HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/20/2001, C2 - FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1402 AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS' CREEK SETBACK STANDARDS, C councit Nov.20,01
j acEnaa Report
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Directo ^
Prepared By: Glen Matteson, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1402 AMENDING THE ZONING
REGULATIONS' CREEK SETBACK STANDARDS, CONCERNING
ALLOWABLE EXCEPTIONS
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Grant final passage to Ordinance No. 1402.
DISCUSSION
On October 16, 2001, the Council voted five to none to introduce Ordinance No. 1402 to print.
This ordinance will amend the Zoning Regulations, to clarify that within a required creek
setback:
1. A discretionary exception is required for a pedestrian path or a bicycle path;
2. Patios and walkways must be associated with singe-family dwellings to be entitled to
certain limited exceptions, and that they must not be covered;
3. Limited parking spaces are entitled to exceptions only if they are associated with a single-
family dwelling and if they are not covered;
4. New paving and buildings are not entitled to an exception if they replace existing paving,
but they may be considered as discretionary exceptions;
5. Pedestrian paths,bicycle paths, and bridges may be justified on large sites where there are
no options for avoiding encroachments into creek setbacks.
Ordinance No. 1402 is now ready for final passage and will become effective thirty days after the
date of its final passage.
ATTACHMENT
Ordinance No. 1402
TA 3801 final.doc
� 2 - 1
-- Attachment#1
ORDINANCE NO. 1402 (2001 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS'
CREEK SETBACK STANDARDS (TA 38-01)
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on October 16, 2001, and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and
action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. Council determines that the amendment is
categorically exempt from environmental review (Class 7), as an action taken by a regulatory
agency as authorized by state law or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, or
enhancement of a natural resource, where the regulatory process involves procedures for
protection of the environment, namely clarification and limitation of the types of features which
may encroach into creek setbacks.
SECTION 2. Finding. Council, after consideration of the proposed amendment, and the
Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports
thereon finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan, in particular the
Open Space Element policies concerning creek setbacks and uses allowed to encroach into creek
setbacks.
SECTION 3. Text Amendment. Municipal Code Section 17.16.025 is amended as fully
set forth in the attached Exhibit A.
SECTION 4. Publication. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of
Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final
passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This
ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
ca -a
1
Attachment#1
Ordinance No. 1402
Page 2
INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo at its meeting held on the 16th day of October, 2001, on a motion of
CouncilmanEwan seconded by Councilwoman Marx , and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Marx, Mulholland, Schwartz, Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Allen K. Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
4��Aw vqo-��
ty mey eff G.Ogensen
Ca-,3
�xh�b;t A
Ordinance No. 1402: Exhibit A
page 1 of 5
17.16.025 Creek setbacks.
A. Purpose.
Creek setbacks are intended to:
1. Protect scenic resources, water quality, and natural creekside habitat, including
opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest, and movement.
2. Further the restoration of damaged or degraded habitat, especially where a continuous
riparian habitat corridor can be established.
3. Allow for natural changes that may occur within the creek corridor.
4. Help avoid damage to development from erosion and flooding.
5. Enable implementation of adopted City plans.
B. Waterways Subject to Setbacks.
Creek setback requirements shall apply to all creeks as defined in the Open Space Element and
shown on that element's Creek Map,.and only to those creeks.
C. Measurement of Creek Setbacks.
Creek setbacks shall be measured from the existing top of bank (or the future top of bank
resulting from a creek alteration reflected in a plan approved by the City), or from the edge of the
predominant pattern of riparian vegetation, whichever is farther from the creek flow line (Figure
4.1). The Community Development Director may determine the predominant pattern of riparian
vegetation, where the edge of the vegetation varies greatly in a short length along the creek, in a
way unrelated to topography (for example, the Director will not base the setback line on
individual trees or branches extending out from the channel or on small gaps in vegetation
extending toward the channel). Where riparian vegetation extends over a public street, no creek
setback is required on property which is on the side of the street away from the creek.
D. Plan Information.
The location of top of bank and of riparian vegetation shall be shown on all project plans subject
to City approval. The location of these features is subject to confirmation by the Community
Development Director, based on observation of actual conditions and, as needed, the conclusions
of persons with expertise in hydrology, biology, or geology.
E. Creek Setback Dimensions.
Different setback dimensions are established in recognition of different parcel sizes and locations
of existing structures for areas within the city in comparison with areas which may be annexed,
and in response to different sizes of the creek channels and tributary drainage areas.
1. Creeks within the 1996 City Limits. Along all creeks within the city limits as of July 1,
1996, the setback shall be 20 feet; except as provided in parts E.3, EA or G below. Where
the city limit follows a creek, the setback on the side within the 1996 city limits shall be
20 feet and the setback on the annexed side shall be as provided in part 2 below.
2. Creeks in Areas Annexed After 1996. Along any creek in an area annexed to the City
after July 1, 1996, the following setbacks shall be provided, unless a specific plan or
development plan approved by the City Council provides a larger or smaller setback,
consistent with the purpose of these regulations and with General Plan policies.
a. Fifty-foot Setbacks. The setback along the following shall be 50 feet: San Luis
Obispo Creek (all of main branch); San Luis Obispo Creek East Fork, from San Luis
Obispo Creek (main branch) to the confluence with Acacia Creek; Stenner Creek.
ca-�
Ordinance No. 1402: Exhibit A
page 2 of 5
b. Thirty-five-foot Setbacks. The setback along the following shall be 35 feet: Prefumo
Creek; Froom Creek; Brizziolari Creek; San Luis Obispo Creek East Fork tributary,
from the confluence with Acacia Creek to Broad Street (Highway 227); Acacia Creek
and its tributaries west of Broad Street (Highway 227); the segment of the tributary of
Acacia Creek which flows generally parallel to and on the easterly side of Broad
Street (Highway 227), from Broad Street to Fuller Road.
c. Twenty-foot Setbacks. The setback along all creeks except those listed in parts "a"
and "b" immediately above shall be 20 feet. (Informational map is available in the
Community Development Department.)
3. Larger Setbacks. To mitigate potentially significant environmental impacts in compliance
with.the California Environmental Quality Act, or to implement adopted City plans,when
approving a discretionary application the City may require setbacks larger than required
by parts I and 2 above, or further limitations on the items which may be placed within
setbacks. (Also, other City regulations may restrict or prevent development in a floodway
or floodplain.)
4. Prior Approvals. Where the City has explicitly approved a creek setback smaller than
required by this section, prior to adoption of this section, by action on a tract or parcel
map (whether or not a vesting map), architectural review application, use permit, Planned
Development zoning, or Special Considerations zoning, that smaller setback shall remain
in effect so long as the approval is in effect.
F. Items Prohibited within Setbacks.
The following shall not be placed or constructed within a creek setback, except as provided in
part G below: structures; paving; parking lots; in nonresidential zones, areas used for storing or
working on vehicles, equipment, or materials.
G. Exceptions to Creek Setbacks.
1. Entitled Replacement Structures.
Where a structure lawfully existed on or before October 3, 1996, within a creek setback
required by this chapter, the following shall apply. This part is not intended to allow
replacement of paving that existed on or before October 3, 1996, with new paving or a
building, unless a discretionary approval is obtained pursuant to part 17.16.025.G(4).
a. Any structure built in replacement of such a structure may occupy the same footprint;
within the creek setback, as the previous structure, without obtaining a discretionary
exception. (See also Section 17.16.020(E)(1)(d).)
b. Additional floor area shall not be added to the encroaching part of the structure (for
example, by adding stories).
c. The part of a structure which is nonconforming due solely to the creek setback
encroachment may be remodeled without regard to the limits of Section 17.14.020(B)
and (C) of this title.
'" S
Ordinance No. 1402: Exhibit A
page 3 of 5
2. Entitled Accessory Structures and Uses.
The following items may be located within the required creek setback, without obtaining a
discretionary exception, provided that they: do not extend beyond the top of bank into the
creek channel; will not cause the removal of native riparian vegetation; will not reduce any
flooding capacity pursuant to the city's flood damage prevention regulations; in total
occupy not more than one-half of the setback area; are consistent with other property
development standards of the zoning regulations..
a. Walls or fences, provided that in combination with buildings they enclose not more
than one-half of the setback area on any development site.
b. For a single-family dwelling: uncovered parking spaces, patios, and walkways.
(Pedestrian paths and bicycle paths require a discretionary exception as provided in
part 4.)
c. Decks, stairs, and landings which are no more than thirty inches in height.
d. One-story, detached buildings used as too] and storage sheds, play houses, and similar
uses, provided the projected roof area does not exceed one hundred twenty square
feet.
e. Garden structures such as trellises, arbors, and gazebos,provided they are constructed
using an open lattice design and light-weight materials.
3. Entitled Architectural Features. The following architectural features may extend into the
setback.up to thirty inches: cornices, canopies, eaves, buttresses, chimneys, solar
collectors, shading louvers, water heater enclosures, and bay or other projecting windows
that do not include usable floor space.
4. Discretionary Exceptions.
a. Intent. Discretionary exceptions to creek setback standards are intended to allow
reasonable use of sites which are subject to creek setbacks, where there is no
practicable alternative to the exception. Generally, such exceptions are limited to
small parcels which are essentially surrounded by sites that have been developed with
setbacks smaller than those in subsection E of this section. In the case of pedestrian
paths, bicycle paths, and bridges, the site may be large, but there are no options for
avoiding a crossing of the creek or encroaching into the creek setback.
b. Application Type. A creek setback smaller than required by subsection E of this
section may be approved by city action on a plan for public facilities approved by the
city council or on a specific plan, development plan under planned development
zoning, land division, use permit, or architectural review. Where one of these types of
applications is not otherwise required for the proposed feature, an exception request
shall be in the form of an administrative use permit.
c. Public Notice. Public notice for a project involving a creek setback exception,.
regardless of application type, shall include a clear description of the feature or
features proposed to receive the exception, and the extent of the exception.
d. Findings. Each discretionary exception shall be subject to each of the following
findings, regardless of the type .of project application under which the request is
considered.
i. The location and design of the feature receiving the exception will minimize
impacts to scenic resources, water quality, and riparian habitat, including
opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest, and movement; and
Ordinance No. 1402: Exhibit A
page 4 of 5
ii. The exception will not limit the city's design options for providing flood control
measures that are needed to achieve adopted city flood policies; and
iiia The exception will not prevent the implementation of city-adopted plans, nor
increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans; and
iv. There are circumstances applying to the site, such as size, shape or topography,
which do not apply generally to land in the vicinity with the same zoning, that
would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity
with the same zoning; and
v. The exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege —an entitlement
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the
same zoning; and
vi. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area of the project or downstream; and
vii. Site development cannot be accomplished with a redesign of the project; and
viii. Redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the
property. ("Reasonable use of the property" in the case of new development may
include less development than indicated by zoning.. In the case of additional
development on an already developed site, "reasonable development" may mean
no additional development considering site constraints and the existing
development's scale, design, or density.)
e. Biological Survey. A biological survey by a qualified, independent person shall be
required for each discretionary exception request, to provide the basis for making
finding subsection (G)(4)(d)(i) of this section, unless waived by the community
development director upon determining that no purpose would be served by such a
survey because no biological resources could be affected by the exception.
f. Application Contents. In addition to any other information required for a project
application, a request for creek setback exception shall include the following:
i. A description of the feature or features proposed for exception and the extent of
the exception.
ii. A description of potential design changes for the project which would eliminate or
reduce the need for the exception.
iii. A statement why an exception is deemed necessary by the applicant.
iv. Mitigation proposed to offset any harmful effects of the exception.
ca - �.
Ordinance No. 1402: Exhibit A
page 5 of 5
creek edges of riparian vegetation-0 creek
a creek corridor
setback ; setback
�+ c M ♦'
top of bank top of bank
. . . • ReWltedSetback
• Top or Bank-IT il" �•
...r��R�mlan[r•getallbn'
• • • • . • ■ • • •Required Setback
—V
..HATE 'Z/1 dol ITEM # L- O\
Community Development Department
Memorandum
DATE: 11/20/01
TO: COUNCIL RED FILE
VIA: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer �"
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Direct 9),
SUBJECT: Revised Creek Setback Ordinance Graphics For Item C-2
Council member Schwartz has requested that additional clarifications be
made to the Creek Setback Ordinance graphics to better illustrate how
understory riparian plants would also be a basis for measuring the starting
point of the creek setback. Staff has prepared the attached graphic to show
this situation. Staff believes the additional graphic better conveys the
description in the ordinance.
The attached graphics are intended to replace the graphics of Exhibit A of
item C-2 on tonight's agenda (page C2-8).
Cpt1NCIL CDD DIR
MMAC FIN DIR
0 C FIRE CHIEF
A RNEY C PW DIR
LERK/ORIG C POLICE CHF
17 DEPT HEADS C REC DIR
C UTIL DIR
❑ HR DIR
ERECIEIVED
2001
9%Palm Sued
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 COUNCIL
805!181-7170 FAX:805/781-7173
edges of predominant
creek i riparian tree canopy creek
setbackE creek corridor setback
I I I [ �•'I I
I I
I I ,
I �•
I
top of bank top of bank
Section View A
edge of predominant
riparian tree canopy
creek
setbackEcreek corridor ' setback ,
b
A
�. 6
edges of groundcover or ,; t ,'�`
understory riparian plants k4, .'
.� top of bank
toP of bank
Section View B
low-growing riparian plants
_ I . . - • - - - - . . . required setback
X__J _z tops of banks
V flow
71 line
v N
-- -- -_ -riparian trees - --- -
. . . . . . . . . .Y. _ r. . .
required setback
Plan View