HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/17/1998, 5 - USE PERMIT U 174-97: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION DENYING A USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A FRATERNITY, AND ALLOW A REDUCED STREET YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FEET TO 10 FEET TO ACCOMMODATE ON-SITE PARKING, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH S council M°V'1 98
j acEnba Repoizt -
u. µ.mu..
CITY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director 0
Prepared By: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner-PR I
SUBJECT: Use Permit U 174-97: Appeal of Planning Commission's action denying a use
permit to establish a fraternity, and allow a reduced street yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet to
accommodate on-site parking, for property located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard
between Carpenter Street and Crandall Way, near Cal Poly (1292 Foothill Blvd.).
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Draft Resolution A, upholding the appeal, and approving the use permit, based on
findings,and with conditions and code requirements.
PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Draft Resolution B, denying the appeal, and upholding the Planning Commission's action
to deny the use permit,based on findings.
DISCUSSION
Situation
Fraternities and sororities are allowed uses in the R-3 and R-4 zones with the approval of a
Planning Commission use permit. The Fraternity was originally granted a use permit by the
Planning Commission in 1980 to operate at 1617 Santa Rosa Street. In December of 1997, the
fraternity applied for a Planning Commission use permit to relocate its house to 1292 Foothill
Boulevard. This site is currently used as a hostel. The applicant is proposing to "swap"
locations with the hostel which would move to the fraternity's current location at 1617 Santa
Rosa Street. The request to relocate the hostel has also been appealed and is on the same
meeting agenda as Use Permit U 178-97.
Planning Staff s Recommendation
Planning staff had recommended approval of the proposed use permit to the Planning
Commission with standard conditions for fraternities that the City has fine-tuned and updated
over the years. The report prepared for the Planning Commission packet is attached and
evaluates standard fraternity issues such as occupancy limits, parking requirements and limits on
events. The report also highlights the project's consistency with general plan policies that call
for fraternities to be located in higher density residential zones near Cal Poly, rather than
dispersed throughout the City.
s '�
Council Agenda Report- Abda Chi Alpha Fraternity Appeal 174-97)
Page 2
Planning Commission's Action
On February 11, 1998,the Planning Commission on a 5-2 vote (Senn& Ready voting no)denied
the use permit, based on findings that a street yard reduction would adversely impact the
streetscape appearance of the site, and that the use was not appropriate at the site and
incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood. While the Commission was clearly impressed
with the track record of this particular fratemity, a majority of the members felt that the proposed
site was not of adequate size to meet the fraternity's needs, and that the establishment of another
group housing use here would have spillover impacts for the nearby neighborhood.
A number of people spoke on this item. Martha Steward, who currently lives next door to the
fraternity, spoke in favor of the request, praising the character and neighborhood relation efforts
of the fraternity members. Doreen Case expressed concerns with the ability of the Police
Department to monitor use permit conditions. Opal Rich, who owns property adjacent to the
proposed site and lives in the neighborhood, objected to the fraternity, as did Paula Carr, Tom
Kay and Dr. Dan Fullmer.
Appeal Filed
On February 12, 1998, Kevin Hauber, the fraternity's representative filed an appeal of the
Planning Commission's action. The actual appeal form simply states that the appeal was filed
because the "application is in accordance with the City's General Plan and conforms with
surrounding uses. " After the appeal form was filed, the fraternity submitted a longer letter
which expands on their reasons for filing the appeal. The appeal letter makes several points
including:
• the fraternity has a good track record and has been a good neighbor at its current location;
• the Alta Vista neighborhood will continue to attract students because of its proximity to Cal
Poly;
• Cal Poly's enrollment continues to grow and there are increasing demands on an already tight
housing market; and
• the fire sprinkler requirement should be waived because of plans to build a new facility in the
future (code requirement-not an issue to be debated at this appeal hearing).
Other Citizen Participation
In addition to the two letters attached to the Planning Commission staff report from Residents for
Quality Neighborhoods and residents of the Alta Vista area, the City has received other input
from the public, both for and against the request. Prior to the Planning Commission hearing, but
after the meeting packet was produced, the following information related to the use permit was
received: a letter from Opal Rich in opposition of the fraternity; a letter from Brian Rogers in
support of the fraternity; and information from the fraternity including an Obispo Beautiful
award and letter thanking them for participating in a food drive. Staff also received a phone call
from Bob Anderson who is an adjacent property owner to the existing fraternity and asked that
his comments be presented to the Commission. He indicated that the fraternity had been a good
Council Agenda Report mbda Chi Alpha Fraternity Appea. 174-97)
Page 3
neighbor and that having them next door was preferable to having a group of unknown students
sharing a house without use permit controls in place.
Five additional letters have been received since the Planning Commission hearing. Two of the
letters, from Henry & Doreen Case and Robert W. Adamson, are opposed to the request, and the
other three, from the Sigma Nu Fraternity, Elaine Simer and Paul Taylor, support the fraternity's
move.
Clarification on Occupancy Limits
Fraternities are a form of group housing that are subject to the Residential Occupancy Standards
contained in Chapter 17.20 of the zoning regulations. In the R-3 zone, up to 40 persons per acre
are allowed. For this site,the maximum occupancy is:
15,750/43,560=0.36 acre; 0.36 x 40= 14.4
Therefore, a maximum of 14 persons may be permitted to live at this site. The request to allow
13 persons is consistent with this standard.
The existing hostel use through their use permit was approved for a maximum occupancy of 20
persons. Hostels are not subject to the same Residential Occupancy Standards that group
housing like fraternities are. There are no particular density standards for hostels,just as there are
none for other uses that cater to the traveling public like motels and hotels.
Conclusion
The CAO Recommendation is consistent with Planning staffs original recommendation to
approve the use permit, rather than the Planning Commission's action to deny the use permit.
The reason for this is that staff found that the project is able to comply with relevant property
development standards and can be appropriately conditioned to address other typical concerns
with a fraternity use. Even more compelling to staff in its review of the project, is the fact that
the City's general plan clearly calls for this type of use to be located in higher density residential
areas near Cal Poly, rather than dispersed throughout the city. The attached Planning
Commission report details relevant general plan policies on pages 2& 3.
FISCAL EMPACT
None.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the use permit with modified conditions.
If the Council feels that site specific concerns warrant changes to recommended conditions,
then conditions related to occupancy levels, parking requirements and allowed events at the
3-3
Council Agenda Report- . ibda Chi Alpha Fraternity Appeal _ 174-97)
Page 4
2. Continue with direction to the staff and appellant.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Draft Resolution A (uphold appeal)
Attachment 2: Draft Resolution B (Planning Commission's recommendation)
Attachment 3: Appeal to City Council received 2-12-98
Attachment 4: Letters for and against the fraternity received since the Planning Commission
packet was produced
Attachment 5: Planning Commission follow-up letter&Resolution No. 5214-98
Attachment 6: Draft 2-11-98 Planning Commission minutes
Attachment 7: 2-11-98 Planning Commission staff report
Available in reading file: Photographs of project site and other nearby properties submitted by
Doreen Case at the 2-11-98 Planning Commission meeting
Draft Resolution A
RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION,THEREBY APPROVING THE USE PERMIT
TO ESTABLISH A FRATERNITY,AND TO ALLOW A REDUCED
STREET YARD SETBACK FROM 15' TO 10' TO ACCOMMODATE
ON-SITE PARKING,FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1292 FOOTHILL BLVD. (U 174-97)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 11,
1998, and denied the request to establish a fraternity, and allow a reduced street yard setback
from 15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate on-site parking, for property located at 1292 Foothill
Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's action on
February 12, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on March 17, 1998, and has
considered testimony of the applicant/appellant, interested parties, the records of the Planning
Commission hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under
Section 15301, Class 1 of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, because it is the use of an
existing facility with no significant expansion of that use.
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 proposed project
(U 174-97), the appellant's statement, staff recommendations and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
J��
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 2
1. The proposed use, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of
persons living or working in the area, because limits on hours for events and numbers of
persons allowed on site will restrict activities and limit disturbances to neighbors.
2. The subject use is appropriate at the proposed location, and will be compatible with
surrounding land uses provided that the fraternity complies with all conditions at all times.
3. The proposed use conforms to the general plan because it is a group housing use, which the
general plan says is appropriate for Medium-High Density Residential areas.
4. The proposed use meets zoning ordinance requirements because it is a fraternity in a
Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) zone, where fraternities are allowed with approval
of a Planning Commission use permit.
5. The requested street yard exception will not adversely impact the streetscape appearance of
the site or the prevalent pattern of yards in the neighborhood with appropriate screening of
the parking space.
6. The proposed use is exempt from environmental review requirements because it is a
residential use similar to the previous hostel use (Class 1, Existing Facilities, Section 15301
of the CEQA Guidelines).
SECTION 2. Anneal approval. The appeal of the Planning Commission's action is
upheld, and therefore the use permit is approved, subject to the following conditions and code
requirements:
Conditions
1. No more than thirteen (13) persons shall reside at the house at any time. Additions to
structures or additional occupancy shall require a use permit amendment. The applicant shall
allow the city to verify occupancy of the house by allowing an inspection of the records or by
a visual inspection of the premises. Any inspection shall be at a reasonable time and shall be
preceded by a 24-hour notice to the residents.
2. A minimum of twelve (12) on-site parking spaces to city standards shall be provided and
maintained at all times for the intended use.
3. The request for a street yard setback exception from 15 feet to 10 feet is hereby approved,
based on the finding cited above and subject to the architectural review requirements for
screening included in Condition No. 10.
3-�
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 3
4. Applicant shall install an enclosed trash and recycling area to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
5. The property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. All plant materials shall be
maintained and replaced as necessary.
6. The maximum number of persons allowed on the site for routine meetings an gatherings is
20, except as specifically approved by the Community Development Director for special
events. For such special events, the applicant shall also submit a parking and transportation
plan.
7. No meetings, parties, or other types of similar activities involving persons other than
residents are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m., except as approved by the
Community Development Director.
8. The applicant shall institute and maintain a neighborhood relations program. This plan shall
include at least the following elements:
•Annual training of all members in community relations.
*A program to inform neighbors of upcoming events at the house.
*Submission of names and telephone numbers of responsible persons, including the
alumni president-and chief financial officer,to the Community Development Director and
to the neighbors within two blocks of the house. Responsible persons shall be available
during all events and at reasonable hours otherwise,to receive and handle complaints.
Evidence of implementation of said plan shall be submitted to the Director for review each
year. Failure to exercise reasonable efforts to implement said plan may be grounds for
revocation of this permit.
9. Events, including meetings or parties, on site, shall be limited to those listed on a meeting
and activities schedule, submitted to and approved by the Community Development Director
in the fall of each year. Exceptions to this schedule must be approved by the Community
Development Director. If the Director determines the change is significant and may have an
adverse impact on the neighborhood,then it will be referred to the Planning Commission for
consideration.
10. There shall be no freestanding signs on the premises. Signs shall be limited to signs located
on building faces or fences.
11. The applicant shall submit an application for architectural review of site changes including a
landscaping plan showing planting in the street yard area, as well as other areas of the site.
S-7
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 4
The landscaping plan shall specifically address the need to adequately screen proposed
parking spaces visible from the street. Plans, prepared to a standard architect's or engineer's
scale, and with accurate dimensions for parking spaces and driveway widths, shall be
submitted to confirm full compliance with City standards, including the need for a
turnaround area.
12. Use permit shall be reviewed if any reasonable written citizen, or Police or Fire Department,
complaints are received by the Community Development Department. In review of the use
permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete or modify conditions of approval, or
revoke the use permit. The Planning Commission may consider adding a condition requiring
fraternity officers to perform a community service project in the neighborhood.
13. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or the following code requirements, or
the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State, or local law, or so as to
constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety,or welfare
of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for revocation
of this permit.
Code Requirements
1. An approved fire sprinkler system, smoke detectors and fire extinguishers shall be installed
and maintained to the approval of the Fire Department.
2. The two parking spaces shown as garage spaces shall be available at all times for parking.
Any physical obstructions existing in the space shall be corrected to allow for their continued
use as complying parking spaces.
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 . 1998.
Mayor Allen Settle
S�'
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 5
ATTEST.
Bonnie Gawf,City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
orn Je y G orgensen
S-9
Draft Resolution B
RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION,THEREBY DENYING THE USE PERMIT
TO ESTABLISH A FRATERNITY,AND TO ALLOW A REDUCED
STREET YARD SETBACK FROM 15' TO 10' TO ACCOMMODATE
ON-SITE PARKING,FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1292 FOOTHILL BLVD. (U 174-97)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 11,
1998, and denied the request to establish a fraternity, and allow a reduced street yard setback
from 15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate on-site parking, for property located at 1292 Foothill
Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's action on
February 12, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on March 17, 1998, and has
considered testimony of the applicant/appellant, interested parties, the records of the Planning
Commission hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff.
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 proposed project
(U 17497), the appellant's statement, staff recommendations and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
1. The requested street yard exception will adversely impact the streetscape appearance of the
site.
2. The subject use is not appropriate at the proposed location, and will be incompatible with
surrounding land uses because:
• the site is too small to fully accommodate fraternity needs;
• proposed parking is awkward and does not function well; and
• the neighborhood is already saturated with many other high intensity residential uses.
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 2
SECTION 2. AApneal Denial. The appeal of the Planning Commission's action is hereby
denied, and therefore,the Commission's action to deny the use permit is upheld.
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 91998.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Bonnie Gawf, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Qj/,,�W/�- Ql�-
ty tto ey J e G. Jorgensen
S l�
Pj11111
Is OBISPOc� t� u
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
()Sa Puy: �- /�1,�._ r h :a�_1 jendered on :V6, /a 2
which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds
for submitting.the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.) .
ApPl� ,,
C.IW CepQ.-,V 3Cnr0w,di'7 Usr5 .
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:
Name/Departent w (Date)
P4-51jl". -ee4- Noose Corp aQ to..4da-CAi
Appellant: (/ev;.,, wa.vbar _7l P.o. 13cw .4 Ig / ft-0 93gcf) Alpho.
Namerritle Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
Sy3- 7.-I 1127
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative: 4 0'^4 e
Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
For Official Use Only:
Calendared for c3'/7'T Date &Time Received:
c: City Attorney
City Administrative Officer
Copy to the following department(s): RECEIVED
A. -------------
�,v-s F E ft 1 21998
SLO C!TY CLERK
Originpl in City Clerk's Office
Phi - Sigma House Corporation
Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity
P.O. Boz 5141 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RECEIVED
February 22, 1998 FEB 25 1998
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Pam Ricci COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Department
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Dear Pam,
I would like to take this opportunity-to thank you for the effort you have expended in preparing the staff
report on the Use Permit application for Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity at 1292 Foothill Blvd There have
been many interesting events that have unfolded in this process,which as I'm sure you are aware led to the
Planning Commission denial of the application and our subsequent appeal to the City Council,now
scheduled for March 17, 1998. This letter will constitute an expansion on our reasons for the appeal.
One justification that was used in the denial was that the proposed site is too small and inappropriately
situated because of the surrounding uses. I wvuld hasten to point out that Lambda Chi Alpha has an
eighteen year operating history on a site half the size of the 1292 Foothill property,and in a neighborhood
far less densely populated with students than the proposed. As was pointed out in the staff report,the
proposed use meets zoning standards as they have been developed and applied to fraternities,and is
surrounded by similar uses.
In denying the Use Permit,several of the Planning Commission members mentioned a need to study
Fraternities and there impact This has been the object of my personal efforts and observations over the
past 19 years,both as a student,and later as a w•orldng person. Please allow me to play prophet for a
moment and forecast the results of such as study: Cal Poly is growing,a lot. The State has mandated that
thousands of students will be added to the enrollments over the next few years. Given the State's
propensity for un-funded mandates,there will be very little additional on campus housing available for
these thousands of young students. Also,the State will continue to refuse to allow amy Cal Poly land to be
used for private group housing purposes,due to a myriad of concerns. So these additional students will
impact an already tight housing market further,many of them wanting to live in the Alta Vista
neighborhood close to campus That's good news in the long nm for property values,given increased
demand,but bad news for the long time residents of the neighborhood who have watched the area steadily
become more densely.populated Many of the long time residents will continue to object to the
intensification right up to the point that they can't stand it any more and sell their properties at
tremendously inflated prices. '—
Students,being human beings first,will continue to have a desire to socialize with those of like mind,so
fraternities and other social organizations will continue just as they have done for centuries. As it has been
in the pest,there will be some organizations that function well as neighbors and community members,as
Lambda Chi Alpha has done. Then there will be others that never seem to get the picture,and become an
embarrassment to themselves and a blight in their neighborhood The City and the University will need to
develop an effective means of eliminating these problem groups while encouraging and recognizing the
good ones. It will continue to be most appropriate to locate as many fraternities and sororities as possible
,s-�3
in close proximity to the University,just as the General Plan now specifies. The prospect of annexing or
setting aside land for a fraternity and sorority row will remain a distant one,since it is a larger project than
the organizations themselves can afford to undertake,and neither the City nor the University has the
available resources to bring such a project about. Seems like a difficult situation,doesn't it?
A final issue to be discussed is the building department requirement that we install fire sprinkler;in the
building,even though we have expressly stated that we plan to remove the current structures within a few
years and build a modem small apartment building. Having been given justifications varying from the
UBC codes to"resource deficiencies'(i.e.lack of water flow to the area),there is still this puzzling fact:
the Use Permit that the Youth Hostel has allows up to 20 persons in residence and does not require fire
sprinklers. The proposal for the fraternity is for 13 residents,but would require fire sprinklers? This
doesn't make sense. My proposal still stands that if Lambda Chi Alpha has not initiated construction of a
new building on site within five years,we will go to the expense of sprinkling the current struchues to
insure the long-term safety of our members. Any thing else would be wasteful
That brings us right back to the proposal at hand Having essentially been left to our own devices,Lambda
Chi Alpha and Elaine Simer have come up with a proposal that makes sense in trading properties as
proposed The bottom fine is this:Elaine Simer is going to sell her Youth Hostel property and relocate her
business to a location she feels is more appropriate. Someone is going to buy the 1292 Foothill Blvd
property and fill it with renters,maybe:even another fraternity that doesn't want to subject itself to the
process we have gone through. Lambda Chi Alpha will continue to exist,and will continue to do
everything possible to be a good neighbor,as many have testified to our ability to do. The question is
really whether it is better for us to operate in our current location at 1617 Santa Rosa,or to move to a
location near Cal Poly such as 1292 Foothill Blvd Obviously,we feel the latter is a far better choice and
we are willing to sustain a substantial cost to do that This proposed trade involves two established
organizations with good operating records. These facts alone bode well for the long-term sins of the
proposal.
Thank you again for your assistance in this process.
Sincerely,
Kc%-m Hauber
Treasurer
Phi-Sigma Zeta House Corporation
Of Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity,Inc.
RECEIVED February 25, 1998
FEB 25 1998
To: The San Luis Obispo City Council CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
From: Paul Taylor �.�
Subject: The proposed housing swap between the Simmer Hostel and the Lambda
Chi Alpha Fraternity
I'm writing the council to protest the unsatisfactory, biased efforts of the Planning
Commission concerning the proposed swap of properties between the Simmer
Hostel and the Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity. Kevin Hauber and Elaine Simmer
should be applauded for developing such an innovative solution to their particular
needs. This plan should be considered on its own merit, in an unbiased arena,
without "special interest" pressures.
An agenda that separated the two use permit issues along with poor direction from
the Planning Commission regarding public input doomed the project from the
beginning. The majority of the commission ignored the staff report and the
approval of the SLO Police Dept. It was obvious that they were intimidated by the
Alta Vista neighbors and RQN.
As this was a "swap" between two parties, the items should have been considered
together. Since this was not the case, many in attendance that were in favor of this
unique solution were not heard. They were waiting for the second item on the
agenda and when the fraternity use permit was turned down, there was no second
item!
Separating the two issues allowed an emotional barrage of negativity from the Alta
Vista neighbors/RQN with no rebuttals from those in favor of the proposal. Every
speaker continued speaking past the allotted three minutes and ignored verbal
warnings to stop. They were clearly in control of the meeting. Only one of the
speakers lived in the immediate vicinity of the Foothill location and she rents to
students in that area! One of their main concerns was the fear of a fraternity row
in an area where one already exists! The potential for parking problems at the
proposed fraternity location was also brought up as a concern by the speakers. The
new use permit for the fraternity would require twice the number of parking places
at the Foothill location as they now have in our neighborhood, but that isn't
enough for them! As usual, the Alta Vista neighborhood is demanding special
treatment from the city.
ATTACHMENT 4 3•�S
As an RQN member, I acknowledge the beneficial work of RQN, but I resent the
fact that the Alta Vista area neighbors are using RQN for their own purposes.
Most areas of the city, including ours in the downtown historic district, are just as
impacted as they are with students and the accompaning problems. At least 50%
of the dwellings in our neighborhood are occupied by students, accounting for
about 75% of the residents.
The Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity has not been without problems, but through
neighborhood communication and the city's noise ordinance enforcement policy
we have gained a coexistence. The past year with the fraternity has been
acceptable and they have made great progress in understanding their
responsibilities in being good neighbors.
The failure of the commission to stick to the issues and not be intimidated by the
Alta Vista contingent was particularly unsettling. They asked a few questions to
which they already knew the answers and the balance of the hearing was devoted
to the Alta Vista contingent. It was obvious that the majority didn't want anything
to do with this "political hot potato" and was going to defer the decision to the City
Council. Several commissioners even alluded to this "intimidation" in their
closing statements.
The staff has done a good job of addressing neighborhood concerns with the
"conditions" section of its recommendations. Additionally, each organization
would have a use permit that can be revoked if not adhered to, and the City has an
enforceable noise ordinance.
Please give this matter your careful attention. Please consider the favorable staff
report with recommended "conditions", SLO Police Dept. approval, and the
present Campus Housing Section (2.7.5) in the Land Use Element of the SLO
General Plan.
CAM I
a �Ku Aratr not 4s a Iji ( 4apter
califmVin Talvinttnic
*aft cAaeurei!
1704 Foothill Blvd.
San Luis Obispo.CA 95405
March 5, 1998
Dear City of San Luis Obispo,
We the brothers of Sigma Nu fraternity wish to support the proposal which would
allow Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity to use 1292 Foothill as a fraternity house. By
organizing successful philanthropies and consistently participating in Greek functions,
we respect Lambda Chi Alpha as a solid fraternity. It seems to us that if the hostel were
to switch locations with the current Lambda Chi Alpha house,both parties would benefit.
I have personally lived at the Sigma Nu house on the corner of Foothill and
Crandall for the past three years and have never had a problem with noise from our
neighbors, many of whom are currently Greek organizations. I do not foresee a problem
if another Greek organization moves into the neighborhood. If there were ever a noise
problem, it is my belief that Lambda Chi Alpha would have the respect to comply with
the requests of neighbors. We hope you reconsider this propostion.
Sincerely, /
'0/
Alexander Gile
President
RECEIVED
AZAR 0 6 1996
Ciry OF SAN LUIS OBF'PO
WL00G OMSION
Retain thi=dour,.-- i for February 13, 1998
future Cou!)6i r eeiir�g
TiFV�1, 3-i7-9s' -
udtA, ccQSr�a -� Er;
CIL DD DIR
.c ❑ FIN DIR
Al ❑ FIRE CHIEF
NEY ❑ rOWICE
KlORIG OLICE CHF
Mayor & Council Members TEAM ❑ REC DIR
City of San Luis Obispo — 13UTILDIR
Palm and Osos Street OPERSDIR
San Luis Obispo , CA 93405
Re: Appeal of Lambda Chi Alpha No. U-174-97
Dear Mayor & Members of the City Council:
I support the appeal of Lambda Chi Alpha to locate their
fraternity at 1292 Foothill and urge the City Council to reverse
the decision of the Planning Commission.
In its application, Lambda Chi Alpha seeks to move from 1617
Santa Rosa Street to 1292 Foothill. The Planning Commission's
denial was based on objections by residents of Albert, Hathway,
and Carpenter Streets, who fear that the addition of another
fraternity on Foothill will adversely impact their neighborhoods .
Foothill Boulevard from California to Cal Poly (including
1292 Foothill) is zoned entirely R-3 or R-4 which allows for
fraternities . 1292 Foothill is separated from the Alta Vista
area (Albert, H athway, Carpenter ) by an R-4 Zone, which allows
for even greater density than R-3 . The City' s general plan calls
for Fraternities to be close to campus and there are already
several fraternities and sororities in the area.
1292 Foothill is right next to Cal Poly. This is a logical
place for a fraternity. The marginal impact of one more
fraternity in the area would be minimal .
Despite what the opponents said at the hearinq, it is
unrealistic to think that this section of Foothill will ever be
anything but a high 'density student neighborhood. The
traditional family alluded to by RQN and Alta Vista members
wouldn 't dream of buying a house there . It is a street that is
only appropriate for students. Most of those objecting at the
hearing live from two to six blocks away and would be unaffected
by any noise .from a fraternity on Foothill.
s'�Q
I am interested in this appeal because I own 1292 Foothill
where I operate the SLO Coast Hostel . In an effort to relocate
my hostel to a an area closer to public transportation and to
downtown San Luis Obispo, I have arranged to exchange real estate
with Lambda Chi Alpha. My application for a use permit to
operate a youth hostel at 1517 Santa Rosa was approved by the
planning commission. Unless the Lambda Chi Alpha' s application
is approved, our proposed real estate swap will not go through.
It is short-sighted of the members of Residents for Quality
Neighborhoods and the Alta Vista Homeowners Association who
oppose the relocation of the fraternity to 1292 Foothill to think
that by doing so they are in any way preserving their own
neighborhoods which are a few blocks away. Because of the
publicity about this proposed swap and the planning commission's
action, I have received two other tentative offers to buy my
property at 1292 Foothill - one from a student group which is not
sanctioned by Cal Poly and another from an investor who would use
it as a student rental. Either of these potential buyers could
possibly house more than 13 students at this site, and without
the benefit of a Use Permit. In that event any problems at that
address would be even more difficult to control . At least. with a
fraternity being there, ooerating under a Use Permit, the
neighbors would have more leverage and control than if it were
merely a student rental.
It is the duty of the Planning Commission and the City
Council to plan for the best interests of the entire community.
Decisions affecting the community at large should not be made
based upon the unfounded fears of special interest groups. I
urge you to grant the use permit for the fraternity as proposed
with the conditions proposed by the city staff .
Sincerely,
Elaine Simer
. S-�9
Retain this document fog
future Council meeting
TENT. .3-/7-990
Date,H agscd`zed February 20, [1123
UNCIL DD DIR
❑ FIN DIR
�'��2r'u0 ❑ FIRE CHIEF
Honorable Mayor Allen Settle 6:riO NEY ❑ PWNrPODIE CHF
and Members of the Council : U f TEA ❑ REC DIR
Re: Fraternity-Hostel Swap M1 o ❑ UTILDiR
p ❑ PERS DIR
Capt. Bart Topham told Tom Kay and I (Doreen) that police officers
could not monitor the number of members and guests attending
fraternity functions as set by a use permit. Officers cannot
monitor hours of parties or rush events as set by the use permit.
They cannot monitor the parking scheme for the driveway.
On Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, Topham concurs that officers run
one, two, and three hours late responding to calls . At times, I see
"no officers available" on the log. Who is the "good fairy" who
would oversee use permit regulations? It takes the Community
Development Department months or years to collect data and take
meaningful action.
It is not just old fuddy-duddys who complain about noise. There are
120 or more students in the Foothill Garden Apartments with senior
managers who call the P.D. about fraternity noise. Students in a
nearby condo complex call the P.D. about frat parties . Opal Rich' s
student renters on Crandall Way want quiet for studies .
Noise does emanate from the Foothill hillside and resounds onto
Hathway, Orange Dr. , and Carpenter streets . Young families and
professional people do not want "medium sized parties" or
"activities like other fraternities have"-- quotes from the
fraternity president at the Planning Commission.
If the hostel owner wishes to move downtown, student tenants would
be acceptable. The number of students would be determined at a
hearing and would have a group use permit with yearly review.
If thirteen fraternity members were allowed to live at the site,
there would be 57 other members looking for rentals in the Alta
Vista neighborhood. They would have no party restrictions except
what the police department could control .
The area in question is dense enough. Solutions to the fraternity
problems must not burden or encroach upon our neighborhoods .
Sincerely,
Henry and Doreen Case
R EC'AVED Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
F r B Z 3 1997
SLO Gi :)UNCIL t•�o
L L e,.-I C . ,
February 12, 1995 �! 01-1 X175 �/y1H( � rJ. Cy,
�e7
Mr.Richard Schmidt
City Planning Commissioner
City Hall SUBJECT: FRATERNITY HOUSE APPLICATION ,,^ FL►
990 Palm Street at 1292 Foothill Blvd. `Olj` e& ¢/G
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 ., o j FQ
� s
Dear Mr.Schmidt: G2/TSO�G ,99�
r
Due to time limitations I was unable to present my negative veiwpoints in regard to permittingo
Fraternity Houses to be located in city residence zones,at the meeting last night. �F2�
Were this practice to continue our neighborhood problems can only be magnified for the following
reasons:
The University Administration will only continue to treat any efforts to provide on-campus
housing for these and similar organizations on a low-priority basis,"things we'd like to do."
The city Police Department is already very much over burdened in responding to
disturbances,noise and traffic problems created by the differences in"social attitudes."
I am well aware of the problems and freedoms students have in living away from home and am basically
sympathetic with their needs since I have been a faculty advisor for several campus clubs for over
twenty years. I have visited a number of college campuses nation wide over the years and observed
how other universities have placed Greek Row on campus (especially the other state universities who
have the wherewithal,as compared to private colleges).
Please do not let the pressure of short-term decisions interfere with more appropriate long-term
solutions.
Sincerely.
Robert W.Adamson,Professor Emeritus
180 Serrano Heights
San Luis Obispo,CA 93405
Tel: 805/543-5957
RWA/dj
c: Janet Kourakis
RQN Board Members
Mayor Allen Settle
RECEIVED
F E 8 1 3 1997 ��
sl n m •"OUNCIL
RECEIVED
FEB 09 1998
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO •��t G / �
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
�.�. 90 A/
-727 0y
I --Z j .Zll
Xtp�y---�,E�
Y-o
-7
�Y� t
Brian Rogers
123 Crandall Way RECEIVED
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93405
547-9161 FEB 10 1998
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Board of Trustees, Planning Commission COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
San Luis Obispo
This letter is in regards to the possible movement of the Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity
into the location of the present youth hostile. We at this residence have no obections
with the fraternity moving in next door. We have been contacted by several members
of the fraternity and they have assured us that there will be no increased disterbances
due the fraternity's arrival.
B Ian J. ogers
5��3
,%;T C.
..........
0 its 9
-ood Bank Coalition of November 7, 1997
San Luis Obispo County
RECEIVED
Community CoDaboration to Help the Needy
FEB 10 1998
?.O. Box 2070 Lambda Chi Alpha COMMUNITY ITY F SAN LUIS
DEVELOP E o
DEVELOPMENT
Robles, CA 93447-2070 8741 Founder's Road
805) 238-4664 Indianapolis, IN 46268-1389
:AX (805) 238-6956
Subject: Phi Sigma Zeta Chapter of SLO, CA Food Drive
`Our County's best
Food resource for The Food Bank Coalition of San Luis Obispo County would like to thank you
my citizen in need." and Lambda Chi Alpha for running the annual San Luis Obispo County North
American Food Drive on November 1, 1997. The fraternity contributed over
5,261 pounds of food as a result of its consolidated efforts and public outreach
advertisements.
The Food Bank servesL as a.warehouse for the distribution of free and low cost
:xecutive Director food to member charitable agencies that in turn distribute to the needy of the
.onstance D. Frayer county. We area tax-deductible 501(C)(3) organization and your support is
essential to ensuring that we can carry out our mission to serve.
The Food Bank has not provided you or anyone associated with your fraternity
any goods or services as consideration for this donation. This declaration is
ioard of Directors pursuant to IRS code 170(f)(8).
)ffi cers. Sincerely,
hairman
lichael Passarelli, Morro Bay
ice-Chairman onstance D. Frayee
tephen Sefton, Paso Robles Executive Director
scretary
hirley Martin, Atascadero
reasurer
on Jacobs, Paso Robles Cc: Phi Sip=Zeta.SLO Chapter
embers
ew, Atascadero
iL ..ev. Terry Martin, Paso Robles
ev. Ruben Tate, Paso Robles
nma Valdivieso, Grover Beach
elen Ziegler, Atascadero �r
J�
����►��������ii�i��i�►►IIIIIIIII IIIIn���������ii III
II
city ® sem �s oBispo
MOM 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
February 18, 1998
Lamda Chi Alpha
1617 Santa Rosa Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: U 174-97: 1292 Foothill Boulevard
Dear Applicant:
The Planning Commission, at its meeting of February 11, 1998, denied your request to establish a
fraternity, and allow a reduced street yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate on-site
parking, for property located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Carpenter Street and
Crandall Way, near Cal Poly (1292 Foothill Boulevard). The decision was based on the findings
listed in the attached resolution.
The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within ten
days of the action. An appeal has been filed with the City .Clerk. The project is tentatively for
review by the City Council on Tuesday,March 17, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
If you have any questions,please contact Pamela Ricci at(805) 781-7168.
Sincerely,
ArnoldlJnas::��
Community Development Director
Attachment: Resolution 5214-98
cc: Kevin Hauber
Elaine Simer
L:pu 14.94
ATTACHMENT 5
OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deat(805) 781-7410.
SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 5214-98
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct a
public hearing in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California,
on February 11, 1998 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application U 174-97, Lamda Chi
Alpha, applicant.
USE PERMIT REVIEWED:
U 174-97: Planning Commission Use Permit to establish a fraternity, and allow a reduced street
yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate on-site parking, for property located on the
north side of Foothill Boulevard between Carpenter Street and Crandall Way, near Cal Poly
(1292 Foothill Boulevard).
DESCRIPTION:
On file in the office of Community Development Department, City Hall.
GENERAL LOCATION:
1292 Foothill Boulevard
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT:
Medium-High-Density Residential
PRESENT ZONING:
R-3
WHEREAS, said commission as a result of its inspections, investigations, and studies
made by itself, and in behalf of testimonies offered at said hearing has established existence of
the following circumstances:
1. The requested street yard exception will adversely impact the streetscape appearance of the
site.
S47
Resolution No. 5214-98
U 174-97
Page 2
2. The subject use is not appropriate at the proposed location, and will be incompatible with
surrounding land uses because:
• the site is too small to fully accommodate fraternity needs;
• proposed parking is awkward and does not function well; and
• the neighborhood is already saturated with many other high intensity residential uses.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Use Permit 174-97 be denied by the Planning
Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo upon the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Ashbaugh, Ewan, Jeffrey,Kourakis, and Whittlesey
NOES: Commissioners Ready and Senn
REFRAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary
Planning Commission
M K\PC\5214-93
S�Y
Draft Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
February 11, 1998
Page 2
1. 1292 Foothill Boulevard: U174-97: Request to allow a fraternity and reduced street
yard setback from 15' to 10' to accommodate on-site parking; R-3 Zone; Lambda Chi
Alpha, applicant.
Associate Planner Ricci presented the staff report and recommended approving the use
permit based on findings and with conditions and code requirements.
Commissioner Ashbaugh questioned staff about the phone call received from Bob
Anderson at 1071 Islay Street, the adjacent property owner to the fraternity at its current
location.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked staff to describe the parking layout. Ms. Ricci indicated
tat twelve spaces are required and shown.
Commissioner Ewan questioned staff on the history of the use/property.
Commissioner Kourakis asked if the driveway is to code.
Associate Planner Ricci replied staff is asking that more detailed plans be submitted
along with an application for minor or incidental review which clearly show the proposed
parking layout and landscaping. There was concern over too much paving in the street
yard area.
Commissioner Kourakis asked for comment on the neighborhood relations plan.
Associate Planner Ricci stated this plan notifies surrounding residents of planned
events/activities that may have neighborhood impacts.
There were no further comments/questions and the public comment session was opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Kevin Hauber, Treasurer, Phi-Sigma Zeta House Corp., stated his group owns/operates
the house and that their fraternity should not be considered with other fraternities with
bad reputations. He noted that the fraternity has been successful in maintaining good
neighborhood relations at their current location. He felt that they should have the
opportunity to move and continue to be good neighbors at their new location.
ATTACHMENT
Draft Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
February 11, 1998
Page 3
Michael Udell, fraternity member, 1617 Santa Rosa, stated the fraternity would like to
move to be closer to Cal Poly. He indicated that the fraternity has maintained solid
relations with neighbors and that the house has won a City beautification award. He
added that fraternity meetings are held on campus.
Commissioner Kourakis asked about noise and parking during recruitment events.
Mr. Udell stated rush events usually take place from 4:00-6:00 p.m. and provide a chance
to meet prospective members. He noted that parking isn't an issue because most walk
from campus and that approximately 50-60 people attend their rush events.
Commissioner Kourakis asked for comment on Condition #6.
Mr. Udell stated that the 20-person occupancy limit is difficult to meet because if all 13
residents were to have a guest then, there would be 26 people in the house which is over
the limit.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked why rush events are held on site.
Mr. Udell stated it's a chance for prospective members to view the site, but noted that the
majority of events are held on campus.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked Mr. Hauber about long-term thoughts on the property.
Mr. Hauber stated that their long-term goal is to redevelop the site with a new building
and more parking. He indicated that these changes mostly likely wouldn't occur for at
least five years.
Commissioner Ashbaugh expressed a concern over non-resident, unregulated fraternity
members concentrating in the neighborhood.
Chairman Senn asked if the required sprinklers/fire prevention is economically feasible.
Mr. Hauber noted that he is presently working with staff on this issue and that their
preference would be to install fire sprinklers/make improvements with the remodel in the
long run.
Martha Steward, 1053 Islay St., stated that she has been a fraternity neighbor for 18
years. She indicated that her experience with this fraternity has improved over the years
and that there are now good neighborhood relations. She emphasized that this fraternity
has not made newspaper headlines or had reports of bad behavior. She felt that, with the
S-30
Draft Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
February 11, 1998
Page 4
proposed conditions, this is an ideal time to set an example for the fraternal community
and that this fraternity should be given a chance.
Doreen Case, Alta Vista area resident, distributed pictures, and stated she would like an
appropriate use on this property. She mentioned that the hostel applicant ran an illegal
hostel until told to stop by the City and built an apartment in her garage without permits.
She felt that property is too small for this use and was concerned that parking
requirements wouldn't be enforced in compliance with Finding#3.
Opal Rich, 189 Carpenter stated that she, owns a rental at 135 Crandall next to the site.
She objected to a fraternity at the proposed location because there will be increased noise
and traffic. She felt that another fraternity will make the neighborhood unbearable. She
mentioned that her former tenants were fraternity members and they trashed her home.
Commissioner Ashbaugh asked Ms. Rich if she's familiar with this fraternity.
Ms. Rich replied no, but she's lost trust in all fraternities. She stated, from her
experience, neighborhood relations plans don't work.
Paula Carr, Hathway Ave. resident, stated that she is trying to preserve the last remnants
of her neighborhood. She indicated that she has indicated that she has lost faith in
fraternities and objects to another one being established because any additional noise will
be unbearable. She noted that other fraternities are operating under similar use permit
conditions and that the system doesn't work. She described buses unloading party-goers
in her neighborhood, given public comment and complained. She questioned what it
would take to deny a fraternity use permit. She complained of the six-plus occupancy
homes in her area and asked for help in preserving the community.
Commissioner Jeffrey had Assistant City Attorney Clemens explain use permit violation
procedures.
Tom Kay, 369 Chaplin Ln., retired Cal Poly faculty, did not support another fraternity in
this area. He noted that Police response time on weekends is up to two hours and that
noise complaints are ongoing. He mentioned that many fraternities have scanners and
clear parties before the police arrive. He identified an existing neighborhood parking
concern and difficulties in enforcing use permit requirements. He explained the police
data bank and radio identification of fraternity properties. He opposed the request mainly
because of parking problems.
Daniel Fulmer, 195 Hathway, stated this is a mixed neighborhood with family residences.
He's witnessed problems that occur with a large preponderance of students together. He
disagreed with landscaping being decreased and noted that there will be more residents at
,S-3/
Draft Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
February 11, 1998
Page 5
the fraternity than at the hostel. He questioned whether this area/property was large
enough to accommodate proposed large gatherings and felt there was a parking and noise
concern. He asked, "Why are we changing what exists if there are no benefits? Why
create new problems?" He noted that he liked the area and the students, but feels we're
losing the single-family neighborhood to a high-density usage.
The public comment period was closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Kourakis explained that she has General Plan concerns with the request
not relating to the specific fraternity or its members. She recalled that during the General
Plan update, the City didn't have an accurate accounting of fraternities/sororities or
growth rates. She believed a General Plan study of areas where fraternities/sororities can
be located is needed. She thought that imposed findings and conditions may be overly
restrictive and impossible to enforce/follow. She did not believe that a long-term
fraternity use is incomparable to a transient hostel use. She supported a recommendation
to the Council that a study be undertaken relative to creating a designated
fraternity/sorority area.
Commissioner Kourakis moved to deny the use permit based on: Finding 1, that the
requested street year exception will adversely impact the street-scape appearance of the
site, and Finding 2, that the subject use is inappropriate at the proposed location and will
be incompatible with surrounding land uses because the site is too small to fully
accommodate fraternity needs, the proposed parking is awkward and does not function
well, and the neighborhood is already saturated with many other high-intensity residential
uses. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Whittlesey.
Commissioner Ashbaugh felt that the site was too small for the fraternity use and was
concerned about off-site parking. He added that this is an R-3 site and it could be
converted to a standard apartment house. He noted that there is more control/regulation
over a fraternity than an apartment complex.
Commissioner Ewan felt that this site was not appropriate for a fraternity use.
Commissioner Jeffrey supported the motion. He explained that this use will impact the
neighborhood and noted concerns with General Plan consistency.
Commissioner Ready indicated that he could not support the motion. He felt that the
location was appropriate for the use as it is surrounded by apartments/students. He added
that conditions imposed on fraternities far exceed the control exercised on rentals, and the
Police Department had indicated no objections to the proposal.
Draft Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
February 11, 1998
Page 6
Chairman Senn supported locating the hostel near the train station/downtown and having
the fraternity adjacent to campus. He added that he was impressed by the management of
this fraternity and the hostel. He noted that he could not cannot support the motion.
Commissioner Whittlesey supported the motion, mentioning that the site would be used
organizationally and was beyond a residential use. She felt that the total impacts must be
considered/weighed and that parking was an issue. She mentioned that the site isn't large
enough to accommodate the use. She specifically noted that the project was inconsistent
with General Plan Policies 2.2.6 and 2.1.1 that deal with neighborhood protection.
AYES: Commissioners Kourakis, Whittlesey, Ewan, Jeffrey, and Ashbaugh
NOES: Chairman Senn and Commissioner Ready
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried 5-2.
Commissioner Kourakis stated the growth of fratemities/sororities had never been
considered by the City and was not included in analyses prepared with the General Plan
update. She noted that there has been an increase in fraternities/sororities and an increase
in complaints. Rising neighborhood friction should be addressed.
Commissioner Kourakis moved to recommend to Council that there is a need for a
General Plan study on the siting of fraternities and sororities.
The motion failed for the lack of a second. Chairman Senn will go forward to Council to
express the Commission's concerns.
2. 1617 Santa Rosa Boulevard: U 178-97: Request to allow a Use Permit for a hostel
in an R-3-H zoning district; R-3-H Zone; Elaine Simer, applicant.
Associate Planner Ricci presented the staff rert and recommended approval of the use
permit, based on findings and subject to conditions.
There were no questions/comments and the public comment session was opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
S•33
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT rrEM it I
BY: Pam Ricci,Associate Planner?({ MEETING DATE: February 11, 1998
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Manage
FILE NUMBER: U 174-97
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1292 Foothill Boulevard
SUBJECT: U 174-97 - Planning Commission Use Permit to establish a fraternity, and allow a
reduced street yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate on-site parking, for property
located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Carpenter Street and Crandall Way, near
Cal Poly (1292 Foothill Blvd.).
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the use permit, based on findings, and with conditions and code requirements.
BACKGROUND
Situation.
Fraternities and sororities are allowed uses in the R-3 and R-4 zones with the approval of a
Planning Commission use permit. The Fraternity was originally granted a use permit by the
Planning Commission in 1980 to operate at 1617 Santa Rosa Street. The use permit was later
amended and the updated conditions are in included in the attached Planning Commission
Resolution No. 1815-82.
The fraternity has now applied for a Planning Commission use permit to relocate its house to
1292 Foothill Boulevard. This site is currently used as a hostel. The applicant is proposing to
"swap" locations with the hostel which would move to the fraternity's current location at 1617
Santa Rosa Street. The request to relocate the hostel is on the same meeting agenda as Use
Permit U 178-97.
Data Summary
Address: 1292 Foothill Boulevard
Applicant: Lamda Chi Alpha
Property owner: Elaine Simer
Representative: Kevin Hauber
Zoning: Medium-High Density Residential (R-3)
General Plan: Medium-High Density Residential
Environmental status: Categorically exempt:CEQA Section 15301,Class 1 (Existing Facilities).
Project action deadline: March 16, 1998
ATTACHMENT 7 .rO
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 2
Site description
The site is a large lot (15,750 SF) in a roughly trapezoidal shape, that contains two separate one-
story residential buildings,each of which shows four sleeping rooms. These buildings are currently
used as a hostel. The lot slopes steeply up from the street to about the level of the garage in the
rear,then levels out to the rear. A driveway and parking area exist on the north and east sides of the
property.The neighborhood is near Cal Poly, and contains high-density apartments,sororities and
fraternities,and some single homes.
Project Description
The applicant wishes to establish a fraternity house at the site. The proposal includes housing for
13 members and the addition of parking spaces. Most fraternity-sponsored events would be held
at Cal Poly or other off-campus locations. The fraternity is asking to have semi-annual
recruitment events and quarterly social events of moderate size at the site. The applicant's
submittal package includes a neighborhood relations plan.
EVALUATION
1. Consistency with the General Plan
The proposal to relocate the fraternity from its present location in the Old Town area of the City
to a site near Cal Poly is consistent with certain policies contained in the City's general plan.
Specifically,these policies include:
Land Use Element
L U 2.7.4: Location
Housing likely to attract faculty or students should be encouraged to locate close
to Cal Poly, to reduce commute travel.
L U 2.7.S: Fraternities & Sororities
Fraternities and sororities should be located in order of preference, (1) on
campus, (2) in medium-high and high-density residential areas near the campus.
Housing Element
H 8.2.4:Fraternities and Sororities
,S-3c4r
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 3
Fraternities and sororities should be located on the Cal Poly University campus.
Until that is possible, they should be concentrated on high-density residential
zones adjacent to campus rather than dispersed throughout the City.
The site is in a R-3 zone. Typically, density, parking and traffic problems are greater in higher
density residential zones than in lower density residential areas. By the nature of the zone then,
the potential for a fraternity to affect its neighbors is high. The benefit of locating the fraternity
at this site on Foothill Boulevard is that the surrounding neighborhood contains other fraternities
and sororities and is predominantly college-oriented (see attached map/index of fraternities and
sororities).
However, staff has received two letters from Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) and
Residents of the Alta Vista Area in opposition to the use permit. The Alta Vista letter cites a
concern for the creation of a Greek row in the area with some buildings and sites that are
unsuitable for higher density uses. The letter goes on to highlight existing fraternities and the
issues related to their operations. The RQN letter states that the use permit should be denied
because: the site is not suitable for larger events; there is not adequate parking for a fraternity
use; and the proximity of the site to established R-1 neighborhoods.
2. Occupancy Limits
The zoning regulations set forth the limits for the number of people that may live in group
housing. In the R-3 zone, up to 40 persons per acre are allowed. For this site, the maximum
occupancy is:
15,750/43,560= 0.36 acre; 0.36 x 40= 14.4
Therefore, a maximum of 14 persons may be permitted to live at this site. The request to allow
13 persons is consistent with this standard.
3. Parkins
The parking requirement for a fraternity is one space per 1.5 occupants or 1.5 space per bedroom,
whichever is greater. The requirement for this proposal is:
13 occupants/1.5 = 8.7 or 9 parking spaces
or
8 bedrooms x 1.5 = 12 parking spaces
The parking requirement for this project then would be 12 parking spaces. Plans show that 12
parking spaces are provided. However, the proposed layout does not fully comply with the
City's Parking & Driveway Standards. Doreen Case, a member of RQN and resident of the Alta
Vista neighborhood, correctly pointed out to staff that the proposed spaces at the end of the
SO-3/0
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 4
driveway are more than 100 feet from the street and would require an approved turnaround. Staff
has come up with a solution to move the two spaces between buildings further to the west
(toward the interior of the lot)to create a turnaround area for the three compact spaces at the end
of the driveway. A marked up version of the applicant's site plan is attached to show how this
could be done. Mrs. Case also questioned whether the width of the driveway was consistent with
City standards. Staff's alternative suggests that a planter be created on the east side of the
driveway to minimize the amount of paving in the street yard. The driveway width by standards
would need to be 16 feet.
4. Street Yard Setback Exception
To accommodate proposed parking, the applicant shows one of the required spaces within a
portion of the required 15-foot street yard. The applicant is asking that the Planning Commission
consider a request to reduce the required street yard setback for the parking space from 15 to 10
feet.
Staff is concerned that the streetscape of the site not be dominated by parking. Therefore, staff
feels that an exception may be warranted if the parking spaces are appropriately screened from
street views. Staff has suggested Condition No. 11, requiring that a landscaping plan showing
planting in the street yard area, as well as other areas of the site, be submitted along with plans
for a minor or incidental architectural review application. Through the architectural review
process, more detailed plans would be reviewed that included full-scale plans with accurate
dimensions for parking spaces and driveway widths to confirm fill compliance with City
standards, including the need for a turnaround area.
5. Fire Sprinklers
The Fire Department and Building Division note that the project will create a change in
occupancy that triggers the requirement for installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system (see
attached memo). The applicant would prefer to defer the requirement because of long-range
plans to redevelop the site, but the Chief Building Official has indicated that the City Building
Code does not authorize postponement of this requirement.
6. Standard Fraternity Conditions
Recent approvals of fraternities and sororities have included requirements for neighbor relations
plans, have limited the number of persons on the site at any one time, and have set limits on
numbers of events and hours for events. Staff is therefore recommending that conditions be
adopted with this use permit to be consistent with recent approvals. Staff also reviewed existing
conditions of the fraternity's current use permit to determine if any of these were pertinent to the
relocated fraternity.
537
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 5
7. Limits on persons on the site
Most newer fraternal houses have conditions limiting the number of persons that can be on the
site for typical routine fraternity meetings and gatherings, including residents and guests. There
should be some logical basis for the determination of such a number. Sometimes it is based on
the number of parking spaces available in the vicinity,the area inside buildings, or the number of
persons living at the house. It is appropriate to place a limit on the number of persons who can
be at typical site events because this limit affects the neighborhood.
With existing development on the site, there is not a large assembly area or outdoor area that is
particularly appropriate for large-scale events. The applicant's application statements indicate
that most fraternity-sponsored events would be held at Cal Poly or other off-campus locations.
Given the size limitations of this site, even the "semi-annual recruitment events and quarterly
social events of moderate size"that the applicant has requested may be problematic.
Condition No. 6 is recommended limiting the number of persons on the site for typical meetings
and gatherings to 20 or fewer persons. The number of 20 is based on the formula developed with
the recent review of the use permit for the Alpha Gamma Rho fraternity at 132 California of 1.5
persons per the number of residents allowed (1.5 x 13 = 19.5 or 20). The condition notes that
any special events involving more than 20 persons would require the approval of the Community
Development Director and the submittal of a parking management plan.
ALTERNATIVES
The Commission may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or continue action on this
application. A denial should be based on specific findings. A continuance should be accompanied
by direction to the applicant or staff.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
A memo from the Police Department is attached indicating support for the proposed "swap" in
uses. The requirement for an automatic fire sprinkler has been previously discussed. Other
departments have indicated no concerns with this application.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the use permit, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions
and code requirements:
S��
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 6
Findings
1. The proposed use, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of
persons living or working in the area, because limits on hours for events and numbers of
persons allowed on site will restrict activities and limit disturbances to neighbors.
2. The subject use is appropriate at the proposed location, and will be compatible with
surrounding land uses provided that the fraternity complies with all conditions at all times.
3. The proposed use conforms to the general plan because it is a group housing use, which the
general plan says is appropriate for Medium-High Density Residential areas.
4. The proposed use meets zoning ordinance requirements because it is a fraternity in a
Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) zone, where fraternities are allowed with approval
of a Planning Commission use permit.
5. The requested street yard exception will not adversely impact the streetscape appearance of
the site or the prevalent pattern of yards in the neighborhood with appropriate screening of
the parking space.
6. The proposed use is exempt from environmental review requirements because it is a
residential use similar to the previous hostel use (Class 1, Existing Facilities, Section 15301
of the CEQA Guidelines).
Conditions
1. No more than thirteen (13) persons shall reside at the house at any time. Additions to
structures or additional occupancy shall require a use permit amendment. The applicant shall
allow the city to verify occupancy of the house by allowing an inspection of the records or by
a visual inspection of the premises. Any inspection shall be at a reasonable time and shall be
preceded by a 24-hour notice to the residents.
2. A minimum of twelve (12) on-site parking spaces to city standards shall be provided and
maintained at all times for the intended use.
3. The request for a street yard setback exception from 15 feet to 10 feet is hereby approved,
based on the finding cited above and subject to the architectural review requirements for
screening included in Condition No. 10.
4. Applicant shall install an enclosed trash and recycling area to the approval of the Community
Development staff.
S•39
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 7
5. The property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. All plant materials shall be
maintained and replaced as necessary.
6. The maximum number of persons allowed on the site for routine meetings an gatherings is
20, except as specifically approved by the Community Development Director for special
events. For such special events, the applicant shall also submit a parking and transportation
plan.
7. No meetings, parties, or other types of similar activities involving persons other than
residents are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m., except as approved by the
Community Development Director.
8. The applicant shall institute and maintain a neighborhood relations program. This plan shall
include at least the following elements:
*Annual training of all members in community relations.
•A program to inform neighbors of upcoming events at the house.
•Submission of names and telephone numbers of responsible persons, including the
alumni president and chief financial officer, to the Community Development Department
and to the neighbors within two blocks of the house. Responsible persons shall be
available during all events and at reasonable hours otherwise, to receive and handle
complaints.
Evidence of implementation of said plan shall be submitted to the director for review each
year. Failure to exercise reasonable efforts to implement said plan may be grounds for
revocation of this permit.
9. Events, including meetings or parties, on site, shall be limited to those listed on a meeting
and activities schedule, submitted to and approved by the Community Development Director
in the fall of each year. Exceptions to this schedule must be approved by the Community
Development Director. If the Director determines the change is significant and may have an
adverse impact on the neighborhood, then it will be referred to the Planning Commission for
consideration.
10. There shall be no freestanding signs on the premises. Signs shall be limited to signs located
on building faces or fences.
11. The applicant shall submit an application for architectural review of site changes including a
landscaping plan showing planting in the street yard area to, as well as other areas of the site.
The landscaping plan shall specifically address the need to adequately screen proposed
parking spaces visible from the street. Full-scale plans shall be submitted with accurate
S•�0
U 174-97
1292 Foothill Blvd.
Page 8
dimensions for parking spaces and driveway widths to confirm full compliance with City
standards, including the need for a turnaround area.
12. Use permit shall be reviewed if any reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department
complaints are received by the city. In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission
may add, delete or modify conditions of approval, or revoke the use permit. The Planning
Commission may consider adding a condition requiring fraternity officers to perform a
community service project in the neighborhood.
13. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of
the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State, or local law, or so as to constitute a
public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons
in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for revocation of this
permit.
Code Requirements
1. An approved fire sprinkler system, smoke detectors and fire extinguishers shall be installed
and maintained to the approval of the Fire Department.
2. The two parking spaces shown as garage spaces shall be available at all times for parking.
Any physical obstructions existing in the space shall be corrected to allow for their continued
use a complying parking spaces.
Attached:
Vicinity map
Map showing locations of fraternities & sororities
Site plan
Staff's suggested changes to site plan
Applicant's submittal including letters, floor plan& neighborhood relations plan
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1815-82 (fraternity's existing use permit)
Comments from City Departments: Site/Grading, Building, Fire & Police
Letter from Alta Vista Area residents dated 1-25-98
Letter from RQN dated 2-3-98
gro
. \ ��e.00 _• � r O Old\
INA
• 5 O�� , . r L 2 \�` A,
6 i
R-3
'O ,!�^ YYC'V Oh V�n' N
5
uv' `
O
. ` r �l
r
QV
O
�y O •moo
y y Y
t!d'o
tt0 R�7'.• �� r9� r j �``
iY `yc 3� Q fS' cd•
to Pr O
t r' Jt 2
O
40,
r
'1.d•t'c'',e4 d a �S p O
VA iP `e c � /B n4 d
sr s O
O O O
o O
c �
,�o do�v O O O6�4 ❑�O
�
R1 O QWw
N
O
o tR-.1 0s 3 o 03Zz0
1 7] =ACt--tei wwxO r
` N O O
bC �1 (✓c M!i•bS enS �Sf. v� 7 .
o O A1.81 N Q
O o N 0 0 0 0 ®?
V 5•. a'
� } /514 /TIO /?20 /Z.6}N, I2
-4 � = H Q Bono sl
$ IF,,
VICINITY MAP U 174 - 97 NORTH
1292 FOOTHILL
\ 1 I
, P 1 T �L •mx s _.�
o � �
r lj +
C 1
Fraternity Houses in the GiN u 8
1P J
I'1
i. 280 Epsilon PI 1i 0
280 California Blvd.X
2. Alpha Gamma Rho
132 California Blvd.,
t
3. Beta Thea PI
152 Foothill Blvd.
CV Delta
4. Deelta Chi - c
(VYse ✓
1551�
S. Delta Sigma Phi a x t
244 California Blvd.:-/ Q �.C� •'a
Cu S14
6. Dela Tau - I
71 Palomar Ave.✓
7. Delta Upsilon • _ _
720 S 7 roc--hili ✓' !w f, - - a = x 1
�u1515�.
B.
Lambda
Ls
1617 Sana Rosa S:.'
�+
9. Phi Kappa Psi
1439 Pnil:ips Line'•'
10. Theta Chi
r, !,
844 Upham S:. ✓ 1 s° �:. °�_ � j -� '.
Sorority Houses in the City ' e
11. Alpha Oil Ome_a S :� � \ � � E
1464 Foothill iivd.
12 Phi
ap�haZFoothill Blvd! .. I I I I I 4 .- '<' � .�r �°I J ` • ^
t3. Gamma Phi Be' -
,w xwI arc I sl �2 �
1326 Kguera S:. <g '
14. Kappa Alpha Thera
150 California Blvd.
15. w*pna i'ap S i9 rn ct.
1716 C`sos St.
(v 1285
16. Sigma Ka pa
615 Grand Ave. i .b r vao<^v
I — — — — !rrn•rr 1
17. Zeta Tau Alpha I q
696 Foothill Blvd. • �:
VICINITY MAP INDEX NORTH
LOCATION OF FRATERNITY AND SORORITY HOUSES IN THE CITY A
S-#3
mum
93 �
� v c c
Sx 16 $x I
a BttEi� ,
ear•
....._ .ZSR
9x Is
7 1, av-0•
n —11Y, gxl8
a Doer j
N z`
got Is
qx K
Cjx[S
V�
/ `PGG el.S I
�ull sit, i x Iff
i iZgZ i;«�h�U � rid.
Zo ' -��f
93 Jj
G C C
8x16 $x!
s — $x1Eia
m-r
v
ti 1, 241-V
'Q
- 11Y, Sx18
6a.vye
a Doer i
9R IS
u•-a ai• 1411
41.
rx fir
LZIW
.icixlS �
J(
� c
G
amn
` re yy p�ndans
Lit
►2�z �oo•Fh�l� )31vd. ,�
Phi - Sigma Mouse Corporation
Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity
— _ P.O. Boz 5141 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
January 22, 1998
To: Pam Ricci
Planning Dept., City of San Luis Obispo
From: Kevin Hauber
Treasurer,Phi-Sigma Zeta House Corporation
Re: Use Permit application for 1292 Foothill Blvd.,San Luis Obispo
This memo is written pursuant to our recent conversation regarding the processing of a Use Permit to allow
a Fraternity at 1292 Foothill Blvd Please note the following:
In regards to the site/grading memorandum of 12/30/97 from Bob Bishop.we have revised the parking plan
to a total of 12 spaces,with the primary modification being in the front yard area. The plan for the spaces
in the front yard area would require installation of short retaining walls to meet normal grade requirements.
The plan calls for the space closest to the street to be set 10 feet from the property line to allow an adequate
walkway to be created to the front door of the house. Parking«ill be screened from the street by a fence
and new plantings along the top of the embankment as noted. This would require a minor variance from
standards in regards to the street yard setback dimension,but would be the most functional and esthetically
pleasing solution. Please see the attached plan for further information.
Regarding the memo of 1/5/98 from the Fire Department,several items should be noted This past year,we
voluntarily chose to install a fire sprinkler system in our present facility at 1617 Santa Rosa Street at a cost
in excess of$10,000. This was motivated by our desire to ensure safety for our undergraduate members
who live in and use the facility. It was also our expectation that we would be using the facility for an
indefinite period of time. At the proposed site of 1292 Foothill Blvd,the situation is slightly different.
Our long-term intention is to remove the existing structures and build a small,modem apartment structure,
which would include the latest fire suppression systems. In light of this it would be wasteful of both time
and money to sprinkle the current structures and a new structure to be built in the next few years. Also,in a
very practical sense,the proposed use with 13 residents is a lighter occupancy load(than the property
currently experiences as a hostel. Having considered these facts,I would like to propose an alternative.
Within five years the fmtemity will submit a plan for a new structure which will include modem fire
suppression systems. If this does not occur,we«ill retrofit a system to the existing structures. In this way
we are not doubling our expense(actually tripling if you include 1617 Santa Rosa St)and we all get what
we want in the long nun which is modem,fire-safe buildings.
Please let me know if there are any other questions or concerns that arise in the review process. Thank you
for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kevin Hauber
December 14, 1997
To: City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
From: Phi-Sigma Zeta House Corporation of Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity,Inc.
Re: Use Permit application for 1292 Foothill Blvd., San Luis Obispo
This memorandum will serve as description of the proposed use for the above referenced property.
However,we will first describe the entities involved in this situation and summarize the situation itself.
Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity(the Chapter)is the undergraduate body of the Fraternity,and is chartered as
an organization by both Cal Poly and the parent organization,Lambda Chi Alpha International Fraternity.
The Chapter has been in existence for nearly 20 years and has been in its present location at 1617 Santa
Rosa St.for 17 years. Phi-Sigma Zeta House Corporation of Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity,Inc.(the House
Corporation)is the alumni run body that owns and manages property for the benefit of the Chapter. The
board of the House Corporation consists of local alumni who serve in various capacities to help insure the
long-term-viability of the Chapter. The House Corporation is the owner of 1617 Santa Rosa St.,and the
Chapter members(currently 9 of them)are our tenants who are held responsible for the daily operation of
the Fraternity House. The same relationship would exist in the proposed location at 1292 Foothill Blvd.,
where we plan to provide housing for 13 Chapter members.
The Chapter has a current membership of approximately 70 members,with meetings held weekly during
the school year on the Cal Poly campus. Proposed uses for the 1292 Foothill Blvd.property would include
housing and meal plans for the 13 tenants, semi-annual recruitment events,and quarterly social events of
moderate size. Large-scale events are typically held on the Cal Poly campus or at other off campus
facilities. The House Corporation,the University,and the International Fraternity all require that the
Chapter adhere to strict policies regarding conduct,alcohol,and numerous other issues. There is great
effort expended to insure conformity with these policies. The Chapter is also required to maintain an active
neighbor relations program
The Chapter has operated in a residential neighborhood at the 1617 Santa Rosa site for the past 17 years
with good relations overall within the neighborhood We look forward to the opportunity to relocate near
the Cal Poly campus in a predominantly student neighborhood.
One final note:this application is being made concurrently with an application to move the youth hostel to
our current location at 1617 Santa Rosa St.as part of a property exchange. These applications are
necessarily dependent upon each other,and while we understand that each must be considered upon its own
merits,both situations will require final approval before the purchase and move can becompleted
Thank you in advance for your assistance in this process.
sw
. -
a r
a
a a
m
p a
P
O
Y O
0
S
., a
� � r
• u i.
Q ® �
J � �" � I I »iV Y� �,y YOB I
1 � ... �..:� � � L 8
e e x
I
e::� ' a a I I m
. � O . .:�:: > I III _
y II
. .
1 I � C Q
I � Y
' �� �:. ..�:.�. � :�,.�•• � •verso i � u
I.... ..
.\ � s�4�'tia 1 i V 1
� �
8 ..1 1 I �
•�a O\.... Y � �
e � i � g. �
O
6 �
p� � I C 6
Y e O
s
\•�. �
S-�P
Neighborhood Relations
Upon its move to 1217 Foothill, the Lambda Chi A1pha.Fratemity will implement the
following neighborhood relations program. This program, which is designed to make
Lambda Chi Alpha an upstanding member of its neighborhood, will contain the following
provisions.
1. All members will be trained in community relations on a regular scheduled basis
through our Fraternity education program. This training will take place during
education meetings three times per year, or once quarterly. This training will include
reviewing neighborhood policies, teaching of proper conduct on the premises, and
evaluating the effectiveness of current procedures. The core concept of the education
program will be that of respect for the property and the neighborhood as well.
2. All neighbors will be informed of upcoming Fraternity functions at least one week in
advance of the event. Prior to an event, a memo describing the nature of the event,
the date and time of its occurrence and names and phone numbers of responsible
persons will be distributed.
3. Names and phone numbers of responsible persons will be provided to the Community
Development Department as well as to all neighbors and apartment property
managers within two blocks or three hundred yards in all directions. These numbers
shall be revised annually of more frequently if necessary. This information shall be
S-�9
provided initially to the neighbors and the Community Development Department no
later than March 20. Thereafter, the information will be distributed no later than
September 30 or whenever a revision is necessary.
The Neighborhood Relations Committee will conduct several functions to geared
towards developing positive neighbor relations. Also it will be the duty of this
committee to deal will non-compliance of members.
1. Good Neighbor Day: All active members will participate in a Good Neighbor
Day, which will be held once per quarter. Services will include gardening,
window washing and other needed services. Neighbors will be informed of
community service days in advance to provide an opportunity for service requests.
2. Open House: Each Fall and Spring quarters the chapter will host an Open House
inviting the neighbors to become aquatinted with the members of Lambda Chi
Alpha and express and concerns that they may have. The event will consist of a
house tour, a calendar of events to come, and a question and answer session.
3. Non-Compliance: Should a member be in violation of the agreed upon house
rules and regulations, there are penalty fines established in the chapter's bylaws.
These fines which will be levied by the Neighbor Relations Committee provide
for probation of a collegiate member for failure to comply with designated
3�d
1 -
policies.. Serious violations can result in probation and suspension from'fraternal
activities. -.
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 1815-82
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct
a Public Hearing in the Council Chamber of the San Luis Obispo City Hall, San
Luis Obispo, California, on March 10, 1981, pursuant to a proceeding instituted
cinder application No. U0898 by- Lamda Chi Alpha to consider amendments to
••onditions for previously approved use permit .
11SE PERMIT REVIEWED: T
To allow a fraternity house.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
On file in the office of Community Development , City Hall
GENERAL. LOCATION:
1617 Santa Rosa Street . /
"RESENT ZONE:
R-3 (Medium—high residential)
WHEREAS, said commission as a result of its inspections , investigations ,
;znd studies made by itself, and in its behalf, and of testimonies offered at
hearing, has established existence of the following circumstances :
1 . The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare
of persons living or working in the area.
?. The proposed use is appropriate at the proposed location, and will be
compatible with surrounding land uses.
3. The proposed use conforms to the general plan.
4. The proposed use meets zoning ordinance requirements .
i. The proposed use is categorically exempt from environmental impact require—
ments .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application No. U0898 be amended
subject to the following conditions:
1 . No more than ten (10) persons shall occupy the residence at any time.
2. A minimmn of five (5) on—site parking spaces shall be provided, ,•onsistcnt f `�
with city Parkin! nnl nrivewnv Standards .
Resolution No. 1815-82
Ilse Permit U0898
Page 2
3. The building shall be inspected by the Chief Building Inspector and Fire
Marshal for code compliance. Applicant shall pay normal fees, for said
inspection.
4. Smoke detectors shall be installed on the first and second floors, to the
approval of the Fire Department.
5. Stairwell between first and second floors shall have a one hour fire rated
separation to the approval of the city building inspector.
6. An alternative means of egress shall be provided from the second floor, to
the approval of the Chief Building Inspector and Community Development
Director. (The existing stairwell may meet this condition).
7. Fire extinguishers (2AlOBC minimum classification) shall be provided on the
first and second floors, to the approval of the Fire Department.
R. Applicant shall install two street trees to the approval of the Public
Services Department: .
1. Applicant: shall file with the Community Development Department for
recordation a common access driveway easement and agreement, consistent with
provisions of the city's zoning ordinance. Said easement shall provide
16-foot access to the subject parking lot and provide suitable turn-around
area for any spaces backing onto the driveway.
10. Applicant shall repair or replace existing curb, gutter and sidewalk to the
approval of the Public Services Department.
11 . Parking space(s) at the side of the house shall be provided with a 6-foot
fence and gate to the approval of the Community Develoment Department .
12. Applicant shall widen the existing driveway to 16 feet with materials that
match the existing driveway.
13. Applicant shall install an enclosed trash area to the approval of the
Community Development Department.
14. No meetings, parties or other social type of activities involving persons
other than residents living on the site shall be allowed between the hours
of 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.
15. The property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. All plant
materials shall be maintained and replaced as necessary.
16. Creek letter sign may be located on building face or fence. Freestanding
signs are prohibited. Variation to this condition may be considered if
requested, reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Commission.
5S3
Resolution No. 1815-82
Use Permit U0898
Page 3
17. Use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at any time upon
receipt , by the city, of any written citizen or Police Department
complaint . In review of the use permit , the Planning Commission may add,
delete, or modify conditions of approval or may revoke the use permit.
18. Use as a fraternity shall be limited solely to the Lambda Chi Alpha
fraternity. Any other occupancy would require approval of the Planning
Commission of an amended use permit .
19. Applicant shall a.Ilow the city Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
to verify that occupancy of the house is limited to the residents , either by
allowing an inspection of the premises or records, provided that said
inspection shall be preceded by notice to the residents of not less than one
hour.
20. No outdoor use shall take place between the hours of 11 :00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m.
"1 . All reasonable written citizen or Police Department complaints received by
the Community Development Department shall be forwarded to the
representative of the Interfraternity Council and Panhellenic Council for
their review and comment prior to review by the Planning Commission. Said
review by representatives of the Interfraternity Council and Panhellenic
Council shall not include the names of the complaining parties unless said
complaining parties consent to the use of their names. The Interfraternity
Council and Panhellenic Council shall agree to respond in writing to all
complaints forwarded by the Community Development Department within ten days
of receipt of the memorandum.
The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning, Commission of the City
of San Luis Obispo upon motion by Commr. Drucker, seconded by Commr. Gerety
VOTING: AYES: Commrs. Drucker, Gerety, Bullock, Howard and Reiss
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Ken Bruce, Secretary
i'lanning Commission of the
City of San Luis Obispo
Dated: March 10, 1982
3�y
community DevelopmL- City of San Luis Obispoe.� Department Project Review 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 934
The City has received the following application and would like your comments.
Project Address 1292 FOOTHILL Parcel# 052-071-011 Date Printed:01/23/98
Application Number 17¢97 Routed to: Building Reg.(1 copies)
Legal Description CY SLO CAL PK PTN LT 96 Fire Department(1 copies)
Zoning 1 R-3 Zoning 2 Rob Bryn,Neighborhood Services
Property Owner SIMER ELAINE Manager
In Care Of
Owner Address 1292 FOOTHILL BLVD
SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93405-1412
Applicant Name LAMBDA CHI ALP.tiA Day Phone(805)545-8067
Applicant Address 1617 SANTA ROSA SS.,S.L.O. CA 93401
Representative Name KEVIN HAUBER Day Phone(805)5132727
Representative Address PO BOX 5141,S.LO.,CA 93403 Residents for Quality
Neighborhoods,
U allow fraternity First action date: 02/11/98 P(
Resource Deficiency Certification:
PlLas-e. respond +z7 -1-hP a4a6he--A IeTTet� _This project can be adequately accommodate
J II'� rr without overloading the city's facilities and
plan S�w I rl C7 " rG VL�eG4�ti�/fel rl� resources. (Municipal Code Chapter 2.44)
m� —This project cannot be accommodated because
Y 1 of utility deficiencies explained here or attached.
' ^'/Ov r— ^�POk,7L TQ �rG���Q U� (Municipal Code Chapter 2.44)
nn y Signed
DQ11,l�tJfl�/ SfAnt1E'p5 �2 H�Y,E55 1/L19 Date
Return with comments to PAM RICCI by 01/30/98
Although not requred, comments and conditions are encouraged to be sent to the above
planner via e-mail utilizing Microsoft Word format.
Community Development Department Project Review City of San Luis Obispo990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 9;:401
The City has received the following application and would like your comments.
Project Address 1292 FOOTHILL Parcel# 052-071-011. Date Printed:12/23/97
Application Number 174.97 Routed to: Police Department(1 copies)
Legal Description CY SLO CAL PK PTN LT 96 Building Reg.(2 copies)
Zoning I. R-3 Zoning 2 Fire Department(1 copies)
Property Owner SIMER ELAINE Utilities(1 copies)
In Care Of Engineering(2 copies)
Owner Address 1292 FOOTHILL BLVD Rob Bryn,Neighborhood Services
Manager
SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93405-1412
Applicant Name LAMBDA CHI ALPHA Day Phone(a05)545-8067
Applicant Address 1617 SANTA ROSA ST.,S.L.O. CA 93401
Representative Name KEVIN HAUBER Day Phone(805)5432727
Representative Address PO BOX 5141,S.L.O.,CA 93403 Residents for Quality
Neighborhoods,
U allow fraternity First action date: 02/11/98 PC
Resource Deficiency Certification:
by -Z. 60' -V Ti TU T,e A This project can be adequately accommodated
without overloading the city's facilities and
C 1 T C A Gr— resources. (Municipal Code Chapter 2.44)
_This project cannot be accommodated because
of utility deficiencies explained here or attached.
(Municipal Code Chapter 2.44)
IF Signed
y D9 Date
z
Return with comments to PAM RICCI by Ot/o9/98
Although not required, comments and conditions are encouraged to be sent to the abovess'�
From: Spencer Meyer
To: SLOIPO.PRICCI
Date: 1/5/98 12:27pm
Subject: 1817 Santa Rosa, U 178-97/1292 Foothill, U 174-97
The Fire Department has no major concerns with reference to these proposed Use
Permits.
The Applicant/Fraternity should be advised that moving to the Foothill
location, will change sites current occupancy, from an R-3, to an R-1
(congregate residence) . This occupancy change, 'w'ill trigger the requirement
for automatic fire sprinkles and a Type I Hood system for the kitchen
(protection for the food cooking equipment) . The fraternity's current
building (1617 Santa Rosa St.) , is protected by an automatic fire sprinkler
system.
CC: DevRev
x.57
SAN LUIS • •
•
DEPARTMENT
Me o
To: Pam Ricci,community Development
From: Bart Topham, Police
Date: January 15, 1998
Re: 178-97 PHI SIGMA/ELAINE SIMER APPS. (SWAP)
After review of these applications,we have no objections.This is probably a reasonable swap to a more
conforming use.
•Page 1
S�
r
January 25, 1998 RECEIVED
S.L.O. Planning Commissioners FEB 04 1996
CITY OF
Honorable Members: C"1"UNITY DE ELO PMEBISPO
Approving the request for a fraternity use permit at 1292
Foothill Boulevard would open the door for a Greek row of
fraternities and sororities , many in unsuitable housing.
A study should be made of the sizes and growth of
fraternities, their activities, and the accumulative effects
where they are located. The study should include the density
of the area bounded by Hathway, California, Foothill, and
Carpenter Streets . Only a few fraternities in the area have
adequately sized residences for the membership and have
indoor facilities for meetings and entertaining. These are
Alpha Gamma Rho, 132 Calif . Blvd. , and Delta Sigma Phi, 244
Calif. Blvd.
Pi Kappa Alpha, 1252 Foothill, near the proposed site, is a
large fraternity in a large apartment house with no indoor
facility for group meetings . The previous fraternity was
evicted for noise disturbances in the front patio, etc. The
present fraternity has similar offenses . Just behind resides
Sigma Chi, an unofficial fraternity in an apartment house at
1236 Monte Vista. The owner has been encouraged to evict
without success . Payment of the rent is easier by a group
than by single apartments . The police log shows there have
been out of control parties and rock and bottle feuds with Pi
Kappa Alpha.
Sigma Nu, 1304 Foothill, near the proposed site, is composed
of three small buildings with insufficient parking for
fraternity members and no adequate indoor facility for
entertaining. There have been noise disturbance complaints
and unofficial parties .
Sigma Alpha Epsilon, once at 424 Hathway, a large apartment
house, was evicted recently due to behavior problems and a
zoning conflict. The city at times encourages evictions by
the owner because court cases take from two to four years or
more. Evictions are more difficult when a fraternity owns the
property.
Located opposite the proposed fraternity site is the 60 unit
Foothill Garden Apartments with a senior managerial couple in
residence. There have been noise problems with Sigma Nu and
student houses on Hathway Street. Sometimes prospective
renters decline to live there because "the area is noisy. "
There are other single family homes and duplexes in the area,
none of which would be suitable for Greek residences . The
Newman Center is a compatible use.
The hostel at 1292 Foothill presents no problems and is a
good land use. It was approved with minimal parking sites,
because guests would come in public transportation.
�-s'9
The membership of L..,nbda Chi Alpha is a surpri5_Lng 70 . It is
mind-boggling to consider a small complex with only a tiny
indoor area for entertaining. A fraternity of this size
should be looking for an adequate facility for the meetings
alone. Social events "of moderate size" would be in outdoor
areas (at night) and noise would be considerable. For the
same reasons, recruitment events would not be appropriate.
There would be no parking for guest cars or buses bringing
participants as these streets are parked solid at all times .
More than fifty-five of these members are living in at least
ten other rental residences affording off site opportunity
for partying in the neighborhoods . This will increase demand
for rental housing in the Alta Vista neighborhoods . There are
two known troublesome fraternity member rentals on Hathway
and other suspected ones .
If fraternities are going to have this type of growth, it is
their responsibility along with their alumni leaders to come
up with adequate solutions and not disturb the neighborhoods .
The Inter Fraternity Council has had a problem with
formulating drinking guidelines that are effective and
enforceable. We do not have enough officers for adequate
enforcement in this location or at times throughout the city.
The Housing Element should be looked at and revised. There
are better possibilities for Greek residences such as leased
Poly land, Stenner Glen, Camp San Luis Obispo, and student
complexes with vacancy problems .
There is no room for guest parking at this site and outdoor
parties and recruitment events would be disturbing. This
property has lovely landscaping in the front . It would be
unsightly to put parking there. We ask that you deny this
project.
Respectfully,
Residents of Alta Vista Area:
(DAN FU�Mtr<)
--- - icy
61I xfn "Ale. caslna-Ca �
. s
RECEIVED
FEB 03 1998
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
January 27, 1998
San Luis Obispo City Planning Commission
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California
Subject: Fraternity Use Permit at 1292 Foothill Boulevard
Dear Honorable Members of the Planning Commission,
We do not support the request for a fraternity use permit at 1292 Foothill Boulevard for the
following reasons;
1. There is not adequate square footage at this property for a seventy member fraternity
which has plans to hold "moderate sized social events", and semi annual recruitment
events("tush") on site.
2. There is not adequate parking.
3. This site is close to, and within"hearing distance" of, established RI
neighborhoods.Approval of this would set a precedent for allowing additional fraternity
use permits in an area which negatively impacts established Rl neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
The Board of Directors,
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods