be necessary to modify the carport design
and place the additional space just west of it (uncovered). It appears that this is the only
space on the lot that could legally be used for an additional parking space. Some
consideration to the appearance of this arrangement needs to be made. If the existing
driveway is to remain, the additional paving needed to allow access to both new spaces
would result in paving that exceeds that allowed by the City's property maintenance
regulations (a maximum width of 26' is allowed).
Staff therefore recommended that the existing driveway and ramp be removed and a new
one constructed that has direct access to the two new parking spaces. The Planning
Commission felt that perhaps the existing driveway ramp could be retained, if paving
could be designed to meet all City regulations, and therefore allowed it to remain if
feasible (see condition #3). That Commission also required that the design of the addition
and conversion be to the approval of the Community Development Director.
-3
A 143-96
1990 Loomis
Page 4
The applicant explored the driveway access options with Planning and Public Works staff
and is now choosing to remove the old ramp and driveway and add a new ramp and
driveway directly to the new spaces.
CONCURRENCES
As noted above, the Public Works Department concurs with the applicant/appellant's request for
deferral of the Henderson sidewalk. No other departments have concerns with this request.
FISCAL llMPACT
Approval or denial of the appeal or of the use permit will have no effect on the City's finances.
Costs of improvements, including the installation of sidewalks, will be home by the applicant.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may approve or deny the appeal, modify conditions, or deny the use permit. If the
Council approves the appeal, then the applicant would be allowed to defer installation of the
sidewalk on Henderson until demanded by the City. If the Council denies the appeal, the
applicant would be required to install sidewalks on both frontages. If the Council denies the use .
permit, the applicant will be unable to add a carport to the side of the house. In this case, if he is
able to build a carport detached from the residence, use permit approval would not be required,
and the garage could still be converted.
Attachments
draft resolutions
vicinity map
site plan
letter notifying applicant of Planning Commission's action
Administrative Hearing minutes
Planning Commission update for January 8, 1997, in lieu of minutes
�►��I��IIIDIIIIIIIII �IUIIII�IIII
II IIIIItyof sAn luis oaspo
IMIMAIM11011111
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedures as authorized by.Title, 1, Chapter 1.20 of the
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of
;2 !TI rendered on
�J
which
/consisted of/the followir /�i�e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds
for,s[ubmitt�ing/.the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.)
� J
The undersign cu decision being ap led with:
on
Name Departme (Date)
Appellant: oea /V5 W D. V/, � � �{ -1'aj 616S
Na e/Title Mailing Addres (& Zip Code) 9,4�/Ok
1-1=4 Phone Work Phone
Representative:
Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
For Official Use Only:
Calendared for / !n Date &Time Received:
c: City Attorney
City Administrative Officer
Copy to the following department(s):
i' / JAN 16 lyyr
Ci�lltiEiP .
CrrY CLERK
Origl7l in City Clerk's Office SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA /
RESOLUTION NO. (1997 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COIVIIVIISSION'S ACTION,
THEREBY UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
OFFICER AND PLANNING COMIVIISSION,APPROVING AN ADDITION TO A NON-
CONFORMING BUILDING,WITH CONDITIONS,AT 1990 LOOMIS STREET.
(A 143-96)
WHEREAS,the Administrative Hearing Officer conducted a public hearing on November
15, 1996 and approved Administrative Use Permit A 143-96 with conditions; and
WHEREAS,Don Wasson and K. Wallace filed appeals of that action; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 8, 1997,
and denied the appeals, thereby upholding the Administrative Hearing Officer's action with
modifications to the conditions and code requirements; and
WHEREAS,the applicant filed an appeal of that action; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on February 18, 1997 and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Administrative Hearing and action,
the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and
recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under
Section 15305, Class 5, of the California Environmental Quality Act, because it is a minor change to
land use limitations, specifically allowing the addition of a small carport to a non-conforming addition,
not resulting in the creation of any new parcel;
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Fes. That this Council, after consideration of the Administrative Use
Permit, application A 143-96, and the Administrative Hearing Officer's action and the Planning
Commission's action, the appellant's statements, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports
thereof; makes the following findings:
1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan, the Zoning
Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances, and is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
2. The addition will not adversely affect persons living or working in the vicinity, because the
required street yard on Loomis Street for this lot is 10 feet, whereas the carport will be set back 191
,
and therefore conforms to the regulations.
3. The addition's size and location are consistent with the intent of the regulations on non-
conforming structures(Chapter 17.14 of the Municipal Code), and will not increase the degree of non-
conformity of the building.
4. The additional bedrooms will intensify the need for more parking for this residential lot in a
Resolution no 1997 Series)
A 143-96 appeal
1990 Loomis Street
Page 2
neighborhood where on-street parking is at a premium.
SEC'][TON 2. Appeal denial. The request for approval of an appeal of the
Planning Commission's action approving the use permit with two conditions is hereby denied,
and therefore the Planning Commission's action is upheld, subject to the following
Conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide one additional off-street parking space, for a total of two
off-street parking spaces, subject to City standards.
2. Design of the garage conversion, carport and driveway shall be to the approval of the
Community Development Director.
3. The e�dsting driveway and ramp may remain, subject to applicable City standards.
4. The applicant shall install sidewalks along both street frontages with design to the
approval of the Public Works Department. Sidewalks shall be installed prior to occupancy of the
garage conversion.
On motion of seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1997.
/-7
Resolution no 1997 Series)
A 143-96 appeal
1990 Loomis Street
Page 3
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk Bonnie Crawf
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
nrffil'JerJ gensen
RESOLUTION NO. (1997 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION,
THEREBY UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
OFFICER AND PLANNING COMMISSION,APPROVING AN ADDITION TO A NON-
CONFORMING BUILDING,WITH A CHANGE TO CONDITIONS,
AT 1990 LOOMIS STREET.
(A 143-96)
WHEREAS,the Administrative Hearing Officer conducted a public hearing on November
15, 1996 and approved Administrative Use Permit A 143-96 with conditions; and
WHEREAS,Don Wasson and K. Wallace filed appeals of that action; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 8, 1997,
and denied the appeals, thereby upholding the Administrative Hearing Officer's action with
modifications to the conditions and code requirements; and
WHEREAS,the applicant filed an appeal of that action; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on February 18, 1997 and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Administrative Hearing and action,
the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and
recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under
Section 15305, Class 5, of the California Environmental Quality Act, because it is a minor change to
land use limitations, specifically allowing the addition of a small carport to a non-conforming addition,
not resulting in the creation of any new parcel;
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 Administrative Use
Permit application A 143-96, and the Administrative Hearing Officer's action and the Planning
Commission's action, the appellant's statements, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports
thereof;makes the following findings:
1. The proposed project, as conditioned and modified by this resolution, is consistent
with the General Plan,the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances, and is compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
2. The addition will not adversely affect persons living or working in the vicinity,
because the required street yard on Loomis Street for this lot is 10 feet,whereas the carport will be set
back 19', and therefore conforms to the regulations.
3. The addition's size and location are consistent with the intent of the regulations on
non-conforming structures(Chapter 17.14 of the Municipal Code), and will not increase the degree of
non-conformity of the building.
4. The additional bedrooms will intensify the need for more parking for this residential
Resolution no. (1997 Series)
A 143-96 appeal
1990 Loomis Street
Page 2
lot in a neighborhood where on-street parking is at a premium.
SECTION 2. Appeal approval. The request for approval of an appeal of the
Planning Commission's action approving the use permit is hereby approved, subject to the
following
Conditions.
1. The applicant shall provide one additional off-street parking space, for a total of two
off-street parking spaces, subject to City standards.
2. Design of the garage conversion, carport and driveway shall be to the approval of the
Community Development Director.
3. The existing driveway and ramp may remain subject to applicable City standards.
4. The applicant shall install sidewalks along both street frontages with design to the
approval of the Public Works Department. Sidewalks shall be installed prior to occupancy of the
garage conversion except that the sidewalk along the Henderson Avenue frontage may be deferred if
the property owner submits a covenant, for recordation agreeing to install improvements within 30
days of written notice from the City Engineer.
On motion of _ seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 1997.
Resolution no. (1997 Series)
A 143-96 appeal
1990 Loomis Street
Page 3
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk Bonnie Gawf
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
mey effre • org
rj
^ % '�I � 1 1�• Iq IyS
.1 'O�� � 7i 1^.24 19fs12 1990 20L0 `�
HOPE STREET __•- =°-d
1915
r+rr
r 0 O O O 0 0 .,,�,� P T O
nnr•
W0 O r ' O O AWP O
rMMI
n w
O �1 Z O �O P ■
L + T
W QsJ. O.gQ O r � < O 0 O O O • a Q
O O :7 0 O O
1866 1696 Ince 1912 1942 146eYo90 x044 'e,sa .
1x.0
LOOMIS STREET
.1699 Ip9T '
M
Gr�R 131.95 C/
O
At
taco 1
I
- U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 101
I
K-8-L
ABBOTT STREET
Q V11 G>.73 I,lL
19074 IBo•Ie :9Y/ 111! pe! illi.M ��9 Aec 11-3211-wet
e,yp. Yc 4•IasPl W 614d:
RHpw1,11w1
Aw
04 0
N � 4AIM� o a o In
F-
II.UNlr9 19 UmTH 3 UNIT
2 M 111.141 _
7 W
. °aYLM. �
(y-�7 .GC.I.11
3n uNIrm1wmrNTh `7 ^ ^'A'1-d v 91./1 W ^.1{w.,u w..• -
0 Q4 'A C-T z
a
Z1,.,61 11.p.,1 . _ W
ro 1M11 bl,elwl'1- ��^r
.tel •= 9i1�✓ y y
e]
.�<.,
lee° A°6 1+Le 11x2 .11s° F (2°i1)
GARPIELO STREET
�•�/�//�]\/\ lees M91
V APL 11 Y�qV
A 40' 9�fNLC yra'al
s TM1IfJ1(I.0.�'
A ('-ti 1�I11
..� _ 07 PVT
v,�e
. V
,�•er,6
C ROME
T
/ a
vlscc
P40TOR E N
V •'a
j_9_R J - 8 - R
/—/IS
H r- -p
v1 oSa�a� 'i
cc
K
I ! I
r i Lo
c - C
J
0
� M
I / `I -�
32
Jit�7-
LLI
I K
-212 y.
. , v
��►����►���������iiii��►�►II�IIIIlllli�►��►� ►��� III _
8
® city of sin luis omspo
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
January 15, 1997
Glen Johnston
1595 Los Osos Valley road,#31A
Los Osos, CA 93402
SUBJECT: 1990 Loomis Street: A 143-96
Dear Mr. Johnston:
The Planning Commission, at its January 8, 1997 meeting, upheld the Hearing Officer's action, thereby
approving the Use Permit A 143-96 subject to the original findings; and subject to the original conditions
and code requirements,with the following changes: _
Revised Conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide one additional off-street parking space, for a total of t>'vo
off-street parking spaces,subject to City standards.
3. The existing driveway and ramp may remain,subject to applicable City standards.
Revised Code Requirement:
1. The applicant shall install sidewalks along both street frontages with design to the
approval of the Public Works Department Sidelvalks shall be installed prior to
occupancy of the garage conversion.
The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within ten days of
the action. The appeal period will expire on January 17, 1997. An appeal may be filed with the City
Clerk by any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission.
Due to City water allocation regulations, the Planning Commission's approval expires after three years.if
construction has not started, unless the Commission designated a different time period. On request, the
Community Development Director may grant renewals for successive periods of not more than one year
each
If you have questions,please contact Judith Lautner at 781-7166.
Sincerely,
ohn Mandeville
Long Range Planning Manager
JM:mk
cc: Dan Wasson
�� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410.
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING - MINUTES
FRIDAY NOVEMBER 15, 1996
1990 Loomis Street. Use Permit Appl. A 143-96; Request to allow reduced
street yard from 20 feet to 19 feet for carport, and to allow
an addition to a non-conforming structure; R-1 zone; Glen
.Johnston, applicant.
Judy Lautner presented the staff report, explaining that the request is to convert a
garage into living space (2 bedrooms) and to add a carport on the side of the property
to replace the parking space that would be lost by the conversion. She noted that the
existing structure is non-conforming because it is 3 feet from the property line on one
side, which is why use permit approval is required for the addition. Ms. Lautner also
explained that the addition would be conforming and is not of significant size. Based
on this information, staff recommended approval of the request, based on findings and
subject to code requirements which she outlined. _
Ron Whisenand noted that the existing house contains three bedrooms, and the
request is to add two more bedrooms by means of a garage conversion for a total of
five bedrooms. There would be one parking space to accommodate all five bedrooms
because of the existing non-conforming situation and because of the R-1 zoning,
intensification of the use does not require additional parking.
The public hearing was opened.
Glen Johnston, applicant, spoke in support of his request. He indicated this house
has been used for student housing, and that due to current financing, he loses money
each month. He said he is trying to turn this into a break-even situation where the
house payment could be made from the rent. In response to a question from Mr.
Whisenand, Mr. Johnston responded that the maximum number of students that
would live in the house would be five. He did not feel that parking would be a
problem, since the house currently has five bedrooms due to an illegal conversion
which this would correct, and parking has not been a problem.
Ron Whisenand asked if there were another location on this property where additional
parking could be provided. There was some discussion regarding the possibility of
additional parking at various locations on the property.
Ron Whisenand noted that he had received a phone call from a woman named Leona
who objected to any exceptions being granted. She indicated there have been
problems with students in the neighborhood, specifically relating to parties, traffic, and
a variety of other issues.
D.H. Wasson, 2044 Loomis Street, spoke in opposition to the request. He was
concerned that this was going to be a detached 2-bedroom apartment. He explained
that student housing has been a problem in this general area, along with many garage
conversions to accommodate them. He felt this would add to the parking problems,
and is not in the best interest of the neighborhood. He also had concerns with lot
coverage.
Administrative Hearing Minutes
November 15, 1996
Page 2
Judy Lautner clarified that there would be interior access to the proposed bedrooms. .
Based on a field investigation made by Mr. Whisenand immediately prior to the hearing
(about 1:30 p.m.), he noted that Henderson Street had a large number of cars parked
on both sides of the street, and that Loomis Street had a large number of available
parking spaces. He asked at what time of day was the parking situation a problem.
Mr. Wasson responded that at night the parking is solid from Henderson Street to
Grand Avenue on both sides of the street. Many cars also park in the neighborhood
and walk to campus because of the parking situation occurring on-campus, which
significantly impacts the neighborhood at various times. He noted that other than
when there is a party, parking on the weekends is not a significant problem.
Mr. Johnston then noted that he has observed on many occasions that students park
on the street in their trucks, take their bicycles out of the back, and ride the bicycles
onto campus.
The public hearing was closed.
Ron Whisenand explained that he cannot regulate student behavior, but he can
regulate land use, which is the purpose of this hearing. He felt that those that spoke
confirmed that night-time parking was at a premium. Mr. Whisenand also felt that one
parking space for a 5-bedroom residence is really not sufficient to handle the number
of people who would occupy the house. He referred to the Zoning Regulations
section that allows for unusual circumstances such as this, which states "Parking, in
addition to these requirements, may be required as a condition of use permit
approval."
Mr. Whisenand felt that parking is a problem in this area, and that this is an unusual
circumstance, but he felt he could support the conversion of the garage by applying
this section of the code, and requiring one additional parking space. He noted that it
does not have to be covered, but it cannot be in tandem. Its location must meet the
setback requirements of the code. He approved the use permit, based on the following
findings, and subject to the following condition and code requirements:
Findings
1. The addition will not adversely affect persons living or working in the vicinity,
because the required street yard on Loomis Street for this lot is 10 feet,
whereas the carport will be set back 19 feet, and therefore conforms to the
regulations.
2. The addition's size and location are consistent with the intent of the regulations
on non-conforming structures (Chapter 17.14 of the Municipal Code), and will
not increase the degree of non-conformity of the building.
Administrative Hearing Minutes
November 15, 1996
Page 3
3. The additional bedrooms will intensify the need for more parking for this
residential lot in a neighborhood where on-street parking is at a premium.
Condition
1. The applicant shall provide one additional off-street parking space, to City
standards.
(Pursuant to Section 17.16.060.f of the Municipal Code)
Code requirements
1. The applicant shall install frontage improvements to the approval of the Public
Works Department. Installation may be deferred if the property owner submits a
covenant,for recordation, agreeing to install improvements within 30 days of
written notice from the City Engineer.
2. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department will be required to
widen the existing driveway.
3. A building permit is required for construction of the carport and for conversion
of the garage into living space.
Mr. Whisenand explained that his decision is final unless appealed to the Planning
Commission within 10 days of the action, and that any person can appeal this
decision.
Planning Commission Meeting
January 8, 1997
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 1990 Loomis Street: (A 143-96): Appeal of the Hearing Officer's action allowing
a conforming carport addition to a non-conforming dwelling; R-1 zone; Glen
Johnston, applicant, Dan Wasson, appellant. (30 Minutes)
On a motion by Commissioner Kourakis, seconded by Commissioner Senn, the
Commission voted 7-0 to uphold the Hearing Officer's action, thereby approving Use
Permit A 143-96 subject to the original findings; and subject to the original conditions
and code requirements, with the following changes:
Revised conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide one additional off-street parking space, for a total of 2
off-street parking spaces, to City standards.
3. The existing driveway and ramp may remain, subject to applicable City standards.
Revised code requirement:
1. The applicant shall install sidewalk along both street frontages, with design to the
approval of the Public Works Department. Sidewalk shall be installed prior to
occupancy of the garage conversion.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
At this time, Ron Whisenand presented the Agenda Forecast and the Commission
discussed pending items, including issues surrounding the SLO Homeless Shelter on
Orcutt Road. Chairperson Karleskint, with the consensus of other Commissioners,
requested staff to arrange a meeting between the Planning Commission and the City
Council to discuss and clarify the City's policy for allowing warehouse stores in the City.
The Commission also discussed the idea of holding its own study session/workshop on
this topic. At this time, staff is not clear if the Commission took an action directing staff
to arrange such a studysession/workshop. Staff will request a clarification on this at the
next Commission meeting.
Chairperson Karleskint and Commissioners Ready and Senn left the meeting due to a
potential conflict of interest in connection with Item 2. The Commission appointed
MEETING .AGENDA
F
( CDD DIR DATE /.P 97 ITEM #
❑ FIN DIR
Gr r
❑ FIRE CHIEF
❑ PW DIR
❑ POLICE CHF
❑ REC DIR
C3 ❑ UTIL DIR
� ❑ PERS DIR
+m
Feb. 17, 1997
Dear City Council Members and Mayor:
As residents in the Grand Avenue area, we are both concerned& opposed to any
addition to the 1990 Loomis address. Our basic opposition is to garage conversions in the
area. In addition, the lot in question is too small for the proposed addition. Adding
sidewalks on both street frontages (or providing extra parking spaces) may improve the
property in question, however it will not change either of these facts.
Although we are aware that the current student overcrowding in the areas
surrounding Loomis Street is not an issue in allowing the approval of an addition to a
already non-conforming residence in an RI area, to permanent residents living here, it is
very much an issue. Traffic, parking situations, congestion in neighborhoods, loud parties,
and other problems of having a large number of students living in a designated RI area IQ
have an impact on permanent residents.
Sincerely,
Ione &Darwin Donati
1990 Hope Street
San Luis Obispo. CA 93405
RECD vEr)
'FEB: I � Iyyi
CITY COUNCIL
+an. As
MEETING AGENDA
DATE,=17 ITEM #
MEMORANDUM
February 18, 1997
TO: Mayor Settle
FROM: John
SUBJECT: iming of Jo' t Meeting with SLOCOG
Allen, I talked briefly this morning with Ron DeCarli, who is inquiring about a mutually-agreeable time for the
forthcoming joint meeting. He said that the entire purpose of the joint City Council/SLOCOG meeting was to
review the Multi-Modal Center acquisition plans and operation and the "super-stop", on Osos, between
Monterey and Palm.
SLOCOG meets on March 50' and on April 2nd, during the day. Ron realizes that the City Council normally
meets on Tuesday evenings.
This Thursday morning at 8:151 am meeting with Ron to discuss certain ideas about the Multi-Modal Center,
which I have previously discussed with you, the major two are that the fee-simple ownership should be with
the City of San Luis Obispo, rather than in "joint ownership", and that the City should be the administering
agency on plans and construction rather than SLOCOG, a transportation planning agency.
Any ideas from you on the desired timing on the meeting would be appreciated, or perhaps we can discuss the
subject at tonight's City Council meeting under Communications.
cc: City Council
Mike McCluskey
fOUNCIL ❑ CDD DI
�AG ❑ FINCAO ❑ FIR,���EY QIPWO° CLERK DRIG ❑ PG❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ RE-❑ 9AR D FILE ❑ UTI❑ PER
FEE-06-1997 09: 18 FROM CITY OF PISMO BEACH TO SLrl CITY P.01
City Of Pismo Beach
760 Mattic Road-Post Office Box 3
Pismo Beach,California 93448
(805)773657•Fax(805)773-7006
rs.wwr
`- MEETING AGENDA
DATE e2/4 97 ITEM #Co
February 5, 1997
TO: San Luis Obispo Mayor
San Luis Obispo City Managers
FROM: John Brown, Mayor
City of Pismo Beach
RE: Joint San Luis Obisp?ties eting
VIA: FAX
Following up on discissions at the last Mayor's group meeting, preliminary plans are to have the next
Joint San Luis Obispo Cities meeting at the Cliffs Hotel in Pismo Beach on the evening of Thursday,
May 1, 1997. The meeting will be hosted by the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach and Pismo
Beach.
Please advise Pismo Beach City Manager's Secretary Jeri Young at 773-4657, prior to the end of
February, whether or not this date will work for your city so that we can move forward with planning
the arrangements. Also, feel free to either call me or forward proposed agenda items which can be
considered at the next Mayor's group meeting.
Tf you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at any of the following numbers:
Pismo Beach City Hall 773-4657
Voice Mail messages 473-5388
JB:jy
rj
COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR
6CA0 ❑ FIN DIR
dACAO 0 FIRE CHIEF
C(ATTORNEY ❑ PW DIR
CKCLERK/MG 0 POUCE CHF
0 MGMT TEAM 0 REC DIR
.13 C READ FILE 0 UTIL DIR
0 PERS DIR