HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/18/1993, 1 - ARC 162-92: APPEALS OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S ACTION GRANTING SCHEMATIC APPROVAL TO A NE lllll�►tl►►I�IIIIIII�IA IUIII � f MEETING GATE:
In�u►� cio san �a�s oBi spo - •
ORGA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: /
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director
BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner ,,,
SUBJECT: ARC 162-92: Appeals of Architectural Review Commission's
action granting schematic approval to a new church on.the
east side of Johnson Avenue, just north of General
Hospital.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution denying the appeals, thereby upholding the
Architectural Review Commission's action.
Report-in-brief
The Planning and Architectural Review Commissions have reviewed and
approved plans for a church, to be built on a 4 . 65-acre site on the
easterly side of Johnson Avenue. Neighbors of the site have
appealed the Architectural Review Commission's final approval,
citing several concerns:
* Fixlini Street should have a cul-de-sac. No cul-de-sac is
proposed for the southerly end of Fixlini Street, because the.
church will not have access from that street.
* Pedestrian and bicycle traffic need neighbor approval An
existing access easement across the end of Fixlini Street is
proposed to be used to allow access to and from the church by
pedestrians and bicyclists. The property owner says he has not
allowed this use. The easement language does allow this use.
* The church should be moved. The nearest neighbor wants the
building to be placed farther away from his home. Alternative
locations would create additional concerns, and a general planting
buffer will be installed between the buildings. Overlook and noise
concerns should be adequately mitigated by distance, planting, and
a fence.
* The building is too large Compared to other churches in the
city, the building is not out of proportion to its site, and takes
up less of the site than most.
* The driveway should be relocated because of concerns about
noise and light from headlights. Alternative locations have been
investigated. The proposed driveway location appears reasonable
and the limited use (primarily Sundays) , fencing, and buffer areas
should mitigate concerns.
* The trash enclosure should be moved. The location of the trash
enclosure, in the upper parking lot, is most convenient to church
��In�i�►►Ilullllll�p ��d��l city O� San LUIS OBISp0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fix1ini Street
Page 2
users. Noise from trash trucks once or . twice a week will be
insignificant, compared to general Johnson Avenue traffic noise.
* Retaining wall shouldbe removed. A neighbor would like an
existing retaining wall, on the property line between his lot and
the LDS lot, to be removed and the site graded downward to
eliminate need for retaining walls. Grading regulations prohibit
work closer than two feet from the property line, except in special
circumstances. There don't appear to be any special circumstances
in this case.
* The fire hydrant should be on church property. The church has
a choice of installing a private hydrant on its property, or a
public hydrant at the end of. Fixlini. The. public hydrant will be
more effective, less costly, and a benefit to the whole
neighborhood. Removal of one or two on-street parking spaces is a
small price to pay for this benefit.
* ARC direction should be followed. One neighbor wants to be sure
that the direction given by the ARC, at the time of granting
schematic approval, was followed. It was.
* Headlights might nroiect into Mrs. Schroeder's yard. With the
6' fencing and landscaping proposed, and the requirement that
headlights aim in a downward direction, headlight glare into
neighboring yards will. not be a problem.
* The fence should be a wall. Mrs. Schroeder wants the fence to
be masonry, to muffle noise. Noise is not expected to be a
problem. A masonry wall should not be required.
DISCUSSION
I
Background
The Architectural Review Commission reviewed this project on three
occasions, and .on April 5, 1993, granted final approval. In two
separate appeals, three neighbors have appealed that approval.
Appeals of Architectural Review Commission actions are heard by the
Council.
Previous Review
The project has been reviewed by both the Architectural Review
Commission (ARC) , as noted above, and by the Planning Commission
(PC) . The ARC's schematic approval of the project in January was
appealed . to the City Council by a citizen concerned about the
setback from the riparian vegetation. The City Council denied that
��iii���N�IVIIIIIII�I�1��u►I����N MY of San tAS OBISp0 -
a COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 3
appeal, but did require a larger setback from the vegetation for
part of the project. Both the PC and the ARC reviewed the revised
plans.
Data Summary
Address: 2070 Fixlini_ Street
Applicant/property owner: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day
Saints
Representative: Studio Design Group (David Brannon)
Appellants: Mary Beth Schroeder and Jack and Carol Hinson
Zoning: R-1
General plan: Low-density residential
Environmental status: Negative declaration, with mitigation,
granted January 12, 1993 .
Project action deadline: None. Action has been taken.
Site description
The lot is a 4.65-acre sloping site, on the easterly side of
Johnson Avenue, just northoof County General Hospital. Numerous
trees exist on the site, mostly near the southerly and easterly
property lines. A natural spring near the northeasterly corner of
- the site was diverted several years ago. A pipe now channels water
from the spring to the southeasterly portion of the site, where it
runs downhill, creating a waterway lined by riparian growth.
Additional noxi-riparian trees have been planted near the waterway
over the years.
The site is downhill from General Hospital, and shares the creek
channel with the hospital site. To the north is a residential
neighborhood, containing low-density housing, with some apartments-
close to Johnson Avenue. Johnson Avenue is an arterial street that
moves traffic between the north and south ends of the city. It is
therefore heavily used on weekdays, less so on weekends. The site
is across from the Johnson Avenue Baptist Church, two apartments,
and a small office.
Project description
The project is a two-level, 15,480-square-foot church to be built
approximately in the center of the site, about 150' back from the
street property line. Parking is to be provided both near the
street (set back about 35' from the property line) and behind the
building. The average height of the church is about 321 , which
means it is higher than 32' whereit faces Johnson Avenue (about
44' at most) and lower (about 281 ) at the rear.
1-3
w
C� of san pais oBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 4
Access is to be provided from a driveway off Johnson Avenue.
Emergency and pedestrian access is available from Fixlini Street,
by way of two easements across private property on Fixlini Street.
EVALUATION
1. The review process. The request requires:
* environmental review. The Community Development Director
has granted a negative declaration of environmental
impact. The ARC and PC both added to the mitigation
measures as part of their action on the project. The
environmental initial study attached to this report
includes all changes made by the City Council (CC) , ARC,
and PC. As part of its action on the appeals, the CC may
choose to make further modifications to the initial
study, if it chooses.
* architectural review. The ARC granted schematic approval
on January 19, 1993 and final approval on April 5, 1993 .
* planning commission review. Churches require a Planning
Commission use permit in the R-1 zone. Use permit review
assures that access, is from a major street and site
planning issues are resolved. A use permit was approved
for 'this project on March 10, 1993 .
2. The appeals. The different appellants express different
concerns. Each of these concerns will be addressed in the
following paragraphs.
3 . Cul-de-sac at the end of Fixlini Street. The Hinsons want to
see a cul-de-sac on the LDS property, at the northeasterly end
of Fixlini Street. No cul-de-sac is proposed, nor is
vehicular access from Fixlini proposed.
Fixlini Street ends at the LDS site, with no turnaround. City
policy is to require a cul-de-sac or other turnaround to be
created with further development of property adjacent to such
a street. A previous residential proposal for the LDS site,
in fact, did include an extension of Fixlini with a cul-de-sac
at the end.
However, the project is a large church, not an extension of
the residential neighborhood; and it is more appropriate for
this use to have access from a major street (Johnson) than
from a residential minor street. Therefore, no access from
Fixlini to the church site is proposed, except for pedestrians
�A -
���N�► ��uIIIIIIUIP°AMY Of san LaIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 5
and bicyclists. If the applicants were to install a cul-de-
sac, then the church should also have access to Fixlini. on
balance, it appears that the proposed access from Johnson is
preferable, and eliminates additional traffic in the Fixlini
neighborhood.
4.. Use of easement. The Hinsons state that they "have not given
the .Church the right to use the easement across my property as
a thorough-fare for bicycle riders and walking church
members. " Mr. Hinson has stated at previous meetings that he
feels he controls the conditions of the access easement
through his property.
Copies of the easements are attached to this report. The
right-of-way document (Volume 7.29, page 503) states that the
northerly 25' of lot 16 is granted to the owners of the church
site, "and to their heirs, legatees, and assigns forever" for
road purposes: "Said right of way shall be for use as a road, .
coupled with the right to lay, construct or erect over, across
or under the land covered by said right of way any and all
public utility lines and pipes. " The right-of-way assignment
includes a provision that the grantor will also have rights to
use the road. There is no provision for revocation of these
rights by either party. Therefore, there was no need for the
church to obtain permission from the Hinsons for use of the
right of way as a road.
5. Location of the church. . The Hinsons are concerned that the
church building will be too close to their home . at 2051
Fixlini Street. The Hinsons worry that people will be able to
"look down into my home. " They have also expressed, at
meetings, a concern that church members would be noisy and
would interfere with their peace.
The north elevation shows what would be facing the Hinsons'
property. The large window in the center of the building is
in the sanctuary, behind the pulpit and choir loft. This
window will provide the only natural light for this interior
room. Its location assures that it will not normally be used
for looking out. The smaller windows on the side are located
in church offices. There is potential that persons in those
offices would look outside.
However, the landscape plans show significant screen planting
along the 17'-wide buffer area, between the northerly property
line and the driveway. Additional planting is shown
immediately outside the building, in 'front of these windows.
It is unlikely that persons looking from church windows would
����itNllVlllllll�►N II�III city of san tuts oBispo --
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fialini Street
Page 6
be able to see inside the Hinsons' home or yard, once the
landscaping has been established for a few years. Further
mitigating overlook concerns is the 6'-high fence that will be
installed along the northerly property line, and the angle of
the building. .
Mr. Hinson has suggested realigning the building, so that it
is parallel to the lot lines, and so that the longest
dimension parallels the long dimensions of the site. If the
building were located in such a way, it would be farther from
the Hinsons' property. The primary entrances and a multitude
of windows would face Fixlini Street. Such an alignment may
create greater disturbance to neighbors than the proposal.
The building's siting on the lot has been adequately mitigated
by distance, planting, and a fence.
6. Size of the church. Both appeals say the church is too large
for the site. It is a large building. 'It is also a large
site. The building's footprint takes up about 8% of the site
area, while zoning regulations standards say that up to 505 of
the site may be covered by buildings. For comparison, the
council may wish to look at the following chart:
Site Bldg size Lot size Ratio o f
bldg to lot
("Floor area
ratio")
3396 Johnson 36, 545 SF 108,900 SF 0. 34
A v e n u e :
Church of
the Nazarene
3 1 7 2 61825 SF 40, 530 SF 0. 17
Johnson :
Church of
Christ
2 0 7 5 10, 000 78,844 SF 0. 13
Johnson :
J o h n s o n
A v e n u e
Baptist
i
���H�i�►►►IUIIIIII�Ip ��Ili city Of San LAS OBISp0
MONZA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fislini Street
Page 7
1344 Nipomo, 41804 SF 38,750 SF 0. 12
650 & 660
Pismo: St.
Stephens .
2 0 7 0 15,480 SF 202,554 SF 0. 08
Fislini :
proposed LDS
church
The proposed church is smaller, relatively, than the other
four listed. It is also less than half the building size of
the Church of the Nazarene. Other churches in the city appear
to be similar in proportion to the four listed. Therefore,
the proposed building is not inconsistent in size with other
churches in this community, except that the development
appears to use less of the site than others.
7. The driveway location. Both appeals state that the driveway
should be located elsewhere on the site, because its use will
be disruptive for the neighborhood.
The proposed driveway lies 17' from the northerly property
line, (about 30' from the Hinsons' house and about 65' from
the Schroeder residence) and will be buffered by trees and
other landscaping.. The driveway ends about 85' from the
easterly property Eine.
Other locations have been explored, as noted in the attached
ARC reports. In sum:
* Other side or middle of lot.. Some neighbors and
commissioners preferred a driveway on the southerly side
of the site, or through the middle: A driveway along the
southerly side of the site would affect the riparian
vegetation, especially the' large trees. A driveway
through the middle of the site is feasible, but would
require significant redesign of the site layout. It is
not clear that the advantages of such a drive would be
significant for the neighbors.
* From Bishop Street. An ideal driveway location, from the
standpoint of both the church and the neighbors, would be
from Bishop Street, through the County General Hospital
site. Plans for this site appear to preclude such an
option. Although a formal proposal has not been
submitted to the County Board of Supervisors, Curt Sorg
1.
�iih��10►�IIIIlIIUI�Iu►�u►I��B�U MY Of San AS OBISp0
i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 8
of County General Services says it is highly unlikely
such an access would be approved.
* Common driveway with hospital. One option not explored
in previous reports is a common driveway on the hospital
property, south of the riparian corridor. The County
appears to be amenable to such a driveway, because plans
for the future call for one in approximately this
location. However, because hospital redevelopment is
still some years off, the cost of developing the driveway
would have to be borne by the church.
The City's traffic engineer feels a common driveway is
preferable because it eliminates one driveway on Johnson.
To make use of such a driveway would. require significant
site design changes: . movement of the church towards the
residential neighborhood, rearrangement of parking lots
to allow connections on the southerly side, possibly a
change to the primary entrance to the church. Other
impacts would have to be explored, such as the impact on
the riparian area. Staff has not explored these impacts
in depth.
Use of a common driveway with the hospital will depend on
the ability of the applicants to obtain the County's
approval in a reasonable time. If the Council is
considering placing such a requirement on the applicants,
it should be in the form of direction to the ARC or
Community Development Director, to allow review of the
impacts of such a driveway.
Although alternatives to the proposed driveway location are
available, the real issue is: will the proposed driveway
location be a nuisance to the neighbors? The driveway will be
used primarily on Sundays, as are most church driveways.
Meetings and events during the rest of the week are much
smaller in scope, and will usually involve use of the lower
parking lot only. With the limited use, 6' fence and 17'
planting buffer, impacts on the neighborhood are expected .to
be negligible.
8. Trash enclosure location. Both appeals mention the location
of the trash enclosure, and ask that it be moved. The trash
enclosure is located at the southerly end of the upper parking
lot, because that parking lot is at the same level as the main
level of the church building. At ARC and PC meetings,
commissioners discussed locating the enclosure in the lower
parking lot, to limit travel by trash trucks. Because the
�iIII�INIII��IIIII���Ili�ullIIUIU City of San _.ils OBISpo
A=ago COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
/ ARC 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 9
lower site would be more difficult to reach from the upper
level, and because the trash trucks are likely to enter the
site no more than twice a week, the ARC approved its location
as proposed.
9. The retaining wall. Mr. Hinson would like an existing
retaining wall, at the property line between his property and
the LDS site, to be removed, and the grade of the site lowered
so that a retaining wall will not be necessary. The City's
grading regulations require that no grading be done within two
.feet of a property line, unless special conditions exist. It
is unlikely that a homeowner's preference for removing a
retaining wall would qualify as a special condition.
10. Fire hydrant location. The .Hinsons are asking that a new fire
hydrant, required of this project, be placed on the church
property instead of on Fixlini Street, to save parking spaces.
Because of the distance of the building from Johnson Avenue,
and the size of the site, three new hydrants are required.:
two on Johnson Avenue, and one private hydrant on the church
site. An alternative available to the applicant is to install
a new water main from Johnson to Fixlini, which would improve
flows in the area, and install a public hydrant at the end of
Fixlini Street. Such a hydrant would serve the entire
neighborhood instead of just the church, would be more
reliable, and less costly over the long run. (See also the
discussion in the environmental initial study on 'If ireflow" . )
The existing water system on Fixlini is not up to current
standards. The looped water main and hydrant will improve
fireflow for the entire neighborhood. On balance, the loss of
one or two on-street parking spaces seems a minor loss for
such an improvement.
11. ARC direction. The Hinsons note the ARC's direction at the.
time it granted schematic approval: the commission directed
the applicant to modify the building corner to allow the
driveway to become closer to the building, and to redesign the
driveway to allow vehicles to drop off church members in front
of the church and leave., without driving further up the hill.
Mr. Hinson asks the Council to confirm that these changes were
made.
The ARC reviewed the revised plans and determined that these
changes have indeed been made. Schematic plans are available,
in the Community Development Department, for Councilmembers
who wish to see them.
-9
„�H�i�u►lulllllf��la������ll cety of San , as OBISp0
NiN COUNCIL, AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
2070 Fislini Street
Page 10
12. Lighting. Mrs. Schroeder is concerned that headlights will
glare into her home, from the driveway or upper parking lot.
The grading plan shows the upper part of the driveway at a
lesser slope than the natural grade. The driveway is also
parallel to the northerly property line. Therefore,
headlights would not be facing Mrs. Schroeder's home from the
driveway at any time.
Vehicles in the uppermost parking area, heading for the
driveway, would be facing the Schroeder property. The parking
area slopes up at about 1% from the southerly to the northerly
ends. The fence will be approximately six feet above the
grade of the parking lot at its northeasterly end.
Vehicle headlights are required by law to be from 22” to 54"
above the ground, with the average about 30" above the ground.
The light projected from a headlight is required to be
directed downward, so that the top of a headlight beam is
slightly below level at a point 25' in front of the vehicle.
This means that a .typical car's headlights would reach no
higher than 30" on a fence 25' away from the car, and would be
lower for a car farther away. In the present case, only if
there were unusual large bumps in the parking "lot, that cause
vehicles to tilt upward at a steep angle, would headlights be
able to project beyond the proposed fence.
13. Wall or fence? Mrs. Schroeder feels that the wall to be.
constructed along her property line should be masonry, "to
stifle noise", rather than the wood proposed. There is no
evidence that there will be a noise problem at the church,
especially such that it would intrude on a home 65' from the
driveway and about 250' from the church building itself. A
masonry wall should not be required. At a previous hearing, '
Mrs. Schroeder asked that the fence be 8' high next to her
property. The ARC supported approving a height exception for
that portion of the fence. Since then, . she has changed her
mind and is no longer asking for the height exception.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may adopt a resolution approving the appeal, thereby
reversing the Architectural Review Commission's action granting
final approval with specific conditions. The action may be a
requirement to modify the project design, or a 'denial of the
project.
����►i �►IUIIIII ���N�►�8��i city of San ..yes OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ARC 162-92
\_ 2070 Fialini street
Page 11
The Council may continue action. Direction should be given to
staff and the applicants.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Other departments have no opinion on this request.
FISCAL IMPACTS
Either an approval or a denial of the appeal would have no fiscal
impact on the city.
Attached:
Vicinity map
Draft resolutions
Architectural Review Commission report for April 5, 1993
Initial study
Minutes of April 5, 1993 ARC meeting
Appeals and follow-up letter from Mrs. Schroeder.
Response from applicant's representative
Access easements
Plan for General Hospital site
Letter from County department of general services
I
1\1-
'•` ° p\ �� p�PNO \`
L
O °\ O - - —
5
�i O 0 ' O lND DR-
0
o O 0 o o C/8s-40
.r O ° 9@ ° . n O
p �i
v �a ° ° %�ti 01. o R-1 �.
o � `
/� t
��•�
°
r.
// •�" ":::ciir::i1iE iii::::eir::iiii:::ci:::iEii:::ii2i:::iiii; \ `
°
° ::
e:;ii:::...?(ii.-.--
i° ♦•
,
R-2
.� .�---�•�:•�:•�.y=:�L=�;.s��.•-=yam.�•- \
�......a'. -.�4 ..0-. ��a.. n...J,�..� .:�.. ���,fF..� ��G}f-ti•+•t •1• . . . .. ... ;I' '::.a...-.... .-.. �r1 '4: .. ...
f
`� t
° �`� P F \
° Q. C(DUIINTY
O :�.
'L` HOSPITAL '
@
O �(
° O1 lye
PF
O P F S OQ
�.. ,�... R-1 ...'.
VICINITY MAP ARC162-92 NORTH
2070 FIXLINI
411 - Denying
RESOLUTION NO. (1993 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S
ACTION, THEREBY APPROVING A CHURCH
ON THE EAST SIDE OF JOHNSON AVENUE,
NORTH OF GENERAL HOSPITAL (ARC 162-92)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public
testimony, the applicant's request for approval of a church (ARC 162-92), the appellants'
statements, the Architectural Review Commission's action, staff recommendations and
reports thereon, makes the following findings:
1. The proposed project will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare
of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity.
2. The Community Development Director has determined that the proposed
project, as amended by mitigation, will not have a significant effect on the
environment and has granted a negative declaration. The City Council hereby —
affirms this action.
SECTION 2. Appeal denied. The appeal of the Architectural Review
Commission's action is hereby denied, and the Architectural Review Commission's action
approving the design is upheld, subject to all conditions as required by the Architectural
Review Commission.
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 , 1993.
/-13
ti
Resolution No. (1993 Series)
ARC 162-92: 2070 Fixlini Street
Page 2
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Administrative Officer
ItWlAttjrnl�
#2 `roving
RESOLUTION NO. (1993 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY DENYING APPROVAL OF A CHURCH
ON THE EAST SIDE OF JOHNSON AVENUE,
NORTH OF GENERAL HOSPITAL (ARC 162-92)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public
testimony, the applicant's and appellants' statements, and the Architectural Review
Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following
findings:.
1. The proposed church design will be detrimental to the health, safety, or
welfare of persons in the vicinity because (COUNCIL STATE REASONS).
SECTION 2. The appeal is hereby approved and the proposed church design
is denied.
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 , 1993.
HS
i
Resolution No. (1993 Series)
ARC 162-92: 2070 Fixlini Street
Page 2
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City A nistrative Officer
tt
U
— Approving w/conditions
RESOLUTION NO. (1993 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION'S ACTION, THEREBY MODIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL OF A CHURCH ON THE EAST SIDE OF JOHNSON AVENUE,
NORTH OF GENERAL HOSPITAL (ARC 162-92)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public
testimony, the applicant's and appellants' statements, and the Architectural Review
Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following
findings:
1. The proposed church design will be detrimental to the health, safety, or
welfare of persons in the vicinity because (COUNCIL STATE REASONS).
SECTION 2. The appeal is hereby approved and the proposed church design
is modified by imposition of additional conditions.
SECTION 3. Conditions. The project approval is modified by the following
conditions: (COUNCIL LIST)
On motion of , seconded by ,
and on the following rollcall vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1993.
/- 17
i
Resolution No. (1993 Series)
ARC 162-92: 2070 Fixlini Street
Page 2
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Ad 'nistrative TOfficer
i tt
HE
JITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO -
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM a 1
BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner MEETING DATE: April 5, 1993
FILE NUMBER: ARC 162-92
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2070 Fixlini Street
SUBJECT: Removal of house and construction of church on a large lot on the east side of Johnson
Avenue, just north of General Hospital.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
1.) Concur with the negative declaration of environmental impact,
2) Find the existing residence not significant architecturally, esthetically, or culturally, and approve
its removal,
and
3) Grant final approval, with permeable paving, trash enclosure details, signage and lighting details,
crash gate design, and vanpool space locations to return to staff for approval.
BACKGROUND
Situation
The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the project on November 9, 1992 and on
January 19, 1993, and granted it schematic approval. A citizen appealed the schematic approval
because of concerns about the setback from the riparian vegetation. The City Council denied the
appeal, but required a larger setback for the parking area below the church building. On March 10,
1993, the Planning Commission (PC) approved a use permit, allowing the church on the site, with
direction to staff to return with revised mitigation measures and conditions. At that meeting, the PC
listed several items for the ARC to review. On March 24, the Planning Commission approved the
findings, conditions, and ARC list. The list of ARC items is discussed below. The Planning
Commission resolution, approving the use permit, is attached to this report.
Data summary
Address: 2070 Fixlini Street
Applicant/property owner: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Representative: Studio Design Group (David Brannon)
Zoning: R-1
General plan: Low-density residential
Environmental status: Negative declaration, with mitigation, granted January 12, 1993.
Project action deadline: May 21, 1993
Site description
The lot is a 4.65-acre sloping site, on the easterly side of Johnson Avenue,just north of County General
Hospital. Numerous trees exist on the site, mostly near the southerly and easterly property lines. A
ARC 1.62-92 �
2070 MAW Street
Page 2
natural spring near the northeasterly corner of the site was diverted several years ago. A pipe now
channels water from the spring to the southeasterly portion of the site, where it runs downhill, creating
a waterway lined by riparian growth. Additional non-riparian trees have been planted near the
waterway over the years.
The site is downhill from General Hospital, and shares the creek channel with the hospital site. To the
north is a residential neighborhood, containing low-density housing, with some apartments close to
Johnson Avenue. Johnson Avenue is an arterial street that moves traffic between the north and south
ends of the city. It is therefore heavily used on weekdays, less so on weekends. The site is across
from the Johnson Avenue Baptist Church, two apartments, and a small office.
Project description
The project is a two-level, 18,200-square-foot church to be built approximately in the center of the site,
about 150' back from the street property line. Parking is to be provided both near the street (set back
about 35' from the property line) and behind the building. The average height of the church is about
32', which means it is higher than 32' where it faces Johnson Avenue (about 44' at worst) and lower
(about 28') at the rear..
Access is to be provided from a driveway off Johnson Avenue. Emergency and pedestrian access is
available from Fixlini Street.
PREVIOUS REVIEW
The ARC and PC have both given direction on details of this project:
At its use permit review, some Planning.Commissioners expressed concerns about the building design
and various site elements. That commission asks the ARC to look at the following items:
* The potential to use permeable paving in some parts of the parking areas, to help absorb some
of the drainage on-site.
* The location of a satellite dish antenna.
* The location of the trash enclosure.
* The massing of the building on the hillside, with consideration to lowering the building on the
site and creating more open space above.
1
The ARC granted schematic approval on January 19, 1993, with direction to reduce the driveway to
25' in width where possible, restudy the tower detail, add larger-scale trees in the downhill areas, and
larger-scale plants at the planter, use a darker tan color for the stucco at the lower level, modify the
driveway to reduce traffic speed, provide a drop-off area at the west side of the building, change the
paving materials for the pedestrian walk to Johnson Avenue, maintain a pedestrian gate at Fixlini Street,
and provide a color rendering, signing, building, and lighting details.
These items will be discussed .in the paragraphs below.
i.
ARC 162-92 -
2070 Fxlini Street
Page 3
EVALUATION -
1. Driveway, parking, and drainage.
ft
PermeableaR ving. To improve drainage, the PC asked the ARC to look at the potential for use of
permeable paving in parking areas. In the flatter areas, such paving could absorb what water landed
on it. Any water draining through permeable paving would be filtered by the sand and gravel base,
and would be clean of oil and debris by the time it reached the soil. Therefore, if such paving is
to be used, it would not pollute the groundwater, or, ultimately, the creek. The letter from the
representative, attached, says that permeable paving will be installed in the parking area near the
riparian vegetation, if the soil drains well in that area.
Permeable paving will not, in itself, handle all the drainage from this, site. There are several
different ways to collect runoff and direct it to storm drains. The various techniques, including use
of catch basins in parking lots, minor grade changes, and others, will not affect the design of the
project. The building division does not anticipate any difficulties in developing a drainage system
which will work effectively on this site.
Driveway width: The driveway has been narrowed to 25', as directed by the ARC. This change
has increased the width of the buffer area, between the driveway and the northerly property line,
to 17' feet. The landscape plans show good screening materials to be planted in this area.
Driveway modifications: The ARC wanted the driveway modified to reduce the speed of vehicles,
and to limit its use by skateboarders. The situation is analogous to any road or driveway that goes
up a slope. If it is a convenient part of a route, it is possible persons with skateboards or skates will
use it. The representative feels the driveway cannot be modified significantly, and notes that if
speed becomes a problem the church will install bumpers. Speed bumps would not deter skaters.
If skaters become a problem, the church will have to use other methods, such as signing and
temporary obstructions, to control it.
Drop-off point: The ARC asked that a drop-off area be created at the west side of the building.
The design of the lower (westerly) parking area is such that a vehicle may enter the first driveway,
drop off in front o the church, and leave at the second driveway.
2. Satellite dish. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicants revealed that they would be
installing a satellite dish antenna on the ground. The PC asked that the ARC review,the specific
location, to make sure it is adequately screened. The letter from the representative notes that the
dish is not planned to be installed in the near future. City ordinances require screening of such
dishes, along with a building permit. It will not be difficult to locate the dish so that it is screened
effectively.
3. Trash. The Planning Commission placed a condition on its use permit approval, that says:
13. The trash enclosure must be designed to accommodate recycling containers, to the approval
of the City's recycling coordinator or Communiry Development Director, and shall be located
so that trash trucks may easily reach it.
ARC 162-92 -
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 4
In addition, that commission asked the ARC to look specifically at the location of the trash
enclosure.
The enclosure is shown at the southerly end of the upper parking lot, next to a storage building.
Its size appears to be about 8' X 10'. If it is to accommodate recycling containers, the enclosure
may not be large enough. However, it is possible that recycling containers for office paper will be
picked up from the church building itself, rather than from the trash enclosure. Details in its design
can be worked out with the City's recycling coordinator. The location, though, may be addressed
at this time.
The location is convenient for the church, but may not be for trash trucks or the neighbors. It may
be preferable to move it to the lower parking area, and incorporate it in the design for the retaining
wall (note #1 on the plans). Such a location would be closer to Johnson Avenue, and therefore
would require less travel by heavy and noisy trash trucks.
The representative says that the bulk of the trash will be generated on the upper level, and that a
trash pickup once a week would not be unduly disturbing. Current plans call for waste-wheelers.
If these containers are used, then they may be rolled downhill if the garbage company has a problem
with the length of the driveway and parking lot.
4. Landscaping changes. The Commission asked that larger trees be planted in the downhill area,
and larger plants installed in the planters. The representative says that the applicant prefers to use
the type of plants currently proporsed. The west elevation (facing Johnson Avenue) has been
changed, and there are fewer planters and more ground area to be planted, directly in front of the
church. Plants chosen for this area do tend to be smaller trees and shrubs. However, planting
below the church includes oaks and sycamores, and existing trees near Johnson Avenue are large.
Views of the building from the street will be limited by views of significant vegetation. The church
feels the plants chosen for the immediate front of the building will be appropriate. Since this area
will be less visible, the smaller plants should be acceptable to the commission.
5. Sidewalk materials. The ARC asked that the sidewalk from Johnson be of a distinctive material
where it crosses the parking lot. The sidewalk is now concrete for its entire length.
6. Pedestrian gate. The ARC wanted to be sure a pedestrian gate is provided at the south end of
Fixlini Street. A detail attached to the plans shows the fence design continuing across the Fixlini
Street right-of-way, with one twelve-foot-wide panel openable for emergencies, and a four-foot gap
for pedestrians and bicyclists. The Fire Department representative says that crash gate openings
need to be 20' wide, to allow one truck to pass another in case the first is stopped at the gate.
Modifications to the gate design can be reviewed by staff, to meet this requirement. Alternatively,
the Fire Department may allow an exception.
7. Building details.
Tower: The ARC wanted the tower reduced in size, located closer to the building, or attached.
This direction has not been followed. The tower remains the reduced height, but has increased in
width. The representative says additional changes to reduce its size would compromise "the esthetic
effect we are trying to accomplish." The building's generally-Spanish style calls for massive
ARC 162-92 —
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 5
columns and walls, since the original buildings of this style were built of hand-made masonry units.
The tower, then, is solid and massive in appearance, with little detailing.
Although the tower may not meet everyone's expectations, it is what the church wants. It also
should have no ill effect.on the neighborhood. It will not block significant views or create shading
problems. When the landscaping has matured, it may not be visible at all from the north.
Colors. The ARC asked that the lower level stucco be darker in color, and requested a color
rendering showing the new colors. The color board was being revised at the time this report was
being written. The representative indicated he intended to add a darker color for the lower level
stucco, and revise the roof tile to all one, darker, color, instead of the variegated colors previously
proposed. The revised color board will be available at the meeting. A colored rendering may also
be available.
Signage, lighting, building details. The one sign proposed is an 18-square-foot wall sign at the
bottom of the tower. No details have been provided for this sign, although the representative has
indicated it will be of individual channel letters. Signage in the R-1 zone is restricted to 10-square-
foot identification signs for institutional uses. While the area of the proposed sign would exceed
this limitation, it would be an understated sign for a building of this size. The commission may
approve limitations on signage area or location, and allow staff to review the sign itself, or may call
for details to return to the commission.
Lighting fixture details are not shown on the plans. Locations of fixtures are set, and the height of
the fixtures is proposed to be fifteen feet high, sheilded to eliminate glare. An illumination study
shows that light levels will reach 0 at property lines, consistent with City standards. Brochures
showing proposed fixtures will be available at the meeting.
Building details are shown on the fourth sheet in the commission's set of plans (sheets are not
numbered).
8. Building location. Some Planning Commissioners and Architectural Review Commissioners
preferred that the building be located farther downhill, with a larger open space area located at the
uppermost part of the site. The present layout allows the building to be between parking lots,
eliminating the appearance of one large parking lot. The site design also preserves a large upper
portion of the site, about 0.4 acre, in its present state, except for additional planting. The building's
setback from the street also helps to mitigate its large appearance from the street and other viewing
locations.
Changes have been made to the westerly elevation (the elevation facing Johnson Avenue). An
upper-level balcony has been eliminated, along with planters below and the large arched basement
windows and patio. In place of these elements is a higher ground elevation and fewer, simpler
planters. The basement floor plan has also been revised, so that much of the ground floor will be
unused at this time.
The changes to the front of the building help mitigate the bulky appearance from the street. These
changes, plus the heavy planting, should help this large building to blend more into the site.
/�z3
I'
ARC 162-92
2070 Fxlini Street
Page 6
9. Vanpool spaces. The initial study calls for designated van-pool spaces near the entrance to the
building. Van-pool spaces are shown closest to Johnson Avenue. These spaces should be located
for the greatest benefit of the uses, and therefore closer to the building.
OTHER DEPARTMENT CONEWENTS
Comments from other departments have been discussed in previous reports. No additional concerns
have been raised.
ALTERNATIVES
The Commission may continue consideration, if it has significant concerns with site planning.
The Commission may deny the project, if it finds that it is incompatible with architectural guidelines,
and cannot reasonably be modified to meet those guidelines.
Attached:
vicinity map
reduced site plan
environmental initial study (as revised by the Planning Commission)
letter from representative (March 29, 1993)
Planning Commission resolution
� i
I
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini
New church on sloping site
As amended by the City Council on February 16, 1993 ,
by the Planning Commission on March 24, 1993 ,
and by the Architectural Review Commission on April 5, 1993
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The applicant proposes the construction of a two-story, 15, 000-
square foot (+/-) church building on a 4. 65-acre site. The sloping
site is located on the easterly side of Johnson Avenue, just north
of County General Hospital. The building is to be placed
approximately in the center of the site, with parking lots both in
front of and behind it. The development will also involve the
demolition of a residence that presently exists on the site.
Numerous trees exist on the site, primarily along the southerly and
easterly property lines. A natural spring near the northeasterly
corner of the site was diverted several years ago. A pipe now
channels water from the spring to the southeasterly portion of the
site, where it runs downhill, creating a waterway lined by riparian
growth. Additional non-riparian trees have been planted near the
waterway over the years.
The site is downhill from General Hospital, and shares the creek
channel with the hospital site. To the north is a residential
neighborhood, containing low-density housing, with some apartments
close to Johnson Avenue.
Johnson Avenue is an arterial street that moves traffic between the
north and south ends of the city. It is therefore heavily used on
weekdays, less so on weekends. The site is across from the Johnson
Avenue Baptist Church, two apartments, . and a small office.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Community Plans and Goals
Land Use Element: The Land Use Element (LUE) of the City's general
plan says that "nonresidential uses which serve neighborhood needs
(convenience shopping, schools, parks, day care centers, churches,
lodges, and similar public or semipublic facilities) should. . ..be
considered conditionally compatible with residential environs,
subject to evaluation of site development plans. " (Section C. 2 .g)
A Planning Commission use permit is required to allow this use.
This review process is adequate to address site development and
compatibility issues.
Conclusion: Consistent.
�J
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 2
Transportation and Circulation
The church will have access from a driveway on Johnson Avenue, at
the northerly end of the site. Emergency access will be available
also through Fixlini Street, where crash gates are to be installed.
Therefore, Fixlini will not be available for everyday automobile
access to the site. Pedestrian use may be available.
Turning movements: Because the site is across from another church,
it is possible that automobiles will be entering and leaving both
driveways at about the same time on Sundays. The proposed driveway
location is approximately opposite the Baptist church driveway.
Traffic at that time, then, is expected to increase and left turns
may be more difficult. If services at both churches are held at
the same time, left lanes could be blocked for a period of time.
If the services are staggered twenty minutes or more, turning
movements would not be expected to be a major concern.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Recommended mitigation:
1. The new church shall schedule services so that they do not
start or end at the same time as those of the Baptist Church.
Traffic increase: This portion of Johnson Avenue carries about
20, 000 automobiles per weekday, according to 1989 traffic counts.
The project is expected to generate about 730 trips on Sundays, and
about 190 trips per day the other days of the week. This is an
increase of less than one percent on weekdays. Sunday counts are
not available, but observation indicates that average traffic on
Sundays is well below the weekday load. Therefore, the traffic
increase generated by this project on Sundays will be a larger
percentage of the total, but the total will still be well below
average weekday levels.
Because of incremental increases in traffic on Johnson Avenue,
including traffic from this project, a traffic signal will need to
be installed at the Ella Street intersection in the near future.
The signal will regulate traffic so that vehicles will be driving
at a lower speed and turning movements are easier to make.
Conclusion: Cumulatively, significant.
Recommended mitigation:
2. The project developers will be required to ..share in the cost
of the Ella Street intersection signal installation. The
appropriate share will be determined by the City Engineer, and
will be payable upon building permit issuance.
�4
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 3
3 . To encourage car- and vanpooling, walking, and bicycling, the
plans shall be revised to include the following:
* Ten spaces in the parking lot, near the entrance, shall
be marked for the use of vanpools or carpools of three or
more persons.
* A gate or other opening shall be provided at the Fixlini
Street barricade., to allow pedestrians and bicyclists to
enter and leave the site.
* Spaces for a minimum of twenty bicycles shall be
provided, near the entrance to the church. In addition,
lockable storage for at least four bicycles shall be
allocated, free of charge, to active members.
* A pedestrian path shall extend from Johnson Avenue to the
church entrance. Such path may take the form of an
alternative paving strip along the southerly side of the
driveway, if necessary.
4 . The applicant shall pay the cost of restriping Johnson Avenue
to provide a center left-turn lane to the City prior to 1
building permit issuance. (estimate: $500)
Parking: The church is expected to have a congregation of about
1, 000 persons, divided into three "wards". Two of the wards will
contain 400 to 500 persons each, while the third, comprised
primarily of Cal Poly students, will contain about 200 persons.
Members of each ward are required to attend services at a specific
time each Sunday, and may remain for other activities for a total
of three hours. The church estimates that about 500 of the members
will attend services each week. Therefore, about 200 to 250
members are expected to attend the first and third services, while
about 100 members are anticipated to attend the second service,
which overlaps the other two. It is possible, then, that up to 350
members will be at the church at any one time on a Sunday. If
parking is not adequate for the use, members will park on nearby
streets, impacting the adjoining residential neighborhood. Fixlini
would likely be the street most affected. There are no sidewalks
on Fixlini Street. Additional cars parked on this street could be
a noise and safety concern for the. residents.
In anticipation of a recent church expansion in Arroyo Grande, a
parking study was conducted at an existing LDS church there (Heath,
1991) , which is incorporated into this report by reference. The
conclusion of the study was that a parking space rate of 0.4 spaces
per seat would be adequate to meet parking needs. Since all LDS
churches are operated in a similar manner, the conclusion of this
study can be applied to this new church.
ER 162-92
2070 Pislini Street
C Page 4
The proposed church contains 278 fixed seats. Therefore, according
to the parking study,
278 X 0.4 .= 111 spaces
should be adequate for the use. In anticipation of some growth in
the future, and in recognition of the possible differences in the
college ward's use of automobiles, the church is proposing to
provide 158 spaces. This number should be more than adequate for
the use. The City's zoning regulations require one space per four
fixed seats, which in this case would mean 278/4 = 70 spaces. The
proposal far exceeds City requirements.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Driveway speed. The driveway is almost straight, and drivers may
travel up and down it at higher rates of speed than would be
considered safe. The sloping drive may also be a temptation for
skaters in the area.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Recommended mitigation:
5. Community Development Department staff shall review the
functioning of the driveway after it has been in use for one
year, and shall require speed bumps to be installed or other
mitigation, to alleviate speeding or skating concerns.
Public Services
Fire-flow: Existing fire hydrant density is inadequate for this
use. The building is also more than 300 feet from a water supply
or public street. Three hundred feet is the average distance a
fireperson can pull a hose. Therefore, fire suppression water
supplies existing in the area would not be adequate to suppress a
fire in the proposed building.
The City's Fire Department Development Guide requires that, to
correct this condition, two additional hydrants be installed along
Johnson Avenue, and an additional hydrant be installed on-site.
Fire sprinklers are also required within the building.
The Public Works Department confirms that the f.ireflow is not
adequate to serve the fire suppression needs of this use. Instead
of installing an on-site hydrant, however, Public Works suggests
installation of a new main from the undersized
' 6"' main in Johnson
Avenue to the deadend main in Fixlini, to make a looped water
system. A public hydrant could then be installed at the southerly
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini street
Page 5
end of Fixlini, and would be available to serve the neighborhood as
well as the project site.
Since it would be difficult and expensive to attain required flows
in a private hydrant (including monthly assessment fees) , the new
main and public hydrant would likely be preferable from both an
economic and service standpoint.
Conclusion: With the above requirements for additional hydrants
met through the building permit process, the fire-flow capacity
impacts will be reduced to an insignificant level.
Fire. access: Parts of the building will be set back more than 300'
from the street. If the driveway from Johnson should become
blocked during an emergency, it would be difficult for emergency
personnel to reach the building in a timely fashion.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Recommended mitigation:
6. The applicants must attempt to secure access easements over
the two 25.5'-wide parcels at the end of Fixlini. Such
easements shall make access from Fixlini Street available to \
emergency vehicles when other access is not available.
Sewer: There is currently no public sewer within the property's
Johnson Avenue frontage (it ends north of the property boundaries) .
To connect to the Johnson Avenue sewer, the applicant will need to
extend the City's sewer main. If the applicant chooses instead to
connect to the Fixlini main, a private sewer pump will be required.
Either way, the project can be accommodated by the existing sewer
system.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Geological and seismic hazards and topographic modifications
The project is on a sloping site. The preliminary grading plan
indicates that the driveway will be raised up to four feet in
parts. The parking lots will conform closely to the existing
terrain and the building will be primarily on one level. There
will be a lower level, dug partly into the hillside, that will
function as a study area for members of the church, with a family
history room, a seminary, and small offices. There are large areas
on this level designated as "basement" only, to be converted to
other uses as the need arises.
A soils engineering report for a prior residential development.
proposed for the site was completed in 1989 (Pacific Geoscience) .
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 6
Five borings were taken at different locations, including one
location approximately where the center of the church is proposed.
The soils engineer found expansive soils and springs on the site.
The report, which is incorporated into the report by reference,
concluded that each building site would need to be studied prior to
completion of foundation designs. Special techniques are commonly
required for building on expansive soils. These techniques include
pre-saturation of sub-slab soils or use of non-expansive material
between the slab and the native soil. If any springs are
encountered during grading, drains would be required to be
installed. According to the report, the site is suitable for
development, but a project-specific soils study should be
undertaken prior to final design of the foundation. Soils reports
are always required with building permit applications. This
requirement will mitigate any possible hazards that might otherwise
arise from these conditions.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Air quality and wind conditions
Additional traffic generated by the new use will incrementally add
contaminants to the air. Over a period of time, the pollution from
this project and others in the city will worsen air quality.
Conclusion: Cumulatively, significant.
Recommended mitigation: Same as # 3, above.
Surface water flow and quality
Fixlini Creek flows along the southerly property line, curving in
a northerly direction near Johnson Avenue. The creek originates
from some underground springs just uphill, near the Sunny Acres
building, and connects with Lizzie Creek farther west. The natural
flow was diverted several years ago by way of a pipe from the
underground spring near the northeasterly corner of the site
(identified as number 10 on the site plan) to the southeasterly
edge of the property. The channel is small, but supports riparian
vegetation, especially near Johnson Avenue. It tends to remain wet
year-round.
The city's Administrative Creek Policy provides guidelines for
determining appropriate setbacks from creeks. The guidelines call
for new structures to be set back at least 20 feet from the top of
bank or edge of riparian vegetation of open creek channels.
Greater or lesser setbacks may be required or allowed if certain
conditions exist.
�-3
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 7
The plans show the flow line of the creek, but do not show the top
of bank. The channel is narrow, in some cases only about one foot
in width. Therefore, the top of bank on both sides is close to the
flow line. Willows line the waterway near Johnson Avenue, but
riparian vegetation diminishes to almost none uphill. Several
trees have been planted by the owners of the existing house on the
site, which are non-riparian and surrounded by grass. Willows end
and non-natives take over approximately in the area where the new
church is to be built.
The building and parking areas are located at least twenty feet
from the top of bank, except for a small area where the creek
begins, where the parking lot is about ten feet from the top of
bank. Setbacks from the top of bank average 40' to 50' . The
building and parking areas are not twenty feet beyond the riparian
edge, however. A corner of the building and portions of the
parking areas are within a twenty-foot setback from the edge of the
riparian corridor.
According to the creek policy, lesser setbacks may be allowed when:
1. the channel is minor and is not judged to be a
significant riparian corridor or likely to be part of the
urban trails system;
Comment: The channel itself is narrow, although it carries a
lot of water in rainstorms. The riparian corridor is wide and
healthy where it exists. This creek is unlikely to be part of
the urban trails system.
2 . the lot is small, and reasonable development without some
exception is impossible;
Comment: The lot is 4 .65 acres in area. The creek extends
primarily across the southerly edge of the site, allowing
reasonable development on the remainder.
3 . the lot is a small infill site where a clear pattern of
lesser setbacks has been established on both sides of the
lot along the creek.
Comment: The lot is an infill site, although not small . The
creek originates on this site, is culverted downstream, and is
open again near where it connects with Lizzie Creek. A
parking lot intrudes into the riparian area on the south side
of the creek (General Hospital lot) . The buildings lining the
culverted creek on the opposite side of Johnson appear to have
lesser setbacks than twenty feet, in many cases.
/-31
i
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 8
The Fixlini Creek corridor is small, and culverted for about half
its length. That which remains is degraded, particularly by the
planting of inappropriate species of trees, but has potential for
improvement. Improvements can be made by removal of inappropriate
species and planting of native riparian species, and by provision
of adequate room .for the corridor to expand.
Conclusion: Intrusion into the creek corridor can have a
significant impact on wildlife and water quality. However, an
extensive amount of riparian growth exists, which is proposed to
remain. To limit harm to the existing growth and encourage new
. growth, some setback from the existing riparian line is needed.
However, a reduced setback from the riparian vegetation appears
appropriate in this case.
Recommended mitigation:
7. The lower parking lot shall be set back a minimum of 20' from
the existing riparian vegetation. The building and upper
parking lot shall maintain the setbacks from the riparian
vegetation shown on plans submitted to the Community
Development Department December 14, 1992.
S. Temporary fencing shall be installed along the edge of
vegetation during construction only. The location of this
fencing is to be shown on building plans, to the approval of
the Community Development Director.
Plant and animal life
The site is home to small animals and birds, especially within the
riparian corridor. Construction of a church on the site will cause
some of the ground-dwelling and foraging animals to relocate
elsewhere. Additional persons in the vicinity may affect the
habitat value of the riparian area.
There is no evidence that any of the plants or animals in the area
are rare or endangered. However, serpentine-derived soils in the
general area are known to support Brewer's spine flower, a rare and
endangered plant that is found only in San Luis Obispo County.
Because the flower blooms in the spring, with May being a typical
peak month, it is difficult to determine its presence on the site
at this time (December 1992) . Because the serpentine bedrock is
deep on this site, and the site was grazed continuously for a long
period of time, it is unlikely that the spine flower occurs here.
The project is designed to remove as few trees as possible. Five
are intended to be removed, including two peppers, a eucalyptus, a
magnolia, and a loquat. None of these trees is considered
significant individually or as a species, and none are riparian.
1-3�.
ER 162-92
2070 Fizlini Street
Page 9
Conclusion: May be significant.
Recommended mitigation:
9 . The site shall be inspected by a qualified botanist during the
spring, to determine if any rare or endangered plants exist on
the site. Such investigation shall occur prior to any grading
or removal of vegetation. If any such plants do exist on the
site, then a) if not in a construction area, they shall be
protected by fencing during construction, or b) if they grow
in an area proposed for construction, seeds shall be obtained
from the plants and replanted in an appropriate uphill .area by
a qualified botanist.
10. The exotic plants, such as blue gums, palms, pampas grass, and
pepper trees currently within the riparian area, shall be
removed and replaced with native trees, such as Platanus
racemosa (sycamore) , Populus tr.ichocarpa (black cottonwood) ,
Salix spp. (willows) , Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) ,
Mryica californica (wax myrtle) , Umbellularia californica
(California bay-laurel) , Sambucus mexicana (elderberry) and
Acer negundo (box elder) . All trees planted along the creek
shall be native, indigenous plants to the area, such. as those
listed above.
11. The riparian area shall be checked periodically for invasion
by exotics. If exotic plants are found, they shall be removed
and replaced by natives as necessary.
12. Drainage must be designed to eliminate runoff from the upland
portion of the site into the riparian area, and to assure that
no pollutants enter the water in the creek.
13 . The riparian woodland is not to be used for any purpose except
passive recreation, such as bird watching, and must not be
disturbed except for the purpose of removing exotics and
planting native vegetation.
Aesthetic
The building is large, about 44' high on the Johnson Avenue
elevation (32' average height) , and is sited so that its longest
side is the most visible. Since it is located halfway up a
hillside, its height is well above most other buildings on Johnson.
It may appear large and out of place, and may block views of the
hillsides to the east.
There are mitigating factors affecting the appearance of the
building from below. Existing trees, which will remain, now screen
views of about half of the site. While these trees won't
J -3�
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 10
completely block views of the building, they are expected to lessen
exposure of the building to views from cars and pedestrians on
Johnson Avenue. Additional Coast live oak trees are to be planted
near the existing ones, which eventually will also serve to screen
views. The distance. of the project from the street - about 180, at
the nearest point - also will result in a lessening of impacts.
Long-range views of the project may be more difficult to screen,
especially from Terrace Hill and other viewpoints.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Recommended mitigation: None. The project is subject to review by
the City's Architectural Review Commission. Massing and view
blockage are purviews of that commission. If determined necessary,
conditions will be imposed on the project to mitigate these
concerns. The process reduces impacts to insignificant.
Resource use
Water: The project, once occupied, is expected to generate use of
about 2.8 acre-feet of water per year. The City's Water Allocation
Regulations allow water to be allocated to new development only
when such water allocation does not affect the city's supply. This
can happen only if the new use replaces a similar use of a similar
size on the same site, or if water is provided by some other means
to replace that used. One method, allowed by the regulations, to
obtain additional water is to retrofit existing plumbing fixtures.
The, City allows a developer to replace fixtures in other homes,
chuches, or businesses, to save approximately twice as much water
as the new development is expected to use.
With these regulations in force, water allocated to new development
will not have a detrimental effect on the available supply.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Other impacts
Light and glare: Churches are typically lit at night, and large
parking lots need to be lit for use at night. Pole and flood
lights can cause glare and create a nuisance for the neighborhood.
The applicant's representative indicates that parking lot lighting
is proposed to be on poles, approximately 15' high, with shielded
fixtures 'directed so that light levels will be low at the property
lines. No spot lights are proposed for the building, and safety
lighting will be soffit downlights or 42" Bollard lights.
/-3'
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 11
Conclusion: In spite of these precautions, lighting may become a
nuisance if left on all night. Impacts on the neighborhood may be
significant.
Recommended mitigation:
14. Outdoor lighting shall be timed to be shut off every evening
by 10:30, except for special events when a church activity is
taking place after that time.
The project is not expected to have a significant impact on any
other aspect of the environment.
RECOMMENDATION
Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact, with the
following
Mitigation measures:
1. The new church shall schedule services so that they do not
start or end at the same time as those of the Baptist Church.
Monitoring: Staff will recommend that this measure be made a
condition of approval of the Planning Commission use permit.
2 . The project developers will be required to share in the cost
of the Ella Street intersection signal installation. The
appropriate share willbe determined by the City Engineer, and
will be payable upon building permit issuance.
3 . To encourage car- and vanpooling, walking, and bicycling, the
plans shall be revised to include the following:
* Ten spaces in the parking lot, near the entrance, shall
be marked for the use of vanpools or carpools of three or
more persons.
* A gate or other opening shall be provided at the Fixlini
Street barricade, to allow pedestrians and bicyclists to
enter and leave the site.
* Spaces for a minimum of twenty bicycles shall be
provided, near the entrance to the church. In addition,
lockable storage for at least four bicycles shall be
allocated, free of charge, to active members.
* A pedestrian path shall extend from Johnson Avenue to the _
church entrance. Such path may take the form of an
ER 162-92
2070 Fixlini Street
Page 12
alternative paving strip along the southerly side of the
driveway, if necessary.
4. The applicant shall pay the cost of restriping Johnson Avenue
to provide a center left-turn lane to the City prior to
building permit issuance. (estimate: $500)
5. Community Development Department staff shall review the
functioning of the driveway after it has been in use for one
year, and shall require speed bumps to be installed or other
mitigation, to alleviate speeding or skating concerns.
Monitoring: Community Development staff will use a computer
"tickler" file to set the date for reviewing the driveway
functioning, at the time of occupancy of the building. When
the date comes, staff will check the site on several occasions
and check files for complaints submitted. If a speed or
skating problem arises, staff will contact the church
leadership to discuss solutions.
6. The applicants must attempt to secure access easements over
the two 25.5'-wide parcels at the end of Fixlini. Such
easements shall make access from Fixlini Street available to
emergency vehicles when other access is not available.
Monitoring: Planning staff will check building plans and
ensure that easements are obtained and recorded prior to
building permit issuance, and that funds for restriping are
received. If the applicant is unable to obtain the access
easements, alternative mitigation will be determined by the
Community Development Director.
7. The lower parking lot shall be set back a minimum of 2.0" from
the existing riparian vegetation. The building and upper
parking lot shall maintain the setbacks from the riparian
vegetation shown on plans submitted to the Community
Development Department December 14, 1992.
8. Temporary fencing shall be installed along the edge of
vegetation during construction only. The location of this
fencing is to be shown on building plans, to the approval of
the Community Development Director.
Monitoring: Building plans shall be checked for these
measures.
9 . The site shall be inspected by a qualified.•botanist during the
spring, to determine if any rare or endangered plants exist on
the site. Such investigation shall occur prior to any grading
or removal of vegetation. If any such plants do exist on the
�-3!
ER 162-92
2070 Fislini Street
Page 13
site, then a). if not in a construction area, they shall be
protected by fencing during construction, or b) if they grow
in an area proposed for construction, seeds shall be obtained
from the plants and replanted in an appropriate uphill area by
a qualified botanist.
Monitoring: The applicant will be required to submit the
completed biological survey report prior to building permit
issuance.
10. The exotic plants, such as blue gums, palms, pampas grass, and
pepper trees currently within the riparian area, shall be
removed and replaced with native trees, such as Platanus
racemosa (sycamore) , Populus trichocarpa (black cottonwood) ,
Salix spp. (willows) , Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) ,
Mryica californica (wax myrtle) , Umbellularia californica
(California bay-laurel) , Sambucus mexicana (elderberry) and
Acer negundo (box elder) . All trees planted along the creek
shall be native, indigenous plants to the area, such as those
listed above.
11. The riparian area shall be checked periodically for invasion
by exotics. If exotic plants are found, they shall be removed
and replaced by natives as necessary.
12 . Drainage must be designed to eliminate runoff from the upland
portion of the site into the riparian area, and to assure that
no pollutants enter the water in the creek.
13 . The riparian woodland is not to be used for any purpose except
passive recreation, such as bird watching, and must not be
disturbed except for the purpose of removing exotics and
planting native vegetation.
Monitoring: Final inspections of the project, once
constructed, will include a review of the riparian area.
City staff may call on the Department of Fish and Game or
the botanist who recommended the above measures to assist
in the inspection. Drainage design will be reviewed
through the building permit process. These measures will
also be incorporated into conditions of approval for the
use permit. Periodic inspections by Community
Development Department staff will assure compliance with
measures 10 and 12.
14. Outdoor lighting shall be timed to be shut off every evening
by 10: 30, except for special events when a church activity is
taking place after that time.
F
/-3�
Monitoring: Staff will recommend that this mitigation measure
become a condition of approval of the Planning Commission use
permit.
/-3�
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION r
San Luis Obispo, California
Regular Meeting - April 5, 1993
PRESENT: Commrs. Woody Combrink, Allen Cooper, Jim Homer, Curtis Illingworth,
Ron Regier, Bruce Sievertson, and Chairman Mike Underwood
OTHERS
PRESENT: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner, and Ron Whisenand, Development
Review Manager
The commission welcomed newly-appointed Commissioner Ron Regier and reappointed
Commissioner Curtis Illingworth.
PROJECTS:
1. ARC 162-92: 2070 Fixlini Street: A request for final review of plans to construct
a new church; R-1 zone; Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, applicant.
Judith Lautner, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
commission concur with the negative declaration of environmental impact; find that the
existing residence is not significant architecturally, aesthetically, or culturally, and
approve its removal; and grant final approval with permeable paving, trash enclosure
details, signage and lighting details, crashgate design, and vanpool space locations to
return to staff for approval.
David Brannon, architect, responded to the staff report, and reviewed the issues. He
noted that this project had been heavily reviewed and that the applicants have
investigated suggestions, but he felt there was a need to balance needs. He noted that
some items were not possible to do without major changes to the project. He indicated
that in'order to lower the building on the site, the parking would have to be relocated to
the rear of the building. He noted the main concern was with the building's appearance
from the street and that changes had been made in the grade to make the building
appear less massive.--He noted that the driveway location would be difficult to change
and would need to be relocated to the middle of the parking area which could be
dangerous. Safety was a major concern of the church and felt they should be allowed to
handle it. He understood the concern about trucks (trash and recyclers) coming up the
grade and felt it was not worth relocating the trash enclosure just their twice a week
visits, since noise was not likely to be a problem. He felt that mature landscaping would
obscure the tower from the north and it may eventually be invisible from Johnson
ARC Minutes
April 5, 1993
Page 2
Avenue. He felt that the tower is the focal point of the building would emphasize the
entrance and moving the tower closer to the building makes for a compromise. He
noted that the tower had already been lowered and narrowed, but that made it look
spindly. He preferred the revised, wider appearance of the tower, and said it wouldn't
hurt the neighbors. He felt that the jacarandas would eventually achieve the height
shown in the plans. He noted that the landscaping palette had changed somewhat
because of Dr. Holland's recommendations. He noted that.Barry Karleskint, Planning
Conun;aioner and plant expert, liked the proposed landscaping. He noted that most
cars would carry four people to the site. He would be happy to relocate the vanpool
spaces if both car and vanpooling were allowed there. Regarding permeable paving, he
noted that if the soil drains well, he would agree to do permeable paving. He noted
there were no plans at this time to install a satellite dish. He discussed the lighting
illumination plan. He indicated that discreet signage was proposed. There would be no
exterior lighting of the sign. He indicated that a solid color tile roof was now preferred
over flashed tiles. He indicated that an 8-foot fence, requested by a neighbor, would
need an exception. He wanted the commission's input on whether they wanted an 8-foot
fence installed. He indicated that the trash enclosure could be enlarged. He noted that
proposed lighting consisted of 4-foot high bollards, with an electric eye turning on the
lights at dusk and a timer turning them off at 10:30 p.m. He indicated that the lights
wouldn't be on every night and that security lighting would be placed only on the doors.
He noted that excess parking was proposed for overlapping services so that people won't
park on Fixlini or Johnson Avenue. He noted that parking was based on LDS standards
and spaces were considered a minimum for this church. He indicated that the crash gate
could be modified to meet Fire Department standards.
Carol Florence, landscape architect, indicated that smaller trees were proposed near the
building for a pedestrian feeling. She indicated that a plumbago would cascade over the
highest planter. She noted that too many shrubs made for a "wall" feeling. She
suggested the commission look at the jacaranda in front of the Jack House for
comparison. She noted that the spring would not be tapped into until it was tested to
determine how much water was available.
Mary Beth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, a SLO native, read a letter expressing her
concerns, which had been delivered to ARC members and the City previously. She
noted that she lived in a two-story home and was concerned that if lighting was high, it
would shine in her upper windows. She asked that an 8-foot fence be installed by her
property. She did not.want a speed strip or trash pickup site located behind her
property.
ARC Minutes
April 5, 1993
Page 3
In response to a question from Commr. Cooper regarding installing evergreen trees
adjacent to her property, Mrs. Schroeder indicated that planting evergreens would be
acceptable, but she still wanted the fence.
Carol Florence explained what plants would be installed near Mrs. Schroeder's property.
They would be very dense and would reach over 6 feet in height in three years.
Mrs. Schroeder indicated that she still wanted an 8-foot fence, saying the fence could be
reduced to 6 feet below her property line.
Commr. Sievertson was concerned with the location of the driveway, which he felt was
too close to the housing. He suggested having the driveway go through pan of the
parking lot or eliminate some of the parking spaces. He felt the location of the trash
enclosure was better in the lower lot because trucks will crush the paving. Regarding
permeable paving, he indicated that the soils are a problem all over the city. He was
concerned that headlights may cause glare into some homes. He felt that sycamores
wouldn't screen sufficiently and wanted to see landscaping with a lower canopy. He felt
the oaks would also have too high a canopy ultimately. He felt the parking area could
be reduced and was concerned that the site would be overpaved.
Commr. Homer indicated that overall he liked the landscaping, but he had personal
preferences for some different plants. He felt that screening would be adequate. He
was concerned that the oaks near Fixlini may have problem because there was too much
water in that location, and suggested using evergreen pears.
In response to a questions from Commr. Homer, Carol Florence indicated that drip
irrigation would be used.
Commr. Regier indicated that he felt comfortable with the issues and would participate
in the project review. He wanted permeable paving used where possible. He felt that
the driveway location and design was a disaster waiting to happen. He felt the location
of the trash enclosure should be lowered but understood the applicant's position. He
liked the tower. He thought a sign at the base of the tower was appropriate and felt an
exception was warranted. He felt that lowering the building on the site would make the
mass of the building seem more prominent at the Johnson Avenue elevation. He also
had a concern with headlight glare. He supported an exception for an 8-foot fence at
the top of the site.
Commr. Combrink felt the project was overpaved and that the amount of parking
determined the site plan. He thought the entry was enormous and the elimination of the
i
ARC Minutes
April 5, 1993
C Page 4
balcony and windows made it worse. He felt it would be better to lower the building
than have an empty basement. He felt the driveway design was bad. He felt proposed
landscaping was acceptable. He felt the landscaping was trying to overcome the
monolithic design, He thought the tower should be integrated as a steeple.
Commr. Cooper felt Commr. Combrink had an interesting idea about lowering the floor.
He concurred with the neighbor's concerns. He supported the installation of an 8-foot
fence at Mrs. Schroeder's property line. He felt that evergreens were needed to block
headlight glare. He suggested adding a mitigation to the initial study that the City
review the driveway after one year for speeding or skateboarding and require
speedbumps if those incidents occur. He thought the idea of a giant honeysuckle was
interesting. He felt the tower design had improved.
Commr. Illingworth agreed with Commrs. Cooper and Regier. He supported the
installation of an 8-foot fence. He thought the lighting was acceptable. He thought
some lighting would be on for 24 hours for security reasons. He approved the proposed
sign in concept since he was familiar with LDS signs.
Chairman Underwood indicated his comments were similar to Commr. Elingworth's. He
felt that parking was balanced. He thought the fundamental problem is the type of
church. If it's a neighborhood church, it works well in the R-1 zone, but not if a
community church. He felt the articulation in the previous design made sense and now
it was eliminated. He felt the building seemed taller and more monolithic than before.
He would prefer to see the windows put back in, even if they were just false relief. He
wanted to allow for expansion to what was previously planned. He thought that more
shrubbery was needed in the landscaping. He noted that jacarandas do poorly in windy
sites and questioned that choice. He felt that bicycle parking should be closer to the
entry and that.the vanpool spaces were acceptable. People could be dropped off and
then the vans parked. He supported an 8-foot fence at Mrs. Schroeder's property. He
felt proposed colors were acceptable but thought they could be a shade darker. He
supported the sign concept.
David Brannon indicated that all issues had been discussed at length and felt that
explanations had been given for everything. He felt that some proposed changes would
require a radical redesign of the project.. He indicated that most people like the project
and that 50 percent of the site was proposed for landscaping. He felt that earth could be
bermed up higher on the building than shown.
Commr. Cooper moved to find that the existing residence was,not significant
architecturally, aesthetically, or culturally, and allowed its removal; to concur with the
y
ARC Minutes
April 5, 1993
Page 5
negative declaration of environmental impact with an added mitigation measure that the
City will review the functioning of the driveway after one year, and require mitigation if
speed or skating has become a problem; and to grant final approval to the project with
the following changes to return to the commission for approval: (1) landscaping
modified to include evergreen trees adjacent to 2085 Wilding Lane and possible
substitution of Bradford pears for oaks near the northerly property line; (2) outdoor
lighting phased so that lower lighting levels will be used most of the time; (3) an
elevation or section of the landscaping that shows its headlight-screening ability; (4)
additional berming against the building wall (up to 5-foot higher); (5) a schematic
irrigation plan; (6) a clearer description of lighting fixtures and the following items to
return to staff for approval: (1) an &foot high fence adjacent to 2085 Wilding Lane, if
the additional height is approved at an administrative hearing; (2) permeable paving
where possible; (3) trash enclosure details; (4) signage details; (5) crash gate design.
Commr. Homer seconded the motion.
AYES: Cooper, Homer, Illingworth, Regier, Underwood
NOES: Combrink, Sievertson
ABSENT: None
The motion passed.
2. 1-129: 502-504 Hathway Avenue: A request to review landscaping and
detail p or the addition of one unit to a site with two existing houses; R-3
zone; Joe Nicho plicant..
Judith Lautner, Associate Planner, presen the staff report, recommending that the
commission approve the landscape plan and det ' with modifications to return to staff..
Joe Nichols, applicant, responded to the staff report and in ' ted he thought that all
issues had been addressed. He felt he could work out details wt taff. He indicated he
preferred 9-foot parking spaces because he did not want a tight turnin ea. He noted
that the driveway would be plain concrete and he would prefer not to use ped
concrete. He indicated he could add brick bands. He proposed solid dog-ear ng:
1-4�3
I I
IIF'
city ,of san luis OBISPO '
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 •San Luis Obispo,CA 93403-8100
Peomit -: U 16 L -52 APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
207v Fikhi z, S7`re-t . . .
In accordance with the appeals procedure as authorized by Tfite 1, Chapter 12D of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code,the undersigned herebyappealsfromthedeclsionof -Ic-73
rendered on which decision consisted of the following (Le. set forth factual
situation and the grounds for submkiing this appeaL Use additional sheets as needed): PQr.n.r U
2-0 70 Pi. 11.7, 3T.
I
,Due T a., irrcfease i-n cp,7 ria{'�►Gj "fi-►zre is need �' rk
-5-dc (>n the AkfvNt{ esTe.=l/ edqd d P,;% 11#71 STrer-T.
Z. r P7,,e . 'n.,-r vue.r nie I?haver-4 ?Xe rtytiT Tc u,e t>;E
ease m ��T c�c:. ,.,r p,-rrPf• as ao �q ti - {��e ,�
/rh1Cj/i �e riders cin I toa lli' y di"r`ch me-wbe,`5 Ajv OitJ�
T�rn 7-6,e C;SAM�i /hs $L5 d+ C uSS ed �l P k 5 e o4' n+F
epS P,•rr 2,a�,
j
The undt&gned dt cussed th�dec�ton�being appealed with:
on '
DATE &TIME APPEAL R CEAW: Appellant:
e •
E'QV � Representative
L`116
APR 1 5 194 Zc>_S ,-n
l F',;r 1 , 67 S o
ress
C1F1 p�Ea�
aAN LUI$OBiSPo.CA Li-,? - 1 2 SL
one
Original to City Clerk
City Attorney
Calendared for. �P�9 Copy to Administrative Officer
Copy to the•foUowing department(s):
L
3. T�e g�ho�oS ea CA LL►^C 4l;ef,
w-11 be -1
'tom l 57 W �lo m�
/oca eC�
Prop,^ . at !I lose prr J.iLc/ baC46-u5L
!n Ike CJi..,rc4 , l/ be a /oo C�wi7 /n�c
/►� ho•ne , 7�ie CfiLA,rcti 54ould
�. �- / d
D u-8r) t2,^a / �ps e /o.� c�.. ci �y-' �.y rr+ /^e [u /
ho•yreS , e Cldurc.4 !S -45- la-l- }ae 7'-Ilk.
PPbf'OS�d IaCo-��or7e
It• 717c u euro-�. S4o, Id be desr��cd
ce,csa/ `r ,rn 714 a 6 i:�ca. Lo e
P Y,'O /cg4T -Pro.s1 Tire cti:ufa rr►oA� les
GL��o vhe 6 ; ie
I 1� Ori1J � Wa� l5n'r r � dC.SIY led .
A e�reafen ei�w�7" 5ho� I d b� red r��: galdrP
C�t•c►�c.h 7^� ��foa7`� ;.0 e
e5fo-hli,4,'i7 et c4urcli `proM be41ncl
Cul era / l�os/,�7a l
�, • T� (! f'^eLs 4 con-rar•7 irs chec, fd bt It,eu7�e4 clos le
,U Vohvrs�.� live'. *�i�.ts rZ �uC�ih4 /Jvrs � �V`arrt
Alo:/11:17 Cvl�e�7`rvv1� ,
7, 74 f- lS an e- i.,� walk 2 - 2/z to/,
to -Cra,., ✓o-l�e+� /7 CAT 4Tile 'C.�t.�re�� /_�r-D� C�lyl
14 QO:S[ 6/E/ `1l�v/e" � e
e- C4AP P r
ct5 On/ prop tr`�y T!V4-,e -�r Ql tt i !on l��aTe a n� e(�
a- relvLtntr7 WA-//, I -g 7�er.t /s a /Deed A/
cL relanc� W P,/ daLn ci we. !1 be ba'l f7 u-•, dL•�
1;70
g. 7e C,y,L Nc A /p%rt s n e�rd If'?
lri et n s7Q//e ort 7�Z �ttoY-71 e,.Sre r-I
S7r,eeT, I re�a6 -t-4e Are h�omaHT
be- u7itil/ec/ on r4r elta..4--fis RrcP.o.—T, 7"�ce ex ts7%»y
I n
�--' Par K�r� Pl�P, i,, �tran�` d�' •r►r fjo.>7e air e
nEed �et'.
y, 7�� ARC .�►? ee7'�n�
0'01 1-19- 93 -t-4e
�oll�c�,�tn y r~ec.c,,.,•,r�end�T,ohs
a) Mod: 47`1i e b cc i Cbrn l low Tit p
Orli Ql.Var� T Cern r C/osEj/` te., 7�,e e�iarr�
es �roeC,N-u10 cLt,k�lr�/r �r/Frnb
7�1�/'e Tvr,? r ie et u c t.r cj cctae
k o-0
(^^\\ Mh 81-a.nnon 10- '&•med - Pl,ALnn,�)/ �.',a:y,n�i�sst�n o77
UI /
3 �/o—t3 ��y' he his r� t��s �c�/ 7�2e Plans "ho
( Drnp �� � i ��`l l.e l�PCOh7�17Pnal a / 10/1So eLl e /
Sµ 6Y`t2t ' Q.:7`e -hka ' foie c4r rl9e-s bove been ride
pill�p�
��11I
A city .of San tuis oaspo '.
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 a San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the`appeals procedure as authorized by Title I, Chapter 120 of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code,the undersigned herebyappealsfromthedecistonof AA . G
rendered on 5, /ffj which decision consisted of the following (Le. set forth factual
situation on ang the ground for submitting ap yse additional ets as n ed
�Q
•�/ „......iii �/ � � ' �/(�.•/(/.. /,�, �,L/,, G �C�2'•"�!ti f'rtRl
� Lam•�� �' �� -�
The � ed discussed theda. n being appealed with:
v
on
DATE &TIME APPEAL RECFIVFrf• Appellant:
ame e
Kepresenume
APR 1 1993 x'a
Xaar�ess
CITY CLERK _ p
SAN LUIS OBISpo.CA
Phone
Original to City Clerk
Calendared for: city Attomey
Copy to Administrative Officer
Copy
�to the-following depanment(s): -
G I4 r e
loe
RECEIVED
APR 2 01993
MY of sew WIS OMSpo
CCMWJ M DEMOMEHT
i
SDG
April 27, 1993
Judith Lautner
City of San Luis Obispo
P. O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
RE: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Johnson Avenue
Dear Judith:
This letter is in response to the appeals to the Architectural Review Commission final
approval that was granted to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints on April
5, 1993. There are two appeals, one from Jack Hinson and one from Mary Beth
Schroeder, that essentially address the same issues- I intend to respond to both
appeals simultaneously.
There are no new issues being raised in either of these appeals. This project has
been reviewed three times by the ARC, once by the Planning Commission and once
by the City Council. Both Mr. Hinson and Mrs. Schroeder have made presentations
at all of these meetings. In their presentations every issue mentioned in their
appeals was presented and thoroughly discussed by the reviewing board. As the
project has been approved at every level after the thorough discussion, it would
seem that we have adequately addressed both Mr. Flinson's and Mrs. Schroeder's
concerns to the satisfaction of the reviewing body.
The following are the specific issues being appealed, and the action that was taken
by the city and the Church in response to each issue:
A. Cul-De-Sac at the End of Fixlini Street:
The issue of a cul-de-sac at the end of RAW Street was raised in the first of
several informal meetings we had with city staff before we submitted for the first
formal review. At that time, the Engineering Department felt the best way to
reduce traffic impact and prevent Church traffic access on Fixlini Street was to
eliminate the cul-de-sac. A "crash gate" integrated into the perimeter fencing
for improved emergency vehicle access to the Church and Fixlini Street was
discussed and approved by the ARC and Planning Commission in lieu of the
cul-de-sac
The Church of Jesus ist of Latter-Day Saints
Johnson Avenue
April 27, 1993
Page 2
The amount of traffic on this end of Fixlini Street will be reduced, not increased
as Mr. Hanson suggests, by the development of the Church because the cars of
the friends and residents of the existing house we are removing will be
eliminated. It is not likely that Church members will park on Fixlini Street and
walk to Church as it would be a long uphill walk when compared with parking
on site. It was also pointed out, at previous reviews, that a further reduction in
the amount of vehicles inadvertently driving down Fixlini Street and discovering
that it is a dead end could be achieved by moving the existing "Not a Through
Street" sign to the corner of Fixlini and Iris Streets. The current sign is located
well back from the corner and is not visible until a vehicle is committed to the
turn.
The addition of a cul-de-sac will add 6,000 square feet of paving to the site just
for the cul-de-sac. Additional driveways required to provide access to the
parking lots would add even more paving. It would also spread the
development out further on the site, causing even more site disturbance, which
is the opposite of the intent of the appeals. This seems an unreasonable
demand for the very few vehicles which may turn around in Mr. Hinson's
driveway.
B Access Easement at the Ehd of Fixlini Street:
We have provided city staff with the deed indicating the existence and use of
the easement. The deed clearly states, "Said right of way shall be for use as a
road, coupled with the right to lay, construct or erect over, across or under the
land covered by said right of way any and all public utility lines and pipes." The
pedestrian and bicycle use issue has been thoroughly discussed at all of the
previous reviews and access was supported in every case.
C. Location of the Building on the Site:
The location of the Church building on the site is very constrained. Significant
movement in any direction is not possible without violating some constraint.
Movement of the building to the south )the General Hospital side) will further
encroach on the riparian growth corridor. Movement to the east, up the hill, will
increase the height of the front elevation of the building because the site
becomes steeper as it nears the eastern property line. This is also the opposite
of the intent of Mrs. Schroeder's appeal. Movement to the west (the Johnson
Avenue side) would push more of the parking to the back of the site, and further
aggravate the traffic going past Mr. Hinson's and Mrs. Schroeder's homes.
Obviously, moving the building to the north, toward the residential
neighborhood side, is not an option at all. Turning the building on the site will
increase the height of the building at its tallest elevation. Its current orientation
is designed to relate to the existing topography of the site presenting the
smallest profile.
During the review process the building was moved several times in an effort to
accommodate the concerns of Mr. Hinson, Mrs. Schroeder and the other
/-So
The Church of Jesus G._...st of Latter-Day Saints
Johnson Avenue
April 27, 1993
Page 3
t I
neighbors. Each movement increased the distance from the northern property
line and increased the landscaping adjacent to the homes. The current
location is as far away from the homes as we can get without cutting down the
riparian habitat. We cannot see how any additional movement will result in a
significant improvement.
D. Driveway Location:
During the various review hearings, in response to the concerns of the
neighbors, the location of the driveway has been moved away from the
adjacent homes to its current location. It has also been reduced in width to its
present 25 feet, with the reduced area being placed in the landscaped buffer
between the Church and the existing homes. The buffer is currently 17 feet
wide with very dense landscaping designed to act as a sound and light buffer.
The type, species and amount of landscaping has been reviewed by the
Planning Commission and the ARC, and determined to be appropriate for the
task of buffering the homes from the traffic. There is also a solid, six foot high
fence along the entire northern property line.
Moving the driveway on the site is not feasible within the constraints of the city's
requirements, and is totally contradictory to Mr. Hinson's demands to keep the
building away from the homes. The access to Johnson Avenue is restricted to
the northern edge of the site because we cannot put a driveway through the
riparian habitat.. Relocating the driveway to the southern property line will
require traversing the entire width of the site. It would also require moving the
building to the northern property line to make room for the driveway on the
south, which is again contradictory to this appeal and all of the previous review
approvals.
We feel, and the ARC and Planning Commission agree, that we have made
every feasible effort to protect the privacy of the neighboring houses from the
Church traffic, given the constraints of the site. After the mitigations that we will
install, we do not think the traffic will have a significant impact on the
neighboring homes. The overwhelming majority of traffic will occur on
Sundays, and will be negligible when compared to the noise and light
generated daily on Johnson Avenue.
A related issue to the driveway is the location of the trash enclosure. It has
been suggested that locating the trash enclosure on the Johnson Avenue side
of the building will reduce the traffic noise from the one or two trash trucks per
week that will service the site. As we have mentioned above, the noise has
already been mitigated as far as possible. One additional weekly visit will be
insignificant if it is even noticeable at all. Moving the trash enclosure, on the
other hand, will be an extreme inconvenience to the Church. Nearly all of the
trash and recyclables will be generated in the upper level of the building. It is
unreasonable, and poor planning, to require the Church custodians to walk or
drive from the top of the site to the bottom of the sight every time they need to
empty a trash can.
The Church of Jesus st of Latter-Day Saints
Johnson Avenue
April 27, 1993
Page 4
E. General Hospital Access:.
When this project was first being designed nearly a year ago, we contacted the
county regarding access to Bishop Street across the hospital site. We were
informed it would require a formal easement from the county. We sent plans
And spoke with Harish Bhatt, the Project Manager for Hospital Replacement.
This action took place before the general election, and we were informed that
no action could be taken until a decision had been made regarding the future of
General Hospital, as they did not want to encumber the land. Since the funding
measure was defeated, the future of General Hospital is more in question
today, and it is reasonable to assume that access to Bishop Street is still not
possible.
Any access agreement that we could have received from the hospitai would
have required a reciprocal agreement from the Church allowing the hospital
access to our site. The hospital, however, was looking for access to Fixlini
Street so they could access the stop light at Lizzie Street. Even if that were
denied them, as it surely would be, they would still have access to our driveway
to Johnson Avenue, which would significantly increase the traffic going past the
Hinson and Schroeder homes.
F. Size of the Building:
This building is not too large for this site. Crier 52'/0 of the site has been left as
open space either in landscaped or und!sturbed natural area. The area at the
top of the site beyond the eastern parking lot,is 1.2 acres, Teff as open space
with only minimal landscaping near the parking area. The parking lots as well
as the building are surrounded by landscaping. In addition to the existing trees
on site, we are adding over 160 new trees. Throughout all of the review
meetings, the size of the building, or the impact on the site has never been a
contested issue. The height of-the west elevation has been commented on,
and we have worked to reduce the impact of that side of the building:
Apparently, we have been successful in our attempt as both the Planning
Commission and the ARC have approved the building.
G. Other Issues:
Every guidance or suggestion from every review has been considered and
complied with to the extent possible. If this were not so, the ARC would not
have given final approval
The location of the fire hydrant is at the direction of the Fire Department. We
will insta!I :he hydrant wherever they deem appropriate.
All construction, including retaining wa!ls, will occur on the Church property.
There will be no impact to the adjoining properties. All.grading is designed
such that the existing grade at the property line is maintained. This is per the
city grading ordinance.
The Church of Jesus G. ..st of Latter-Day Saints
Johnson Avenue
April 27, 1993
Page 5
We have submitted detailed lighting analysis for thg exterior lights which proves
all illumination levels are zero at the property line. In addition, we have agreed
to timed and multi-switched lighting that will turn off by 10:30 p.m.. Even without
the fence and landscaping there will be no light from the Church site reaching
the neighboring property.
Throughout the design and review process we have made every effort to consider
the impact that this development will have on the neighbors and to respect their
privacy. We think we have succeeded commendably and, apparently, the ARC and
Planning Commission agree. It is not possible, however, to solve every problem to a
degree that totally pleases everyone. A balance must be found between the
conflicting interests. For example, Mr. Hinson would like us to move the building to
the south, but that will impact the riparian habitat, which we have been instructed not
to disturb. Phil Ashley wants us to move the building to the north, away form the
trees, but that would increase the impact on Mr. Hinton's property. We have tried,
with the guidance of the Planning Commission and the ARC, to find a balance
between the two interests. This same scenario applies to all of the issues noted in
the appeals. Every change effects every other part of the project, and jeopardizes
the carefully developed balance obtained through the extensive review process.
I have personally spent over 550 hours on this project, much of it considering the
very issues that are listed in Mr. Hinson's and Mrs. Schroeder's appeals. In total,
there have been two informal group meetings with representatives of the various city
departments to set the preliminary design guidelines, one meeting of the neighbors
to discuss in depth their concerns, three ARC reviews, one Planning Commission
review and one appearance before the City Council. At each of these meetings, the
issues listed in these two appeals have been thoroughly discussed. The Planning
Commission meeting, for instance, lasted 2 1/2 hours. In every formal meeting, the
majority of the officers approved the plan and the proposed solutions to the issues.
Also, the planning staff, as well as the engineering, public works, parks and other
appropriate departments have concurred with our solutions and recommended
approval. Clearly this design, given the constraints of the site and use, is the best
possible balance of all of the conflicting issues.
Sincerely,
SDG
rannon
Project Architect
JDB/mjs
Enclosures
< 1
729 ma5o(
" 1=:e33 to an: use/ of said richt of Ney for r^sd r'irn`'30!'3 n Z. - - .
?:y ^vcr, across or under the land covered by ss id rl._ht of ..3y 3r•;
an-1 all public utility lines and pipes.._ _
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto'a^:`
tt.�'_r hands on the day and year first above writter... . ; '•:.;_y ,
?aid Parties of the Firs. Far: :
Afc a� .r"� _&dvie
Agt go/1
VCra ne Trca uc -
_ 47-: ! Said Parties of,the
th
e y e
- ♦ F).�j xy Ate`�S9.Kt=sM.•+�:� Y..q - u C C ^n Yr+^'C'.✓}i. x' .. ^
•..._*" fi�+r j-yl' •t"S ii�i."}�7 s t' -ra 4'�H. ria:�.."''i- . y::
Stattr_ of California
5a ri-��� 4����Ltr'�• ka i a .pyk"r,`• �u � 9i� ��
l.lf CJmity of Zan Luis Obispo)
On this z -_day of Sept:,` 1953;. before me,. the uri er .
at✓s a♦ ` =' .<'1' . .-• G',?''=�.Sia•- .:.;x!�.��ter T a•4'Y° `'• yY,•w eG.rJ.w,� �-c.-'6.. _ c
si ^e', a tlotary Publi_o in and�tfor said county and state, pe.scnaiI -
u- 3zw)o3-ed Cecil; W.;:-Jones Dorothy 0e Jones, Richard T. Treadwell,^ -,- .44, 's_ 3
an3 Geraldine Treadwell, imoiwn.,to me to,be the persons whose names-.--
jr-
ares —.--3r•- subscribed to the within instrument; and. they duly- acknotrlvikcedr6t""•�'�`,f
f �, '. lln L �.." 1f � Sa C ry'P'{'.+^•[ y. Y Y .ti ITMf• + }• •4
•s sae that they executed the
q.
aWgVprir, Y. w
. ., ...-..` ' (Seal)>� ,k --ri'%'.ar.-•• - ..�- ,•r- . rx
Notary u c—"in a�3ror-the County off- .•
.1 t � •1 w �41 � :.�.t. a.-t > y'ai�c rBs r`�.'•F f w f,
San Luis Obispo, State of California
" rfF:
{ .moi ...,�•.., .. r
:,. •.7_. - <')i••i. yJ/' .".ts -. .7:16'F�, - .:/•F•<. �y.'mei"`�' f` '.`?•i."'f.i {R' ..
.,:! '$lii : -'-.(, a t`1<r •:. f: r7 Sl.-..i�!«�"yg:t: :.. LT Mi'..•t-a +tj.:
xx r.?+=e1iRUlD AT
ATS MIN.PAST r <
:xr a ve:. &W MOM case o C01N��4 04M. ¢ ??4• - ��_•� .._'.._ M
i :a ^a7i•.. -.Y+�'`AXra.... S'j.0 .i ",N L+p t•• .. .y�t'•'�=:1+: i:" Wr
-- r OCT is _ r
Y:M
•�.TGowan" a
_.M �•`T9 Pf ✓. 'L 1. .♦
t
All
I DowRlBet�B ' VOL 1389 ?x11696 i
RccoRaNc REoucsTEo w
I Martin ?olin �moR At,P y U
1026 Chorro Street wT rfa Iwsr._ ff r,
San Luis Obispo, Calli.93401 dzoiR' I.._-• T.CAL-
ma
A �T o
I YB LUIS 000�,/U�IO pCOY�tT�•t,CAL
Aww��w,cru w w 1a 18
F Richard T. Treadwell
` l
c
o
San Luis Obispo,
Fixlini Street
p , calif.
I
L at E� ndaxedDeputy
1 1- J
1 „ ,-,• SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
r�
G A
w.. L Arns I.R.S.i.._.:._...._.a.TRts•Sr.cz
Grant Deed
q aB c Tw.a IY/wlMm R TILL[IMW". ARO TRY"COwN.IT i I
9 FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATIO\, rec ipt of which is hereby acknowledged.
Richard T. Treadwell and Constance Geraldine Treadwell
herebyy GRANT to';, Richard R. Treadwell and Patronella S. Treadwell, husband
and wife, receiving title as community property, and to David J. Hosbein an
he+eb.(Ti►Ae�.S! w Florence T. Hcsbein, husband and wife, receiving title as
community property, and to Joe D. §tray and Elizabeth T. Wray' husband and I
wife, receiving title as community property,
i thefellowmg deecibed•real property in the .City of San Luis Obispo,
Coomyof San Luis Obispo •,Slate of California: I
Easements for ingress and egress for every lawful purpose through the south
westerly twenty-five (25) feet of lot 22 in block 4 of ?ixlini Terrace, and
i thf
rough the northeasterly twenty-five (25) feet of lot 16 in block 3 o
Fixlini Terrace, in the city of San Lula Obispo, according to the map there-
of filed in the office of the recorder of said county in book A, page 10iJ
of Maps--including easementsl•or'all kinds of vehicular and pedestrian traf-
fic• and for utilities of every kind, both public and private, and for the
-installation, establishment, maintenance and repairing of the same in the I
broadest sense, and for all facilitles and eiuipment necessary or convenient
thereto, including all types of poles, conduits, pipes and the like. I
I
AA
Diad rarch 15. 1966
l Richard T. Treadwell I
sTAYE Of C%LlMxxu
�•.. T nr San Luis Ob ago
I oa Ya 12 15. 19 a r.. ,tiT.wa T- rdTnF TMa`dwe= z
I a V+oT Patdi is sad(.v..id saw.P"--Ab .pian l as
Achard T. Treadwell and
onaKahee Gerald ne Treadwell. ,� I
B
wwL
� w�!Ia wwb.Tilwd H dr wilLiw ' -
C�IiVwi+•ad'TeV.t.tpd eL-• nIy d eLe wr. ,•,
t.
MA
-z - ! I Crime Ku
tai
:.-,o t,. :=c Martin Polin � rattm"We to" C'
1• • tdtlfoew
:two ITyprd we Fr6wWj
rrt4 Old.tr Cx.,Rw er lan Y.� --- ' /a✓
' ! J
RECORDING REGUESTED ST Doct;ReBc N11.—_S��? ��1389 Pw;897 ,
Parti" PolinPAST
1�P0,gj 7CW I f/
I /
1026 ':horro Street AT � rir.►wsi.1%R.. 1�
San Luis Cbi3Do, Calli.93u pia P,
a" L016 011160,0 COORTT. CAL-
18
Al-
r www.rc..w.w ons I
MAR 181966
�rRic?:ard T. _reac.Tall �
2070 ?i-11r1 Street upty R et I
G a San Lull UbispO, Calif.
I ` L J Fee
.. .......... SPLI
ACE ABOVE THIS NE FOR RECOROER'S USE I
a
Arnz LR-S.
I
Grant Deed
t to o C tr,w rover rrwr.wm nn.[,rww.rct.w.nwFT corw.r� I
Ir FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION• r jpt of.hid is hmeby arino.lcdged.
RICFARD T. TRE;Dd_LL and CONSTANCE GERALDINE TRE,:DdELL I
hrreby CRANToS) to JOE D. 1R:,Y and --LIZ:.BETH T. WARY, as TRUSTEES, Jointly,
i the following described real property in the City of San Luis Obisoo,
Ii Cn®q of San Luis Obispo. ,State of California:
Lot 22 and the southeasterl• feet of
I Terrace, in'the city of SanLuis Obispo,lot 21 in bloc -e ma Fihereo
ccorl.n o••, a map thereof
I filed in the office of the recorder of said county In book A, nage lOJ I
Or Y.a Ds.
IlR=SE VING TO TME GRANTORS easements for Ingress and egress for every
lful purpose through the southwesterly twenty-five 25) feet o'
aw '
I lot 22 in Block 4 of ?Sz11n1 Terrace, aforesaid, including easements
for 311 kinds of vehicular and pedestrian traii'ic and for utliities of
J every kind, both public and private, and for the installation, estab-
f lishstent, maintenance 2nd repairing of the same in the broadest sense,
I and :or all acilities and equipment necessary or convenient thereto, '
including all types of poles, condults, pipes and the like.
I I
I
DAw_ -Latoh_L•S . 1966. [
IT.%TE OF C.%UMRNt%
C'OC•.YTT OF-40I1�a{li g�i3 ( •i� I
� V=ryt�t0 SiveaSL� Ij�f j
a1_= 9'Ln
lj 196b•t.r,. .,.,., .�,. Costance Geraldine Treadwell a I
;=n L a 444n. ►rhr¢ 0. .-t 1,-.1a Sl .P-wry
Richard T. Tre�dwet�
and Constancer-1d1ne—Tr�ve11 b '
I ! o
r I
i - tnw.ww b s Ol
0,w to the pss . S.Ir Ysr s ..h...E.J r,tr riN.iw
Ass�ackw/rhdant IIW � nw.•VJ 0,h.Mw. I
' 4P0zr-.
77* MAW
GSL �
IMaT'31n ?Olin soon cow*coma
•!• •.\.1` !CC ww Ify- r I4i.nn1, t1tR6Tna
,. •
- --
TNk� Ns _F.rr..w or L•an No
-- I
LIM
<W Y� 2Z: ai^ „.a w• t:l °'' 'g' la O_
01(1 O
B• t go, 9i ttl t • / !� 9TP ]�]L An 9p=]s
i Pat= all 1 0 Jd 11 i �d............ a � G v_e
_ T FF LLW 6
] g q 1F S w
Ul
oil
o ]
a P
Lu
_34d
11
p � �
iz02
C a
a Y. arl
$ 1 '
e Y_�
R
I" R L
Liz
r
I
IID
Alis
1 OY Q\ � \Ipa\ s• � I
=
rwl\v u°n]I°I' MJIM L=
ISI 1plm �
.._� COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
: = 08pautment o f...cEnERat sERvices
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALLFORNIA 93408 • (805)781-52&
\ DUANE P. LAB, DIRECTOR
April 29, 1993
Mrs. Mary Beth Schroeder
2085 Wilding Lane
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
PROPOSED CHURCH OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS ON JOHNSON AVENUE
You have made several inquiries of this office regarding a proposed
church on Johnson Avenue in the City of San Luis Obispo. You also
have specifically asked about communications between
representatives) of the proposed project and the County of San
Luis Obispo as an adjacent property owner to the project.
As you may be aware, in the summer and fall of 1992, the County had
embarked upon schematic architectural design for a replacement
hospital facility on our Johnson Avenue site. A further refinement
of the Hospital Site Master Plan was included in this work. In an
effort to properly plan our site, contact was made with a
representative of the Latter Day Saints project. The County was
provided a preliminary site plan and project elevations by J. D.
Brannon, Architect. I believe this was sometime in July of 1992.
Further follow-up communication may have. occurred, but was cursory
in nature. To the best of my knowledge, the issue of a shared or
common site access drive was never formally discussed with the
County nor was access to Bishop Street discussed. Such a request
would normally be processed through this department, therefore,
neither a positive or negative response was provided.
The Board of Supervisors received and filed the Hospital Schematic.
Design and Site Master Plan in October of 1992. A copy of the Site
Master Plan is available for your review in this office. In
February 1993 the Board directed interim continued operation of the
County Hospital. They also directed staff to develop a plan
wherein the County would continue to provide preventive and primary
care services but would contract with other hospitals for acute
care services, transitioning out of the hospital business. This
leaves site planning for the County's Johnson Avenue/Hospital Site
in a "yet to be determined" state and no immediate site work is
currently contemplated.
Mary Beth Schroeder
April 29, 1993
Page two
I hope this information adequately addresses your concerns. This
letter supersedes Curtis Sorgrs letter of April 20, 1993 from this
office. Should you have any further questions, don't hesitate to
contact me.
R. GEORGE ROSENBERGER
Deputy Director of General Services
Attachments
c - Curt Sorg, County Property Manager
Raryne Dargan, Administration
✓Judy Lautner, City Community Development
eje%k%c&oeder.RGR
I t
1 '
/
i
/
-
OF
/ O, /
:wj
.�`7i8�g3
ire
/�,1 , �Z
of
eloe� �
ewe` G
O /
RECEIVED
MAY 1 8 1993
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA
J � �
,
y �
/
�r
- u
� r r
o •
N"'TIN AGENDA
--
Wass"�� s� ITEM #
vol
alYell
,
all
04,
41
D,IFSTo:
i• Action
10Camc1 d CDe7 DIR
o o F{I I.Dlit.
D fVJ Dom. � ���, 4-4? Gly
'.!ChIT.T L3
1:l DI?
/DFi-scDp UT1LDiR jr.%�� !/}�)�• / ply/ / /
all
;:k( 1
y;ysyry-
M AY 1 0 1993
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA
THECHURCHOF
JESUS CHRISTMEETING AGENDA
OFLATTER-DAY DATE- ;f-3 ffEM
C
SAINTS
SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA STAKE
May 3, 1293--S T 0:
I ❑�/'Dcno!cs Action ❑ FYI
lJ j
Mayor, Peg Pinard Ca�ncl Q�CDJ D11 t
Vice Mayor, Bill Roalman vu'o Cl �ZI'L-'Z'
City Councilmember, Penny Rappa � GT.o CD FIRE:.
Il �iT'O:��T�Y EDFVJ DiR.
City Councilmember, David Romero [XCLZ?u/.;_;