HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/01/1990, 6 - A.) TRACT 1750: A SUBDIVISION TO CREATE 251 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, 88 MEDIUM-DENSITY AIRSPACE CONDOMIN N MEETING DATE:
�iU8�1�0 ���►�I�����pj�IIIIIII City Of San LUIS OBISPO 5-1-90.0ftZe
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER:
FROM: Arnold Jonas, ommunity Development Director
PREPARED BY: Judith L utner, Associate Planner'
SUBJECT: a. ) Tract 1750: A subdivision toycreate 251 single-family
lots, 88 medium-density airspace condominiums, a
neighborhood park and a small "historical" park, in five
phases;
b. ) PD 1449-B: A planned development rezoning to allow
exceptions to lot sizes, yards, and density.
The proposals affect property on the east, side of the railroad
tracks in the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: By motion, continue consideration of the request
to June 5, 1990, as requested by the applicant.
Report-in-brief
The City Council adopted the Edna-Islay Specific Plan in 1982. Since
then, development of the area has been proceeding in phases, in
accordance with the specific plan. In 1989, a vesting tentative map
(Tract 1360 - subdivider: John French) to subdivide the remainder of
the area on the west side of the railroad tracks was approved. The first
phase of that map is near completion.
The first phase on the east side of the tracks was approved in 1986.
That phase, consisting of 131 lots, is also close to complete.
The applicants are now asking for approval of a vesting tentative map to i
subdivide the remainder of the Islay (east) side. Construction would
take place in six phases, extending over a period of several years.
The project is complex. Involved is the creation of a variety of
residential lots, dedication of parks and open space areas, improvement
of the creek habitat, creation of a railroad buffer area, and
construction of bicycle paths.
There are several issues to be discussed by the council. The Planning
Commission and Architectural Review Commission hearings raised concerns
that the developers prefer to resolve prior to council consideration of
this tract map. The developers are, therefore, asking for a continuance
to June 5, 1990 to allow them to make changes to their plans and to
obtain information not now available. Staff concurs with this request.
However, the City Attorney advised that, to meet time limits imposed by
the Subdivision Map Act, a report be transmitted that explains the
Planning Commission's action. This report fulfills that requirement.
RECEIVF, D
APR Z 1990
CITY CERN
SAN LUIS 0;%I; 0 CA 5:3DA77.
-I
�►u�ilillli�i �d�li MY O� san LUIS OBI SPO
SlaSs COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
1107 Tank Farm Road
Page 2
The issues of greatest concern to the Planning Commission were:
specific plan consistency: The map for Tract 1750 differs from the
specific plan map in several respects: an area proposed for a mix of
low- and medium-density housing is proposed to be a small-lot development
zoned R-1-PD, with density averaging 7.5 units per acre (slightly above
the 7 units per acre allowed in the R-1 zone) ; the proposed railroad
buffer area is smaller in area than shown on specific plan maps; the
phasing boundaries differ and the number of phases is greater than shown
on the specific plan maps; the limits of development against the
hillside vary - homes proposed along the southwest side are lower, while
homes along the northeast are-higher; the private recreation area has
been replaced by a small public park containing the Rodriguez adobe.
The previous interim Community Development Director determined that the
differences are consistent with the specific plan, in that there are no
major changes to land uses involved in the changes. Planning
Commissioners disagreed on the significance of the changes. Three areas
generating the largest amount of disagreement were:
* The lots against the hillside. The specific plan map shows a street
as the upper limit of development against the northeasterly hillside.
The map shows lots in this location. The council will need to decide if
the proposal for homes on the upper side of the street is appropriate in
this location.
* The bike path in the preservation area. The specific plan
differentiates treatment of areas designated "creek improvement" and
"creek preservation". Creek preservation areas already have habitat
value, and are to be preserved by the provision of larger setbacks from
the top of bank than are required in creek improvement areas.
Specifically, bike paths in preservation areas are required to be located
a minimum of 26' from the top of bank. The path starting in the public
park has been routed into the adjoining creek preservation area, closer
than 26' from the top of bank. This routing happened as a result of
minor changes to the street layout of Tract 1376 made as part of the
final tract map for that development. It has since been been determined
that a colony of Western Pond Turtles, which live in the preservation
area, are now considered a threatened species.
At this time, it is difficult to go back and modify the bicycle path
route. The Planning Commission recommendation is to have the developer
fund a study to determine the impacts of the proposed path on the turtles
and then for the developer to mitigate those impacts.
* Railroad buffer area. The size of the railroad buffer area is
proposed to be smaller than shown on the specific plan map. The specific
plan allows for modifications to this buffer area. The council must
6-z
city of San Luis OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
1107 Tank Farm Road
Page 3
decide if the alternative chosen, involving a combination of distance and
sound walls for mitigation, is acceptable.
Hillside dedication and trails: The use and ownership of the hillside
was a concern of commissioners and members of the public. The specific
plan says the owner is to grant an open space easement to the city, and
that long-term maintenance is a responsibility of the owner. Consistent
with this requirement, the developers are offering the easement to the
city.
The Parks and Recreation Element calls for trails on the hillside. After
reviewing a trails plan created by the developer, the Parks and
Recreation Commission recommends that the developer instead donate an
amount to the city, equal to the cost of developing the trails, so that
they may be installed later if determined necessary.
The council may prefer, given the degree of public use already occurring
and expected in the future, to require that the hillside be granted to
the city in fee.
Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the council continue the
discussion, to allow the developer, as requested, to respond to concerns
raised by the Planning and Architectural Review Commissions. Staff
encourages council comments regarding items that need clarification or
additional information.
DISCUSSION
Background
Situation
The applicants want to develop the remainder of their property on the
"Islay Hill" side of the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area. They are asking
for approval of a master vesting tentative subdivision map and a planned
development rezoning. Final maps would be submitted for each of five
phases, consistent with the approved tentative map.
The Planning Commission reviewed this request in a study session on
January 3, 1990, and held public hearings on February 28 and March 28,
1990. On March 28, the commission voted 3-2 to recommend approval of the
tentative map to the council. The Architectural Review Commission
reviewed plans for the condominium and apartment sites on April 16, 1990,
and continued consideration with direction to the applicants. The Parks
` and Recreation Commission reviewed the trail proposal for Islay Hill on
March 7, 1990, and recommended that no trails be installed as part of
this development. The Cultural Heritage Committee visited the adobe site
3
11111119iI11$in1U111111ll city OF SM LUIS OBI SPO C
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
1107 Tank Farm Road
Page 4
and discussed the use of the adobe. That committee will have reviewed
the proposed adobe park site by the time the council receives this
report.
Data summary
Address: 1107 Tank Farm Road
Applicant/property owner: Pacifica Corporation (Stuart Greene, project
director)
zoning: R-1-SP, R-2-SP, and C/OS-40-SP
General plan: Low-density residential
Environmental status: EIR certified in 1982; no further study needed,
but monitoring of EIR mitigation measures will
take place.
Project action deadline: June 28, 1990
Site description
The site is a large (139 acres) , irregular-shaped parcel of varying
topography. A creek cuts across the property from north to south,
starting near the intersection of Orcutt with Tank Farm Road. A portion
of Islay Hill takes up about a third of the area. An adobe dating from
the 1850's is the only building on the site.
The site surrounds (on three sides) the first development on this side
of the tracks, Tract 1376 ("The Arbors") . The 131 homes in Tract 1376
are complete or under construction.
Project description
The applicants propose a subdivision and planned development to create:
1.. ) 134 single-family lots ranging from 4,100 to 8600 square feet,
averaging 5,500 square feet in area;
2. ) 88 air-space condominiums on 6.6 acres, including a program to
provide 23 units to low- and moderate-income families (administered
by the Housing Authority) ;
3. ) A 1.8-acre site to be made available for sale to the Housing
Authority, adequate in size for twenty apartments (as required by
the specific plan) ;
4. ) 117 large "custom" lots, averaging 9,900 square feet;
5. ) 75 acres of open space to be dedicated to the city (Islay Hill) ,
with a contribution for trail construction;
6. ) A combined city and linear park, totalling 12.9 acres, to be
����� ►�iIIII��p�q�NDI city of san Luis oamspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 5
dedicated to the city;
7. ) A one-acre "mini-park" to be dedicated to the city, containing a
rehabilitated Rodriguez adobe (restoration partially funded by
developer) ;
8. ) A 400,000-gallon water tank to serve a portion of the development
(water from the Edna Saddle and Terrace Hill reservoirs, along with
the new water tank, will adequately serve the entire Edna Islay
area) .
EVALUATION
1. Water availability. No city water is presently available for this
development. The developers plan to use well water for park
irrigation, but none would be available for homes or other
irrigation. The city attorney has previously found that the
creation of lots does not in itself create a demand for water, and
that therefore, lack of water cannot be used as a finding for
denying a subdivision map. Any approval, however, should contain
a condition requiring notification of future lot owners of the
possibility of building permit delay because of lack of water.
Staff notes that such notes have been required on other maps
recently, and that in some instances the State Department of Real
Estate has been unwilling to approve the lots created until water
was made available for them. In those cases, the subdividers are
currently retrofitting plumbing fixtures throughout the city to
build a "bank" of water allocations sufficient to build homes on the
lots. The developers of Tract 1750 have the same option. Staff
notes that approximately seventeen existing homes would have to be
retrofitted for each lot created.
2. specific plan consistency. Several parts of the proposal deviate
from the layout of the specific plan map. The former (interim)
Community Development Director determined that the proposal is
consistent with the plan, and approved minor changes to the plan,
based on finding that changes to the layout of land use do not
significantly affect a planning concept spelled out in this report.
Changes of concern are:
Railroad buffer areas. Instead of the wider landscaped areas along
the railroad, the developer proposes some narrower landscaped
buffers along with walls. Walls are proposed from Tank Farm Road
down to the lots at the end of Wavertree Street. The remainder of
_ the lots do not need walls for noise attenuation. The specific plan
says that alternative sound mitigation methods may be used, if
acceptable to the commission and council.
���� iilVlllllll�pn� ���►U city of san tuns oBispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750 ,
PD 1449-B
Page 6
Lots against the hill. The specific plan calls for a street against
the east side of Islay Hill, whereas the developer wants to place
lots in this location. Also, the lots are higher in elevation than
the road on the specific plan map was shown. The director found
this proposed change consistent with the specific plan, based on the
overall design, which places lots on the west side of the hill lower
down, more than balancing the total open space to be dedicated to
the city. It was the director's determination at the time that the
visual impact of the homes in this location would not be
significant. See below for additional discussion on this item.
Bike path in creek preservation area. The current neighborhood park
plan (off Tank Farm Road, between the two tributaries) shows a bike
path entering the neighborhood park., meandering south for about
1,000 feet, then crossing the creek to continue along the rear of
existing lots. A portion of the path (the last 400 feet) intrudes
into the creek preservation area.
The specific plan calls for different treatments for "creek
preservation" and "creek improvement" areas, as the preservation
areas already have wildlife habitat value. The specific plan says
that bike paths near creeks must be set back a minimum of 26 feet
from the top of bank (see figure 19) .
The southerly portion of the path in the park, then, intrudes in the
preservation area farther than the specific plan allows.
The original proposal for the park, which was approved along with
the first subdivision on the east side of the tracks (copy
attached) , showed the path along the rear of the lots along the
westerly side of the creek from Tank Farm Road southerly. In this
proposal, the path also intrudes into the creek preservation area,
in that in places it is closer than 20 ' from the top of bank.
During the review of the original plan, staff pointed out that the
specific plan called for the bike path to be in the park, then to
cross over the creek. Accordingly, the path was moved to the
opposite side of the creek and crossed over where it intersected
with a street. During preparation of the final map, the layout of
the streets in Tract 1376 was modified slightly. Unfortunately,
because the street intersection had moved south, the bike path
entered the creek preservation area.
An additional concern related to this section of the creek is the
discovery of a threatened species- the Western Pond Turtle - on the
site. When the specific plan EIR was prepared, this turtle was
identified (called the "Pacific Pond Turtle") , but it was not
considered threatened at the time. Further, the creek preservation
area standards were considered adequate to protect creek wildlife.
city of San LUIS OBISpo
00 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
.Page 7
It is unclear at this time if allowing the bike path to enter the
creek preservation area will, in fact., harm the turtle's habitat.
Staff points out that the entire creek is being planted to improve
its habitat value. Not only creek preservation areas, but creek
improvement areas as well, have been designed with minimum 20'
setbacks (except for 360' having 10 foot setbacks, discussed below. )
Except for this one area, where the path was inadvertently routed
into the creek preservation area, the creek preservation area
standards are met and the creek improvement area standards are
exceeded. The present proposal does improve the habitat value of
the creek, in staff's view, in a manner superior to the specific
plan guidelines. The one exception is the stretch of bike path on
the peninsula, within the preservation area.
At this point, the obstacles to relocating the path from the
preservation area are almost insurmountable. The alternatives
considered by staff are:
* Cut across the creek farther north, as shown in the specific
plan. Unfortunately, Tract 1376 is built. The city has an easement
over the rear of the first fourteen creekside lots, but this
easement does not include the right to place a bicycle path in any
part of that location. Further, the area available behind those
lots does not allow much room for a bike path and vegetation. The
city would have to obtain permission from each lot owner to place
a path behind their lots. BAsed on resident comments at earlier
hearings, staff does not believe the lot owners would grant this
permission. Continuing the path down the narrow creekside easement
might also be more destructive to the creek habitat than the present
proposal.
* Cut across farther north, and place the path on Wavertree Street.
The path cannot be placed on Wavertree Street, because city
standards require any on-street path to be on both sides of the
street. There is not room for on-street paths and parking lanes as
well. Also, the path could not be placed off-street, adjacent to
Wavertree, simply because the right-of-way is not wide enough.
Wavertree Street exists and therefore cannot be realigned to
accomodate a bicycle path.
* Use the path to "A°' Street and continue the path along that
street until it is outside the preservation area, then cut in and
continue along the creek. On paper, this solution looks workable,
if awkward. In the field it does not appear feasible because of the
steep slopes in the area where the path would reroute back to the
creekside. This solution, if physically feasible, would require a
wider right-of-way and the path would have to be off-street.
�7
111111111104111 city of san tins oBispo
AONG@ COUNUL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 144.9-B
Page 8
* Use the path to "A" Street and continue down "A" Street to the
railroad underpass. A wider right-of-way would accomplish this
diversion. This alternative would lessen impacts on the creek from
the park southerly. It would also leave the existing bike path
behind the homes in Tract 1376 without any connections at either
end. The counvil would have to decide if it is consistent with the
specific plan to reroute the path from the creek to the road.
* Eliminate the path in the peninsula only but make no other
changes. This alternative would essentially place the beginning of
the path where it is now, lined up with the intersection of Ironbark
and Wavertree Streets. The path in the park would be a separate
amenity. This alternative is feasible, but amounts to a break in
the path. The council would have to decide if the choices available
to a cyclist are acceptable.
Staff will have exhibits available at the meeting, showing these
alternatives.
Conclusion: Staff feels the issue is simply, "Is significant harm
going to come from the path where it is currently shown?" If not,
then the path should be allowed to be built as proposed. If harm
is seen to result, then staff would support eliminating the path in
this location, or imposing mitigation measures to limit the
potential for harm.
Staff recommends that the developer fund a study to determine the
Western Pond Turtle's habits and potential impacts upon its
continued existence here. The study should identify mitigation
measures to limit impacts. A condition has been drafted that
requires such a study and requires the developer to perform
recommended mitigation measures.
3. Grading. The grading proposal is superior to the grading done for
Tract 1376. The great majority of lots have banks of four feet or
less in height. About thirty lots have rear yard banks from five
to 12 feet in height, with most of those in the five through eight-
foot range. Sideyard banks are four feet or lower, except for two,
which are five and six feet in height.
These bank heights could be reduced if the site were essentially
flattened, or if the lots themselves sloped. Of these two
alternatives, the second is preferable. However, construction on
unevenly sloped lots would require the developers to custom-design
each house, considerably adding to the cost. The difference in cost
would not likely be acceptable to future homebuyers, given that
homeowners typically want usable flat yard areas and are unwilling
to pay extra for the inconvenience of creating their own. Unpadded
-Ir
��� ►�II1111�� ►��B�II city of San lues OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 9
lots also require unique drainage solutions that can be costly and
inefficient. In staff's view, there is not a significant public
gain to be obtained from requiring the small and standard lots to
be unpadded.
The hillside lots are a different matter. The lots adjacent to the
hillside open space are larger and more visible to the general
public. Staff is recommending that grading on these lots be limited.
to the house, driveway, and small yard areas, consistent with the
hillside standards in the Land Use Element. However, the
potentially unstable soils on lots within the "shallow slide area"
(lots 170 - 173 and lots 189 - 192 in phases 5 and 6) should be
removed, filled, and recompacted in accordance with the geology
report recommendations. Grading of these lots is, therefore,
necessary to assure stability. Staff is recommending, in the case
of these lots, that the fill and recompaction essentially match the
original terrain.
The lots on the west slope of the hill have been designed in
accordance with the geology report recommendation, which says that
i, lot lines should be kept at least five feet away from the outer
limits of the slide area. The Engineering Division notes that slope
stabilization is not an exact science, and therefore recommends a
more conservative setback from this slide, unless further geological
investigation proves the slide is stable as is. Engineering is
recommending a 50' setback, but points out that the council needs
to make a policy decision on this, as there are no definitive
guidelines. Conditions have been recommended that address the slide
areas in accordance with the Engineering Division's recommendations.
4. Hillside lots versus public street. As mentioned above, under
"specific plan consistency", the specific plan calls for a public
street against the open space area on the east side of the hill,
while the developers are proposing lots on the uphill side. The
difference is primarily visual, since other factors (such as fire,
public access, and geology) can be mitigated and have been on
similar lots throughout the city.
The appearance of the open space area from a distance is not likely
to be significantly altered by the imposition of homes as opposed
to a street in this location. However, from the point of view of
a driver along "A" Street, the difference could be significant.
After hearing public testimony at the February 28 Planning
Commission meeting, on the value of visual access from the street,
staff now recommends that the street layout be modified so that "L"
Street defines the upper limit of development. A connection from
"A" Street to "L" Street is preferable, to allow a car travelling
along "A" Street to drive next to the hillside, uninterrupted by
homes. Because of the slope, a modification to the street layout
411111$11l 111$ city of San tins OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 10
may be necessary to achieve this goal.
At the Planning Commission hearings, the issue of lots against the
hillside along the east side of the hill was significant, with the
two dissenting commissioners preferring a street against the
hillside, and with public testimony, especially from nearby
residents, also supporting a street. This is the only issue where
the staff recommendation differs from . the Planning Commission
recommendation.
Staff does not object to the upper limits of development as now
proposed, however. In other words, we would support moving "L"
Street to the location now shown as the rear lot lines of the lots
adjacent to the hillside. We feel that the dedication of open space
as currently proposed exceeds that originally envisioned by the
specific plan, since the lots on the west side of the hill are lower
on the hillside, and the lots on the east side do not extend as far
along Orcutt Road. The attached map shows the tradeoffs proposed.
5. Railroad buffer. As noted above, the railroad buffer area differs
from the standards in the specific plan, but the specific plan
allows for differences if acceptable to the commission and council.
Staff supports the differences, for the following reasons:
* The proposal includes a plan for small homes on small lots to
meet part of the medium-density requirement of the specific plan.
Staff finds this type housing is different from most other medium-
density proposals in that it allows for individual lot ownership
different from the restrictions of condominiums, but with the
advantage of proportionately lower cost than for larger lots, and
less yard area to maintain. The proposal, in staff's view, meets
a need in the community. Further, the smaller lots are not so small
that privacy is unattainable.
To provide this type housing, however, takes more land area for the
same number of homes than an apartment development would take. The
developer's answer: make the railroad buffer area smaller.
* The railroad buffer area is not a usable open space area. It is
a noise mitigation and visual barrier. The current proposal still
includes a densely-planted buffer, although narrower than the
specific plan design.
* The sound walls can be attractively designed and effectively
landscaped. Further, it is likely that either the developers or the
lot owners would install fencing on these lots. The sound walls can ,
be more attractive than fences, especially if required to be
landscaped as part of the tract approval.
����,�; iB(lf�p ���l► city of San tins OBISpo
WhiMe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 11
Staff notes that if the council requires the original standards to
be adhered to, that requirement would effectively eliminate the
small lots, as the smaller number remaining would not likely be
financially feasible. This change, in essence, would constitute a
denial of the map.
Staff's support of the map is a support for the entire proposal,
which we feel, on balance, is a superior proposal to the original
specific plan map.
6. Drainage swales on the hillside. One concern noted at the February
28 commission meeting was the implied culverting of drainage swales
now existing on the hillside, particularly on the lots on the
easterly side of the hill. If the above recommendation for a street
along the hillside is followed, the swales become effectively a moot
point. The street will intercept drainage from swales, rendering
the downhill swales unnecessary for a significant amount of
drainage.
If the council feels strongly that the swales should remain as is,
it could require their retention. In staff's estimation, lot 224
may be undevelopable with this condition, and the others may be
developed around it. Staff does not see the public benefit of
requiring swale retention, when views of these swales will likely
be obscured by homes and the swales themselves will likely be
planted.
The Planning Commission action did not .include a requirement to
retain these swales.
7. Trails on the hillside. As noted in the previous report, the Parks
and Recreation Element calls for developing trails on the Islay Hill
open space when the site is developed. The Parks and Recreation
Commission reviewed a trail plan on March 7, 1990. Because of
public testimony on the sensitivity of the soils, that commission
recommended that no trails be established at this time, but that
public access be allowed and the developer be required to pay to the
city the estimated cost of installing the proposed trails. This
amount would be allocated to maintenance and improvements of the
Islay Hill open space exclusively. If, after several years of use,
the council determines that trails are needed, they can be installed
at that time.
The Planning Commission supported this approach. Staff concurs with
this recommendation, and has included a condition requiring the
developer to pay the estimated cost. The developer is also
supportive of this recommendation.
8. Schools. Staff has heard from residents in the general area of the
City Of San IDIS OBISPO
NMZB COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 12
development, who are concerned about the development's impact on
schools. The environmental impact report for the Edna-Islay
Specific Plan concluded that as the area is occupied, impact on
schools should be monitored, and the developers may be required to
post bonds to help finance school facilities or help bus students.
Since the EIR was approved, the school board imposed fees on all new
development. These fees have been paid with each residence built
in the Edna-Islay area since the fees were adopted. The City
Attorney says that additional fees for schools should not be imposed
on this subdivision without similar action on all others in the
city.
The school district did not project a need for a new school in the
Edna-Islay area, but anticipated that if the Edna Valley were
further developed a school somewhere in the vicinity may be needed.
Staff has met with school officials in the recent past on this
issue, and found that there are alternative school sites superior
to the Edna-Islay specific plan area that the school board would
prefer to develop. The Edna-Islay area has been rejected because ,
of its nearness to the airport and the .need for a school more ,
centrally located in the area of need.
one concern voiced by the residents is that because the proposed
development includes single-family lots instead of apartments, the
number of children may exceed that anticipated by the specific plan
EIR. The EIR (p. 67) says:
"An additional projection of student populations was made based on
the assumption that the various housing types would generate
approximately the same numbers of students. The reason for this
assumption is the growing number of single parents living in medium
density housing and increased numbers of childless working couples
living in low density housing. As a worst case condition, student
generation rates in the Laguna Area, which has the highest student
generation rate in the city, were utilized, and population
projections were based on the citywide rate for single-family
housing. "
Hence, the change from apartments to single family lots was in fact
anticipated in the EIR.
Staff has provided this information in the hope of dispelling any
confusion on the subject, and notes that the city does not control
the school district, nor does the district override the city. The
two agencies operate independently. The city is willing to assist
the school district in finding suitable locations for schools. No
action is needed on the part of the council.
������►�►►i�ifllll►�1►u�u►91�1ii city of San LUIS OBISPO
WN.As COUNCIL AGENDAREPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 13
9. Well site. If a well can be developed onsite, the developer would
like to use the water to irrigate the creek buffer areas and the
park, ahead of any other development.
A groundwater hydrologist has recommended a location on the west
side of Islay Hili, in the open space area, as a possible place to
find water. The developers are asking for permission to drill a
test well at the site (location shown on attached plan) . They need
to know if a well. is an acceptable use in an open space area.
The city's Utilities Department has no objection to the request, and
notes that an improved access road would not be required for such
a limited well site. Therefore, the well site would be nearly
invisible as developed.
The Planning Commission supported the well use in the open space
area. Staff finds the use of the open space area for a well
consistent with uses otherwise allowed in this zone, although the
zoning regulations are silent on the subject of wells.
If a well is unacceptable in this location, the developers are
willing to find other means to provide water, including retrofitting
plumbing fixtures, to allow them to landscape and maintain a
creekside buffer area. In staff's view, if water can be obtained
that does not affect the city's supply, it should be used to improve
the creek habitat and develop the park.
10. Medium density design. One part of the medium-density proposal for
the site is the condominium site, discussed further below. Another
part of the proposal includes small (average 5,500 square feet) lots
with smaller homes (averaging 1,582 square feet; all three-
bedroom) . The developers propose this portion of the medium-
density area be designated R-1-PD, instead of R-2, to create a
single-family neighborhood and to allow more flexibility in bedroom
counts. The overall density of the lots is higher than normally
allowed in the R-1 zone, but lower than the maximum in the R-2 zone.
Compared with a typical R-1 development, this proposal is only
slightly more dense (7.5 as opposed to 7.0 dwellings per acre) .
The zoning regulations define "dwelling units" differently in the
R-1 and the multi-family zones. In the R-1 zone, a single dwelling
of any size is considered a "unit". In the other three residential
zones, a two-bedroom dwelling is a "unit".
The total number of "equivalent units" (as defined by the zoning
regulations) , on the easterly side of the tracks, if this area were
designated R-2, is 519. If counted instead as single dwellings (R-
1) , the number is 471. It is this unit count, along with the
increased density on the condominium and housing authority lots,
G-/3
klicity of San lues OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 14
that led to the staff's determination that a density bonus is
required for the development.
The homes may appeal to first-time buyers or "empty-nesters" (who
often prefer extra bedrooms for guests or offices) . Some drawbacks
are the increased lot coverage and proportionally larger areas
devoted to streets. Some advantages are that because the lots and
homes are smaller, they should cost less than the larger homes in
Tract 1376; there will be less maintenance of yards, and they may
appeal to a population that is inadequately served.
Staff supports the inclusion of smaller homes on smaller lots as
meeting the intent of the specific plan in providing medium-density
housing. For greater flexibility, staff also supports the R-1-PD
rezoning. Staff notes that the development, now under construction,
on the north side of Tank Farm Road, west of the tracks, was rezoned
to R-1-PD to allow a different bedroom mix than would have been
allowed in the R-2 zone, as well as to maintain the single-family
character of the development. The present project is similar to
that one, except that these lots are larger (density is lower) and -
-
the streets are public.
11. Affordable housing and density bonus. The developer is offering a
site to the Housing Authority sufficient for 20 medium-density
dwellings, consistent with the specific plan. The Housing Authority
component is over the density allowed in the R-2 zone.
The specific plan says the developer shall offer to the Authority
a lot large enough for twenty dwellings. The developers offered the
lot west of the condominiums and next to the railroad tracks, which
is of sufficient size to accommodate 20 two-bedroom dwellings
consistent with the city's R-2 standards. The Housing Authority
(HA) , however, wants to build fourteen two-bedroom and six three-
bedroom apartments on this site. The three-bedroom units cause the
overall allowed density on this lot to be exceeded by fifteen
percent. (Density is 12.8 units per acre. )
Originally, the developer designed a. development for the HA lot not
as an actual proposal, but only to show that twenty units could be
placed there that meet property development standards. The HA liked
the proposal, and was happy to have the developer do the design work
so that it is compatible with the condominiums next door. Working
with the Authority, the developer has redesigned the project to
include more open space, no enclosed garages, and six three-bedroom
units. Therefore, this lot has become a part of the planned
development proposal and a density bonus of 15% is being requested,
for it.
Beyond the housing authority lot, the proposal includes an offer of
city of San tins osIspo
ININGs COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 15
23 condominium units to be restricted for sale to qualifying low-
and moderate-income families. These units would be randomly
selected from the 88 proposed. The number of restricted units is
5% of the total number of dwellings on this side of the tracks, and
is slightly greater than the increase in the number of "equivalent
units" over the specific plan maximum (519 - 498 = 21) . Staff sees
the project as including a density bonus request, because of this
overall difference.
The specific plan sets standards for approving planned developments
and density bonuses. The standards (see page 17 of the EISP, copy
attached) are similar to the criteria listed in the zoning
regulations for approving planned developments and density bonuses.
Staff finds that the affordable housing component is desirable, and
the design of the small lots meets a need in the city. These
special components of the project justify a density bonus.
12. Condominium standards. The city has an ordinance setting property
development standards (open space, storage, private yards, etc. ) for
residential condominium development.
e
The condominium development will meet all of the standards. In the
R-2 zone, a minimum of 250 square feet of private open space is
required for each unit. Each unit has 250 square feet of private
open space, provided either in an interior "courtyard" or on a
balcony over the garage. Additional 80-square-foot private open
space areas are provided 'off the living rooms, but these areas do
not meet the minimum width requirement of ten feet. A minimum of.
750 square feet of total (private and common) open space per unit
is required. About 950 square feet of total open space per unit is
provided. Required storage units are not indicated, but this
requirement may be met with minor changes in the plans.
The Architectural Review Commission reviewed the condominium
proposal on April 16, 1990. That commission had concerns about the
effect of a row of garages on the private street, and wanted to see
larger common areas and more evenly distributed guest parking
spaces. The architect is revising the plans, and plans on having
them ready for the ARC's May 14 meeting. Staff would prefer that
the council not take a final action on this project until the ARC
has granted schematic approval.
13. Yard setbacks. The applicants have requested street yard exceptions
for eight homes on the smaller lots (see sheets P6 and P7) . The
exceptions range from three to seven feet and involve only portions
of the buildings. The largest exceptions, for lots numbered 90 in
both phase 1 and 2, are for homes on large but fairly shallow lots.
The exceptions will afford easier access to the garages (all of
which are set back at least 20 feet) , and will provide more usable
6 -/s
111111III1jflllu4181N city or San LUIS OBISp0
A COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 16
yard area. In staff's view, the exceptions are minor, and present
no health, safety, or visual problems. Staff's recommendation to
the Planning Commission was for approval.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the street yard
setbacks, but denial of the sideyard exceptions also requested.
Since the building of homes on thoselots is still years away, the
applicants are reconsidering their request, and looking at different
designs for the small lots, including zero-lot-line proposals. The
streetyard exceptions may be irrelevant.
Staff now recommends that any streetyard exceptions be considered
at administrative hearings when home designs are finalized. If the
council is concerned, as was the Planning Commission, that sideyard
exceptions would affect the solar access and liveability of these
lots, then the recommended condition allowing no sideyard exceptions
should be retained.
14. Detention basin. The applicants have used a method for calculating
the needed capacity of the proposed detention basin (next to the ,-
tracks, south of the adobe) that differs from the technique employed
for specific plan calculations. The Public Works Department is
unable to verify if the proposed capacity will be adequate, and is
requiring additional calculations and a review by the original
specific plan engineer.
If the capacity of this basin is determined inadequate, then it will
need to be enlarged. The result of that enlargement will be the
removal of some of the residential lots.
Staff would prefer to have the additional calculations and review
prior to council action. This information may be available at the
council meeting or soon after. However, the impact of requiring a
larger basin, if needed, will be to have fewer houses. The council
can determine if fewer houses is acceptable.
15. Power lines. The specific plan calls for a linear park beneath the
electrical transmission lines on the northeast side of Islay hill.
The width of the park is not stated in the specific plan, but scales
at approximately 100' on the specific plan map. The developer
originally showed the park as 50' wide. The Planning Commission
recommends that it be 100' wide, and that no buildings or parking
areas be allowed. within this area. The commission's concern arose
out of reports on the possible danger of concentrated electrical
fields to humans. An additional condition, requiring a statement
to be recorded on each lot near the power lines, was imposed. The ,
statement is intended to inform lot buyers that they live near such
a field.
6 Ao
city of San tins OBISp0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 17
The developer is revising plans to show the wider linear park. As
now proposed, the park would provide access to Islay Hill, but would
not include any amenities, such as picnic tables, that would
encourage people to stay in this area.
16. Islay Hill open space and related parcel map. The developers are
offering the dedication of an easement over the Islay Hill open
space, consistent with the specific plan. The easement would
include the entire 75-acre site.
Recently, the Planning Division received a parcel map that would
create the open space area as a separate parcel. The applicants of
that parcel map, who are the former owners of the Islay site, want
to create the parcel so that it can be transferred to them by the
present owners (Pacifica) with the easement intact.
There are three issues raised by this parcel map:
_ 1) Will the creation of a separate parcel only usable as open space
lead to a future "taking" issue? In other words, will the new
owners later try to obtain compensation from the city for not
allowing development on the site?
The answer is no, according to the City Attorney. The new owners
have been informed ahead of time, through the specific plan and
the easement, that the hillside is intended for open space uses
only. Further, these uses include limited agricultural and
similar uses, and therefore the property owner is not deprived
of "all reasonable uses".
2) Is an equestrian center appropriate on the hillside? There is
one difference on the parcel map from the Tract 1750 map: an
area approximating a possible equestrian site is excluded from
the open space easement. The applicants of the parcel map would
prefer to retain the option of developing an equestrian center
in the northeast portion of the site.
The specific plan says an equestrian center may be allowed in
that location, subject to a Planning Commission use permit.
Given the recommended action on the trails, staff is concerned
about the possibility of an equestrian center on the hillside.
Horses need trails, and if none are created they may create their
own, which could be damaging to the hillside. Further, such a
center may not be necessary in this area, given the possibility
of similar future development in the vicinity (county) .
Staff is recommending that the council require the open space
easement to include the entire hillside, including the area
�-l7
�����v �WiIIIIII�P° ��NdUI city of san lues oBispo _
iONG@ COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1750
PD 1449-B
Page 18
designated for equestrian use. The specific plan shows the
equestrian area as part of the open space, presumably because
such a use is consistent with open space uses. The issue of
whether or not to allow the equestrian center can be resolved
with the required Planning Commission use permit.
3) What does the council ultimately want the hillside to be used
for? The specific plan says that the hillside will remain in
private ownership and will be maintained privately, but that the
city will have an easement over it. This arrangement presumes
little public use of the property.
Staff notes that the hillside is already used regularly by hikers
from within and without the neighborhood. The Parks and
Recreation Element shows trails up the hill as part of the city's
overall trails plan. It is likely that it. will be used
increasingly by the public.
Normally, in cases where public use is encouraged, it is best for
the city to own the property so that it can be properly
maintained and supervised. The council may find it more _
appropriate to require dedication of the open space area in fee
than as an easement. Staff would support this action.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Concerns of other departments are contained in the discussion above or
in the conditions.
ALTERNATIVES
The council may continue consideration, as recommended by staff and
requested by the applicants.
The council may approve the map, as proposed, as recommended by staff,
or with changed conditions.
The council may deny the map, if it makes findings to support a denial.
RECOMMENDATION
Move to continue until June 5, 1990, to allow the applicants to complete
changes to the plans and resolve some of the issues.
If the council prefers to approve or deny the map at this meeting, then
it should adopt a resolution approving or denying it. Draft resolutions
are attached.
d -I8'
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR TRACT 1750, CREATING
251 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, 88 CONDOMINIUMS, TWO PUBLIC PARKS,
AND A LOT TO BE SOLD TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY,
ON TANK FARM ROAD, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS
(TRACT 1750)
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 subdivision request Tract
17.50, the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Architectural
Review Commission's action, the Cultural Heritage Committee's
recommendation, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes
the following findings:
1. The design of the tentative map and the proposed
improvements are consistent with the general plan and
specific plan for the Edna-Islay area.
2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of
development allowed in an R-1-PD-SP and an R-2-PD-SP zone.
3 . The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements
are not likely to cause serious health problems,
substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
4 . The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements
will not conflict with easements for access through (or use
of the property within) the proposed subdivision.
5. The Community Development Director has determined that the
proposed subdivision is substantially in compliance with
the Edna-Islay Specific Plan and that an environmental
impact report was certified for the specific plan, and no
further environmental study is needed.
617
Resolution no (1990 Series) '
Tract 1750
Page 2
SECTION 2. The tentative map for Tract 1750 is approved
subject to the following conditions:
Conditions:
1. Multiple final maps may be filed.
2 . Development of the subdivision must be in accordance with
the Edna-Islay Specific Plan, except as specifically shown
on the tentative maps approved by the council on (date) or
as conditioned herein.
Fire Department requirements:
3. Fire protection facilities required by the fire department
are to be installed by the developer. Such facilities,
including all access roads, shall be installed and made
serviceable prior to and during the time of building
construction.
4. Hydrants are to be spaced at 500' maximum intervals.
5. The subdivider shall pay $60, 000 to the city for a fast
response vehicle with off-road capability, to serve this
area. Payment of $60,000, adjusted for inflation between
tentative map approval and time of payment, shall be made
prior to approval of the final map for phase 6.
6. All structures will require an approved, automatic fire-
sprinkler system, to the satisfaction of the Fire
Department. Minimum water services shall be one-inch
diameter.
7. The developer shall fund $10,000 for their share of the
cost of a device that lets Fire Station 3 know when
railroad tracks are blocked by a train at Orcutt Road, or
three Opticom intersection controllers for responding fire
apparatus.
8. A 20 '-wide paved access road shall be provided through lots
183 , 184, and 185 to provide access to the open space area,
to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and City
Engineer.
9 . Emergency access to the Islay Hill open space shall be
provided to the approval of the Fire Department.
Creek and detention basin requirements:
6-Z D
Resolution no (1990 Series)
C. Tract 1750
Page 3
10. A minimum setback of 20 ' from the creek top of bank is
required for rear property lines or any improvements.
11. A creek protection and restoration plan must be submitted
to the approval of the. City Engineer and Community
Development Director, along with improvement plans. Such
plan must show improvements to the creek area included in
the creek maintenance easement or extending from the rear
lot lines to the lot lines across the creek, whichever is
greater. Plans shall show all landscaping and erosion
.protection methods.
12. The creek crossing methods proposed for the
bicycle/pedestrian paths and for Orcutt Road must be within
the guidelines established in the Flood Prevention Policy
adopted by the city, unless an alternative is specifically
approved by the council.
13. Fish and Game and Corps of Engineers permits are required.
for all work within the creek, and for crossing the creek
near the intersection of A Street and' Orcutt Road.
14. A study team shall be established to monitor the Western
C' Pond Turtle colony. The team shall be made up of
representatives of the Department of Fish and Game, the San
luis obispo urban Creeks Council, the Community Development
Department, and the developer. Funding, not to exceed
$10,000, shall be provided by the applicant. The purpose
of the study will be to inventory the population, identify
the extent of existing habitat, and identify impacts to the
turtle colony and to identify mitigation measures, if any
with the developer will be required to provide. The study
period will continue for 24 months.
15. The design of the bicycle path within the creek
preservation area at the southerly end of the public park
must be in accordance with Fish and Game recommendations,
not to disturb the creek preservation area.
16. The creek banks adjacent to Tract 1376 shall be revegetated
in accordance with a plan developed with assistance from
the Urban Creeks Council, to the satisfaction of the
Community Development and Parks Divisions. Work shall be
completed prior to acceptance of the first phase of Tract
1750.
17. The detention basin must be designed per standards
established by the Edna-Islay Specific Plan and to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The detention basin may
be fenced, at the developer's option, and must be
Resolution no (1990 Series) �.
Tract 1750
Page 4
maintained by the tract homeownersassociation. A
maintenance schedule and reporting procedure shall be
submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
The schedule shall include periodic reports to the city on
the condition of the basin.
Public Works requirements:
18. Orcutt Road shall be widened and improved along the entire
frontage as part of phase 4. Orcutt Road shall meet City
and county design standards with respect to super
elevation, vertical, and horizontal stopping sight distance
(55 mph design speed) , and shall include a bicycle path on
the westerly side. Sight distance at the proposed Orcutt
Road/A Street intersection must be evaluated as to
adequacy. Existing road may require .regrading.
19. Modifications to sewage lift-stations and related
improvements may be required in accordance with the
specific plan. The developer may be required to contribute
towards these improvements in lieu of actual construction,
to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director.
20. The water tank must be installed and operating prior to the
issuance of building permits for phase 3.
21. Water acreage fees and sewer lift station charges are
required to be paid prior to recordation of the Final Map.
22. All lots must be served by individual water, sewer, and
utilities.
23 . The construction of public streets shall comply with the
city's Engineering Standard Details/Specifications, the
Pavement Management Plan, and to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. Street structural sections shall provide
for the ultimate design-life upon acceptance of the street
by the city. Phased construction of housing will require
the phasing of street construction or an increase in the
street structural section to compensate for the reduction
in the life of the street, prior to acceptance, from
construction traffic.
24 . All residential water services must be sized to accommodate
fire sprinklers to the satisfaction of the Fire Department.
25. The developer must dedicate a 1-foot vehicular- non-access
strip along all lots adjacent to Tank Farm Road and Orcutt
Road, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Resolution no (1990 Series)
Tract 1750
Page 5
26. Phasing of this tract and utilities may require off-site
utility extensions within subsequent phases, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and Utilities Engineer.
27 . At the time of development of phase 5, an emergency and
construction access road must be provided that continues
A Street to Orcutt Road, to the approval of the City
Engineer and Fire Department.
28. All grading and development improvements shall be done as
. approved by the City Engineer and in accordance with the
recommendations per the soils report prepared by Pacific
Geoscience, Inc. , dated July 5, 1989 and the Geotechnical
Update and Plan Review by Gorian and Associates dated July
14, 1987 for Tract 1750, and any subsequent soils reports
requested by the City Engineer.
The grading plan must be approved by a registered soils
engineer and the City Engineer. The grading shall be
inspected and certified by the soils engineer prior to
.installation of any subdivision improvements or issuance
of building permits.
� The northwesterly limit of the landslide denoted as Qls 1
shall be determined precisely in the field prior to final
map approval of the respective phase. The nearest lot line
shall be at least 50 feet from that boundary and the
adjacent lots shall be adjusted or deleted and Courts "H"
and "G" adjusted, accordingly except that property lines
may not extend beyond that shown on the tentative map.
29. The grading plans for phases 5 and 6 shall include such
facilities and preparation so that individual lots will
not require offsite construction.
30. Individual lots on phases 5 and 6 shall have the foundation
design approved by a registered soils engineer. A notice
shall be recorded concurrently with the final map notifying
any purchaser of these lots of this requirement.
31. Additional soil investigations shall be done to ascertain
that the proposed water tank site and lots and streets
above and below Street "A" (phases 5 and. 6) are stable and
suitable for development, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, prior to final map approval. If evidence is
found that indicates any instability, mitigation measures
must be taken to remedy the instability, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, or the respective final
_ ' map shall be modified accordingly.
Resolution no (1990 Series)
Tract 1750
Page 6
If these sites are required to be excavated and filled and
recompacted, the fill and recompaction should closely match
the original terrain, as determined by the Community
Development Director and Engineering Division staff.
32. Any existing mines encountered shall be abandoned in
accordance with State of California and local regulations,
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
33 . Any slope instability observed during grading operations
and subdivision construction shall be evaluated by a soils
engineer and repaired to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Community Development Director prior to final
acceptance of the respective phases. The final maps or
separate recorded instruments shall note that (T)the city
reserves the right to withhold building permits on any lot
which appears to be threatened by slope instability.
.34. The subdivider shall submit a report by a registered civil
engineer certifying that all lots are not subject to
flooding during a "100-year" storm, to the satisfaction fo
the City Engineer.
i
Parks and open space:
35. The neighborhood park may be completed in one phase by the
developer- . The subdivider shall record a lien or
alternative approved by the Community Development
Department, equal to $750 per unit for park improvements,
to become due and payable to a special fund, maintained by
the city, upon transfer of the lots or dwelling units. If
the developer chooses to develop the park to the
satisfaction of the Community Development, Parks, and
Recreation Departments, the city shall refund the amounts
accumulated in the park improvement fund to the developer
after completion of each phase as described on the approved
park phasing plan, on a quarterly basis, until all fees
have been collected.
36. The hardscape areas in the neighborhood park shall be
installed in the first phase. The remainder of the park
shall be completed in phases, as described in the approved
park phasing plan, or all in one phase as described in the
preceeding condition.
37. The developer is responsible for securing access rights for
the bicycle path under the railroad.
38. The Islay Hill open space shall be dedicated to the city
as part of the final map for phase 6. Prior to approval
4-2
j�
1
Resolution no (1990 Series)
Tract 1750
Page 7
of the final map for phase 1, the developer shall pay to
the city an amount adequate to install the proposed trail
system, the amount to be determined by estimates for the
work and as approved by the Parks and Recreation Director.
This money is to be used solely for the maintenance and
improvement of the Islay Hill open space. The Parks and
Recreation Commission will periodically review how the
hillside is being used, and make recommendations to the
council on the disposition of the money.
39. Public access to the Islay Hill open space shall be
provided directly from all streets adjacent to the open
space area, except Orcutt Road, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer and Community Development. Director.
40. The open space beneath the existing power transmission
lines shall .be a minimum of 100' wide. No structures shall
be allowed within this 100' area. A note- shall be recorded
for each of the lots adjacent to this open space area,
informing lot owners of the proximity fo the power lines.
41. The Rodriguez Adobe park shall be dedicated to the city for
public park purposes, in or prior to phase 4. The
Rodriguez Adobe will be restored by the city. The
developer shall contribute to its restoration by paying
one-half the restoration cost, up to a maximum of $100,000.
Water:
42 . The subdivider shall inform future lot buyers of the
possibility of building permit delay based on the city's
water shortage. Such notification shall be made by
recording a document simultaneously with the final map.
Archeology:
43. Grading plans must note that if grading or other operations
unearth archeological resources, construction activities
shall cease. The Community Development Director shall be
notified of the extent and location of discovered materials
so that they may be recorded by a qualified archeologist.
Disposition of artifacts shall comply with state and
federal laws.
Homeowners' Association:
44 . The subdivider shall establish covenants, conditions, and
restrictions for the regulations of land use control of
nuisances and architectural control of all buildings and
facilities. These. CC&R's shall be approved by the
Resolution no (1990 Series)
Tract 1750
Page 8
Community Development Department and administered by the
homeowners' association.
The subdivider shall include the following provisions in
the CC&R's for the tract:
a. Maintenance of linear parks, railroad buffer areas,
and all storm water detention basins shall be by
the homeowners' association in conformance with the
Edna-Islay Specific Plan.
b. There shall be no change in city-regulated
provisions of the CC&R's without prior approval of
the Community Development Department.
Affordable housing:
45. Resale controls applying to the 23 affordable housing units
shall remain in perpetuity. All affordable units shall be
required to be owner-occupied.
46. Development of homes on the small lots (phases 3 and 4)
shall be limited to approximately the square footage
proposed as part of the tentative map. Remodelling and
additions to these homes in the future shall be in
accordance with the limitations in the zoning regulations.
Transit system equipment:
47 . The subdivider shall provide for street furniture and signs
for transit systems, as well as bus turnouts if necessary,
to the satisfaction of the Mass Transit Committee, as
needed with each phase.
Hillside lots:
48. Architectural review is required for all lots east of the
creek.
49. The maximum streetyard allowed on the hillside lots is 201 .
Streetyard exceptions will be encouraged where no safety
concerns are involved.
50. No solid fences shall be allowed at the rear of any lots
abutting the Islay hill or creek open space. Design
standards for fencing shall be developed, to be approved
by the Community Development Department and the
Architectural Review Commission.
r
Resolution no (1990 Series)
C- 1 Tract 1750
Page 9
Noise:
51. Noise walls on the single-family lots adjacent to the
railroad buffer area shall be set back at least 10' from
the property line, and the area between the wall and the
street landscaped with drought-tolerant shrubs and
groundcover by the developer, to the approval of the
Community Development Department staff.
52. The final map shall be submitted to the Planning Commission
for review and recommendation, prior to City Council
approval.
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 1989.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Resolution No. (1990 Series) -�
ARC 89-19
Page 10
APPROVED:
City Adm' istrative Officer
21
Pit Attorney
l
Community Deveo went Director
JL1:res\trl750.wp
6-2?'
ORDINANCE NO. (1990 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS MAP TO DESIGNATE
AN AREA ON TANK FARM ROAD, EAST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS,
AS R-1-SP-PD AND R-2-SP-PD,
ALLOWING SOME EXCEPTIONS TO DENSITY AND YARDS (PD 1449-B)
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a hearing to consider
the planned development request PD 1449-B; and
WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings;
Findings:
1. The proposed planned development will not adversely affect the
health, safety, or welfare of persons living or working in the
vicinity.
2. The planned development is appropriate at the proposed
location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses.
3. The planned development conforms to the general plan and
specific plan for Edna Islay and meets zoning ordinance
requirements.
U
4. The proposed planned development is consistent with the Edna-
Islay Specific Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report
was certified by the council in 1982. NO further
environmental study is necessary.
5. The project provides facilities and amenities suited to
particular occupancy groups: families with children, and
moderate-income homebuyers.
6. The project provides a greater range of housing types and
costs than would be possible with development of uniform
dwellings throughout. the project site or neighborhood.
7. Features of the particular design, including common open space
areas, narrower right-of-way widths, small lots, design of the
Rodriguez Adobe Park, creek setbacks and bicycle paths,
achieve the intent of conventional standards for privacy,
usable open space, adequate parking, and compatibility with
neighborhood character as well as or better than the standards
do.
6-z 9
Ordinance No. (1990 Series)
PD 1449-B
Page 2 .
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planned Development PD 1449-B is hereby
approved, subject to the following conditions:
Conditions•
1. Reduced streetyards are hereby granted, as shown on plans
approved at the council's (date) meeting.
2. No sideyard exceptions are allowed for the lots in phases 3
and 4 (small lots) .
3. Smaller than normal lot sizes are hereby approved, but in no
case shall a lot size be smaller than 4,000 square feet.
4. A density bonus, allowing 470 dwellings, including the 131
lots in Tract 1376, 134 small lots, 88 two-bedroom condominium
units, 117 large single-family lots, and 20 two-and three-
bedroom Housing Authority apartments is hereby granted.
5. The applicant shall submit a precise plan, consistent with the
zoning regulations requirements for precise plans, to the
Community Development Director for approval. Such precise
plan may be incorporated in the improvement plans for Tract
1750.
SECTION 2. This ordinance, together with the names of
councilmembers voting for and against, shall be published once in
full, at least (3) days prior to its final passage, in the
Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this
city. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of
thirty (30) days after its final passage.
6 ��
Ordinance No. (1990 Series)
PD 1449-B
Page 3
INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the day of
1990, on motion of , seconded
by and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:.
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:-
inistrative Officer
y A• o ney
I
CCommunity Deve` pment Director
6 �3l
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR TRACT 1750,
ON TANK FARM ROAD, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS
(TRACT 1750)
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 subdivision request Tract
1750, the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Architectural
Review Commission's action, the Cultural Heritage Committee's
recommendation, staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes
the following findings:.
1. The design of the tentative, map and the proposed
improvements are not consistent with the general plan and specific
plan for the Edna-islay area.
2. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements
are likely to cause serious health problems, substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish
or wildlife or their habitat.
3. The Community Development Director has determined that the.
proposed subdivision is not in compliance with the Edna-Islay
Specific Plan and that further environmental study is needed.
SECTION 2 . The tentative map for Tract 1750 is hereby
denied.
Resolution no (1990 Series)
CTract 1750
Page 2
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 , 1989:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
I<City Admi istrative Officer
X
3t orney
-
CommuTfity Developine t Director
jzl:res\tr1750no.wp ��
THE ARBORS AT ISLAY HILL
DEVELOPER'S STATEMENT
The Pacifica Corporation is proposing to develop the remaining portion of the Islay Hill project.
The development will be phased and will provide several housing types, parks and recreation
areas, open space, and historical preservation areas. The proposal also volunteers a program of
affordable housing in addition to providing a site for the Housing Authority as envisioned in the
Edna Islay Specific Plan.
In an effort to create a thoughtful and comprehensive project, the development is presented as
a planned development and a vesting tentative map application. The proposed development,Tract
1750, follows existing Tract 1376 to complete the Islay half of the Edna-Islay specific plan area,
and is carefully planned to provide the unique.blend of housing and amenities the specific plan
envisioned.
Housinst
Tract 1750 is designed to coordinate with Tract 1376 to provide a.wide range of housing types
within the Islay area. This range of housing includes a housing authority site, low maintenance
clustered condominiums, and single family residences in three distinct market levels. These are.
identified in the following text as small lot single-family residential, medium lot single-family
residential and large lot single-family residential areas.. (�
The condominium area will consist of 90 2-bedroom dwellings; these will be 1,200 square feet
units and will be clustered in tri-plexes and four-plexes. The condominium units provide entry
level housing and housing for those looking for minimum maintenance responsibilities. A
swimming pool is provided as a private recreation area, and the site plan includes over 66% of
the area as open, common areas.
It is in this area where the Pacifica Corporation is volunteering an affordable housing program.
Of the 90 dwellings, 25 percent will be offered for sale at low and moderate income price levels.
The units will be identical to the remaining units and will be interspersed randomly within the
site. The Housing Authority will administer the unit sales and related issues.
The 90 dwelling "units" are sited on a 6.8 acre area. This is a density of 13 units per acre, and
requires a density increase as allowed under the R2-PD zone. This density can be allowed based
on the folloHing findings:
1. The density of the proposed condominium area makes it possible to provide an area of
housing and amenities for particular occupancy groups. The two bedroom, low
maintenance units will be attractive to fust time buyers, single parents, and students.
2. Within the Planned Development, the allowable density is transferred from the more
sensitive hillside sites to the less sensitive areas in phases 1, 2, and 3.
1
G-3�
3. The density of the proposed condominium area will allow greater construction efficiency,
and therefore, more affordable housing than would be possible with conventional
development.
4. The features of this planned.area provide housing, parking, open space, and recreation
facilities as well as those required by the zoning standards.
Adjacent to the condominium site is the Housing Authority site envisioned by the Specific Plan.
The 1.7 acre site is shown with a schematic layout of 20 dwellings in a format compatible with
the condominium layout. The Housing Authority will design the units under its own project
application, and the schematic plan is shown only to suggest a compatible site design
Within the proposed R-1-PD zone, another housing type is provided with the 134 small lot single-
family residences in phases 1 and 2. This area will provide housing in the 1,400 to 1,700 square
foot range. The development will include construction of the homes, which will be smaller than
the Tract 1376 units, but will share similar architecture in order to provide neighborhood
continuity.
As with the condominium area, this area has been increased in density by a small amount to
allow the hillside areas to be less dense. A density exception is requested for this area based on
similar findings to those expressed above.
In keeping with the medium density shown for this area in the specific plan, are the smaller lot
size and reduced setbacks. These are both requested as exceptions allowed under the planned
C development application The minimum lot size for this area is 4,100 square feet, and the average
is 5,500 square feet. With a net area of 17.8 acres, the density is 7.5 units per acre.
In proportion with the lot size are the reduced setbacks proposed on some of the lots. The lot
sizes, setbacks and house orientations have been carefully fitted to the topography of the site.
Solar access, sideyard slopes, and the housing interrelationship have all been considered in the
establishment of setbacks proposed. The requested setback exceptions are shown on the planned
development drawings. Similar setback reductions were approved for Tract 1376.
Tract 1376 is an existing development, but deserves mention because it is an integral part of the
housing mix which makes up the overall Islay Hill development. This is the medium lot area and
is a standard R-1 subdivision with 131 lots. Houses range in size from 1,400 to 2,100 square
feet; and lots average about 7,000 square feet.
The remaining housing type will be a 117 lot R-1-FD single family development on the lower
slopes of Islay Hill These will be large, natural terrain hillside lou with an average size of 9,900
square feet. The density of this area is 4.7 units per acre.
Specific housing units for this area are not proposed at this time. Because of the hillside nature
of this area, reduced front yard setbacks are proposed to allow the houses to more closely
conform to this natural terrain Whether the homes are built as production units or as custom.
homes, the specific plan requires ARC approval of all house plans for this area.
2
A significant concept of the Planned Development is the arrangement of housing and densities.
On an overall basis, the development is well below the Specific Plan limit of 498 "units". Within
the development density is proposed to be min�ed on the more sensitive hillside areas. The
proposed development has a total of only 472 dwelling"units" providing for a broad spectrum of
housing needs.
Gradin
A preliminary grading plan has been prepared for the project The grading concept concentrates
the areas of grading consistent with the specific plan and with the distribution of housing types.
In Phase 4 and 5 on the lower slopes of Islay Hill, all lots will be left natural, with grading only
for the streets. On the Phase 1, 2 and 3 areas, the lots and condominiums will be graded and
padded. In the design of the grading plan, every effort has been made to minimize grading. The
padded lots are stepped to follow the natural contours as closely as possible, balancing other
concerns such as minimizing bank heights and meeting engineering standards. Approximately
15% of this area will be graded by less than 2 feet.
In Phase 1 and 2 the existing slope is between 6 and 10%, and according to the Grading
Ordinance, 25% of the area (or 20 acres) should remain natural. In Phase 4 and 5 the existing
slope is between 16 and 20% and the Grading Ordinance calls for 60% of the area (or about 25
acres) to be left natural. Therefore, a total of 45 acres is to be left natural. In the approval of
Tract 1376, those areas where grading was less than 2 feet were. determined to be "natural"
satisfying the intent of the ordinance. By this criteria, 15 acres remain natural in the 11=2-PD area
and all 45 acres within the R-1-PD area is natural. This proposal provides a total of 60 acres of
area left "natural" when only 45 acres are required, and therefore meets the intent of the Grading �J
Ordinance and the specific plan
Parks and Recreation Areas
Several park and recreation areas are incorporated into the development plan These include the.
park site and creek areas called for in the specific plan, a one acre park designated as a site for
the historical preservation of the Rodriguez Adobe, and private recreation areas in the
condominium and housing authority sites. In addition, a 75 acre site is provided as permanent
open space for Islay Hill.
A revised conceptual park plan is included in the application. This plan is similar to the previous
concept plan approved by the council in 1987 with proposed revisions based primarily on a more.
detailed knowledge of the site area and topography.
The area proposed for the park dedication includes the creek areas adjacent and downstream of
the useable park area. Of the 13 acres offered for dedication, approximately 7 acres is the
useable park, with the remainder being the creek area.
The specific plan calls for a private recreation area to be provided in one of two sites. Private
recreation sites are included as a pool area for the condominium site and potentially within the
Housing Authority site. In additions, the site for the Rodriguez Adobe is offered for dedication
as a City park in the approximate location of one of the areas designated by the specific plan. \
3 J
G-3d
C- While this will be a public area, the adobe park site will combine with the pool areas to satisfy
the intent of providing recreation in this area.
A conceptual plan has been prepared for the adobe park, and is included in the project submittal
It is anticipated that the City will restore the adobe and develop the site under a pending grant
from the State.
Water Conservation
This project proposes several measures to conserve water. The park concepts have been designed
to limit turf areas to those areas where turf is critical to the intended use. Public and common
area landscaping should use drought tolerant landscaping in conformance with current City
ordinances.
The concept of irrigating the park and creek areas with on-site wells has been pursued, and
several test wells were drilled. Unfortunately, none of the wells proved useable and therefore,
the irrigation areas will use City water. The public area landscaping should use drip or similar
low water use irrigation materials.
Orcutt Road Plan Line
A proposed plan line has been prepared for Orcutt Road. The route generally follows the existing
route centerline. However, to accommodate a 55 mile per hour (mph) design speed flatter
( horizontal and vertical curves are required. In 1983, 23 feet were dedicated as additional right-
of-way on the west (Islay) side of the original 40 foot right-of-way. The plan line indicates that
an additional 30 feet on the Islay side is still needed along some portions of the road. Even with
this, the plan line study indicates that. without jeopardizing a suitable alignment, the full
improvements called for in the specific plan (including cut and fill banks) cannot be constructed
without additional right-of-way on the east side of the road.
Because this property is not owned by the Pacifica Corporation, the right-of-way may not be
available. In that case, the City must be prepared either to waive or reduce the conditions, or
acquire the right-of-way through the powers of eminent domain.
Fire Department Mitigation
In meetings with the City Fire Department, alternative fire service mitigation measures were
discussed. Based on these meetings, the following mitigation efforts are proposed:
1. All dwellings will have fire sprinkler systems._
2. A fee of $60,000 will be paid for a fast response vehicle.
3. A fee of$5,000 will be paid to provide fire truck control of local traffic signals.
4
Technical Studies '
i
Several technical studies are included in the application in order to support the proposed
development. These include a soils and geology report, a detention analysis, an Orcutt Road plan
line and a noise analysis.
Phasing
A phasing plan is included in the application which designates phase areas. These areas are listed
below with an approximate time schedule:
PHASE DESCRIPTION DATE
Current Adopt Tentative Map 1989
Adopt Planned Development
Establish Orcutt Road Plan Line
Approve Park Plans
1 61 R-1-PD Lots 1989-1990
Dedicate and Construct Neighborhood
Park and Creek Improvements
Fire Mitigation Fees
2 72 R-1-PD Lots 1990-1991
Dedicate Adobe Site
Construct Detention Basin
Construct Adjacent Creek Improvements
3 Condominium Site 1990-1991
90 Units
Dedicate Housing Authority
Construct Water Tank
4 59 R-1-PD Lots 1992-1993
Construct Linear Park
Dedicate Open Space
Dedicate and Construct Orcutt Road
Construct Bike Lanes
There are utility lines which need to occur out of phase to provide service during all phases.
During Phase 1, a portion of the Phase 2 and Phase 3 sewer lines must be constructed, and
during Phase 3, a portion of the Phase 4 water line must be installed in order to serve the water
tank These lines will be constructed in recorded easements which may be abandoned during the
subsequent phase.
5
�-38�
The grading plan for the development balances the earthwork, considering the project as a whole.
As a result, grading will also need to occur out of phase. Final grading plans for each phase will
be prepared indicating the ares to be used for earthwork balancing. Generally, this will occur
according to the following schedule:
PHASE ADDPPIONAL EARTHWORK AREA
Phase 2 or 3 Place fill
Phase 3 or 4 If necessary
Phase 4 Excavation.and water tank
Phase 5 Cut and fill for all weather access road
Conclusion
This application provides an important opportunity to integrate all aspects of this project in a
planned approach. Significant efforts have been made to create a quality and desireable project
The proposal meets the intent of the specific plan and City ordinances, and will provide a needed
addition to the Cities housing, park, and open space needs.
6
� -39
` Page 10
Noise Impact Analysis
Tract No. 1750
July 21, 1989
Lots Brri acri tion and Hei ht
149 15, 23, 24 None - Edge of road and/or slope to tracks
provides required shielding
46, 479 559 56, 629 79 Wall at Edge of Lot - Top 6.5' above
80, 90, 110, 111 & 134 adjacent side or rear yard elevation
135 through 143 and 169 Berm Between EjA Court da
ev 226 acrossfrom Lot 169 Railroad
a drTop
rise to
Elev 246 across from Lot 135
220 and 246 through 251 Wall at Edge of yard Lot - Top 6' above adjacent
elevation
256 Northerly P.L.
Easterly end Wall at Top of Slope. - 6' above adj. yard
Westerly end Wall at Top of Slope - 6.5' above adj. yard
Westerly P.L. Wall at Top of Slope - 6.5' above adj. yard
257 Northerly P.L.
W'ly end, lot abv road Wall at Top of Slope - 6' above adj. yard
Mid, lot level w/ road Wall at Edge of Lot - 7' above adj. yard
E'ly end, lot bel road Wall at Top of Slope - Higher of 4' above
road or 6' above. adjacent yard
Easterly P.L. Wall at Top of Slope - 4' above adj. yard
from north P.L. to 100' south of north P.L.
Table 3
Required Noise Control Barriers
Indoor Noise:
Normal residential construction with closed windows typically produces
approximately 20 dB of outdoor-to-indoor noise reduction, therefore, only
those areas with outdoor noise exposures higher than Ldp 65 would require
special mitigation measures beyond closed windows and mechanical
ventilation, in order to conform with the La+ 45 indoor noise limit. Thus,
no special noise control construction measures would be necessary at the
first floors of any of the units.
The unshielded second floors of two story residences in some areas of the
project will be subject to outdoor noise levels between Ldp 65 and 69.
WALKER, CELANO & ASSOCIATES
lD
following standards will apply to all residential areas within the planning
area. They are briefly outlined below and dealt with in greater detail in
the Special Design Concerns section of this Specific Plan.
Design..Standards
= Interior and exterior noise must be reduced to acceptable levels as
defined by the 1975 general plan Noise Element and the city's
building code.
- Visual screening of housing areas must be provided along the Southern
Pacific Railroad.
- Landscaped buffer areas will be installed where housing is next to
agricultural or commercial areas or major circulation elements such
as Tank Farm Road or the railroad underpass.
- Housing development next to. waterways must resolve special design
concerns, such as flood protection, grading, creek access and
conservation of creekside vegetation.
- Housing construction on the lower slopes of Islay Hill will require
detailed evaluation of soils and geological conditions.
- Potential archaeological sites will have special review.
4
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS
Purpose and Application - The planned development procedure, as applied
within the specific plan area, is intended to encourage imaginative
development and provide for effective use of unusual sites by allowing more
flexibility in the design of housing projects than normal standards allow.
Such variations from zoning and subdivision standards should provide
benefits to the project or community which could not be provided under
conventional regulations.
The "PD" overlay zone, as defined by the city's zoning regulations, may be
applied to areas designated by this specific plan for low density or medium
density housing.
;r
Planned Development Procedures - The processing of a planned development
application will be as specified by the city zoning regulations. To
approve a planned development (including any density bonuses described
below) the city council will find that the project fulfills the general
purpose of this section and- meets one or more of the following criteria:
- It provides facilities or amenities suited to a particular occupancy
group (such as the elderly or families with children).
- It transfers allowable development within a site from areas of
greater environmental sensitivity or hazard to areas of less
sensitivity or hazard.
It provides a greater range of housing types and costs than would be I
possible with development of uniform dwellings throughout the project
site or neighborhood.
- Features of the particular design achieve the intent of conventional
standards (privacy, usable open space, adequate parking,
compatibility with neighborhood character, and so on) as well as or
better than the standards do.
- It incorporates features which result in consumption of significantly
less materials, energy or water than conventional development.
Density Bonuses
When approving a planned development, the city council may allow higher
densities (more. housing units per acre) than typically permitted by the
city's zoning regulations. The approval of density bonuses is not an
automatic entitlement. The community benefit created by increasing
densities and the ability of the project to meet the criteria listed above
will be the basis for approving density bonuses.
In Low and Medium Density Housing Areas - The City Council may approve
adensity up percent more housing units per acre. . This
provision may -apply to all low and medium density housing areas except
the lower slopes of Islay Hill south of the seasonal waterway. In .this
area the city will not approve density bonuses.
442.
17
�l
3 WA
growth management
The development sequence of the Edna-Islay neighborhood has been divided
into nine phases. ;
months. The growth of the neighborhood is that scheduled so that it cannot
be "built-out" in less than 11 years (a maximum average annual growth of 94
units) . To assure development proceeds in an orderly fashion the following-
standards shall apply:
— Building permits for each phase shall be issued no sooner
than provided in the following schedule:
Phase Date before which building permits may not be issued:
February 1982 (specific plan adopted)
1 April 1984
2 April 1983
3 _AELL 1985
4 June 1986
S September 1987
6 April 1989
7 April 1990
8 Apr11_1991
9 September 1992
- phasing must proceed sequentially as shown in figures 3-1 and 33;
and
- at least 50% of the improvements and residential units required in each
phase must also be completed prior to creation of residential
subdivision or development in a succeeding phase; and
- all improvements in a phase which are required to assure the health
and safety of residents must be completed prior to initiation of
residential subdivision or development in the succeeding .phase; and
- no phase must be initiated if more than 200 residential units (as
permitted by maximum density provisions of this specific plan.
excluding housing program bonuses) remain to be constructed in
preceeding phases.
- the city's toning map will be amended to .be consistent (see .
Zontng
Consistency section. page 71) immediately upon adoption of .thJs .
IX Cqcog M
t Z2 W 6 S2U.
r
O OW V a W U IT U Z S
I mC o SS V Z Q ~
` = Q Q ~
mA Q _ QO ? LL Z fll
•5N¢eq W f71 W {y
W Q {z� fA
Cl)
0 y y F_ 0_
I mon VJ Z. Z Z O
tl
CL_^ O
W
a
e-a
m O/Q n U
VU`S O y J
=' ooa W U O
g U Z Z um
0 LL
A c c� U r
m m
Z°QQ_ =4
ti r W
W
N OU U
r Q
Zr.'' O O
LU H e�^ Q/
W Q
= Z (^ >
� Z Z
O �+
cc
a _ /4 Fa
0 N N
O � Z 2
I Z
• �• W 2 V 0
r' LL
z
> O W i
t e Z
` U
Z �
O Z
W
f uj
1l W O uj
< �«-
U = O.
0 LU
Y6 < v Q
-Or
•f. W W
W 0
N V
O
Z C
W
0
U.
♦'e
LuA�
6,
Z r'
J
0O Z
Z� Q
®tea
Al Q
to" V o
¢s= �1 QZ !—
�¢ ►-Os lf
=a LL,
~gam
LL
a m¢
xz /ate z
_ Ii c
W �
t C • .a Q I LU
:yy.Q -
oce
�� n
0. 4 ;i §a -
atj
E�,�
'if itLU
W 01�
L
feria/ vw;
a IQ,
;._.
u
cc
a
O a
O
e�
0
5
W
LL
� r
es
ymC ; ym
m` m N C 0 m b O N
._
` m C,a ` � �$ c
0
� mc� � a e ¢ w
I 'M 111 c40,NNCGX
a- cc m N�-am� o< ¢ w
mCOm.8C � C —t - O{_.
z = g8 �R z � y� 9° $ o w dS
m C m C gis 2.94 b—� m°
d a_ jE
Y�� �0 g.� gg d - �� W§0 w 3 �I
U 0 ?.m mf m C 6t.0
¢ �u Q J
$ ,mac 40 cc - - oa wZ 8 Oc. Z
O- 30
.. a � �mo8LU E ,s �m m� 8ss a �" � c ffm W LL ZI"'
W co 0.8 (W mark z ¢off' W ° a
Z �—° °—g Z „4 8 Sg E 8 Z m:Q'Q. Z:g W
IZ U � mEm? m Q�-bmEcm � `°'2tl� OtO
� ccmTo gmc�i8om8Eo V � o888W J
UJ
o
aaz
Y
o
� a
cc
Y
b
a
I I
� I � i � I ..•Y 1.�
� � I
I '
b
0.
!! al I b R d Q
ria � < � �$ � � �•
e �. ... .... — W
-- - - -- _
to
Ii
I�
I '
kv
16
� \ �� '' \• \ ` t - '�1.1 Illy 1\ �\ � /,
It
��JS�'�lot
�}'�`('
10
\a . a
Ar
Ap
RC
cc
a
''o
View pp(rldor IW L&F �.
Iii((/�1//,Y�, �' TOY1Et•tN CM•t•N4 ONK•••P
- _oar6tp•Y�•TN• �
1
IV _ � t ••a ••Nna.va•n t �__
ni turf area
noise/visual buffer urge shrub sc
eft.M a
medium shrub S
c
low groundcover
,fit 2i
� 1
large shrub scree
\
turf area
6
•�
to 7•".•^t N••tMt•b u•C
-:med'nrn strut
screen
\ •al•tp•ycrna•
_ —_-- .ao.•.o•oot
�
i iindigenous v,2ggtati n
L
ti ...
•.rtno o.•o•t
cercis occidentalis tyP.
i
r I ' large Stroh screen
Ito oaooa:a ww rvmt. I
1 1 INNNIYCMA•.tplany
--Sequa sertpervlrens tyP.
• ,-^ -�platanus ram tYR
aierais agrifolia WP-
This is a summary of provisions governing uses allowed in the conservation/open
(r l space WOO zone. Consult the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations for
additional information.
Date Revised: May 1984
V. CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE (C/OS) ZONE
1. Allowed Uses:
* Agriculture - grazing and outdoor crops
* Caretaker's quarters
* Construction activities
* Dwellings (maximum density is one dwelling per 5 acres or per acreage as
specified in the zone designation)
* Mobile homes as temporary residence at building site
2. Uses Allowed by Director's Approval of an Administrative Use Permit:
* Christmas tree sales
* Circus, carnival, fair, festival
* Mobile home as construction office
* Parades, carnivals, fairs
* Parks
* Produce stand (incidental sales of items produced on the premises)
* Temporary uses - not otherwise listed
3. Uses Allowed by Planning Commission Approval of a_Use Permit:
* Agriculture - greenhouse culture, livestock feeding
* Antennas (commercial broadcasting)
* Cemeteries , mausoleums, columbar.iums
* Mineral extraction
{ 1
53-84
NG
—IAH T' AGpin
O
R R NI 1) E 5 1 G N G R 0 U P
pinspond by
Ind]
ICAO
April 26, 1990
Councilman Bill Roalman
City of San Luis Obispo
P.O. Box 990
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
Dear Mr. Roalman:
I've been requested to forward the enclosed materials to you on behalf of La Lomita
Ranch through Doug Murdock (my client), and on behalf of the Pacifica Corporation, the
developers of the Islay Hill project. These documents outline the pertinent real estate
transaction between Pacifica and La Lomita regarding the Islay Hill Open Space.
If, after reviewing them, you still have questions regarding these transactions or the future
of the open space dedication on Islay Hill, please call either Myself or Pete Miller (541-
i
6601), an attorney involved in the documenting of the transactions between Pacifica and
i
Pacific Ventures, Pacific Ventures and La Lomita, etc..
If I might be permitted some observations regarding the open space dedication, they are
as follows:
1. Pacifica's application should be dealt with separately and distinctly from the parcel
map application of La Lomita.
2. The legal agreements are very clear that La Lomita has an obligation to work with
Pacifica and the city to comply with the open space easement dedication
requirements of the Edna/Islay Specific Plan. They also make it clear that Pacifica
has no ability to make a dedication in fee.
3. The worst case scenario would be that the City would receive the open space
easement in Phase 9 of the Edna/Islay project, consistent with the Edna/Islay
Specific Plan.
4. If the La Lomita parcel map application is approved, the open space dedication will
be done much sooner and could be completed within a period of 3-4 months.
Therefore, with the approval of the La Lomita parcel map application to create the
Islay Hill parcel, the open space dedication will only occur at a quicker pace than
envisioned in the Edna/Islay Specific Plan. RECEIVED
APP 2 6 1990
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA
Mr. Bill Roalman
Page 2
April 26, 1990
5. The issue of the so-called "double dipping" or "who is taking credit" for the open
space is a non-issue. The open space easement dedication requirement is a
condition of the Edna/Islay Specific Plan and it is a condition that must, can, and
will be met by Pacifica as part.of its master tentative map approvals.
Again, please call if you have any further.questions.
Sincerely,
RRM DESIGN GROUP .
`J T. Keith Gurnee
Senior Vice President
Director Planning Di ' n
cc: Doug Murdock
Pete Miller
Enclosures
c/kg-roal.isl
C-
LAW OFFICES COPY
MILLER & WALTER
-PETER C.MILLER* A partnership Including Professional Corporations Cable Address
_UAM S.WALTER* PROPLAW
JEFFREY EHRUCII 679 MONTEREY STREET
NORA OUINN SAN LUIS OBISPO.CALIFORNIA 93401
Telefax
'Professional Corporation TELEMIONE(005)541-6601 (1105)541.5766
April 20, 1990
Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, Esq.,
City Attorney
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Re: Mutual Rights arid Obligations of The Pacifica Corporation as the Owner of The
Arbors at Islay Hill and Northwinds as a Successor in Interest to Pacific Ventures
With Regard to Islay Hill
Dear Mr. Jorgensen:
As I mentioned to you by phone this afternoon, I have been requested by Mr.
Douglas Murdock, who represents the owners of La Lomita Ranch, to attempt to clear up,
some apparent misunderstandings regarding the interests of various private parties in the
future of Islay Hill. As you may be aware, The Pacifica Corporation ("Pacifica") now holds
fee title to a portion of Islay Hill while the rest is within the boundaries of La Lomita
Ranch. The owners of La Lomita ("La Lomita") have succeeded to the residual interests
in Islay Hill which were retained by Pacific Ventures when it sold the Islay project to
Pacifica-. I presently represent La Lomita. Of more import to this letter, I was deeply
involved in the negotiation and documentation of the sale by Pacific Ventures (then my
client) to Pacifica back in 1936.
At the time of the transaction, the Edna/Islay Specific Plan was already in place. It
was the intent of the parties involved .in the transaction that the transaction facilitate the
implementation of the Specific Plan by-Pacifica and the others interested developers. The
seller was to retain the ability to develop an equestrian center on [lie 9 acre site designated
for this purpose by the Specific Plan. The seller was also to retain ultimate fee title to the
top of Islay Hill, which would be made subject to an open space easement in favor of a the
City of San Luis Obispo or other appropriate governmental agency.
At the time that the transaction was documented, it was not yet clear exactly where
the development portion, open space portion or equestrian center portion would be located.
it was also not certain whether these areas would he created by recorded map prior to the
time that escrow needed to be closed. The solution to this problem was to document the
transaction so that it Could timely be concluded regardless of whether the designation of
these respective areas of the project had been legally completed by the filing of an approp-
. r
�) Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, Esq.
April 20, 1990
Page 2
priate map. If the map were filed prior to close of escrow, the seller would retain fee title
to the equestrian center and open space areas, but would grant to Pacifica the right to place
whatever facilities on the equestrian center and open space areas which were needed for its
development of the rest of the property according to the Specific Plan. Alternatively, if the
map had not been filed prior .to close of escrow, fee title was to pass to Pacifica for the
entire development, equestrian center and open space areas. Pacifica.would be. obligated
to convey back the fee title for the equestrian center and open space areas as soon as this
became legally possible. . In the meantime, Pacifica was to have the ability to install those
facilities on the equestrian center and open space areas which were required to implement
the Specific Plan. Pacifica was to also have the ability to convey an appropriate open space
easement as required to comply with the Specific Plan. As you can see, these alternatives
were the two sides of the same coin. The ultimate result was to be the same regardless of
whether the parcelizatign had been completed prior.to close of escrow.
The goals of the preceding paragraph were to be carried out under Paragraph 2.4 of
the Purchase and Sale Agreement. I am enclosing copies of that Paragraph. Also enclosed
is a copy of the form of deed of trust used to secure performance of payment for the
property and compliance with Paragraph 2.4. I hope they will aid you in your gaining an
understanding of the present rights and obligations of the private parties who hold interests
in the portion of Islay Hill which is subject to the Edna/Islay Specific Plan.
I believe that it has always been contemplated by the parties .that the open space
easement to be granted to the City would be perpetual in nature and would be of a type
generally envisioned by Government Section 51050, et. seq.
Pleas call me with any questions which you may have on this topic.
Ve truly yours,
11-1- �R �� WALT' R
Peter C. Miller
Enclosures
—,y cc: Douglas F. Murdock
\N0283\ISLYCi-Y 1.i:i-R 1
C\` PURC(jASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
WITH ESCROW INS'T'RUCTIONS
( ISLAY [TILL)
THIS PURCIIASE AND SALE AGR�MENT WITH ESCROW
INSTRUCTIONS ( "Agreement" ) dated the 'f l�
/l day of. April , 198{, .
( "Effective Date" ) is entered into `by and among PACIFIC
VENTURES, a California joint venture ( "Seller" ) , THE PACIFICA
CORPORATION, a California, corporation
Buyer" and and ESCROW
SERVICES OF THE CENTRAL COAST ( "Escrow Bolder" ) with reference
to the following facts and circumstances :
A. Seller owns that ce.rt-ain real property compris-
ing 202 acres , more or less, located in the City and County of
Sari Luis Obispo, California more particularly described on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto ( "Property" ) ;
D . Subject to the terms .and conditions of this
Agreement , Seller desires to sell. , and Buyer desires to pur-
chase , 1.37 acres , more or less , of the. Property as .identified
in Exhibit "II" ( "Development Parcel" ) for residential develop-
merit
G . Seller shall hold and/or convey interests in
the approximately 65 acres of. the Property, of which an
approximately 56 acre. portion ( the "Dedication Parcel " ) will
be subjected to an open space easement- pursuant to Paragraph
G
A-RMR0071
04/04/86
i I
r 2 . 4 . Seller anl: lcl LPs developing Lhe approximately acre
liA.: - P g t i Y
balance ( the "Fquestrlan CenL•er Parcel" ) o.f said approximately
65 acre portion of the Property into an egc.cestrian center .
The parties anticipaLe that Lhe relative sizes and conf: igura-
Lions of Lhe Development Parcel , Lhe Dedication Parcel and the
Equestrian Center Parcel shall he approxi.maLely as shown on
Exhibit "n" attached hereto and i.ncorporaLed . herein by Lhis
reference . however , the Dedication Parcel and the Equeslion
Center Parcel do not exist: as of the Effective Date of this
r
Agreement an(] their u.l.l:i.maLe loca.l: lon , sixes .and conf igura-
Lions , and whether they .shall eventually consLitute separate
parcels or a. . single parcel L•ogether shall. be , provided the
same are generally cons.isl•ent wiLh Lhe. Specific . Plan, subject
to the reasonable discretion of Seiler and approval of Buyer ,
such approval not Lo be unreasonably withheld . As used herein
the "Seller ' s Parcel" shall refer Lo . Lhe Dedication Parcel and
Lhe Equestrian Center Parcel. , col.lecL•.ivel.y .
HOW TIII REFORI" , Moyer and Seller agree as follows :
1 . smx. AIJD Puw-,IlAsl P111c1°.
l. . l Sale_-and Purchase . Seller agrees to sell.
and convey to Huyer. , and Moyer agrees to purchase and acquire,
from . Seller , the DevelopnlenL Parcel for the price and upon all
Lhe terms and conditions set forth herein .
1. . 2 Pkirchase -Pr. ice . The Lota .l purchase price
( "Purchase Price" ) for Hie DevelopmenL Parcel is
-2-
i
shall be deemed approy,ed . If Buyer shall fail to waive its
prior disapproval , then such disapproval shall remain in
effect , or should Buyer not approve the condition of title by
the Review Date and this Agreement shall thereupon be ter-
minated , and the parties shall be relieved of any further
obligation to each other with. respect• to the. Property . Both
parties agree to execute promptly those documents requested by
Escrow Holder to evidence termination of this Agreement and to
authorize Escrow holder to return Buyer ' s Deposit to Buyer
r
( "Cancellation Documents" ) as contemplated by Paragraph 4 . 12 ..
2 . 3 00ptional ALTA Policy. At any time prior
to the Close of. Escrow, Buyer , at• its option, shall have the
right to require that the Title Policy be a ALTA extended
coverage joint protection policy, provided that Buyer shall
pay the cost of any survey required in connection therewith ,
and the incremental increase in premium cost thereof pursuant
to Paragraph 2 . 1 .
2 . 4 Creation of Seller ' s Parcel ; Alternate
Instruments . As promptly as possible after. the execution of
this Agreement , Seller shall initiate with the City and County
of San Luis Obispo, and the State of California as may be.
necessary, and shall thereafter diligently process to comple-
tion , a parcel map or other legal lot subdivision , ( t-he
"Parcel Map" ) for the Property so as to create the "Seller ' s
Parcel" as defined in Paragraph C above , provided that such
-8-
Parcel Map is ge'nera.Ily consistent with the Specific Plan
identified in Paragraph 3 . 1 . Seller shall be responsible for
all costs of initiating and processing the Parcel Map, includ-
ing the engineering and surveying and the application , publi-
cation. and recording fees attributable to creation of Seller ' s
Parcel . Buyer shall be responsible for satisfying all
requirements imposed, as conditions to the re.cording of the
Parcel Map with the exception of those a.ttributable only to
the use of Seller ' s Parcel by Seller . The Parcel Map, and any
modifications thereto., and any conditions to be imposed
thereon, shall be submitted by Seller for Buyer ' s approval ,
which may be reasonably, but shall not be unreasonably, with-
held .
Prior to the Review Da.te, or as soon thereafter as
reasonably possible , Buyer and Seller shall mutually determine
what rights on., ove.r , under . and across Seller ' s Parcel will
need to be held by Buyer in order to develop the Development
Parcel pursuant to the Specific Plan as it then exists and as
Buyer contemplates altering it . Prior to close of escrow,
Buyer and Seller shall establish the particular language and
provisions which shall be used to protect the said interests
of Buyer in Seller ' s Parcel , both for conveyance of those
rights to Buyer in the event the Parcel Map is recorded prior
to close of escrow or for - reservation of those rights by Buyer
in the event. that Seller ' s Parcel must be conveyed to Seller
-9-
f
C / after the close of escrow due to the recording of t•he Parcel
Map being delayed until after the close of escrow. In any
event , any dedication of any portion of. Seller ' s Parcel or any
conveyance thereof to a third party at any time after the
executionof this Agreement shall be subject and subordinate
to the vesting of those rights in the then owner of the
Development Parcel , which rights shall be considered appur-
tenant thereto.
If the Parcel Map has been recorded prior to the
e.
Closing Date , Escrow Holder shall attach the legal description
of the Development Parcel plus a description of the easement
rights of Buyer in 'Seller ' s Parcel to the Grant Deed which is
in the form of Exhibit "E" and to tiie All-Inclusive Deed of
Trust which is in the form of Exhibit• "D" . Escrow Holder
shall then record ExhibiL "D" and Exhibit "E" at . close of
Escrow.
If the Parcel Map has not• been recorded prior to the
Closing Date , escrow shall close on the entire Property sub-
ject to the obligation of Buyer to convey "as is" Seller ' s
Parcel to Seller , for no additional consideration, immediately
following recordation of the Parcel Map . In such event , at
close oE ' escrow, Escrow Holder shall attach the legal descrip-
tion for the Property, and shall cause to be recorded, the
Grant Deed which is in L-he form of Exhibit "E" a.nd the All-
Inclusive Deed oC Trust which is in the form of Exhibit "D" .
-10-
1
�,• Thereafter , upon recgrdation of the Parcel Map, Buyer shall
/ attach the legal description of Seller ' s Parcel to a grant
deed in the form of Exhibit "E" , but subject to the rights to
be reserved by Buyer , and cause it to be recorded . Buyer ,
while in record ownership, agrees not to undertake any action
with respect to the Equestrian Center Parcel which materially
and adversely affects its development potential as hereinafter
permitted. Seller covenants and agrees that ( i ) the
Equestrian Center Parcel shall never be used for any purpose,
other than as an equestrian center , which requires a commer-
cial. zoning, or conditional use permit in lieu thereof and
( ii ) any horse facilities constructed on the Equestrian Center
Parcel shall be at least 200 feet, from the nearest common
boundary of the Development Parcel .
At any time after execution of this Agreement , and
at such time as is required by the City of San Luis Obispo for
implementation of the Specific Plan , Seller or Buyer , which-
ever is then in title , shall convey to the City of San Luis
Obispo, or to such agency as is acceptable to said City, an
easement ( in a form acceptable to said City and/or the.- other
grantee ) over the Dedication Parcel which restricts its
development and commits it to open space . Any such conveyance
shall be made subject and .subordinate to the rights of Buyer
as discussed above in this Paragraph 2 . 4 . At closeof escrow,
or at any time thereafter , and from time to time , and without
-11-
Cany compensation or charge , Seller shall also grant and convey
to Buyer and its successors and assigns , together 'with the
right to grant and transfer all or a portion of t-he same , non-
exclusive easements on , over , under or across t-he Dedication
Parcel and/or the Equestrian Center Parcel ( in a manner that
does not materially and adversely affect the development
potential only of the equestrian area ) for the :installation,
operation or maintenance of any Eacilities or , improvements
required to be installed by Buyer under the Specific Plan as a
r
condition to, or otherwise reasonably necessary for , or
incidental to, the development of the Development Parcel .
Such easements shall run with the land and be binding upon the
Dedication Parcel and the Equestrian Center Parcel , as the .
case may be , for the benefit of Buyer so long as Buyer , .or its
successors and assigns , continues to hold any interest in the.
Development Parcel . Without limiting the foregoing, Seller
shall not convey any right , title or interest in the
Dedication Parcel or the Equestrian Center Parcel without
Buyer ' s prior written consent- , which shall not be unreasonably
withheld provided that ( i } Buyer is provided reasonable
assurances that any future easements that may be required by
Buyer in connection with its development of the Development
Parcel will be reserved , and ( ii ) the intended disposition of
such parcels are in accordance with Che Specific Plan.
-12-
At close -.oE Escrow, iC- t•lie Parcel Map has
theretofore been recorded , or if t•he Parcel Map is recorded
/ subsequent to the close of Escrow, then upon the conveyance of
Seller ' s Parcel from Buyer to Seller , Buyer and Seller shall
place appropriate restrictions of record against the
Dedication Parcel and the Equestrian. Center Parcel to refer to
all of the provisions and restrictions contained in this
Paragraph 2 . 4 .
3 . INSPECTION AND REVIEW.
3 . 1 Review. Seller has previously delivered
to Buyer certain information concerning the Property, includ-
ing the Edna-Islay Specific Plan ( ".Specific Plan" ) adopted by
the City on February 0 , 1902 under Resolution No. 4733 . Buyer
has previously commenced, and upon execution hereof , shall
diligently continue at its own cost and expense, in good faith
and with due diligence , its investigation of t•he Development
Parcel , and suitability for .Buyer ' s purposes. Such investiga-
tion will include , without- limitation , a study of the market
economic feasibility of Buye.r ' s development- of the Development
Parcel , and other matters affecting development of the
Development Parcel including , but not limited to, engineering
requirements , soil and geological conditions , lot size and
location , sewer and utility connections , improvement costs ,
governmental requirements ror dedications , documentation and
Eees , current and EUtUre assessment districts for provision of
-r
/. 412
OnDING nEOUi, 1py. ,
SERVICES OF 14AL COAST
uera Street
s Obispo, CA 93401
10 vn.E u nECOnoEo Sean to
FPETL•R C. MILLER, ESQ.
tor" MILLER 6 WALTISIR
Se," 412 Street
Stree
S. ...
eava San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
s,w. L J
SPACE ABOVE TI[IS LINE Fon nECOROEn'S USE
c.l rro m.ramal LONG FOnM ALL-INCLUSIVE y UnCIIASE MONEY DEED OF?nUST AND ASSIGNMENT OF nENTS
+o nn•c•rvuI
I his All-InchiSive Ptimhnsc Monc)• Uml of'I 1isl, illi+dc alis T-day of, , 19 06
bclWecn TIB—PACIFICA CORPORATION, a California corQorat-ion
a o
a herein c:111Cd TRUSTOR.Whose uddtcss ir200 NO_41�sllake 61�T1. id�stlake Village', California _9132
la,.ndtreml,ten) Icily) Cable) flip)
I'ICOR '1'1'1'1,1: INtiURANCI?,C(,)MI'ANN' OF CALIFORNIA, n cur)iiration, hercin called TaUSTr;E; and
PACIFIC VCNTURE'S, a 3oinL ventw e
herein Caned nErfEnCIART,
NYInc55C(h: That letwor ,Rnr:VOccAIt1 V GRANTS,TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNS TO TRUSTE[• IN TRUST, WIT11 (OWER OF SALE.
San Ts.
,h:d pe,+gacay inLuis ObisEo _llttl ell y,.Califnrnia descrilyed.ns:
Vio itEe wan Ilse:rears• issues anti prunla Ihtaaf,lt11n1Y.el',.liowev Ra, it,file til:lll, power and authority Ietrtinarite given to and
crmfened upna fice,cncietry to culled and apply mch ants•issue,lead proem.
For life Purpose of Securing:
\, 1, rtdammame of cath aroccieers,mf Temno battles evlaminefl. 7. raymtnl ler d.e in.ldaedwe.a f.1.u(�e'`h�I,�'f�dl•iaelasia purchase money
,sivar q rose!or e...date herewith,unit any esttmlan mrarwal thereof.in the principalmom of S 7 a`/`r`r/'V"" eenmW by Trv.ow in
-- i..r•r.1 nine rre'.ry.,r mdo. -
Underlying Obligations:
Tb.,i ell.fwr 1..l.t irso ! ey deed or Ina,see d-C!m Off iacluslvt.p alchine IMlney p,aml,mry.tae in IM original principal al+tevm.or
FIVE' M1LL10N ISesULLAIiS
5 ,000,000
Ihd1a..IS I llhe'Nme'1 which In<Iln@a within such m+f+1m1 the onpnhl Iwl. ollht Ipllmvinr:
Ile) Ap.nmi..myneat in he original prirrcignl sans esf,rWO Milljoil lour llli'IClred Fa.i-ty-rl�lree Thousand
Five Hundred Oranan
as 2all 53,500.00 ) infavneof John P. Deyincenzo and Roberta DeVincenzo
.,Payte.
.tcv"d by a u,d air its,,see....test UO,Ober 3 r_, 19 06 .a,Daumtm No, 52002 ,in nooE2640 par,
_5920R,;,,nrrw.d,nq San Luis Obispo courtly.Califnmb,amf
Chi A pronri.wry nun in the original principal sum of
Dolfan
Is_
a Payee.
•,va.,j by rdre.,of uo.s ncmJrd .--__.....-__._..17 as I1,tuoient Nn._— ,in Ilona ,rare
Onlrial 11",od.of Coenly,Culifun.ia,
IThs pnmd.,nry Ns.n,,.cu.<d by mal.deed.of Iaat ore hneinahtr<ulltJ lk"omltdying Nmn".1
I'll Prolect file Serurily of This occd of Tritsl,'malar Agrees:
t t 1 In l rrr.uiJ p.gtny in gn.d aominn•n n...l,elm .ma uo nnus.<m df nod;Jt v.,y Imilding d.erean:to enmplat nr assns(pmmNly and in goal mJ'
..nAnunGlf nwnmc,vis,I...;hlimg which nary 1•<crin,unrltd,damugid nr Je,+rnyfJ tlt<+urn and to pay when due ail ebdm,far foliar pr Stormed and material,
Wn.i.heJ shrre tor:is,a.....rty-ills nil I.w,ss"wimg said ptul•coy to nnpl;ring any dbtarioas or Improvement.to he made shanties:nor to transmit or permit
.,.It d,<nnl; on IS,canm.it.,ulin'nt IVnuit rely art equal said pralittle in violulinn o(.I.w:ler telllvutt,irrigate,fc,tilict,fumigate•print and do all other
act,.vhich(tont list chvacnr Its use of,uid pngtrty may It rta,anubly ntdt,any,the.pcciRe tnume miom herein nm asduding the renNal.
la 'hr foo—;Jt.ns:dm4in veld Jdiver Ile Ilene fivinry nR,vu llithsol red mutiriau,mi.chicl Insurance sulisfoaory to and with ins.payublt to Dent ficiary.
The annum c,,frc«J antic,any foe ler miter insunncc policy"say Ire applied by Ilcnrf,Anry upon any indeMedirm secured htr:by and in,ah order as
Ilenenrl,•y tory Jrst mint,r.v1 npdam a(Iltn<ficimy the twist,vn.nem.a co(Itcnd ler:o.y Fort Iheuaf may It nleawd to Lu,tor.
Soh appi:ra;nn w"lease'I..II nm tart ler tvrive any defselt are noire of default hereunder or invalidate any act donc,punuant to such notice.The
psa•nitm•h,,mr ars object is,the mmual agnnneme of drc panics a.Lelow xl rows,
111 To aP,Xio in veld Jtptd any tai r.err prRctdiwg pequmling,a unct'l lite«curdy hereof or the rights orp.owtn of ilentbiiary at Truute:and to pay
.R cost,and f,ptna s,including era of tvidcn<e of tide and attorney.fees In•rtit,onablt mm.In any such nation nr pro<bling in which neneGciary or
Truan alar appy n,and In any.ell bunyshl by Iltnellciury In I..ndn.e till,MO. ,•
�s NI tis pay:at lc.,s«n day.)+date dtlinqucacy all nut%and a6b,ounl,affcclinr suid property.Including assessments on appuntnanl water stat:
ul.p Ct n•drc.....NA uVice..<nh ler Ihc panic,r,Isle..ct I..Sit.to tiny when due,dl'incen.loaners.closes and litm,with inlarcsl,on said prgrcny m any
par.h,,f ml,s.loeh.rpt n....It p.i...or sult,i...IS......:.11 tsar..rte,and f sltmr.of Chi.Tr..1. '
.l'6....14 Lis...(..;I o.mole arty pupae.,ler ler do tiny u<s m hard.pnwidt A,liters Ilan Cdury ler T...ice.bat vilhom a:Jienion.o to Jo and wish",
-vice h•o1 dcmm.,d aro..Tants,end whln.Sit nitnainy liva...hnna tiny aldigmion henaf,o..y;o.v1e a.dr Ihc•.elf in rod.o...est..J..wch Stant at
fish,,ata,df un necn.nry m r.mnv she.,v...iq l,,<of,Reneneivey wr Tiomcc Igor nods...;red h.note,alma said pr.rytny err such purpm,t,;appear in and
r:VUIRIT n ,
i
3.2 Attocne�Feess. Should it be necessary for
any party to commence an action at lav or in equity against
the other to enforce the terms of any provision of this Rider,
the prevailing party shall have a right to judgment against
.the losing party for reasonable attorney's fees and costs as
determined by the court.
3.3 Cooperation. Beneficiary agrees to take
all steps necessary Co instruct the Trustee, from time to
time, promptly upon written request of Truster, to partially
reconvey; without consideration or compensation, any and all
areas of the Property, wherever located, either (1) to be
conveyed to any homeowner's association or the like and/or (2)
C to be dedicated to the public, (x) either pursuant to
conditions required by any governmental agency whether in
connection with the approval of any final subdivision or
parcel maps(s) or otherwise or (Y) in connection with the
development of the Property.
3.4 Joinder. Beneficiary shall, and hereby
agrees to, without consideration or compensation, from time to
time, promptly upon the written request of Trustor, and hereby
authorizes Trustee to; enter into and join in the execution of
me (i) any development plan or amendment thereto affecting the
Property; (2) any dedication of portions of the Property for
public streets or ways; (3) any grant of easements) over, in,
or about any Portion of the Property for public utilities or
the like; and (4) any grant(s) of easements, dedications,
covenants or rights similar or dissimilar to the foregoing
that are reasonably necessary to the development of the
Property or any portion thereof.
3.5 Prom t_Im lementation. In recognition of
the fact that releases an pa rtral releases of the Property
will be requested from time to time, Beneficiary agrees that
-4-
2874 rwc-�312
L
IMEETING AGENDA
RATE -517-17-90 ITEM,#
THE PACIFICA CORPORATION
RECEIVEDficlan 571167111 Person
. ...........
P
;A A0
ADMINISTRAI ION
AN
25, 1990
Lt:'Ttyq.
SAN I�Uj p131SI!0, PA '�Z
0!erk
-orig,
i
Mr. John Dunn FY 70
City Administrative OfficerFIL45
City of San Luis Obispo
P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
Dear John:
To follow up on our conversation of this morning. It is our
understanding from Arnold Jonas the Tract 1750, vesting
tentative map request will be included on the agenda for
City Council review on May 1st in order to comply with a
city ordinance.
Pacifica respectfully requests the item be continued without
a public hearing for at least 30 days due to the following
reasons:
1. The conditions, adopted by the planning commission, have
yet to be clarified and resolved to the satisfaction of
commission members, planning staff and Pacifica. .
2. Additional conditions and comments proposed by the
Architectural Review Commi-ssion necessitated another
meeting with the commission scheduled for May 14th.
With regards to your comment regarding a proposed study
session for the City council, Pacifica would be pleased to
assist in the implementation of same. Please advise me of
the desire of the council .
Thank you.
-Sincerely,
wV Lo
/,TL/o a 11 R Lorenzen APR 26 19
Regional Director CIFY CCHPICIL
SAN LUIS CEISP0. CA
:an 867 Pacific Street-- San Luis Obispo, California 93401 (805)544-9339 FAX(805)544-8345